The Popeular History Podcast

NOTE: SHOW LINKS FOR ALL THE MENTIONED PODCASTERS WILL BE ADDED SOON (AND WILL ALSO BE IN THE NOTES FOR NEXT EPISODE TO ENSURE THEY GET SEEN), FOR NOW GETTING THIS OUT WHILE I CAN! TRANSCRIPT: Good Evening Everyone, Welcome to Popeular History. My name is Gregg, and this is another admin update I'll try to keep from being too boring, in part by offering some observations and speculations about the new Papacy interspersed throughout. First, some personal updates. I was very tired by the end of last week, thank you for asking. I got some rest and then made sure Vice-Pope Mrs. Popeular History's primary Mother's Day present was rest. I am immeasurably grateful for her support, but the reality is even if she weren't so supportive of this passion project of mine and the fairly unhinged extremes I took it to in the last few weeks, I would still be immeasurably grateful to her for a million other things. She's the best partner I could have ever hoped to have for so many reasons, and all of you are welcome to be jealous.   I'd also like to thank my children for being malleable enough that I can pass on my love of the faith in general and also my nerdiness to them. Patrick, Catherine, Joseph, William, Gabriel, I love you all and thank you for sharing me with the internet a bit more lately. I try to shield my children from my more concentrated geekery so they can have somewhat normal childhoods, much like I try to spare my Vice Pope so she can have a somewhat normal marriage, but I will admit I felt a special sense of pride when I heard footsteps after I had invited any of my children interested in appearing on one of my livestreams to come on down to the studio. Those footsteps were from Catherine, who was by that point a good hour and a half into a livestream of the Pope's funeral that had began at 4am our time. To be clear, the kids aren't usually up at that time–I mean, neither am I–but wanting to be on the livestream she had asked to be awakened when it began, so I woke her and set her up with a watching station before kicking things off. Days later, she still excitedly references things from it. Just one of many special times from the last couple weeks. My thanks go not only to my immediate household, but to my family beyond as well, in particular my father, who came over at another particularly uncivil hour and summoned black smoke basically as soon as he arrived so I could go rest, as well as my in-laws, who bore with me through a packed weekend of a wedding and a papal funeral. And again, Vice Pope-Mrs Popeular history through it all.   Thanks are due as well to the lovely and supportive folks at work. I wouldn't want to name anyone who would rather I not name them, so I will be general when I say the atmosphere there has been lovely, and in particular I appreciate those who knew I was their best local source for answers to questions about Popes and Cardinals and conclaves and such. I lead a charmed life these days, and work, from my team to my coworkers to those above me and those supporting me, is full of amazing people I could not appreciate more.   Before I thank even more people, including you the listeners, let's talk about the New Pope, Leo XIV, specifically, his status as an American. And please, I beg you, don't be one of the contrarians who have been trying to make “United Statesian” a thing, it's fine to call Leo XIV the First American Pope. Of course you're welcome to use the opportunity to draw attention to the fact that Pope Francis is also from “the Americas”, but “American” is the demonym for a person from the United States and there is nothing wrong with using that word in that sense, so stop trying to make fetch happen.   Anyways, Pope Leo was born on September 14, 1955, in Chicago, Illinois. The date is memorable for Catholics as the Triumph of the Cross, one of the more venerable feasts of the Church, commemorating Emperor Constantine's mother Saint Helena's apparently successful expedition to the Holy Land in search of the Cross Christ was crucified on, AKA the True Cross. Of course, many of my listeners are more captivated by the Chicago aspect, so let's hone in on that. First, to get this out of the way, yes, he was raised in Dolton, a community just *outside* Chicago, but contrarians should brace for more disappointment as it remains technically correct to describe Robert Francis Prevost as being “from Chicago”, having been born at Mercy Hospital in the Bronzeville neighborhood on the south side.   In a way, it would be somewhat surprising if Pope Leo *weren't* from the midwest, considering 80% of the 10 American Cardinals who participated in the conclave are midwesterners by birth. But also that number should actually closer to 90%, considering that's including the Irish-born Kevin Cardinal Farrell under the American tally, and by that logic the future Leo XIV should probably count as Peruvian. But I'm not gonna begrudge anyone who wants to claim the Pope as one of their own. Even without that wrinkle, I think we can agree Ireland can count as the midwest, especially given the whole Notre Dame thing.   If it were tallied as its own nationality, the Midwestern United States would be the second most represented county in the conclave, still actually in the same place that the United States currently occupies: comfortably behind Italy, and a bit ahead of Brazil.   Nor of course is Chicago unfamiliar to Cardinals in general, having had their senior cleric sporting a red hat–or getting one at the first opportunity–for  over a hundred years running, putting them in extremely rarified air, actually I think they're the only US see that can claim the red hat century club when it's set on hard mode like that, as New York's Cardinal Dolan wasn't elevated at the first opportunity, presumably because Cardinal Egan was still kicking around and Conclave-eligible for a while, and Archbishop Henning of Boston just got passed over last December despite Cardinal O'Malley having freshly aged out.   And my midwest Catholic trivia dump can't be complete without noting that spookily, Mar Awa III, the current Catholicos-Patriarch of the Assyrian Church of the East, which shares the spotlight on my upcoming 0.22 supplemental, was also born in Chicago, which may further help the ecumenical relations I discuss in that supplemental episode. Here's hoping!   One more topic relating to Pope Leo's roots I want to touch on today: His Louisiana creole and black caribbean heritage. Both of His Holiness' grandparents on his mother's side were described as black or mulatto in census documents of their day, with his mother's father, Joseph Martinez, being listed as born in Santo Domingo, now the capital of the Dominican Republic, though it was then part of Haiti, the only country to have been born as the result of a successful slave rebellion, making black heritage from that region particularly poignant.   I'll note that His Holiness' melanin levels are such that he can fairly be described as white passing, and I'd consider it unlikely that the matter was discussed during the recent conclave, though I expect then-Cardinal Prevost was aware of this bit of family history. That said, it's certainly *possible* that it was a surprise even to him. One way or another, the basic fact is that these genealogical records exist. What to make of them, I leave to those more competent than I. I will commit to circling back to the topic in time, though. For now, it's time to thank, like, a lot of podcasters.   First and foremost, you probably wouldn't be listening to this if it weren't for Bry and Fry of Pontifacts. Their support has been critical in a number of ways and I could not be more appreciative of the way they've shared their platform with me, and so much more, right down to Bry making sure I checked my email when she saw that NPR had reached out for an interview. I tragically did not have Bry's attentive support on the inbox situation when PBS invited me on solo, so that one will always be a bit of a what-if, a hint of how much harder things are without the active support of so many. So again, thank you all, especially people I'm sure I'm forgetting since I'm extremely forgetful.   I think the safest thing to do is to thank the rest of the podcasters who have collaborated with me in order of appearance this year, starting back in February with the Intelligent Speech crew, in particular my fellows on the religion panel discussion, namely Trevor Cully of the History of Persia Podcast as well as the cheekier America's Secret Wars podcast, Aurora of the Swords, Sorcery, and Socialism podcast, and Bailey of Totalus Jeffianus. What a panel we had. And oh, by the way, apparently I've got the green light to share both that and my talk on the Original Grey Eminence, François Leclerc du Tremblay on this feed, so watch out for that in due course. Oh, and uh, shoutout to David Montgomery of The Siecle for his help with French pronunciation this year, not to mention various other assists through the years. All errors are my own, and David is a good guy to know.   Thank you to Jerry of The Presidencies podcast for having me on for one of his intro quotes, his process is impeccably professional just as one would expect after having listened to his show, and it was a great honor to take part.   Thank you as well to Thomas Rillstone of the History of Aotearoa New Zealand podcast for picking a surprisingly fascinating year to solicit info about, even if your release timing was ultimately made awkward by the death of the Holy Father. Oh, I suppose I can release that for you guys as well, though really, go check out his lovely show. Aotearoa is spelled: A-O-T-E-A-R-O-A   Moving on to my guests from the recent sede vacante, the first you all heard was Umberto from the So You Think You Can Rule Persia podcast, who, in addition to offering a fascinating overview of the history of transitions among the Islamic Caliphate also it turns out had the extremely clutch ability to offer live translations of Italian, which put our humble livestream ahead of EWTN, no offense to that major network.   The following day this feed was graced by the previously mentioned Aurora, now on as half of Tsar Power, along with Roberto, who is also from The History of Saqartvelo Georgia and Quest For Power. I'll let you sort all that out from the links in the show notes, but it's worth noting that you can expect more collaboration with Roberto on this feed, starting in the not too distant future with a conversation we unwittingly recorded just hours before Pope Francis' passing, talking optimistically about the future prospects of his papacy. Fortunately there's still cause for such optimism: Habemus Papam, after all.   Right before the conclave began, I put out a Cardinal Numbers First Judgment segment with John from Prim e Time, though admittedly that episode was originally recorded over a year ago. We did have a fresher appearance from John on the Youtube side of things, as he joined us to meet the new Pope after the white smoke, having cunningly signed up for the correct smokewatch to do so, much like Umberto our live translator. Ethan from Play History on Youtube was also kind enough to join us, helping hold down the fort along with Fry while I juggled toddlers and the white smoke first billowed out. Memorable times, all.   A special thank you to all those who shared the episode I had already prepared on Cardinal Prevost with the wider world, leading to thousands of exposures and hundreds of new listeners. Which, welcome if you're one of the new listeners. Thank you for tuning in, and I promise I'll update my Episode 0 soon to help you find your way.   Ok, it's time for another bout of new Pope stuff before I fill you all in on what to expect from me moving forward. I think it's appropriate that we take a look at what Pope Leo himself has outlined as important topics and themes here at the start of his papacy.   First, peace, which was literally the first word of Leo's papacy. An emphasis on peace is no surprise, for one thing, as the newly-elected Pope Leo himself pointed out, his greeting of peace was in the tradition of the resurrected Christ Himself, and thereby an appropriate greeting for the Easter season, which Pope Francis had opened right before his death and through which Pope Leo will continue to guide the Church until Pentecost on June 8th.   The topic of peace is even less surprising in light of the rare public message from the College of Cardinals that was released just before the Conclave, pleading for peace amid escalating war. In light of that, it would have been surprising if he *hadn't* come out advocating for peace. As is, it's definitely a core message, and needless to say a timely one too, with Pope Leo already echoing the late Pope Francis' observation that World War III is already being fought piecemeal.    The appeal for peace does seem to be getting a bit of traction, with India and Pakistan agreeing to a ceasefire, and the Trump administration proposing the Vatican as a mediator in the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine. If you don't look in the box marked Gaza or consider the actual likelihood of a breakthrough in Ukraine, you might be tempted to feel hopeful: admittedly as you can probably tell I'm more on the skeptical end myself, though I'd be happy to be wrong.   Another topic Pope Leo emphasized in his first speech–and repeatedly since–is togetherness, which could also be filed under dialog or even unity: the interplay between commonality and difference is critical here, and the most consistent analogy is one very suitable to his role as Pope, that of a bridge-builder, a pontifex in Latin, a traditional title of Popes for centuries, though probably not one that really traces back to the ancient Roman priestly title of Pontifex Maximus directly, as it seems to have been primarily added to the Pope's titles during the renaissance, when the classical world was very fashionable. Now, to really tie the old and the new together, I can tell you that a title once held by Julius Caesar is Pope Leo's handle on the social media platform formerly known as Twitter: @Pontifex.   When it comes to the Papacy, concepts like building bridges and promoting togetherness play out on multiple levels. First, as pastor of the giant flock known as Catholicism, we can talk about healing divisions within the church. Then, we can talk about healing divisions among all of Christianity, since the Pope is the head of the largest Christian group–and frankly it's always worth noting that most Christians are Catholics. But really, getting arrogant about it isn't the way to bring people on board, and from what I can tell so far Leo seems to have taken that lesson from Francis to heart–not that humility is a novel lesson in the history of the Papacy that Francis just invented, but still, give the guy his due..   Lastly, though certainly not leastly, what about healing divisions all over the world, not just among all Christians or even among all religions, but among all people? We're talking about the Vicar of Christ here, the idea of “not my circus, not my monkies” does not apply, and the more divisions across humanity are healed, the more likely we are to see enduring peace. So, Pope Leo has his work cut out for him, indeed I daresay we all do, as I am going to charitably assume you all want to make the world a better place.   