#because some of the earliest converts were greeks

[tetrachromate]

"why do white people dig into their ancestry for a smidgen of culture" because they think they're not allowed to meaningfully associate with anything outside their own immediate cultural context. Even *universalist* traditions like, idk, buddhism, are tainted by the perception of cultural appropriation because their most recent adherents tend to come from the sinosphere or SE asia

[classicschronicles]

Hi lovelies,

A few days ago this new Bollywood movie called Pathaan, starring Shah Rukh Khan and John Abrahams, came out and so obviously I HAD to go and watch it. But fun fact about me is that I am literally a melting pot of different cultures. My dads family are Indian-Kenyan. My mums family were initially (back in the 5th-7th century) a family of Jewish royalty in what is now Afghanistan (which is actually pretty cool). They converted to Islam some time later and became part of a very particular Afghani tribe called the Pathaan (also another reason I had to watch this movie). Over the course of the next few centuries they migrated from Afghanistan to India, before being forced into Pakistan because of colonialism. Throughout all of this, my mums branch of the Pathaan tribe stuck together and so even still, my mum’s family in pure Pathaan, but I’m only half Pathaan because my mum married out. However, me being me did some deep diving into this because it’s actually pretty cool that my family tree can be traced back that far. Okay so at this point you’re probably wondering how on earth this related to Classics, but I found out that the Pathaan langue (Pashto) is actually about 2500 years old, which makes it about the same age as Latin and therefore a classical language! And so today I thought I would tell you a little bit about Pashto.

The Pashto language belongs to the Indi-Iranian language family and is mainly spoken by the ethnic communities of Afghanistan and western provinces of Pakistan, which is partially inhabited by Pashtuns (aka Pathaan’s). It is also still the native language of the indigenous Pathaan people. The language is said to have originated in the Kandahar district of Afghanistan and is said to be one of the two national languages (the other being Dari, a Persian language).

The vocabulary of Pashto has actually not been borrowed or derived from other languages, which is extremely rare for any language still spoken in a modern setting. Many of its lexis do, however, relate to other Eastern Iranian languages such as Pamir and Ossetia.

The exact origin of the Pashto language and the Pathaan tribes are unknown, but the word ‘Pashto’ derives from the regular phonological process. Nevertheless, the Pathaan are sometimes compared with the Pakhta tribes mentioned in Rigvenda, around 1700-1100 B.C., apparently they are the same people that the Greek historian Herodotus referred to Paktika (a northern province in Afghanistan). However, this comparison appears to be due in large part to the apparent similarity between their names, despite the fact that etymologically it can’t really be justified. But there are some archeological compilations and historical data and so the majority of researchers now believe that the Pashto language is around 25000 years old.

Herodotus also mentions the Paktika ‘Apridai’ tribe but it is unknown what language they spoke. However, Strabo (who lived between 64 B.C. and 24 C.E.) suggests that the tribes inhabiting the lands west of the Indus River were part of Ariana and to their east was India. Since about the 3rd century B.C. and onwards from that, these tribes were mostly referred to by the name ‘Afghan’ (or ‘Abgan’) and their language as ‘Afghani’.

Many historians and scholars believe that the earliest piece of written Pashto work dates back to the 8th century. However, a lot of history outside of the western empires lacks the same clarity and information and so even this is highly disputed. However, during the 17th century, Pashto poetry became very popular amongst the Pathaan.

To be honest, there isn’t a whole lot of information on the Pashtun language or the origin of the Pathaan, other than that they have been around since the B.C. But it’s pretty cool to me that my families culture has such a long history. This entry was pretty special to me so hopefully you all enjoyed it and I hope you all have a lovely rest of your weekend!

~Z

[beyond-crusading]

How did Christianity survive Jesus' death ?

(I know this question makes zero sense from a theological standpoint but hear me out, I swear it's interesting)

In the times of Jesus, there were many Jewish prophets wandering the land. They managed to accumulate a following by performing miracles and preaching. These movements were based on the charisma of the leader, and so, when the leader died, the movement usually dissolved on its own.

A few years after starting his predication, Jesus was arrested in Jerusalem and crucified: it was the humiliating death of a criminal accused of rebellion. This would have been interpreted by many as a definite proof that Jesus was not, in fact, sent by God.

At this point, belief in Christ would have been very likely to disappear. But it didn't. In the contrary, faith in Jesus grew (to about 7500 followers at the end of the 1st century).

So, why didn't belief in Jesus disappear after Jesus' death ?

- Jesus had recruted a group of close disciples, heavily motivated to spread his message, who were extremely intelligent and competent. Even after his death, they kept on preaching and recruted more believers.

- His death didn't necessarily render his message obsolete. Many Jewish prophets preached the victory of a certain rebellion for example. When the rebellion was crushed by the Roman army, their message was evidently obsolete. Jesus didn't preach political rebellion, but forgiveness and the imminent end of times. After his death, his followers could argue that his death was necessary (as prophesied in Jewish scriptures) and that his message of forgiveness remained valid until the end of times.

- A progressive opening firstly towards Hellenic Jews (Jews of the Diaspora, who didn't live in Israel but in other countries around the Mediterranean world, and spoke Greek as their primary language)

- An even more radical opening towards Gentiles - non-Jews - who were thought by some (but not all) to be included in Jesus' message

- The very tense alliance of two very distinct groups inside early Christianity: people who believed that only those following the Law of Moses could benefit from the forgiveness that Jesus promised, and those who believed that his message was also directed towards the Gentiles, who should not be asked to follow the Law upon conversion

This alliance was to be fundamental to Christianity's success: thanks to this alliance, early Christianity didn't cut ties with Judaism (and therefore benefitted from the legitimating influence of Jewish scriptures) while making itself incredibly more attractive to Gentiles (who didn't have to follow the Law - and therefore didn't have to completely abandon their previous social relationships due to Judaism's heavy standards on purity).

- They managed to surmount the disappointment of the end of times not arriving. Complex phenomenon, but basically, the imminence of the Kingdom of God - a very important theme in the teaching of Jesus and the early Apostles - was progressively "spiritualised", turned into metaphor of earthly spiritual life. The Kingdom of God wasn't coming, so each and everyone had to enter the Kingdom of God on Earth, by converting and participating in the Church.

- The progressive marginalisation of heterodox groups challenging the authority of the proto-orthodoxy. Marcionites, Gnostics, and Montanists eventually saw their influence decline and eventually disappeared, not really because they lost on the theological side, but because their theological positions often inevitably lead them to marginalisation. For example, some Gnostics refused to have children, so no more of the divine being would be trapped in physical matter. Marcionites actively condemned Jewish scriptures, the Law of Moses and many texts which were very respected at the time, including many of the texts which would later be part of the official canon.

- The progressive rise of mono-bishops. Churches originally controlled by assemblies of important men of the community tended more and more to be controlled by only one bishop. This man had the authority to impose orthodoxy and turn belief in Jesus away from charismatic preaching into institutions that were made to last.

- The constitution of a canon of recognized texts, which became the New Testament. This wasn't a simple process. Many different texts, and therefore many different "memories" of Jesus were excluded by this canon. Therefore, the image given of Jesus in the New Testament is far from being simple and univocal: for example, Matthew's Jesus strongly advocates for strict adherence to the Law, while Paul's Jesus considered that strict adherence to the Law was useless, and that it never granted anybody salvation. Still, early Church theologians, most notably Irénée de Lyon, worked to reconcile these texts, and managed to create a somewhat coherent picture of Jesus and his message - therefore setting down the basis for Christianity.

Source: Enrico Norelli, La nascità del cristianesimo, Bologna, 2014

The earliest depiction of the Crucifixion, a 2nd century graffiti meant as an insult towards Christians.The Greek text reads "Alexamenos worships God".

[scarletravenswood]

Pagan vs Christian Worldview || 4 HUGE Differences

One of the most common questions I receive is if someone can be both Christian and Pagan. This is a difficult question as it depends on what perspective you're coming from. From a Christian perspective the answer is definitely NO as in Christianity you must only believe in the one ‘true’ God. If you’re looking from the Pagan perspective the idea of combining Christianity & Paganism is a bit more possible because as Pagans we can always add on an additional deity, which in this case would be the Christian God, into our religious practice. However, there are some huge differences between the Pagan & Christian lifestyle and worldview that would make combining these two faiths difficult. So for this video & blogpost I want to share what I view makes the Pagan worldview so fundamentally different from Christianity.

Now before we begin, some disclaimers. I am not an official expert on religion. This is just my personal understanding of the differences between Paganism and Christianity so take everything I mention with a grain of salt. I understand that there is complexity and nuance to everything and this is just meant to be an introduction & my personal beliefs. This is also a very difficult topic to tackle because Paganism is an umbrella term and there are many different religions with varying beliefs and practices that could be considered Pagan. For the purposes of this post I’m using commonalities I find among the majority of Pagan religions, though this will of course not reflect all Pagans or Pagan religions.

Now that we got that out of the way here are 4 fundamental differences between Paganism and Christianity:

One God vs. Many Gods

In Christianity there is belief in one true god. Those that believe in this God will ascend to heaven and those that believe in either multiple deities or a different singular God are incorrect and they must be “saved” or else they will not ascend to heaven. In Paganism we believe in multiple Gods. While there may be a hierarchy of Gods, with some more powerful than others, the belief in multiple deities is an essential part to Paganism.

This makes Paganism distinctively different from Christianity and also makes it extremely versatile as each individual can choose the deities they would like to incorporate in their religious practice. This Pagan worldview also allows for religious syncretism which is the blending of two or more religious belief systems into a new system. The deity Hermes Trismegistus is an example of this as he is a deity formed by combining the Greek god Hermes and the Egyptian god Thoth.

Why is Religious syncretism important? Well, Pagans have the ability to adopt other deities and religious customs instead of completely rejecting them as wrong or sinful. Because of this unique feature it is my personal belief that Paganism is very conducive to peacefully living in a society that is filled with a diversity of people with various faiths. Also, as a side note, since there is not ONE true God in Paganism that means that others don’t need to be “saved” so there is no need to proselytize in Paganism. “Spreading the word” or converting others is not necessary or desired in Paganism.

Faith vs. Actions

Faith is the most important aspect of Christianity. Sin can be forgiven as long as you confess & have faith in the one true God. For example, in Hebrews 11:6 “And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.”

In most Pagan societies, faith was secondary to actions. It was more important to perform the rituals & festivals to honor the Gods than it was to fully believe in the Gods. It was your actions in life, not your faith, that determined your place in the afterlife. You can look at Valhalla as an example - it was your strength in battle, not your faith, that determined a place in Valhalla.

You can also look towards ancient Roman society where religion was practical and contractual, based on the principle of "I give that you might give." Roman religion depended on knowledge and the correct practice of prayer, ritual, and sacrifice, not on faith or dogma. Excessive devotion or fearful groveling to deities was considered undignified in Roman society. This does not mean that faith was unimportant among Pagan societies, it just means that it was not valued in the same way as it was within a Christian worldview.

For example, we can look at a quote from Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations, “Since it is possible that you might depart from life this very moment, regulate every act and thought accordingly. But to go away from among men, if there are gods, is not a thing to be afraid of, for the gods will not involve you in evil; but if indeed they do not exist, or if they have no concern about human affairs, why would I wish to live in a universe devoid of gods or devoid of Providence? But in truth they do exist, and they do care for human things, and they have put all the means in man’s power to enable him not to fall into real evils.”

Here Marcus Aurelius is stating how the Gods have created us not to watch over us to see if we are sinning, but instead they have empowered us to create and mold our own lives. Faith here is not what’s truly important. What’s important is the quest to empower ourselves to actions that better our lives and the lives of others.

Mercy vs. The Warrior

In Christianity there is a focus on humility, peace, and meekness and an de-emphasis on physical strength & the warrior archetype. For example, Matthew 5:5 - “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.”

