*   *   *   *

“The Risen Christ Appearing to Mary Magdalen” – which comes at the end of Holy Week…

*   *   *   *

Today is the start of Holy Week.  (Also known as the last week of Lent.)  And just as an aside, last year – 2015 – Easter Sunday came later, on April 4.  (As noted in On Holy Week – and hot buns.)

The “hot buns” part of that equation noted that “’hot cross buns are traditionally toasted and eaten on Good Friday,’ in the Anglican countries of the British Commonwealth:”

A hot cross bun is a “spiced sweet bun made with currants or raisins and marked with a cross on the top.”  The eating of this hot cross bun was designed to mark the end of Lent, with all its disciplines and “giving ups.”  I.e., during Lent, only “plain buns made without dairy products” could be eaten.  That prohibition ended at noon on Good Friday.

The post also noted a number of superstitions from English folklore, about such “hot buns.”  For example: Sharing a hot cross bun with friend “is supposed to ensure friendship throughout the coming year.”  Also, if taken on a sea voyage, “hot cross buns are said to protect against shipwreck.”

But enough about those “hot buns.”  (We are still in Lent, after all…)  

More to the point, Holy Week includes – but is not limited to, spiritually speaking – the following Feast Days:  Palm Sunday,  Holy Wednesday (also known as Spy Wednesday), Maundy Thursday (Holy Thursday), Good Friday (Holy Friday), and Holy Saturday.”  But here’s a key note:

Holy Week doesn’t “end” with Easter Sunday.  By definition, Easter Sunday “is the beginning of another liturgical [season, 50 days long]…”  That in turn could be a metaphor or object lesson for a whole new beginning, as in a “whole new way of life.”  Which is another way of saying [that] Easter Sunday is the defining moment of the liturgical year…

See On Easter Season – AND BEYOND.  That post noted that Easter Sunday – the end of Holy Week – is also known as Resurrection Sunday.  For obvious reasons.  It also included “a word about Rembrandt‘s interpretation of Easter morning, shown above:”

Mary Magdalen had just found Jesus’ grave empty, and asks a bystander what has happened. In her confusion she thinks the man is a gardener.  Only when he replies with “Mary!” does she realize who she’s talking to.  To illustrate Mary’s confusion, Jesus is often depicted as a gardener in this scene.

Then there’s the matter of Easter Sunday as celebrated today, “with the ‘Easter Bunny, colorfully decorated Easter eggs, and Easter egg hunts.’”  (For a more liturgical view see What is Easter Sunday?)   Which leads to the question:  “So how did the Easter Bunny get mixed up in all this?”

The Easter Bunny (also called the Easter Rabbit or Easter Hare) is a symbol of Easter, depicted as a rabbit bringing Easter eggs.  Originating among German Lutherans, the “Easter Hare” originally played the role of a judge, evaluating whether children were good or disobedient…   In legend, the creature carries colored eggs in his basket, candy, and sometimes also toys to the homes of children, and as such shows similarities to Santa Claus or the Christkind, as they both bring gifts to children on the night before their respective holidays.

That’s from the Easter Bunny link, connected with the “bunny” postcard image at the bottom of the main text.  There’s also a note that the Easter Bunny custom was first written of – in America – at about the year 1682.  (See also social control, connected to similar practices before Christmas.)

Last year’s post – On Easter Season – AND BEYOND – also included a link to Ēostre – Wikipedia.

That noted the “Germanic divinity” who originally served as “namesake of the festival of Easter.”  And it noted that the “Ēostre” celebration was mentioned by the Venerable Bede – at left – in his “8th-century work The Reckoning of Time.”

But in closing, here’s a more incongruous note.

I was sitting in church this morning, listening to the priest read from Luke 22:14-23:56.  (Part of the full Palm Sunday readings, which can be seen at Sunday of the Passion: Palm Sunday.)  And for some reason, on this particular morning I was struck by Luke 22:37.  That passage came right after Jesus said that Peter would deny Him three times before the cock crowed.  Jesus went on to say – in our translation – “I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me, `And he was counted among the lawless‘; and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled.“

Biblehub.com has a number of different translations for the word “lawless:”  Words like “transgressors,” or “rebels,” or “evil doers,” “criminals,” or even “outlaws.”  And the notes thereto point to the “fifty third chapter of Isaiah, where this passage stands.”  That 53d chapter is in turn “a manifest prophecy of the Messiah.”  Specifically, see Isaiah 53:12:

Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors.  For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

Another note pointed out that Jesus was “crucified between two thieves; and more than this.”

The more than this involved what might be known in the lawyer trade as a legal fiction.  (That is, ” a fact assumed or created by courts which is then used in order to apply a legal rule.”)  The legal rule in question demanded a blood sacrifice, under the Old Law, to cover the sins of the people.  But to solve that problem for all time, Jesus substituted HIs own “blood” for ours:

[B]eing in the legal place, and stead of his people, and having their sins laid upon him, and imputed to him, he was made and accounted, by imputation, not only a sinner, but sin itself; and as such, was considered in the eye of the law, and by the justice of God…   (E.A.)

Which is something to remember next Sunday, while enjoying those Chocolate Bunnies.

*   *   *   *

“An Easter postcard depicting the Easter Bunny...”

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of The Risen Christ Appearing to Mary Magdalen – Art and the Bible.

The lower image is courtesy of Easter – Wikipedia.

 

“Simeon and Anna Recognize the Lord in Jesus” – at the Presentation of Our Lord…

*   *   *   *

Tuesday, February 2, was the Feast for the Presentation of Jesus at the Temple:

Counting forward from December 25 as Day One, we find that Day Forty is February 2.  A Jewish woman is in semi-seclusion for 40 days after giving birth to a son, and accordingly it is on February 2 that we celebrate the coming of Mary and Joseph with the infant Jesus to the Temple at Jerusalem…

See The Presentation, from the Satucket web site.  (The one with all the DORs.)  See also On The Presentation of Our Lord, a post I did last year at this time.  And as noted last year, this Feast celebrates the episode in Jesus’ life described in Luke 2:22-40.

Luke said that “Mary and Joseph took the Infant Jesus to the Temple in Jerusalem … to complete Mary’s ritual purification after childbirth.”  They did so “in obedience to the Torah (Leviticus 12, Exodus 13:12–15.”

Luke explicitly says that Joseph and Mary take the option provided for poor people (those who could not afford a lamb) (Leviticus 12:8), sacrificing “a pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.”  Leviticus 12:1–4 indicates that this event should take place forty days after birth for a male child, hence the Presentation is celebrated forty days after Christmas.

That’s where “Simeon and Anna” come in.  Briefly, they recognize the Lord in Jesus.

