Glorification

By Nathaniel Dandridge Pendleton
1941

Part II
The Divine Nativity

I. THE GENERATION OF JESUS CHRIST

"The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham." (Matthew 1: 1)

The Writings tell us that the Lord was born a King. And indeed He was born of the royal line of David. He was born a King of the everlasting kingdom of Truth; yet, as this Truth, He was born, not of Mary, but of God. Therefore He was Truth Divine at birth, and during His life in the world He made His Human ever more to be that Truth; yet this Truth was not separated from Divine Good, but the two were joined in Him from nativity. (A. E. 449.) Therefore it is said in the text, not only that Jesus was the son of David, but also that David was the son of Abraham. These two, Divine Truth conjoined with the Divine Good, were the essentials in the Lord's Divine generation.

In the second verse of this chapter, Abraham is again mentioned, but there as having begot Isaac, and Isaac, Jacob, and so on down in succession to Joseph. This sequence of procreative names stands as an enlarged representation of the Lord's Divine generation, and as such it may be called His genealogy. We note with interest that this genealogy does not mention Mary, but ends with Joseph. Yet the Lord was born of Mary. In this chapter it is recorded that "the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as His mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit." In view of this, why does the Lord's genealogy end with Joseph? But if it be regarded as the genealogy of Joseph, how then may it be taken as the book of the generation of Jesus Christ? This question has been asked since the beginning of the Christian Church, and many answers have been given by the fathers of the church and the pious learned.

The difficulty becomes even more perplexing by a comparison with the genealogy given in Luke. There also the table stands as a list of the Lord's progenitors, but in a reverse order, and with many differences. Also, we there find the name of Joseph instead of Mary. Luke, however, begins with Joseph, and goes back, not only to Abraham, but to Noah, and Adam, and to God. Here, then, the same question arises. How may this be a genealogy of the Lord, since it is traced back from Joseph? Of the many efforts at reconciliation we shall mention only one which has found wide acceptance. This explanation is, that in both genealogies the name of Joseph has been substituted for that of Mary because the Jews would not allow a woman's name to be inserted in their genealogical tables. Also, that the difference in names between Matthew and Luke arises from the fact that one is given according to natural generation and the other in accord with legal requirements, as when a man died childless, his brother was obliged to take his wife and credit the issue to his deceased brother. But neither this nor any other theory has solved the many perplexing difficulties.

As the two genealogies stand, both seem intended to be taken according to the flesh and at the same, time as the genealogy of the Lord. However, as noted, the one ends and the other begins, not with Mary, but with Joseph, her betrothed, who "knew her not till she had brought forth her first-born Son."

It is a happy circumstance that the English version of our text reads, "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ," and not His genealogy. The word generation is not only more fitting, but it enlarges the meaning and releases a spiritual idea, enabling us to perceive the truth that the book of the generation of Jesus Christ is, in verity, the book of His Divine generation. The Writings give us no direct statement to this effect; yet the teachings concerning other genealogies in the Word provide ample warrant for this conclusion.

In treating of the succession of the descendants of Adam, we are told that "it was customary with the most ancient people to give names, and by them to signify things, and thus to frame a genealogy. For the things of the church are related to each other in this way, one being born from another, as in generation." (AC 399, 400.)

In like manner, in treating of the succession of descendants from Esau, it is shown that the succession represents the derivations of the Divine Good Natural in the Lord's Divine Human, and it is said of these derivations, which are contained in the names mentioned, that they are represented to the angels in a general way, and that by an influx of Divine Love from the Lord the angels are profoundly affected thereby. In other words, while the angels may not be given a clearly defined idea of the verities of this Divine Good, but only a "faint outline "thereof (A. C. 4644), yet they are profoundly affected by an influx of love when the names in that chapter are recited. If this be so in the case of the names of the descendants of Esau, what may be said of the sacred table in Matthew? May there not be a like, if not a more intimate, effect upon the angels? And from what is said of the signification of Esau's descendants, may we not gain some idea of the meaning of the genealogy in Matthew? May we not realize that the table of names in Matthew, in a most exalted sense, is a record of the Divine generation of the Lord, and this the more so, since just that is the direct claim made for it in the text?

