Nativity scene

[Bluegoat]

So in order to inspire our devotion to the Lord we use something that is not correct. To put our own interpretation of what happened that night, something that the Bible says happened differently, going against what is in the Bible just to inspire our devotion. We have to use something that is incorrect to inspire us.

The elements in the nativity scene are meant to remind us of the nativity, not to stand alone. We understand the significance of the different elements by receiving correct teaching.

What you are suggesting is very similar to saying that we ought not celebrate Christmas on the 25th of Dec because it is not the “real” day(a modern heresy), or insisting that we celebrate Easter on the actual date of the Resurrection rather than on always on a Sunday.(An early church heresy) This is a kind of post-Enlightenment literalism that we see in fundamentalist groups, that think fact and truth are always the same thing.

The use of a wooden stable is simply a matter of using what people are most familiar with. Remember that in the history of the Church most people in Europe and North America were not aware that animals had been kept in caves. Tht does not negate the point of the story.

We have the wise men show up at epiphany because that is how we structure the Christian year - on a yearly basis. It would be rather confusing to have this years nativity scene up and last years as well for the wise men. The point is to be a visual reminder the important points of the story in concert with the yearly cycle of celebration and scripture readings. And why are you insisting on Biblical evidence of three wise men - Catholic teaching doesn’t require that kind of support for every teaching.

All that being said - you could probably work up a really nice cave with some paper mache, or with items for model rail-way use.

 

[rev_kevin]

The date of his birth, and the date on which we choose to celebrate that birth, ARE part of the way the Nativity is portrayed. We’re celebrating an event that occurred in time, after all. If historical accuracy is what you’re after then accuracy about the date is just as important as accuracy about the number of wise men or any other detail.

As for not being historically accurate - I don’t think I’ve ever seen a film about the life of Christ that was 100% absolutely true to the wording of the Gospels, let alone chronologically accurate, or historically accurate.

They don’t none of them take 30-some years to portray His life, for example. Mind you, if they did they’d have to leave about 10 years of blank film between the Flight into Egypt and the Finding of Jesus in the Temple, and then another 18 years of blank film between then and the start of His ministry.

Most don’t show Jesus or the Apostles as Semitic but instead as Caucasian. Most are incredibly light on the blood and gore as well - the Passion of the Christ was the only one to approach realism in that regard.

And I can bet you John the Baptist never looked anything like Charlton Heston, nor did the soldier at the Cross sound anything like John Wayne! And none of them spoke English.

Nonetheless, many of these films have been and are incredibly powerful and significant tools to teach people about the faith. They have done the job of bringing people to Christ. And you probably use inaccurate tools as well - do you use pictures of Our Lord that show Him as Caucasian?

Read out the Gospels to your congregation in English rather than Aramaic or Greek?

Celebrate His birth on December 25? Or any other day?

Then you too are guilty of doing things that you know to be historically inaccurate in the name of teaching people about Christ.

Oh now stop. We’re not talking about films, we’re not talking about John the Baptist looking like Charlton Heston or the solder looking like John Wayne. You’re really streatching it. Sure his birth on December 25th is inaccurate but I don’t teach that it is his correct birth date. Now can we leave the birth date out of this and try to focus on the accuracy of the Nativity Scene?

 

[LilyM]

Ok lets see how the Bible puts it and the way I teach it. Luke 2:6 says, “And while they were there, the time came for her baby to be born. She gave birth to her first child, a son. She wrapped him snugly in strips of cloth and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the village inn. That night some shepherds were in the fields outside the village, guarding their flocks of sheep. Suddenly, an angel of the Lord appeared among them, and the radiance of the Lord’s glory surrounded them. They were terribly frightened, but the angel reasurred them…When the angels had returned to heaven, the shepherds said to eachother, ‘Come on, let’s go to Bethlehem! Let’s see this wonderful thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about.’ They ran to the village and found Mary and Joseph. And there was the baby, lying in the manger…”

Then I go into Matthew 2 abolut the wise men. “Once again the star appeared to them, guiding them to Bethlehem. It went ahead of them and stopped over the place where the child was…They entered the house where the child and his mother, Mary, were, and they fell down before him and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasure chests and gave him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh.”

