The Architecture of Mercy

Chartres Street at Night, New Orleans French Quarter 

Luke 10:25-37

"And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” He said to him, “What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?” So he answered and said, “ ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,’^[a] and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’” And He said to him, “You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.” But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?..." 

Since it has been ten years after I evacuated my home in New Orleans due to Hurricane Katrina I guess that it is fitting that I discuss what I remember.

Shotgun house next to 712 Barracks Street in French Quarter. New Orleans, Louisiana,

"Then Jesus answered and said: “ A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, who stripped him of his clothing, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead..."

I remember that after my federal government failed to respond following the biggest national tragedy in a generation the Mexican government sent troops with aid across the southern border. I remember Mexican immigrants (both documented and undocumented) coming to rebuild my city. I remember afterwards when many of them were cheated out of their due payment and were reminded that they were not welcome.

HOLY NAME OF JESUS CATHOLIC CHURCH (On the campus of Loyola University in New Orleans) 6367 St. Charles Ave

"Now by chance a certain priest came down that road. And when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite, when he arrived at the place, came and looked, and passed by on the other side..." 

I remember seeing televangelists of my own Evangelical faith on television and falsely asserting that this city of Roman Catholics, Southern Baptists and Full Gospel Baptists was being judged for practicing Voodoo. I remember when the Islamic Kingdom of Qatar donated millions to rebuild our Catholic colleges.  

Courtyard Hotel Downtown New Orleans

"But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was. And when he saw him, he had compassion. So he went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; and he set him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. On the next day, when he departed,^[c] he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said to him, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I come again, I will repay you.’..."

I remember having to move 2,000 miles away to Rochester, Minnesota where few of the residents looked like me and even fewer voted like me but they took me in and freely gave to me like I was their own.

New Orleans Historic Wrought Iron in French Quarter

"So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?” And he said, “He who showed mercy on him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”

The greatness of New Orleans' past lies in it's nearly 300 year old blend of French, Spanish, Afro-Caribbean and American aesthetics and culture, but the greatness of its present is embedded in the architecture of Marcy. The promise of this city's future is even a possibility because the citizens of the global village willed it to be so. So when the clamor of the politics of division based on nationalism, religion and race drowns out the voices of brotherhood and mercy I just remember the lessons of Hurricane Katrina. Most of all I remember life teaching me that the meaning of the Good Samaritan parable was that often the help that God sends your way is in the form of someone that is nothing like you. This is the foundation that New Orleans was rebuilt upon: one that will withstand though the rain descends, the floods come, and the winds blow. 

Of Penance and the Penitentiary

Trent Bell, "Brandon"

Matthew 25:31-46

“When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me..."
Trent Bell is a commercial architectural photographer. If you visit his website trentbell.com you will be greeted with a slick site featuring sharp images of newly constructed glass and steel office buildings, museums, condos and other urban spaces of New England. But in 2013 Trent focused his lens on another Atlantic Coast public space: the State Prison in Warren, Maine. It wasn't the building's architectural exterior that interested him but rather the inmates emotional interior. An article on the DailyMail.co.uk shares that this artistic change of genre started when Trent discovered that "a friend, who was a father and respected professional, had been sentenced to 36 years behind bars." So in true Shawshank Redemption form, Trent went into the Main correctional system to peer into the lives and regrets of the convicted. He photographed portraits of the prison inmates and superimposed the text of letters they had written to their younger selves in the background. And that is where Trent Bell first met Jesus... Or rather Brandon, a guy who looks like Jesus. But maybe that is only the influence of Western Art making me see the image of Jesus reflected in a thirty-something, bearded White guy with long hair. Jesus himself believed that he looked like another (African American) inmate named Jamie. And he also thought that he favored Ben, a post-middle aged, husky, gray bearded White inmate who looks something like a Maine lobster fisherman turned librarian. Jesus actually believed that his resemblance could be seen in all of the prisoners... also in the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger/foreigner, the naked/destitute and the sick. Matter of fact, Jesus taught that our salvation depended upon us seeing him in the faces of those who suffer around us. But he doesn't use the word "saved." We are fortunate that he doesn't because we have prepackaged that term into being a loaded image that always reads as "going to Heaven." Not that I am against Heaven or reward in the afterlife but I believe that Jesus is speaking about something a little larger here. He uses the phrase "Inherit the kingdom" to speak of reward laid up for those sheep who recognize their shepherd disguised as the needy if this world. In the era of the "Black Lives Matter" movement where we increasingly highlight those (like Sandra Bland) who die in state custody (like Anne Frank, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Polycarp, St. Paul and yes, Jesus) it is important to recognize that Jesus' list of requirements for "inheriting the kingdom" end with going to those in prison. Jesus doesn't specify that they be innocent, guilty, reformed or unrepentant. The burden here isn't on the prisoner converting but the disciple serving. Inhering the kingdom isn't contingent on success but rather faithfulness.