Another priority of the new Pontiff is one that came to light even before his first speech: Vatican-watchers know that modern Popes don't just pick names at random, for example Pope Francis was strongly broadcasting that he was going to do something different by being the first  in the modern era to choose a truly new Papal name. As for Pope Leo, my first impression was quickly confirmed, as Pope Leo XIII looms large in modern Catholic history and his encyclical Rerum Novarum was a watershed moment in the development of modern Catholic Social Teaching, which is a foundational enough topic that I capitalized all those words and you will absolutely catch folks calling Catholic Social Teaching “CST” for short. Before Pope Francis, when you were talking about social justice in a Catholic context–which, by the way, is the context where the idea first gained traction, being popularized among the Jesuits in the early 19th century–anyways before Pope Francis, when you were talking about social justice in a Catholic context, you were talking about Pope Leo and Rerum Novarum, published in 1891 as a critique of modern economic systems from Capitalism to Communism and all over, emphasizing the fundamental importance of worker's rights given, well, the fundamental importance of workers themselves, as human beings with divine dignity. The Church has been revisiting Rerum Novarum on a regular basis ever since, and Pope Leo has explicitly centered it for those wondering what to expect from his papacy. To borrow the language of a generation slightly ahead of me, it's based, so get hype.   Of course lots of people are wondering what Pope Leo will get up to beyond these key starts of peace, unity, and social justice in the mold of so many of his predecessors. We can be here all day and I still won't be able to comment on every individual topic, nor will h e. We'll see more of Pope Leo in the years to come. Of course we can look to his past comments on anything you like, but the basic reality is Robert Francis Prevost is dead, and  Pope Leo XIV is a different man. At least, he may be, anyhow. History has shown election to the Papacy can change folks, but it's also shown that that's not always the case. Sorry to disappoint those looking for surefire answers, we'll find out together in the coming years and quite possibly decades, as, at 69, Pope Leo will likely be with us for a generation.   BUT, and this is a big but, I do think from what he's indicated so far and from the apparent expectations of the Cardinals who elected him, not to mention historical patterns, I do think it's very likely that Pope Leo will, on the whole, prove to be something of a centrist. That's not to say that he'll be middle-of-the-road on all issues–I really do expect him to lean into the Leonine legacy of Rerum Novarum-style social and economic justice with a major encyclical on the topic within the next few years–but on average I do not expect him to be as progressive as Pope Francis or as conservative as Pope Benedict. Again, how exactly that all will shake out remains to be seen, and I am very bad at making predictions anyways. After all, when I got asked directly about the possibility of an American Pope, I gave a simple “no” and moved on. In my defense, apparently the future Pope Leo did the same, allegedly telling his brother “they're not going to pick an American Pope” on the eve of the conclave that did just that.   Now I want to take a moment to thank some non-podcasters who have been very supportive of my work the last few years, specifically the priests at my home parish of Saint Francis de Sales. Shoutout Fr. Mike, Fr. PC, and Fr. Sizemore, who have all supported me in various ways both in relation to the podcast and off-mic. In particular I want to thank Fr. PC for helping review my upcoming worldbuilding episodes on mass and the Eucharist to make sure I didn't go too far off the rails, and Fr. Sizemore for his consistent support and encouragement of my work, as well as his willingness to promote it. Longtime listeners know that I am willing to set aside the Pope-colored glasses to offer necessary critiques of the Church at times–indeed, necessary critiques are actually themselves part of Pope-colored glasses anyways. It's been very cool to have that support even when offering that criticism at times, and I am, of course, grateful.   To give a little more personal insight, I think it's worth noting that I'm bringing Fr Sizemore and Fr PC up in part because they're on my mind and in my prayers a little extra these days since they are going to another parish as part of the normal juggling that occurs with basically any diocese. Back in the day such moves were less common, and could indeed be signs of darker things, but more recent practice has keeping priests from staying at a particular parish for too extended a period as a guard against exactly such dark things as may occur when a pastor is seen as the absolute bedrock of a faith community and is effectively given all sorts of extra deference and leeway and such to an inappropriate degree. In the end, Christ is the foundation, it's not about any particular pastor. Nevertheless, I will miss Fr Sizemore deeply, as excited as I am to see what he does at his new parish, and as excited as I am to meet our new pastor, Father Tom Gardner, and the other priest and a half that are coming to Saint Francis as part of the general shuffle. Interestingly, this will have our household lined up with a relatively young priest, a relatively young bishop, and a relatively young Pope, so these positions are likely going to be set in my life for a while yet.   And now that we've talked a bit about the future of my home parish, let's talk about the future of Popeular History.   First, as you've already seen if you're caught up on the feed, I have some content from Conclave Time still being edited and prepared for release on this feed. In the last week or so you've seen my chat with Benjamin Jacobs of Wittenberg to Westphalia and Why Tho?, who had me on as his guest of his 100th episode for the former. He's more like me than most, so if you enjoy this, go check him out. And if you don't enjoy this, well, I'm confused as to the sequence of events that has you somehow still listening, but even then, you should *also* still go  check him out. Just in case. You never know.   Also already released is a chat with Meredith of The Alexander Standard, another Rexypod in the mold of Cardinal Numbers and of course Pontifacts, reviewing, rating, and ranking all the successors of Alexander the Great from Perdiccas to Cleopatra VII. Meredith bravely volunteered to take the first spot on what was a near nightly guest list during the recent sede vacante, and we had a great chat that you should go check out if you haven't already.   Still to come most likely this month is a very extended conversation I had with Steve Guerra of the History of the Papacy Podcast, a collaboration that was pretty long overdue. I first reached out to Steve over five years ago when Popeular History was just starting out, but I was too timid to propose a collaboration at the time. I was actually still too timid to suggest such a thing when Pope Francis' fading health got us talking again earlier this year, but fortunately for all of us Steve had no such scruples and when he suggested we get together over a couple of mics, well, so far we've got hours of good stuff that will be ready for your ears very shortly, I just wanted to get all this admin stuff and early Leo discussion out first so I did. But you can expect hours of Steve and I on this feed soon, and if you just can't wait–don't! Bec ause it's already out on his feed at the History of the Papacy Podcast. Part III talking Leo specifically is already in the works, with hopefully more to come from Steve and I collaborating in the years to come.   After that, you'll hear a chat I had with Quinn from Nobelesse Oblige, one half of another rexypod that ranks all the nobel laureates from 1901 until he and cohost Maggie run out of people. Their show was on hiatus, but is back now, so rejoice! All the best shows go on hiatus, like, a lot, amirite? Look, subscribe and you'll know when any shows with that particular habit get back. Anyways, that's gonna be another conclave second helping episode.   The third on the conclave second helping trilogy, likely appearing early next month at this rate with apologies to my patient guest, will be a great chat I had right before the doors were sealed with none other than Garry Stevens of the History in the Bible podcast, in which I fielded his conclave questions and talked about the recent movie as well. Thank you as always, Garry, especially for your patience as I edited my way through our chat!   After that puts a cap on my conclave coverage, it'll be high time to release the previously mentioned chat I had with Roberto of Tsar Power and more, right before Pope Francis passed.   And there you go, that's the plan for the next month or so. After all that, it'll be 5th anniversary time, and I think it'll be fun to do a bit of Q&A for that. The anniversary will officially on June 29th, so let's go ahead and say send in almost any question you like to popeularhistory@gmail.com by June 20th and I'll answer it for you on the show. The only limit I'm placing is that the question should be relatively family-friendly so I don't get flagged as explicit content by the powers that be.    After that, well, we'll see. Popeular History and Cardinal Numbers will be carrying on, I'm looking forward to finishing my longrunning Catholic worldbuilding series, as well as covering all the living Cardinals I haven't gotten to yet. And those items just represent finishing up the current stages. Plus, tere's gonna be more Pontifacts collaboration, including the much hyped Habemus Pointsam project, ranking all the Papal transitions with Bry! But do  keep in mind I had *just* put out a note indicating that I was going to stay on hiatus for a while longer right before all this happened, and the factors that lead me to that are still present. I've got a strong head of steam for when I'm officially back up to full production, but until then, you won't hear from me quite as regularly as I'd like. Actually, let's be honest, you're never going to hear from me as regularly as I'd like unless there's a wealthy patron who wants to hand over a living wage for myself and my family as compensation for me doing this full-time. And nah, I'm not counting on that. I do have a patreon though, so if you want to help offset my costs and fuel Taco Bell expeditions or moving to Rome, you know, little things like that, you can. Mary specifically said I can get Taco Bell every time I get a new patron, so thank you very much in advance. Also, a big thank you to Joe, my current patron, who hosts Prime Factors with his son Abram, and yes that's another Rexypod, in fact, yes, that's another Rexypod ranking the British Prime Ministers! Prime Time is the other one in case you've already forgotten, and now you can easily find both of them on one another's feeds as they recently did a collaborative special you should absolutely check out! I especially owe Joe as I forgot to keep mentioning him when speeding through my recent sede vacante coverage, a situation which will be remedied hopefully in small part by this note, and then eventually with judicious editing. Thanks again for your support, Joe!   If you'd like to support my work and are financially able to do so, go to Patreon.com/popeular. I'm going to do as much as I can even without many patrons, but more patron support  would go a long way to making things easier, I have to admit. So if you want to join Joe on the wall of ongoing thanks, there are still spots left! And if you can't support financially, no sweat, do what you gotta do, but please consider spreading the word about Popeular History and keeping me and my family in prayer while you're at it. Words of encouragement or any other words you'd like to send can be sent to popeularhistory@gmail.com or you can also find me on social media in a few spots, primarily on Bluesky these days at Popeular as I'm focusing more on direct content creation rather than trying to keep up with socials and the website and such. Oh, speaking of the website, Google Domains went caput so the website's kind of frozen, not that I was updating it much anyways apart from the automatic RSS feeds, which for what it's worth are still chugging along. But the rest you can ignore, in particular the big daily show announcement that's still up there, because that was fun while it lasted but that is definitely on the list of things that are not happening unless I get thousands of patreon dollars a month to make this a full-time job, which, again, I am realistic enough to not expect. It just turns out I can't take that notification down without tanking the whole site at the moment, or without, you know, a fair amount of extra work, and since the RSS feeds are still handy and my time is still fairly crunched, I'm reluctant to do that. So, uh, here we are. Awkward. Ignore the big daily show announcement. Thank you.   Now, I'm going to make a couple specific predictions about the future of Leo's papacy that I'd be happy to be wrong about. But before I do *that*, I want to note that after today, apart from the contemporary cardinals episodes, I plan to get back to history, leaving current events to other commentators generally, with the exception of a plan to have some commentary on contemporary news, Catholic and otherwise, available as bonus content for my Patreon subscribers. That would allow my regular listeners to have access to all the historical goodies I find without barrier, while still offering something interesting and informative, you know, hopefully, for my backers. If you hate the idea, let me know, and of course if you love the idea, sure, let me know that too. I'm thinking maybe some kind of monthly roundup, something like that.   Anyways, on to those predictions. First, while I genuinely believe we would have seen Sister Rafaella Petrini elevated to the College of Cardinals had Pope Francis lived to create another batch of Cardinals, I do not see that happening under Pope Leo, though he did reconfirm her in her role as President of the Governorate of Vatican City State as part of his general “as you were” instructions right after his election, reconfirming all of Pope Francis' appointments in one of the more unambiguous signs of continuity you can have. It's of course likely that there will be shuffling in time, but I think Petrini is safe in her role, I just don't expect her to be the first Cardinelle at the next opportunity, as Leo appears interested in a degree of centrist rapprochement.   Similarly, while I had fairly big hopes for the observances of the 1700th anniversary of Nicea that were due this month, namely a reunified dating of Easter, obviously those observances aren't happening right now. And, while it look like there are now plans for later this year, around the Feast of Saint Andrew–November 30th–I think that moment has passed, and I expect it's not something we'll see in year one of a Papacy. Again, I'd be happy to be wrong, but I don't think that's a “coming super  soon” type situation at this point. And that's it for today, thanks for sitting through a record-breaking amount of admin. Thanks, Joe!