See Jesus is believed to be about one or two years old when the wise men found him. I teach it the way the Bible says it happened. Mary, Joseph, baby Jesus and the shepherds were present right after the birth and the wise men came a year or so later.

A year or so? Why? The Bible says Herod ordered children under the age of TWO to be killed, it makes more sense to believe that it was two years after. To say one year later is as inaccurate as saying they were there on the night.

Believe it or not, we DO read the Gospels too, and we DO, even the children, assuming they’re not totally unschooled, know that the Wise Men weren’t there at the exact same time as the shepherds. That much is obvious even on the face of the Gospels.

But nonetheless the Wise Men are included in Nativity scenes because they are an integral part of the Christmas story, even if they weren’t present on the night of the event. It wouldn’t be right to exclude such an important episode from the Christmas story simply because it didn’t happen on the night. But I suppose you must exclude it, since it wasn’t contemporaneous. And thereby miss out on much.

If you’ve been Catholic, you’re no doubt aware of the Stations of the Cross. Different episodes from the Passion, all depicted and visible on the Church walls at one and the same time. By your logic you must believe that we are teaching kids that Christ’s Judgement by Pilate happened at exactly the same time as Simon of Cyrene assisting Jesus, which was the same time as His nailing to the Cross and the same time as His burial, because all are visible at the same time.

 

[LilyM]

Oh now stop. We’re not talking about films, we’re not talking about John the Baptist looking like Charlton Heston or the solder looking like John Wayne. You’re really streatching it. Sure his birth on December 25th is inaccurate but I don’t teach that it is his correct birth date. Now can we leave the birth date out of this and try to focus on the accuracy of the Nativity Scene?

Neither do we teach that December 25 is the correct date.

Neither do we teach that the Wise Men were present at the same time as the shepherds, or that there were three of them.

Neither did Our Lord teach that there really was a poor beggar Lazarus and a rich man who went to Hell. Mind you, he didn’t explicitly state that the story was a parable rather than fact, but His audience understood that it was so.

As I said earlier, even a cursory understanding of the Gospels (and they are read even to the children) shows them that Nativity scenes aren’t meant to be an utterly realistic depiction.

 

[KathleenGee]

Rev Kevin,
I remember a year ago we were debating about the Nativity scene.

Yes, it was St. Francis who first started the practice…lo and behold, he invited the villagers to come in the night. When they arrived, there were bonfires set…a baby statue of the Infant lay in a manger with living animals…and then Francis picked up the statue as if it were alive and carried it out to the people to venerate…!!! No – they were not into statue worship.

The other part missing is that the Angel told the shepherds— and I like that idea that perhaps they were the shepherds who looked over the lambs to be used for slaughter in the Temple…that to behold – an Infant laying in a manger—this is significant…an animal feeder…and wrapped in swaddling clothes. These were signs…‘look’…there was great meaning of Christ being placed in an animal feeder…to become the Living Bread of Heaven for us.

Oh Holy Night…it awaits us…and I pray that all will be greatly blessed by the Lord’s coming to you all…

 

[Dorothy]

I think the most important thing here is not producing Nativity scenes of textbook historical accuracy, but instead making art which depicts the realities of the faith in such a way as to inspire devotion. When the average person looks at a Nativity, they don’t whip out their Bible and go “hmm this isn’t EXACTLY how the Gospels depict this, is it?” Rather, most are inclined to reflect upon the poverty into which the King of Glory was born, the reverence shown by all peoples–from the highest state to the lowest–and of the beauty of the love of the Holy Family. The question should not be “how exactly correct is my Nativity scene when it comes to history,” but “does this art inspire me to lift my thoughts toward God?”

