The God who does Big Things

While Ezekiel was preaching his message amongst the exiles in Babylon, his contemporary Jeremiah was giving a similar message in Jerusalem itself.  He condemned their idolatry, prophesied the coming destruction of Jerusalem, but also prophesied about Israel's future restoration.  During that prophesy he says something that, thousands of years later, still says much about our relationship with God.

Therefore behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when it shall no longer be said, 'As the LORD lives who brought up the sons of Israel out of the land of Egypt', but 'As the LORD lives who brought up the sons of Israel out of the north country and out of all the countries where he had driven them.'

We can all recount the great things God did throughout salvation history.  Do we spend much time reflecting on what he is currently doing and will do?  Do we ask Him for something beyond fame and good looks?  Jeremiah sees the time when that statement will be something done in the present.  The Jews of that time would no longer have to look back to Egypt to see God's deliverance.

Furthermore, the action God undertakes is not something small.  This isn't the God who helps me find a temporary job.  It is the God who cleanses me of sin to allow me to live out my lifelong job.  Do we view God as the God who delivers from promiscuity?  Do we speak of "As the Lord lives who delivers America from Roe vs. Wade?"  Does the traditionalist say "As the Lord lives who protected His integrity in the liturgy?"

All of these things seem far-fetched, but we are supposed to pray for precisely these kind of things.  God is not limited towards acting in the trivial and mundane.  It was precisely this attitude that led the sons of Israel to the other countries to begin with.  If God provided anything, it wasn't something that important.  The gods of the world provided far more immediate benefits.  He may have acted in the past, but times are different nowadays.

This isn't blind optimism.  It is central to our identity as Christians.  Through the Incarnation, Jesus Christ became man and accomplished the biggest deal of all.  He did not just save His people.  He did not just restore His people to what they were originally meant to be.  Such would make him no different than the great secular leaders of history, and perhaps even lesser.  No, the biggest deal of all was through His sacrifice (the entire purpose of the Incarnation), man is given all these things, and an eternal reigning in heaven with Christ.  No religion promises that.  No secular ideology promises that.  Indeed, the very notion of it can sound absurd. 

Yet the notion is no more absurd than a few thousand exiles being freed from the strongest power in the world, sent back to their homeland under their own governance, and free to rebuild their destroyed temple.  Yet we know that happened.  No more absurd than the idea that Christ, who lived and walked physically on earth, ascended into heaven, and now rules all creation, inviting us to share in His rule.  Yet we know that happened, and still happens today.

Why the Incarnation Matters: The Restoration Begins

With the Book of Ezekiel, this commentary enters into a new stage, juast as salvation history entered a new stage with Ezekiel.  He begins what could be called the literature of the Exile.  He was amongst the first wave of the Kingdom of Judah exiled to Babylon.  To understand why this is important, we need to reflect on who Ezekiel is.

We know that the prophet Ezekiel was a priest, from an upper class family of priests.  His job was to offer sacrifice.  For sacrifice to occur, it was to be connected with the temple worship.  Yet being in exile, he is deprived of that temple worship.  Indeed, the temple (along with the entire city) is sacked, fulfilling Ezekiel's prophesy.

In addition to this, he is in a foreign land.  He is essentially cut off from his vocation, his people, and his culture.  During his prophetic ministry, he would suffer constant ailments and sicknesses, as well as the loss of his wife.  Yet it was through these deprivations that Ezekiel came to understand the coming restoration, of which the heavenly temple symbolizes.  He experiences the first signs of that restoration in a rather curious incident.

He describes four figures who appeared as beasts yet also men.  These creatures are shown worshipping Yahweh.  To the prophet, this vision would have been unmistakable.  The four creatures represented the Assyrian karibu, the figures in statues portrayed guarding the royal palace.  By showing them worshipping Yahweh, God is trying to communicate to His people that He is not limited to Jerusalem, an error the people frequently made throughout history.  (One need only remember David's anguish over God not having a house of brick and mortar to dwell in.)

Yet there is something far more important towards this image.  Being the karibu, these things would be pagan.  They would be viewed as something to seperate from.  Yet by this act, they are losing their "profane" character.   The Incarnation is seen through this passage, where that which once rebelled against God now enters into God's service.  Foremost amongst this is human flesh.  Ever since the days of Eden, mankind had been in a state of rebellion against God.  In the Incarnation, Jesus takes on human flesh and serves the Father instead of rebelling against Him.

This imagery is also a recognition of God's supremacy.  If even the things of this world can be pressed into His service, what can thrwart his plans?  This is key to the understanding of the entire book.  In this book, Ezekiel makes some very bold predicitons in his claiming to speak for God.  Certainly this image helped cement in Ezekiel's mind what was to be.  These statues represented the regal authority of the King, and the strongest power in their known earth.  And yet even they act according to His divine plan.  Keep this in mind for later installments.

Why the Incarnation Matters: The Point of Worship

I am sure we have all heard this a million times. Perhaps we have even said it to ourselves. “I am just not getting enough out of Mass.” The fallen away Catholic says this, and goes to look for a Protestant Church that “gives” them something. The abomination of desolation parish liturgical councils engage in elaborate planning to maximize what people “get” out of Mass.


Whenever this happens, we need to tell them in a not so polite manner “you are doing it wrong.” I would daresay that when we approach Mass like this, we are betraying not just the faith, but the very person of Our Lord Himself. Not only are we betraying Him, we are saying that His Incarnation is pointless.

Yes, I just said that. To all of you who are devising the latest way to make your liturgy creative, you deny the importance of the Incarnation. To those who feel that Mass is primarily about what they get out of it, we need to send you to a re-education facility.

The first lesson of that facility will be a question. Why did the Incarnation occur? We could say “so the Son of God could become man.” That is true, but that simply describes what occurred, not why it did. We could say “so He could die on the cross for our sins.” This again is true, but merely a description of events, not why they were necessary. In order to get to the truth, one must venture to the Psalms, as interpreted by the writer of the Hebrews:

For when he came into the world he said: Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire, but a body thou hast fitted me. Then I said, behold I come. In the head of the book it is written of me, that I should do your will.

This was the reason for the Incarnation. First and foremost, the Incarnation was an act of worship to the Father. Christ became man so He could offer Himself on the Cross to glorify the Father.

Furthermore, the Incarnation allowed true worship to take place. The law had plenty of sacrifices and oblations to offer. Yet the New Covenant had to be something better. Christ shows what that “better” is. He offers Himself, holding absolutely nothing back. Not only did He not do this for His own sake, He expects us to do likewise. He demands of us that we take up our own cross and follow Him.

As an aside, this is one of the most powerful reasons for celebrating Mass ad orientam. The priest stands in the person of Christ, and with the authority of Christ in offering the sacrifice. The priest leads to the altar, we follow him.  Let that sink in. We follow Christ in taking our own crosses to Mass.

Those own crosses are no doubt our sins. As such, we can never offer ourselves perfectly to the Father. There is always something within us holding us back, fallen humans that we are. Yet at the Mass, that perfect offering is offered. We “add” our own sufferings and flawed offering of ourselves alongside Jesus, asking Him to cleanse it through His blood. Not because we are “adding to the finished work of Christ.” Such is impossible. Yet we should still desire to do the will of the Lord, and the will of the Lord is that we hold nothing back of ourselves.

With this in mind, we can ask the question: Did Christ “get” anything out of the Incarnation? Did He feel “fed” by the Church of His day? The “food” He received was the food of blows to the face. He “got” betrayed by a member of His inner circle. The man He stated was a rock solid foundation upon which His Church would be built denied Him. The very people He tried to save ended up having Him executed.

Was the Incarnation then a failure? Was there something lacking from Calvary? On the contrary, this made the worship offered to the Father all the more efficacious. Anyone can say “Blessed be the Lord” in times of greatness. Yet to truly do the will of the Father is to say “Blessed be the Lord” in every moment, and to follow that up with your actions.

Perhaps that is why our worship is so abysmal today. In so many Churches, we demand these abominations pastoral committees be tailored around us. We suddenly think that everything should revolve around us. Even the supreme act of worship to the Father should be centered on us!

Yet what of the idea that worship is also a source of great instruction to the faithful? Do we not “get” something out of that? Here we come to the idea so thoroughly Western and so thoroughly wrong. This idea holds that only that which is in intellectual abstractions can be called “knowledge.” This has absolutely no basis in the Gospel.

Through reflection on our sins, do we not “learn” our unworthiness before God? In uniting ourselves to the Sacrifice of Christ, do we not “learn” that Christ’s sacrifice must purify our very unworthy offering to the Father of ourselves? Do we not “learn” the requirement of humility when we passively receive Holy Communion, as opposed to the grasping by force of the tree by Adam? I would say these things offer greater instruction than a thousand excellent homilies, or better yet, a thousand things we could “do” to make people “understand” Mass more.  Before you complain about what you "get" out of Mass, perhaps you should question what you put into it.

Beyond Eden

Central to the Mass, and indeed our entire existence as Christians, is on the nature of Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross at Calvary. When a Protestant hears of the Mass as a sacrifice, they think of it the same way as the sacrifices of the Old Covenant: they are rote, mechanical, and simply “solve” the problem of man’s sins, yet things stay fundamentally the same.