That is, Simeon had previously been “visited by the Holy Spirit” – as imagined in the image below right – “and told that he would not die until he had seen the Lord’s Christ.”  So – according to Luke 2:27 – Simeon “came in the Spirit into the temple,” on what happened to be the exact day that Jesus’ parents brought Him in.  (For “ritual purification.”)

(See also 2d Peter 1:21 for an example of prophets being moved in the spirit: “no prophecy ever originated through a human decision.  Instead, men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”)

So anyway, on seeing the baby Jesus, Simeon “uttered the prayer that would become known as the Nunc Dimittis,” Luke 2:29-32 (NIV):

“Sovereign Lord, as you have promised, you may now dismiss your servant in peace.  For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all nations:  a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and the glory of your people Israel.”

Simeon then prophesied to Mary, as told in Luke 2:34-35.  And finally there was the “elderly prophetess Anna,” who was also in the Temple at the time.

She too offered prayers and praise to God – for Jesus – and spoke to everyone there of His importance to the redemption of His People.  (In Luke 2:36-38.)

In last year’s post on the Presentation, I wrote a lot about Mardi Gras.

Put simply, Mardi Gras is one final blowout (celebration) on the last day before by Lent.  (A “solemn religious observance” involving some 40 days of “prayer, penance,repentance of sins, almsgiving, atonement and self-denial.”)  And both of those Feast Days are right around the corner.

Shrove Tuesday in 2016 comes a week after the Presentation, on February 9.  The next day, February 10, is Ash Wednesday, which marks the beginning of Lent.  And Lent serves as a reminder of the last time that Jesus would be “Presented to the People.”

The painting below shows us that last time Jesus would be presented.  This time it was by Pontius Pilate, “presenting the mocked and scourged Jesus to the people.”

*   *   *   *

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of the “Simeon” link in the Wikipedia article on the Presentation.  That caption:  “Simeon the Godreceiver by Alexei Egorov. 1830–40s.”  The caption I used for the upper image is actually the one from Simeon and Anna Recognize the Lord in Jesus.  That’s another interpretation of the event, by Rembrandt (van Rijn).  (Who is far better known that Egorov.)  You can see Rembrandt’s interpretation at “Wikigallery,” or at “Rembrandtonline.”

And I’m assuming “Anna” is one of the women in Egorov’s background.

*   *   *   *

The Nunc Dimittis is also known as the Canticle Of Simeon, “which prophesied the redemption of the world by Jesus.”  See Prayers – Catholic Online for another good image of the event. 

The lower image is courtesy of Pontius Pilate – Wikipedia.  The caption:  “Ecce Homo (‘Behold the Man’), Antonio Ciseri‘s depiction of Pilate presenting a scourged Jesus to the people of Jerusalem.”

See also Rembrandt van Rijn: Christ Presented to the People – for a drypoint image – and Jesus Christ Presented to the People by Rembrandt, which provided the “mocked and scourged Jesus” text.

St. Thomas Aquinas, being “girded by angels with a mystical belt of purity…” 

*   *   *   *

January 28 is the feast day of perhaps the greatest intellect of the Catholic Church, St. Thomas Aquinas, known as the Angelic Doctor due to his purity of mind and body.  He gave up a life of nobility and wealth to be a poor Dominican friar, at the time a new religious order, much to the consternation of his family.

See January 28 … Thomas Aquinas.  See also Thomas Aquinas – Wikipedia, which noted that this St. Thomas is considered the Catholic Church’s greatest theologian and philosopher, and was “honored as a Doctor of the Church.”

But first note the word “doctor” used here comes from the Latin docere.  That means “to instruct, teach, or point out.”

Thus Doctor of the Church – like St. Isidore of Seville, at left – “is a title given by a variety of Christian Churches, to those they recognize as “having been of particular importance, particularly regarding their contribution to theology or doctrine.”

(And incidentally, I’d argue that any good “doctor of the church” would recognize that he – or she – can learn as much from the person being taught, as he – or she – knows already.  See also Seneca the Younger …)

So anyway, for more on what made this St. Thomas so special, see St. Thomas Aquinas.  (From the Satucket website.)  For starters, he was born in 1225 and died – a mere 49 years old – in 1274.

That means he lived right at the end of the Dark Ages.  (A time of “cultural and economic deterioration” in Western Europe, “following the decline of the Roman Empire.”)

During the Dark Ages, one of the institutions that kept things together was “Holy Mother Church.”  (In Latin, “Sancta Mater Ecclesia.”)  But one problem was that – largely due to widespread illiteracy – the Bible became the only book that was widely studied.  (And then only as interpreted by local parish priests, and many of them couldn’t read.)

Thomas Aquinas changed things up.  He “modernized” things.

Ironically, he did that by reading golden oldies, books written by people like Aristotle.  (Shown at “right right,” but who was at the time of Aquinas ” largely forgotten in Western Europe.”)

There was no such thing as printing – not until Gutenberg, in and around 1450 – and there were precious few books other than the Bible to “read.”  (Or more likely, have read to you.)

But then by Aquinas’s time – after a “dark” millennium or more – such books started reappearing.  (They’d been preserved “partly from Eastern European sources and partly from Moslem Arab sources in Africa and Spain.”)  And like all good golden oldies, such re-discovered books got “liked:”

These works offered a new and exciting way of looking at the world.  Many enthusiastic students of Aristotle adopted him quite frankly as as an alternative to Christianity.  The response of many Christians was to denounce Aristotle as an enemy of the Christian Faith.

Put another way, there were two initial reactions.  Some people rejected the Bible and adopted the philosophy of Aristotle “whole cloth.”  Others reacted vehemently and felt that reading such books bordered on heresy.  (See On Moses getting stoned, on a similar phenomenon, illustrated at left.)

Gradually a third approach emerged:  Those “who tried to hold both Christian and Aristotelian views side by side with no attempt to reconcile the two.”  And finally came Aquinas, who developed what has been called his “fourth approach:”

Aquinas had a fourth approach.  While remaining a Christian, he immersed himself in the ideas of Aristotle, and then undertook to explain Christian ideas and beliefs in language that would make sense to disciples of Aristotle.  At the time, this seemed like a very dangerous and radical idea, and Aquinas spent much of his life living on the edge of ecclesiastical approval.  His success can be measured by the prevalence today of the notion that of course all Christian scholars in the Middle Ages were followers of Aristotle.

Another source said Aquinas “lived at a critical juncture of western culture when the arrival of the Aristotelian corpus in Latin translation reopened the question of the relation between faith and reason.”  Which is another way of asking:  “Can you be ‘smart’ and still believe in the Bible?“

(See also On broadminded, spelled “s-i-n”,” about the old – 1952 – Louvin Brothers song.)

Which is another way of saying that – even to this day – some believe you can’t do both.  That you can’t have “true faith” and at the same time use your powers of reason.  In other words, such people reject any modus vivendi.  They say you have to choose between faith and reason.