Trent Bell, "Jamie"

“...Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me...’"


It must be noted that when the Law was given to Moses it never called for jail, prison or a correctional system at all. Though it provided for the office of judges, many of the punishments of the Law were based on a system of just vengeance. An example would be that a murderer himself would be killed by a close relative (the kinsman redeemer/avenger of blood) of the victim. Jesus knows the Law and never doubts that it came from the lips of God, however, he doesn't use this parable to object to the institution of prison as against God's original intention. Nor does Jesus ever encourage the death penalty for lawbreakers (like the woman caught in adultery) who according to the Law were deserving of death. On the contrary, Jesus worked against the death penalty's use. Why is this? Did Jesus not value the Law? Did Jesus not esteem it as God's Word? Jesus not only believed in God's Word, he actually is the Word of God. Where the Law was Moses' glimpse of the backside of God, Jesus (and his teachings) is the fullness if the Godhead bodily. To believe this about Jesus is to believe that God engages mankind in Progressive Revelation. That is to say that Scripture is the record of God revealing more about Himself over time in history. We then can agree with the writer of Hebrews that "God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son." If the final revelation of God comes in the man Jesus, then it would prove advantageous for us to take his words, acts and methods seriously. If Jesus rethought how we treat those we punish then shouldn't we? If Jesus said that we should visit those in prison then shouldn't we? That was the idea behind much of the Social Gospel and public reform movements of the  nineteenth century. The conclusions of the Gospel were applied on a societal level. The ideas of Progressive Revelation and Progressive Social policy must be intertwined: the more we know about God the more it must cause us to rethink how we treat each other. This kind of thinking led many Quakers and other socially conscious Christians to be involved in the reform of the prison system. According to Wikipedia they not only viewed prisons as houses of punishment but as a place of "rehabilitation or moral reform, was based on religious ideas that equated crime with sin, and saw prisons as a place to instruct prisoners in Christian morality, obedience and proper behavior. These later reformers believed that prisons could be constructed as humane institutions of moral instruction, and that prisoners' behavior could be 'corrected' so that when they were released, they would be model members of society." Hence they birthed the idea of the "penitentiary" as a place of "penance." It was a reimagining of prison as a place where one could think long and hard about their sins against society. Contemporary prison may seem hard to us, however, it is just the latest step on our continually evolving approach to how we treat each other. It is a reform from the days of execution for most crimes, dungeons and being a galley slave. Yet even the well meaning intentions of the progressives of the past must be rethought in light of our present predicament. This cannot be achieved if we, Christ's contemporary disciples, are not aware of the conditions of those who suffer in the penitentiary. This cannot happen until we follow Jesus' call to go to those in prison. This cannot happen until we see the face of Christ in every inmate. We will not inherit the kingdom until this happens. 

“...Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me...’"

At the heart of both this parable and the marriage of progressive revelation and progressive social policy Is seeing Jesus in others. Yet the inability to see Christ in the face of the needy is exactly what leads to the judgment of the "goats" in Jesus' parable. I believe that the inclusion of prisoners in Jesus' list of those in need is critical here. For most can see Jesus in the hungry and thirsty because they can remember the sorties of Jesus feeding the multitudes. Many can see Jesus in the naked, the stranger and the sick because they can recall his story of the Good Samaritan. Yet finding Jesus' facial features in the faces of felons takes spiritual creativity that most of us don't possess. This is because as "upstanding" Christians we Pharisaically pride ourselves as keepers of the Ten Commandments as opposed to the sinners who find themselves locked up in prison. We support campaigns to keep monuments to the Ten Commandments in American courts to remind law breakers that their offenses are repugnant to a holy God.   And if we do donate to prison ministries (such as Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship) it is often with a heart of helping those who don't resemble Christ or us. It is at this point where we forget the premise of substitutionary atonement. For it is not by our good works that we gave been saved but because when God looks down upon sinners like us He sees the face of Christ. God Himself follows the commands of Christ's parable and sees the image of His dear Son in the face of the suffering and has mercy on them. Since we live as the recipients of such great mercy, we then should ourselves be merciful. We start by following the popular rephrasing of Jesus' golden rule in Matthew 7:12, "Do unto others as you would have then do unto you." The actual text reads, "Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets." The last part of that verse leads us to realize that the golden rule isn't just a social campaign to increase considerateness but rather the fulfillment of our religion. It is not only doing unto others as you would have them do unto you but also doing unto others as you would do unto Jesus. That is gist of our religion and the purest form of worship to God. That us the selfless ethic that Christ calls us to. That is how we inherit the kingdom. 