Unfortunately, many Catholics present it precisely this way, which is completely anathema to the true understanding of Catholics. In the crowd of Christopher West and friends, there is talk that Christ’s sacrifice allows us to “reclaim Eden.”  The sacrifice of Christ in this view simply resets the balance. While our sin once barred us from Eden, now we can re-enter it through the merit of Christ’s sacrifice.

This is ambiguous at best. Luckily, those of us attending the Extraordinary Form have a prayer to reflect upon. During the Offertory, water is mixed with wine in the chalice, and the priest says:

O God, who in creating human nature, didst wonderfully dignify it, and hast still more wonderfully restored it, grant that, by the Mystery of this water and wine, we may become partakers of His divine nature, who deigned to become partaker of our human nature, Jesus Christ our Lord, Thy Son, who with Thee liveth and reigneth in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God: world without end. Amen.

When speaking on this gorgeous prayer, Cardinal Ottaviani said the following:

The "Deus qui humanae substantiae dignitatem mirabiliter condidisti et mirabilius reformasti" was a reference to man's former condition of innocence and to his present one of being ransomed by the Blood of Christ: a recapitulation of the whole economy of the Sacrifice, from Adam to the present moment.

In this one paragraph, the entirety of the teaching of Christ’s sacrifice is mentioned. God is mentioned as the creator of man and woman, and that this creation was a good thing, nay, a wonderful thing! By the point it must be “restored”, we learn that man lost what he was given. Our faith tells us this happened in Eden. Yet the curious phrase is “et mirabilius reformasti.” In English, it could roughly be understood as “more wonderfully restored.”

Calvary was not simply pressing the reset button on the human race. Sacred Scripture teaches us that upon Christ’s death on the cross, the gates of Abraham’s bosom were opened, and souls (tradition stating the first being Adam) flocked to heaven as fast as they could. When Christ rose from the dead and ascended into heaven, he showed us our true home, and the ultimate truth about Eden: there is nothing to reclaim. Christ offers something far greater than Eden could ever offer.

What is that he offers? The prayer makes it clear. The water mixed with wine is rich on so many levels. It calls to mine the mixing of two natures, just as Christ had a union of a human and divine nature. It recalls the blood and water which flowed from His side on Calvary, and that blood and water cleansed the Roman Centurion. (Whom tradition identifies simply as Longinus.) That water and wine will come soon to truly be the Blood of Christ, “the chalice of the New Covenant in My Blood.” Through the cleansing of Christ’s blood, we become “partakers of the Divine Nature.” We become united to God, sharing in His nature as a result of that Blood.

Eden was but a symbol of that which was to come, just as the sacrifices of the Old Testament were mere shadows of the true and ultimate Sacrifice of Christ. Like the Old Testament sacrifices, Eden had some efficacy. The paradise and providing of every physical need ultimately pointed toward the one who provided that need, the Father. The sacrifices in an imperfect way cleansed sin, but not necessarily the guilt of such sin. Furthermore, since the sacrifice died, for new sins you had to constantly offer a different animal. Though Christ died, He demonstrates His power over even death in the Resurrection. He is present always before the Father, and need not be killed again to offer Himself. He offers himself once in time, and that one offering extends outside of time. Through this one offering we are provided something Adam never had.

Indeed, we are provided by grace the very thing Adam and Eve attempted to grasp by force. As we remember from the beginning, they ate of the tree to become like God. They attempted to grasp something beyond themselves by force. Jesus Christ, who “though being equal with God did not consider that equality something to be grasped” gave us the example of resignation to God’s will and faith in the Father’s promise. When we are faithful unto the end, He gives that to us. A true irony in this entire situation is that all Adam had to do was ask and be patient, and it would have been provided.

Creation itself speaks of the consummation of this gift. St. John tells us (1 John 2) that “the old world passeth away.” If the old world passes away, something new is being prepared. When this age is consummated, a new heaven and new earth exist. Both are as far beyond the former as can be imagined, and then some. With that in mind, why on earth would we want to “reclaim Eden?” Why would we want to have what we had in Eden? We would sooner wish to go back to the Sacrifices of the Old Covenant. Yet the writer to the Hebrews makes one thing emphatically clear: one cannot return to the Old Covenant because there is nothing to return to. Likewise, Eden is in the past. Even now, we have something greater. Even the slightest experience with Christ and His sanctifying grace surpasses all the splendor of Eden, which had only that grace which existed in the created nature. To return to Eden would be to turn our back on the greater gift Christ gives us. Further still, once this age is completed, there will be something yet greater still. That is what we should direct our eyes to with anticipation. The liturgy draws our eyes towards this and gives us that path, as will be made clear.

All of this we know to be true, because we know the liturgy. Even in the Ordinary form, the totality of this symbolism exists. (If not the explicit formulation by words.) Those amongst the company of West and friends speak with great fervor about refusing to limit the power of Calvary. We should agree with them, and point out, using the liturgy, the incredible power of Christ’s sacrifice. On this “Mercy” Sunday, may we reach the destination this prayer of the Mass speaks of.

The Extraordinary Form: The Creed

It is said that Christianity becomes different from other religions in that we are a religion of a "person", not a creed.  That being said, creeds are still incredibly important.  We get "creed" from the Latin credo, which stands for "I believe."  For this part in the series I would like to do two things.  I would like to discuss the significance behind "I believe", and also deal with some of the problems facing a proper understanding of the Nicene Creed today.

If there is one thing that defines modern man and the world, it is their indifference.  Pope Benedict XVI speaks of this as the "dictatorship of relativism" where the only truth is that there is no truth.  The corollary is that those who believe in absolute truth must be treated as the outcast.  If truth even exists, it is the product of the rationalization of the individual.  It never comes from an external force (i.e. an objective truth.)

The Nicene Creed is a rejection of that understanding.  If one wishes to presume themselves a follower of God, they must hold to these truths.  All other truths of the faith flow from these central truths (even if they are not explicitly spelled out.)  The Creed is ultimately a statement in monotheism (credo in unum Deum).  In addition, it is a statement of belief in the Holy Trinity (in the three "sections" of the Creed the 3 persons of the Trinity are explained), and in Christ's role as the Savior of mankind.

These words should never be a rote repetition.  Every time we speak those words, we are submitting ourselves to God.  We submit ourselves to His truth, made possible by the gift of Faith, itself made possible by the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross.  We cannot have this faith however without the Holy Spirit, who enlightens the minds of the faithful.  Our very recitation of the Creed is only possible through the constant action of the Holy Trinity.

Today, at least in English speaking countries, this experience has been hampered by the translations of the liturgy.  Words were translated in ways that were not necessarily false, but did not fully express the significance contained within the Latin, and in the Churches belief of these doctrines.  Thankfully, new translations are set to take place with the start of the next liturgical year. (The First Sunday of Advent)  Since the Creed is identical in both forms of the Roman liturgy, I hope the following will be of instruction to all Catholics.

In today's Creed in the vernacular, it begins with the statement "We Believe" as opposed to the Latin translation of "I believe."  The translations no doubt wanted to stress the importance of the community.  It is certainly true that as Catholics, we do believe certain things.

Yet the existence of these truths was independent of the group.  Some try to say that the faith of the Church comes about as a result of the belief of the community.  If the "community" (typically a bunch of dissenting liberal hippies) does not believe something, it is not the faith of the Church.  The Catholic answers this charge with "Credo", I believe.  While the community is important, God's calling is at first to the individual.  He did not call the Chaldean's as a person to be the father of many, but He called Abraham.  While God did indeed call entire nations (and all of humanity) to a certain vocation, the Bible was equally clear that one was not righteous or wicked on the account of others.  One was righteous or wicked on the account of the individual.  In the fullness of revelation, one is righteous or wicked to the extent he personally denies himself and follows Christ in all things.

There is also a general structure of the Mass being followed.  Up until the Creed, the action is very community centered.  The people pray as a community, they hear the Scriptures as a community, etc.  The Creed is a distinct shift.  We are transitioning from the Liturgy of the Word to the Liturgy of the Eucharist, culminating in our ultimate participation in Holy Communion.  This is a distinctly personal event.  While the Eucharist provides grace to the Church as a whole, the most importance grace is the chance for union with Christ Jesus through the Church.

The next part of the Creed tells us God the Father is the creator of all things visibilium et omnium et invisibilium.  The English lackadaisically translates this as "of all things seen and unseen."  A story best explains the difference.  It may be apocryphal, if so, it should be true.  Cardinal Francis Arinze was discussing with a Bishop about this very clause, and the Bishop wondered what the big deal was.  During this bewilderment, Cardinal Arinze got up and ducked behind a chair.  He replied "I am unseen, but I am not invisible." 