And pardon me for saying so, but such people are idiots.**  (Or at least greatly misled.)

Which is another way of saying such views are antithetical to this blog.  But I’m not alone.  St. Thomas Aquinas – for one – is “on the same page” as me.  (And the image at right is titled, “Triumph of St. Thomas Aquinas.”)

That is, beginning with Thomas Aquinas, people started reading books in addition to the Bible.  And from that developed – in due course – things like the Wesleyan Quadrilateral.  (Referring to the use of Scripture, Tradition, and Reason as a “methodology for theological reflection.”)

All of which brings us – as if “preordained before the beginning of time” – to one of the Daily Office Readings for Monday, January 25, 2016.  (To wit: the Feast Day for the Conversion of St. Paul.)  That reading is Ecclesiasticus – not to be confused with Ecclesiastes – 39:1-10;

He seeks out the wisdom of all the ancients…   [H]e preserves the sayings of the famous and penetrates the subtleties of parables;  he seeks out the hidden meanings of proverbs and is at home with the obscurities of parables.

Which is another of saying that when it comes to God – or for that matter the Bible:

There’s no such thing as a know-it-all…

 

*   *   *   *

“Four Great Doctors,” including Saint Augustine and Saint Jerome… 

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of Thomas Aquinas – Wikipedia.  The caption:  “Diego Velázquez, Aquinas is girded by angels with a mystical belt of purity after his proof of chastity.”  

Re: “Doctors” – as teachers – learning from their students:

One of the best ways to understand something is to try to explain it to others.  If you want to test your own understanding of this new way of thinking, try springing it on some of your friends.  Undoubtedly, you will discover something all teachers know – that the person giving instruction often learns more than the person receiving it…

See How to Develop Your Thinking Ability, by Kenneth S. Keyes, Jr., originally published in 1950.  The quote is found on page 34 of the McGraw-Hill paperback edition, published in 1963.

See also Know-it-all – Wikipedia, referring to a person “who obnoxiously purports an expansive comprehension of a topic and/or situation when in reality, his/her comprehension is inaccurate or limited.”  Based in part on Mr. Keyes’ point of view – with which I agree – I’d argue that – when it comes to “God” – there’s no such thing as a “know it all.”  (Notwithstanding the massive evidence to the contrary in too many religious circles.)

And finally, see Learning by teaching – Wikipedia:  “Seneca the Younger told … Lucilius that we are learning if we teach[:] docendo discimus (lat.: ‘by teaching we are learning’).”

*   *   *   *

Here’s the full quote from the St. Thomas Aquinas link at Satucket, on his “fourth approach,” etc:

In the thirteenth century, when Thomas Aquinas lived, the works of Aristotle, largely forgotten in Western Europe, began to be available again, partly from Eastern European sources and partly from Moslem Arab sources in Africa and Spain.  These works offered a new and exciting way of looking at the world.  Many enthusiastic students of Aristotle adopted him quite frankly as as an alternative to Christianity.  The response of many Christians was to denounce Aristotle as an enemy of the Christian Faith.  A third approach was that of those who tried to hold both Christian and Aristotelian views side by side with no attempt to reconcile the two.  Aquinas had a fourth approach.  While remaining a Christian…

I added the emphasized “dangerous and radical idea,” in the quoted section in the main text.  The all in “all Christian scholars in the Middle Ages” was emphasized in the original.

The image of Aristotle is courtesy of the Wikipedia article on Aristotle.  A partial caption reads: “Plato (left) and Aristotle (right), a detail of The School of Athens, a fresco by Raphael.”

Re: Thomas living “at a critical juncture of western culture.”  See Saint Thomas Aquinas (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).  That article also used the term modus vivendi in a way that seemed incongruous at best, at least to me.

**  Re: “such people are idiots.”  That statement is an example of hyperbole, “the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech.”  Obviously – as a good Christian – I could never really believe such a thing.  I merely believe that such Biblical literalists are greatly misquided.  On the other hand, it seems that most people won’t listen to anything but overblown hyperbole these days…

Re: Antithetical.  See also Anathema, referring to “something dedicated to evil and thus accursed.” 

The side panel of Aquinas is courtesy of Thomas Aquinas – Wikipedia. The full caption:  “Triumph of St Thomas Aquinas, ‘Doctor Angelicus,’ with saints and angels, Andrea di Bonaiuto, 1366.  Basilica of Santa Maria Novella, fresco.”

Re: “Preordained before the beginning of time.”  See also Ephesians 1:4, “For he [God] chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight…” 

On that note, the link phrased as “preordained before the beginning of time” – near the end of the main text – will take you to the article, Incentives, Predestination and Free Will, by “Glaeser, Edward L.,” and “Glendon, Spencer.”  That excerpt distinguished some points of theology between Catholicism on the one hand and some brands of Protestantism:

One of the largest theological gaps between the denominations is that Calvinism accepts the dogma of predestination while Catholicism argues for a dogma of free will…  Under predestination, a spiritual elite is preordained before the beginning of time and will receive eternal life.  Under free will, it is only through a lifetime of good actions that individuals are accepted into Heaven. (E.A.)

Re: The difference between Ecclesiasticus and Ecclesiastes.  The former – also known as Wisdom of Sirach – is “accepted as part of the Christian biblical canons by Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and most of Oriental Orthodox.  The Anglican Church [does] not accept Sirach as protocanonical, and say[s] it should be read only ‘for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth not apply them to establish any doctrine.'”  Ecclesiastes on the other hand is far more widely known.  It’s “one of 24 books of the Tanakh or Hebrew Bible” – classified as Ketuvim (or ‘Writings’) – and is “among the canonical Wisdom Books in the Old Testament of most denominations of Christianity.”

See also On Ecclesiasticus – NOT “Ecclesiastes,” which noted in part that the latter was popularized by the 1965 hit song “Turn! Turn! Turn!”  See also The Byrds … YouTube.   

The lower image is courtesy of the Doctor of the Church, at Thomas Aquinas – Wikipedia.  The full caption:  “The Four Great Doctors of the Western Church were often depicted in art, here by Pier Francesco Sacchi, c. 1516.  From the left: Saint Augustine,Pope Gregory I, Saint Jerome, and Saint Ambrose, with their attributes.”

“Saints Peter and Paul,” by El Greco…

*   *   *   *

January 20, 2016 – Here’s a parable.  Or at least a quasi-parable.

Two marathon runners were enrolled in a race.  By all accounts they were perfectly equal, in speed and endurance. But there was one minor difference:  One runner wanted to do it all on his own.  He didn’t want help from anyone.  But the other runner could imagine.  So as the race wore on and each runner got more and more tired, the second runner “imagined.”

He imagined wearing a harness, attached to a long rope.  And he further imagined that long, strong rope pulled him along, pulled him forward.  And as he imagined that long, strong rope, he could feel himself pulled along, a process that seemed to give him extra strength.