This is much different from Paganism. There is not a ‘turn the other cheek’ worldview and Pagan societies were not always peaceful or gentle. In fact, pretty much every Pagan society had at least one God of war.

This does not mean that we as modern pagans condone violence. However, it does mean the warrior archetype has value and that building both physical & mental strength can be an active part of Pagan practice. If you are interested in learning more about the Warrior archetype I would recommend watching the video The Archetype of the Warrior – How Films Help Empower Us All. 

Strength in the Pagan worldview, both personally & collectively as a society, was greatly important. For example, you can consider the value of athletic glory in Ancient Greece or you can look towards Socrates who wrote, “No man has the right to be an amateur in the matter of physical training. It is a shame for a man to grow old without seeing the beauty and strength of which his body is capable.”

In Paganism the body is not sinful nor is it something to be ignored. In fact, the body is an integral part of spiritual practices. Through bodily strength & pleasures we gain access to glimpses of the divine, but that does not mean we should descend into purely hedonism. There is of course a time & a place for hedonism in Paganism, but it must be balanced by a strong body and mind.

Focus on Afterlife vs. Focus on Life

In a Christian worldview the goal is to live in faith without sin so that you may ascend to heaven. In many Christian texts and in certain aspects of modern Christian culture there is a yearning for this life to end and for the rapture to occur. During this time faithful Christians will be chosen by God and the rest of us will descend to hell for eternity.

Even the main symbol of Christianity, the cross, focuses on death and the afterlife. Additionally, you have the concept of the martyr - to sacrifice your life for God leads to sainthood.

By contrast, the afterlife is not as important within Pagan societies. While there are some occasional mentions of places like Elysium or Valhalla, it’s clear that the afterlife was not a main focus of Pagan religions. Instead, a main focus of Pagan religious rites and festivals was to celebrate life & fertility. This celebration of fertility is a clear departure from the Christian worldview.

In Christianity, female sexuality and fertility is often viewed through a lens of sin. Pagan societies however, greatly celebrated fertility - both our human fertility and the fertility of the land. Some of the earliest art we humans created, like the Venus of Willendorf, emphasized the sexuality & fertility of the female form and celebrating this fertility is an integral part of pretty much all pagan religions.

When it comes to death in Pagan societies, it was your legacy that mattered much more than where you end up after you die. For Pagans achieving eternity did not mean dying and going somewhere where you’ll live forever. Instead eternity was achieved when the great acts you performed in life are remembered & retold by your descendants and your community.

There’s a lot more I could discuss about the differences between the Christian & Pagan worldview, such as Purity of God vs Flawed Gods or the Intersection of Science and faith in Christianity & Paganism so let me know if you enjoyed this post and I maybe I will make a part 2.

Next I’d love to hear what you think are some of the fundamental differences between Christianity and Paganism, so please share your thoughts as well. ✨

[scripttorture]

If you don't mind me asking what got you into educating yourself and others on torture?

I don’t mind. Some readers may have heard this story before.

Basically it’s because of where I’m from and the life I had growing up. My mother is English, my father is Greek-Cypriot, I was raised in Saudi Arabia near Bahrain. This mix of backgrounds (and this holds true for a lot of people globally) means that human rights abuses and torture are tied up in my personal history.

One of my earliest memories is being evacuated because Bush Sr decided to invade Iraq. I grew up surrounded by people from India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, working as drivers, maids, construction workers, porters, shop attendants, guards- and some of them will have been slaves.

If ethnic tensions in Cyprus had not been allowed to grow into violent clashes that ultimately divided the island I would not exist. Because there’s a good chance my father’s family just wouldn’t have left.

There’s a rusted, husk of a pistol in my Yiayia’s house used by a relative in her mountain village to fight the English.

The English tortured people throughout the period Cyprus was a colony. Some of the records were recently ‘re-discovered’ in a former MOD facility.

I occasionally wonder if my great-grandfathers shot at each other.

And all of this means that torture was part of the background radiation of my life growing up.

It was not something ‘exciting’ that happened in cartoons. It was not something from the movies. It was a very real function of the police and the government.

In essence I grew up knowing the police existed to make people disappear.

I was shielded to a large degree. Because I’m white, because my family is rich and to some degree because I was a child. But I was a precocious child and I very quickly realised that not everyone had the same shield around them I did.

And I began to get very angry.

I’ve never been tortured. I’ve never seen anyone tortured and as far as I know no one I know has been tortured. But I knew growing up that it was something that could happen. To me and the people around me. And there was really nothing anyone could do about it.

I’ve spent decades reading about violence, human rights abuses and torture because I wanted to understand my countries, my roots, myself. I feel like I am at least closer to that understanding now and honestly it makes me even angrier.

It is such a pointless, awful waste. Of life, of time and, to borrow from Rushdie, of the promises of independence.

I read about these things because I feel deeply obligated to. Because despite my relative safety and power I couldn’t do anything to help the people around me. I can’t re-make my country and I can’t undo the past. And I also have a realistic idea of my own strengths. I think trying to re-train, to do the research, to treat people would have a terrible effect on my health.

But I could not look away when I was seven. I can not do it now. Because I can’t- swoop in and protect protesters in Kashmir but I can listen. I feel that I owe it to them, all of them, the 44% of the global population who think they’d be tortured if they were arrested-

Doesn’t that make you seethe? Almost half of the world, three billion human beings, judge themselves at risk from the people who are supposed to protect them.

And it is preventable.

I do this because I am really very very passionate about this global goddamned disaster.

I also do it because I like stories of real, everyday heroism and stories about the world getting better. There are more of those here then in any other subject I can think of.

It’s Fela Kuti, just out of jail, marching his murdered mother’s funeral procession up to the military barracks to face her killers. Dr Hawa Abdi facing down the terrorists who tried to take over her hospital. The White Helmets running towards the bombs to pull people out of the rubble.

The story of Bacha Khan trying to convert his English prison guards to pacifism and when they asked him what he’d be doing if he wasn’t a pacifist he stood up and bent the bars.

It seems to me a very dirty trick, that we have somehow been convinced that these people’s lives are unrealistic.

And- it seems, from my admittedly odd perspective, that other people’s lives are poorer for not knowing these things. That the world is narrower, more pessimistic without the assurance that people do not break.

The world is unfair and yes, you should be angry about it.

There’s a wonderful little piece of philosophy in the Yoruban traditional religion (which I hope I’m interpreting/explaining correctly here).

In this religion after the perfect High God created the world they withdrew from their imperfect creation. This is because the purpose of humanity is to make the world perfect. The heaven we create has more meaning then a perfect thing we are given.

The process of trying to improve life has meaning. Is our meaning.

And this is the way in which I am most suited to help.

Availableon Wordpress.

Disclaimer

[keshetchai]

As someone who was baptized Roman Catholic but was never observant before I converted to Judaism — I did once have to explain to a Jehovah's witness classmate in HS the basic history of the early Christian church and how/why the earliest Christian church was referred to as "katholike ekklesia" (Greek: "catholic Church." (catholic meaning universal, not the later meaning of "Roman Catholic", because Ignatius's Epistle to the Symerneans predates the Great Schism).

And then I pointed out there was a reason why the oldest denominations of christianity all adopted the Nicene creed (hence Nicene Christianity) which references a singular "holy and apostolic catholic church," and it was actually Jehovah's witnesses who were breaking with some 1,800 odd years of tradition by trying to claim Roman Catholicism was some kind of modern heretical invention instead of simply one of the most major (early!) interpretations of what the "apostolic catholic church" looked like.

And uh. I don't think they knew that. At all. I had to explain the concept of apostolic succession to them as part of why Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox claimed to be like...the original church.

Fundie-evangelicals are pretty much the same when it comes to this. They have zero sense of christian religious history, or theology outside of their specific denomination other than "incorrect."

Presbyterians and Methodists are way more likely to be aware at least of why their church diverged from the Roman Catholic church**, and even consider it part of "church history", and have some sense of that as like...their theological heritage despite divergences, and are way more chill about it. Lutherans aren't chill at all about catholicism, but they definitely know. Basically Protestants at least have some grounding in their own religious history, even if it's just really really vague.

It is indeed, absolutely baffling every time.

...still is, tbh.

** eta: wiki says that Presbyterians are technically fundamentalist evangelicals (which...ehhhhh...). The mainstream Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA) in my experience, and to my knowledge is nothing like the right wing fundies most people are thinking of. Like, they're definitely moderate to progressive/liberal leaning politically and theologically. there are other variants of Presbyterian that are more fundamentalist but as of the 1930's, the modernist/liberal side of presbyterianism became the mainline version in the US.

that thing where evangelicals coopt the term "christian" to be synonymous with their group/movement. do you know what i mean.

i imagine that hits real weird if you're like, presbyterian or methodist or anything like that

[militant-holy-knight]

In light of President Obama’s recent remarks comparing the brutality of the Islamic State to the Crusades, it might be time to take a fresh look at those events. Were they really the one-sided Dark Ages barbarism we have been taught? Were they an early manifestation of Western imperialism and global conquest?

In his landmark book, “God’s Battalions” (HarperOne 2009), Baylor University social sciences professor Rodney Stark suggests otherwise. It is a well-researched chronicle, including 639 footnotes and a bibliography of about 300 other works, yet reads like an adventure story full of military strategy and political intrigue.

What Prompted the Crusades

He begins in the final years of Mohammed and describes how a newly united Arab people swept through (Zoroastrian) Persia and the (Orthodox Christian) Byzantine-  controlled areas of Syria, Palestine, Egypt, and North Africa. (Byzantine refers to the Greek-speaking eastern remainder of the Roman Empire.) Eventually Arabs took over control of the Mediterranean islands, most of Spain, and the southern part of Italy, and even reached as far as 150 miles outside of Paris before being turned back by the Franks, or early French.

The Muslims were brutal in their conquered territories. They gave pagans a choice of converting to Islam or being killed or enslaved. Jews and Christians (other People of the Book) were usually but not always treated somewhat better, and allowed to retain their beliefs but under conditions of Sharia subjugation. But the Muslim-held territories were not monolithic. Stark writes:

‘Perhaps the single most remarkable feature of the Islamic territories was the almost ceaseless internal conflict; the intricate plots, assassinations, and betrayals form a lethal soap opera. North Africa was frequently torn by rebellions and intra-Islamic wars and conquests. Spain was a patchwork of constantly feuding Muslim regimes that often allied themselves with Christians against one another.’

Not surprisingly, there was intense Christian resistance and determination to take back lost territories. Especially effective were the Normans and the Franks in Spain and Italy.

The Golden Middle Ages Belonged to Europeans

Western scholars have often characterized this clash of cultures as an Islamic Golden Age versus a European Dark Age, but Stark demolishes this as a myth. He says the best of the Islamic culture was appropriated from the people Muslims conquered—the Greeks, Jews, Persians, Hindus, and even from heretical Christian sects such as the Copts and Nestorians. He quotes E.D. Hunt as writing, “the earliest scientific book in the language of Islam [was a] treatise on medicine by a Syrian Christian priest in Alexandria translated into Arabic by a Persian Jewish physician.” Stark writes that Muslim naval fleets were built by Egyptian shipwrights, manned by Christian crews, and often captained by Italians.  When Baghdad was built, the caliph “entrusted the design of the city to a Zoroastrian and a Jew.” Even the “Arabic” numbering system was Hindu in origin.

And, while it is true that the Arabs embraced the writings of Plato and Aristotle, Stark comments,

‘However, rather than treat these works as attempts by Greek scholars to answer various questions, Muslin intellectuals quickly read them in the same way they read the Qur’an – as settled truths to be understood without question or contradiction…. Attitudes such as these prevented Islam from taking up where the Greeks had left off in their pursuit of knowledge.’