Interview one of three of "second helping" conclave interviews. The Alexander Standard podcast: https://alexanderstandardpod.weebly.com/

Wittenberg to Westphalia: The Wars of the Reformation: https://wittenbergtowestphaliapodcast.weebly.com/ 

Before I give the extra omnes to everyone that isn't my pillow, I wanted to put something out about the new Pope that wasn't just his life prior to being a Cardinal (which has quickly become our most popular episode, thank you to all who shared it and keep in mind I will almost certainly have an episode on the NEXT Pope ready when the time comes, hopefully decades from now). Given my current energy levels, I am simply posting (with permission) the same version that went up on the Pontifacts feed a few minutes ago, right down to the plug for this show at the end. Very meta. If you somehow *haven't* checked out Pontifacts, perhaps if you're new from the exposure yesterday, they're well worth a listen, and I'm not just saying that because I edit their show, though I do.

HABEMUS PAPAM! IF YOU WANT THE SHOW TO GROW, SHOW WHAT I KNOW WITH THE WORLD! THANK YOU!

John is from Prime Time! https://shows.acast.com/prime-time   (I'll fill this out more soon, for now making sure it goes out before habemus papam)

IMAGE CREDIT Claude Truong-Ngoc / Wikimedia Commons - cc-by-sa-3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Kurt KOCH: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_koch_k.html         Kurt KOCH on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvador Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2010.htm#Koch      Cardinal Kurt KOCH on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/p/4021                         Cardinal Kurt KOCH on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bkoch.html    Dicastery for Promoting Christian Unity on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/dioceses/romancuria/d16.htm  Dicastery for Promoting Christian Unity on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dxpcu.html Basel Cathedral website discussing the canons: https://www.bistum-basel.ch/news/drei-neue-domherren-eingesetzt La Repubblica 1995 article on Bishop Vogel's resignation and son: https://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/1995/06/03/il-vescovo-si-dimette-aspetto-un.html  Nostra Aetate: https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html 2012 Catholic News Service overview of Cardinal Koch's comments on conservative Catholics and Judaism (archived via Library of Congress Web Archives): https://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20121205205921/http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1202023.htm    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Kurt KOCH was born on March 15, 1950, Emmenbrücke a town just north of the middle of Switzerland, in the Canton of Lucerne.   Cardinal Koch is the second Swiss-born Cardinal we've met after Cardinal Tscherrig, the Nuncio's Nuncio we met last summer. But at the time we had dozens of countries involved, because, well, nuncio's nuncio, and didn't get a chance to just talk Switzerland.   These days Switzerland is famous for their neutrality, staying out of pretty much every conflict they can avoid. Perhaps that's in part due to the fact that it used to be a battleground, especially in the rolling conflicts between the Popes in Italy and the Holy Roman Emperors in Germany. When the Reformation came, Switzerland was again divided in loyalty between largely Catholic southern Europe and largely Protestant northern Europe. One of the fruits of conflict, for better or for worse, is military skill, which is how the Swiss Guard that still protects the Vatican today came about. Fortunately, like I mentioned, the Swiss came to embrace neutrality, including in religion, with laws allowing for freedom of conscience–first just among Christian denominations and then more broadly. Keep this context  of conflict to resolution in the back of your mind as we go.    Kurt Koch studied Theology at the University of Lucerne in Switzerland, then went to Munich Germany to study more theology, getting a diploma in theology in 1975. He served as a research assistant at the University of Lucerne from ‘76 to ‘81, presumably while studying even More theology, and soon after he was ordained a priest for his home Diocese of Basel in 1982. This is actually the first time I've seen someone ordained apparently without any specific philosophy training, going pure theology isn't as normal as one might expect.   After a period of chaplaincy, his theology studies continued, and in 1987 he wound up with a doctorate in, you guessed it, theology. I expected he'd stop there, or perhaps get another doctorate, but apparently in Kurt's neck of the woods there's another step you can go beyond a simple doctorate, the Habilitation, which basically works out to full professorship. The most surprising thing about this to me is that this is the first time I'm realizing it, it's extremely possible- I would say likely- that he actually isn't our first Cardinal to achieve this level, I just didn't flag it before and my sources described it differently this time. Part of why I love doing this is it lets me learn something every day.   Anyways, after obtaining his habilitation, Father Koch became Professor of dogmatics, liturgy and ecumenical theology at the Theological Faculty of the University of Lucerne from 1989, a post he held until 1996. He was also simultaneously rector for a short time, though that was interrupted by a call. Normally this would be a tongue-in-cheek note about a white phone, but in this case the call was coming from the Cathedral Chapter of the Diocese of Basel, because it was actually their job to elect the next Bishop of Basel and they wanted to choose Father Koch.   Of course, much like my normal white phone joke, this isn't necessarily *exactly* how it went down, since for all I know maybe Father Koch *was* one of the Canons of Basel Cathedral and no phone was needed for the news. But either way, my point is that unlike the typical process for most dioceses, where the relevant nuncio and the relevant Dicastery work with the Pope to figure out new bishops, Basel uses the old Cathedral Chapter model, where there's a local election among the members of the Chapter.   The Cathedral Chapter might have been a little sheepish, because they had actually just elected a new Bishop of Basel, who had found himself under a lot of psychological pressure–being a bishop isn't easy–and had wound up going to an old friend for comfort. A female friend, who wound up pregnant. He resigned, got laicized, and married her. Hopefully he's a better traditional father than he was a spiritual one.   Bishop Koch received his episcopal consecration directly and personally from Pope John Paul II in the Vatican, possibly because everyone was wanting to do things right after the last kerfuffle, though I don't have any source claiming that, just a guess.   The University Of Lucerne made him an honorary professor on his way out the door, a nice gesture, presumably a sort of “you're welcome to come back by any time” kind of arrangement.   Bishop Koch got involved in the Swiss Bishop's conference, serving as their Vice-President for nine years, and as their President for three. Together that represents pretty much his entire time as a bishop in Switzerland, because in 2010 Bishop Koch was called up to the Vatican to head the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity, of which he had been a member since 2002. To fit the dignity of his new office, he was promoted to Archbishop and then Cardinal.    Speaking of archbishops, today I learned Switzerland has no archbishops, all six dioceses are immediately subject to the Holy See, meaning if there's something that would normally involve an Archbishop, it goes to the Vatican. But enough about Switzerland, we're in Rome now.   Pope Benedict had Cardinal Koch jump in headfirst, heading a delegation to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew–the leader of the Orthodox,  the largest Christian Church outside of Catholicism, and co-presiding over a meeting of the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue Between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church with his Orthodox counterpart. In December, Pope Benedict also added Koch to the Congregation for the Oriental Churches and the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue.   What a difference a year makes, Koch had started the year as a simple bishop, now he was pretty much everywhere.   Cardinal Koch's big Christian unity gig also extends outside Christianity, as the head of that dicastery is also automatically the President of the Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews. Sometimes the two overlap, like when he's talking with traditionalists who are to varying degrees reluctant to embrace Jews as their brothers. In those cases he points to Nostra Aetate, essentially the Catholic Church's foundational document on religious freedom, which explicitly decries antisemitism, and which Cardinal Koch has called “important for every Catholic”.   In addition to dozens of articles and papers, Cardinal Koch has written at least fifteen books.   Originally elevated as a Cardinal-Deacon, Cardinal Koch exercised his right to become a Cardinal-Priest after ten years of service as a Cardinal.   In addition to the roles we've already discussed, Cardinal Koch is currently a member of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith; the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints; the Dicastery for Bishops; and the Dicastery for Culture and Education.   A veteran of the 2013 conclave that elected Pope Francis, Kurt Cardinal KOCH is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2030.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers. Stay tuned to see if today's Cardinal gets selected for a deeper dive in the next round! Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

IMAGE CREDIT Marinha do Brasil, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Orani João TEMPESTA: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_tempesta_oj.html        Orani João TEMPESTA on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvador Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2014.htm#Tempesta     Cardinal Orani João TEMPESTA on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/p/5693                        Cardinal Orani João TEMPESTA on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/btempesta.html   Archdiocese of São Sebastião do Rio de Janeiro on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/zseb0.htm?tab=info        Archdiocese of São Sebastião do Rio de Janeiro on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dsase.html Abbey of Nossa Senhora de São Bernardo (Portuguese): https://www.cistercienses.org.br/en/mosteiros-da-ordem-cisterciense/abadia-de-nossa-senhora-de-s%C3%A3o-bernardo “Currently inhabited monasteries” on Cistopedia.org  https://www.cistopedia.org/index.php?id=580 2013 The Guardian reporting on World Youth Day in Rio: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/28/pope-world-youth-day-mass-rio 2016 Sim Sou Católico blog firefight coverage: https://www.simsoucatolico.com.br/2016/06/cardeal-tempesta-fica-preso-em-tiroteio-no-rio-de-janeiro.html?m=1  The Guardian coverage of 2014 robbery:    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/16/brazil-armed-robbers-rio-de-janeiro-archbishop    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   The youngest of nine, Orani João TEMPESTA, who typically drops the Orani part, was born on June 23, 1950 in São José do Rio Pardo, in the São Paulo state in southeastern Brazil.   We've had like a Brazilian Brazilian cardinals, so I'll skip the national details. And ok, just four, which is fewer than I was thinking, but I'm keeping the joke in anyways because it amuses me.   João joined the Cistercian Order in 1968 at the ripe old age of 17, entering the monastery of Nossa Senhora de São Bernardo, all without leaving his hometown, which must have been very convent. I mean convenient. Simple vows followed in ‘69, followed by a period of study with the ever popular combo of philosophy and theology, and then in 1972 he did his solemn profession.   As we'll see, it sometimes seems like João has a schedule to keep, and so like clockwork the next year he was made a deacon, and the year after that, 1974 if you've lost count, João Tempesta was ordained as a priest for the order by the local diocesan bishop, a fairly standard arrangement but hold that thought for later.   From 1974 to 1984, Father Tempesta served as the Vice-Prior of the monastery, which may have been the plan all along as they prepped him for the priesthood, given the nature of that as a sort of a vocation within the vocation in his religious life. In the same period, it's worth noting, he also served as vicar of the parish in town, which basically means he was second in command of both buildings. In 1984, he became first in command in both, starting with his elevation to Prior of the monastery in July, and then becoming pastor of the parish on December 7th, which incidentally was also the 10th anniversary of his priestly ordination.   By this point he was getting out more, he had actually already done some additional studying in the next state over that I glossed over, and at some point here he became a professor in the seminary in the cathedral city of São João da Boa Vista.   Father Tempesta's time as Prior came to an end in 1993, but the best was yet to come. In ‘96 the monastery was promoted from a Priory to an Abbey, which is sort of kind of like a Diocese going to an Archdiocese, though I'm sure that analogy has its flaws. In any event, Tempesta the prior Prior was elected as its first abbot. Admittedly I'm more secure in my knowledge on the diocesan end, in part because the specific workings of religious orders vary from one order to the next and there are a LOT of different orders, but that's just as well, because Father Tempesta barely had time to get his special abbatial blessing before his white phone rang and he was chosen as the bishop of São José do Rio Preto. Seriously, it was about two and a half months from one to the other.   Perhaps surprisingly for a monk, as Bishop, Tempesta was rather engaged with media, being elected as member of the superior council of the Brazilian Institute of Christian Communications that oversees the #1 Catholic TV station in the country-and keep in mind this is the country with the most Catholics, period. Eventually, he would become that organization's president.   Ok, so now remember that thought I told you to hold about how it's fairly standard for a diocesan bishop to be involved in the running of local monasteries? Well, that wasn't always the case everywhere, though it *has* always been a thing… there's a lot I could get into here, and a lot I *will* get into in the main narrative of Popeular History about this, but suffice to say the model of monasteries as part of a larger diocese isn't the only model. There are also what's called territorial abbeys, where the Abbot actually has jurisdiction outside the Abbey itself over a certain geographic area, functioning as the Ordinary and canonical equivalent of a bishop over that surrounding area, not to mention over the Abbey itself. I'm bringing this up now because in 1999, Bishop Tempesta added Territorial Abbot of the Cistercian Abbey of Claraval to his duties. Unfortunately, that fairly unique setup was not to last, as in 2002 Claraval lost its status  as a Territorial Abbey, becoming part of the local diocese. My sense is that Tempesta, being a friendly Cistercian face but also a diocesan bishop, was chosen for the final Territorial Abbot role to help ease the transition.   I went down a bit of a rabbit hole myself to see if Claraval is still active- it became a Priory after losing its Territorial Abbacy status, and I did track down the name of a prior after Bishop-Abbot Tempesta, but their web presence doesn't seem to have been maintained [I said “on the mainland”, man I was tired recording this]. I did find an entry on them on Cistopedia, which is a resource I was happy to learn exists, and they're listed there as an active monastery,  but I wasn't able to conform to my satisfaction that that list itself was current.   Anyways, back to Bishop Tempesta, who is no doubt feeling the loss of what may well have been the last active territorial abbacy outside Europe, not counting a defunct one in North Korea, which remains active on the books as its own kind of statement.   In 2003, Tempesta was elected president of the Episcopal Commission for Culture, Education and Social Communications, a role which he held until 2011. Like I said, a surprisingly media-oriented monk.   In 2004 he became an archbishop, being promoted to the metropolitan see of Belém do Pará, well to the north of the country. Later that same year, he was made a titular member of National Council of Social Communications of the Federal Senate, whatever that is. But he refused to settle for the rank of titular member and became President of that council too in 2012. The man never met a council he didn't become president of.   In 2008 he got an honorary doctorate, which must have been nice, and in 2009 he was transferred to another see again, this time the top dog spot in the Archdiocese of São Sebastião do Rio de Janeiro. I know these Brazilian names can get a lot of names on them, but I bet you've heard of the town's shorter name, Rio. A city of six million with the giant hilltop Jesus statue I'm also willing to bet you're familiar with, Rio is neither Brazil's capital nor it's largest city, but it's the place to be, especially if the year is 2013 and you're a Catholic, because then Rio was the host city of the much balleyhooed World Youth Day, a periodic mega gathering of young Catholics that often sets crowd record sizes for the Papal masses. The 2013 edition was attended by over 3 million people. Ok, the source I checked said “three million” for the final mass, not “over three million”, but I'm assuming there was at least one attendee that decided to skip the final mass that I can still include in the overall event tally, right?   Anyways, can you guess why I'm bringing all this up? Because the host was, of course, the local Archbishop, our friend, Tempesta.   Ok, I just looked at my word count and all I can say is oops. We better make Tempesta a Cardinal NOW. And so Pope Francis did, in his 2014 consistory.   In 2016, Cardinal Tempesta had to hide behind his car for 10 minutes when his trip was interrupted by a firefight between law enforcement and armed robbers. Just throwing that in in case you were wondering whether any cardinals have had to do *that*. Oh, for what it's worth, he had already personally been the victim of two armed robberies by that point, one in 2014, one in 2015. Like I said, clockwork. In 2014 they stole his ring, his crucifix, and his pen, that last one just seems petty.   In addition to everything else he's up to, Cardinal Tempesta is currently a member of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, as well as the following Dicasteries-   -For Culture and Education, -For Evangelization, and  -For Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. Orani João Cardinal TEMPESTA is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2030.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers. Stay tuned to see if today's Cardinal gets selected for a deeper dive in the next round! Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

IMAGE CREDIT Yohanes Kwirinus Steviean, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Ignatius Suharyo HARDJOATMODJO: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_suharyohardjomatmodjo_i.html       Ignatius Suharyo HARDJOATMODJO on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvador Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2019.htm#Hardjoatmodjo   2012 Synod of Bishops notes (via Zenit): https://zenit.org/2012/10/17/full-text-of-tuesday-morning-interventions-at-synod-of-bishops/    Cardinal Ignatius Suharyo HARDJOATMODJO on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/p/3272                       Cardinal Ignatius Suharyo HARDJOATMODJO on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bsuharyo.html  Archdiocese of Jakarta on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/jaka0.htm?tab=info          Archdiocese of Jakarta on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/djaka.html 2013 Infovaticana profile of Cardinal-elect: https://infovaticana.com/2013/12/10/10373/  2023 Time article on Nusantara: https://time.com/6329063/indonesia-nusantara-jokowi-democratic-decline/    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Ignatius Suharyo HARDJOATMODJO, who is generally addressed with the Suharyo part, was born on July 9, 1950 in Sedayu, a community right near the middle of the southern shore of the Island of Java. Home to over 150 million souls and therefore the most populated island in the world, Java hosts over half of Indonesia's population, with the remainder spread out across the other 17,000-odd islands that together make up the archipelagic nation, which was newly independent from the Dutch colonizers when Ignatius was born.   More Muslims live in Indonesia than in any other country, leaving relatively little room for any other faith. Christians Make up about 10% of the population, with Catholics in particular being about 3% of the overall total. Ignatius' father had come from a Muslim family, being the only Catholic in the lot, while Ignatius' mother had originally practiced Javanese folk religion with her family, though she later became Catholic.   When Ignatius' convert parents embraced Catholicism, they ran with it, resulting in four of their ten Children entring the Church: two of his sisters became nuns; one of his brothers entered a Trappist hermitage, and of course Ignatius himself, who will be our focus today.   Ignatius' seminary studies were done locally, first at the St. Peter Canisius Minor Seminary in Mertoyudan, then at the Sanata Dharma University in Yogyakarta, where he got a degree in theology and philosophy in 1971.   In 1976, Ignatius Suharyo was ordained a priest for the Archdiocese of Semarang by Cardinal Darmojuwono, who incidentally was the first Indonesian Cardinal. My sources are pretty thin after that, but I assume he did priest stuff in Indonesia until he went off to study in Rome, which I guess still falls under the umbrella of priest stuff. in any event, he wound up with a doctorate in Biblical Studies from the Urbaniana in 1981. When he came back to Java he took on several teaching roles at various institutions in Yogyakarta, eventually becoming dean of Theology at Holy Dharma University from 1993 till 1997.   I did a double take when I saw that name, Holy Dharma. Dharma is definitely more of a Hindu and Buddhist concept. So I took a closer look, and as near as I can tell–there are some discrepancies so take this with a grain of salt– but certainly it looks like the Jesuits are involved, which makes all the sense in the world if you know the Jesuits.   Speaking of Jesuits, in 1997 when Father Suharyo's white phone rang and JPII appointed him the Archbishop of Semarang, it was the Jesuit Cardinal Darmaatmadja, Indonesia's second Cardinal, who consecrated him.   In 2006, Archbishop Suharyo got a second hat when he was made the Military Ordinary for Indonesia, a post he still holds at time of recording. Not much later, in 2009, he was made the coadjutor Archbishop of Indonesia's capital, Jakarta, a city larger than New York.   The following year, his predecessor retired and Archbishop Suharyo dropped the coadjutor part of his title, and from here on out he's Archbishop of Jakarta.   There's a bit of an interesting wrinkle though, as Indonesia is actually in the process of moving its capital entirely, off the crowded island of Java–and away from polluted Jakarta–onto the roomier and healthier island of Borneo. Seriously, Borneo is about 40 times less densely populated than Java, though of course the plan is to draw about 1.9 million people to the new scene there, so that's going to put a dent in the ratio.   The new capital, Nusantara, is set to be opened on August 17th, 2024, which is, incidentally, after I'm writing this but before this gets released, so you can let me know how that went. It'll be interesting to see how the Church handles the new arrangement, I expect the new Capital will get its own Diocese in time, but the Church isn't known for turning on a dime, and even after the transition is complete, smoggy Jakarta will still be Indonesia's largest city by far.   In 2012, Archbishop Suharyo was elected President of the Episcopal Conference of Indonesia, a post which he held until 2022, and in 2014 he was made a member of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.   Archbishop Suharyo, who had been ordained by Indonesia's first cardinal and consecrated by its second, was made Indonesia's third cardinal in October 2019, though he didn't take formal possession of his titular church until August 28th 2022, the day after that year's consistory. Something something COVID, something else something else, when in Rome.   In 2020, Cardinal Suharyo was added to the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialog, which makes sense, given his placement in a country where the majority of the population is Muslim. Speaking of, the Cardinal has noted that having prayers available in the vernacular language has a special appeal to Indonesians, as the local Muslims pray in Arabic even though they don't speak it.   Cardinal Ignatius Suharyo is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2030.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers. Stay tuned to see if today's Cardinal gets selected for a deeper dive in the next round! Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