So here’s the question. Which runner has a better chance of winning the marathon?

“Just sayin’…”

But getting back to the topic at hand, see Peter, Paul – and other “relics:”

On January 18 we celebrate the Confession of Peter:  “Thou art the Christ, Son of the Living God.”  A week later on January 25 we celebrate the Conversion of St. Paul.  Then comes June 29, when we celebrate both men…

That post – from last June 25 – noted that the June 29 Feast Day remembers both Peter and Paul, together.  We remember that both men were martyred at about the same time.  (In Rome, around 65 A.D.)  We also remember on June 29 that their body parts – relics – were removed (“translated”) at about the same time, to keep them from being desecrated.

(That’s where the “relics” came in, in the post title.  In turn, the image at right – from that June 25 post – shows “St. Corbinian’s relics being moved…”)

But on the other side of the liturgical year – here, in the dead of winter – we remember both men separately, on January 18 and 25.  Or more precisely, we remember how these two “Pillars of the Church” took two completely different paths to the same destination.

On 18 January we remember how the Apostle Peter was led by God’s grace to acknowledge Jesus as the Christ (Matthew 16:13-20), and we join with Peter, and with all Christians everywhere, in hailing Jesus as our Lord, God, and Savior.

(See Confession of St. Peter, from the Satucket website.)  Put another way, the January 18 Feast Day commemorates Peter being the first apostle “to confess Jesus as Messiah.”

On the other hand, the January 25 Feast Day commemorates how “Saul (or Paul) of Tarsus, formerly an enemy and persecutor of the early Christian Church, was led by God’s grace to become one of its chief spokesmen.”  (See Conversion of St. Paul, emphasis added.)

In other words, Peter came to his position of authority from “inside the church.”  Paul on the other hand was pretty much dragged kicking and screaming into his position of authority.

Turning to the Confession of Peter, that refers to “an episode in the New Testament:”

[The] Apostle Peter proclaims Jesus to be Christ – the Messiah.  The proclamation is described in the three Synoptic Gospels: Matthew 16:13-20, Mark 8:27–30 and Luke 9:18–20.  The proclamation of Jesus as Christ is fundamental to Christology … and Jesus’ acceptance of the title is a definitive statement for it in the New Testament narrative.

On the other hand, the Conversion of St. Paul commemorates “an event in the life of Paul the Apostle that led him to cease persecuting early Christians and to become a follower of Jesus.”

Wikipedia noted that before that event, Paul – known as Saul – was a zealous “Pharisee who ‘intensely persecuted‘” what might then have been called the Jesus Movement.  (An allusion to an arguably-similar movement in the late 1960s and early 1970s):

…beginning on the West Coast of the United States … and spreading primarily throughout North America and Europe, before subsiding by the early 1980s.  [The Jesus movement] was the major Christian element within the hippie counterculture…  Members of the movement were called Jesus people, or Jesus freaks.

Getting back to Paul:  He wrote about his former life – as a devout and zealous enemy of the budding Christian church – in Galatians 1:13-14.  There he wrote about his being “extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers.”  Accordingly, he intensely “persecuted the church of God” – that is, the newly-formed Christian Church –  “and tried to destroy it.”  

But then he had his Damascus Road Experience (illustrated above right).  In that episode he was literally struck blind, for three days.  So like I said before, Paul was “pretty much dragged kicking and screaming into his position of authority.”

Paul also wrote about his former life – as a persecutor of the church – and in particular his part in the stoning of Stephen, in Acts 7:57-8:3.  (“Saul was ravaging the church, and entering house after house, he dragged off men and women and committed them to prison.”)

In plain words, Paul’s Damascus experience “changed him from a Christ-hating persecutor of Christians to the foremost spokesman for the faith.”  But before that could happen, the people most afraid of him – in Jerusalem especially – had to be convinced that his change of heart was genuine.  In turn, that change of heart by those early Christians started with Barnabas:

To sum up, if it hadn’t been for Barnabas and his willingness to give Paul a second chance – a second chance for the formerly zealous persecutor of the early Church – he might never have become Christianity’s most important early convert, if not the “Founder of Christianity.”

See St. Barnabus’ Day, 2015, and also On St. Barnabas – from 2014.  Both posts noted:

[E]ven after Paul’s Damascus Road experience, most Christians in Jerusalem “wanted nothing to do with him.  They had known him as a persecutor and an enemy of the Church.  But Barnabas was willing to give him a second chance.”

I concluded the second Barnabas post by saying:

“So we might just call Barnabas ‘the Apostle of Second Chances.’”

Which seems – after all – to be pretty much what “the Jesus movement” is all about.

*   *   *   *

The original post had an upper image courtesy of Saints Peter and Paul by GRECO – Web Gallery and showed:

The two saints … the most influential leaders of the early Church … engaged in an animated discussion.  The older, white-haired Peter … inclines his head thoughtfully to one side as he looks towards the text being expounded.  In his left hand he holds his attribute, the key to the kingdom of Heaven.  His right hand is cupped as if weighing up an idea.  Paul presses his left hand down firmly on the open volume on the table, his right hand raised in a gesture of explanation as he looks directly at the viewer.

The article said El Greco painted the two together several times “with remarkable consistency.”  Peter always has white hair and a beard, while “Paul is always shown slightly balding, with dark hair and beard, wearing a red mantle…”  See also Feast of Peter and Paul – Wikipedia, with caption:  “Saint Peter and Saint Paul. Oil on canvas by El Greco. circa 16th-century. Hermitage Museum,Russia.”

*   *   *   *

A “marathon” image was courtesy of Marathon – Wikipedia.  The caption:  “A competitor collapses just prior to the finish line of the 2006 Melbourne Marathon.”

The point of the parable:  That if the second runner couldn’t “imagine” the existence of that Helping Rope, he had no hope of “finding” that Source of Help…

The death-dates of Peter and Paul.  The best answer seems to come from Answers.com:

Tradition has it that Peter was crucified upside down in Rome, Italy.  The actual date is unknown but is probably around the late 50s to late 60s AD.  The Annuario Pontificio gives the year of Peter’s death as … A.D. 67.  Early church tradition says Peter probably died at the time of the Great Fire of Rome of the year 64.  His co-worker Paul was also executed a little later, but as Paul was a Roman citizen … he was granted a swift death by beheading by sword … as opposed to crucifixion which was reserved for foreigners.

Re:  “Pillars of the church.”  A Google-search will lead to widely disparate answers as to who or what such “pillars” are.  (Some sites refer to people, but most refer to Biblical principles.)  But see especially The Three Pillars of the First Century Christian Church, citing Galatians 2:9.  In the New Living Translation, Paul wrote of a meeting in Jerusalem:  

James, Peter, and John, who were known as pillars of the church, recognized the gift God had given me, and they accepted Barnabas and me as their co-workers.  They encouraged us to keep preaching to the Gentiles, while they continued their work with the Jews.