“...Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me'...”

When meditating upon Scripture I find it helpful to imagine the parables as dramatic or cinematic productions.  Most of them are not that long so they are more similar to a 60 second commercial than a Tolkien trilogy. Most commercials (or at least the funny ones) surround one key point of impact... a punch line of sorts. It is the place where the full intention of the piece is wrapped up in a digestible sound bite. The parables are no different. The punch line of this specific parable is "inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me." The justification of Jesus' judgment on the "goats" is understood in one line. Yet one remaining subtlety that may elude the reader us the identity of the goats. The parable says that the sheep and the goats together are the nations of the earth, with the ones (on the right) receiving reward being sheep and the ones (on the left) receiving punishment being goats. One would assume that this division would be between the good and the bad or the believers and the unbelievers, however, things are not always so simple. For the goats "answer Him, saying, ‘Lord'." We must also give notice to Jesus' choice of imagery. The division is not between sheep and wolves (an image that Christ had used before) or sheep and swine (which any Kosher Jew would understand) but sheep and goats. Both sheep and goats are farm animals that are Kosher to eat, yet one group is preferable to the other. One is known for its humility while the other is known for its stubbornness. It is not a division between opposites but rather sheep and almost-sheep. It is a division between those who follow and those who rebel. Both may contain believers who recognize Jesus as Lord but Christ was never looking only for believers. Christ desires both believers and doers. Christ desires those who both believe in his sovereignty and also submit to his sovereign will to show mercy to those in need. This is what separates sheep from goats. This is what divides the obedient follower from the stubborn rebel. This is what inherits the kingdom.

"...And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

So my request today is that all Christians be more like Trent Bell. We must go into the prisons and places if suffering and find the face of Jesus in people like Brandon, Jamie, Ben and Sandra Bland. Some of them may not look like us but they do look like Jesus. Until we we adopt the mindset of Christ that sees God in others then our criminal justice system will continue to suffer from cover ups and lack of citizen oversight. Until we adopt the mindset of Christ the less fortunate among us will continue to suffer and perish in silence and anonymity. Until we adopt the mindset of Christ we will remain afar off from inheriting the kingdom. For inheriting the kingdom is not only about gaining admission to the kingdom or the riches of the kingdom but the work of the kingdom. Inheriting the kingdom is taking up the family business of divine mercy distribution. Inheriting the kingdom is about taking up Christ's spiritual mantle of acting prophetically in accordance to progressive revelation and in opposition to an unjust world-system. Most of all, inheriting the kingdom is following Jesus: the God whose face can only be seen after we have looked into the faces of our unseen brothers.

Trent Bell, "Ben"

The Artist's Signature: What's In A Name?

It is said that after the Middle Ages a new component started to be included in paintings. This ingredient distinguished the age artisan from the age of the artist... and turned the artist into the Artist (with a capital "A"). Individual artists were now more than just craftsmen but potential geniuses worthy of collection and stardom. This one specific part of every painting was the artist's signature. There are several artist's who may share a style, subject matter and approach to creating, so the signature exists as the final way to distinguish the identity of the creator. The artist's signature is the way that one distinguishes Caravaggio from just another caravaggisti. Now that we've established the significance of the artist's signature let us ask another question: How does the artist select what his/her signature should be? If your answer is that they just write down their name, then I have a big surprise for you. Many of the most famous artists of history aren't known by their "real" names at all (or only their names). The name that is used as a signature is a carefully considered thing that is chosen to reveal the desired image of the creator. So the question begs: What is in a name? We focus a lot on first names because our contemporary culture bestows great clout on individuality being a paramount aspect of identity. However it is the surname, the family name (or the Last name in the English speaking tradition), that tells the most of the individual's narrative. It is this name that tells the story of the long line of individuals who came together in love (hopefully) to create life. Both of these approaches were utilized in the naming process taken up by the being that we call God. Unlike any other living being, He was not preceded by any other life-form that could name him. This being the case, the Creator had to decide what name to reveal himself as to creation. In this act of progressive revelation, God (the creative Creator) chose to illuminate His identity through the story of his relationships with the long line of individuals who came together with Him in love to create life.