-ACEGC

Exactly! We can get so hung up on details that it takes our focus off of the Lord.

 

[rev_kevin]

The elements in the nativity scene are meant to remind us of the nativity, not to stand alone. We understand the significance of the different elements by receiving correct teaching.

What you are suggesting is very similar to saying that we ought not celebrate Christmas on the 25th of Dec because it is not the “real” day(a modern heresy), or insisting that we celebrate Easter on the actual date of the Resurrection rather than on always on a Sunday.(An early church heresy) This is a kind of post-Enlightenment literalism that we see in fundamentalist groups, that think fact and truth are always the same thing.

The use of a wooden stable is simply a matter of using what people are most familiar with. Remember that in the history of the Church most people in Europe and North America were not aware that animals had been kept in caves. Tht does not negate the point of the story.

We have the wise men show up at epiphany because that is how we structure the Christian year - on a yearly basis. It would be rather confusing to have this years nativity scene up and last years as well for the wise men. The point is to be a visual reminder the important points of the story in concert with the yearly cycle of celebration and scripture readings. And why are you insisting on Biblical evidence of three wise men - Catholic teaching doesn’t require that kind of support for every teaching.

All that being said - you could probably work up a really nice cave with some paper mache, or with items for model rail-way use.

I’m saying that the Nativity is inaccurate and you know it is. There are people out there that believe it is accurate. They believe the 3 wise men were present right after his birth. They only know what they see and what they see is incorrect but nobody tells them different. There are childrens stories that say the wise men were their directly after his birth and they believe it because that is what they see and are not told any different. I’m not concerned with any yearly cycle here. Its only confusing because of the way they were taught the way the Nativity Scene has been structured. If it was portrayed correctly in the first place there would be no confusion. As far as me insisting on Biblical evidence of the three wise men, I only mentioned it once here the other times I mentioned it was reguarding them not being present right after Jesus was born, it was not until a year of 2 after his birth. And yes I could make a really nice cave out of some paper mache or how about making it out of chicken wire and plaster.

 

[KathleenGee]

RevKevin,

I am an old woman now getting ready to apply for social security. The nuns taught us that Jesus was about 2 years old when the Wise Men came to visit…

So you still have a bit of Catholicism remaining in you, as well as the Catholic baptism…you can’t wash it away…the Lord is drawing you to us.

 

[rev_kevin]

Rev Kevin,
I remember a year ago we were debating about the Nativity scene.

Yes, it was St. Francis who first started the practice…lo and behold, he invited the villagers to come in the night. When they arrived, there were bonfires set…a baby statue of the Infant lay in a manger with living animals…and then Francis picked up the statue as if it were alive and carried it out to the people to venerate…!!! No – they were not into statue worship.

The other part missing is that the Angel told the shepherds— and I like that idea that perhaps they were the shepherds who looked over the lambs to be used for slaughter in the Temple…that to behold – an Infant laying in a manger—this is significant…an animal feeder…and wrapped in swaddling clothes. These were signs…‘look’…there was great meaning of Christ being placed in an animal feeder…to become the Living Bread of Heaven for us.

Oh Holy Night…it awaits us…and I pray that all will be greatly blessed by the Lord’s coming to you all…

I fully understand the meaning behind the Nativity. I just want to know why we don’t portray/teach is accuratly. As far as the lambs being used for slaughter in the temple, I didn’t say that and its news to me.

 

[LilyM]

I’m saying that the Nativity is inaccurate and you know it is. There are people out there that believe it is accurate. They believe the 3 wise men were present right after his birth. They only know what they see and what they see is incorrect but nobody tells them different. There are childrens stories that say the wise men were their directly after his birth and they believe it because that is what they see and are not told any different. I’m not concerned with any yearly cycle here. Its only confusing because of the way they were taught the way the Nativity Scene has been structured. If it was portrayed correctly in the first place there would be no confusion. As far as me insisting on Biblical evidence of the three wise men, I only mentioned it once here the other times I mentioned it was reguarding them not being present right after Jesus was born, it was not until a year of 2 after his birth. And yes I could make a really nice cave out of some paper mache or how about making it out of chicken wire and plaster.

