by Sophie Borland
The Telegraph
The Archbishop of Canterbury said yesterday that the Christmas story of the Three Wise Men was nothing but a 'legend'.
Dr Rowan Williams has claimed there was little evidence that the Magi even existed and there was certainly nothing to prove there were three of them or that they were kings.
Dr Williams argued that the traditional Christmas story was nothing but a 'legend'
He said the only reference to the wise men from the East was in Matthew's gospel and the details were very vague.
Dr Williams said: "Matthew's gospel says they are astrologers, wise men, priests from somewhere outside the Roman Empire, that's all we're really told. It works quite well as legend."
The Archbishop went on to dispel other details of the Christmas story, adding that there were probably no asses or oxen in the stable.
He argued that Christmas cards which showed the Virgin Mary cradling the baby Jesus, flanked by shepherds and wise men, were misleading. As for the scenes that depicted snow falling in Bethlehem, the Archbishop said the chance of this was "very unlikely".
In a final blow to the traditional nativity story, Dr Williams concluded that Jesus was probably not born in December at all. He said: "Christmas was when it was because it fitted well with the winter festival."
His comments came during an interview on BBC Radio 5 Live with Simon Mayo yesterday. Later on in the show, the Archbishop was challenged by fellow guest Ricky Gervais, the comedian, about the credibility of the Christmas story.
Gervais told Dr Williams he was concerned about "brainwashing" of children who are sent to faith schools at an early age, comparing teaching that God exists to belief in Father Christmas.
Dr Williams said faith schools expose children to the full range of human experience and values and he did not believe they indoctrinated people.
"Holy Mother Church has firmly and with absolute constancy held, and continues to hold, that the four Gospels just named, whose historical character the Church unhesitatingly asserts, faithfully hand on what Jesus Christ, while living among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation until the day He was taken up into heaven"
"The Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office at the command of Pope St. Pius X issued the Syllabus of Errors condemning the errors of the Modernists on July 3, 1907 which officially CONDEMNED 65 modernist propositions including #16: "The narrations of John are not properly history, but a mystical contemplation of the Gospel. The discourses contained in his Gospel are theological meditations, lacking historical truth concerning the mystery of salvation."
The "Archbishop" (the quotation marks are there because he is not a bishop in any true sense and does not have valid Orders) is certainly treading dangerous waters by calling the Bible into question. When one starts questioning what is plainly written in the scriptures, it becomes increasingly easy to start questioning whether Jesus rose from the dead or whether He was the Son of God or whether He gave the Catholic Church its authority--Oh, wait--the adulterer king who started the Church of England already did that!
It's no wonder that large groups of Anglicans are petitioning Rome to join the Catholic Church when their leader is talking like this. This gives Dr. Williams about as much credibility as a cartoon character.
2 comments:
Rowan may have a point about the date. We'd have to know the time of the census that Augustus ordered, since Luke plainly says the Nativity occurred at that time. It probably didn't snow in that part of the world either. I think Scripture is silent about the animals. However, no such doubt exists about the shepherds and the Magi. That is revealed truth, not mere legend. Shame on Rowan for suggesting anything to that effect.
Janet is right. If you think about the extreme improbability that such respect would go to people who were not only non-Jews but even non-Judeans, you'd have to believe that the Gospel story is accurate. As for the census, we have Josephus's history to validate that. That's how we know that our calendar is three (or is it four?) years off.
Post a Comment