The Family Name 

Exodus 3:1-6

"Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. And the Angel of the Lordappeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. Then Moses said, “I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.” So when the Lord saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.” Then He said, “Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” Moreover He said, “I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God."

Pablo Picasso is considered the most famous and influential twentieth century artist. According to Wikipedia "Picasso was baptized Pablo Diego José Francisco de Paula Juan Nepomuceno María de los Remedios Cipriano de la Santísima Trinidad Ruiz y Picasso, a series of names honoring various saints and relatives. Ruiz y Picasso were included for his father and mother, respectively, as per Spanish law." In spite of Spanish law, artistic custom would have been for Pablo to have chosen his father's name (especially since his father was also an artist). However he consciously chose to identify himself to the world as Pablo Picasso not Pablo Ruiz. He decided to publicly bear the name if his mother and with it reveal his identity in his relationship to his mother. I don't believe it was meant as a slight against his father but society takes note when you name yourself by unconventional means. The world notices when you chose to reveal yourself in the story of those that would normally be overlooked. And yet that us the way that  God first chose to reveal Himself. Documenting a succession of meaningful relationships that had God chose to be known as the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Yet these relationships were more than associations, acquaintances  or even friendships. These relationships were the foundation of family. Indeed God would later refer to the offspring of these three patriarchs as "My son." Herein lies the greater revolutionary notion, God identifies Himself by the name of His kids. Now you may interject that God referred to them as His children metaphorically, but I would argue that the truth that the metaphor represents only makes His choice of words more powerful. Let us consider another metaphor that God often used for Israel: his wife. In the Book of Hosea, God calls the prophet Hosea to marry Gomer, a prostitute. Eventually their relationship runs into turmoil when Gomer returns to her old profession. But the sermon illustration that came out of this ordeal was apparently what God was looking for. Hosea's marital struggle with the adulterous Gomer was analogous to God's marital struggle with an idolatrous Israel. God was married to his people and would not divorce them. So when Hosea was forced to buy his wife back out of the sex trade, God too said that he would redeem (meaning buy back) His people from the sin that ensnared them. So when we hear the name "the God of Israel" we know that it is God taking upon the name of His wife. She is not a perfect or faithful wife but the one that He chose and loves. When we hear "the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" we know that it is God taking upon the name of His children. They are not perfect or obedient children but the ones that He bore and loved. The world notices when you chose to reveal yourself in the story of those that would normally be overlooked. That is the identity that God shares in His name. He is the God of those whom He loves.

The Revealed Name

Exodus 3:13-15

"Then Moses said to God, “Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they say to me, ‘What is His name?’ what shall I say to them?” And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” Moreover God said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.’"

Pablo Picasso may have been the most famous artist of the twentieth century but the story of Art has not ended. Modern Art gave way to Post-Modern Art and the galleries and museums yielded their authority to the streets. So Banksy is now the most famous artist of the present.  Like many of his Street Art contemporaries, Banksy signs (or rather stencils) his art with a moniker. Banksy is not his real name... or maybe it is. We really don't know. Their are a few murky details about this art world version of Batman from Bristol, UK. It appears, however, that the sparse details, urban legends and mystery that surround him are exactly what allow Banksy to operate in the way that he so choses. Whether it be on walls in London, New York, Palestine, New Orleans or a warehouse in Los Angeles the allure that Banksy garners and authority that he speaks with are both entangled within his mysterious anonymity. All that we truly know of him are his public works and work history. They may not reveal his face but they indeed reveal his mind and heart. Yet the viewer is repeatedly prodded to ask, "What is your name?" Just like the story of Art doesn't end with Picasso or Banksy, the revelation of the Creator didn't end with God's first declaration to Moses. Like Banksy's viewers Moses is lead to ask, "What is your name?" when confronted with Deity Himself. The answer that Moses receives from God is a simultaneous answer and non answer. God tells Moses that His name is "I am" or YHWH (from here on out we will refer to that Tetragrammaton as "Yahweh". I will not be spelling it out as "Jehovah" because that is a historical misspelling that you can read more about here). "I am" is a non-answer in that it is literally Divine comedy, being a play on words. God answers "I am who I am" in true Popeye fashion. And commands Moses to tell the people of Israel that "I am" sent him. Yet it is an answer in that it reveals the very nature of the Eternal One (though clouded in the mystery of a riddle). Where the reader takes Yahweh to mean "I am" or "I will be" it speaks of the perpetual presence of His existence and character. It says "God is", "God will be Who He is" and "God will be God." Though He encounters Moses in the inexplicable phenomenon of a burning bush that is not fully consumed and retorts to him with a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, God is still choosing to reveal Himself. He just does so on His own terms. So after revealing Himself as the I am, Yahweh doubles down own His earlier chosen method of revelation. He restates that He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob's narrative, but then He prophetically reveals the God that He will be to Moses and the Children of Israel. Just as God was the sovereign hand of Providence to the Patriarchs, He would be the strong arm of Justice to the Israelites and Judgment against their Egyptian slave masters. At Moses' point in the story of Progressive Revelation All that we truly know of Him are his public works and work history. They may not reveal His face but they indeed reveal His mind and heart. He is the God who acts (in history) out of love. 