When we express these words, we express faith in the truth that there is more than just this physical world. While our bodies may tell us much, they cannot tell us everything.  More importantly, that which they do tell us leads to something that cannot be seen by sight, or even fully comprehended by human reason.  That is why we say visible first.  We move from the visible to the invisible.  Both are good, but the latter is clearly superior.  The liturgy itself uses visible actions to reveal the invisible realities they signify, mainly God's union with us.  The cross did the same.  The visible realities of Christ's suffering revealed (though only in a partial sense to dulled human reason) the length of obedience to the Father.  That perfect and unyielding obedience is why salvation is available to us.  While seen and unseen can signify this, it is done so in a far less powerful way.

That powerful way is again encountered when we come to the focal point of the Creed.  In the English, we bow and state "by the power of the Holy spirit, he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man."  The Latin uses a phrase of far greater precision:  Et Incarnatus est, de Spiritu Sancto, ex Maria Virgine, et homo factus est.  "By the power of the Holy Spirit he was incarnate of the Virgin Mary and became man.  The mystery of the Incarnation is expressed in all it's splendor.  While Christ certainly had a "birth" in the "natural" order (He did not just appear in this world out of nothing!), it was entirely different from the birth you and I experienced from our mothers.

"Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire, but a body thou hast fitted me" says the Messiah in the words of the Psalmist.  One could say that in Christ becoming man, He assumed the role, that body, which had been prepared for Him by the Father not only from the beginning of time, but beyond the existence of time as we know it.  As a result, every moment in history before led up to the Incarnation, where Christ, whom Heaven and Earth could not contain, enthroned Himself within the tiny womb of what, to the world, was an irrelevant peasant teenage girl.  (In the culture of that time, the three adjectives would only reinforce the seeming irrelevance!)  All time since that moment is due to that moment.

Again, one could get this from the word "born", but not as easily.  As one can see, these words are not chosen because of they sound more formal and liturgical, but because the express intimately what exactly is the truth.  When professing something as central to human existence as the Trinity and the Incarnation, precision is not just important, it is paramount.

Why the Incarnation Matters: The Fall of Judah

Immediately following the death of Hezekiah, one could be forgiven for assuming that the Kingdom of Judah was in great shape. The Kingdom of Samaria had ceased to exist. The Assyrians had been beaten back, and were beginning to crumble. When he finally passed, Hezekiah gave to his son a peaceful and one could even say flourishing Kingdom. Most importantly, the worship of the True God flourished under his reign. The young King Manasseh would also have the prophet Isaiah to guide him just as he guided his father.


All of these assumptions, while logical, ended up being tragically mistaken. Manasseh is now remembered as one of the worst kings in the Biblical record. Normally when the writer of Kings (whom many presume to be Jeremiah the Prophet) spoke of a wicked King, he speaks of their cruelty in as short of terms as possible, states they did “wicked in the sight of the Lord” and moves on. With Manasseh, he spends considerable time detailing what he did. This I believe would imply that even amongst bad kings (of which there were several) Manasseh outdid them by far:

 

• Restore the High Places throughout Judah, eliminating the centrality of worship in Jerusalem according to the law.
• Installed pagan altars within the temple, even in place of the altar where sacrifice to Yahweh was offered
• Built a grove in his palace for the worship of idols
• Offered his son as a human sacrifice to idols
• Promoted heavy use of the occult (wizards, soothsayers, divniation, etc)
• Built a giant idol in the court of the temple and commanded worship of it
• Murdered those who supported his fathers reforms
• Is traditionally held as the one who ordered the execution of the Prophet Isaiah, who died by being sawn in half

In the biblical accounts, Kings were condemned as “wicked” for far less. Because of these things, the Kingdom of Judah is sent on a course for which it will never recover. For because of his actions, the Kingdom of Judah would be destroyed. The first part of this involves the punishment of Manasseh directly. Assyria invades Judah (again), and this time they capture the King. We know from historical accounts that the Assyrians were particularly brutal towards Kings that they captured, and it can be implied that Manasseh was tortured grievously.

 

Eventually, Manasseh repents and begs for deliverance from the God he had done so much to profane. God accepts this repentance, and he is released from captivity and restored to the throne. The remainder of his rule is spent attempting to clean the mess he had propagated for decades. This did little in the end, since the people never turned their ways. Once he died (and he was buried in the same pagan grove he had installed in his own house), his son continued his father’s wicked reign, yet refused to repent.

 

Josiah’s reign is far different than his father or his grandfathers. At the young age of 16 (according to the biblical accounts) Josiah begins to worship God, and begins his program of reform. Most likely this was also the time he could assert the throne without (much) interference from regents. A decade later, he discovers the book of Deuteronomy and is stunned. Let us ponder that a bit.

 

One would think that even if they lacked the physical book, Jews should have known the laws prescribed in the book. One would think they would know about the Sabbath and all that entails. Even if they weren’t practiced perfectly throughout times, they were known. In the time of Hezekiah, these things were completely unknown to the King. An inference would be that the successive reigns of Manasseh and Amon were so thorough in their cleansing of the religion of God that there was almost no knowledge left of it. Even those who wanted to follow Yahweh would have had no little clue how.

 

Inspired by the law, Josiah undertakes a massive reform. Paganism is banned, the high places are destroyed, the prostitution cults are expelled from the Kingdom, and many festivals were celebrated for the first time in centuries during his reign, despite them being in the law as obligations to celebrate. He listened to the counsels of wise priests, and was greatly assisted by his strongest defender, the prophet Jeremiah.

 

Sadly, all he did was buy the Kingdom of Judah time. The regional situation was rapidly shifting, and successive Kings did away with almost all of Josiah’s reforms. Within 25 years, the Kingdom was conquered by Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon.

 

I mention this history for the purposes of painting the general background of future installments. This is also mentioned to show the providence and mercy of God, paradoxical as it seems. As was the case all too often, sinful man chose to serve himself above God. Yet even with this situation, God provides a way for the people to turn to him. Whether it was righteous Kings or prophets, there would always be a way for the Jews to find their way back to God. This will be expanded upon later, as we begin to see the theology of the Incarnation start to take concrete form.

Why the Incarnation Matters: "Whom You Knew Not"

After prophesying of the future universal Kingdom of Israel, Isaiah then gives a bit of insight as to how this Kingdom will come about. Ironically (or so it would seem!), some of these foundations are laid by a man outside of the nation of Israel. Isaiah declares:

Thus saith the Lord to my anointed Cyrus, whose right hand I have taken hold of, to subdue nations before his face, and to turn the backs of kings, and to open the doors before him, and the gates shall not be shut. I will go before thee, and will humble the great ones of the earth: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and will burst the bars of iron. And I will give thee hidden treasures, and the concealed riches of secret places: that thou mayest know that I am the Lord who call thee by thy name, the God of Israel. For the sake of my servant Jacob, and Israel my elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have made a likeness of thee, and thou hast not known me. I am the Lord, and there is none else: there is no God, besides me: I girded thee, and thou hast not known me:

The Cyrus mentioned is Cyrus the Great. He was the great Persian King who conquered the Babylonians, along with countless other Kingdoms. In doing so, he freed the Israelis from their exile, and sent them back to their native land to rebuild their temple. In Jewish Culture, he is the only gentile to be referred to as a Christ, an anointed one who delivers God’s people. What he did is not in dispute. Yet how did he pave the way for that future Kingdom. Most importantly, why should we care?

In the culture surrounding Israel at the time, the King was portrayed as divine, or at least the personal messenger of a divinity. The Persians practiced proskynesis. This was a system of submission as a way of placing the King above everyone else. Varying social ranks had to perform different acts of submission. The lower you got, the more one humbled themselves. For the lowest on the ladder, they were required to be completely prostrate before the King. The full title of Cyrus was King of Aryavrata, King of Persia, King of Anshan, King of Media, King of Babylon, King of Sumer and Akkad, King of the four corners of the World. In shorthand, the Persian King was referred to as the King of Kings.

Even with all of this claimed authority, Yahweh claims that such a man is His anointed. In the choosing of these words, God is claiming authority over the reign of even foreign kingdoms. He is establishing Himself as the source of all ruling authority here. The idea that such a King would be pressed into the service of a foreign god would have seemed absurd. Yet Yahweh is proclaiming precisely this.

We can also gain much insight when we ponder the type of kingdom that Cyrus ruled over. To put it mildly, it was quite different than most Kingdoms of the past and future. Though an absolute monarch, he rarely dealt in the affairs of his subject. Instead, he relied on satraps, those who had pledged their service to him. They had a considerable amount of autonomy to run things as they saw fit. This was in remarkable contrast to the Babylonians, who ruled with an iron fist frequently their vassals.

On religious matters as well, Cyrus’ approach was far different than the previous great rulers of the region. Though divinity was inseparable from kingly authority, Cyrus followed a policy of religious tolerance. He frequently portrayed himself as the servant of local gods in propaganda to establish his rule. He allowed people to worship as they pleased, provided they kept in their prayers the Emperor (a shadow of this is seen in the book of Ezra). Most famously, he is known for the Edict of Restoration, the proclamation which gave the Jews the order to rebuild their temple and places of worship.