Yes, and there are plenty of people who think that Noah’s ark included two of every kind of animal because it is so depicted, even though the scriptures indicate that there were SEVEN of particular kinds of animals. Why aren’t you kicking up a stink about that?

My parents HAVE a Nativity scene that is set in a cave-like structure. And for that matter my nativity scene includes neither shepherds nor wise men. There are all sorts of variant depictions of the Nativity. What makes you think ALL Nativity scenes, or even most of them, are necessarily inaccurate, or that the majority of people aren’t aware of that inaccuracy? At the very least, since we DO read out the Gospel accounts of the Nativity every year, if they aren’t it’s their own fault.

 

[edward_george]

I’m saying that the Nativity is inaccurate and you know it is. There are people out there that believe it is accurate. They believe the 3 wise men were present right after his birth. They only know what they see and what they see is incorrect but nobody tells them different. There are childrens stories that say the wise men were their directly after his birth and they believe it because that is what they see and are not told any different. I’m not concerned with any yearly cycle here. Its only confusing because of the way they were taught the way the Nativity Scene has been structured. If it was portrayed correctly in the first place there would be no confusion. As far as me insisting on Biblical evidence of the three wise men, I only mentioned it once here the other times I mentioned it was reguarding them not being present right after Jesus was born, it was not until a year of 2 after his birth. And yes I could make a really nice cave out of some paper mache or how about making it out of chicken wire and plaster.

Who cares if it is “inaccurate” as you seem fond of repeating, despite objections to the contrary? Do you think these supposed inaccuracies in chronology affect the state of anyone’s soul? There’s no sense getting hung up on all of this. The Nativity has a specific purpose: to inspire devotion to Christ. Its purpose is not museum-piece quality historical accuracy. If you want to make your nativity as historically accurate as possible, by all means, do so. But don’t condemn others for not meeting this standard. Do you think God judges us based on the historical details of our art, or how much it inspires our devotion?

 

[Dorothy]

In every Catholic Church the wise men bearing gifts are not at the Nativity scene until we celebrate the Feast of the Epiphany. In fact, in my parish we show the wise men approaching from a distance, and getting closer and closer, and then on the Feast of the Epiphany they are at the Nativity scene.

That helps all those in the congregation to see what actually happened. And, as the previous poster said, we also learned that the wise men didn’t arrive until about two years after the birth of Our Lord.

Oh come let us adore Him!

 

[rev_kevin]

RevKevin,

I am an old woman now getting ready to apply for social security. The nuns taught us that Jesus was about 2 years old when the Wise Men came to visit…

So you still have a bit of Catholicism remaining in you, as well as the Catholic baptism…you can’t wash it away…the Lord is drawing you to us.

Social security is not all that its cracked up to be. I know I’m on it. Yes I do have some Catholicism remaining in me as well as the baptism. But the Lord is drawing me to him not a church. I guess the Catholic school I went to didn’t teach us right because they never said anything about the Wise men visiting Jesus when he was about 2. The first time I heard this was when I became a Baptist.

 

[patrick457]

They don’t none of them take 30-some years to portray His life, for example. Mind you, if they did they’d have to leave about 10 years of blank film between the Flight into Egypt and the Finding of Jesus in the Temple, and then another 18 years of blank film between then and the start of His ministry.

Most don’t show Jesus or the Apostles as Semitic but instead as Caucasian. Most are incredibly light on the blood and gore as well - the Passion of the Christ was the only one to approach realism in that regard.

And even then, I think Mel quite overdid it somewhat. While Jesus would probably still have been brutally whipped in real life, a prolonged flogging like the one you see in TPotC would have killed a man within minutes in real life and denied him the agony of the cross.