The Personal Name

Luke 1:30-33

"Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.”

Some of the most famous names in Art are not necessarily known by their names but rather named by their location. It may not surprise you to find out that Judy Chicago was not born "Judy Chicago." She was born Judith Sylvia Cohen in the city of Chicago, Illinois (big surprise). And Caravaggio was not Caravaggio at all. Caravaggio was the name of the little town outside of Milan that where he was raised. His real name was Michelangelo Merisi. But maybe those two artists don't matter much to you. How about this one: Da Vinci was not really da Vinci. That is why the art-types only refer to him as Leonardo instead of Leonardo da Vinci (one of the many problems with "The Da Vinci Code"). He indeed was named "Leonardo" but "da Vinci" was less of a surname and more of a designator of where he was from (Vinci, a little suburb of Florence). If none of those name inaccuracies impress you then how about this one: Jesus' name wash;t actually Jesus of Nazareth. Just like Judy Chicago, Caravaggio and Leonardo da Vinci, the second name (Nazareth) attached to Jesus' name speaks of his hometown (hence the "of"). It was to distinguish him from any other "Jesus" walking around at that time. But except for a handful of cases we don't know of that many Palestinian Jews named Jesus during Christ's lifetime, yet the Gospel writers consistantly add disincentives to his name as if Jesus alone was a fairly common name. Why is that? It is because Jesus' actual name wasn't "Jesus" per se but another more common name. It is usually believed to have been the Hebrew name ישוע‎ (Yeshua), a shortening of יהושע‎ (Yehoshua). But there shouldn't be any controversy to this at all; great historical figures like Confucius (from the Chinese 孔夫子 Kǒng Fūzǐ) and Moses (from the Hebrew Moshe) all get their names Latinized before translating them into English. The difference with Jesus' case is that his name "Yeshua" is normally translated into English as "Joshua." Most likely Jesus Christ was not translated as Joshua Christ because there was already a fairly prominent character in Scripture named Joshua. Keeping the Latinized name "Jesus" cuts down on confusion between the two figures.  But there is deep significance with Jesus sharing the name of an Old Testament figure. When we read the Gospel of Luke's account of the Gabriel's announcement to Mary then we see that it is pointed out that Christ shares several similarities with multiple Biblical characters...and that's the entire point. Whether it was Joshua, David and Jacob or even Moses and Elijah, the evangelists and consistently highlighting the parallels between Jesus and those that God worked with in the past. All of them were Shadows and types of Christ. In truth all of Scripture past gives us a prefiguring of Christ. That is why he is called the Word of God just like Scripture is called the Word of God. Jesus is God's Word and the fleshly embodiment of God's mind and heart. The Gospel of Matthew's account of the angel's message to Joseph gives us a more detailed insight:

Matthew 1:21

"And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.”

Whenever you see a person being named (or renamed) in Scripture it is usually followed by a clause that explains the name choice by featuring the name's definition. The reason for Jesus' name has to deal with "sav(ing) His people from their sins" because Yeshua/Joshua/Jesus literally means "Yahweh is salvation." Within Jesus' name lies his revelation as God's agent of Salvation. The God who acted in the sacrificial love of Jesus.

The Universal Name

1 John 4:7-11

"Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another."

