Advent and the Hymns of Luke’s Gospel

The four songs embedded within the first two chapters of the Gospel of Luke are a rich resource for reflecting on the advent of Jesus. Individually, they are meaningful and moving prayers and exclamations of praise in response to the good news about the arrival of the long-awaited messiah. Collectively, they reinforce and complement one another creating a tapestry of praise in celebration of the birth of the savior. The season of Advent is a perfect time to reflect on these beautiful passages.

For those unfamiliar with these passages, they are commonly referred to by their Latin names: the Magnificat (1:46–55) is the song of Mary; the Benedictus (1:68–79) is the song of Zechariah; the Gloria in excelsis (2:14) is the song of the angels; and the Nunc Dimittis (2:29–32) is the song of Simeon. Reading them as the responses of praise to the announcement and arrival of the promised savior is particularly instructive.

Themes of these songs include such things as the mercy of God, which is mentioned twice in the Magnificat and twice in the Benedictus; though the term is not explicitly used in the other two songs, they clearly reflect responses to God’s favor. The notion of reversals where the proud are brought low and the humble are raised up, or those in darkness are enlightened, are prominent in the Magnificat and Benedictus. The fulfillment of God’s promises to his people to deliver them is a theme of the Magnificat, Benedictus, and Nunc Dimittis. The arrival of light, salvation, forgiveness, and guidance into the way of peace are major themes of the Benedictus. The glorifying of God and the announcement of peace and God’s favor are themes of the Gloria in excelsis. Peace, light, salvation, and glory are themes of the Nunc Dimittis, along with the notion of the Gentiles as recipients of God’s enlightening and saving work through the savior. Taken together there is a very interesting move from the individual blessing of Mary, to the fulfillment of God’s promises of deliverance to God’s people, to the praise of the angels, to the enlightening work of the savior extending to all of humanity. In this way the progression of thematic praise to God in Luke’s birth narrative aligns with the overall thrust of Luke’s two-part masterpiece of Gospel and Acts. Both Luke’s Gospel and Acts end with echoes of this notion of the inclusion of the Gentiles in the people of God (Luke 24:47; Acts 28:28).

It is instructive to compare the contents and emphases of these four songs with the christological hymns embedded within other writings of the New Testament (e.g., Phil 2:5-11; Col 1:15-20). If we were to do so, we might immediately be struck by a few significant differences. Luke’s songs do not have a primary focus on Jesus, as much as the saving work of God, and they do not mention some important themes of the other NT hymns. Missing from Luke’s hymns are references to such concepts as the preexistence of Jesus, the incarnation of Jesus, the death of Jesus, the resurrection of Jesus, and the ascension of Jesus. The Magnificat does not even mention Jesus! While this sounds like a lot of significant christological content that is absent from these songs, the context of these songs is important to consider. These are included at the beginning of Luke’s narrative, a narrative which itself will unfold the significance of Jesus, detailing the death on the cross and the resurrection and ascension. For the author of the gospel, it was not necessary to spell out all of these specific christological ideas in each song or even in the opening chapters. Instead, the songs of the infancy narrative set the stage for what will follow. Here is how I’ve explained it: “Rather than recount the salient contents of the life, death, and resurrection of Christ, these four psalms portray the responses of a range of devout characters to the news that the time of redemption has begun.” (New Testament Christological Hymns, 207)

In this regard I find the work of Kindalee De Long at Pepperdine University especially instructive. She explains how the narrative of Luke unfolds in such a way that these songs demonstrate the responses of joy that would be expected in the arrival of the promised new age of divine deliverance. This idea can be found throughout the prophetic writings including Joel 2:26-27, Zephaniah 3:14-15, Zechariah 9:9-10, and Isaiah 66:7-11. So it is not just in the words of the songs that the meaning is found, but in the actual act of joyous singing in response to the news of the arrival of the savior.

Also, in spite of the differences from the other early hymns, there are significant shared themes:

“In common with the christological hymns, however, is an emphasis on the birth of Christ as signaling the initiation of the new age in which God fulfills the expectations of the prophets. Specific touch points with the early Christian hymns are the idea that Christ brings about peace, that his advent enlightens humanity, and that Gentiles and Jews alike are included as beneficiaries of God’s actions in Christ. One final point of connection is the idea that God’s redemptive activities in and through Christ result in glory to God.” (New Testament Christological Hymns, 207-208)

All of those elements of Luke's hymns are the central themes of the christological hymns found throughout the New Testament.