Meanwhile, back in Europe was an explosion of technology that made ordinary people far richer than any people had ever been. It began with the development of collars and harnesses that allowed horses to pull plows and wagons rather than oxen, doubling the speed at which people could till fields. Plows were improved, iron horseshoes invented, wagons given brakes and swivel axels, and larger draft horses were bred. All this along with the new idea of crop rotation led to a massive improvement in agricultural productivity that in turn led to a much healthier, larger, and stronger population.

Technology was also improving warfare with the invention of the crossbow and chain mail. Crossbows were far more accurate and deadly than conventional archery, and could be fired with very little training. Chain mail was almost impervious to the kind of arrows in use throughout the world. Mounted knights were fitted with high-back saddles and stirrups that enabled them to use more force in charging an opponent, and much larger horses were bred as chargers, giving the knights a height advantage over enemies. Better military tactics made European armies much more lethal. Stark writes:

It is axiomatic in military science that cavalry cannot succeed against well-armed and well-disciplined infantry formations unless they greatly outnumber them…. When determined infantry hold their ranks, standing shoulder to shoulder to present a wall of shields from which they project a thicket of long spears butted in the ground, cavalry charges are easily turned away; the horses often rear out of control and refuse to meet the spears.

In contrast, Muslim warriors were almost exclusively light cavalry, riding faster but lighter horses bareback with little armor, few shields, and using swords and axes. Their biggest advantage was their use of camels, which made them much more mobile than foot soldiers and gave them the ability to swoop in and out of the desert areas to attack poorly defended cities.

Muslims Slaughter, Rape, and Pillage

These differences provided Crusader armies with huge advantages, but what would prompt hundreds of thousand Europeans to leave their homes and travel 2,500 miles to engage an enemy is a desert kingdom—especially after the Muslim conquest of Europe had been turned back?

In 638 Jerusalem surrendered to Muslim invaders, and mass murders of Christian pilgrims and monks became commonplace.

There had been long-festering concern about the fate of Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land. After his conversion to Christianity in the early 300s, the Roman Emperor Constantine built the Church of the Holy Sepulchre on the site of what was believed to be Jesus’ tomb, and other churches in Bethlehem and on the Mount of Olives. These sites prompted a growing number of European pilgrims to visit the Holy Land, including Saint Jerome, who lived in Bethlehem for the last 32 years of his life as he translated the Bible from Greek and Hebrew into Latin. By the late fifth century, Stark reports, more than 300 hostels and monasteries offered lodging to pilgrims in Jerusalem alone.

But in 638 Jerusalem surrendered to Muslim invaders, and mass murders of Christian pilgrims and monks became commonplace. Stark includes a list of select atrocities in the eight and ninth centuries, but none worse than the some 5,000 German Christians slaughtered by Bedouin robbers in the tenth century.

Throughout this period, control of Palestine was contested by several conflicting Muslim groups. Stark writes, “In 878 a new dynasty was established in Egypt and seized control of the Holy Land from the caliph in Baghdad.” One hundred years later, Tariqu al-Hakim became the sixth caliph of Egypt and initiated an unprecedented reign of terror, not just against Christians but against his own people as well. He burned or pillaged some 30,000 churches, including the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the tomb beneath it.

Soon enough, newly converted Turkish tribes came out of the north to seize Persia and Baghdad (by 1045) and press on to Armenia, overrunning the city of Ardzen in 1048, where they murdered all the men, raped the women, and enslaved the children. Next they attacked the Egyptians, in part because the Turks were Orthodox Sunnis and the Egyptians were heretical Shiites. While the Turks did not succeed in overthrowing the Egyptians, they did conquer Palestine, entering Jerusalem in 1071. The Turks promised safety to the residents of Jerusalem if they surrendered the city, but broke this promise and slaughtered the population. They did the same in Ramla, Gaza, Tyre, and Jaffa.

Emperor Alexius Pleads for Help

Finally, they threatened Constantinople, the capital of the Byzantine Empire. Emperor Alexius Comnenus wrote to Pope Urban II in 1095, begging for help to turn back the Turks. This was remarkable given the intense hostility between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. Perhaps the pope saw an opportunity to unite or at least reduce tensions between the two Christian churches, but he responded with a call to create an army that would go to the Middle East.

Without ongoing support from Europe, the Crusaders could not survive constant attacks from the Muslims.

I am not going to regurgitate all the battles of the Crusades themselves. It is a fascinating history well worth studying in part for its parallels and lessons for today. Let’s just say that the Crusaders were extremely effective militarily, often defeating far larger Muslim armies, despite having traveled some 2,500 miles into an alien desert climate. Their biggest enemies were disease, starvation, and political betrayal. Plus, the Crusades were expensive and home countries grew weary of paying the taxes needed to support them (sound familiar?)

The Crusaders ended up establishing their own kingdoms in the Holy Land, which lasted for about 200 years or, as Stark notes, almost as long as the United States has existed; but without ongoing support from Europe they could not survive constant attacks from the Muslims.

How the Crusades Were Different from Military Action of the Day

So, what to make of all this?

The Crusaders were unique in that they did not seek to plunder or enslave.

Actually, the Crusaders were unique in that they did not seek to plunder or enslave. They didn’t even try to forcibly convert anyone to Christianity. Their sole interest was to protect the pilgrims and Christian holy sites. They sometimes sacked cities that refused to provide food to a hungry army, but they didn’t take riches back to Europe. There were few riches to be found. Rather than exploiting indigenous resources to benefit Europe, Europe sent money and resources to the Middle East. Pilgrims were quite lucrative for host countries, just as tourism is today.

War was a nasty and brutal business at the time, and had been for all of recorded history. Cities fortified themselves as protection against invading armies. A siege of a city meant surrounding the area and cutting off supplies until the population surrendered, often by starving. In the Bible, II Kings 6:24-33 relates the story of the siege of Samaria, in which two starving women agree to kill and eat their sons.

The rule of war at the time was that, if a city surrendered, the population would be spared, but if it resisted and the invading army had to take it by force all the inhabitants would be killed or enslaved. But Stark notes that Muslim armies often violated even this rule—promising sanctuary, then slaughtering the population that surrendered. (Before we get too smug and condescending about the savagery of these ancients, let’s not forget the rocket bombing of London, the firebombing of Dresden, and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a mere 70 years ago.)

Muslim armies often promised sanctuary, then slaughtered the population that surrendered.

One way in which Muslim fighters today have advanced over their forebears is that during the Crusades they did not adopt new tactics to counter the technological advantage of the Europeans. They never used crossbows or shielded infantry, even after several hundred years of fighting. Today, Muslim warriors quickly evolve to make the most of Western technology, although they still never seem to develop anything of their own.

An Enduring Clash Between Inquiry and Submission

One final thought on this. As Stark indicates above, there is in too many Muslim countries a sense of obedience that precludes robust debate or new ideas, let alone technological innovation. In his classic, “The World is Flat,” Thomas Friedman quotes Osama bin Laden as saying,

‘It is enough to know that the economy of all Arab countries is weaker than the economy of one country that had been part of our (Islamic) world when we used to truly adhere to Islam. That country is the lost Andalusia. Spain is an infidel country, but its economy is stronger that our economy because the ruler there is accountable. In our countries, there is no accountability or punishment, but there is only obedience to the rulers and prayers of long life for them. (pp. 400-401)’

Friedman confirms that this is based on a 2002 report, the first Arab Human Development Report. This report, written by Arabs, found that Spain had a larger gross domestic product than all 22 Arab states combined!

I think Stark is closer to the mark than bin Laden. The problem is a cultural way of thinking that starts with the Qur’an and the Prophet and emphasizes unquestioning obedience. The very name of the religion, Islam, means “submission.” The thinking of bin Laden that emphasizes punishing poor rulers is a complete misunderstanding how progress is made. European cultures place a high value on questioning everything, even the divinity of Jesus Christ. Certainly there have been exceptions to this, but in the sweep of history it is an unmistakable trait.

So we have perhaps the starkest conflict of worldviews imaginable: on one hand, a robust and virtually unlimited spirit of inquiry, and on the other a fervent dedication to universal obedience and submission. How this plays out is the story of our times.

[red-wines-recipes]

Cheers - Its Wine

Wine is one of the most fascinating drinks among the European citizens. It is an alcoholic beverage prepared from the fermented grape juice. Grapes have the chemical property of carrying out fermentation without the utilization of sugars, enzymes or other nutrients. It is prepared fermenting the crushed grapes with the different types of yeast strains. Yeast consumes all the sugars present in grapes and converts them into alcohol. Different types of grapes and different strains of grapes are responsible for the production of different types of wines. Apples and berries are also utilized for the preparation of wines and the wines obtained are named after the name of the fruit like apple wine or elderberry wine or are popularly name as fruit wine or country wine. Barley and rice wine are prepared from the starch based materials and resemble beer and spirit more than wine and ginger wine is fortified with brandy. The term wine is used for these beverages because of their high alcoholic content. The commercial use of the term English wine is under the government control.

Wine has a very rich history which is 6000 BC old and is thought to have originated in the borders of Georgia and Iran. The wine was prepared in Europe for the first time about 4500 BC ago in the Balkans and was very common in Rome, Thrace and ancient Greece. Wine also deserves an important role in religion throughout the history. The Greek god Dionysus and the Roman god Bacchus symbolize wine and the wine is used in the catholic and Jewish ceremonies. The word wine has originated from a Proto-Germanic word winam which means grape. The earliest cultivation of grapevine Vitis vinifera first started in Georgia. Wine has been prepared in India from the Vedic times. Viticulture started in India first in the Indus valley where grapevines were introduced for the first time from Persia about 5000 BC ago. Chanakya, the chief minister of the Emperor Chandragupta Maurya has discussed about wine in his writings about 4th century BC ago and has designated wine by the term Madhu. He has focused on the side effects of wine and has strongly condemned the use of wine.

Wine is prepared from more than one varieties of Vitis vinifera like Pinot Noir, Chardonnay, Cabernet Sauvignon, Gamay and Merlot. When one of these varieties is used the resultant is termed as varietal. The world's most expensive wines come from the regions like Bordeaux and Rhone Valley are blended from different varieties of the same vintage. Wine can also be prepared from the hybrid varieties of grapes obtained by genetic cross breeding. Vitis labrusca, Vitis aestivalis, Vitis rupestris, Vitis rotundifolia and Vitis riparia are native North American varieties of grapes grown for the production of jams, jellies or sometimes wine.

Hybridization is a different process so cannot be confused with grafting. Most of the world's grape vineyards are planted with the European variety of grapevine Vitis vinifera grafted with the North American species rootstock. This is basically done because the North American species are resistant to Phyllosera a root louse that damages the roots of grapevines resulting in death. In the late 19th century most of the vineyards of Europe were destroyed by a bug leading to deaths of grapevines and heavy economic loss. Grafting is a common practice in all wine producing nations except Argentina, Chile and Canary Islands and only these areas include vineyards free from any devastating pests. Associated with wine production terroir is an important concept that includes variety of grapevine to be used, elevation and shape of vineyard, type and chemistry of soil, climate and seasonal conditions and the local yeast cultures to be used. The fermentation, ageing and processing of wine in terroir may result in good wine production.

The classification, production and sale of wine are under the control of government in many parts of the world. European wines are classified on the basis of the regions where they are produced while non-European ones are classified on the variety of grape used. Common examples of locally recognized non-Europeans regions for wine production include Napa Valley in California, Columbia Valley in Washington, Barossa and Hunter Valley in Australia, Central Valley in Chile, Hawke's Bay and Marlborough in New Zealand and Niagara Peninsula in Canada. Some blended wines are sold by a particular trademark and are under strict rules and regulations of the government for example, Meritage is a generally a Bordeaux-style blend of Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot and may also include Cabernet Franc, Petit Verdot, and Malbec. The commercial use of the term Meritage is possible only after getting license from the Meritage Association. France uses different systems based on the concept terroir for classification. Greece and Italy classify on the basis of the regions where they are prepared. New World ones are classified on the variety of grapes used for preparation.