Check out Tsar Power: https://tsarpowerpod.weebly.com/ Cardinal Marengo's episode: https://popeularhistory.podbean.com/e/cardinal-marengo/  Cardinal Krajewski's episode: https://popeularhistory.podbean.com/e/cardinal-konrad-krajewski-elevated-2018/  First Judgment with Tsar Power: https://popeularhistory.podbean.com/e/the-first-judgment-i/  IMAGE CREDIT: Photo courtesy of Cardinal Mykola Bychok. Via St Michael the Archangel Ukrainian Catholic Church on Facebook

https://soyouthinkyoucanrulepersia.wordpress.com/

IMAGE CREDIT: Peciul, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons LINKS: Vatican bio of Cardinal Oscar CANTONI: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_cantoni_o.html      Oscar CANTONI on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvador Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2022.htm#Cantoni    Cardinal Oscar CANTONI on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/p/4928                      Cardinal Oscar CANTONI on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bcantoni.html Diocese of Como on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/como0.htm?tab=info         Diocese of Como on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dcomi.html   2022 Aleteia.org profile of Cardinal-elect Cantoni and the Diocese of Como: https://aleteia.org/2022/08/27/cardinal-cantoni-an-italian-in-red-for-a-martyred-diocese/  Telegraph.co.uk 2024 reporting on Fr. Martinelli case: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/24/priest-jailed-abuse-altar-boy-popes-choirboys/ Catholic News Agency reporting on the 2021 Fr. Martinelli trial: https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/246626/vatican-abuse-trial-witnesses-say-allegations-about-youth-seminary-were-ignored National Catholic Reporter 2024 reporting on Fr. Martinelli case: https://www.ncronline.org/vatican/vatican-news/vatican-appeals-court-finds-priest-guilty-corrupting-minor  Reuters 2024 reporting on Fr. Martinelli case: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/vatican-convicts-priest-accused-abuse-papal-altar-boys-school-2024-01-23/   Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed.  As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Please note that this episode includes discussion of sexual crimes and allegations, and may not be appropriate for all audiences.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal o f the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes..   Oscar CANTONI was born on September 1, 1950, in Lenno, a small town in the Como Province of the Lombardy Region of northern Italy.   We've had several Italian Cardinals before- nine, to be exact, and we've even had another Cardinal from Lombardy–Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, and I count myself blessed every time I have the chance to say the name of Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa.   In any event, Oscar had the most surprising educational history out of all the Cardinals so far: while by all accounts he did well at school, and he's actually published several books, *and* he's taught in various capacities for decades, he doesn't have any academic degrees.   Nevertheless, in 1975 he was ordained as a priest for the Diocese of Como. From 1985 to 1999 he was actively involved in promoting vocations, becoming director of the Vocational Diocesan Center in 1986. From 1990 to 2005, Father Cantoni served as a Spiritual Director at the diocesan seminary.    One more unique project came along in 2000, when he re-founded the Ordo Virginum in the Diocese, the Ordo Virginum being an association of consecrated virgins that had fallen into obscurity until it was restored by the Second Vatican Council.   From 2003 to 2005, Father Cantoni was episcopal vicar for the clergy of Como, and it's time that I admit that for a while I thought each Diocese could only have one Episcopal Vicar but I have since come to understand that while each Episcopal Vicar has their own distinct mandate, there can nevertheless be several, if that's what the Bishop wants.   In 2005, the trusty old white phone rang, and it was Pope Saint John Paul II, looking to make Father Cantoni Bishop of Crema.   Now, you don't say no to JPII, or at least Father Cantoni didn't, and so on March 5th, he was consecrated by his former ordinary, the Bishop of Como, and, well, his other former ordinary, the Bishop Emeritus of Como. The third spot was filled by the Italian Nuncio, a fairly standard arrangement. The previous Bishop of Crema had died in office a few months before, if you're wondering what he was up to.   In 2016, Bishop Cantoni was transferred to the Diocese of Como, where he had grown up and served as a priest. In 2017, he ordained Gabriele Martinelli, despite having received some reports of sexual misconduct connected to Matinelli over the years, which Bishop Cantoni later said he had dismissed as quote “transitory homosexual tendency linked to adolescence”.   Both the future Father Martinelli and his alleged victim, identified as “L.G.” were teenagers at the time, with Martinelli being about a year older.    The alleged sexual relationship took place over several years in a pre-seminary that was actually on Vatican grounds, tasked with supplying altar servers for Saint Peter's Basilica. The pre-seminary was sponsored by the Diocese of Como, hence Bishop Cantoni's connection.   In 2021, Father Martinelli, who has consistently denied everything, was cleared due to a combination of his youth at the time and insufficient evidence, and it was after that ruling that Pope Francis elevated Bishop Cantoni to the Cardinalate, which we'll circle back to.   The Martinelli case has a coda, because under Vatican Law the prosecution can appeal cases and earlier this year, that's 2024, Father Martinelli was found guilty of corrupting a minor, that is, L.G., the same accuser as in the 2021 trial.   In September 2020, one of Bishop Cantoni's priests, Father Robero Malgesini, was murdered by a homeless person he was caring for. The event was widely covered in the press and prompted Pope Francis to praise God for quote “the martyrdom of this witness of charity toward the poorest”.   It should be noted that by all accounts Father Malgesini knew the risks associated with serving the outcasts, who often suffer mental illness. It should also be noted that in 2019, he was fined by local police for feeding people living under the portico of a former church, which, allow me to say, as the only official public policy position of Popeular History, **** such fines.   In 2022, in a somewhat surprising move, Pope Francis elevated Bishop Cantoni to the college of Cardinals and added him to the Dicastery for Bishops. I say somewhat sur prising because Como hasn't been headed by a Cardinal since 1694, so it's surprising in that sense, but people knew to expect surprises from Pope Francis by that point, it being his 8th consistory and all, so it  would have been surprising if there had been no surprises on the list. Still, it's fair to ask, why Como?   This is always a matter of speculation, because Popes are absolute monarchs and are never expected to give reasons for choosing one possible Cardinal over another. But my guess is the safest one for any analysis: it's a combination of factors. The fluffiest is one I've seen elsewhere, namely leaning into the crimson of the martyrs worn by the Cardinals and seeking to honor a Diocese that had seen more martyrdom in the last generation than most in Italy, not just Father Malgesini, but also Bl. Sr. Maria Laura Mainetti, who was murdered by three teenage girls in a satanic ritual in 2000, dying while asking God to forgive her murderers, certainly a death more on the classic end of the martyrdom spectrum.   I think it's likely the Martinelli case also played a role, certainly in the form of delaying Bishop Cantoni's elevation, but also, well, hear me out here.   Pope Francis *really* likes to reach out to the marginalized. Like, it's a whole thing for him, and he has absolutely used his cardinatial appointments to do just that–Cardinal Cantoni was sandwiched between a Pacific Islander and an African American in the 2022 consistory. I'm by no means confident in this assessment, but I don't think the fact that Cardinal Cantoni had been recently facing criticism for his handling o f Father Martinelli's case hurt his standings in Pope Francis' assessment. Especially fresh off Martinelli's initial acquittal, Pope Francis may have seen in Bishop Cantoni another marginalized individual.    One way or another, Cardinal Oscar CANTONI is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2030.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers. Stay tuned to see if today's Cardinal gets selected for a deeper dive in the next round! Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

