Nativity Scene Depicts Jesus, Mary, And Joseph In Cages

[ImmortalFlame]

It's Greek, not Hebrew, and specifically refers to "a crib for fodder." It comes from a verb meaning "to eat."
Strong's G5336

The same word is used at Luke 13:15 :

15 But the Lord answered him and said, “Hypocrites! Doesn’t each one of you untie his ox or donkey from the feeding trough on the Sabbath and lead it to water?​

Thank you!

 

[halbhh]

.

"A Methodist church in Claremont unveiled a Nativity scene Saturday night depicting Jesus, Mary and Joseph as refugees in cages, likening one of the most well-known images of the Christmas season to photos that have become synonymous with criticism of the Trump administration’s border separation policies.

The display, which has stoked debate on the Facebook page of the church's lead pastor shows classic Nativity figurines of Joseph and Mary in cages on either side of a cage containing the manger of Jesus.

“We see this as, in some ways, the Holy Family standing in for the nameless families,” said the Rev. Karen Clark Ristine, the lead pastor at Claremont United Methodist Church. “We’ve heard of their plight; we’ve seen how these asylum seekers have been greeted and treated. We wanted the Holy Family to stand in for those nameless people because they also were refugees.”

While the Nativity scene shows Jesus shortly after birth and is the foundation of the Christmas holiday, the Claremont depiction appears to be invoking Joseph and Mary’s flight to Egypt. Under most interpretations, the infant Jesus and his parents had to escape Jerusalem for fear King Herod would have the baby slaughtered, perceiving the child as a threat to his reign."
source​

Thoughts?

Yes, explicitly in the gospel account, Jesus, Joseph and Mary literally were actual refugees.
(Gospel of Matthew chapter 2)

They fled violence, immigrating to Egypt, just like many Central Americans fleeing north to us are fleeing violence.

Egypt.... That brings to mind the direct, forceful commandment about refugees:

"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God."
Leviticus 19:34 You must treat the foreigner living among you as native-born and love him as yourself, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

 

[halbhh]

It sends a message and is perhaps an act of religious conscience reflecting the church's sense of it's wider responsibilities, but part of me wants to groan that even Christmas is now being turned in to an opportunity for a political partisanship.

In this instance, it's anything but political noise. (for example: if you protest the death penalty for instance, that's not political talking points stuff, but actual conviction)

It's about being Christian ("following Christ"), or not being Christian.

 

[halbhh]

see post just below

 

[halbhh]

The policy of separating children from parents began in the Obama administration. No one was put in a cage, unless you consider large indoor areas divided by fencing instead of a wall a cage.

The policy existed for good reason. A federal judge ruled that children could only be detained for a short time, and if adults who say they are a childs parent/s are housed with the child, the adults must be released in that short period that applied to the child. The need to ensure that adults were truly the parents of the child, were true asylum seekers, and had no criminal record.

It is a free country and this church has the right to express it's concerns as they choose. They also have the right to use utterly poor taste if they choose, as in this case.

 

[halbhh]

To set the record straight, Joseph was a carpenter, which was a good paying profession, even at that time. Mary and Joseph were not poor. The reason they had to travel was because of the census, which was the basis for estimating tax collecting. All the citizens had to register at their places of birth. This story was due to big government and big taxes.

Joseph and Mary, were middle class ,and had the money to stay at an Inn. However, because Mary had been in late pregnancy and their travel was slow, they reached Bethlehem late, and all the hotel and motel rooms were taken. The only accommodations were inside the animal stalls, which they happily took. Shortly thereafter Mary gives birth.

Please see post #22 just above.

 

[halbhh]

Ahhhhh....the Christians.

Well, even if there is a lot of that competing religion some label 'Christian nationalism' that seems so unlike what is in the actions of Jesus, then there are on the other hand, the churches that are...more like the actions of Jesus:

 

[Windwalker]

It sends a message and is perhaps an act of religious conscience reflecting the church's sense of it's wider responsibilities, but part of me wants to groan that even Christmas is now being turned in to an opportunity for a political partisanship.

Compassion is not a political partisan issue. It's Christian theology. Anyone identifying as Christian should understand this is about how we treat the least of these among us, is how we are treating Christ. Jesus taught this. The nativity symbolizes this. It's a theological statement about Christianity, not about American politics. It's a humanity issue.