A vintage wine is one that is prepared from the grapes grown in a particular season of the year are labeled as vintage. Variations in the character of wine may vary due to palate, colour, nose and development. High quality wines taste better if are stored properly for a long time. Habitual wine drinkers generally stored the bottles of vintage wine for future consumption. For a wine to be called as vintage wine in United States the American Viticultural Area has passed certain rules like the vintage wine must contain 95% of the its volume of the grapes harvested in that year. All the vintage wines are bottles in a single batch so that all may have the similar taste. Climate plays an important role in character of wine as it affects its flavour and quality strongly. So we can say that vintage wines are characteristic of a particular vintage. Superior vintages from a reputed producer and region fetch higher prices of wine than average vintages. Non-vintage wines can also be blended from more than one vintage for consistency a process which allows wine makers to keep a reliable market image and maintain sales even in bad years.

Wine tasting is sensory examination and evaluation of wine. Wines are made from the chemical compounds that found in fruits, vegetables and spices. The sweetness of measured by the amount of sugar left in wine after fermentation, relative to the acidity present in wine. Dry wine has a very small percentage of residual sugar. Individual flavours in the wine can be easily detected as the grape juice and wine contain terpenes and esters as chief components. Experienced tasters can easily identify the type and flavour of wine. Chocolate, vanilla and coffee also act as flavouring agents for wine. Wine aroma comes from the compounds present in wine which are released on being exposed to air. Red wines are highly aromatic. Outstanding vintages from best vineyards fetch good prices in the market around $US 30-50 dollars per bottle. The most commonly purchase wines in Europe include Bordeaux, Burgundy and cult wines. The wine grapes grow almost between thirty to fifty degrees north or south of the equator. The world's southernmost vineyards are present in the Central Otago of New Zealand's South Islands near the 45th parallel south and the north most are in Flen, Sweden just north of 59th parallel north. UK was the largest producer of wine in the year 2007.

Wine is the most important and popular beverage of European and Mediterranean cuisines participating in the simple as well as complex traditions. Apart from its popularity as a beverage wine is also a good flavouring agent particularly used stocks and braising as its acidity imparts a different taste to the sweet dishes. Red, white and sparkling wines are very popular and are known as light wines as they conatin only 10-14% alcohol content by volume. Desert wines contain 14-20% alcohol and are sometimes fortified to make more sweet and tasty. Some wine labels suggest that after opening the wine bottle they must be allowed to breathe for few minutes before consuming while others recommend drinking the wine immediately after opening. Decanting is the process of pouring the wine in a special container for the purpose of breathing only. Decanting the wine with the help of filter removes the bitter sediments that may have been formed in the wine. Sediments are more easily formed in the older wines.

During aeration the exposure of younger wines to air adds flavour as well as aroma to them and also makes them smoother. Older wines lose their flavour as well as aroma if exposed to air for a long time. Exposure of wines to air does not benefit all types of wines. Use of wines in religion and ceremonies has been known since ancient times. Wine is an integral part of Jewish laws and traditions. Kiddush is a blessing recited over grape juice to sanctify the Jewish holiday. In Christianity wine is used in a sacred rite called Eucharist which originates in the Gospel accounts of the Last Supper in which Jesus shared bread and wine with his disciples and commanded them to do the same in remembrance to me. Beliefs about the nature of Eucharist have been disputed among different Christian denominations. The use of alcohol has been strictly prohibited in the Islamic law. Iran and Afghanistan had a wine industry that vanished after the Islamic Revolution in 1979.

Excessive consumption of wine affects the human body. Every 100 gram of red wine provides about 85 Kcal energy, 2.6 g carbohydrates, 0.6 g sugars, 0.0 g fat, 0.1 g proteins and 10.6 g alcohol. Epidemiological studies have shown that moderate consumption of wine reduced death rate by preventing heart attack. Population studies have observed a J curve association between wine consumption and risk of cardiac failure. This suggests that heavy drinkers are at higher risk of getting heart attack than moderate drinkers and non-drinkers. Studies have shown that moderate consumption of alcoholic beverages reduces the risk of cardiac arrest but this association is very much strong with the wines. Some studies have proved red wines to be best over white wines. Red wine contains more polyphenols than white wine so is much more protective against cardiovascular disease.

[lawrenceop]

Holy Land Retrospective - Day 3

Reminder: clicking on the link for each photo (links are all in red text) will take you to the Flickr page where you can see the photo in larger sizes. Start with DAY 1, or go back to DAY 2, or read on!

PHOTO 9: This symbol is called the labarum, and it is one of the oldest of Christian symbols, which takes us back to the time of the Emperor Constantine, under whose auspices the Holy Land sites were first explored (by his mother St Helena) and who built the first major churches on these sites. At the centre of the labarum is the monogram of Christ, formed by the first two Greek letters of that title, Χριστός (Christos), and it is surrounded by a laurel wreath, a symbol of victory and imperial power. According to Eusebius, Constantine saw a vision in which he saw this symbol, and he was told by Jesus that in this sign, he would be victorious. He subsequently won the battle at the Milvian Bridge near Rome in 312, which led to his becoming sole Emperor of the Roman Empire. In 313, he ended the State persecution of the Christians, and eventually was baptised. His mother Helena converted shortly after her son became Emperor, and she was proclaimed Augusta Imperatrix. 

In 326-28, St Helena came to the Holy Land and, using funds from the imperial treasury, she found the holy sites which we visit throughout the Holy Land today, and she built great basilicas on these sites. Sadly, none of these basilicas have survived the millennia in which Islamic conquest and the fall of the Byzantine empire led to their destruction. This mosaic of the labarum, though, dates to the 4th-century, almost certainly from the Constantinian basilica that Helena had built here, and it is in now preserved within the current (very modern-looking) basilica of the Annunciation in Nazareth; the current basilica was dedicated in 1969. 

Many people cluster around the cave, which is where Our Lady lived, and around which her house was built (although the house was somehow transferred to Loreto for safekeeping when the Christian sites of the Holy Land were being ravaged by Islamic invaders). It was in that cave that the archangel St Gabriel appeared to Mary, and it is here that he made the announcement that changed the course of human history. 

“In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!"” - Luke 1:26-28

But in our excitement to see this marvellous place, and to contemplate the incarnation, it is easy to miss all that surrounds this rather unique location. For around the site of Mary’s cave are several layers of architectural history. Christianity, you might say, began with Mary’s “Fiat” to the angelic revelation, but in another sense, this mosaic of the labarum reminds us of another beginning that was caused by a divine revelation. For Christ himself intervened in 312 to safeguard his Church from Roman persecution, and thanks to Constantine the Great (whom some Christians venerate as a saint) and his mother St Helena, the Church spread and the Faith flourished, and pilgrimages to the Holy Land began. One of the earliest pilgrims, Egeria, came here in 384, and she mentions being shown this “big and splendid cave” in Nazareth where Our Lady had lived.

But this mosaic labarum, this sign of victory, being all that remains of a great past age reminds us of the essential truth that it signifies: The victory of Christ is not principally about military might, nor the maintenance of empire, nor about worldly power. Rather, in Nazareth, in this humble backwater town where the people lived in caves, in holes in the ground, we see that the victory of Christ is the victory of love, of divine grace winning over the hearts of men and women. And it all began here, where Mary of Nazareth said: "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." (Lk 1:38)

PHOTO 10: 

“And Mary said to the angel, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?" And the angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.”

This window at the centre of the facade of the Annunciation basilica shows the moment of the divine overshadowing. In the Greek of St Luke, the word used is ἐπισκιάζω (episkiazó). God is all light, pure brilliance, dwelling in inaccessible light, in whom there is no darkness at all. (cf 1 Jn 1:5 and 1 Tim 6:16). Everything that is not God, therefore, i.e., every created thing is by comparison in darkness so that when the divine Light shines upon them, they are overshadowed, literally, they stand in the shade of the light. It’s a beautiful profound image, when we think about it, and this stained glass window vividly expresses its meaning. For Mary is not shown in any shadow at all, but rather, as the word ἐπισκιάζω implies, Mary is enveloped and bathed in light. Thus she is “full of grace”, she is full of God’s divine light. Indeed, he who is Light dwells in her womb. Indeed, it is the light of her Son, his grace, which sanctifies Mary so thoroughly, so completely, that she is conceived, even, in light and hence she is uniquely preserved from the moment of her conception from the darkness of sin. 

PHOTO 11: The inscription reads: “And he came to Nazareth. And he began to say to them, "Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing."” (cf Lk 4:21) On the third morning we had travelled several hours by coach from Jerusalem to Nazareth, praying the Rosary as we went. The town is now dominated by the conical dome of the Annunciation basilica, but a short walk from the basilica is the church built on St Joseph’s house, the place where the Holy Family of Nazareth lived. Like the cave of the Annunciation, this, too, is like a rock-hewn cave underground. Nearby, is the site of the synagogue, shown here, where Jesus had preached. And just a stone’s throw away are more excavations of underground caves where people lived in Nazareth; I was amazed to realise that Jesus and his family were ‘cave-dwellers’. Moreover, everything is ‘nearby’ because Nazareth was a very small village. And yet, two thousand years ago, among these humble cave-dwellers in this humble location, God accomplished his greatest work: the salvation of the human race, overturning the sin of Adam, and the ending the reign of Satan over this world. For in Nazareth Christ had announced to his townspeople “this has been fulfilled in your hearing.” It is mistaken to think that epic events need to be performed on a grand and monumental stage. God’s greatness is precisely to be found in his humility and his attention to the little. All he needs is a human heart that is opened in faith to his Word. 

PHOTO 12: It was a short journey from Nazareth to Mount Tabor. The landscape here was relatively flat; we had come across some hills and mountains as we had driven north from Jerusalem, and now in Galilee, the landscape reaching down to the sea was low-lying. Except for one great mountain that could be seen from miles around. The Bible does not tell us which mountain Christ ascended for his Transfiguration, but in 348 St Cyril of Jerusalem chose Mount Tabor as the most likely location, and this was backed by St Jerome, the great Biblical scholar who lived and died in Bethlehem. This inscription records that “according to an old tradition, Tabor is the mountain of the apparition of Christ”, but interestingly, not simply the mountain of the Transfiguration where Saints Peter, James, and John receive a foretaste of Easter glory, but also where the Risen Lord appeared to his disciples. As Luke 28:16-17 says: “Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshipped him; but some doubted.” 

A church was built on this site shortly after St Cyril of Jerusalem identified this place, and in 1099 even a Benedictine monastery was founded here. This photo shows the marble inscription on the ruins of that monastery, which had been destroyed by Islamic invaders in 1113; the monks were martyred. 

Perhaps this is what Resurrection faith entails, and this mountain that witnessed the Resurrection of Jesus fittingly is the place to remember the faith of countless Christian martyrs: 

"Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” – Mt 10:28 

PHOTO 13: If Tabor is the mountain of the Risen Lord, then it is right to expect symbols of the Resurrection to abound. This stained glass window in the Art Deco style stands behind the Altar where we celebrated Mass. The peacock is, like the labarum, another early Christian symbol although this was installed in the 1920s when the current Transfiguration Basilica was built. Because the ancients believed that the flesh of peacocks was incorruptible, the peacock became a symbol of immortality. The beauty of the peacock was also a symbol of the Resurrection and the new life of grace that transforms and beautifies us. Here, the peacocks flank a Eucharistic chalice, with the Triangle indicative of the Holy Trinity. Therefore, this window is a reminder that we Christians receive a share in divine life through the Eucharist, and that the power of Christ’s Body and Blood gives us eternal life, and also makes us as beautiful as Christ is. Every time we come to the Mass, we stand on Tabor, as it were, and we glimpse the Resurrection; we receive a foretaste of the divine life of heaven; and, indeed, we receive the command and comforting reminder of the Risen Lord which he first pronounced on Mount Tabor: 

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age." – Mt 28:19-20

PHOTO 14: The view from the high vantage point of Mount Tabor (which had been an important military post) explains why the Lord chose this mountain to send his apostles out to “all nations” (cf My 28:19). From here, one can glimpse on one side the Sea of Galilee, which for the apostles was home. It was familiar, and safe, and was their ‘comfort zone’. But on the other side, one catches in the distance the glint of the Mediterranean sea, which was perilous, unknown, and forbidding. But, Christ promised to be with them always, and so, secure in that faith, they set out into the big wide world. Thank God for that!