Whether the artist be Picasso, Banksy or Leonardo, the signature is not only significant as a display of the creator's identity and brand, but because the same brushstrokes are evident in the signature that were utilized in the creation of his masterpiece (or in Banksy's case stencil spray). Both the artwork and the name of the artisan display reveal the hand of the creator. Our Creator is no different. It is most evident in the most universal revelation of his name and identity. St. John informs us that God has revealed Himself to all people everywhere throughout time. However, he has not revealed Himself in the identity of the false gods of the nations but as something more primal and intimate than that. God is not revealed in their idols, religions or superstitions. God has revealed Himself as Love. Love is known and desired by all people everywhere. Indeed it is Love that people partner with in relationship with others to create life. Love is more than an emotion, force or impulse. Love is a being who uses it's emotions to emote love to creation. Love is a being who uses it's force as the power to promote love. Love is a being who endowed it's creation with the impulse to feel love. Love is the Creator. Love is the Savior. Love is beginning of the revelation and the manifested inner working of the God known as Jesus Christ.  

What My Newborn Son Taught Me About God

Giotto, Nativity, Birth of Jesus

It all began a few weeks ago when my wife and I found our lives wrapped up in a series of first time parenting classes as we awaited the gift of our firstborn child. First there was a tour of the labor/delivery facilities and directions on what to expect on delivery day. Next was a class about baby CPR and child safety. NFollowing that was a session about Infant care and baby cleaning. Finally there a seminar about the actual delivery and birth. All of these classes impressed upon me the great calling of God that is parenting. Yet the third one (infant care and baby cleaning) was the only one that caused me to reflect on actual Scripture. One of the many things that the instructor trained us in was swaddling, a practice that I ignorantly thought had gone out popularity since it's heyday in the nativity story. Swaddling is the wrapping an infant in a cloth (or strips of cloth) to restrict movement and induce sleep. According to Wikipedia, it's popularity did wane a bit after the 1700's but only in the West. So when the Pre-Renaiisance master Giotto painted his fresco "Nativity, Birth of Jesus" in the 1300's, his depiction of a swaddled Christ child was on its way to being a historical sermon illustration rather than a potent universal symbol in Western Europe. So while learning to wrap my soon coming newborn I googled articles about the ancient childcare technique and re-read its mention in Luke's telling of Jesus' nativity. In doing so there was one persistent question in my mind: why did the Gospel writer mention this detail? All of the four Gospels are intentional documents. The narrative, characters, events and other details are all carefully chosen to communicate a desired message. No detail was given "just because." The details that each evangelist shares are threads that weave into layers that envelope the essential truths that the writer wants to share about Jesus. So, why does Luke want readers to take notice that Jesus was wrapped in "swaddling cloths." Wouldn't this have been the garb for any other child then and untold millions throughout the centuries? How does this detail weave into the threads of Luke's account and the other Gospels' thematic tapestry? Apparently their is something about the Son of God to be learned in this seemingly insignificant detail. And since it is about Jesus (the Word of God Incarnate) then it also contains something to be learned about God Himself.

Giotto, Nativity, Birth of Jesus

Luke 2:10-16

"Then the angel said to them,'Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will bethe sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger.' And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying: 'Glory to God in the highest. And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!' So it was, when the angels had gone away from them into heaven, that the shepherds said to one another, 'Let us now go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has come to pass, which the Lord has made known to us.' And they came with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the Babe lying in a manger."

Discovering the meaning and significance behind Jesus being swaddled at birth will also teach us the significance of biblical literacy. The first thing that we must learn from the swaddling note is that (just like real swaddling) it consists of layers. The meaning of the Gospel (finding Christ) lies at the center of several layers of narrative, bands of imagery and strips of Old Testament allusions. They have been placed there by the gospel writer intentionally. When we unpack their meaning (layer by layer) then the gospel writer will show us the the true nature of the Christ child laid bare... which is the revelation of God Himself. This true biblical literacy is not one that only relies on "verse by verse" exegesis (because the chapters and verses are a later editorial construct...albeit helpful ones). No, true biblical exegesis deciphers the meaning of a text with an "idea by idea" based exegesis. We must determine what ideas a given writer was trying to convey to determine the teaching of the Holy Spirit. I believe that there are three elements in the Lucan birth narrative that will aid us in appreciating the gravity of the swaddling imagery.

1) Placement: It is part of a greater sub-narrative (the Nativity) that in itself continues a thread that unlocks the meaning of the Gospel narrative itself. This sub-narrative acts as the evangelist's preface and will give us a foundation of what to expect in the rest of his narrative.