IMAGE DESCRIPTION: By Pufui Pc Pifpef I - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=31309211 via Wikipedia LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Raymond Leo BURKE https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_burke_rl.html        Raymond Leo BURKE on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvador Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2010.htm#Burke                             Cardinal Raymond Leo BURKE on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/p/2334                                                Cardinal Raymond Leo BURKE on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bburke.html                            Apostolic Signatura on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/dioceses/romancuria/d13.htm   Apostolic Signatura on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dbgch.html 2003 Catholic News Agency bio of Archbishop Burke: https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/286/pope-appoints-bishop-raymond-burke-as-new-archbishop-of-st-louis  Merriam-Webster, “Defender of the Bond”: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defender%20of%20the%20bond#:~:text=The%20meaning%20of%20DEFENDER%20OF%20THE%20BOND,the%20marriage%20bond%20in%20suits%20for%20annulment Dead Theologians Society: https://deadtheologianssociety.com/about/  Catholic Herald analysis of Cardinal Burke's 2014 reassignment: https://web.archive.org/web/20160701214308/http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2014/11/10/thousands-sign-petition-thanking-cardinal-burke/  2013 National Catholic Reporter commentary- “I want a mess” -Pope Francis: https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/distinctly-catholic/pope-i-want-mess  2014 CruxNow “Soap Opera” Synod on the Family coverage: https://web.archive.org/web/20141017055135/http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2014/10/16/synod-is-more-and-more-like-a-soap-opera/ Amoris Laetitia: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia.html  2017 Knights of Malta reshuffle: https://catholicherald.co.uk/pope-names-archbishop-becciu-as-personal-delegate-to-order-of-malta/  2018 National Catholic Register editorial Reflection on Amoris Laetitia controversy https://www.ncregister.com/news/francis-fifth-a-pontificate-of-footnotes  2016 National Catholic Register coverage of the Dubia: https://www.ncregister.com/news/four-cardinals-formally-ask-pope-for-clarity-on-amoris-laetitia Traditionis custodes: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/motu_proprio/documents/20210716-motu-proprio-traditionis-custodes.html  Cardinal Burke's Statement on Traditionis Custodes: https://www.cardinalburke.com/presentations/traditionis-custodes The 2023 Dubia (w/Pope Francis' responses): https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2023-10/pope-francis-responds-to-dubia-of-five-cardinals.html  National Catholic Reporter coverage of removal of Cardinal Burke's Vatican apartment and salary: https://www.ncronline.org/vatican/vatican-news/pope-francis-remove-cardinal-burkes-vatican-apartment-and-salary-sources-say Anonymous “Cardinal Burke is my enemy” report: https://catholicherald.co.uk/pope-calls-cardinal-burke-his-enemy-and-threatens-to-strip-him-of-privileges-reports-claim/  Where Peter Is coverage of Cardinal Burke's 2024 private meeting with Pope Francis https://wherepeteris.com/cardinal-burkes-meeting-withĥhh-pope-francis/    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes. The youngest of six, Raymond Leo Burke was born on June 30, 1948, in Richland Center, a small town in sparsely populated Richland County, Wisconsin.   Not too much later, the family moved north to tiny Stratford, Wisconsin, where he grew up.   We've had a *lot*, of midwestern Cardinals, in fact all but one of our 8 American Cardinals so far has been born in the midwest, a percentage I would probably consider shocking if I didn't identify as a midwesterner myself, though technically I'm about as much of a northern southerner as you can get, considering my parents basically moved to Virginia to have their kids and immediately moved back to Ohio once that was accomplished. But enough about me, this is about Raymond Leo Burke, who signed up for Holy Cross Seminary in La Crosse in 1962. Later he went to The Catholic University of America in Washington, DC, where he wound up with a masters in philosophy in 1971. After that he was sent to Rome for his theology studies, getting a second masters, this time from the Gregorian. He was ordained by Pope Paul VI–yes, *before* JPII, crazy I know, in 1975 on June 29th, which longtime listeners will probably clock as the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul and more importantly the Popeular History podcasts' official anniversary date.   Returning to Wisconsin as a priest for the Diocese of La Crosse, Father Burke served as an associate rector for the cathedral, then as a religion teacher at Aquinas High School in town.   Making his way back to Rome, Father Burke returned to the Gregorian to study Canon Law, by 1984 he had a doctorate in the topic with a specialization in jurisprudence.   He came back stateside long enough to pick up a couple diocesan roles back in La Crosse, but soon enough he went back to the Gregorian for a third time, this time not as a student but as a teacher, namely as a Visiting professor of Canonical Jurisprudence, a post which he held for nearly a decade from ‘85 to ‘94.   He wound up becoming the first American to hold the position of Defender of the Bond of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signature, as a reminder that's basically the Vatican's Supreme Court.   As for what being a Defender of the Bond entails, it's basically the guy in charge of proving the validity of a disputed marriage, typically–I'd imagine--oversomeone's objections, or else, you know, the case wouldn't have wound up in court.   In 1994, his white phone rang, and it was Pope John Paul II, calling to make him bishop of his home Diocese of La Crosse. Father Burke was personally consecrated by His Holiness in the Vatican.   In ‘97, Bishop Burke became a member of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre, ranking as a Knight Commander with Star automatically by virtue of his being a bishop. The Order traces its origins to the First Crusade, making it one of the oldest chivalric Orders in the world–and it's not the only such order Bishop Burke will get involved in.   In 2000, bishop Burke became National Director of the Marian Catechist Apostolate, something which certainly seems near to his heart considering he's still in the role. Well, international director now, as things have grown.   In 2002, Bishop Burke invited a fairly new apostolate named the Dead Theologians Society to the diocese, which isn't something I'd normally include, but I wanted to make sure it got a shoutout because it started at my parish. Oriented towards high school and college students, they study the lives of the saints, and Cardinal Burke is a fan, saying: “I am happy to commend the Dead Theologians Society to individual families and to parishes, as a most effective form of Catholic youth ministry.”   In 2003, Bishop Burke became Archbishop Burke when he was transferred to the Metropolitan Archdiocese of Saint Louis, where he served until 2008, when he was called up to Rome, to serve as prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signature, there's that Vatican Supreme Court again, and this time he's running it. And if you're making assumptions based on that appointment, yes, he's absolutely considered one of the foremost experts on canon law worldwide, having published numerous books and articles.   In 2010, Pope Benedict raised Archbishop Burke to the rank of Cardinal Deacon and assigned him the deaconry of S. Agata de 'Goti. Naturally he participated in the 2013 conclave that elected Pope Francis, where I am prepared to guess he was in the minority given subsequent events.   The next year, so 2014, Cardinal Burke was transferred from his top judicial spot to serve as the patron of the Sovereign Order of Malta, aka the Knights of Malta, a reassignment that was generally interpreted as a demotion, given he was going from his dream job for canon law geek that made him the highest ranking American in the Vatican at the time to a largely ceremonial post that was, well, not that.   [All that is nothing against the Knights of Malta, which these days are a solid humanitarian resource and quasi-state trivia machine I'll give their own episode at some point.]   The tension between Cardinal Burke and Pope Francis has been fairly clear from the start. They have fundamentally different approaches and styles, and frankly different goals. Cardinal Burke is dedicated to maintaining tradition as the safest route, while Pope Francis has famously called for shaking things up, for example saying:   “What is it that I expect as a consequence of World Youth Day? I want a mess. We knew that in Rio there would be great disorder, but I want trouble in the dioceses!”   That's Pope Francis, of course. Just before his transfer out of his top spot at the Vatican's court, Cardinal Burke noted that many Catholics, quote:   “feel a bit of seasickness, because it seems to them that the ship of the Church has lost its compass.”   End quote.   To his credit, Cardinal Burke took the move in stride, which matches up well with his general view that authority should be respected and that, as a canonist, the Pope is the ultimate authority.   Deference to such authority in the context of the Catholic Church is known as Clericalism, and being pro or anti Clericalism is another point of disagreement between Cardinal Burke and Pope Francis, who said “I want to get rid of clericalism” in the same early interview I mentioned before.   Part of what Cardinal Burke was responding to with his “lost compass” quote was the first stages of the Synod on the Family, which veteran Vatican reporter John Allen Jr described as like a “soap opera”, with working notes that were released to the public speaking positively about things like same-sex unions and other relationships the Vatican tends to describe as “irregular”. After the Synod on the Family wrapped up, in 2016 Pope Francis produced a post-synodal apostolic exhortation called Amoris Laetitia, or “The Joy of Love”, which I saw one of my sources described the longest document in the history of the Papacy, a hell of a claim I am not immediately able to refute because it sure *is* a long one, which is primarily known for the controversy of just one of its footnotes, footnote 351.   I'm still making *some* effort to make these first round episodes be brief, but it's important to keep things in context, so let's go ahead and look at the sentence the footnote is attached to, which is in paragraph 305, and Then the footnote itself. If you want even more context, the entirety of Amoris Laetitia is, of course, linked in the show notes.   Here we go:   “Because of forms of conditioning and mitigating factors, it is possible that in an objective situation of sin – which may not be subjectively culpable, or fully such – a person can be living in God's grace, can love and can also grow in the life of grace and charity, while receiving the Church's help to this end.”   And yes, that is one sentence. Popes are almost as bad about sentence length as I am.   Without the footnote, this probably would have gone relatively unnoticed, the Church accompanying sinners is not a fundamentally revolutionary idea. But the footnote in question gets specific and brings in the Sacraments, which is where things get touchy:   “In certain cases, this can include the help of the sacraments. Hence, “I want to remind priests that the confessional must not be a torture chamber, but rather an encounter with the Lord's mercy” I would also point out that the Eucharist “is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak”.   For one thing, just to get this out of the way, some of that is in quotation marks with citations. In a document like this that's pretty normal, showing how your argument is based on precedent and authority. Except in this case the precedent and the authority being cited is literally Pope Francis himself. To be clear, this is a normal Pope thing, I found multiple examples of JPII and Pope Benedict doing the same thing, it just amuses me.   Anyways, the idea of people in objectively sinful states receiving communion is hyper-controversial. After all, even as far back as Saint Paul, receiving Communion “unworthily” is an awful thing. Of course, questions have long followed about how anyone can be truly worthy of the Eucharist, with the basic answer there being “with God's help”, but yeah, it's tricky.   We can have an educated guess how Cardinal Burke felt about all this, because he and three other Cardinals--it'll be a while before we get to any of the others–anyways Cardinal Burke and three other Cardinals asked Pope Francis some fairly pointed questions about this in a format called a dubia, traditionally a yes/no format where the Holy Father affirms or denies potential implications drawn from one of their teachings to clarify areas of doubt. In this case, there were five questions submitted, with the first and I daresay the most sincerely debated being the question of whether footnote 351 means divorced and subsequently remarried Catholics can receive communion. There's lots of subtext here, but as a reminder this is actually the *short* version of this episode, so pardon the abbreviation. The next four questions are, to put it snarkily, variations on the obviously very sincere question of “does the truth matter anymore?”   Pope Francis decided not to answer these dubia, which the Cardinals took as an invitation to make them–and his lack of a response–public. Not as a way of outing him after his refusal to answer gotcha questions with a yes/no, not by any means, but because clearly that's what not getting an answer meant Pope Francis wanted them to do.   Now, there's something of an issue here, because we're nearing record word count for Cardinal Numbers, and that's without any real long diversions about the history of Catholicism in Cardinal Burke's area or his interactions with the local secular ruler. It's all been Church stuff. And we're nowhere near the end.   The reality is that I'm painfully aware my own discipline is the only thing that keeps me from going longer on these episodes when appropriate, and the major driving force for keeping them short was to keep things manageable. But now that I'm no longer committed to a daily format, “manageable” has very different implications. And even my secondary driver, a general sense of fairness, not making one Cardinal's episode too much longer than the others, well, the other Cardinals in this batch have had longer episodes too, so it's not as much of a lopsided battle for the First Judgment, and it's not like longer automatically means more interesting.   In the end, with those inhibitions gone, and a sense that this stuff is important and it would be a shame to skip big chunks of it if Cardinal Burke *doesn't* make it to the next round, I'm going to go ahead and keep walking through this so it gets said, and let it take what time it takes. My best guess is we're about halfway through. That way there's no special pressure to make Cardinal Burke advance just to cover anything I felt was too rushed. Don't worry, there's still plenty being left out. Fair?   Fair or not, Let's resume.   In 2015, so after his relegation to the Knights of Malta but before Amoris Laetitia and the Dubia, Cardinal Burke was added to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, which is still one of his roles though like other Vatican offices it has since been rebranded as a Dicastery.   In 2017, Burke's posting as Patron of the Knights of Malta, the one I described as largely ceremonial, threatened to become interesting when Pope Francis forced the head of the order to resign over, well, condoms, basically. But as soon as things started looking interesting Pope Francis helicoptered in an archbishop to serve as his “special delegate” and more importantly his “exclusive spokesman” to the Order, which effectively sidelined Burke from a gig he had been sidelined *to* a few years earlier.   Nevertheless, 2017 also actually saw Burke start to bounce back some. I want to re emphasize this is notably *after* the Dubia, when later in the year Pope Francis picked Cardinal Burke as the judge in the case of an Archbishop who had been accused of sexully abusing his altar servers. The Archbishop was found guilty and deposed, and by the end of the year, having gotten his feet wet again, Cardinal Burke was back on as a member of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signature, though, notably, not as its head anymore.   The next major flashpoint came In 2021, when Pope Francis published Traditionis Custodes, a document that severely restricted the celebration of the old Latin Mass.    Long story short, what's colloquially called Latin Mass is the version of Mass that was the main liturgy for Latin rite Catholics for hundreds of years until the Second Vatican Council kicked off serious updates in the 1960s, the most obvious of which is the general shift from Latin to the use of local aka vernacular languages, and the second most obvious is the direction the priest is facing for the majority of the liturgy. There's obviously more detail available on everything I just said, and people have *opinions*, I'll tell you that for sure.   Cardinal Burke's fundamental opinion was and is that the Latin Mass is great and should be maintained and that, in short, Pope Francis may even be overstepping his bounds in restricting it as much as he is with Traditionis Custodes, which is a strong claim given the whole, you know, general idea of the Papacy.   A few weeks after the Traditionis Custodes stuff went down, Cardinal Burke was on a ventilator fighting for his life. We're only doing living Cardinals at this time, so no suspense there for us, but his bout with COVID was touch-and-go for a while there.   In June 2023, notably a few weeks before his 75th birthday and that customary retirement age, Pope Francis replaced Cardinal Burke as the Patron of the Knights of Malta with an 80 year old Jesuit Cardinal. If you're noticing that Burke was relaced by someone who was themselves a fair bit older and also well past retirement age, yeah, you're not alone in noticing that, and you wouldn't be alone in thinking that some kind of point was being made here.   Just a few weeks after that retirement, Cardinal Burke attached his name to another dubia document, this one covering a larger variety of topics and appearing and in the context of the ongoing Synod on Synodality.   Cardinal Burke was again joined by one of his fellow signers of the first dubia, the other two having passed away in 2017, may they rest in peace. They were also joined by three Cardinals who had not cosigned the previous Dubia, though all of those are over 80 and so we won't be covering them for a while.   In any event, this second set of dubia covered a wider range of topics in its five questions, including two particularly hot-button issues, namely the question of blessings for same sex unions, which is something I will refer you to my Fiducia Supplicans anniversary coverage (oops, didn't get that out yet) on for fuller detail, and notion of women serving as deacons, which is still an open question at the time of this writing: as we've discussed previously, ordination has been pretty firmly ruled out, but there may be room for an unordained diaconate. After all, Saint Paul entrusted the letter to the Romans to a woman he described as a deacon.   Pope Francis actually responded to this second dubia the day after the dubious Cardinals submitted it, giving lengthy and detailed answers to all of their questions. Naturally this seems to have annoyed Cardinal Burke and his compatriots, because remember, traditionally answers to Dubia have been yes or no, and so they reframed their questions and asked Pope Francis to respond just with “yes” or “no”. When it was evident His Holiness was not going to reply further, the Cardinals once again took the lack of an answer- or rather the lack of yes/no format answers- as encouragement to publish everything, which was an interesting move since that seems to have essentially set Fiducia Supplicans in motion, as Pope Francis indicated an openness to informal blessings for homosexuals in one of his dubia responses. All of that is in the show notes.   Later in 2023, Pope Francis stripped Cardinal Burke of his Vatican apartment and retirement salary, which I have been tempted to call a pension but everyone I've seen calls it a retirement salary so it's probably safest to follow suit. Officially no reason was given, but I mean, you've listened to this episode, take your pick of tension points and believe it or not I've skipped several chapters of drama real or alleged. Speaking of alleged, this is the Vatican, so anonymous sources are happy to weigh in, including alleging that Pope Francis straight up said “Cardinal Burke is my enemy”. I don't think I buy that he was so plain about it, but I also don't expect Cardinal Burke is Pope Francis' favorite guy.   On December 29, 2023, Cardinal Burke had a private audience with Pope Francis for the first time in over seven years. Cardinal Burke's last private audience with Pope Francis had been back in 2016, four days before the first dubia was made public.   The idea of the two having a little chat grabbed media attention more than any other meeting between a Cardinal and a Pope that I can recall. As is typical for such one-on-ones, no official reason or agenda was given, and it's not likely we'll ever know what exactly was said, but I've got to hand it to Cardinal Burke for his response when Reuters asked him about it:   ‘Well, I'm still alive.'”   Raymond Leo Cardinal BURKE is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2028. “AM I THE DRAMA”? Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers,  and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