PHOTO 15: Back in Jerusalem, at dinner on the third night, our special guest, Jim Caviezel arrived to join our pilgrimage; he would have a week with us. But I had an appointment somewhere even more special: the Holy Sepulchre! So, I dashed out of dinner and rushed back to spend some quiet moments before the church closed for the night. 

This photo, I think, captures the quiet of the night time in the church of the Holy Sepulchre, and it also shows you one of its many hidden passages and nooks - it is well worth exploring at leisure in the evening. The deeply marked stones on the wall, and the flagstones, worn smooth and shiny by countless feet, speaks of the antiquity of this church, and yet, this section is only a thousand years old.   Before it was vaulted in stone, this section stood open to the elements, a kind of open courtyard between the two structures that sheltered Calvary and the Empty Tomb. At the end of this passageway, in the well-lit space is the prison where Christ and the two thieves were held before they were crucified. 

You may have noticed in yesterday’s photo from the Holy Sepulchre (Photo 8), that a very tall ladder is prominently placed at the entrance of the church. So, too, in this side passage, ladders are in evidence. All these ladders are used for changing the hundreds of votive oil lamps that constantly burn within the church. But the ladders also remind me of two things. Firstly, that a ladder was probably needed to take Jesus down from the Cross for his burial, and so it is fitting that ladders should be seen in this church because the ladder connects Calvary and the Empty Tomb; he goes from the Cross to the Tomb. But, secondly, the ladder is a symbol of what Christ’s Death and Resurrection have accomplished for us. Because of Jesus’s sacrifice on the Cross, and by his rising from the dead, Mankind can now climb up the ladder of grace to heaven; we go from our tombs to eternal life! 

PHOTO 16: The doors of the Holy Sepulchre church are sealed for the night, and a fortunate few are locked within alongside the monks and clergy where they will remain in prayer all night. But the rest of us have been herded outdoors by the Muslim keeper of the keys, and sometimes with the encouragement of the Israeli police. Since at least 1192, the keys of the Holy Sepulchre have been entrusted to a prominent Muslim family because no single Christian denomination could be seen to have control of the church. Although we might see this as a sad sign of Christian disunity, there is a fittingness to it. The Tomb of Christ, after all, had also been sealed by unbelievers. 

The doors are locked, again with a ladder because the lock is so high up, and then a hatch is opened, and the ladder passed back into the church through the hatch. This simple nightly routine is being photographed by the many pilgrims and tourists gathered outside at 9pm, and I liked the look of the blue glow of their screens against the warmer light of their surroundings. 

Hundreds stand outside for this spectacle, but far far fewer will be here before dawn when the church re-opens its doors (before 4am). I suppose this, too, is fitting for only three very devout women came to the tomb early that Sunday morning and saw its stone rolled away. 

“But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb, taking the spices which they had prepared. And they found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they went in they did not find the body.” – Luke 24:1-3

Tomorrow: Sea of Galilee and Capernaum

[markrmorrisjr]

I grew up fundy, I’ve had to face it. I’ve tried to put all kinds of spins on it, conservative, mainline traditional, but facts are facts, and although I didn’t see it, and still don’t remember my parents or grandparents as cruel, or hateful in any  way, that’s what it was.

From the time I was born until the age of fourteen, my dad was a Church of Christ preacher. I never experienced any kind of racism, or bigotry, toward anyone who came into the congregations where he preached, or in our home. Everyone was welcome, no matter their heritage,  status, “orientation” or “lifestyle” ( I use these terms in quotes, because this is the language that was used to describe the “others”) they were always treated with love and respect and we tried to help everyone we could.

That being said, there was a fair bit of proselytizing, which only makes sense in the circumstances, but never any condemnation from them toward anyone that I witnessed,. Regardless of their beliefs. Maybe this is why I was able to hide from my own concerns for so long. There was never any doubt that they believed whole-heartedly that without a meaningful conversion experience to Christ, everyone was lost and going to a literal, real hell.

I know what some of you are thinking, what kind of monsters were they? But, you likely have had some beliefs in your life that you were forced to reconsider, and I fully believe, had they lived long enough, this would have been one for them. My dad admitted at the end of his life that I had convinced him that hell definitely wasn’t what he’d thought. But, that’s a story for another time.

About the time I turned fourteen, my dad’s theology changed, but not necessarily for the better. We dived headlong out of the mega conservative, no instrumental music in worship, COC, into the hotbed of the Charismatic Renewal in 1985. Rock bands, and tambourines, if you couldn’t speak in tongues, you might not be saved, kind of places. The Sunday services would run for hours!

From there, I ran through the gamut of “non-denominational” churches, but everywhere I went, a certain arrogant ignorance pervaded the leadership.  Most of them had only a rudimentary knowledge of scripture. Which, for a COC kid was appalling, after all, we basically treated the Bible as a defacto minister of God. It was inerrant, and perfect in every way, after all, it was just up to us to study it hard enough to suss out the answers.

There’s a certain level of death to intellectual curiosity that comes with accepting that the Bible, is, in your mind, inerrant. Although this is a relatively new idea, in the scheme of things, it has been pervasive through most of American Evangelical Christianity for the past century or so. Even in places where it wasn’t considered quite as literal and concrete as I’d been taught as a child (6 literal days of creation, and so on) those ideas were almost never expressed from the pulpit. There was a tacit understanding that the book was the book, and whatever it said, and whoever was in charge agreed to interpret is as meaning, stood.

So, what’s so wrong with that? Well, I don’t know all of the answers to this question, but here are ten things I picked up on later in life that led to a whole bunch of questions that ended up with me thinking there is no hell, and gay people are okay with Jesus and maybe a lot of the other rules we made for ourselves didn’t make a whole lot of sense, and the whole thing was really about being good to people in the first place.

Here they are, the ten things they never told me.

The best description of God in the Bible is a metaphor.

That’s right. We’ve fought wars over these poetic understandings, though. So, they must be able to be understood and taken literally, right? See, the idea is this, God is so big (and if there is a single intelligence behind the universe, it would have to be) that we simply cannot understand, and so, we have to resort to metaphorical language to compare God to things we can know. God is ineffable in essence. But, if this is true, why did I see so much anger for people who insisted on seeing the feminine in the divine, or had another name for God?

God is not a man.

At best, the divine is a blend of genders. It says so right in the first two chapters, but we overlook that and default to father, although he’s also described as animals, a woman, forces of nature, and even inanimate objects. As science begins to unfold what it means for humans to have gender, they are discovering that even on a measurable level, there is very little evidence for the strict binary definitions we’ve applied until very recently. To me, this binary understanding has been used primarily to hold half of the population in check. Yes, women, you’ve been robbed of your rightful place, because some guys decided that some other guys, who wrote all this stuff down, said guys were put in charge by the head guy himself, God, and it’s not true.

There’s very little history, outside of the Bible itself, to back up much of what is in it.

Sorry, whatever they told you at Bible college, might need to be reconfirmed, as awful as it sounds a whole lot of lies have been told to prop up doctrine. I don’t know a lot about this. It is true there is as much evidence for the existence of some of the personalities in the Bible as for other historical figures, but much of what is told within its pages cannot be confirmed through other historical records.

Almost NONE of the source texts come from “original” languages.

In many evangelical circles there is this belief that if you get to the "original" language of the Bible you can make more sense of it. In some cases this is true. It's been mistranslated and misinterpreted. In other places, additional words have simply been made up to make it make what the translator thought was good sense. So, what is the truth

The OT was rewritten into other languages, and then translated back into Hebrew. The Greek that the NT scrolls were written in was not the spoken language of the people who wrote it. Many of them spoke Aramaic, it's believed. Linguistically speaking it’s a stew, and that’s before you even get to the oral tradition being handed down for generations before many of the books were written, or the translation challenges of converting mostly dead languages into somewhat modern English equivalents.

There's more than one "canon" of the "Holy Bible

To say that the “canon” (group of books included in the Bible) of scripture is inspired (directly selected by the Holy Spirit) is a confusing, and misleading statement. There have been many. Hell, there are still many groups of books claiming the title of Bible. Right now there is the 66 book canon of the mainline protestant church, the 73 books of the Catholic Bible, which by the way, has the claim of being older than the protestant, just by history and logic. And the Eastern Orthodox canon contains 81 books, and is said to be the oldest canon in church history. So, which one was inspired? Even these canons are disputed.

Not all of the Biblical authors are necessarily who I was taught they were.

For example, Paul seems to have penned the lion’s share of the New Testament. But, some of what has his name on it, most scholars believe, may have been penned by one of his own disciples, using his name to gain authority. As to the ancient texts, some of them have never had an author attributed to them.

Not everything in the Bible is scientifically accurate.

You're probably saying, wow, no kidding? (sarcastically) It is obvious that there are gaps in the understanding of the writers, and some of their observations are plain illogical. But, and here's the thing, we had a 1954 set of World Book encyclopedias as a kid and I wouldn't want to use that as a text book in a modern science class either. So much of the understanding has changed. Honestly, this point only matters if you're expecting the Bible to be completely infallible.

Surprisingly, however, the same pattern claimed as the biological order of ascendance in evolution by Darwin, is the same order used in the Creation Myth in Genesis. I remember a serious debate in our house when my brother found out that whales are not fish and my father attempted to defend the idea that the whale Jonah was “literally” swallowed by, was both a whale and a great fish, as the Bible states. To me, most of these are simply errors in understanding from the author’s point of view. After all, most people still thought of the world as flat, although the Bible describes it as round. But, I don’t need the Bible to be scientifically accurate in every point. Most historical philosophical texts have similar inaccuracies.

The idea that the Bible is perfect is new

Yep, it started less than a hundred years ago, which is funny. You'd think the earliest followers of this book would have been turned onto the fact that it was perfect, unless, maybe, it's not.

I was never told this. I doubt my father ever knew it. Different schools of theological understanding tend to insulate themselves to preserve their way of thinking. You’ll find that two Biblical scholars, both trained to similar levels of education, may have completely different understandings of what the book means on many points and often have never even been confronted with opposing views. The other interesting thing is this, I’ve rarely met a Bible professor who found the Bible to be as black and white as it was nearly always presented from the pulpits I heard it taught from.

There are even problems with the doctrine of "Divine Inspiration"

The idea of the divine inspiration of the Biblical writers doesn’t gel with the idea of free will. Either God creates automatons, even temporarily, to act as mediums ( a practice strictly forbidden in scripture) to transcribe the history and thoughts of God, or men do it willingly. If the former, then what the hell? And was that same possession present when all translation, interpretation, and transcription was done? If not, how would you assume that all of these men (they’re always all considered men) get it all perfectly right, without inserting a single opinion. But, then, we’re given a glimpse into this by Paul, at least once when he tells us straight up this is my opinion, not God speaking.

The Bible’s inerrancy is not only unprovable, but it simply doesn’t matter.