2) Imagery: Swaddling is wrapping a child in strips of cloth to restrict his movement and induce sleep. This image will be repeated and deconstructed in other places to carry a theme throughout the other sub-narratives.

3) Characters: The present actions feed off of the story of Mary and Elizabeth earlier within the Nativity sub-narrative. This sets a pattern that will be repeated later on: There are two prominent women who attest to his birth, one named Mary who cares for Jesus. This pattern will be repeated when the deconstructed swaddling imagery appears to carry the underlying theme.

In ancient literature repitition, patterns and parallels acted as an equivalent to our present day undelines, italics, bold text and ALL CAPS. They were used by writers to communicate to the reader that something was important. The three elements of placement, imagery and characters are used in the cases of swaddling throughout the gospel to convey the central theme.

John 11:38-44

"Then Jesus, again groaning in Himself, came to the tomb. It was a cave, and a stone lay against it. Jesus said, 'Take away the stone.' Martha, the sister of him who was dead, said to Him, 'Lord, by this time there is a stench, for he has been dead four days.' Jesus said to her, 'Did I not say to you that if you would believe you would see the glory of God?' Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead man was lying. And Jesus lifted up His eyes and said, 'Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. And I know that You always hear Me, but because of the people who are standing by I said this, that they may believe that You sent Me.' Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, 'Lazarus, come forth!' And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with grave clothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, 'Loose him, and let him go.'”


Giotto, The Raising of Lazarus (detail)

Luke is not the only gospel to employ the the same elements of placement, imagery and characters to further the theme put forth with the swaddling detail. In fact is it's use in the Gospel of John where we are allowed to see the identity of the theme. John does this by deconstructing the swaddling to its basic elements and using them in inverse order. Just like Luke, John tells of a body wrapping that is paired with entrance into one of life's portals. Yet John does not tell of a child's entrance at birth but a man's exit at death. The swaddling that he speaks of is Lazarus's mummification and burial. The placement of this episode occurs within the stories of Jesus' friendship with the siblings Lazarus, Martha and Mary that ribbon throughout the various gospel accounts. By the time Jesus encounters Lazarus' corpse it has been fitted in the standard grave cloths (which appear similar tithe standard birth cloths) and his face has been wrapped. While on his way to the tomb Jesus is meet by two characters: women who are prominent to those familiar with the gospel accounts. True to the template that Luke set forth, one of these women is named Mary and she had cared for Jesus. The keen reader at this point remembers the story of the sibling rivalry between Mary and Martha where Martha served the party while Mary took the position of a disciple at Jesus' feet. These are the same feet that had been doused in the ointment if an unnamed woman's alabaster box, washed with her tears and dried with her hair. An unnamed woman whom many believe to Mary Magdalene... a woman who some have argued may also have been Mary the sister of Lazarus and Martha. These women were tasked with the cruel assignment of clothing their deceased brother for the afterlife and the eventual resurrection. It was a resurrection that they both assumed would come with the final judgment on the last day. Little did they know that they had seen the Resurrection, befriended it and stood amongst them now in the person of Jesus. It was to Mary that Jesus declared "I am the resurrection." In calling Lazarus back from his untimely death, Jesus ordered that Lazarus be loosed from the cloths that wrapped him. They were clothes for the newborn and the dead... not the reborn. And herein lies the theme of the swaddling detail of Luke's Nativity: Eternal Life is wrapped up in the illusion of Death.

Luke 23:50-

"Now behold, there was a man named Joseph, a council member, a good and just man. He had not consented to their decision and deed. He was from Arimathea, a city of the Jews, who himself was also waiting for the kingdom of God. This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a tomb that was hewn out of the rock, where no one had ever lain before. That day was the Preparation, and the Sabbath drew near. And the women who had come with Him from Galilee followed after, and they observed the tomb and how His body was laid. Then they returned and prepared spices and fragrant oils. And they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment. Now on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they, and certain other women with them, came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared. But they found the stone rolled away from the tomb. Then they went in and did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. And it happened, as they were greatly perplexed about this, that behold, two men stood by them in shining garments. Then, as they were afraid and bowed their faces to the earth, they said to them, 'Why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen! Remember how He spoke to you when He was still in Galilee, saying, ‘The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.’' And they remembered His words. Then they returned from the tomb and told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest. It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the other women with them, who told these things to the apostles. And their words seemed to them like idle tales, and they did not believe them. But Peter arose and ran to the tomb; and stooping down, he saw the linen cloths lying by themselves; and he departed, marveling to himself at what had happened."