This was some 14 to 17 years or more after his Damascus Road Experience.

*   *   *   *

A “Conversion of St. Paul” image was courtesy of vocations-syracuse.org/who-prayed-for-pauls-conversion. The title of the painting, “The Conversion of St. Paul, 1767 by Nicolas-Bernard Lepicie.” See also Nicolas-Bernard Lepicie | Conversion of St. Paul.  (For a print.)

A quote about Paul changing from “Christ-hating persecutor of Christians” can be found at the post, Doubting Thomas’ “passage to India.”  That post discussed Doubting Thomases in general, and specifically “the ‘mother of all‘ such skeptics,” the Apostle Thomas himself.   The post also discussed the differences between “skeptical” and “cynical.” 

A lower image was courtesy of www.canvasreplicas.com/Rembrandt.htm.  See also Two Scholars Disputing by REMBRANDT Harmenszoon van Rijn.

*   *   *   *

An original caption: “Two Scholars Disputing” – Peter and Paul – but working together… 

The “Hillary” in pink is NOT the one we’re talking about today…

 

Wednesday, January 13, is the Feast Day for St. Hilary.  And the “Hillary” we’re talking about today is not the one shown in the image above.

But note first that the term “feast” here doesn’t mean a large meal.  (As in a family celebration.) Instead it refers to a religious celebration dedicated to a particular saint.

In this case, Saint Hilary was born in Poitiers, a city in France.  (Some 210 miles southwest of Paris.)  We don’t know exactly when he was born.  (Either “at the end of the 3rd or beginning of the 4th century A.D.” Best guess: somewhere around 310 A.D.)

For the Bible readings of the day – and a short biography –  see Hilary, from the “Satucket” Lectionary.  (That page included the image at left, apparently related to Hilary.  For more on the image, right-click “Search Google for image.”)  And speaking of Hilary, we’re not real sure when he died either.  But according to St. Jerome, he died in Poitiers in 367.

(Jerome was a noted priest, confessor, theologian, historian, and Doctor of the Church.)

Hilary’s parents were pagans – “of distinction.”  And he was said to have had a “good pagan education, which included a high level of Greek.”  His name came from the Latin for “happy” or “cheerful.”  And somewhere between 350 and 353, the Christians of Poitiers “so respected Hilary” that they unanimously elected him their bishop.

The problem was that Hilary served as bishop at the time of a great early-church conflict:  The one pitting Athanasius – shown at right – against Arius.  (For whom Arianism was named.)

Arianism is the nontrinitarian belief that Jesus, as the Son of God, was “created by God the Father.”  In other words, that “God the Father and the Son of God did not always exist together eternally.”

For more information on the conflict, see Arian controversy:

The Arian controversy …  arose between Arius, a priest and theologian, and Bishop Athanasius, a Church Father.  The most important of these controversies concerned the substantial relationship between God the Father and Jesus Christ.  These disagreements divided the Church into two opposing theological factions for over 55 years … until after the Council of Constantinople in 381.  There was no formal resolution or formal schism[.]  The Catholic church eventually formed its own theology on this matter.

In a nutshell, the issue was whether Jesus was of the “same substance” as God – the Athanasian position – or of (merely) a “similar substance.”  (The position held by Arius.)

The argument may sound pretty obtuse to us today.  But back in the mid-300s, it was immensely important.  It had just been some 40 years – since around 313 – that Christianity had been “decriminalized.”  (It changed from being a persecuted religion to one that was “tolerated” by the Roman state.  In documents including the Edict of Milan.)

And contrary to the popular assertion that Roman emperor Constantine the Great made Christianity Rome’s official religion, that didn’t happen in 313.

The image at right shows Constantine’s conversion.  (As “imagined by Rubens.”)  But despite that conversion, Constantine “continued to support both Christianity and paganism.  In 314, the cross appeared on Constantine’s coins, but so did the figures of Sol Invictus and Mars.” (Mars was the Roman god of war.  See also “to hedge your bets.”)

In fact, Christianity wasn’t made Rome’s official religion until 380 – or 391 – under Theodosius I.

The point is this:  That at the time of the Arian controversy, the stakes were pretty high. (Basically the future of the Western Church was at stake.)  Then too, Roman emperors changed their minds quite often.  That’s what happened to St. Hilary.  For a time the Emperor backed the Arian argument, which led to Hilary getting exiled for four years.

On that note, the Gospel for Hilary’s day – Luke 12:8-12 – included this:

“When you are brought before synagogues, rulers and authorities, do not worry about how you will defend yourselves or what you will say, for the Holy Spirit will teach you at that time what you should say.”

Those are the words of Jesus, in Luke 12:11 and 12:12.  And they pretty much summed up what Hilary had to go through, facing up to the Roman emperor Constantius II.

Constantius II ultimately followed a compromise position – between Arius and Athanasius. (“Retrospectively called Semi-Arianism.”)  But in 356 A.D., he found the Arian position persuasive enough to banish Hilary to Phrygia for four long years.  (At the time, Phrygia – in the west central part of what is now Turkey – was something of a backwater of the Roman Empire.)

Put another way, for his strong defense of Athanasius, “Hilary has often been referred to as ‘Athanasius of the West.'”  But in 356, he essentially backed the wrong horse.

On the other hand, Hilary put his four years in exile to good use.  He honed his arguments so well that they ultimately acquired the force of (church) law.  In essence he was a “Great Dissenter” over 1,500 years before Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.  (Holmes’ “dissents were often prescient and acquired so much authority that he became known as ‘The Great Dissenter.'”  He is shown at right.)

Which is another way of saying “Athanasianism” ultimately won the day.

In fact – and as a bit of an aside – you can see the full text of the Athanasian Creed in today’s Book of Common Prayer.  (Under the link, Historical Documents of the Church, and/or beginning on page 864, under the “Council of Chalcedon” entry.  For more on the Creed, see the notes.)

But note also that Athanasius wrote his creed “during his exile in Rome.”  In fact, Athanasius got exiled five times during his bishopric, mostly because succeeding emperors kept changing their minds.  (Between “orthodoxy” and Arianism.)  Which could go to show that some of the great writing in history has come from people “in exile.”  (See e.g. Prison literature – Wikipedia.)

Be that as it may, on January 13 we remember Hilary of Poitiers, the 4th-century philosopher:

[His] studies made him a champion of orthodox Trinitarian theology during one of the most difficult periods of Church history. He protected the Church and its members by brilliantly defending the sacred humanity of Jesus while also defeating aranism which denied Christ’s divinity.  St. Hilary was a gentle and courteous man, devoted to writing some of the greatest theology on the Trinity, and … in being labeled a “disturber of the peace.”  In a very troubled period in the Church, his holiness was lived out in both scholarship and controversy.