Here’s why. After being in church, literally, since the third day of my life, I’ve come to this conclusion, it does not matter one bit if the Bible is perfect or not. Well, of course it does, some will say, otherwise, we might be living a lie. Well, here’s the thing, you might anyway, even if it’s perfect. Why? Imagine this.

There is an atomic bomb in your front yard. Unless you defuse it, at some point in the future, no one knows exactly when, it will take you and everyone you know out. Never fear! Instructions for defusing this bomb have been delivered. But, here’s the thing. They were written by someone who never saw this bomb. Two thousand years ago. With their untechnological minds. In a foreign language they didn’t speak. That’s not all. Then it was translated from these ancient texts, then transcribed many times, and finally, it was made into an “interpretation” of the original text. But, if you are not precise in every single detail of your defusal process, BOOM!

So, you call in the experts. They can help, right? They’ve devoted their entire lives to studying these instructions and teaching these instructions. They arrive and immediately begin to argue. Why? Because they all have a different idea of how the bomb should be defused and all of them show you in the instructions how their way is right. One says you open the bomb first, then pray, then defuse. Another says, no, pray only, God will defuse the bomb. Another says, dunk the bomb in water, pray, then defuse. And they all have followers who espouse their method. Because, if you don’t get this right, they’re all doomed.

Finally, they resort, not to the original texts, but to commentaries based on other’s understanding of the texts, to solve their disagreements, but this just leads to more disagreements. What do you do? The instructions are perfect, you know that. But, now you’ve got three different versions of them, and tons of peripheral information explaining them and the more you try to make it make sense, the less it does.

That’s why it simply does not matter if the Bible is perfect, infallible, or inerrant. Because, even if it were, we cannot come to a common understanding of what it means.

So, what is the Bible? To me, it’s simply a journal. It’s a journal of men and women who dedicated their entire existence to unravelling the God puzzle, understanding who the creator is, and what our relationship to the divine should be. It records their mistakes, their broken ideas, their imperfect observations, and some of the results. It encourages us to good things, and where it does, we should follow it. Then it has some horrible advice, which is proven wrong. Where this is true, we should learn from it.

But, how do you make peace with all of this? Simple. I’ve come to understand that the bomb (hell) does not exist. There is no lake of eternal fire. God doesn’t torture people eternally for deeds committed on a finite time line. In fact, the Bible doesn’t even say that. But, that’s a story for another time.

[kabane52]

The Production Context of Matthew’s Gospel

My view is that Matthew was written in Hebrew for the Jerusalem Church in AD 30- scripture wasn't merely a tool, after all, but was a symbolic sign that God had worked a great work in the history of His covenant- each development in Israel's history comes with a burst of scripture production. Matthew as the apostle with Levitical training, who may well have taken notes, was chosen in AD 30 to set the teachings of Jesus down in organized form. With 3,000 new converts, there needs to be a consistent and reliable record of Jesus' teaching. While they had the capacity to accurately transmit tradition orally over decades, it seems to make more sense that the written Gospel be produced immediately.

That's conjecture- my concrete reason for holding that is that we have the Greek Gospel of Matthew. There are a number of patristic references to this being a product of Matthew's own hand, less a translation of the Hebrew and more a rewriting of Hebrew Matthew in Greek- the content is identical but since it's the original author doing the reproduction in Greek, he has no need to translate speculatively, attempting to reconstruct the most appropriate Greek word for the Hebrew counterpart. He can simply select them himself according to his own intent. Matthew's Gospel appears to address a Church which is predominantly Jewish. NT scholars love to make things up and so have made up such a sitz em leben late in the first century. But we have documentation of an historical Christian period where this was the case: the church before the Gentile mission, which I hold to be 30-33.

James quotes Matthew, and understanding the setting of James will help lock in Matthew. Acts 8 tells us that a great persecution blew up in Jerusalem and scattered the Christians across the oikumene for the first time. It's in this context that the Apostle Paul is converted. After the three year period described in Galatians, Paul returns and the Gentile mission begins with Peter in Acts 10. James addresses the "twelve tribes in the dispersion"- the church is Israel and the context for such a statement is quite neatly explained by the scattering of Acts 8. He encourages them in the midst of their suffering and exhorts them to endure their trials patiently. Likewise, this fits with the great persecution of Acts 8. And as James is the head of the Jerusalem Church this suggests that the letter is written when the Church is still largely centered on the single city-church of Jerusalem with the others as satellites. Later in the apostolic age we see a much more balanced network of city-churches which have no single geographical center. 

Finally, we know that the major center of the earliest Gentile Christianity in Acts 11 is Antioch- the very setting which is most appropriate for the Greek text of the Gospel of Matthew. So Matthew, in a journey to Antioch, needs to make his Gospel available to the newly baptized Gentile Christians. This is the true sitz em leben for the production of the Gospel of Matthew as we know it. I actually came to these conclusions and then discovered that there were patristic traditions setting the production of Matthew's Gospel in this very context: the persecution following the death of Stephen, though the chronology of these events is inflated to 38 AD rather than the 30-33 which seems to me conclusive. 

[see John Wenham Redating Matthew Mark and Luke, who cites the “Letter of the Three Patriarchs” from Cosmas of Alexandria (+550 AD) in endnote 44 on p. 303-304.]

1. The Jewishness of the Christianity reflected in Matthew.

2. The quotations of Matthew in James in light of James' apparent setting in the aftermath of the Acts 8 persecution.

3. The Antiochene origins of Greek Matthew.

4. The tradition of a Hebrew (or Aramaic, though I think the evidence is suggestive of Hebrew) Matthew- it would be natural to produce the first of the church's new scriptures (note that the beginning and ending of Matthew echoes the beginning and ending of Chronicles, the last book of the Tanakh in its overarching and singular literary structure) in the Hebrew language as long as the great majority of the believers were Jews. 

5. The transition from Hebrew to Greek Matthew under the apostle's own hand- Hebrew is much less appropriate once the Gentiles start flowing in.

6. Matthew's organization as a teaching tool, presenting five blocks of Jesus' teaching. This is the most urgent concern for the earliest Christians, to ensure that the Lord's teachings is sufficiently available in accurate form.

7. Patristic traditions setting the production of Matthew in 33 AD.

8. The ubiquity of Matthew and various Matthean gospels (such as the Gospel of the Hebrews, the Gospel of the Nazarenes, etc) formed by a combination of Matthew's Hebrew gospel (basically identical to the Greek Matthew we read) and other traditions, probably including a sizeable proportion of authentic Jesus tradition that is not in our canonical gospels- i.e. the appearance to James, perhaps the sayings cited by Ignatius to Peter (presumably in the resurrection appearance to Peter mentioned in Luke and Paul), and other aspects about which we only have tantalizing hints. Matthew is ubiquitous because it precedes the Judaizing controversy, which begins very early.

This is important, because the Judaizing controversy is, given its prominence in the NT, the likely catalyzt for the early process of Jewish Christian fragmentation that we see reflected in latter disparate communities of Jewish Christians, some more or less orthodox, others rejecting Paul's apostleship (likely the community descended from the original Judaizers slammed by Paul), others holding other views. Since this process of fragmentation begins early, probably before Mark and certainly before Luke and John, the special place given to Matthew and Matthean gospels in these sects is quite telling.

[pamphletstoinspire]

Lent

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And after He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He then became hungry. And the tempter came and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.” But He answered and said, “It is written, ‘MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE, BUT ON EVERY WORD THAT PROCEEDS OUT OF THE MOUTH OF GOD.’”

Origin of the word Lent

The etymological meaning of Lent is ‘long days’. It comes from ‘langgitinaz’, a prehistoric West Germanic compound formed from ‘lanngaz’ ‘long’ and an element ‘tina’-denoting ‘day’. This signified originally spring, an allusion to the lengthening days at that time of the year. It passed into Old English as lencten, which became Middle English Lenten, but in the 13th century the en-was dropped from the noun, leaving Lenten to function as an adjective. By this time too the secular sense of spring was fast dying out, having been usurped by the application of Lent to the period between Ash Wednesday and Easter.

This Teutonic word Lent from the Anglo-Saxon period translates to the more significant Latin term quadragesima meaning the “forty days”, or more literally the ‘fortieth day”. This in turn imitated the Greek name for Lent, tessarakoste (fortieth), a word formed on the analogy of Pentecost (pentekoste), which last was in use for the Jewish festival before New Testament times. This etymology is of some importance in explaining the early development of the Easter fast.

Biblical Reference

Lent is one of the oldest observations on the Christian calendar. Early Church father Irenanus of Lyons (c. 130-200) wrote of such a season in the earliest days of the Church, but back then it lasted only two or three days, not the 40 observed today. In 325, the Council of Nicea discussed a 40-day Lenten season of fasting, but it is unclear whether its original intent was just for new Christians preparing for Baptism, but it soon encompassed the whole Church.

How exactly the churches counted those 40 days varied depending on location. In the East, one only fasted on weekdays. The Western Church’s Lent was one week shorter, but included Saturdays. In both places, the observance was both strict and serious. Only one meal was taken a day, near the evening. There was to be no meat, fish, or animal products eaten.

Until the 600’s, Lent began on Quadragesima (Fortieth) Sunday, but Gregory the Great (c. 540-604) moved it to Wednesday, now called Ash Wednesday, to secure the exact number of 40 days in Lent-not counting Sundays, which were fast days. Gregory, who is regarded as the father of the medieval papacy, is also credited with the ceremony that gives the day its name. As Christians came forth to the church for forgiveness, Gregory marked their foreheads with ashes reminding them of the biblical symbol of repentance (sackcloth and ashes) and mortality: “You are dust, and to dust you will return” (Gen. 3:19).

By the 800’s, some Lenten practices were already becoming more relaxed. First, Christians were allowed to eat after 3p.m. By the 1400’s, it was noon. Eventually, various foods (like fish) were allowed, and in 1966 the Roman Catholic Church only restricted fast days to Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. It should be noted that practices in Eastern Orthodox churches are still quite strict.

The forty day period has symbolic importance in religion. Moses and Elias spent forty days in the wilderness; the Jews wandered forty years searching for the Promised Land; Jonah gave the city of Nineveh forty days’ grace in which to repent. Jesus retreated into the wilderness and fasted for forty days to prepare for his ministry. It was for him a time of contemplation, reflection, and preparation. So by observing Lent, most Christians join Jesus on His retreat.

The Lenten period of forty days owes its origin, as noted, to the Latin word Quadragesima, originally signifying forty hours. This referred to the forty hours of complete fasting which preceded the Easter celebration in the early Church. The main ceremony was the baptizing of the initiates on Easter Eve, and the fast was a preparation to receive this sacrament. Later, the period from Good Friday until Easter Day was extended to six days, to correspond with the six weeks of training, necessary to instruct the converts who were to be baptized.

A strict schedule was adhered to in the teaching of the converts. In Jerusalem near the end of the fourth century, classes were held throughout the seven weeks of Lent for three hours a day. With the acceptance of Christianity as the state religion of Rome in the 4th century, its character was endangered by the great influx of new members. To combat the hazard, the Lenten fast and practices of self renunciation were required of all Christians. The less zealous of the converts were thus brought more securely into the Christian fold.

Sometime before the year 330 the duration of Lent had been fixed at forty days, to correspond to Christ’s forty days in the desert. It was evident quite early that a six-week Lent contained only thirty-six days-since Sunday is never a fast day. Gradually four more days were added at the beginning of Lent and became known as Ash Wednesday. The first evidence of this increase is in the Galasian Sacramentary of the early eight century.

In Mark’s Gospel, the desert marks the beginning of Jesus’ battle with Satan; the ultimate test will be in Jesus’ final hours on the cross. In a similar way, our Lenten observances are only a beginning, a preparation for and a reinforcement of our ongoing struggle to resist the temptations we face in our lives. During Lent, we are led by the Holy Ghost to remember the vows of Baptism in which we promised to reject sin and to follow Jesus. Just as Jesus was ministered to by the angels, God also supports us in our struggle against sin and temptation. We succeed because Jesus conquered sin once and for all, in his saving death on the cross.