These policies gave the Jews a new lease on life. Returning from their exile (of which we will speak more of later), they were in a sense a purified remnant. They were allowed to practice their faith and develop their traditions in almost complete and total safety during Persian rule. The governor of Jerusalem was even the grandson of the last legitimate King of Judah. Without the actions of Cyrus, there would have been no Israel. We see God working behind the scenes, slowly laying the landscape for the Incarnation. The Incarnation literally was an act millennia in the making.

Why the Incarnation Matters: The House of David Continues

After a bit of a break, I would now like to continue our series on the Incarnation and its understanding throughout salvation history.. Today, we come across what could be viewed as the most important of the “Emmanuel” prophecies of Isaiah. Indeed, we Christians have recently celebrated the fulfillment of this prophesy at Christmas. We are told “Behold, a woman shall conceive a son, and he shall be called Emmanuel.”


While this prophesy ultimately points towards Christ, I believe there are certain aspects of it that we miss, and these are vital for why this was such a comforting prophesy to the Jews. We must remember, the prophets were not simply there to tell news of the distant future. The immediate context is quite different.

If we remember from our previous discussions, the Kingdom of Judah was a vassal of the King of Assyria. A vassal is one who is forced to be in submission to a stronger power, for the sake of their own survival. The King of Assyria had almost complete domination of this region. In addition to Judah, the Kingdom had forced into servitude the Kings of Damascus and Samaria (amongst many others) as well. As with any vassal, rebellion was a common occurrence. People hate to be under forced submission for long. The moment they get an opportunity, they will likely rebel to assert their own independence.

This is precisely what was happening. The Samarians and Syrians declared their independence from Assyria. In such rebellions, the retaliation of the overlord is normally swift and brutal. If the Assyrians let this go unpunished, their other vassals may likely follow suit. Once they declared their independence, Damascus and Samaria immediately prepared for war. They also did their best to recruit other vassals of Assyria to likewise follow in their footsteps. The most obvious choice was the Kingdom of Judah.

For various reasons, Judah rejected this overture. They felt their interests were not served by a rebellion. They were historical enemies of Damascus. (Within the very generation of this event, Syria launched a failed siege of Jerusalem) They originally submitted to the Assyrians to save their necks from Samarian aggression. Barely a century before, they had been the vassal of Omri, King of Samaria.

For the anti-Assyrian coalition, this rejection was unacceptable. They needed all the manpower they could get in defending their lands from the coming Assyrian invasion. Furthermore, if Judah stayed loyal to Assyria, the Assyrians could easily use the realm of Judah for their own ends. Their troops could be resupplied, and they would have easy access to launch invasions on both fronts. For their plan to work, Judah had to go along with them.

With this in mind, they devised a plan. They would invade Judah and depose King Ahaz. In his place, they would place their own puppet ruler. This ruler was not of Ahaz’s direct line, and would be gladly follow along with this plan if it meant he could secure the throne. The armies of Judah would then join with Damascus and Samaria to prepare for the Assyrian invasion.

Whatever one thinks of King Ahaz, he was no fool. He knew that joining this coalition would not work. The Assyrians would respond, and respond brutally. (Such was their history.) Even if it did, Ahaz would not find his kingdom independent. Syria would no doubt attempt to bring them under their umbrella. At least with the Assyrians, they were far enough away to where Ahaz had a degree of autonomy, provided he did not rebel. Yet this distance was also a curse. Ahaz reasoned the Assyrians would not arrive in time to save him most likely. He could not stand against the might of both Damascus and Samaria. The situation looked hopeless.

God announces that He will not let this stand. He made a promise to David that one of his descendants would remain on the throne. This plot went directly against that plan. In addition to announcing His opposition to this, God declares to Ahaz He will perform a sign to that effect. The God of the universe intends to show a sign of good faith in His defense of Judah.

Ahaz rejects this overture, claiming He has no desire to tempt God. While sounding noble, perhaps there is something more at work. We know that Ahaz was not a noble man. The book of Kings describes him as doing “what was evil in the sight of the Lord, like the Kings of Israel.” In a sense, he was even worse than the Kings of Israel. The last time he felt threatened, he offered his son as a burnt offering to his pagan deity. He desecrated the altar in the temple; making it identical to a pagan altar he was awestruck by when he visited Damascus.

When Ahaz rejects a sign, he does so out of a rejection of the God of Israel. In his eyes, Yahweh was not supreme. He was just another god. Any god could give a sign. His humility is entirely false. God delivers an angry response, stating that this rejection shows Ahaz wishes to provoke Him as well as the nations.

Yet God will still show a sign, yet not for Ahaz’s sake. Just as He defended the wicked Samarians from the Syrians because they insulted Him (1st Kings 20:23-28), He would defend Judah for His own sake. If the royal line died, God would have broken His promise.

This is the context for what was said. Isaiah announces that a woman shall bear a son, and he shall be called Emmanuel. He also predicts a true golden age for the people of Israel as a result of this son.

Christians and Jews have debated for centuries if the prophesy is to be understood in light of Jesus of Nazareth. Yet what we do know is that this birth would be a sign. What was that sign? If a true golden age of the Davidic Kingdom would be launched by this son; this means the Davidic line would survive. This would mean that the schemes of Damascus and Samaria would have to fail. They would not be deposing Ahaz, for one of his sons would reign over a true golden age of Judah according to God. Considering that at the time Ahaz had no direct heir, this cemented the deal.

In the immediate sense, the people would have seen this prophesy fulfilled with Ahaz’s son Hezekiah. Hezekiah was one of the greatest Kings of Judah. Under him they did gain independence from Assyria. Judah ended up rebelling anyways later in Hezekiah’s life, but for their own freedom. When the Assyrians invaded, they suffered a humiliating defeat. Though the Assyrians attempted to spin it as a victory (Sennachrib in his memoirs uses propaganda to boast of humbling the “puny” King of Judah, even though he retreated with a significantly smaller army and never again attempted to make them submit), their hegemony over Judah had ended. Hezekiah also launched bold religious reforms, helping Judah to return to the worship of Yahweh.

While a certain case can be made for Hezekiah to be the fulfillment of this prophesy, I submit Isaiah has much more to say on the matter. In chapter 9 Isaiah expounds on what kind of child this servant will be. The prophesied child shall be called “Father of the World to Come”, the “Prince of Peace”, and one whose “empire” would be “multiplied.” Illustrious though his reign was, Hezekiah did none of these things. There had to be someone else.

Whoever this applies to, the message is clear. Even in their darkest hour, God stands beside them, for the sake of His covenant. Man may plot and scheme all they wish, their plans will not come to fruition when they conflict with God’s.

Why the Incarnation Matters: Isaiah the Universalist

                After exhorting the Kingdom of Judah to righteousness, Isaiah begins what could be called the “Messianic” Prophecies.  While they certainly do foretell the coming of the Chosen One, I think we must look deeper.  We must consider how they would sound to their initial audience.

It shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and shall be raised above the hills, and all the nations shall flow to it, and many peoples shall come, and say:  Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; that he may teach us his ways, and that we may walk in his paths.  For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.  He shall judge between the nations, and shall decide for many peoples…

               While this is a very inspiring text, the average Jew of that time would’ve looked at it in one of two ways.  He would’ve viewed it inspiring, or thought of Isaiah as a madman.  We must consider the context in which this was written.  Isaiah lived during a time of great unrest.  The King of Judah was a vassal of Assyria.  It was the King of Judah who requested the aid of the Assyrians, which eventually led to the destruction of the Kingdom of Israel.  The Jews of this time were lowly vassals, and a divided people.  The prophet speaks of a time when not only are the children of Jacob united, but the entire world is united under the faith of Yahweh.

               Contained in this call is the call to their original purpose, and something even greater.  It is frequently noted that the original purpose of the nation of Israel was to be a “priestly” nation, bringing the light of Yahweh to the nations.  Yet I submit that Isaiah is going even further.  In these “latter days”, they will be a lot like the first days. 

               From creation through Abraham, there was no “Jew” or “Gentile.”  In the earliest times of creation, man was of one mind and language.  Once again remembering our history, we remember how bad we human beings corrupted that initial vision.  Far from changing that vision, God reaffirms it.  If the successive covenants God established with man looked to be an accommodation to man’s weaknesses, the foretelling of the “latter days”, we see something entirely different.  All the people of the world are God’s people.

                Already we see in this calling a promised new covenant.  Under the Old Covenant, there were distinctions between Jews and Gentiles.  Under the Old Covenant, the law had evidence of man’s weakness and sin.  Many in Israel had no desire to learn the ways of Yahweh, much less the nations!  Isaiah follows his prophecy with an indictment of precisely this fact.  Trusting in their own devices, man has perverted the initial purpose of the Kingdom, and they will suffer as a result.

               Yet why does Isaiah prophecy of such a time?  Such a vision would be almost impossible to reconcile with the facts.  I would say, that’s the point.  God will do this not because of Israel’s merits.  Their only merit is destruction for their acts.  In the beginning of this series, I spoke about how God called us to union with Him.  Even though we rejected that call, the call is still made, and that call will come to fruition.    Yet we need help.