IMAGE CREDIT MEDEF, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Philippe BARBARIN: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_barbarin_p.html   Philippe BARBARIN on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvador Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2003.htm#Barbarin   Cardinal Philippe BARBARIN on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/p/17                     Cardinal Philippe BARBARIN on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bbarbarin.html    Archdiocese of Lyon on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/lyon0.htm?tab=info        Archdiocese of Lyon on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dlyon.htm The Catholic Encyclopedia, “Primate” (via newadvent.org): https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12423b.htm Brittanca.com, “Lyon”: https://www.britannica.com/place/Lyon-France  Zenit.org coverage of Cardinal Barbarin's 2013 heart attack: https://zenit.org/2013/07/24/cardinal-philippe-barbarin-suffers-heart-attack/  2020 The Guardian reporting on the Preynat case: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/defrocked-french-priest-jailed-for-abusing-scouts-over-20-year-period  2019 France24 coverage of Cardinal Barbarin and the Preynat scandal as it stood at the time: https://www.france24.com/en/video/20190319-pope-refuses-french-cardinal-barbarins-resignation-over-abuse-cover-scandal 2020 La Croix interview with the early-retiring Cardinal: https://international.la-croix.com/news/religion/cardinal-philippe-barbarin-begins-busy-early-retirement/12647      Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   One of eleven children, Philippe Xavier Christian Ignace Marie Barbarin was born on October 17, 1950 in Rabat, Morocco, located right in the middle of the second big inward curve if you're following the coast coming up from south. Though Morocco is over 99% Muslim, Rabat has popped up on our radar before, thanks to recent Cardinal López Romero winding up as Archbishop of Rabat after his continent hopping journeys. Cardinal Barbarin hasn't gotten credit as Morocco's first Cardinal, when you Google that up you get lots of Lopez Romero. Granted, Philippe Barbarin wasn't born in the modern nation of Morocco, rather he was born in French Morocco, like Cardinal Mamberti, if you remember that. And it's fair to not count colonizers who never really lived the same lives as the locals. I don't know for sure that Philippe actually fits that description, but that's also not the only reason folks might not be in a rush to credit him as the first Moroccan Cardinal… but I'm getting ahead of myself.   After Moroccan independence, Philippe wound up in France, experiencing the joys of military service while also studying a little theology and a lot of philosophy in Paris, getting a licentiate in the former from the Carmes Seminary and a doctorate in the latter from the Sarbonne.   In 1977, Philippe Barbarin was ordained a priest for the young diocese of Créteil, centered on an eponymous suburb southeast of Paris. From 1977 till 1985, he served as Vicar in two parishes: Notre-Dame d'Alfortville and Notre-Dame de Vincennes, Notre-Dame of course being French for “Our Lady”, on the off chance that you got this deep without already knowing that.   From ‘85 to ‘90, Father Barbarin served two parishes and a school simultaneously, as well as an ecumenical role in the diocese. The parishes, if you're wondering, were Saint François de Sales d'Adambille en Saint-Maur, and Saint-Hilaire de la Varenne.   From ‘91 to ‘94, Father Barbarin served as the pastor of Saint Léger Parish and then transferred quite a ways, effectively being loaned out to the Archdiocese of Fianarantsoa in Madagascar, where he taught theology at the Major Seminary of Vohitsoa. Which explains the presence of Malagasy, the dominant language of Madagascar, on the list of languages Cardinal Barbarin Speaks, along with English, Italian, Spanish, German, and of course his native French.   1998 was white phone time, when Father Barbarin heard from Pope Saint John Paul the Second that he was going to be made Bishop of Moulins, back in France. As is so often the case, you can see why the three bishops that consecrated him were chosen for the task: his principal consectator was the Archbishop of Fianarantsoa, who he had been serving under in Madagascar, accompanied by his original bishop in France from Créteil, as well as the Bishop emeritus of Moulins who he was replacing.   Physically located in pretty much the exact center of France, it's worth noting that I simply do not trust the demographic data Catholic-Hierarchy.org has for the Diocese of Moulins. I want to give them credit for their essential work, and it's entirely possible the error is in the sources they're relying on and not some issue on their end, but I don't see how you can have the shifts shown in the period recorded. I'm sure I've missed flagging bad data before, so don't take this as an indication that I'll point it out whenever there's something fishy floating around, but I do what I can and felt I should mention the oddity there. At some point when I get around to it I'll cross reference their source material since they're kind enough to cite it.   In 2002, Bishop Barbarin was chosen as the next Archbishop of the ancient see of Lyon in southeasternish France. Allegedly, Lyon was the Capital of the Gauls back when the Gauls were a thing, and in any event it's pretty universally agreed that it's old enough one of its first bishops was a disciple of a disciple of Saint John, so basically Jesus' spiritual great-grandson, and that wasn't even the *first* bishop there. To this day, the Archbishop of Lyon also carries the title of Primate of the Gauls.   In 2003, that is, at the next opportunity, Archbishop Barbarin was made a Cardinal, which is completely unsurprising given the status of Lyon: every Archbishop of Lyon in the 20th century was made a Cardinal. And as we know, the red hat gets you additional duties: he was made a member of the Congregations for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, and for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. Of course the most famous duty of a Cardinal is the one he exercised in the conclave of 2005 that elected Pope Benedict, and again in the 2013 election that gave us Pope Francis.   Later on in 2013, Cardinal Barbarin suffered a heart attack while in South America preparing for World Youth Day. An unsourced wikipedia entry states that he underwent a successful triple bypass surgery in Martinique a few days later, and I think it's safe enough to say something like that happened: in any event he did survive.   In 2016, Cardinal Barbarin began to get asked questions about his handling–or lack thereof-of a bad priest, a certain Father Bernard Preynat. Content warning, I'm not going to go into graphic detail but yes we're talking about the abuse of minors here. From 1971 to 1991 Father Preynat abused some seventy minors he encountered principally through the scouting program.   Obviously, and allow me to stress this emphatically, the charge against Barbarin was not the abuse itself, but rather his lack of disclosure of the situation to the authorities. This was very much a charge though, because his lack of reporting was apparently a crime, and as a victim myself- though not of clergy- rightly so. Apparently in 2019 when Cardinal Barbarin was originally convicted of failing to report and was given a six month suspended sentence, he offered his resignation to Pope Francis, who initially refused, speaking of the presumption of innocence, which seems an odd line to take given Barbarin had *just* been convicted, but hey what do I know.   In any event, the next year Cardinal Barbarin's conviction *was* overturned on appeal, so it seems Pope Francis was perhaps wise to wait, but then in March his holiness turned around and accepted Cardinal Barbarin's resignation after all, making him the Archbishop Emeritus of Lyon.    Cardinal Barbarin says he is available for whatever mission Pope Francis might entrust him with next.   Barring a further change in his status, which to be clear I do not expect as I think it would have happened already if it was going to happen, Cardinal Philippe Barbarin remains eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2030.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers. Stay tuned to see if today's Cardinal gets selected for a deeper dive in the next round! Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

IMAGE CREDIT Elza Fiúza/Abr, CC BY 3.0 BR, via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Leonardo Ulrich STEINER: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_steiner_l.html  Leonardo Ulrich STEINER on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvador Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2022.htm#Steiner  Cardinal Leonardo Ulrich STEINER on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/p/5762                    Cardinal Leonardo Ulrich STEINER on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bulst.html   Archdiocese of Manaus on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/mana1.htm?tab=info       Archdiocese of Manaus on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dmanb.html   2022 Aleteia.org profile of Cardinal-Elect Steiner: https://aleteia.org/2022/08/26/a-red-hat-for-the-amazon-basin/  2022 Vatican News profile of Cardinal-Elect Steiner (Portuguese): https://www.vaticannews.va/pt/igreja/news/2022-05/presidencia-da-cnbb-sauda-os-novos-cardeais-do-brasil.html  Special Assembly for the Pan-Amazon Region–list of participants: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2019/09/21/0723/01479.html  2017 La Stampa coverage of the Amazon Synod (archived version): https://web.archive.org/web/20190618142401/https://www.lastampa.it/2017/10/15/vaticaninsider/eng/world-news/a-synod-for-the-indigenous-peoples-of-south-america-bu6BcrTX8a4HWl645ztM6O/pagina.html Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20200202_querida-amazonia.html  Ecclesiastical Conference of the Amazon on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/dioceses/organizations/j02.htm  The Revealer.org profile of Sister Manso Pereira: https://therevealer.org/in-the-amazon-religious-women-lead-the-way/  2023 America Magazine report of indigenous women leaders from the Ecclesiastical Conference of the Amazon meeting with Pope Francis: https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2023/06/06/women-deacons-indigenous-pope-francis-meeting-245437 2023 National Catholic Reporter piece on women ministering in the Amazon: https://www.ncronline.org/opinion/guest-voices/sisters-model-womens-diaconal-ministry-amazon  Cruxnow coverage of 2022 delegation of bishops (including Archbishop Steiner) meeting with Pope Francis to discuss violence in Amazonia: https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-americas/2022/06/brazilian-bishops-discuss-violence-in-the-amazon-with-pope-francis    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   The thirteenth of sixteen children, Leonardo Ulrich STEINER was born on November 6, 1950 in Forquilhinha, a community in Brazil's second southernmost state of Santa Catarina. He's our third Brazilian Cardinal, but he won't be our last, in fact one of his cousins is fellow Brazilian Cardinal Paulo Evaristo Arns.   Leonardo joined the Franciscans in 1972 at the age of 21, making his solemn profession in ‘76. In a pattern we've seen before, he studied philosophy and theology in Brazil, then went to Rome for more advanced studies, obtaining a licentiate and then a doctorate from the Antonianum. I don't know if I've emphasized the Franciscan affiliation of the Antonianum before, but it's certainly there–the Anthony it's named after is the Franciscan Anthony of Padua, after all.   When Leonardo was ordained in 1978, it was carried out by his Cardinal-cousin I mentioned earlier, fellow Franciscan and then-Archbishop of São Paulo Cardinal Arns. He did pastoral work for a while, then he served as a formator at, uh, a seminary. From 1986 till 1995 Father Steiner was Master of Novices at, *a* seminary, presumably the same one, though that's not especially clear. The third source I checked for this particular detail described the posts he took up at the Antonianum in Rome in 1995 as the result of a transfer between institutions, so it I guess can rule that out as our mystery institution. While at the Antonianum, he served as a secretary–I expect the high level kind–and as a professor of Philosophy. He was in Rome for several years before moving back to southern Brazil in 2003.   Back home, he served both as a pastor and lecturer, this time at the Bom Jesus Faculty of Philosophy, “bom” meaning "good” or I would perhaps suggest “sweet Jesus” as the more familiar English phrase with a close meaning.   In 2005, Father Steiner's white phone rang and he learned he was being made Bishop-Prelate of São Félix. His episcopal consecration was carried out by none other than his longserving cousin, Cardinal Arns, who had been fully retired for years by that point, but apparently didn't mind making it a family affair. By the way, the voice on the other end of that white phone must have been fairly shaky, because Pope John Paul II died in the few months between the appointment and Bishop Steiner's actual consecration.   Oh, also, did you catch that Prelate part of “Bishop-Prelate”? You see, São Félix was not and actually still is not a full-on diocese, rather it's at an intermediate sort of state called a “Territorial Prelature”. To give you an idea of why it's in an unusual state canonically, let me give you some stats. São Félix covers an area larger than England, with a total population of a bit under 200,000. At the time of his consecration, Bishop-Prelate Steiner had about ten priests to work with to address the spiritual needs of about 130,000 Catholics.   The relatively sparse population is due to São Félix being on the edge of the Amazon Rainforest. This was not Bishop-Prelate Steiner's last contact with Amazonia. In May 2011 he became secretary general of the Brazilian Episcopal Conference, a post he held for the next eight years, and later on in 2011 Bishop-Prelate Steiner was appointed as an auxiliary bishop of the capitol, Brasília, working alongside Cardinal da Rocha, who we discussed in fall 2023.   In 2017 Pope Francis announced the Synod on the Amazon, something which Bishop Steiner had apparently personally handed Pope Francis a document requesting on behalf of the Brazilian bishops. The Synod was duely held in 2019, and had a special focus on the indigenous peoples of the area, who, to quote Pope Francis, are “often forgotten and without the prospect of a serene future”. Another substantial issue is the ecology of the matter, with Pope Francis being known as an environmentalist before and certainly no less so after his 2015 encyclical Laudato Si, which called out the Amazon specifically as in need of special care.   Bishop Steiner notably did *not* participate in the synod. I was fully expecting to say he had, and maybe I missed something, but the list of hundreds of official participants is linked in the show notes, and he's not on it. In reality his delivery of the bishop's request for the Synod was probably due to his formal role in the overall Bishop's conference and not due to his own connection to the region, which at this point was minor.   However, despite that narratively inconvenient historical fact, later that year Bishop Steiner did become a full-on Amazonian bishop, being appointed the Archbishop of Manaus in the rather pointedly named Brazilian state of Amazonas. There he got to experience the staffing and geographic issues he had seen in his Bishop-Prelate days on a larger scale: there's a reason the Amazon Synod discussed things like allowing for married priests to help with the shortages, something which was much discussed in media coverage but was in truth only a minor topic in the Synod itself.   One real fruit of the Amazon Synod was the establishment of the Ecclesiastical Conference of the Amazon. Adding yet another organizational wrinkle to the megacluster of organizational wrinkles that is the Catholic Church, an *Ecclesiastical* Conference functions like a Bishop's Conference, but is not limited to Bishops. In 2022, Archbishop Steiner became its First Vice-President. In yet another example of the organizational wrinkling I just joked about, I don't mean he's the first person to hold that office, instead, “First Vice-President” is his actual title, as the Ecclesiastical Conference actually has multiple Vice-President roles.   I've been fairly brief and matter-of-fact in my descriptions here, so I want to end on a more human note, as there is real struggle in Amazonia. So let's hear from another Vice-President of the Ecclesiastical Conference, Sister Manso Pereira.   A descendent of the Kariri Brazilian tribal group, Sister Manso Pereira recently related a conversation she had with the Karipuna people about the danger  they face from armed groups of illegal logging and mining companies. Quote:    “We sleep well when you are here, because you're with us.' I said, ‘Why? If they come for you to kill you, they're going to kill me, too.' And they said, ‘We know if you went missing, the church would come looking for you. They would know you were gone.'”   In 2022, Pope Francis made Archbishop Steiner the first Cardinal from the Amazon region, also adding him to the Dicastery for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and the Societies of Apostolic Life.   Leonardo Ulrich STEINER  is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2030.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers. Stay tuned to see if today's Cardinal gets selected  for a deeper dive in the next round! Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

Including the future of Cardinal Numbers (hint: it's not changing)

