Both John and Mary prepare for the coming of the Messiah. Through the figure of John the Baptiser, we are reminded that we can be so jaded as to be unawares that Christ is already amongst us. Through Mary, we are shown what our response should be to the Lord when He comes.
In the 1st Reading, King David felt that he needed to remedy a situation. Moved with devotion, David intended to render to his Lord God an abode befitting His honour. The Lord did not reject David’s good intentions. Instead, He furthered David’s response through a promise. In other words, David, rather than rushing off to prove his love for God was given a promise of the future, one which would be time-proof. A temple can surely decay or be destroyed but God’s promised future will stand the test of time. David’s great temple would be a living Ark of the Covenant.
David’s desire and God’s promise remind us that there exists an unequal relationship between God and man but it is definitely one which opens up to great possibilities. Therefore, when the angel appeared to Mary to announce the birth of God’s Son, Mary’s question was unlike Zechariah’s. The old man had asked for proof of Elizabeth’s pregnancy. Whereas Mary’s “How can it be since I am a Virgin?”, was a question that opened up the possible.
Mary’s question actually furthered her desire to cooperate fully with God. In the first place, children should naturally be expected in any marriage, meaning that when one enters into marriage, the children should come as part of the package. Mary’s dialogue with the Archangel makes no sense unless her question can be rephrased as “How can it be since I intend to remain a Virgin?”. Here, virginity should be seen as an expression of self-donation to God and understood within the context of desiring to do God’s will.
Mary’s total self-giving to God now takes on a new expression. Giving herself entirely to the Lord, He elevates her virginity through the Incarnation and the birth of Jesus the Son of God. In a way, Mary shatters the idea of freedom centred on autonomy. We define freedom as self-fulfilment, meaning that we want to be able to live according to our desires. Whereas Mary defined freedom as the will of God to be done in her life. Indeed, Mary’s fiat challenges our modern mentality where the more we try to define freedom as absolute autonomy, the less free we become. But the more we embrace God’s will, the freer we become.
At the cusp of Christmas, both David and Mary are symbols of humanity. While both figures stand for the possibilities of love for God, Mary’s total love gave us the fullest expression of God’s love for us—God’s only Son. Christmas is the fruit of the Incarnation of God’s love for Man. You may know of how a parent and a child play the game of love. One says, “I love you”. The other replies, “I love you more”. Well, whenever we desire to love God, He responds by loving us more. Naïvely or innocently, we believe that we can love God by performing great feats for Him. Our example was David through his temple. But in the Annunciation to Mary, our greatest achievements pale in comparison to God’s gift to us.
Today’s focus on Mary at the Annunciation reveals not only the possibility of Man’s response to God but it also represents the depth of God’s love for us. In Mary’s “fiat”, she became the bearer of God, the true Ark of the Covenant. She alone carried God in her womb making her the only Theotokos. But Mary is not alone. In her response, she invites us also be the bearer of Christ her Son. Her “yes” to God gives us to the courage to say yes to God.
Christmas is later tonight when all our Advent preparations will come to their conclusion. At this 4th Sunday of Advent, we stand alongside Mary, the Theotokos, praying that our preparations can pave the way for Christ, her Son to be born in our hearts, both through our thoughts and actions. That way, we can become truly Christotokos[1] in the world and for the world.
_____
[1] Theotokos and Christotokos belong the controversy that gave rise to the Nestorian heresy. The original discussion centred on Mary and who she is in relation to Jesus. Is she the bearer of God or the bearer of Christ (the man)? The Council of Ephesus settled on Mary’s title as the bearer of God. Mary is Theotokos because the divine person of Jesus Christ has two natures—human and divine. As such Mary is rightfully the mother of God. The usage of the terms here respects Mary as truly the Mother of God for she alone bore God physically in her womb. Whereas we are not bearers of God physically. We bear Him morally and so we can be called the bearers of Christ in and to the world. The use of the term Christotokos here does not carry the same baggage of the Nestorian heresy. We are truly bearers of Christ (Christotokos) who is both human and divine.