For Luke as an author it seems that he not only “tells” the reader about the messiah but also “shows” the reader that the birth of Jesus inaugurates a new age. And for Luke, the scripturesque language of the hymns does not simply “tell” but also “shows” that this new work of God is the work that the Jewish scriptures and prophets had foretold. Like the other hymns in the New Testament, these passages show a rich and deep engagement with the Jewish Scriptures. Apart from a careful reading of the scriptural grounding of these hymns in their early Jewish context, it is difficult to appreciate the full meaning of these passages.

Not only Luke the author but the characters in the narrative themselves invite us to understand that this was good news for “all the people.” And as Zechariah exclaimed it was “by the tender mercy of our God” that the dawn from on high was breaking upon them. Further, these characters model an appropriate response to the divine visitation: joyous praise to God.

In our world that is still longing for peace, the praises of Mary, Zechariah, the angels, and Simeon, are as timely as they were in the first-century context. And they can still enlighten us today as we contemplate with them the mystery of God’s mercy revealed in the advent of Jesus.

Mercy in a Culture of Indifference

“Living Mercy in an Age of Indifference” was the subject of a talk this week by Dr. Johann Vento who is a Professor of Religious Studies and Theology at Georgian Court University. This very timely presentation was given at Carlow’s “Common Hour”—a space and time set aside on the first Tuesday of each month for faculty and staff to come together to have dialogue and discussion about a topic of importance to the community. Here are a few points that I noted that really resonated with me.

Dr. Vento began with a review of mercy in the Psalms, showing that mercy is a theme that infuses the prayers and praises of the people of God. She pointed to one of my favorites, Ps 103: “The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love” (Psalm 103:8). Dr. Vento pointed out that the biblical theme of mercy, and mercy in the Psalms in particular, was a thread that runs through the writings of Pope Francis. His 2015 “The Face of Mercy” announced 2016 as the year of mercy, building on this scriptural foundation. When you note that the Psalms are the most cited book in the NT, it is not surprising that mercy themes infuse the New Testament as well.

As Dr. Vento moved on to an open discussion with the group about mercy in our world today, a few themes in our own culture were noted. One is the high level of distress in our culture, and particularly among students; there is a palpable hunger and thirst for mercy. Second, our contemporary culture actually teaches us not to be merciful, with its individualistic and judgmental tendencies. In other words, “we” tend to think we are doing well because of our effort and hard work; “they” are in need because of their own faults and failures. Third, she pointed to a “closed-off and privatized form of Christianity” which is poorly equipped to be present to suffering. The effect of these dynamics, intended or not, is that we have a tendency to isolate and insulate ourselves from the suffering of others. The extreme customization of our own personalized “news feeds” in social media potentially only serves to exacerbate this insulation from the suffering of others who are not like us.

Dr. Vento then turned to several theologians who have helped her consider mercy, not just from an individual religious perspective, but in terms of mercy as “a passion to end injustice.” In particular, she drew from the work of Walter Kasper, Johannes Metz, and John Sobrino, theologians who have reflected deeply on the gospel teachings about mercy and their connection to contemporary issues in society.

A few concepts in this part of her presentation were particularly striking. One that resonated with me was Johannes Metz’s notion of “theology as interruption.” In the cultural context described above, theology can serve to jar us and awaken us from a pre-occupation with ourselves and our own comfort and our own successes or small sufferings. A biblical theology of mercy grounded in the mercy of God as seen in the Psalms and the NT requires us to be attentive to the suffering of others, and to be “moved with compassion” as the Samaritan was in the parable of Jesus that is commonly known as “the Good Samaritan” (Luke 10). Notably, Metz did much of his writing and thinking in the wake of the Holocaust as he sought to understand how the Christian church in Nazi Germany not only had no ability to generate a robust, counter-cultural Christian response to the Nazi atrocities, but was actually largely silent about it. As history shows, many Christians were complicit simply by not taking action or speaking up about what was happening to the marginalized in their society when they could have and should have. In response, Metz proposes a theology that emphasizes solidarity with those who suffer, based on the actual reality of the inter-connectedness of all people, including the most vulnerable. To me this is an insightful and compelling application of the teaching of Jesus in Luke 10:25-37.

Finally, Dr. Vento ended up discussing the work of John Sobrino, a Jesuit from Nicaragua who has been on my reading list for some time (but whom I have not yet gotten to!). According to Sobrino, to be truly human is to respond to suffering and to be moved by it. Moved to act. This involves “making someone else’s pain our very own” (Principle of Mercy, p. 11). Again, an embodiment of the compassion and care toward one’s neighbor as seen in the teaching of Jesus.

For me the entire conversation was an embodiment of “theology as interruption.” I have my own priorities, stressors, and daily sufferings, not to mention my to-do list each day. The theology of mercy calls me to be ready and open to look up from my screen, to see human need and be open to be moved. And in that moment of being moved, to act.

“But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. He went to him and bound up his wounds” (Luke 10:33-34)