AND IN A
HUMBLE MANGER
Filed
by
PAULY FONGEMIE
December
21, 2007
"And
it
came to pass, that when they were there, her days were
accomplished, that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her
firstborn [
1] Son, and wrapped
Him up in swaddling
clothes, and laid Him in a manger; because there was no room for them
in the inn. And there were in the same country shepherds watching, and
keeping the night watches over their flock. And behold an Angel of the
Lord stood by them, and the
brightness of God shone round about them; and they feared with a great
fear. And the Angel said to them: Fear not; for, behold, I bring you
good tidings of great joy, that shall be to all the people:
"For,
this day, is born to you a Saviour, Who is Christ the Lord, in
the city of David. And this shall be a sign unto you. You shall find
the Infant wrapped in swaddling clothes, and laid in a manger. And
suddenly there was with the Angel a multitude of the heavenly army,
praising God, and saying: Glory to God in the highest; and on earth
peace to men of good will. And
it came to pass, after the Angels departed from them into Heaven, the
shepherds said one to another: Let us go over to Bethlehem,
and let us see this word that is come to pass, which the Lord hath
shewed to us.
"And
they came with haste; and they found Mary and Joseph, and the
Infant lying in the manger. And seeing, they understood of the word
that had been spoken to them concerning this Child. And all that heard,
wondered; and at those things that were told them by the
shepherds. But Mary kept all these words, pondering them in her
heart. And
the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God, for all the things
they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them." [St. Luke 2:7-20]
This is
the more complete account of the first Christmas, the other
being in St. Matthew's Gospel. We are struck by the simplicity of the
scene, its utter humility, contentment, peace and joy, the perfection
of
Love Himself Who consented to be born of human nature in so lowly a
place, the King of kings born to the Queen of queens and not with the
fanfare of men but that of the Angels. To those who
think like the world thinks and judges all things accordingly, the
manger scene is one of incongruity and even implausibility. To see the
first Christmas as it truly was and is one needs to see with the eyes
of faith, or the desire for it, which is a gift from God, a response to
grace. The shepherds had it, and the Magi,
too. Apparently not, the current Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury who
scoffs at the Nativity scene. Not even Herod scoffed,
although he had not the gift of faith, for he worried exceedingly about
the Little King Who might rival his power and thus instructed the Three
Kings to report to him what they found as they journeyed East. [Thanks
to the Providence of God, they avoided his environs on their way back
to their kingdoms.] The Magi had consulted with Herod originally
because there was no public proclamation of this momentous event
that would forever change the world men had known since the fall in
Eden.
While
all the Mysteries of the Holy Rosary are beautiful and truly the
"School of Mary", of the Joyful Mysteries it is the third, the
Nativity, on which one lingers longest, indeed, those ten Hail Marys
pass all
together too quickly, for one
wants to remain at the foot of the manger---as Mary did there as she
would later at the Foot of the Cross---the first sacrifice of
Christ, so to speak. Now the two Gospels, that of Matthew and Luke, do
not speak of the animals that enclosed the manger with warmth, but
through tradition we
believe that, since it was a place where shepherds and country folks
sheltered with their animals, it is natural and a part of God's plan
for
them to be present at the manger as they were and as signposts of the
Passion and the Resurrection and what came after.
Consider
the donkey, who so lovingly and carefully bore Mary to her
visit to Saint Elizabeth for the birth of St. John the Baptist, then on
the arduous trek to Bethlehem, heavy with Child, and later them both on
the flight into Egypt under command of an Angel: It would be the donkey
who would bear the Savior into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, triumphant as
a King, before His Passion and Crucifixion. Perhaps, through the
Providence of God, the same donkey?
Consider
the oxen, beasts of burden who are bound to the yoke: Christ
would later call all men unto Him into His loving Sacred Heart, to
bind themselves to Him, with the words, "For My yoke is sweet and My
burden light." [St. Matthew 11:30]
Later
we will look again at the oxen.