                I believe the Scriptures point to this help, albeit in an indirect manner.  After giving the “lay of the land” so to speak, Isaiah recounts a vision he has.  In this vision, he appears right before the throne of heaven itself.  Faced with such majesty, Isaiah recognizes his utter unworthiness.  At that time one of the Seraphim places a hot coal upon his lips. 

                If one ever tries to eat something that is too hot, one gets a burning sensation in their mouth, and we immediately recoil.  We talk about how that ruins our taste buds.  Well think of placing a burning coal on your lips and inside your mouth.  Such would destroy any trace of our taste buds.  So why did this occur?  Man needed to have his spiritual taste buds burned away.    In that act, the angel states that his guilt is removed, and is cleansed from his sin.  All of those impurities are removed by God, so the prophet can fulfill his ministry. 

                Likewise, we must do the same.  If we look to aspire to this calling Isaiah gives, we too must be purified.  Our senses have not only been darkened, but they have been perverted.  Elsewhere in his prophesy he states “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil!”  It is only through God’s gift that we can be purified, and become able to fulfill our original calling.  Once we have been cleansed, we must then learn of what our true calling is.  Isaiah gives us that in our next section.

Why the Incarnation Matters: Isaiah's Call

When pondering the lives of the prophets, we can do no higher than pondering the life of Isaiah.  We will be spending several posts on this prophet's message, because he was a prophet without equal in the Old Testament. 

He lived during a time of great peril and great change in the world.  It was during his time that the Kingdoms of Judah and Samaria first came into conflict with the mighty Assyrians.  During his time, the Kingdom of Samaria was actually destroyed by the same Assyrian Empire.  The Kingdom of Judah was originally meant to serve as God's way of bringing the light to the nations.  During this period, that light is about to be extinguished.  Isaiah appears to not only comfort his people, but also to remind them of their calling. 

By the time he walked the earth, Judah had indeed fallen far from their calling.  After the righteous reigns of Uzziah and Jotham, Ahaz ascended to the throne.  Ahaz turned away from God, and committed sins even greater than that of the people of Samaria.  He sacrificed his (at the time) only son to pagan idols.  He removed the altar of God from the temple, and replaced it with a copy of the Syrian altar in the great temple of Damascus.  In his desperation, he swore allegiance to the King of Assyria becoming his vassal, begging the King to bring vengeance upon Samaria.  (In a true irony, what he relied upon for salvation ended up nearly becoming his doom.)

This was the time during which Isaiah lived.  We know from the introduction that he was the son of Amoz, a man of high nobility.  He was born during the reign of Uzziah, and promoted the true worship of Yahweh during his reign.  No doubt he had fallen out of favor with the powers that be during the reign of Ahaz.  Yet it is during this time that he begins to build his reputation.

What is this reputation?  He indicts with great rhetorical power the sins of Judah.  The first chapter is full of a seething condemnation of Judah for her sins and hypocrisy.  Their hypocrisy if anything makes them worse than the pagans.  The pagans knew no better.  Judah had the truth, and they had turned their back on it.  Here the prophet calls on them to forsake this path in what could be called the summation of Isaiah's entire message:

Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean; remove the evil of your doings from before my eyes; cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression, defend the fatherless, plead for the widow.

Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord:  though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool.  If you are willing and obedient, you shall eat the good of the land; but if you refuse and rebel, you shall be devoured by the sword; for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.

This is a prophecy of restoration.  He calls them back not only to the practices of the previous Kings, but to their original calling from Adam, to Abraham and to Moses.  They must not only put away the evil they did, but learn to do something in place of it.  Many times the people of Judah and her kings would repent of the evil they did, but they continued to do it.  There was no real change in their behavior.  If anything, the sacrifices they offered were being used as an excuse for loose living.  The prophet points out that God does not accept the sacrifices offered unless a real change of heart occurs.

Instead, we must replace our evil with that which is righteous.  If we do so, God will bless the land and leave them in security.  His message was a great challenge to the people.  His next prophesy gives us insight into the fruits of this repentance and conversion.  May we likewise repent of our evils and experience true conversion in our hearts and souls.

Why The Incarnation Matters: Back to the Future

Having covered the prophets Elijah and Elisha in previous installments, we now make our way to the group known as the “Major” Prophets in the Old Testament: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel. With these individuals, the Incarnational aspect of our faith undergoes considerable development. In modern language, when many people see “prophet” they think of someone telling the future. I would suggest the meaning is far deeper than this.


While these men do indeed predict the future, I would say they also spend time on the past. They remind Israel of their sins. For the future, they attempt to point Israel back to their initial calling. One could even say that there is precious little “new” about their ministry. The “newness” comes from the fulfillment of that original calling, and how will be carried out.

The prophets, despite living millennia ago, also live during a time which is quite relevant for our reflection. In one sense or another, they all lived during a time of apostasy. Those who were meant to act as custodians of the faith of Yahweh allowed the faith to weaken, whether through negligence or an active persecution of the true faith. In their varied walks of life, they used the understanding gained from these experiences to confront those leaders.

Is this not what we see today? The errors of the world have in many cases infected many Christians, even those whose job it is to guard the faith. In the world at large, they have not simply turned their back on God. Rather, they turn to face him, and raise their swords. This is a war man cannot win.

Like our heroes of old, God sends prophets into the world even today. Not in the sense of giving new revelation, but in the sense I described above. These prophets are meant to call the Church and the world back to what they were meant to be. They are meant to point out the folly of idols, whether they are actual “gods” or the self. Yet many times a fair question can be asked: where are today’s prophets? It seems that the Church grows weaker and weaker by the day, because there are no prophets to guide her message.

If one is upset over this state of events, we can blame nobody but ourselves. We are called to be today’s prophets. Through our baptism (of which we will discuss more in the future), we become citizens of Christ’s Kingdom, His Church. We are meant to proclaim God’s truth about man’s calling and destiny to both the secular and the religious. It is for this reason that we must turn to these great heroes.

Unfortunately, today’s Church frequently neglects the Prophets. They are viewed in two ways. Firstly, as those who were relevant millennia ago, and only dealt with issues particular to their time. Others look at the Prophets solely in light of prophesies about the Messiah. With those prophesies fulfilled in Christ, their value for the Christian today is minimal. Both are tragic, and nothing could be further from the truth. Not only is their message timeless, their message takes on a higher meaning in Christ. He never did away with their message, since He came to fulfill, not destroy. Indeed, the Incarnation of Our Lord elevates this message to an entirely new level. We read the message of the prophets in light of Christ’s elevation of their work.

It is with this understanding that we shall continue our study, beginning with the one known as the greatest prophet of them all, Isaiah.

Why the Incarnation Matters: The Divine Kingmaker

Concluding the studies on the prophets Elijah and Elisha, let us accomplish two things. The first will be a very brief recap of the events in their lives, and how these events will shape the future for God’s people.


Elijah appeared during what could be called one of the darkest times in the entire region for God’s people. Paganism was wide-spread. Though the Kingdom of Judah during this time was undergoing something of a religious revival (under the good kings Asa and Jehoshaphat), they Kingdom of Judah soon become little better than vassals of Samaria. (Omri’s intermarriages with Judah gave his house brief control over Judah even.) Pagan worship flourished.


Elijah challenged the pagans boldly, and won at Mt. Carmel. During one of his (many) forced exiles from Samaria, he receives God in a cave atop Mt. Horeb. God tells him:

“Go, return on your way to the wilderness of Damascus; and when you arrive, you shall anoint Hazael to be king over Syria; and Jehu the son of Nimshi you shall anoint as King over Israel; and Elisha the son of Shaphat you shall anoint to be prophet in your place. And him who escapes from the sword of Hazael shall Jehu slay, and him who escapes from the sword of Jehu shall Elisha slay. Yet I will leave seven thousand in Israel, all the knees that have not bowed to Ba’al, and every mouth that has not kissed him.” (1 Kings 19:15-18)

When people look at this text, they see God putting kings in place to execute his wrath upon the house of Ahab. I would like to take a step backwards. On what basis does God make these claims? While one can understand why Jehu would be interested in securing the support of Elijah (through his successor Elisha), of what good is an Israelite anointing a Syrian king?

God can make these proclamations through His universal kingship over the entire Earth. In his treatise on the Incarnation, St. Athanasius the Great likened God to a King, and the Earth to a city he founded. The areas of the Earth were ruled by the temporal rulers in his mind as regents. If their work was poor, God could choose to dismiss them at His will. Even in those areas which reject His authority, this does not change God’s dominion over these lands. If he wills a new ruler to be installed, such is His right.

In addition to the two Kingdoms, God reveals two more players in this “game.” Elisha will become the successor to Elijah. There can also be seen a prophecy in the final sentence from God. He states 7,000 would be left in Israel who has not been stained by the idolatry rampant around them. If they are left, implied is that the others wouldn’t be. Here we see the destruction of the Kingdom of Samaria foretold I believe. With the 7,000, we see the beginnings of the Church in a certain way.


This prophesy also has much to say for the Kingdom of Judah, though we may not realize it at first. Those 7,000 exist in Samaria, in the world. They are not part (at least by their original nature in birth) of the Davidic Kingdom. Yet we know that the Davidic Kingdom would reign forever once the Messiah became King. I believe the only way to explain this anomaly is through what is known as the Social Kingship of Christ.