It is clear, therefore, that this book of the generation of Jesus Christ should not, by any adroit interpretation, be turned into a genealogy of Mary, as by the claim that Joseph's name was inserted in place of hers. The Word of the Lord is right as it stands, and an enforced interpretation, a strained reconciliation based on a false natural premise, cannot but impose an injurious violence on the sacred letter. Spiritual interpretation alone will join together that which appears as if disunited and contradictory in the letter. The table of names in Matthew is therefore not a genealogy of Mary, but in truth of Joseph, and yet it is also, in supreme verity, the book of the generation of Jesus Christ, and for this reason it begins with Abraham and ends with Joseph.

In spiritual fact, and of Divine reason, the name of the protective Joseph, with all the other names in the list, stands for an angel, or an angelic society; that is, for all the departments of heaven, and yet not for the angels themselves, but for the Divine in them.

It should be noted that this Divine generation of Jesus Christ was threefold. It was effected by the Supreme Divine, by the Divine in and with the angels, and by birth into the world. The sacred record of names in Matthew stands for the second of these; that is, it stands for the Lord's heavenly generation which was prior to His earthly birth. Therefore, in Matthew, the record of His heavenly generation comes before the account of His actual birth into the world, the point being that all the societies of heaven, and every angel, unconsciously mediated in this sacred service, and that they did so by protective and moderative accommodations of the Divine transflowing on the occasion. Let us, however, recall that His passing through heaven was clear; that is, nothing was taken from the angels, nothing proprial to them, but only, as it were, a moulding or an apparent finition, an accommodation whereby His conception and is birth into the world were made possible. It was in this way that the Lord bowed the heavens to obeisance in His coming down. May we not, then, understand that the record of births in Matthew, from Abraham to Joseph, is in utmost reality and highest verity the book of the heavenly generation of Jesus Christ, that is, His generation prior to the Mary conception and birth? In fact, this heavenly generation took place from eternity, and its first product was the Divine Man in the heavens, and its second was that Man in the world.

In the Matthew record, therefore, Abraham is the first named and Joseph the last. It is a spiritual law that both the first and the last stand for the whole-here the whole of heaven, and all the angels, in this their gift of an unconscious service, a service which was ordained from the beginning and effected through infinite heavenly mediations until the event could no longer be delayed. If so, then may we conclude, in sympathy with the teaching in Arcana Coelestia 4642, that while this Divine transflux transcends the understanding of men, and while its procedure is but "faintly outlined" to the angels, yet, when the sacred list of names significant of it is recited, the angels are affected by an influx of love which profoundly moves them. And knowing this, even we may be moved.

If, then, it is the Divine and heavenly generation of Jesus Christ which is recorded in Matthew, and not the genealogy of Mary, what may be said of that other like record in Luke? Is it also the book of the generation of Jesus Christ?

In the first place, it is not so called in the text. Besides, in Luke the record runs in a reverse order, and in an ascending instead of a descending series. Luke begins his genealogy with Joseph, and goes back to Abraham, and to Noah and Adam, and finally to God. Also, in the section between Joseph and Abraham, in many cases quite other names are given. We note also that Matthew treats definitively of the subject of generation. His record is called the "book of the generation," and it records the fact that Abraham begat Isaac, and that Isaac begat Jacob, and so on down to Joseph. The vital generative word in its continuity, is lacking in Luke. After noting that Jesus was supposed to be the son of Joseph, Luke's record runs as follows: "Joseph of Heli, and Heli of Matthat, and that of Levi," and so on back to Abraham, Noah, Adam, and God.