Consider
the sheep and the little lambs: Jesus told His disciples that
He was the Good Shepherd, Who knows His sheep and His sheep know Him,
including: "And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold: them
also I must bring, and they shall hear My voice, and there shall be one
fold and one Shepherd." [St. John 10:16]
The
figure of the lamb or the sheep is perhaps the most familiar one of
all in Scripture. The Apostles, in particular St. Peter, as the first
Pontiff, were to feed His lambs or sheep with the His teachings and the
Sacraments He entrusted to them, they too, being shepherds. But it is
the little lamb, the one so often depicted in Nativity scenes that is
the most poignant for it is the Savior Himself, Who is not only
Shepherd but the Lamb, the Agnus Dei, the sacrificed Lamb of God, both
Victim and High Priest, both Lamb and Shepherd.
Oh yes,
the Mystery of the Holy Nativity is very rich, indeed, beyond
our ability to plumb all its depths. As numerous as the stars in the
sky of Bethlehem, as numerous as the Angels singing in chorus and
adoring the newborn King of Angels, as many as these are the vast
innumerable riches of the poor manger ...
We must
not intrude on this holy scene, this "Heaven on earth" by
bringing in the unseemingly profane modernity, although the purpose of
this
column is one of contrast to ponder. In order to avoid any undue
incursion or spoliation, the column is deliberately concluded below as
if on a second page.
..................
John 2
14 And
He found in the temple them that sold oxen and sheep and doves,
and the changers of money sitting.
15 And
when He had made, as
it were, a scourge of little cords, He drove them all out of the
temple, the sheep also and the oxen, and the money of the changers He
poured out, and the tables He overthrew.
2
Corinthians 6
14 Bear
not the yoke with
unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or
what fellowship hath light with darkness?
Galatians 5
1 Stand
fast, and be not held again under the yoke
of bondage. [reference to the slavery of sin, one sin of which is
injustice, the withholding of truth men require to live in dignity and
harmony with one another.]
Acts
Of Apostles 15
28 For
it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no
further burden upon
you than these necessary things ... [reference to religious observance,
but good counsel in general regarding human nature and men's right to
justice under the natural law. Man is not owed charity as he is
justice, and while charity is the greatest of the three theological
virtues, the purpose of government, ecclesiastical and civil is
justice, not charity.]
Taking
in the unsightly bedlam of the anti-Bethlehem scene that is
modern politics, and public debate, one can only think that the above
image is too benign, for all its swift dispatch of evildoers, to
capture the profane, stupid, obscene cacophony before
us. Modern man, despite his claim to "have faith" is spiritually blind,
politically inept at best and subject to that which is not only
unbecoming persons created in the image of God, but completely
incongruous. This segment of the column could be subtitled, "How come?"
in sharp contrast to that first Christmas and most historic of historic
events, for the Church teaches us why the Incarnation of Christ.
Christmas
in secular America otherwise known and hailed as "the holiday
season", ought to be renamed the "silly mean season", courtesy of the
rampant secularists with power who despise Christ. In the year of 2007,
it is rendered
even more so by the presidential election of 2008, thus it is more
accurately called the perennial season of hubris, hype, and hypocrisy.
Note,
the party affiliation is not mentioned because there is only one party
in America, the party of the establishment, big government handouts,
largesse with other people's money, the new world order, a la "Foreign
Affairs" articles written by one of the candidates, as
much abortion as can be gotten away with, and the nanny PC state in one
form or another, preferably both in some quarters. Until Christ reigns
in enough hearts, truly reigns, America is flirting with national
dissolution and moral, social suicide. Our judas goats have enslaved us
poor oxen bound ever and ever more tightly to a burdensome yoke
unworthy of a people if they still possessed the use of reason. We can
choose to have an abortion, women can "make the right decision" but no
one can decide for themselves or not if they want to smoke in their own
home while alone, in many jurisdictions, or what their children eat for
lunch at school. Imagine! One of the candidates is seeking to establish
by law universal Pre-K indoctrination for all children in the USA. Of
course the age of the so-called Pre-K will be moved further and further
back until "no child is left behind" in his mother's arms, that is.
