Saints, I sorely missed being with you this past Sunday, especially as we were coming to the end of our series on the infancy narratives in the Gospel of Luke. So, I thought I would share a thought or two about that final passage in 2:41-52. It will give us a sense of closure on these opening chapters.
It can be difficult to read this story of the boy Jesus in the Temple and not read it through our own experiences. Some of us have been 12-year-old boys. Many have dealt with 12-year-old boys, as sons, brothers, friends, etc. We tend to view 12-year-olds the way my father jokingly did. He would tell people that if you went to the birthday party of a boy turning 12, you should listen closely. If you did, you would hear a distinct ‘thunk’ at some point in the proceedings. That sound was the boy’s brain dropping to his backside and it would take 8-10 years for it to work its way back to its proper place of function.
We chuckle because the truth is funny that way. We all can recall the antics of a 12-year-old boy. The goofiness and the courses of action that are not thought through quite all the way. We also know the attitude and the back talk. It can be easy then to read Jesus’ response to a distressed Mary and Joseph as if it had a tone to it and perhaps a smirk. Did Jesus actually sass his mom?!?
Clearly, the answer is no. While I am sure the infant Jesus cried in the manager (contra Away in the Manger), I am just as certain that Jesus’ response was not disrespectful to Mary. We must remember that a 12-year-old in Jesus’ day was different from a modern 12-year-old. In Jesus’ day, a 12-year-old would be almost to the point of being considered an adult and so his ability and maturity to make decisions for himself were assumed. Also, the passage goes on to state that he continued to be submissive to them (2:51). This was not an action or statement of a rebellious heart.
So, how should we understand Jesus’s defense? What do the words, Why is it that you were seeking me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house? David Gooding highlights the import of this statement when he writes:
My Father’s house? The learned doctors knew the Old Testament inside out. In all the long biblical record, not even Moses who had built the tabernacle, not David who had longed to build the temple, nor Solomon who had actually built it, no prophet, no king or commoner, not the most exalted of them, had ever referred to the tabernacle or temple as ‘my Father’s house.’ The child was conscious of a relationship with God that none had conceived of, let alone expressed, before. And with that relationship, a compelling devotion: ‘I had to be in my Father’s house.’
Still, a strange story to our ears. How does one respond? Mary shows us the way in how she treasured up all these things in her heart (2:51). Dale Ralph Davis, commenting on this verse, says, What do you do when you find Jesus mysterious and baffling? You begin by mulling it over and over, trying to piece it all together, seeking to make sense out of His mysterious words and ways. There’s a sense in which the mystery of Jesus’ words and ways has an inviting aspect, as if challenging us to make what we can of it all. And eventually the Lord brings light.
As we prepare to enter the Advent season, Jesus is inviting us to once again consider the wonder of the Incarnation. To place it against the darkness of a broken and sin-ravaged world. To see the lengths our covenant God has gone to redeem His people. To see the humility of the Son of God who did not grasp his equality with the Father but made himself nothing, being born in the likeness of men. And to see that the Incarnation was the beginning of a humiliation that would end in death but would be followed by a great exaltation of resurrection and reign. Oh, saints, once again, let us come and behold the wondrous mystery!
