Comments on: Signs and Wonders

By: David Nickol

David Nickol — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 14:21:17 +0000

So the message the angel proclaimed to the shepherds or Gabriel to Mary was not a proclamation of who Jesus “really was”? Sam Schmitt, The question discussed in the article was: "Is there one person who may be said to have certainly 'seen' (understood) the true identity of Jesus Christ while he lived?" The angels announce Jesus as the Messiah to the shepherds. What was the understanding at the time of who the Messiah would be? The Messiah was expected to be anything but a man of peace who lived humbly, was executed by the Romans, rose from the dead, and was God Incarnate, the Second Person of the Trinity. Still less can one claim that Mary was somehow unsure. One can claim that Jesus was unsure. The question of Jesus's self-understanding is a very difficult one. What did Jesus know as a 2-year-old? That he was God Incarnate? Was Jesus omniscient from the moment of his conception?

By: Frank Miller

Frank Miller — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:11:18 +0000

C.S. Lewis is in many ways a reliable reference especially in this context. The RSV as well. The point made by Mr. Miner suggesting wonder as ‘What just happened?’ connotation is not one that ever occurred to me. However, ‘My God, look what has happened!’, is the connotation. I am a 54 yo cradle Catholic and never confused Mary and Joseph’s awe (recognition of God’s actions) for being dumbstruck and left questioning as to the events of which they were part. Their understanding of the awe they experienced no doubt grew as Jesus himself grew. I don’t think they were blessed with perfect understanding nor needed to be but, with Mary it was perfect faith, and, with Joseph near perfect as far as we can tell. Surely Mary was not immune to ‘fides quaerens intellectum’ meaning ‘the active love of God leads a desire for deeper knowledge of God’. ‘And Mary kept all these things, reflecting on them in her heart’ (Luke 2:19). I agree that mr. Miner’s take is not a traditional context but I can see how it is now a popular one. That is, to ascribe ignorance in faith as easily as in 21st century scientific findings to our ancestors. Although these two aspects of our nature are unalike in this regard they can be used effectively to undermine the other.

By: Sam Schmitt

Sam Schmitt — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:50:28 +0000

So the message the angel proclaimed to the shepherds or Gabriel to Mary was not a proclamation of who Jesus “really was”? I think you are confusing the content of the faith with its expression. The fact that the Church formulated the doctrine centuries after Christ’s resurrection does not mean that Christians were unsure of who Jesus was. Still less can one claim that Mary was somehow unsure. The Church today hands on the same faith the apostles taught – although the challenge to the Church’s belief by the various heresies sharpened her understanding and made it more explicit.

By: BE

BE — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:44:54 +0000

Every morning the world we wake to is amazing. Flowers, clouds, children – you name it, or them, we’ve seen them all before, and they’re amazing, every day. Imagine waking up every day with Jesus in your home, and you were the mother or the guardian father; wouldn’t you be amazed?

By: David Nickol

David Nickol — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 20:46:31 +0000

Raymond Takashi Swenson,

When the angels announced Jesus as the Messiah, or when Gabriel told Mary that Jesus would be the Son of God, that was far from revealing what Christians came to believe Jesus really was. It took centuries to come to an agreement.

By: Raymond Takashi Swenson

Raymond Takashi Swenson — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 20:28:16 +0000

If we are going to believe the gospels, that includes the visit of an angel to Mary telling her the identity of the child she would bear. Joseph was comforted through a similar message in a dream. And Mary visited her cousin Elizabeth, mother of John the Baptist, who testified that she knew the identity of the child. The shepherds who sought them out in Bethlehem affirmed that angels were explicit about the identity of the child as the Messiah, and Lord.

By: David Nickol

David Nickol — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:59:35 +0000

Brad Miner’s first Bible quotation (Luke 8:14) is from the New American Bible (NAB), but Luke 2:33 in the NAB is, “The child’s father and mother were amazed at what was said about him.” The phrase he quotes from Luke 2:33 (“were wondering at those things which were spoken concerning”) appears to be from the Douay-Rheims version. It is very strange to use Douay-Rheims at all, let alone for a single verse.

The quote he identifies as Numbers 17:19 is actually Numbers 24:17 (from the NAB), and what he identifies as Matthew 16:13 is actually 16:23 (also from the NAB).

By: harry

harry — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:58:11 +0000

I think Luke used the word (2296 in Strong’s Greek Lexicon) in Lk 2:33 the same way he used it in Lk 24:41, indicating amazement at a truth it takes a while to grasp completely, even if one had an incomplete grasp of it prior to whatever “drove the point home” that is filling one with “wonder.”

Mary and Joseph had some idea of Who Jesus was before presenting Him in the temple. The apostles had heard that Jesus was risen and no doubt hoped that was true, and unlike Thomas, allowed themselves to believe that, or at least hope in it, in some small way.

Mary and Joseph were filled with “wonder” at the words of Simeon. The apostles were filled in “wonder” at the bodily presence of the risen Lord. I think theoretical belief being confronted with a more concrete demonstration of what one believes brings about “wonder,” which in this case is not so much a case of disbelief, but one of rapidly increasing comprehension of the truth of what one already knew or at least suspected was true.