When we say the Kingship of Christ, it is not meant in terms of an earthly theocracy, ruled by the Pope acting in the person of Christ. While at times this has been how it appeared, it really is much deeper than this. With Christ as King, He claims dominion over all of heaven and earth. Though there continue to be earthly princes and rulers, they are called to acknowledge Christ’s superior Kingship over them, just as a vassal may be left with full autonomy, yet he is still required to acknowledge who his lord is.

Those 7,000 are his heralds. They are the ones who call upon the people and rulers of nations to acknowledge the supremacy of this ruler. Is this not the Catholic Church? Are we not made up from the world? Yet do we not serve the eternal King of David’s house? Do we not make disciples of all nations to follow and serve this King?

Yet who is this ruler? What will he be? How will he rule? The prophet Isaiah provides the most exhaustive prophecy concerning the rule of the anointed King of Judah, as such he will be our next figure.

Why the Incarnation Matters: Extra Elisha Nulla Salus

One of the things I have always found curious about the prophet Elijah is how much “unfinished business” he leaves. He destroyed all the priests of pagan worship in Samaria, encountered the presence of God on Mt. Horeb, worked miracles left and right, and yet there is more to do. Future Kings must be anointed. (Of which we will speak more of later.) In addition to these secular matters, God commands Elijah to anoint a successor, to finish the job he started. One can see a very interesting shadow of Christ here I believe. Even the greatest prophet in Israel (until that time) still had things to do. A successor would come who was even greater than Elijah! In the meantime, he chooses Elisha as his successor.

The choice of Elisha is again demonstrative of God’s supremacy. He is a herdsman, still under the authority of his father when God makes known to Elijah his successor. We know from our earlier study that it can be inferred that Elijah was a man of at least moderate nobility. (Being able to secure an audience with King Ahab to announce the drought.) God calls him because it is His will, not for any reason according to the standards of the world. When he is adopted by Elijah, Elisha becomes essentially his apprentice, traveling with Elijah for 8 years.

When Elijah is assumed into heaven, Elisha formally takes over, receiving a “double inheritance” from Elijah. While the terms might be confusing to us, it simply means that he received the fullness of Elijah’s ministry. He proves this by doing precisely what Elijah did in demonstrating power over the Jordan River, invoking God’s name to force the river to part. If we remember, the Israelites of this time worshipped the nature gods of the Phoenicians. By subjecting the water to his will, God demonstrates to Elisha that he will continue in his masters calling.

Like his predecessor, he continues the missionary nature of the prophetic ministry. When he meets several of “the prophets” (essentially minstrels of the time) he learns that their rivers are polluted. He does so by the most curious means; he pours salt into the waters.

In this instance and when Elisha commands rain to fall on the earth during before a battle to quench the thirst of soldiers, (2 Kings 3) the supremacy of Yahweh over the elemental forces of nature was demonstrated. With the salt, God takes simple matter from the earth and uses it to purify everything. One is reminded of the sacraments here, how a small wafer, a few drops of water, a smidgen of oil, how these are able to cleanse the souls of the faithful. We are that polluted water.

He continues working other miracles (in saving the estate of a woman, and then later raising her son) just as Elijah did, outside of Israel. When he finally returns to Samaria, he continues the prophetic ministry. He then displays the missionary character in a different way.

During this time, the rising power of Syria is in a state of constant war with the nations surrounding Israel. Even in times of peace, all parties involved are simply replenishing their forces, preparing for another war. One of the Syrian generals is a man by the name of Naaman. Known as a brave and valiant man, he is also diseased as a leper. (Not the leprosy we know of, but a debilitating skin disease nonetheless.) When he learns of a prophet in Samaria who could certainly cure him, he obtains permission to head there. Eventually, he meets with Elisha, and the prophet tells him “wash seven times in the Jordan.”

Namaan leaves angrily, and one can hardly blame him. In his tradition (and the traditions of various pagan peoples), prophets normally had their ministry followed by much extravagance. (Remember the minstrels in Israel, “prophets” known for the ecstasies, the prophets of Hadad who confronted Elijah with their elaborate dancing and cutting of themselves, etc.) Elisha doesn’t even offer to do anything. He simply tells him to wash in the waters, and not just any water, but the Jordan River. Why did Namaan waste all of this time, just to take a bath in what seems to him as some dirty backwater? (He displays his contempt in the Scriptures by mentioning several other waters which were obviously better.)

As he is leaving, his servants finally convince him to just do what the prophet says. He would have offered a thousand sacrifices had the prophet commanded him. Why not just take a dip in the river? As he does this, he is cured! Running back to Elisha, he gives one of the greatest statements of monotheism and faith in Yahweh to be found anywhere in the Scriptures. He immediately renounces his faith in Rimmon, the pagan god of Damascus.

What does this say about the nature of the Church and Jesus Christ, whose Incarnation we celebrate as Christians? Here you could see the roots of that ever controversial doctrine extra ecclesiam nulla salus: Outside the Church There is no Salvation. The sinner is called to God’s land, which is the Church. We are Namaan. The Church gives the waters of baptism, which clean. Left implied in the story is that any other water would not have cleansed Lamaan of his sickness, it would have made him feel good. Likewise, how many people in the world today accept false remedies to their problems? Whether it be promiscuity, drugs, alcohol, greed, pride, these may give the individual a certain euphoria, but they cannot heal the soul.

The Church asks instead for the simplest of things: Have a few drops of water poured on your head.

Why The Incarnation Matters: Elijah the Evangelist

When we consider the nature of Israel during Biblical times, we must remember that first and foremost, they were intended to possess a missionary character. Their purpose was to be God’s chosen people for several reasons. First, their personal example in holiness was meant to draw the nations back to God, as it had been in the beginning. Second, they were meant, as priests, to instruct the nations in the ways of God. We see this missionary character at its peak during the reign of King Solomon, when rulers from all around the world traveled to learn his wisdom, which was ultimately a gift from God.


With a few exceptions, the exact opposite of their calling happened. Rather than leading the world to God, they were led by the nations to serve false idols. Rather than instructing in wisdom, they were instructed in foolishness, as the very notion of serving dead pieces of wood was the height of absurdity.

If man was faithless however, God was still faithful. His people would serve their purpose one way or another.  We begin to see the recapturing of this missionary spirit during the times of the prophets Elijah and Elisha. They establish the path that is expounded upon by later prophets. In their own individual way, they begin paving the landscape for not only Jesus Christ, but the very missionary nature of His Church thousands of years later.


With Elijah, we note his missionary character during his exile by King Ahab when he is sent to Zarephath. The Book of Kings tells us Elijah is sent there, and “I have commanded a widow there to feed you.” When the Kingdom of Israel rejects Elijah’s message, God sends him to the nations represented by this Phoenician woman.


As a Phoenician, she worshipped the elements of nature like her people. As was noted in the last posting, Elijah causes a drought to fall upon the entire region as a way of showing God’s supremacy over the elements of nature. In addition to the drought, there is a massive famine throughout the land. When Elijah meets the widow, the famine has become so intense that she and her son are preparing one last meal before their death. They have essentially given up all hope.


If the drought showed God’s supremacy, Elijah would show God’s clemency. By taking care of God’s servant Elijah, he promises the woman that what little she has will not run out. Sure enough, that small bit of food and oil feeds them for years.


There is much to be said within this little story about the missionary character of the Church. Like the pagans of the story, the people of the nations today are losing hope. They have worshipped at the altar of sex, power, the passing things of this world, and they have provided no happiness. In the certain sense of the word, they are “widows.” They were called and made for union with God, and they have deserted Him. The widowhood of mankind is stranger though, for the widow is a widow by choice, choosing to treat the one they were called for union with as dead. They are truly alone in the world.


Like Elijah, the Church is sent to the widow, the man of today without God. The Church points out the intellectual and spiritual famine of this world and says “join us, bring us to your home, and you will survive this.” Yet the individual must provide their life towards God’s service. By giving up the last bit of food she had, the widow was taking a great risk, and yet still had nothing to lose. If she gives up the last bit of food and nothing happens, her death is certain. If she turns the man away, she dies anyway, except maybe with a little bit of the pain dulled out.


Is this not what the world does today? They take things that were originally given by God, and use them for their own selfish purposes. They don’t really bring healing; they just make it easier to cope. The sexually promiscuous person is never happy. I had a friend in this state, who told me she had to drink herself into a massive stupor to be able to sleep with anyone anymore. She knew it didn’t help or maker her happier, what it did was kill the pain for a brief amount of time, making the road to death easier.


Elijah challenges the woman to do different. Picking up on the previous column, he offers a second wager to the world. Don’t use what you have simply for the gratification of yourself; use it as a gift to others. Use your food to help save the lives of others. Everyone dies anyways; we might as well spend that time trying to enrich the lives of others. This act of selflessness ends up being her salvation. Through this one act, God provides her an endless supply of food and happiness. When the widow’s son dies, Elijah restores him. At this point, the widow recognizes the truth of God Elijah brings to her, and she begins to worship God.