While, over the years, modifications have been made to the Lenten observances, making our practices not only simple but also easy, Catholics have been taught, “If you gave something up for the Lord, tough it out. Do not act like a Pharisee looking for a loophole.” Moreover, an emphasis must be placed on performing spiritual works, like attending the Stations of the Cross, attending Mass, making a weekly holy hour before the Blessed Sacrament, taking time for personal prayer and spiritual reading and most especially making a good confession and receiving sacramental absolution. Although the practices may have evolved over the centuries, the focus remains the same: to repent of sin, to renew our faith and to prepare to celebrate joyfully the mysteries of our salvation.

While Lent is about giving up (i.e. fasting), it is also about putting something positive in its place. The best way to remove vice is to cultivate virtue. Lent has been a traditional time of helping the poor and doing acts of charity and mercy...Giving alms can be done in more ways than just giving out money to people on the street. It can be done by helping your family, friends and neighbors...One of the best ways to give alms is to get out of your comfort zone and volunteering for a charity or shelter...Lent is a perfect time to discern a call to these or any other ministry…

From: www.pamphletstoinspire.com

[sjrresearch]

Three Tucson Listings with a Rich, Hispanic Heritage

The Southwest is filled with Hispanic influences, from tantalizing restaurants and local festivals to historic communities. Though many of the neighborhoods are now ethnically diverse, the most notable districts are rooted in Latin culture. 

In our latest post, we are taking a look at the history of three homes for sale in iconic neighborhoods of Tucson, Arizona. Each of these homes and their communities tells a worthwhile story that is rich in Hispanic heritage. 

Elysian Grove Market

The Elysian Grove Market is a distinctive mud adobe home located in the El Hoyo neighborhood of Tucson. Jose Q. Trujillo built the structure in 1929 at the corner of W. Simpson Street and S. Samaniego Avenue. It quickly became one of the most important buildings in Barrio El Hoyo since it was the only local grocery store. Neighborhood members used the market as a central place for meeting up and socializing. 

Barrio El Hoyo is historically significant to the Hispanic community. Tucson was founded by Spanish explorers in the late 18th century, but by 1890, Anglos owned 80% of the buildings in the city. Most of the Hispanic population lived south of downtown, where amenities were not easily accessible. 

Leopoldo Carrillo owned most of the land in Barrio El Hoyo and developed it into Carrillo’s Gardens in the 1870s. Carrillo Gardens was a popular, scenic area that consisted of an artificial lake, caged animals and birds, and a park that was used for concerts and dances. 

North of Carrillo Gardens was a field where University of Arizona football games were played and the first Tucson Air Show was held in 1911. 

Emanuel Drachman purchased Carrillo Gardens after Carrillo died in 1903. He partnered with Alex Rossie to open the Elysian Grove amusement park. The park featured a half-mile speed track, a large pavilion, and a swimming pool, but financial issues shut the entire operation down in 1915.  

Around this same time, housing developments began to pop up in El Hoyo, and construction continued well into the 1940s. 

 In 1960, the Elysian Grove Market closed. It was converted into three apartments and later a bed-and-breakfast. This one-of-a-kind property has a visually stunning exterior and modern interior that encompass the intriguing history of its charming neighborhood. 

Dunbar/Spring adobe stunner

The beautiful Sonoran bungalow at 623 North 10th Avenue is a contributing building in the historic Dunbar/Spring neighborhood. Dunbar/Spring is one of the oldest neighborhoods in Tucson. It has a history that stretches back to the late 19th century. 

From 1875 to 1909, the Court Street Cemetery took up half of the area that makes up Dunbar/Spring. In 1909, the cemetery closed, and the remains of the deceased were moved to Evergreen Cemetery. However, the movers may not have been as precise as they had hoped. In the 1920s, a resident of the area discovered the grave of a Civil War soldier in their backyard. 

The southern edge of the neighborhood, from 6th Street to 2nd Street, was planned in 1904. The remainder of the locality was platted in 1917 after Court Street Cemetery closed. 

623 North 10th Avenue, built circa 1911, is one of the oldest homes in the neighborhood, as most were constructed around 1920. The district is architecturally interesting, featuring a mix of Victorian, Sonoran, and Bungalow styles. 

In 1912, around the same time that 623 North 10th Avenue was built, Arizona introduced mandatory school segregation. The Tucson School board converted a vacant building nearby at 215 E. Sixth Street into a school for Black American children. The school was named the Paul Lawrence Dunbar School after the famous poet. Soon after its founding, the school was moved to a larger building. It became integrated in 1951. 

Today, Dunbar/Spring is a family-oriented, racially diverse neighborhood with beautiful homes that are within walking distance to downtown and the University of Arizona. 

Armory Park Bungalow

The airy adobe bungalow, located at 705 6th Avenue in Tucson, is located in the notable Armory Park neighborhood. Armory Park is the first residential neighborhood in Arizona to be placed on the National Register. 

Military members who guarded the Tucson Presidio were stationed in Armory Park during the 18th and 19th centuries. In 1873, the soldiers disbanded and were moved to Fort Lowell. 

In 1913, the first armory in Arizona was constructed on the land, and the area became known as Military Plaza. 

The Armory Park neighborhood was developed in the late 1800s due to the construction of the Southern Pacific Railroad. Many of its earliest residents were railroad workers who settled there because of its proximity to the tracks. Interestingly, some of the houses in the community still have two front doors from when homeowners rented rooms to railroad workers. 

By the early 1900s, part of Military Plaza was converted into a public park and the Carnegie Library. The city purchased the rest of the Plaza.  

Around this same time, the innovation of the trolley brought accessibility to the district. The trolley operated on a loop that started downtown and ran to 17th Street. The residents of Armory Park could quickly get to work, shops, churches, and schools because of this new form of travel.  

Armory Park has been home to many notable residents over the years. In 1898, Henry Trost lived on South 6th Avenue, just two blocks from the listed home at 705 6th Avenue. George Roskruge, who was responsible for laying out the city, lived in Armory Park. Ben Daniels, the first U.S. Marshal of Arizona and the Sheriff of Tucson, lived at 647 South 4th Avenue. Daniels was a Rough Rider who is said to have entertained Theodore Roosevelt at his home. 

Today, this neighborhood boasts an array of architectural styles, including Queen Anne, Greek Revival, and Territorial. The district is home to family-friendly attractions, including the Children’s Museum of Tucson and esteemed, historic schools. 

Your property’s history awaits!

All older neighborhoods have a notable history that is waiting to be discovered! Today’s buyers want to live in a community with significance. Realtors miss out on sales when they fail to advertise their listings’ unique stories. Visit our website to see how our real estate history services help realtors sell homes faster and for a higher profit! 

[autodidact-adventures]

Music History (Part 9): Music in the Early Church

The earliest recorded musical activity of Jesus and his disciples was hymn-singing:

When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. (Matthew 26:30 and Mark 14:26)

Paul encouraged Christian communities to sing:

Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery.  Instead, be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another with psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit.  Sing and make music from your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 2:18-19)

Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts. (Colossians 3:16)

In around 112 AD, Pliny the Younger (governor of a Roman province in Asia Minor) wrote of the Christian custom of singing “a song to Christ as if to a god.”  Christians often met in the evenings for communal meals, and they would sing songs & hymns during them.

During the 300's, the number of Christian converts increased and official recognition of the religion grew.  These small, informal gatherings now became public meetings in basilicas, large rectangular buildings.  In the basilicas, the Christians would chant Scripture and prayers – this made the sound carry better within a large space.

The most devout Christians chose a life of constant prayer; they lived in monasteries, or as hermits in isolation.  They chanted/recited prayers many times a day, and during their nightly vigils.  For them, it was a form of prayer or meditation.

Their philosophy was that they could use psalm-singing to discipline the soul, turn the mind to spiritual matters, and build the Christian community.  As such, it became a central focus of monastic life.

By the late 300's, Christian meetings were starting to conform to a standardized format, with regular singing, using texts from Psalms and non-Biblical hymns.  The rites of the medieval church, later on, codified the practice of singing psalms and hymns.  Today, churches use music in much the same way.

However, some early church leaders rejected other aspects of ancient music practices.  The “church fathers” were early influential Christian writers, such as St. Basil, St. John Chrysostom, St. Jerome and St. Augustine (late 300's – early 400's).  They interpreted the Bible, and set down principles to guide the early Church.

Like the Ancient Greeks, they believed that music had the power to influence people's ethos, for good and for bad, and this made it important.  St. Augustine was greatly moved by singing psalms, but he feared the pleasure it gave him, while also approving of its ability to encourage devotion.

Most of the church fathers stuck with Plato's attitude that beautiful things exist to remind us of divine beauty; they didn't agree with music merely for the sake of enjoyment.  Church leaders, and later theologians of the Protestant Reformation, had much the same sort of attitudes about music.

Most church fathers believed that instrumental music was incapable of opening up people's minds to Christian teachings and holy thoughts, and so condemned it.  Psalms (and other Hebrew scriptures) has many references to instruments, but the church leaders handwaved them away as allegories.  Christians may have used instruments to accompany psalms & hymns in their own homes, but not in church.

Therefore, for over 1000yrs, the Christian musical tradition in churches was entirely vocal.  Early Christian converts associated elaborate singing, large choruses, instruments and dancing with pagan displays, so that was another reason to shun such things.  Avoiding this sort of music helped them to distinguish themselves from the pagan society surrounding them, and helped them proclaim the message of focusing on the eternal soul above the pleasures of the world.

A Christian Observance in Jerusalem (c. 400 AD)

In around 400 AD, a Spanish nun called Egeria made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and described the services there.  This is her account of the Sunday morning Vigil, which eventually became the service called Matins:

As soon as the first cock crows, straightway the bishop comes down and enters the cave in [the church of] the Anastasis.  All the gates are opened, and the entire throng enters the Anastasis, where already countless lamps are burning, and when the people are within, one of the priests sings a psalm and all respond, after which there is a prayer.  Then one of the deacons sings a psalm, similarly followed by a prayer, and a third psalm is sung by some cleric, followed by a third prayer and the commemoration of all.  When these three psalms have been sung and the three prayers said, behold censers are brought into the cave of the Anastasis, so that the entire Anastasis basilica is filled with the smell.  And then as the bishop stands behind the railings, he takes the Gospel book and goes to the gate and the bishop himself reads the Resurrection of the Lord.  When the reading of it has begun, there is such moaning and groaning among everybody and such crying, that even the hardest of hearts could be moved to tears because the Lord has suffered so much for us.  When the Gospel has been read, the bishop leaves and is led with hymns to the Cross, accompanied by all the people.  There, again, one psalms is sung and a prayer said.  Then he blesses the people, and the dismissal takes place.  And as the bishop goes out, all approach to kiss his hand.

St. Basil (c. 300 – 379) was the bishop of Caesarea (central Turkey), and a strong advocate for communal monasticism.  He approved greatly of the use of psalm-singing to convey a religious message & sense of community through the pleasure of music:

When the Holy Spirit saw that mankind was ill-inclined toward virtue and that we were heedless of the righteous life because of our inclination to pleasure, what did he do?  He blended the delight of melody with doctrine in order that through the pleasantness and softness of the sound we might unawares receive what was useful in the words, according to the practice of wise physicians, who, when they give their bitter draughts to the sick, often smear the rim of the cup with honey.  For this purpose these harmonious melodies of the Psalms have been designed for us, that those who are of boyish age or wholly youthful in their character, while in appearance they sing, may in reality be educating their souls.  For hardly a single one of the many, and even of the indolent, has gone away retaining in his memory any precept of the apostles or of the prophets, but the oracles of the Psalms they both sing at home and disseminate in the marketplace.  And if somewhere one who rages like a wild beast from excessive anger falls under the spell of the psalm, he straightway departs, with the fierceness of his soul calmed by the melody.