Consider
first and foremost the audacious egos involved: consider
another Christmas over two hundred years ago, when a small band of
revolutionaries, outnumbered but
not out won, led by General George Washington, crossed the frigid
Delaware River, where the Hessian mercenaries were encamped. You and I
may not have joined the American rebels as the
violence that was used to stir up the masses was more violent and
unjust than that of the supposed British rule, but we can marvel at the
humility of Washington, who was so courageous against all odds. When
the American republic was established a President was needed. The
colonial representatives selected him by popular acclamation, not the
least of which were some of his favorable attributes: honesty,
simplicity, and humility. He did not seek the highest office in the
land; no, in fact, he shunned all such conceit. He had to be convinced
and in the end he relented out of a sense of duty, not ambition.
Only a humble man is open to the grace of God; I am morally certain
that George Washington, once a Freemason, of whom it is said he
converted to the true faith, also kept an image of the Mediatrix of all
graces on his bedroom wall.
Consider
the enormity and boldness of such egos that think they are
fit
not only to be President, but that they are better than their
opponents, and are willing to spend the millions and millions that
could be used to help those they say they want to help, to convince the
voters how worthy they are for such office where they will assist the
ultra liberal unconstitutionally bent Congress to match what they spent
getting elected and then some. Evolutionists and those who think they
can peacefully coexist with them also believe that money
grows on trees.
Consider
the megalomania
that has seized one American family,
whose husband served two terms and now is in the thick of things,
managing his wife's campaign for President, so that once more we can
have "two for one" as if the first round wasn't sufficient to reveal
how corrupt and or naive the electorate are and how shame itself has
lost all meaning along with the verb "is". Consider that while claiming
to be for reducing taxes on the "middle class"---this is also the year
that our candidates
have "gotten religion", in more ways than one, the first being the
recognition that the middle class, the burdened oxen that make the
water wheels revolve, has been selected for
extermination---this same candidate makes no such claim
in re
the upper classes, yet has her and her husband's substantial millions
safely out of reach of the IRS in the banks of the Cayman Islands.
Consider that
she, taking cynical advantage of the "gotten religion movement", has
put out a commercial with a Christmas tree,
sans nativity, in the
background while she
places the finishing touches on gaily wrapped packages, labeled with
the various aspects of socialism, which means higher taxes, period.
Conceit, and deceit. And not one word about the reason for the season,
the Babe in Bethlehem. How come?
This is
the same candidate who is known to permit money to be handed
out at key intervals to the populace while campaigning. In my day we
used to call this "buying an election" or just plain graft. Now it is
merely "handing out money", perfected to an art form by the Kennedy
machine in an earlier era.
Consider
the ego that resides in a man who has barely served part of a
first Senate term, that he is qualified to be President, given the
exigencies of modern warfare. Consider that
having joined the religion bandwagon, he says he joined a such and such
Protestant church. The reason? He was attracted to its social mores and
its action work. Not one word about being a Christian because he
believes in Christ the Savior. Not to be left in the dust, he, too, has
a
"Christmas" commercial, all sweet and charming with a Christmas tree in
the background,
sans
nativity, of course, that would be just too
religious, with sentiments of gratitude and the like. Does he wish the
viewer and voter a Merry Christmas? No, he requires plausible
deniability to hedge his bets. He has a little surrogate say it for him
to cover one of the bases, his young daughter, with the other one
piping
up "Happy Holidays" to cover the rest.
Right. How come?
Consider
a third candidate who has more guts: he does not pretend to be
a Christmas card commercial. He merely sits before a winter scene, like
all too many of the Christmas cards we received this year from
practicing
Christians, and talks of more class warfare and socialism. He wants to
be Kris Kringle dressed up like Uncle Sam who wants us, our money that
is. He is at
least consistent. Yet he made his fortune using the American system of
injustice, the corporate way, the very system he now declaims.
Hypocrisy. He would deny others the chance to do as he did, if he had
his way, by demand or usurpation. Golly gee! To use one expression from
his home locale. How come?