Moreover, in Matthew the story of the Lord's birth from Mary follows after the recorded generation of Jesus Christ. It is very different in this respect in Luke. The Lord had arrived at His maturity; He was baptized, -and had entered upon His mission, before the reputed genealogy in Luke is recorded. This important fact as to the time and place of the record, with reference to the Lord's life, taken in connection with that other fact that Luke's genealogy is given in an ascending series from Joseph to God, suggests the thought that Luke's record is not a generative sequence representing the Lord's descent through heaven into the world, but that it is a Divine regenerative series significant of His ascent through heaven to the Divine. If this be so, then the names in this list stand as a record in forecast of the series and degrees of the heavenly societies which responded to the Lord's ascent; and more interiorly it is significant of the successive states of the Lord's ascending glorification. As He came down through heaven by a Divine generation, so also He ascended through heaven by a Divine regeneration, beginning with the heavenly Joseph, and passing through all the states signified by the sacred names in their order, ending with God.

By the way in which the Lord came down, so He went up, but with a difference. In His ascent He made new heavens and also, in a greater or less degree, He changed the states of the fore-established heavens. For instance, we know that in the process of His glorification He, at will, called to Himself certain heavenly societies and instructed them as to the imperative need of abandoning their former attempt to worship the invisible Divine, and of the need of their entering into the worship of God as Man. The fulfillment of this need could not but change the entire state of heaven. Also, we know that on the occasion of His ascent He raised many from the world of spirits and the lower earth and formed them into new angelic societies. May it not be that all this is briefly represented by the new and the changed names discovered in Luke's genealogy?

Let us, then, take the Divine Word as it stands in the sacred letter, in both these series, the one ending and the other beginning with Joseph; and let us note again that the name of Mary occurs in neither. Her sacred function was other than that implied by the angelic intermediation; yet she was of ultimate service to the whole, the entire transflux. Her part was that of a woman in the world, a virgin betrothed to heaven; and her contribution was a material body, stamped with the heredity of her race.

Finally, it is clear why the generative list of names in Matthew should begin with Abraham. He stands not only as an inclusive representative of the Divine, but specifically for the Divine in the heavens, sometimes called the Divine from eternity, and also the Divine Human from eternity, and the Divine Man in the heavens. Thus Abraham stands for just that which was taking place, when by the Divine transflux the Lord came down by a generative descent. Because Abraham represents this heavenly generation of the Lord in its eternal beginning, his name follows through to the end, even to the ultimate fulfillment, and so it comes to pass that Abraham represents the infancy and childhood of the Lord, and in general the state of the Lord at birth, which state is said, in the Writings, to have been most arcane; for in the child at birth was involved, not only the Divine, but a heavenly accommodation thereof. Hence the teaching that the Lord alone of all men was born of heavenly seed, and that in this He was unlike any man. All other men are born of a seed with the stain of evil which engenders an infernal proprium. The evil that tempted the Lord during His life on earth came from without, through the door of His natural inheritance.

Because the Lord alone was born of heavenly seed, therefore, in His infancy and childhood, He entered into the celestial things of love. Because of this, the opening of His mind as a child to the light of truth was quick beyond the measure of any man; for His love, even in the beginning, was celestial. The doctrine is, that while all men are born natural, He alone was born a spiritual celestial Man, by which is signified His Divine and heavenly inheritance. Because He was born of heavenly seed, He was holy at birth, and this even as to His body, in so far as His body was derived from His soul. In touching upon this derivation the Writings teach that the bodies of men are from their souls. There was with Him at birth, as with all men, not only a mother vestment, but also a derivation from the Father; and this derivation so profoundly qualified Him, so wrought from within the very fibres of His body, that it was holy. Moreover, and because of this, at a later date He was empowered to walk upon the waters, and still later to rise from death, leaving nothing in the sepulchre. This miracle of His resurrection was a fulfillment of all that was in Him by virtue of His Divine generation, which also was signified by the signs and wonders which accompanied His birth. The coming of the wise men, bringing gifts, signifies that all the wisdom of the East was in Him; and the story of the shepherds tells of the child then born to be the Divine Shepherd of Israel. Wisdom was in Him at birth, and the guardian love of the human race.