Which could show that sometimes God’s work means being “a disturber of the peace.”

 

“The ordination of Saint Hilary of Poitiers…”

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of Hillary Clinton – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.  The caption: “The Clinton family takes an Inauguration Day walk down Pennsylvania Avenue to start President Bill Clinton’s second term in office, January 20, 1997.”

The text of this post was gleaned from from sources including Hilary of Poitiers – Wikipedia, ST. HILARY OF POITIERS :: Catholic News Agency (CNA), CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Hilary of Poitiers, and What is Arianism? – GotQuestions.org.

Re: Constantine’s conversion, said to happen in 313.  See Constantine … and Christianity – Wikipedia:

[When] Constantine the Great reigned … Christianity began to transition to the dominant religion of the Roman Empire.  Historians remain uncertain about Constantine’s reasons for favoring Christianity, and theologians and historians have argued about which form of Early Christianity he subscribed to…  Some scholars question whether he should be considered a Christian at all … and he did not receive baptism until shortly before his death.

[His] decision to cease the persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire was a turning point for Early Christianity…  In 313, Constantine and Licinius issued the Edict of Milan decriminalizing Christian worship.  The emperor became a great patron of the Church and set a precedent … and the notion of orthodoxy, Christendom, ecumenical councils and the state church of the Roman Empire declared by edict in 380.

As noted above, the edict in 380 – or 391 depending on the source – was promulgated by Theodisius. 

Re: Athanasius and his Creed.  Note that his first exile was to Gaul (to what is now Trier in Germany). His second exile was a type of “protective custody” in Rome, where he wrote his Creed.  Later exiles included his twice “withdrawing” into the desert of Upper Egypt, and lastly an exile of a few months to the outskirts of Alexandria, where he had been serving as bishop.  As to the Creed:

The Latin name of the creed, Quicunque vult, is taken from the opening words, “Whosoever wishes.”  The creed has been used by Christian churches since the sixth century.  It is the first creed in which the equality of the three persons of the Trinity is explicitly stated.

The lower image is courtesy of Hilary of Poitiers – Wikipedia.  The full caption indicated that the image was gleaned from a 14th-century manuscript.  

 

 

The Adoration of the Magi, by Bartolomé Esteban Murillo…

*   *   *   *

The 12 Days of Christmas officially end on January 6.  But in another sense you could say the extended Christmas holiday season doesn’t end – this year – until January 11.

To the Church of England – and others – that Feast Day is known as Plough Monday.  (As noted in the post of the same name, which also noted the preceding “Plough Sunday.”)  But the key to all these Feast Days is January 6, familiar to most church-goers as the Epiphany.

The Epiphany is the “Christian feast day that celebrates the revelation of God the Son as human in Jesus Christ.”  Yet another name for January 6 is Three Kings’ Day:

The observance [of Epiphany] was a general celebration of the manifestation of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ.  It included the commemoration of his birth; the visit of the Magi [and] all of Jesus’ childhood events, up to and including his baptism in the Jordan by John the Baptist;  and even the miracle at the wedding at Cana in Galilee. [E.A.]

So January 6 is celebrated for a number of reasons, including but not limited to the Epiphany. That’s another way of saying the day also commemorates – inter alia – the circumcision of Jesus, as noted below.  But first some more on the Magi (“Three Kings”).

In its original sense – circa 600 A.D. – Magi meant “followers of Zoroastrianism or Zoroaster.”

But starting about 1200 A.D., the term became more commonly used “in reference to the “μάγοι” [“magoi”] from the east who visit Jesus.”  (As noted in Matthew 2, verses 1-12.  And incidentally, these “Three Wise Men” were mentioned only in Matthew’s Gospel.)

The consensus – that there were three “kings” – seems to have arisen because they brought three gifts:  Gold, frankincense, and myrrh.  And while a literal view of the Three Wise Men seems to indicate that they arrived at the manger-scene shortly after the birth of Jesus, the truth of the matter seems a bit harder to pin down.

For one thing the Bible doesn’t name these three kings.  (Shown at left.)

But later tradition and legend did provide a number of names.  The most common names given the three are:  Melchior, from Persia; Caspar, from India; and Balthazar, from Babylon.  (Which could have presented some logistical difficulties;  for example, in their getting together to start the trip.)  And as to when they actually visited Jesus:

The Bible specifies no interval between the birth and the visit [by the Magi, but] artistic depictions … encourage the popular assumption that the visit took place the same winter as the birth…  [L]ater traditions varied, with the visit [said to occur] up to two winters later.  This maximum interval explained Herod’s command at Matthew 2:16–18 that the Massacre of the Innocents included boys up to two years old. (E.A.)

Thus adding some more confusion to these after-Christmas holidays.

One thing we do know – from the Revised Common Lectionary – is the list of Bible readings for the Epiphany.  It includes Isaiah 60:1-6, Psalm 72, Ephesians 3:1-12, and Matthew 2:1-12.

Matthew’s Gospel begins, “In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, asking, ‘Where is the child who has been born king of the Jews?  For we observed his star at its rising, and have come to pay him homage.'”  

Unfortunately, this news scared the stuffing out of Herod the Great.  (At the time the “Roman client king of Judea.”)  That kingly fright led to another Feast Day – December 28 – remembering the Slaughter of the Holy Innocents.  See also the Wikipedia article, which included the image at right:

Herod ordered the execution of all young male children in the vicinity of Bethlehem, so as to avoid the loss of his throne to a newborn King of the Jews whose birth had been announced to him by the Magi.  In typical Matthean style, it is understood as the fulfillment of an Old Testament prophecy [in] Jeremiah 31:15:  [“Rachel weeping for her children…”]

On a more cheerful note – and also getting back to the Three Kings:

We’re familiar with those three wise men today largely thanks to a Christmas carol,  “We Three Kings of Orient Are.”  (For a live “old-timey” version see the Kings College Choir, Cambridge.)

That carol – a “song of praise or joy, especially for Christmas” – was written in 1857 by John Henry Hopkins, Jr.   (At the time he was an Episcopal deacon serving as the musical director for the General Theological Seminary in New York City.)  But as noted in We Three Kings – Wikipedia, solid facts about the three are hard to pin down:  “Though the event is recounted in the Gospel of Matthew, there are no further details given with regards to their names, the number of Magi that were present or whether they were even royal.”

On that note – and continuing the theme of confusion in these recent “Christmasy” holidays:

We may know January 1st as National Hangover Day.  But in and to the universal church, it’s better known as the Feast of the Holy Name of Jesus.  (See also CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Feast of the Holy Name.)  And for the full “rest of the story,” see Lectionary – Satucket.