And I can bet you John the Baptist never looked anything like Charlton Heston, nor did the soldier at the Cross sound anything like John Wayne! And none of them spoke English.

Nor was Jesus probably like Max von Sydow with short black hair!

 

[patrick457]

I fully understand the meaning behind the Nativity. I just want to know why we don’t portray/teach is accuratly.

Well, my friend, now is the time for YOU to teach everyone the historical context of the birth of Jesus and build historically-accurate creches if you can! If we’re going to just sit down, complain about it and condemn most people, nothing will happen. Why not take the job into your hands?
Sure, I agree with everyone else that knowing the minute details is not necessary for the salvation of our souls, but I would say to you that: if nobody’s doing it, why not blaze new trails? I mean, nobody’s stopping you from doing so.

 

[rev_kevin]

Who cares if it is “inaccurate” as you seem fond of repeating, despite objections to the contrary? Do you think these supposed inaccuracies in chronology affect the state of anyone’s soul? There’s no sense getting hung up on all of this. The Nativity has a specific purpose: to inspire devotion to Christ. Its purpose is not museum-piece quality historical accuracy. If you want to make your nativity as historically accurate as possible, by all means, do so. But don’t condemn others for not meeting this standard. Do you think God judges us based on the historical details of our art, or how much it inspires our devotion?

Now edward_george take a deep breath and calm down because you seem to be the one getting worked up about this. I mearly asked a question about its inaccuracy. I have not comdemned anyone here for not meeting any standard. I never said that God will judge anyone based on the historical details or how much it inspires devotion. All I mentioned was that we use something incorrect to inspire our devotion. I have mentioned that this is not about spiritual or divotional meaning. I never said or implied that these, as you call them, supposed inaccuracies would in anyway affect anyone’s soul. If it inspires you then I’m happy for you and for all that it inspires. It inspires me also. But its inaccurate in the way it is portrayed.

 

[edward_george]

Now edward_george take a deep breath and calm down because you seem to be the one getting worked up about this. I mearly asked a question about its inaccuracy. I have not comdemned anyone here for not meeting any standard. I never said that God will judge anyone based on the historical details or how much it inspires devotion. All I mentioned was that we use something incorrect to inspire our devotion. I have mentioned that this is not about spiritual or divotional meaning. I never said or implied that these, as you call them, supposed inaccuracies would in anyway affect anyone’s soul. If it inspires you then I’m happy for you and for all that it inspires. It inspires me also. But its inaccurate in the way it is portrayed.

Then why discuss it at all? If God can use something “incorrect” to inspire our devotion, isn’t that pretty amazing?

Have a blessed Christmas. I’ll try to do the same, “incorrect” Nativity and all.

-ACEGC

 

[patrick457]

I heard a commentor (Protestant) suggest that these shepherds were tending sheep reserved for slaughter in the Temple. Interesting if true. They were guarding lambs meant for slaughter, while THE Lamb of God was being born.
Dang I wish I had those old notes.

Yes, I believe it was the Jewish convert Alfred Edersheim in his book The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Admittedly the scholarship is outdated (it was written in 1883!), but still a good introduction to the Jewish background of Jesus. He based his arguments on one passage found in the Talmud:

‘Cattle’ (i.e. livestock) found all the way from Jerusalem to Migdal Eder, and in the same vicinity in all directions, are considered, if male, as whole-offerings, and if female as peace-offerings. Rabbi Yehudah says, “If they are fit for Passover-offerings they may be used for such purpose, providing Passover is not more than thirty days off.” (Shekalim 7.4)

This passage in the Mishnah suggests that any stray animals found between Jerusalem and a spot known as Migdal Eder (‘tower of Eder’ or ‘tower of the flock’; cf. Genesis 35:21?), were automatically destined to be sacrificed at the Temple. Edersheim proposes based on Genesis that this spot may be somewhere close to Bethlehem, where Rachel was buried (35:19-20). And because Rabbi Yehudah speaks of these being in the open fields thirty days before Passover (which would be in around February, when conditions are still not so good), they infer that these livestock were kept all year round. So, as per Edersheim, sheep being out in the open at winter is not too unlikely, even though the regular seasons for flocks being out there is during the warmer season between April and November.