The Church today tells the modern world: Following falsehood will lead you to death. There is no happiness in the religion of self. Only in serving others will you find life. Only in being a gift to others will you find true prosperity and happiness.


May we always have this zeal with the world, and everyday bring souls the source of true happiness and life.

Why the Incarnation Matters: Elijah's Wager

When we continue through the Old Testament during the years of the Kingdom, there is always certain sadness in my soul reading this narrative. We see once again a confirmation of God’s plan, and man’s rejection of that plan. After establishing David (and for a time Solomon) as King of a growing state meant to teach the nations of God, Israel is instead influenced by the nations. They go from great power to divided kingdoms, divided kingdoms to vassals, vassals to nothingness.

Each time this occurs, they are given ample opportunity to repent. In the case of the Kingdom of Judah, they sometimes do, although it is always very brief. Within one generation, they turn their backs on God again. God sends them the prophets during this time to provide them with another resource towards Him, and they reject (and in some cases) murder the prophets. The sins of the Kingdom of Israel were so grave the people are wiped off the face of the earth. (Becoming “The Lost Tribes of Israel”) Judah’s kingdom becomes so depraved in her sins, she is called “worse than Israel” by the prophets, and the glorious Temple is destroyed, and their fate is exile. I would like to spend the next few segments reflecting upon this period in Israel’s time, and what it ultimately means for our study.

When discussing the two Kingdoms, it is good to remember one thing. Neither are treated very favorably by the authors in the Scriptures. Of the 39 Kings of Israel and Judah after the split of the kingdom, 7 are spoken of with a general positive image. Out of those 7, only two or three are praised highly. In the Kingdom of Israel, every King is spoken of with greater or lesser contempt with the exception of two of them. (The best that can be said was they did evil “not as much as their fathers.”) Indeed, the writer of Kings can barely be bothered to mention them, since he gives the frequent retort “as for the rest of their works, are they not mentioned in the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel?” In other words “don’t make me waste my time speaking of them beyond what is absolutely necessary.” For us, it is absolutely necessary to focus on the Kingdom of Israel. While an evil people led by mainly evil kings, some of the greatest events in Scripture happen in this Kingdom.

Let us offer a few passing notes on the Kingdom. First, we recognize that life as a King of Israel was a very dangerous job. Out of the 19 Kings, there are 9 different ruling dynasties. Since the kingdom existed for around 210 years, a “change in management” occurred roughly every 24 years. 9 of the kings were assassinated, 2 of them died early deaths not the result of natural causes. Jeroboam was promised a peaceful dynasty had he followed God’s will. Since he didn’t, the very opposite happened.

Following a series of civil wars and coup d’état’s, Omri ascended to the throne of Israel. He brings not only political stability to the Northern Kingdom, but turns them into a regional power as well. Through his work and that of his son, he even manages to effectively control the Kingdom of Judah. (Via marriage alliance, and the fact that Israel was far stronger at the time, it can reasonably be deduced that Judah was essentially a vassal.) When he dies, it looks as if God’s plan has completely failed. Rather than a single kingdom set to bring about the light to the nations, the land is effectively ruled by a cruel pagan.

The cruelty of the Northern Kingdom intensifies under the leadership of Ahab. In addition to continuing the strengthening of the region begun by his father Omri, he married the Phoenician Jezebel, which led to an explosion of pagan worship within the lands, and the slaughter of many Jewish priests and prophets by Jezebel. In their place, worship of ba’al (meaning in Israeli culture a false god, in this case Hadad), the ancient regional god of rain, thunder, and lightning flourished. During this time, salvation history reaches another major event, the appearance of Elijah.

There is curiously little known about Elijah before this point. His name does not tell us much. (It simply means The Lord is God.) Unlike other major figures of the Scriptures, he is given no family background. We can infer he had to have been a man of at least medium importance (since he is introduced in the Scriptures as having an audience with the King), but little else is told.

I believe this to be by design. Just as the selection of David tended to defy the natural order, Elijah’s appearance is not based on nobility, talent, etc. He simply is there. He appears before the King, and delivers God’s message, and takes up the fight against pagan worship. While he may have lived in relative obscurity before, after this point we learn much about him. He enters the scene condemning the rampant paganism by pronouncing sentence upon the Kingdom of Israel, stating:

As the Lord the god of Israel lives, before whom I stand, there shall be neither dew nor rain these years, except by my word. (1 Kings 17:1)

The choice of a drought I always found to be a curious one. While the standard message “they would be forced to trust on God so it would rain again” holds true, I think the modern eye misses a deeper understanding. As previously noted, worship of Hadad flourished in the land of Samaria. (Israel) Since he was the god of storms, this was a direct challenge towards their deity. As was noted before with the story of the Golden Calf, man had perverted the natural order. The seasons, just like the beasts of the earth, were ultimately created for man’s purpose, not for man to worship.

While this can be looked at as an act of punishment, I believe it to also be an act of mercy. God wishes Israel to follow Him, yet He does not wish to leave them ignorant as to why. If they wish to follow an elemental spirit they believe controls the seasons, God will demonstrate that the seasons occur and change at His command only.

In addition to this challenge, Elijah further demonstrates God’s power. The pagan Israelites believed the gods of the land provided food and life in addition to the weather. Elijah proves otherwise, promising a woman that not only would she be able to live indefinitely on a paltry amount of food and drink, but restoring life to her son when he dies. One by one the people begin to believe in Elijah’s mission, turning to God. A definitive clash was inevitable. Elijah decides to strike “first blood” if you will.

Elijah at this point is Israel’s most wanted man (King Ahab refers to him as “you troubler of Israel”), hunted relentlessly. He is hiding in the town of Zarepeth because of Ahab. Ahab even threatens war with whoever amongst the surrounding nations is harboring him. Rather than continue in hiding, he ambushes Ahab personally. He decides to confront Ahab on his own terms. Elijah challenges all the pagan priests and prophets of the Ba’al to assemble at Mount Carmel where he would directly challenge paganism in Israel.

Like Joshua before him and many others, Elijah demands Israel stop sitting on the fence. This day, they will either serve the gods of the nations, or they will serve Yahweh. In Elijah’s challenge, he gives them a reason to follow Yahweh. He pronounces himself as but one man, and points out his foes are 450. He then demands two bulls be sacrificed, one by him, and one by the pagans. Whichever sacrifice was consumed by fire, that would be the true God.

The priests of Ba’al go first. They pray their incantations and chants, and nothing happens. They process around the altar as their religious rituals demand, and nothing happens. Several hours later, they are still doing it. Showing his sense of humor, Elijah mocks them to pray louder, for perhaps their god is sleeping. This only increased their efforts, as they began mutilating themselves, pleading with their deity to respond. A full day and a lot of shed blood later, the bull is still laying on the altar. Elijah has proven the impotence of the pagan gods. Now he wishes to show the power of the true God.

Continuing his flare for the dramatics, it was not enough to have fire immediately consume the bull. First, he builds a brand new altar (refusing to offer sacrifice on the altar of a pagan) and then digs a massive trench. Continuing, he douses the offering in so much water the entire trench is filled. In a certain symbolic sense with all the water, Elijah is not just having a bull consumed by fire, but the very thing the pagans proclaimed their god controlled. As there was still a massive drought occurring throughout the land, the apparent wasting of so much water would only be further insult to injury to the pagans. If he fails, not only has he condemned them further (as there is less water), if he succeeds, they are still condemned. After all this, he asks that God accept the sacrifice.

The response was as dramatic as the challenge itself. Not only does fire consume the sacrifice, but it consumes the altar, and evaporates all of the water surrounding the altar and the trench. The people firmly convinced at this very dramatic display of power of Yahweh, rally to Elijah and execute every single pagan priest in the land.

In this story we see once again that God could have chosen to destroy the kingdom. Rather than destroy, He gives the people even more proof that they should be following Him instead. Through the actions of Elijah, he wins the repentance of King Ahab himself. Such repentance was short-lived, for Ahab and Samaria.

Just like that, Elijah’s ministry on earth abruptly ends. Designating Elisha as his successor, he is taken to heaven with a massive escort of horses and chariots of flame. He who entered in obscurity leaves with a big bang.

Why the Incarnation Matters: David and Solomon

When we reach the entrance of David, we enter another great turning point in salvation history. Just as the fear of Adam and Eve caused sin and death, the fear of the nations caused Israel foolishly to demand a King. As was noted, their first choice was a failure before God and even the people. God decides now to choose one “after His own heart” and finds the young David. What makes David’s entrance into history so powerful?

We must first note who has brought David into the scene. Most autocracies (as in the rule supremely by one) either worked through a direct succession of family members, or through their hand-picked successors (the early Roman Empire operated this way, where future Caesars were “adopted” into the family of the current ruler), or via coup d'état.  At the time of his calling, David was neither of royal blood, or a hand-picked successor by Saul. He becomes a forerunner of Christ at this very anointing. He is anointed King not by the flesh (via royal blood), nor by the will of man (through the current sovereign’s desires or a coup), but of God.

