Circumcision of Christ

[Long Post Warning] What strikes many people as odd on reading the Gospels is that Christ did so many things that one wouldn't associate with a supreme being. Why did he need to be baptized? Why did he have to go to the temple? Why circumcise him while you're at it?

Were there two natures so separate that the mortal coil had to be put through its paces even as the divine essence watched passively or pulled the puppet strings? Accepting the idea of a "ransom" could he not have lived and died without running through what would seem to be unnecessary activities?

The feast day summary I found answers this better (and with more succinctness) than I can.

As Christ wished to fulfil the law and to show His descent according to the flesh from Abraham, He, though not bound by the law, was circumcised on the eighth day (Luke 2.21), and received the sublime name expressive of His office, Jesus, (Saviour). He was, as Saint Paul says, "made under the law", that is, He submitted to the Mosaic Dispensation, "that he might redeem them who were under the law: that we might receive the adoption of sons" (Galatians 4.4-5). "The Christ, in order to fulfil all justice, was required to endure this humiliation, and bear in His body the stigma of the sins which He had taken upon Himself." The circumcision took place, not in the Temple, though painters sometimes so represent it, but in some private house, where the Holy Family had found a rather late hospitality. The public ceremony in the synagogue, which is now the usage, was introduced later. I find that rather interesting - certainly worth pointing to when discussing the important place of the domestic church.

"Joseph. That's an awful lot of quoting with little real substance."

Christ was baptized:

By the mystery of Christ's Baptism, the waters of earth which suffused His Body were spiritually transformed to be a means by which the Holy Spirit may be conveyed to men, to us. In Holy Baptism, the Spirit acts through water and we are united with Christ. Part of Christ's purpose in Baptism was to prepare all of earth's waters for our new birth in the Spirit.

Christ was presented to the temple in keeping with Mosaic Law.

Christ was circumcised:

Reply to Objection 1. Circumcision by the removal of the piece of skin in the member of generation, signified "the passing away of the old generation" [Athanasius, De Sabb. et Circumcis.]: from the decrepitude of which we are freed by Christ's Passion. Consequently this figure was not completely fulfilled in Christ's birth, but in His Passion, until which time the circumcision retained its virtue and status. Therefore it behooved Christ to be circumcised as a son of Abraham before His Passion.

Reply to Objection 2. Christ submitted to circumcision while it was yet of obligation. And thus His action in this should be imitated by us, in fulfilling those things which are of obligation in our own time. Because "there is a time and opportunity for every business" (Ecclesiastes 8:6).

Moreover, according to Origen (Hom. xiv in Luc.), "as we died when He died, and rose again when Christ rose from the dead, so were we circumcised spiritually through Christ: wherefore we need no carnal circumcision." And this is what the Apostle says (Colossians 2:11): "In whom," [i.e. Christ] "you are circumcised with circumcision not made by hand in despoiling of the body of the flesh, but in the circumcision of" our Lord Jesus "Christ."

Reply to Objection 3. As Christ voluntarily took upon Himself our death, which is the effect of sin, whereas He had no sin Himself, in order to deliver us from death, and to make us to die spiritually unto sin, so also He took upon Himself circumcision, which was a remedy against original sin, whereas He contracted no original sin, in order to deliver us from the yoke of the Law, and to accomplish a spiritual circumcision in us--in order, that is to say, that, by taking upon Himself the shadow, He might accomplish the reality.

Certainly hard for the Greeks to accept back then and I think equally difficult for the people of today. This is one of the reasons why "Buddy Jesus" confounds me so completely. He is not a pal that I can talk to when my soufflé isn't rising or when I'm pondering adding ground effects to my car. To substitute egalitarian camaraderie for a true theotic relationship with God - He who is beyond being and I who am blessed to be made in His image - misunderstands His actions and if I may be blunt distorts the very nature of existence.