A psalm is the tranquility of souls, the arbitrator of peace, restraining the disorder and turbulence of thoughts, for it softens the passion of the soul and moderates its unruliness.  A psalm forms friendships, unites the divided, mediates between enemies.  For who can still consider him an enemy with whom he has sent forth one voice to God?  So that the singing of psalms brings love, the greatest of good things, contriving harmony like some bond of union and uniting the people in the symnphony of a single choir.

...Oh, the wise invention of the teacher who devised how we might at the same time sing and learn profitable things, whereby doctrines are somehow more deeply impressed upon the mind!

St. Augustine (c. 354 – 430) in Confessions, considered to be the first modern autobiography:

When I recall the tears that I shed at the song of the Church in the first days of my recovered faith, and even now as I am moved not by the song but by the things that are sung – when chanted with fluent voice and completely appropriate melody – I acknowledge the great benefit of this practice.  Thus I waver between the peril of pleasure and the benefit of my experience; but I am inclined, while not maintaining an irrevocable position, to endorse the custom of singing in church so that weaker souls might rise to a state of devotion by indulging their ears.  Yet when it happens that I am moved more by the song than by what is sung, I confess sinning grievously, and I would prefer not to hear the singer at such times.  See now my condition!

[irelandseyeonmythology]

 I would note that: 

I think it was John Carey who commented that he couldn’t find any reference to a deity actually dying that dated from before the tenth century. CMT is generally accepted to be a ninth century tale, but with later additions made in the eleventh or twelfth century or so. If memory serves, those earliest references to the deaths of any gods would probably be the poems that form part of the Lebor Gabála Érenn, which were composed in the tenth and eleventh centuries. The poems were largely intended to ‘prove’ the gods were human (descendants of Adam and Eve just like everyone else), so while it was acknowledged that the Tuatha Dé Danann were exceptional in many ways, it was important to show they were mortal. I’m pretty sure Carey touched on this in the first chapter of his book, A Single Ray of the Sun.

I believe, when we consider that “How The Dagda Got His Magic Staff” has, to my knowledge, been dated to the 8th century, which was held up by Mark Williams in “Ireland’s Immortals”, published 2018, and that text mentions the tradition of Cermait’s death at the hands of Lugh, though he is resurrected at the end, we can’t hold up the 10th/11th century date, if we accept that that was what John was arguing for. I believe that the writer of the famous “death tales of the Tuatha De” poem, Flann Mainistrech, was absolutely bending tradition for his own purposes or, in some cases, outwardly manufacturing it, especially when we consider that his name means “of the monastery”, and I don’t believe we should take those for granted (especially in the cases where, as Mark Williams points out, there’s something vicious in the nature of the death, such as Dían Cecht’s death by plague), but I also don’t believe we can take that as evidence for there being no tradition of the deaths of any of the Tuatha Dé. 

The good news is that I just so happen to have this text to hand, as part of my collection. 

“The first clearly datable assertion of the mortality of the Tuatha De comes from the end of the tenth century; and the doctrine assumed its most influential formulation late in the eleventh, in the legendary-historical treatise known as Lebor Gabala ('The Book of Taking'; usually, and less accurately, rendered as 'The Book of Invasions). Here the Tuatha De are traced back to one Bethach, himself the grandson of a Scythian Greek named Nemed who was one of Ireland's early settlers.

Now, what I *believe* John is saying, from context, and from the context of his broader work, isn’t that the Tuatha Dé couldn’t be killed before the 11th century, rather that they weren’t seen as *human* before the 10th century, or at least that there was no evidence that they were seen as such. This seems to be held up by Mark Williams in Ireland’s Immortals, who says:

Significantly, this rationalizing version was secondary: the motif of the Túatha Dé’s supernatural arrival seems to have been the older of the two. We know this because something close to it appears in a text called Scél Tuáin meic Chairill (‘The Tale of Tuán son of Cairell’), composed towards the end of the ninth century. The tale provides an account of the various invasions as witnessed by the ancient Tuán—the shapeshifting sole survivor of the Partholonians— and imparted by him to a saint, Finnia of Moville, who is going about converting the people of Ulster to Christianity. The text is crucial because it gives us a snapshot of an intermediate stage in the integration of the god-peoples into the synthetic history. It shows that around the year 900, the god-peoples were already thought of as one in the sequence of invaders, but that they had not (yet) been redefined as human descendants of Nemed in the way that had become orthodox a century or two later. 

 Not being mortal doesn’t mean that a figure can’t be killed -- as pointed out by a colleague of mine, the Norse (even if we assume Ragnarok is a post-Christian innovation, that still leaves us with the ugly question of Ymir), Aztec, Inuit, Canaanite, Egyptian (hello, Osiris -- dead and alive at the same time, what a mood), Chinese, and Japanese pantheons (using the term loosely, naturally) all have gods who bite the dust in some fashion, even if, in some cases, they might survive in some form or fashion. Continuing with Osiris, he does *exist* in some form after his death, as Lord of the Dead, but there is also a clear difference between his existence before his death and his existence after his death. I believe that the insistence that the Tuatha Dé should be immortal *and* invulnerable overwhelmingly reflects the dominance of both classical and Christian ideas of what a god is and what a god looks like and acts like as opposed to a general norm throughout human civilization, and I believe, more to the point, we should be very careful when taking anything for granted, especially when we have even limited evidence to suggest otherwise. 

As a Celticist who actually specializes in CMT, while we know that the text had additions made to it in the 11th century, with changes including the opening from LGE and the modernization of the text, there’s no indication that Nuada’s death was one of those and, given that CMT is a *battle*, it would make no sense for Nuada to have survived, given that medieval Irish battle narratives tend to rely on characters dying. Now, given that it *is* a 9th century text, that doesn’t mean that Nuada’s death is pre-Christian, but it is a 9th century detail, and I would be willing to wager that John would agree with me on this. Especially given that he argues in his “Myth and Mythography in Cath Maige Tuired” for Lugh’s killing of Balor being pre-Christian (as opposed to his killing of Bres, which is a medieval variation of the Balor myth), and given that Balor is a being of similar mortality to the Tuatha Dé, and given that John’s argued in a recent article that the Fomoire are essentially the same race as the Tuatha Dé, I believe John would agree with me. Likewise, in his “A London library, an Irish manuscript, a British myth?: the wanderings of The Battle of Moytirra”, he argues for strands of CMT, including Nuada’s failure, as being pre-Christian, even though, with the greatest respect to him and his meticulous scholarship, I was not entirely sold by his argument in that particular talk. And, of course, that he himself argued for Donn and Donn’s death tale and origin story of lord of the death as being pre-Christian in origin, in his “Donn, Amairgen, Íth and the Prehistory of Irish Pseudohistory.” Like Osiris, Donn would appear to have had some *existence* after his death but, if we accept John’s argument here, and I do, for whatever it’s worth, then it’s highly likely that he was not seen to exist on the same plane of mortality as the immortal beings/gods/supernatural figures who hadn’t bitten the dust yet. 

Nice job with the linguistic stuff, though. 

So since you brought it up yesterday in the reply, I have to ask, how do we know that the Gods in Gaelic Polytheism were seen as deified figures? Maybe my research is poor, but that reminds me heavily of post christianization of both the Irish Gods and Heathen Gods.

So we have to rely on the ancestor veneration that’s referenced in regard to Gaelic peoples, we have to look at why these Irish born monks felt the need to write down these stories and adapt them to be acceptable in the eyes of their god, we have to look at folkloric practices like paying the rents and the roles these figures take within the folklore and the myth.

But ultimately we don’t know how the ancient Gaels viewed the figures we now consider gods- but we can make certain assumptions about the roles these figures played in Gaelic society.

[buiocelestiale]

Ethiopian Literature

Henlo there demons, its ya boi Nyah Lajom.

In this blog, I'll be discussing Ethiopian writing, explicitly their prevailing subjects in their literary works throughout history 

We're going to try and keep things organized, so I'm going to make timelines and talk about what's happened in their literary background. So let's get started, shall we? 

CLASSICAL PERIOD (330-900)

The Classical period is expressed in Ge’ez, is an ancient South Semitic language of the Ethio-Semitic branch language. The language originates from what is now the nation of Eritrea and northern Ethiopia regions in East Africa. 

Ethiopia is one of the kingdoms, or rather, the nations that first embraced Christianity, so clerics taught people how to write, read, and established a culture of learning, and it was called Ge'ez. 

At the time of the fall of the Axumite Kingdom in the 8th-10th centuries, Ge'ez, apparently, ceased to be spoken. But until the 19th century, it was the only literary language. Translations of Christian religious writings from Greek, which may have affected their style and syntax, are the earliest existing literary works in Ge'ez.

Translations of the Scriptures, both the Old and New Testaments, were the first books in Ethiopia, quotes of which are found in the monumental inscriptions of the Axumite kings, liturgical writings, sermons. Therefore, the Ethiopians linked texts of this kind with the concept of the book.

Today, Ge'ez is the Ethiopian Orthodox Church's liturgical language, in which church services are performed. Thus, only a small circle of people engaged in church service or obtained a conventional education knew the texts in Ge'ez.

This was kind of a roller-coaster ride but to summarize, they were taught to be literate because King Ezana of Axum and his kingdom were the first to adopt Christianity and Ge'ez came to exist, and then Axum fell and Ge'ez ceased, but don't worry for it became the liturgical language of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.

TRADITIONAL PERIOD  (1200–1672) 

Remember when I said Ge’ez kinda ceased because of the fall of the Axumite Kingdom? Turns out, there was a Muslim Excursion that happened during that time and a lot of manuscripts were destroyed. 

The nation never completely recovered when Muslims were displaced and then a Muslim man converted into Christianity and wrote Anqas'a amin, (Gate of Faith) to justify his conversion and urge blasphemers to recant. Other similar works were made, and some were written to defend the Christian faith's Miaphysite branch.

(can’t find a picture of Angas’a amin) 

As if the nation’s has recovered from the Islamization, Roman Catholic missionaries made its way and further endangered the nation’s ancestral religion. At this point, since the Muslim almost obliterated a language, Ethiopia had developed a language called Amharic, a language that is a mix of Arabic and Ge’ez. It was spoken and during the 1600′s it is starting to be used for literary purposes. 

EARLY MODERN PERIOD (16th Century – 18th Century) 

This is when Amharic started to be used as a written language, so we shall remember people that paved the way for Amharic to flourish. 

Abba Gorgoryos, he is known for co-authoring encyclopedias in two Ethiopian languages, Amharic and Ge'ez, with his friend and companion Hiob Ludolf, both in Ge'ez script. 

Both created the earliest Amharic language grammar book, and also an Amharic-Latin dictionary.

The first African tongue to be translated into Latin was Amharic.

They also made a book titled A History of Ethiopia

MODERN (19th century – Present)

In this period, people think that the most famous contributor is Haddis Alemayehu. He wrote Love unto the Crypt a novel in Amharic. According to a site I read, (link down below) The story shows that, considering the potential repercussions of the disapproval of her parents, Bezabih and Seblewongel plan an escape with the aid of Gudu Kassaa (a cousin of Seblewongel ). The narration goes on. Externalities have attempted to judge what they owe, but their love paid their due.

https://allafrica.com/stories/200512060288.html

In summary, a lot or dominant themes throughout Ethiopian Literature is Religion.

On a completely different topic, I don’t think Abba Gorgoryos and Hiob Ludolf were just colleagues ;-; they remind me of Achilles and Patroculus, or Bow’s dads in She-ra. They were historians too. 

Thanks for listening to my ted-talk, I will now be passing away. Also look at Bow’s Dads. :DD