Not
that I am an unabashed
devotee of corporate America that has sold us down the river of
extinction to the Red Chinese for a meager 30 billion pieces of
poisoned profit.
Consider
a certain Huckster,
a
former Baptist preacher who envisions for himself a messianic role as
do-gooder that is, a reconstructed socialist for higher taxes, for just
one example, in the White House. As an avowed Christian he says he does
not hold with evolution but thinks it is fine in the textbooks of the
government schools. How come?
A brief
digression here. It is not up to a President to dictate
school
texts, but this is beside the point, one is speaking of his opinion as
to what rightly belongs there. He wants it both ways. If an
interview with the affable Larry King on CNN can cause him to stumble
so easily how will he deal with the other messianic personalities in
the Third World and reconstructed Communist China who do not claim to
be Christian?
Hucksteree
is not for "gay marriage" but approves of the US Supreme
Court decision [Lawrence] that in so many words guarantees that later,
if not sooner we will have "gay marriage" or have a heck of a
fight on our hands to outlaw it, piecemeal, with a war of attrition
that
bodes well for the degenerate among us. How come?
With
this candidate there are so many How come? moments there is not
enough space to list them all. One more shall suffice and it is a
beaut! The hopeful Huckster-in-chief is making a campaign stop at a big
anti-Catholic watering hole headed by the notorious Rev. Hagee who
fulminates
against the Catholic Church as the Beast in the Apocalypse and the Pope
as the Antichrist. If he is for "all the people" as he says, why has he
written off well informed Catholics? How come?
Does he
know that anti-Catholic bigotry is socially acceptable,
especially since so many "Catholics" practice it themselves?
Consider
another well heeled candidate who has had an eleventh hour
conversion on abortion, better late than never, and I believe him.
Well, how come he is for experimentation on live embryos who are tiny
human beings, which he acknowledges they are? How come????
I mean
if a person is a person, isn't he always a person and deserving
of the equal protection of the law? The sanctity of life is so basic
and uncomplicated that only mush heads can botch it. If he is this
confused on the most basic of rights, what are we to think of his
ability to judge rightly elsewhere?
Consider
the Catholic candidate, "America's mayor" who wants to reduce
abortions but went on his own cognition and of his own free will,
before Planned
Parenthood and said he was on their side, in so many damning words. How
come? Consider this man who cannot be true to his marriage vows or his
Baptismal promises, much more sacred than that of the US Constitution,
how should we trust him when he says he wants justices that are strict
constructionists? How come he dares to state this with such vehemence
in his fruitcake filled Christmas commercial,
cum tree,
cum red
sweater,
sans nativity?
Could
it just be that he knows all too well that the left-controlled
Senate will not confirm such a justice? And that he hopes we will
forget the
other drop of the shoe, so to speak? To ask is to answer.
And on
and on it goes and where it will stop nobody knows; all we know
is
that the down sized Huck, our Puck the clown of a thousand faces is the
Pied Piper, so much so
that one of the others above felt compelled to hold a press conference
to
explain his Mormon religion, that is, that he believes it and will not
back down, to the nation. To his credit he is resolute while in error
as to the true faith. Contrast this with a previous era, the one known
as Camelot. King Arthur John turned out to be a latter day Lancelot as
we discovered when he delivered
that shame filled speech to a southern rogue's gallery of heretics and
bigots promising them that
Roman Catholicism would have no affect on him. He then proceeded to
prove it with precision once seated in power. The unbelievably
pig-headed media honchos were
comparing the two men as equals. What a spectacle! The powers that
be abroad must be laughing all the way to the proverbial bank. I would
have said the enemy, but we have met the enemy and it is us ... we
all need
the first Christmas as it really was, not how we imagine it to be, now
more then ever.
1. "Her
firstborn"... The meaning is, not that she
afterward had any
other child; but it is a way of speech among the Hebrews, to call
them also the firstborn, who are the only children. See annotation
Matt. 1. 25.
E-MAIL
HOME-----SOUND-OFF
ARCHIVES
www.catholictradition.org/Christmas/holiday5.htm