 

[Windwalker]

I believe that this violates the spirit of separating church from state. If you're going to make political statements on church property, then you should be taxed as any other business entity.

It's not a political statement. It's a theological statement.

 

[BSM1]

It's not a political statement. It's a theological statement.

Really? How?

 

[shmogie]

Compassion is not a political partisan issue. It's Christian theology. Anyone identifying as Christian should understand this is about how we treat the least of these among us, is how we are treating Christ. Jesus taught this. The nativity symbolizes this. It's a theological statement about Christianity, not about American politics. It's a humanity issue.

If so, then it is an erroneous theological statement. Unlike where they came from, and the conditions and dangers of their trek to the US These children are safe, have proper medical care, have ample food and shelter.

The argument can be made that separating them from their parents is inherently immoral, but the policy came about because of the concentrated efforts of immigrant advocates judge shopping to find one who would rule as he did. These advocates have some moral responsibility in what resulted from their activities.

The adult asylum seekers too are safe, have medical care, food, shelter, etc.

The tawdry display of this church is designed to support the idea that anyone from anywhere should simply be allowed to enter the country, because detaining them results in their mistreatment. The whole idea of the small actual cages the statues are in screams of mistreatment.

It is quite an Edgar Allen Poe touch to have a newborn baby isolated in a cage where no other statue can care for him, thus the baby has been given a death sentence.

This is using Christian symbolism to generate specific political thought by misrepresenting the nativity and the actual facts that apply to those actually detained.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

.

"A Methodist church in Claremont unveiled a Nativity scene Saturday night depicting Jesus, Mary and Joseph as refugees in cages, likening one of the most well-known images of the Christmas season to photos that have become synonymous with criticism of the Trump administration’s border separation policies.

The display, which has stoked debate on the Facebook page of the church's lead pastor shows classic Nativity figurines of Joseph and Mary in cages on either side of a cage containing the manger of Jesus.

“We see this as, in some ways, the Holy Family standing in for the nameless families,” said the Rev. Karen Clark Ristine, the lead pastor at Claremont United Methodist Church. “We’ve heard of their plight; we’ve seen how these asylum seekers have been greeted and treated. We wanted the Holy Family to stand in for those nameless people because they also were refugees.”

While the Nativity scene shows Jesus shortly after birth and is the foundation of the Christmas holiday, the Claremont depiction appears to be invoking Joseph and Mary’s flight to Egypt. Under most interpretations, the infant Jesus and his parents had to escape Jerusalem for fear King Herod would have the baby slaughtered, perceiving the child as a threat to his reign."
source​

Thoughts?

This is ridiculous.

First off, the photos that everyone references and blame Trump for were taken during Obama's term as President.

It was Trump that fixed that problem.

Second, it's just a bad idea for any church to take such a political stance.

 

[Skwim]

This is ridiculous.

First off, the photos that everyone references and blame Trump for were taken during Obama's term as President.

What photos are those?

Second, it's just a bad idea for any church to take such a political stance.

So what political stances are acceptable?

.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

To set the record straight, Joseph was a carpenter, which was a good paying profession, even at that time. Mary and Joseph were not poor. The reason they had to travel was because of the census, which was the basis for estimating tax collecting. All the citizens had to register at their places of birth. This story was due to big government and big taxes.

Joseph and Mary, were middle class ,and had the money to stay at an Inn. However, because Mary had been in late pregnancy and their travel was slow, they reached Bethlehem late, and all the hotel and motel rooms were taken. The only accommodations were inside the animal stalls, which they happily took. Shortly thereafter Mary gives birth.

If you had bothered to read the church's statement about their display, then you would have known that it's about Mary & Joseph fleeing to Egypt with baby Jesus as refugees in fear for their lives, not about their travel for the census.

Flight into Egypt - Wikipedia

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

This is ridiculous.

First off, the photos that everyone references and blame Trump for were taken during Obama's term as President.

It was Trump that fixed that problem.

Second, it's just a bad idea for any church to take such a political stance.

If a Christian church isn't willing to challenge power and support the downtrodden, how is it Christian?

 

[halbhh]

If a Christian church isn't willing to challenge power and support the downtrodden, how is it Christian?