From another thread I have (rev kevin - and everyone else, if you have more gripes about accuracy, I think you’d probably have a worthwhile time perusing that thread. Comments welcome of course )

Winter, which occurs between December and February in Israel, is the cold, rainy season, in contrast to the dry and hot Judean summer. The heaviest rainfall occurs between December and January (more than 70% of the average rainfall in Israel actually falls between November and March), sometimes with hail, thunder and lightning; there are at times snowfall up in the north and central parts of Israel. The climate is as such due to Israel’s location between the subtropical aridity of the Sahara and the Arabian deserts, and the subtropical humidity of the Levant and Eastern Mediterranean.

December was still warmer than January (the coldest month with average temperatures ranging from 6 to 15 °C, that is 42.8 to 59 °F), but the rains can make things unpleasant. I quote from The Victor Journey Through the Bible by V. Gilbert Beers:

The coldest temperature recorded in Palestine is 19°F (-7°C), much colder than a normal winter night, which on the Bethlehem hills was probably not down to freezing temperatures. However, a 40° night on a lonely hillside in a rainy season can be quite cold. The rain was almost more unpleasant than the cold. Rainfall in Palestine averages from less than an inch in the south at Eilat to about 40 inches per year in the north at Metulla.
Jerusalem averages about 25 inches per year with only slightly less in Bethlehem.​

 

[rev_kevin]

Well, my friend, now is the time for YOU to teach everyone the historical context of the birth of Jesus and build historically-accurate creches if you can! If we’re going to just sit down, complain about it and condemn most people, nothing will happen. Why not take the job into your hands?
Sure, I agree with everyone else that knowing the minute details is not necessary for the salvation of our souls, but I would say to you that: if nobody’s doing it, why not blaze new trails? I mean, nobody’s stopping you from doing so.

Who have I condemned? Nobody. Have you read the Bible on the birth of Jesus? Where does it say the wise men were there directly after his birth? They weren’t it was the shepherds. If you read history you will find out that most of the animals were kept in caves and the manger was carved in the walls of the caves. I’m not blazing any new trails here, that has already been done by others. I never said it was necessary for the salvation of our souls for it to be accurate. We seem to know every accurate step Jesus took while on his way to be crucified, ie, the stations of the cross. But don’t know the accuracy about his birth.

 

[rev_kevin]

Yes, and there are plenty of people who think that Noah’s ark included two of every kind of animal because it is so depicted, even though the scriptures indicate that there were SEVEN of particular kinds of animals. Why aren’t you kicking up a stink about that?

My parents HAVE a Nativity scene that is set in a cave-like structure. And for that matter my nativity scene includes neither shepherds nor wise men. There are all sorts of variant depictions of the Nativity. What makes you think ALL Nativity scenes, or even most of them, are necessarily inaccurate, or that the majority of people aren’t aware of that inaccuracy? At the very least, since we DO read out the Gospel accounts of the Nativity every year, if they aren’t it’s their own fault.

I’m not, as you say, kicking up a stink about Noah’s ark because thats not what I wan’t to discuss right now.
Well I’m glad that your parents have a cave-like structure. Now you ask me what makes me think all Nativity scenes are inaccurate, if you don’t have shepherds there then if would be accurate if you just want to show Mary, Joseph and Jesus. It would be accurate if you want to show Mary, Joseph, Jesus and the shepherds. It would not be accurate if you show Mary, Joseph, Jesus and the wise men. for the wise men showed up a year or 2 later.