Madam, - I fear Dr Martin Pulbrook (December 22nd) has misread G.F. and his treatment of the letter of James (Thinking Anew, December 11th).
G.F. nowhere says that James is speaking of the first coming or incarnation of Jesus; he is instead offering the important "Advent" theme that Christ will come again in judgment.
I also fear that Dr Pulbrook confuses celebrations of "Christmas" (which may indeed have little reference to Jesus Christ) with celebration of the wonder of incarnation, God become human, which I find in all the gospels and in much else of the New Testament, even if not in the letter of James. Mark, it is true, does not mention the nativity, but the theme of incarnation permeates his gospel.
I wish for Dr Pulbrook and all your readers the sort of "Christmas" season where we may reflect on the eternal becoming earthed for us in the person of Jesus Christ. - Yours, etc.,
Rev JOHN FARIS,
Rochestown Rise,
Cork.
Madam, - With reference to Dr Martin Pulbrook's letter of December 22nd, I would like to say that the birthday of Jesus was well known to those who arrived on the scene, to the people living there, and later even to King Herod.
The apostles would have inquired about the early years of Jesus, and his mother could have given them the details. The information would have been handed on by the Christians.
They had to keep a low profile, so to say, until the time of the Emperor Constantine who died in the year 337. As early as 336 there is a reference to a date for the birth of Jesus; it was December 25th. That precise date may possibly have been chosen to counteract (not to accept) the cult of Mithras. We do not know.
About the letter of James and the gospel of Mark, they expressed faith in the return of Jesus, the Christ, who is spoken of as a giver of eternal life, a divine person.
Both James and Mark knew that his first appearance was in human flesh, an incarnation. - Yours, etc.,
IGNATIUS FENNESSY, OFM,
Seafield Road,
Killiney,
Co Dublin.