Since John has identified the theme of the swaddling detail, let us take it's deconstructed inversion and apply it to the end of Luke's gospel. It is placed well within the counterpart to the passion narrative: the resurrection account. Just as in the story of Lazarus we encounter the swaddling imagery of the jewish burial customs. This time it is Jesus himself (who had attested to be the Resurrection) being adorned for his long mortal slumber. Just like the nativity narrative and the the Lazarus narrative, we encounter the characters of prominant women... at least one of these is named Mary. This is the same Mary who could possibly be Lazarus and martha's sister. It is definately the ssme woman who had cared drenched Jesus' feet in sweet smelling ointment ( an act that Jesus attested to as preperation for his burial). These women came to re-wrap Jesus in linen cloth, just like Mary and Martha had done for his dead friend Lazarus wrapped... just like his own mother Mary had wrapped him as a babe. Yet unlike his mother Mary, his disciple Mary had not wrapped him to restrict movement and induce sleep. For she believed that the sleep that Christ now engaged in was "the big sleep." The big sleep that a man does not awake from until the General Resurrection. Unless that man in fact is the Resurrection. When witnesses eventually entered the tomb they found the burial clothes and face wrapping handkerchief that once swadled the corpse discarded and neatly folded where Jesus' body once lay. Jesus loosened himself from the cloths that wrapped him because they were clothes befitting for the newly born and the newly dead... not the reborn. It is in this unswaddled truth that the Apostles found the logical extension of the swaddling's theme: Salvation was wrapped up in the the substitutionary judgment of Christ on our behalf. It is in this revealed foundation that the Church throughout the ages has found its theological extension: peace between God and Man is wrapped up in the person of Jesus Christ.

So this post ends with my son being a month old (tomorrow) and my new entertainment being shopping for baby clothes online. And since I am a bougie art afficianado, it helps if these clothes and trinkets expose my kid to the great achievements of Art History. Case in point, I am not shopping for just any baby mobile to hang from my son's crib but rather one that resembles the mobiles created by Alexander Calder (the 20th century modern artist and father of the mobile as an artform). I just see it as a great case of killing two birds with one stone. That being said, even I was shocked to discover that Zazzle.com new parents can buy a swaddling blanket with Giotto's "Lamentation of Christ" printed on it. What parent would want to wrap their child in a swaddling cloth that told the story of a man's death? God would. In fact, God did. That is exactly why Luke included the swaddling detail in his gospel. So after getting over the initial shock of the Giotto swaddling blanket, I have decided that I am going to order one. I do so in hopes that by wrapping my son in the imagery of Christ's narrative will one day inspire him to unpack its meaning and discover that his own story is wrapped up in God's story. After the birth of my son, I am starting to appreciate the theological significance of childbirth. He has opened a new future for my wife and I. My wife speaks of how it is almost as if he has always been with us. Our lives now only makes sense with his inclusion. The son that was created as a byproduct of our love has now become the focal point of our lives. Indeed the love that resided within our hearts and marital vows manifested itself in the body of this child. The beginning of the Gospel tells of the birth of Jesus, Mary's son. However, as we read along we start to notice narrative threads that culminate in the end being the story of the rebirth of Jesus, God's Son. Behold the Son of Man that the Old Testament prophesied is the same Son of God that the New Testament proclaims. He is the only begotten Son that God the Father swaddled in human flesh to redeem the Children of Men. He is the Son of Abraham that was wrapped in the sins of his brethren and offered to God as a sacrifice on mount Calvary. He is the Son of David, the Word that tabernacled with us before being raised as the true Temple in Jerusalem. And since this body of Christ was raised and established as the temple of God then we understand that our (collective) Body (of Christ) is the temple of the Holy Ghost. It is that Holy Spirit that swaddles us as we are presented to God as his new, newborn children. When I watch my own newborn son sleep, I think about the hardship that his mother endured to birth him and the vigilance that I must maintain to protect, nurture and develop him. Yes, there will be sick days, worrying and the occasional chastisement, but there will also be rosy cheeked smiles, inside jokes and infectious laughter. It is all worth it to know that He will always know me as Father and to him "Father" is just a familiar synonym for "Love." Now I know how God feels...the God who reveals Himself as Father.