“Satucket” has full sets of Bible readings for the Daily Office.  (As noted below, that’s where the “DOR” in Dorscribe” came from.)  And a fuller, more earthy explanation:

On January 1st, we celebrate the Circumcision of Christ.  Since we are more squeamish than our ancestors [ – “easily shocked, offended, or disgusted by unpleasant things” – ], modern calendars often list it as the feast of the Holy Name of Jesus, but the other emphasis is the older.  Every Jewish boy was circumcised (and formally named) on the eighth day of his life, and so, one week after Christmas, we celebrate the occasion when Our Lord first shed His blood for us.  It is a fit close for a week of martyrs, and reminds us that to suffer for Christ is to suffer with Him.  (E.A.)

(See the Holy Name link.)  But one problem leading to confusion is that January 1 is only seven days after December 25.  That problem could be solved by saying Jesus was actually born on Christmas Eve – December 24 – but the confusion wouldn’t end there:

In the Latin Rite Catholic Church it [ – the Feast of the Holy Name – ] is observed as an optional memorial on January 3 by Catholics following the present General Roman Calendar. Franciscans, Carmelites, and Augustinians kept the feast on January 14; Dominicans on January 15[, and] in some localities the date was January 8, in others January 31, in some localities in Great Britain on August 7.*

For one sure answer we can look to Luke 2:21:  “On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise the child, he was named Jesus, the name the angel had given him before he was conceived.”  That was in accordance with Genesis 17:12:  “For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised.”

The reason for such a practice was given in Genesis 17:11.  There God told Abraham (nee “Abram”) – and those who would follow him – “You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you.”  And finally, this was consistent with what happened to John the Baptist, in Luke 1:59: “On the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to name him after his father Zechariah.”  (But his mother said, “No!  His name is John!“)

And now – in closing – a few words about circumcision.  It’s “the world’s oldest planned surgical procedure,” thought to be “over 15,000 years old, pre-dating recorded history.”  And aside from showing one’s “covenant with God,” some historians suggest it began as a way to mark slaves.  (Perhaps with an instrument like that at right.)

But the consensus seems to be that it served as a “mark of distinction:”

The earliest historical record of circumcision comes from Egypt … dating to about 2400–2300 BCE…  No well-accepted theory explains the significance of circumcision to the Egyptians, but it appears to have been endowed with great honor and importance as a rite of passage into adulthood…  It may have been a mark of distinction for the elite: the Egyptian Book of the Dead describes the sun god Ra as having circumcised himself. (E.A.)

It’s thought that about a third of males worldwide have been circumcised.  (Mostly in the “Muslim world and Israel (where it is near-universal), the United States and parts of Southeast Asia and Africa.”  It’s rare in Europe, Latin America, parts of Southern Africa and most of Asia.)

Also – per Wikipedia – a study in 2014 showed the benefits outweigh the risks “by at least 100 to 1.”  (And that “over their lifetime, half of uncircumcised males will require treatment for a medical condition associated with retention of the foreskin.”)

Which pretty much sums up everything you always wanted to know about circumcision – but were afraid to ask.  Except to say that that Ra guy had to be “One Tough Monkey!”

*   *   *   *

The Circumcision of Jesus by Signorelli…

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of Epiphany (holiday) – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.  The full caption: “Adoration of the Magi by Bartolomé Esteban Murillo, 17th century.”

Re: the “Innocents” image.  Courtesy of the Wikipedia article, it’s caption is:  “François-Joseph Navez, The massacre of the innocents, 1824.”  For a different take, see The Triumph of the Innocents, by William Holman Hunt.  That painting showed both the “Holy Family” – Joseph, Mary and Jesus – on their Flight into Egypt, and the martyred “innocents” in ultimate triumph:

The Holy Family are surrounded by the spirits of the children slain by Herod.  Hunt wanted the bubbles, or “airy globes” which accompany the procession, to convey a sense of the waves of “the streams of eternal life.”

Re: The seminary musical director who wrote “We Three Kings.”  Wikipedia first indicated that “At the time of composing the carol, Hopkins served as the rector of Christ Episcopal Church in Williamsport, Pennsylvania.”   But it later added, “Hopkins studied at the General Theological Seminary in New York City and after graduating and being ordained a deacon in 1850, he became its first music teacher five years later, holding the post until 1857 alongside his ministry in the Episcopal Church.“

See also Double dipper … The Free Dictionary.

Re: “Carol.”  According to the Urban Dictionary, the term can also refer to “a hot, irresistable female with a big heart,” and/or a “short, fiery red-headed female.”

Re: the asterisk (“*”) in the indented quote beginning “In the Latin Rite.”  The Wikipedia article featured dates in the “military” format, that is, “14 January,” “7 August,” etc.  I took the liberty of changing the format to the easier-to-read “January 14,” “August 7,” etc.

Re: Circumcision.  As Wikipedia noted, the over 15,000 years old claim was “suggested by anatomist and hyperdiffusionist historian Grafton Elliot Smith.”  The article also noted:

In his 1891 work History of Circumcision, physician Peter Charles Remondino suggested that it began as a less severe form of emasculating a captured enemy:  penectomy or castration would likely have been fatal, while some form of circumcision would permanently mark the defeated yet leave him alive to serve as a slave.

The image of the “instrument like that at right” is courtesy of Wikipedia, with the caption:  “Circumcision knife from the Congo; wood, iron; late 19th/early 20th century.”  

Re: “Everything you wanted to know.”  The phrase is an allusion to the 1969 book Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex* (*But Were Afraid to Ask).  Since then the phrase has been used to apply to all “you” wanted to know about topics as diverse as the Carry Trade, Pig Latin, Family Trusts, and Probability Theory.

Re: “One tough monkey.”  See Jerry Seinfeld (Character) – Quotes – IMDb, and also “1991” “Seinfeld Clip” “Mr. Bookman, Library Cop,” where Seinfeld used the term to describe Bookman.  Former American sportscaster Billy Packer – who spent “more than three decades as a color analyst for television coverage of college basketball” – also used the phrase to describe Georgetown Hoyas star guard Allen Iverson.  Packer’s use of the term led to controversy, as having “racist” overtones:

Packer later apologized, insisting he was actually trying to praise Iverson’s relentless play. Neither Iverson nor Georgetown coach John Thompson [ – both of whom are black – ] said they were offended by the remark. Thompson told USA Today he doesn’t “have to explain to anybody about Billy being a racist because he’s not.“

Note that Seinfeld was not accused of being racist by applying the phrase to an older white man,”Mr. Bookman.”  On that note see also Howard Cosell – ‘Little Monkey’ Comments, Facts and Video,  Political correctness – Wikipedia, and possibly the definition of squeamish used above.  