Yes, that's true. But, fortunately there are plenty of churches (and in many denominations also) that do indeed aid and help the downtrodden, as interestingly shown above in that video in post #27. Not only for refugees, but also for other people too, I've seen first hand.

 

[`mud]

In my strange way of thinking, sometimes, a lot of times,
there's seem a confusion about the difference between,
~~~~~Christianity~~~and~~~Morality~~~~~
Are Christians more moral than atheists ?

 

[halbhh]

In my strange way of thinking, sometimes, a lot of times,
there's seem a confusion about the difference between,
~~~~~Christianity~~~and~~~Morality~~~~~
Are Christians more moral than atheists ?

There ain't no blanket answer to that, unless by "Christian" you mean the far more narrow older meaning of "follower of Christ". If a person is actually (not in lip service only) believing in Him -- enough to actually listen to Him, that is, and follow Him, as He said is by keeping his commandments to them -- then they do indeed change in a good way. That's an 'if'. He actually said at one point that 'few' would do that.

This might help -- if this was the time He was here preaching His gospel for the first time, then it might be that many who happen to be in churches would reject Him it seems, though many others would embrace Him. Also many atheists today in my estimation would embrace Him, and many would reject Him. He's just as radical now as He was then. He is a profound threat to prejudice, comfortable power, materialism, arrogance, and all sorts of modern tendencies.

 

[Windwalker]

Really? How?

From the article:

“We don’t see it as political; we see it as theological. I’m getting responses from people I don’t know … I am having people tell me that it moved them to tears,” she said. “So if the Holy Family and the imagery of the Holy Family and the imagery of a Nativity is something you hold dear, and you see them separated, then that’s going to spark compassion in many people.”
​

That's what theology does. It provokes a response that is god-like. It provokes sympathy for our fellow man suffering from the policies of political powers. It calls forth our humanity in its higher forms. It speaks of the love of God in the face of suffering from the world. You think Martin Luther King's message was about "politics"? At its heart, civil rights is a theological issue. Human rights and dignity, are what theology should and does embrace.

 

[Windwalker]

If so, then it is an erroneous theological statement. Unlike where they came from, and the conditions and dangers of their trek to the US These children are safe, have proper medical care, have ample food and shelter.

Forced separation from children is welcomed by them as better? Care to ask one of the parents if this is so for them in their eyes? How would you feel if it were you fleeing danger at home, only to have your child taken away from you by an armed stranger? You'd be fine with this? I doubt that.

The argument can be made that separating them from their parents is inherently immoral, but the policy came about because of the concentrated efforts of immigrant advocates judge shopping to find one who would rule as he did. These advocates have some moral responsibility in what resulted from their activities.

My understanding is that it began as limited for practical reasons, but has expanded to make anti-immigration stances more pronounced. In other words, it's deliberately abusive. Something any Christian should condone? "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," urges Jesus.

The tawdry display of this church is designed to support the idea that anyone from anywhere should simply be allowed to enter the country, because detaining them results in their mistreatment.

No it does not. That's you reading into what others are saying and judging them for your ideas about them. No one is saying open the doors wide for anyone. Quite the opposite. They are looking for immigration reforms to make it work better. Not get rid of it. That's nonsense, and I believe you know it.

The whole idea of the small actual cages the statues are in screams of mistreatment.

Do you always take art so literally? Maybe they couldn't afford the 2400 square foot fences for each of the Holy Family members, and there wasn't sufficient space on the church property for an exact replica? Maybe they figured it made the point with what they put up. I think it did quite effectively.

But go ahead. Place them in larger cages. They are still in cages. Right? You're for what you see in that scene? As a Christian, you're ok with all of this?

It is quite an Edgar Allen Poe touch to have a newborn baby isolated in a cage where no other statue can care for him, thus the baby has been given a death sentence.

Would it make you feel less offending if he was been watched over by a Roman soldier with a feeding bottle? "Oh, the guard is taking care of baby Jesus. That makes it ok I guess." Really?

This is using Christian symbolism to generate specific political thought by misrepresenting the nativity and the actual facts that apply to those actually detained.

The actual fact is they are being separated from their parents. Would you be okay with your child being taken from you by guards if you were in their position? This is what Jesus hoped to teach people by getting them to think about how they would feel when he told you, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Would you be okay with this treatment to you and your family if you were in their position? That question is what opens up to compassion, and to the teachings of Jesus.