He is also contrasted by Saul in the manner of the heart. When God gave the Israelites Saul, one could almost interpret it as “you want it, you’ll get it, and you will like it.” They were so hung up on external appearances (we wish to be like the nations), God gave them a king of grandiose external appearances, but little else. Just like their ancestors, they lusted after the external, and found it was nothing that they thought it would be.
Since David was God’s choice, God shows through His selection how all future Kings should act. God looks not on the externals, but the heart. Indeed, David was the least impressive of his brothers. Yet God chose David above his brothers, for God could see that David loved, and would always love God.

Also evident is the understanding of obedience in David that is superior to Saul. He understands that Saul is King, and he is not to attempt to supplant Saul. On the contrary, he offers himself into Saul’s service. He becomes a court musician, then soldier, then a great general of Saul’s army, carrying Saul’s wishes throughout the then growing kingdom of Israel. When Saul becomes jealous and seeks to have him killed, David does not seek revenge. This is taken to what could even be viewed a comical extreme when David takes something from Saul, simply to prove to him he could have killed him but chose not to. Later in his life when Saul dies, he slays the one who killed him.

Even more important is the attitude of David once he sins. The power of the King is a very intoxicating power, and eventually David succumbs to it. Desiring another man’s wife, now King David has an affair with her, and then sends her husband on a suicide mission so nobody can find out or take revenge. Once he realizes how gravely he has sinned, he does not attempt to do as Saul did in offering holocaust after holocaust. Rather, the sacrifice offered is David’s broken heart and body, pleading for forgiveness. Through these traits, despite some setbacks, the Kingdom of Israel flourished under David. The people of God were returning to their initial calling in the Garden of Eden, being stewards of all the Earth.

The Entrance of King Solomon

One of the problems we have noticed so far in salvation history is that while there are certainly righteous individuals, that righteousness seldom extends to those who come after them. In the eyes of the orthodox Jew of that time, one could not fault them for thinking this pattern would be broken. Solomon succeeded his father King David, and had dealt with all of the court intrigue that typically surrounds a young kingdom. He demonstrated great wisdom that the world traveled to see, and he built the magnificent Temple.

Through Solomon the world was learning about God. While politically he made many city-states his vassals, he also exposed them to the worship of the One True God. His influence was truly starting to expand throughout the entire region. Piece by piece he expanded his empire. We see here the initial call of Adam and Eve to rule all creation in God’s name.

Yet like his first parents, Solomon had a downfall. One could surmise that it was the pride of his first parents. Solomon was the wisest of his age, and one of the most powerful kings, accustomed to beauty wherever he went. So accustomed was he to this beauty, he began seeking it out everywhere, including within the women of pagan nations. This presented some obvious problems.

In Israel, only Yahweh was worshipped, only He was God. Yet the pagan women Solomon wed obviously still wanted to worship their own gods. Solomon felt he had to still marry them. These were political marriages, and he needed them to grow his stature. Even if divorce was acceptable as a concession, he could not divorce and lose his power. First, he built houses for his wife (then the daughter of the Egyptian Pharaoh), and we do know that worship of those pagan deities happened at these houses.

Like all good men, Solomon had a desire to please his wife. Yet unlike a good man, he did not know how to temper that desire with prudence. Most importantly, he did not lead his wife in serving God. In this instance, his sin was very much like that of Adam’s. Several Church Fathers placed on Adam not only the sin of eating of the fruit, but for allowing his wife to be seduced by the serpent, rather than being there to defend her.
From this small crack in the armor things began to shatter. Not content with just one wife, Solomon takes polygamy to an entire new level. He amasses for himself over 700 wives and 300 concubines. As time went on, his “concessions” to these women grew even more, until eventually pagan temples started appearing within Jerusalem itself. Solomon, he of great wisdom, had turned into a man of absolute perversion, sexually and religiously. Bad as things were, they were about to become much worse.

Why The Incarnation Matters: The First King of Israel

This narrative continues in the days of Israel settling in the land once they conquered the region. The book of Judges tells us on several occasions “everyone did what was right in their own eyes.” Even after all they had seen, they persisted in their rebellion against God, and just as before, God still attempted to help them. This time, he raised judges, holy men and women who rose to prominence teaching the people the ways of God.

Yet the people still persisted in their rebellion “doing what was wicked in the sight of The Lord.” Eventually, they clamored for a King to rule over them, just as “the other nations” had a King to rule them. (1 Samuel 8:5). This was directly contrary to God’s plan. As we remember from Eden, God ruled over Adam and Eve, and they were to be brought into unity ruling creation with Him. The people instead wanted yet another barrier between them and God, in an attempt to be like everyone else. The other nations introduced habits that nearly destroyed them, and still they could not shake their influence. (Gone were the days that God walked and talked with Moses, though he was unable to see God face to face. Even longer gone are the days when God walked side by side with Adam and Eve in the garden!)

However, at this point salvation history reaches one of those irrevocable turning points. God decides to grant the people their request for a King. Yet through that royal line, the True King would come to this world.

The founding of the Kingdom, like all institutions, certainly went through some growing pains. The Israelis could not protest they were unaware however. (1 Samuel 8:10-21) They received this instantly in the person of King Saul. Almost immediately after his coronation, Saul strikes fear into the heart of the people, conscripting them into battle. Rather than being this great man of legend they assumed their King would be, the people quickly realized that Saul would be a tyrant. Yet, the kingdom would remain, and God would use this Kingdom to fulfill his glory.

While Saul’s reign was initially one of expanding the glory of God’s people, this very rapidly changed. He was no longer leading the people, but using them as tools for his own desires, such as when he barred people from eating until every one of his enemies was dead (1 Samuel 14), which almost causes his son, the hero of the battle to die.

It rapidly becomes evident that Saul, far from being a servant of the people, is more interested in holding onto his own power. When he defeats the Egyptians (and their client kingdom) in battle at God’s command, he decides to keep the spoils for himself, contrary to the direct command of God those spoils be destroyed. He attempts to take as hostages of stature, as the kings around him do.

One thing we must remember is that Saul’s decisions are entirely rational, and even defensible from a certain point of view. What he spared from the sword amongst the animals he sacrificed to God. With a court of hostages, Israel’s position would certainly be strengthened, allowing in his mind God’s glory to be spread across the land.

There is just one problem with this. God commanded Saul to do the direct opposite. This campaign of war was not about building up stature, but rather God exacting vengeance upon those who oppressed His people at every corner. It is here that Samuel provides a curious statement:

Does the Lord desire holocausts and victims, and not rather that the voice of the Lord should be obeyed? For obedience is better than sacrifices: and to hearken rather than to offer the fat or rams. Because it is like the sin of witchcraft, to rebel: and like the crime of idolatry, to refuse to obey. Forasmuch, therefore, as you have rejected the word of the Lord, the Lord has also rejected you from being king. (1 Sam 15:22-23)

When one looks at the regulations of the sacrifices of the law in the Old Testament, to hear God say “obedience is better than sacrifices” sounds a bit confusing. Yet in this sentence is contained one of the central truths of our faith.

Why is obedience better than sacrifice? Obedience goes right to the heart of our nature as human beings and created persons. Since we are created, we are not the Creator. When we obey, we in our own little way reverse the sin of our first parents, who sinned through their disobedience. Sure, they had their reasons. Even more, they didn’t become gods upon eating of the tree. Yet all of this is irrelevant. Their first test was to acknowledge God as the Creator of their lives, and they failed that test.

Through disobedience comes every other kind of sin. In doing what he had done, Saul placed himself above everyone, including God. God had given him a Kingdom, and at that point he “thanked” God by doing the precise opposite of what he was supposed to do. After all, he had a mighty army, was a war hero, and the people behind him. Why not enjoy the privileges?

Saul realizes at this point he has done a grave wrong. He repents before God, but that repentance is not total. He seeks to maintain his power which God had given him. Samuel rejects this, and walks away. We may lose a bit of the impact of such a move in the historical manner the Bible records the event.

We must remember that the King was a Dominus, a master over all the land. In the East, there has been a long tradition of the ruler having absolute authority. So absolute was this authority, he was completely separated from the people. Indeed, to merely enter into the presence of the King without his blessing was to incur death. If you took your leave before being given permission to leave, this was also worthy of death. For Samuel to turn his back on Saul was an act of rejecting his authority as King. Saul had been accustomed now for years for people to give him that deference. When it was rejected, his anger kindled hotly, and he tore the garment of Samuel in attempting to stop him. In return, Samuel promises Saul that the kingdom will be torn from him with equal force.

Having been rejected by God, Saul decides to build up his own power base at this point. He becomes a full-fledged tyrant, willing to go to any lengths to hold onto his power, including engaging in sorcery, a violation of the greatest commandment of Israel! Even in spite of all this, God still remains faithful to His people. Rather than end the kingdom right there (which He would certainly be His right), a new king is groomed.

The people demanded a King, even after the warnings, so God is letting them have what they want. We have here another instance of God helping His people, even if they are sinful. Just as He provided clothing to Adam and Eve, God still will give them a King, but this time a righteous King.  The entrance of this heir apparent occurs in a most curious manner, yet much can be learned from it.