The lower image is courtesy of The Circumcision (Signorelli) – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

*   *   *   *

January 6 – last of the 12 Days of Christmas – leads to “Plough Monday…”

*   *   *   *

December 28, 2015 – Christmas Day has come and gone, but that doesn’t mean the Christmas season is over. As noted last year at this time, the 12 Days of Christmas are “both a festive Christmas season” and the title of a “host of songs and spin-offs (including one on a Mustang GT):”

The Twelve Days of Christmas [begin] on Christmas Day (25 December)[, celebrate] the birth of Jesus [and are] also known as Christmastide…   The Feast of the Epiphany is on 6 January [and] celebrates the visit of the Wise Men (Magi) and their bringing of gifts to the child Jesus.  In some traditions, the feast of Epiphany and Twelfth Day overlap.

The post also said that technically this holiday season really started back on Halloween.

The thing is, winters back in the really old days – when life was nasty, brutish and short – were really long and really boring.  So folks back then looked for any good reason to throw a party and get sloshed.  (Which explains why the “party season” started on Halloween.)

In one sense you could say the end of that extended holiday season comes on January 6.  But in another sense you could say the season extends to the Monday following January 6.  That’s the Monday known as Plough Monday.  Which is another way of saying some of the post-Christmas holidays and/or Feast Days can be extremely confusing.

For example, another name for January 6 was Twelfth Night.  That in turn was the name of famous play by William Shakespeare.  The play “expanded on the musical interludes and riotous disorder expected of the occasion,” to wit: the “occasion of the ‘drunken revelry’ of 12th Night.”

And January 6th has yet another name.  It’s perhaps best known as the Epiphany, the Christian feast day celebrating “the revelation of God the Son as a human being in Jesus Christ.”  And yet another name for the Day is The Presentation of Our Lord.

But getting back to Plough Monday:  In England it marked the start of the new Agricultural Year.   (And thus – in a sense – the end of the “old” agricultural year.)  Anyway, the Church of England had a long church service to mark the occasion.  The service included prayers for a bountiful harvest, and both a blessing of the seed to be planted and a “blessing of the plough” – as illustrated at right:

Blessed are you, Lord God of all creation:  for in your abundant care you have given us fertile land, rich soil, the seasons in their courses…  By your blessing, let this plough be a sign of all that you promise to us.  Prosper the work of our hands, and provide abundant crops for your people to share.

In turn, Plough Monday was preceded by Plough Sunday.  Plough Sunday was seen as a way of celebrating farming and the work of farmers, in church.  But since you weren’t supposed to work on Sundays – back in the good old days – the new agricultural year didn’t really start until the next work day:  “work in the fields did not begin until the day after Plough Sunday.”

Put another way:  Since the the date of Epiphany always came on January 6, Plough Sunday came on the Sunday after the Epiphany.  (The Sunday between January 7 and January 13.)  Thus Plough Monday is usually the first Monday after Twelfth Day (Epiphany), 6 January.

The point of all this – January 6, Plough Sunday, Plough Monday, etc. – was to have one more big blast before getting back to work.  (Resuming farm-work after the extended holiday season.)  As such it was one more occasion for general tomfoolery, as shown in the top picture:

In some areas, particularly in northern England and East England, a plough was hauled from house to house in a procession, collecting money.  They were often accompanied by musicians, an old woman or a boy dressed as an old woman, called the “Bessy,” and a man in the role of the “fool.”

In turn it may  help to remember that one big reason for all this general tomfoolery was that – otherwise – life back then was indeed “nasty, brutish and short.”

And finally, people usually celebrated Plough Monday by eating Plough Pudding, as seen at left:  A “boiled suet pudding, containing meat and onions.  It is from Norfolk and is eaten on Plough Monday.”

*   *   *   *

In other news – and in preparation for 2016 – I’ve been tweaking the “pages” above.  (Pages including The basics, The Blog, and The Scribe.)  But I’ve been working especially hard on the INTRODUCTION and CONTENTS.

Part of that work included updating post-links, including the one on how reading the Bible on a regular basis can by like an ongoing “transcendental meditation.”

You try to do what you know you can’t do, yet you try anyway…  It’s as impossible a goal as – say – as trying to love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your strength, and with all your mind.  This is the first and great commandment, and the second is like unto it: you shall love your neighbor as yourself.

(See Matthew 22:36-40, on the Two Great Commandments.)  But there are rewards from this “impossible meditation” – reading the Bible on a daily basis, with an eye to “being one” with God and your neighbor.  Those rewards include but are not limited to:

1)  Greater personal efficiency in everyday life;  2)  The “comprehension of a different view of reality than the one we ordinarily use;”  3)  A capacity to transcend the painful, negative aspects of life;  4)  The ability to live with a serene “inner peace;”  and 5)  The ability to live  with “a zest, a fervor and gusto in life...”

All of which means that starting – or continuing – the meditation of Bible-reading is a great way to ring in the New Year!  (Not to mention reading this blog for color commentary…) 

 

“Baby New Year 1905 chases old 1904 into the history books…”

*   *   *   *

Re:  The theme of this blog.  It is that taking the Bible literally is a great place to start.  (That is, to start the process of evolving on your earthly pilgrimage.)  But if you really want to be all that you can be, you need to go on and explore the “mystical side of Bible reading.*”

That’s what this blog is about.  Exploring that mystical side of the Bible.

Which is another way of saying the blog is all about “evolving.”  On that note see You Want Pies With That, on the quote by “Nick,” the character in The Big Chill played by William Hurt.  Asked about his “coming home from Vietnam a changed man,” Nick answered, “What are you getting at?  I was e-VOL-ving.”   (As we all should be…)

That’s another way of saying that exploring the mystical side of the Bible can help you “be all that you can be.”  On that note see Slogans of the United States Army – Wikipedia, re: the Army recruiting slogan from 1980 to 2001.  In  turn, the related image at  left is courtesy of: “toywonders.com/productcart/pc/catalog/aw30.jpg.”

*  Re: “mystical.”  As first used, the term mysticism “referred to the Biblical liturgical, spiritual, and contemplative dimensions of early and medieval Christianity.”  See Mysticism – Wikipedia, and the post On originalism.  (“That’s what the Bible was originally about!”)

For an explanation of the Daily Office – where “Dorscribe” came from – see What’s a DOR?

*   *   *   *

Re: Mustang GT.  See also Jeff Foxworthy – Redneck 12 Days Of Christmas lyrics.

Re: “Nasty, brutish and short.”  That’s a quote from the book Leviathan, written by Thomas Hobbes and published in 1651.  Hobbes described the natural state of mankind as a “warre of every man against every man,” a life which was in turn “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”  See Wikipedia, and also Nasty, brutish and short – meaning and origin.

The lower image is courtesy of New Year – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.  The full caption:  “Baby New Year 1905 chases old 1904 into the history books in this cartoon by John T. McCutcheon.”  See also ‘Ringing’ Or ‘Bringing In The New Year:’ A History.