Not a spelling mistake, a pun. I do those. Search up "dubia letter" if you're scrathing your head over the title. LINKS Catholic Herald coverage of Cardinal Müller's church split comments: https://thecatholicherald.com/cardinal-muller-warns-church-risks-split-if-orthodox-pope-not-chosen/  Apostolic Constitution Romano Pontifici Eligendo (1975): https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/it/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-vi_apc_19751001_romano-pontifici-eligendo.html  CNN coverage of Cardinal Becciu situation: https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/23/europe/cardinal-becciu-conclave-controversy-intl/index.html  Cruxnow coverage of Sister Brambilla situation: https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2025/04/francis-legacy-lives-as-top-vatican-woman-gets-accidental-invite-to-conclave  Pontifacts + Popeular History Livestream of Pope Francis' funeral (join Adopt-A-Cardinal in the comments!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Cl8ISMTqMA  Novena to Mary, Undoer of Knots: https://www.theholyrosary.org/maryundoerknots/  TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History. My name is Gregg and this is another Conclave special: “Raising the Alarm: Schism by Dubias Means?” Last Thursday, The Catholic Herald ran an article titled “Cardinal Müller warns Church risks split if ‘orthodox' pope not chosen.” Specifically, the Catholic Herald quotes the former head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as saying “a heretic pope who changes every day depending on what the mass media is saying would be catastrophic.” Which, I hope he's answering a question like “would a heretic pope who changes every day depending on what the mass media is saying be catastrophic”? Because unless that idea is being planted in his mind by the interviewer, it would seem that such a dire scenario is something Cardinal Müller is actively worried about. And if it's something he's actively worried about, well that's got its own gravity. Bottom line, the article raises the potential specter of a schism, a split, in the Church, presumably some sort of major antipope situation where some of the Cardinals decide to reject the conclusion and go off and set up a rival Pope. We've seen antipopes before many times in Church history, though it's been a while since there's been a major one, recognized by a significant number of Catholics, say 5 percent. Or heck, even 1 percent. Longtime Pontifacts listeners will recall Bry and Fry actually interviewed Pope Michael, a modern antipope, back in 2022 shortly before his death. Oh, and thanks recent livestream viewer "Nogah f" for asking their antipope question with a handy definition of “serious” antipope accompanying, that was useful. Attentive listeners will probably know that I'm concerned about the possibility of schism myself, and if the Herald headline about Cardinal Müller is correct, I'm not alone. The reality is that even if the headline is wrong, I am comfortable saying it would be naïve to conclude that the possibility of schism isn't present in the minds of most Cardinals. After all, fundamentally, preventing schism is what the conclave process and ultimately the College of Cardinals is all about. Really, you could take it further: preventing schism is what the Papacy is about, uniting Christians under one clear umbrella. Wait, no, preventing schism is what Christianity is about, uniting humanity in Christ. Wait, no, ending the schism between God and humanity caused by the Fall is what Christ is about. You get the idea: Schism bad. Given that there seems to be more concern about the possibility of schism than usual, as we ramp up towards the conclave, it's worth asking what should be done to reduce the possibility and severity of such a break. Obviously it's pretty presumptuous of me to be talking about this, but I haven't seen it elsewhere, and it needs to be discussed. There are steps that should be taken publicly before the conclave to resolve ambiguities and close loopholes, and I haven't seen them taken yet, which has me a bit nervous, but given the nature of the situation, well, it may simply be that fundamental differences will remain. I'll update the show notes if and when I see updates relating to any of these things, this is obviously pretty cutting edge in terms of events coverage and there's a lot going on. Ok, let me lay this out. First, there are a surprising number of issues relating to who is actually a Cardinal-Elector in this conclave: an unusually high number of points of discussion, but not an unprecedented number, to be clear, since you need to work hard to find truly unprecedented things in Church history. Second, there is a notably strong traditionalist camp who, if I may read between the lines in Müller's statement, is prepared to reject any Pope they do not consider sufficiently orthodox. Let's tackle the first topic first. Probably the single most significant source of uncertainty in this election is the canonical limit of 120 Cardinal Electors, given that this will be the first Conclave to exceed the limit. In fact, there will be more Cardinal-Electors in this conclave than there have ever been, though that may be misleading, after all, how many people tended to take part in the Papal elections of the first millennium where not only the clergy but the people of Rome participated? Rome was smaller then, but it would be difficult to believe it wasn't a healthy crowd. The word “thousands” comes to mind. And yes, I too wonder how many women were in the crowds on those occasions when Popes were elected by acclamation. But then I think of how if it were up to individual voting in any form, even the most popular elections in the Hellenistic world appeared to be sausage fests. The Greco-Roman milieu gave us the Patriarchy after all, and as they say, the past is a foreign country, they do things differently there. In any event, the 120 cap being broken isn't too crazy a precedent, as it was only established in 1975 and was ignored at times by two of Pope Francis' traditionally-minded predecessors, Pope Saint John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI. But it's also worth noting that Pope Francis ignored the rule so aggressively you might be tempted to think he misunderstood it. Did he think it was a minimum rather than a maximum? By my count, when Francis announced what would turn out to be his final batch of new Cardinals on October 6th of last year, there were already 121 new Cardinals kicking around, and it was only the untimely death of Spanish Cardinal Miguel Ángel Ayuso Guixot that made sure there were fewer than 120 electors when the time came for the official elevation of the new batch. During the waiting period, one of the announced new Cardinals–Bishop Syukur of Bogor, Indonesia–declined the honor, and, as if to underscore how determined he was to have a very full College of Cardinals, Pope Francis elevated the Archbishop of Naples in his place, bringing the total number of Cardinal-Electors to a record high 140, which went mostly down to 135 by the time of Pope Francis' death last Monday due to Cardinals reaching the age of 80 and automatically losing their elector status. And yes, you heard that right, the Catholic Church of all places is one of the few organizations in the world with a hard cap on the age of electors. Oh, and yes, I did say the number went *mostly* down, more on that later. In reality, the Pope is an absolute monarch. Sure, the Apostolic Constitution Romano Pontifici Eligendo exists and caps the number of Cardinal-Electors at 120 in Paragraph 33, but it's not like that was news to Pope Francis when he was blatantly disregarding It throughout his pontificate, and it's not like absolute monarchs are bound by constitutions–that's pretty specifically what makes them absolute monarchs. In short, it was a bit of a non-issue for him. And I also think it was an occasion where he decided to make things uncomfortable for the cardinals who he critiqued for being too comfortable early on in his pontificate. He famously told people to make a bit of a mess in the Church, and here he made a bit of a mess with the constitution of the college compared to the, uh, well, the Constitution of the College. I think he wanted the Cardinals to *have to * figure it out,  have to be a little uncomfortable with rigid rules. Anyways, in the words of an analysis kindly provided by Gabe over at the Papability Index over on X, quote “The 120 rule is a matter of Ecclesiastical Law, not Divine Law, so the Pope can dispense of it as he sees fit. Those ‘extra' Cardinals have just as many rights as the 120 since the Pope's powers, privileges, and appointments are unassailable as long as he's operating within the confines of Divine Law.”  end quote That makes sense to me, but constitutions are more of an issue for constitutional bodies, which, at the end of the day, is what the College of Cardinals is. I hate to say it, but I am definitely of the opinion that the College needs to address this discrepancy somehow, as this is a loophole that could be used to undermine the legitimacy of the next Pope. Perhaps the safest course would be to ensure the final vote is lopsided enough that a ⅔ majority would be cleared even discounting the “extra” electors, however many there end up being. Really what I think may happen is that this issue will go unaddressed during the sede vacante but may be used by a dissatisfied faction as an excuse to refuse to recognize the result. If this happens, it will be readily identifiable as an excuse because if the faction were really only interested in the legitimacy of the election, they would be objecting sooner, like right now, before any votes take place. To allow the conclave to proceed without flagging legitimate concerns about its, well, legitimacy, would be startlingly irresponsible for any Cardinal, and to follow that up with only rejecting the result and declaring an antipope only after the fact would expose the cynical motives and manipulative nature of such an act. I genuinely hope that doesn't happen, but now is not the time for me to sit back and say nothing about the apparent possibility. There are other smaller-scale eligibility questions with similar solutions and potentially similar outcomes, such as the updated official birthdays of a couple of the African cardinals that have had the result of keeping them eligible. I want to be clear that I, personally, am not questioning their eligibility, nor is this breaking news, this is as publicly available information as the 120 elector limit and everything else I've been talking about. But all legitimately concerned about avoiding schism should raise their objections now. Any Cardinals planning to toss the game board only after they lose need to know that their motives are clear and that this is not a game. And yeah, in case you can't tell, I have a particular concern about this. But it's a general problem, so there's no need to put my case into territory where I could be accused of ad hominem accusations by naming names. Let's just say late challenges here would be doubias at best. There's also the case of Cardinal Becciu, who as I understand it, resigned the rights and privileges of the Cardinalate back in 2020 but who now appears to be arguing that participating in a Conclave wasn't among those rights and privileges that he resigned. I do not expect the other Cardinals to find his arguments convincing. Finally, we have the case of Sister Simona Bambrilla, a female head of one of the Vatican's Dicasteries and more importantly *not a Cardinal* who was accidentally invited to participate in the Cardinals-only general congregations that began last week. I don't expect that to be an actual issue, but I thought it worth mentioning both for a bit of levity and as a reminder of the way women are kept out of places where they really honestly should be if you ask me. Whoops, uh, there went that levity. Ok, so that's my TED talk on the surprisingly fuzzy boundaries marking of the participants in the upcoming conclave. Eventually the “Extra Omnes” will be said and the doors will be locked “Con clave”--with a key, and, well, the “speak now or forever hold your peace” window will have passed at that point. Unless there are significant developments before then, I anticipate only Cardinal Becciu will have raised concerns, and then only for his case if my reading is right. Pro tip: I'm giving plenty of qualifiers when talking about Becciu due to what I perceive as a high risk of litigation. Just in case that wasn't obvious. Anyways, let's shift gears to the second of topic of concern I brought up at the start of this: Cardinals prepared to reject any Pope they do not consider sufficiently orthodox. And really, I can broaden that out to any Catholic prepared to reject the Pope, because the underlying scenario is the same, whether you're a Cardinal or a catechumen. If you reject the Pope, you're not Catholic. Union with the Pope is what defines Catholicism. I know there are those who disagree, I would hope they are not Cardinals of the Catholic Church. They can go play for Saint Louis if they want to be Cardinals while rejecting the Pope. The idea that a Pope can be deposed for heresy has been brought up and refuted time and again throughout Church history. If I need to work up an episode on that specifically I can, but the reality is putting this together has been a lot of work for one night, following up on the two and a half hours I spent livestreaming Francis' funeral at 4 am yesterday. Oh, yes, so if you're looking for yesterday's episode, by the way, look on the Pontifacts feed youtube and get ready to Adopt-A-Cardinal in the comments of the video! In any case, getting away from the self-plug and back to as serious as I have ever been and then some, I'll say this: I will accept whoever the next Pope is as Pope until they die or resign. You'd think Cardinals would be prepared to do this as well, but I've developed a degree of doubt. I want to conclude this episode by encouraging you to join the Vice-Pope and I in a novena to Mary, Undoer of Knots. As you may know, a novena is a sort of nine-day prayer-a-thon for a specific intention: in this case for a successful conclave, defined as one that finds the Cardinals and the whole Church united under the new Pope.  As you may also know, Our Lady, Undoer of Knots was a favorite devotion of the late Pope Francis, himself a noted fan of Our Lady. Since the novena includes a complete Rosary, and it's quite late, I'm not going to accompany you through the actual prayers as we go, just encourage you to consider joining Vice-Pope Mrs Popeular History and I on it in the coming days (and yeah, you can start it whenever, it's not like we have to be on the same timetable or you can't have a similar intention after the conclave wraps up). Fair warning, when I asked Mrs. Popeular History if she was up for this she said, and I quote, “sure, But it's known to end up with things worse before they get better lol” So on that note, thank you all for listening, God bless you all!

Bonus facts to make up for the earlier error: when the 1378 conclave rolled around, it had been 74 years since a Papal conclave taken place in Rome. Many of the participating Cardinals hadn't been born yet, with the only reasonably confirmed exception being the aged Pierre Flandrin, who had been a toddler.  Testament of the Holy Father Francis: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2025/april/documents/20250421-testamento-francesco.html  Principal source for bonus facts: https://cardinals.fiu.edu/conclave-xiv.htm 

Apologies for getting ahead of things, but this is something I have ready, which really helps it jump ahead in line. Plus I want you to know how to join in Adopt-A-Cardinal fun, starting on Saturday!   Thanks to Bry and Fry from Pontifacts for joining me to talk about about 135+ cardinals all at once!

Spoiler alert: the new name is “Popeular History: A Catholic History of the World”. So not much different. Unless you're a search engine. Are you a search engine? Also yeah, I said history twice. I like history. TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History: History through Pope-Colored Glasses. Or perhaps I should say “welcome to Popeular History: A Catholic History of the World”? Hard to tell. No, I'm not changing the tagline, but I have changed the official name of the show, primarily for SEO, that is, Search Engine Optimization. As you probably know because you clearly like learning about a lot of stuff and are quite likely attractive to boot as listeners to this show,  it's helpful to have key words and phrases in your title that can help search engines help people find your show when they Google around. “Catholic History” is a pretty darn useful phrase to have built into this show's official name, probably more helpful than Popeular, so it's happening. Of course, Popeular still narrows things down straight to the point as long as folks spell it right, plus I like the pun, so the short version is staying as is: this is Popeular History. But it's also Popeular History: A Catholic History of the World, at least if a search engine is asking. And no, I'm not going to run wild with things and call this Popeular History: A Catholic History of the World: Popes Pope Papal Cardinals Cardinal Church Bishops Bishop Conclave Suburbicarian Pizzaballa. Probably. I'm definitely probably not going to do that. What I AM definitely going to do is make up for an admittedly fairly lame release today with something more substantial tomorrow. What exactly it will be depends on what editing I can get done around my day job and family stuff and two more collaborations that are also all carrying on tomorrow. And if it tomorrow's stuff does end up being conclave connected, I hope you can forgive me getting ahead a bit. Oh, that reminds me, let's pray for Pope Francis' repose. In nomine Patri, et Filii, et Spiritui Sancti, amen.  Áve María, grátia pléna, Dóminus técum. Benedícta tu in muliéribus, et benedíctus frúctus véntris túi, Iésus. Sáncta María, Máter Déi, óra pro nóbis peccatóribus, nunc et in hóra mórtis nóstrae. Amen. In nomine Patri, et Filii, et Spiritui Sancti, amen.

TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, History through Pope-colored glasses. My name is Gregg. As you know, Pope Francis passed away yesterday, and the Catholic Church is in a period of transition. I spoke about my podcast plans for the present sede vacante yesterday, so if you want more on that look there. Today I'd like to talk a bit about Pope Francis. Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who became Pope Francis, knew all along that he was a man, but he also knew that people–literally billions around the world by the end of his life–wanted him to be more than a man to them. Not just Catholics, but Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Agnostics, Atheists and the great many who don't know exactly what to make of all the theology stuff or who decided long ago it doesn't fundamentally matter to them: across the varied spectrum of humanity Pope Francis caught the attention not only of the faithful and their varied spiritual siblings and cousins but also of the faithless and the hopeless, both inside and outside the Church. From where I sit–and I'm no authority but here we are, you've tuned in to hear me for some reason–much of Pope Francis' impact was actually on secular attitudes towards the Church. He knew how to capture imaginations, especially the nebulous imagination of the media. Having broadly sympathetic coverage from the secular media may have been a blessing for Church leaders more broadly, but it left plenty of questions–many by design, as he famously loved to make a mess and would encourage others to do the same. Because doing the right thing often gets complicated, and messy, and uncomfortable. The fundamental question arising from this willingness to make a mess was simple: where was Pope Francis taking the Church? With so many of his biggest fans either outside the Church or openly dissenting within it, it was a fair question. One of Pope Francis' refrains–todos, todos, todos, “everyone, everyone, everyone” played out against the background of a divided faith and world. Everyone might be welcome according to Pope Francis, but how could everyone find what they were looking for if they decided to come in? No matter what, whether by action or inaction, he was going to frustrate some. In the end, those looking for substantial change would be substantially disappointed. And yet, those looking for no change at all would be disappointed as well. Fundamentally, Pope Francis was a moderate force seeking to keep disparate factions together, and he was willing to use ambiguity to do so. He wasn't always ambiguous, in fact he wasn't always *anything* so much as a man who loved to surprise and who understood well the impact of such surprises. He did have some misfires, but in his honor for today I won't dwell on what I think those were. On the whole, I'm willing to describe myself as a fan, though I'm not sure that's saying much, since I've been unironically a fan of every Pope in my lifetime. Yes, even that one. In addition to his successes and the occasional misfire, Pope Francis had his turn managing a number of longstanding largely intractable issues where the Vatican famously thinking in centuries applies. No real conclusions were reached in the Church's strained relationships with China and the Orthodox, with perhaps mild improvement being seen in both, and it really is a shame we did not have the chance to see any fruit of the celebrations for the 1700th anniversary of Nicaea that Patriarch Bartholomew had been planning with Pope Francis right from the beginning of his papacy, which were set to finally take place next month. Perhaps his successor will keep that commitment, but that's a topic for another day. Meanwhile, Pope Francis' pontificate will most likely be remembered as a period of rapprochement when it comes to LGBT individuals–ok, perhaps not so much the T, but I think it's fair to say he put in some real effort in outreach to the marginalized there and elsewhere. On the perennial topic of curial reform, he did a lot, but I don't know that he really fundamentally changed a lot, with one exception: I would argue Pope Francis' most significant reform came with his promotion of women to positions of real power within the Church. Now,  I respect the right of anyone, especially any woman, to laugh me out of the room when I say that, with him at best politely listening to many women's concerns. BUT, normalizing the presence of women within the body that nominates bishops without facing significant pushback thus making it extremely likely to stick, that was in my opinion quite a feat, and he didn't stop there, ultimately capping off his promotion of women with his designation of Sr. Raffaella Petrini as the President of the Governorate of Vatican City State. Basically the Vatican's Prime Minister. Nor do I think he was done there when his time came, as all previous holders of that title had been Cardinals, and, well, I wouldn't put it past him. However, with his passing, all that and more, from the inside baseball liturgy wars to the broad sweep of ecumenism to more secular questions will be questions for his successors. For today, let's pray an Ave for his repose. In nomine Patri, et Filii, et Spiritui Sancti, amen.  Áve María, grátia pléna, Dóminus técum. Benedícta tu in muliéribus, et benedíctus frúctus véntris túi, Iésus. Sáncta María, Máter Déi, óra pro nóbis peccatóribus, nunc et in hóra mórtis nóstrae. Amen. In nomine Patri, et Filii, et Spiritui Sancti, amen.   

THANKS Thanks to all you listeners, and to those who have supported me through the years and especially through this most recent hiatus. Also thanks to Marco of the Storia d'Italia podcast (https://italiastoria.com/) for giving authenticity to the Italian quote–which, incidentally, I believe I mistranslated somewhat: It's normally rendered as “when one Pope dies, we make another”, giving additional bluntness to the meaning. IMAGE CREDIT: By Korea.net / Korean Culture and Information Service (Photographer name), CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=34828249 (Via Wikipedia) TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History: History through Pope Colored Glasses. My name is Gregg, and this is another special housekeeping episode. Vice-Pope Mrs Popeular History and I have a running joke about my superpower, namely that when I say something, it automatically becomes not true. Which, I know, isn't a great power for a fact-based podcaster to have, I mean, there's a reason I haven't told you about this ability of mine earlier. But you can see it at work here, with me announcing just days ago that Popeular History's hiatus would carry on through at least June, and now, well, I assume this isn't news to you since you're the sort of person to tune into this sort of show and it's been a day, but Pope Francis died early this morning. May he rest in peace, and may he find more mercy than anyone deserves in the Court of the Just Judge, as we would all hope to find for ourselves, and as we should all hope for others. In light of that, I'd like to announce that I am revoking my recent proclamation of continued hiatus, meaning yes, Popeular History is back, at least for the duration of the present Sede Vacante, as long as I can physically manage it and my efforts continue to receive both nihil obstats and imprimaturs from Vice-Pope Mrs Popeular History, who, as  it turns out, does *not* automatically succeed Francis as Pope. Apparently, there's a whole different process for that. Who knew? Anyways, here's what to expect. First, as much as I legitimately hate it, it is time to say goodbye to Pope Francis. You will be seeing an obituary on this feed soon, and there will be more tributes and reflections on his papacy coming now that it has concluded. Catholics do not pray only for the living, it's important to pray for the dead as well, so I would encourage you to pray for Pope Francis to find rest in God's merciful embrace if you're willing to pray. We'll conclude this episode with a brief Ave Maria–known in English as a Hail Mary, and I'll go ahead and do an English version as well–for that purpose, for Pope Francis' repose. After some appropriate reflection on Pope Francis and his legacy, there will be the matter of laying him to rest. Once I know when the funeral will be, information that will likely become available after the first General Congregation tomorrow morning, I will make every effort to plan for some form of livestream coverage, possibly as part of a larger group. The general expectation is that the funeral will be this weekend, I'll keep you all posted. As of now, Francis' body is already in an oak coffin in preparation for lying in state, and the Papal apartments have been sealed with wax as per custom. Within the next week, Pope Francis' remains will ultimately make their way to a storeroom in the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore, or in English, Saint Mary Major. And I just have to acknowledge that “when I go out, stick me in the closet” is *very* on brand for Pope Francis. Though it's also worth noting that it's not like there's you know, a lot of free space for dead popes in the highest tier of Rome's churches, so even if it weren't as on brand for him, well, needs must and all that. Anyways, after Pope Francis is laid to rest in an old closet, any reluctance to talk about the upcoming conclave on my part will vanish. Granted, lots of folks are already taking bets and asking for my lines and predictions, but, you know, I'm not planning to be focusing on that so much this week. This is the time for goodbyes. However, as the Italians say, “Morto un papa se ne fa un altro”: “when the Pope dies, we make a new one” (Marco recording). And so next week, after the funeral, I'll begin to look in earnest at the conclave process, including looking at the Cardinals to hopefully get a first glimpse of the new Pope. Ideally, of course, I'd love to be able to point to an existing episode on whoever is elected when the time comes. And I've got a decent chance of being able to do that thanks to Cardinal Numbers: so far we've talked about over 50 Cardinals on this feed, and I've got dozens more basically researched and scripted, who were awaiting just a bit of touching up before recording and editing closer to their release date. Which actually sounds REALLY promising when you consider the theoretical cap of 120 Cardinal-Electors you're going to hear more about soon in the context of the fact that there are currently more Cardinal Electors than that and no apparent provisions for dealing with that situation. Bottom line, of the 135 current Cardinal electors, I've only got about 30 that I haven't gone in-depth on in some fashion. To be clear, I'm not going to have every Cardinal elector covered in time. It's just not possible with work and family continuing apace. But you're going to see a lot from me in the coming weeks, especially once we're officially in Conclave mode after the funeral. Which brings us back to where started this chat. Let's close tonight by praying for Pope Francis' repose, first in Latin, then in English. I'll be doing both parts of the Hail Mary, since Vice-Pope Mrs Popeular History went to bed a while ago. In nomine Patri, et Filii, et Spiritui Sancti amen: Áve María, grátia pléna, Dóminus técum. Benedícta tu in muliéribus, et benedíctus frúctus véntris túi, Iésus. Sáncta María, Máter Déi, óra pro nóbis peccatóribus, nunc et in hóra mórtis nóstrae. Amen. Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, amen.

Not gonna transcript this, but bottom line enjoy your Easter when it comes, hiatus is continuing, current target for getting back to regular schedule is 6/29/25 (5th anniversary of the show). There will still be some new collab stuff coming out including a special on the fascinating 1769 conclave where the Holy Roman Emperor showed up in person while pretending to not be the Emperor, which will be on the History of Aotearoa New Zealand feed of all places: https://open.spotify.com/show/6VnykMReqvxl9QJMmzlN28?si=cb53cd96a14e4618

Reminder that I will be speaking in multiple settings at the online Intelligent Speech conference this Saturday, Feb 8th. Get your tickets at intelligentspeechonline.com and use the promo code Popeular for a special discount. See you there!

Hello everyone, As you know if you catch my personal updates, and apparently you do because you're listening to one now, I got a new job recently. And it's been amazing I'm finally putting my library degree to use in the service of my hometown. I run mobile operations, so I schedule the bookmobile- or rather, I schedule the Mobile Library, since Marketing wants to make sure people know it's more than just books. I drive it too, along with an amazing team. Last week I pulled up to my kid's school as the hero in a slight modification of the kindergarten dream I had of being a bus driver. I--we--had very high hopes for this change, and it's exceeded them. One area that's been especially positive is work-life balance. I've gone from over an hour commute to five minutes tops. I come home for lunch most days, and hang out with Mrs. Popeular History and my preschooler while the other kids are either at school or napping. At the end of the day, I come home and spend time with my family. I used to never quite know when I was coming home, because there was always a chance I'd wind up with a customer, and it would be my job to try and sell them a bed to keep the lights on. Now, I help preschoolers get books, and have weekends off. Weekends off! What, like a normal person? I can't tell you how much of an improvement the schedule has been. I even have more time for podcasting, now that I'm no longer commuting. Or at least, I thought I'd have more time for podcasting. In reality, the more time has gone straight into the family bucket, which is where it needs to be. It turns out that now that I no longer work most evenings and weekends, I can be home and active when my kids are.  Life is good, except for one thing. The podcast. Look, it's not you, it's me. I've said from the beginning that family takes priority over this. It has to, and what's more, it should. And that's not a sad note, I can't tell you how much everything has benefitted from there being more proper daddy days on the calendar. But this one piece isn't how I thought things would go. I'm still coming to terms with it. The plan was for the podcast to continue uninterrupted. Yet, here we are, with, it would be generous to call it a shaky release schedule, and it's only going to get shakier, at least for a good while. You're going to get *something* from me next weekend in connection with the new Consistory, perhaps just the next Cardinal, and on February 8th I'll be speaking at Intelligent Speech online, so, you know, get your tickets today (intelligentspeechonline.com). But I'm not in a position to give a more specific forecast than that, except to say stay tuned to Pontifacts for cool stuff on that front. Popeular History isn't done, I've got more things prepped for the podcast than I ever did in years past, including some collaborations, which, my podcasting friends, thank you for bearing with me. It's time for me to embrace my role as dad, first and foremost. [Clip from Cat's in the Cradle by Harry Chapin] Thank you for listening, God bless you all!  

IMAGE Romanuspontifex, CC BY-SA 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0, via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Luis Gerardo CABRERA HERRERA on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bcahe.html     Luis Gerardo CABRERA HERRERA on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/p/24679   2009 Vatican Biographical Summary of Luis Gerardo CABRERA HERRERA (Italian): https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2009/04/20/0256/00600.html  Ecuadorian Bishops' Conference bio of Luis Gerardo CABRERA HERRERA: https://www.conferenciaepiscopal.ec/directiva/mons-luis-gerardo-cabrera-herrera-ofm.html  1909 Catholic Encyclopedia article on the Order of Friars Minor (often called the Franciscans), “OFM”: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06281a.htm  NOTE: If I recall correctly (and it's possible I don't, this was done in stages), free Adobe Podcast AI was used to help clean up some of the audio on this episode, as my setup and voice were both struggling this recording session but the show must go on. https://podcast.adobe.com/enhance#  TRANSCRIPT Hello everyone, welcome to Cardinal Numbers, a rexypod reviewing and ranking all the Cardinals of the Catholic Church from the Catacombs to Kingdom Come. Today we're looking at our fourth bishop from the list of new Cardinals Pope Francis will be officially elevating on December 7th 2024. Luis Gerardo CABRERA HERRERA was born on October 11th, 1955 in Azogues, Ecuador, which is a bit southwest of the middle of the country, due west of the western terminus of the fascinatingly consistent curve of the southeast edge of the national border. I'm sure there's a story there, but it's not a story for us today. He is actually our first Ecuadorian Cardinal, so I'll take a moment to note that Catholicism in Ecuador has generally followed the mold of Catholicism in Latin America more broadly, with the Church being established with the cooperation of Spanish colonial authorities and becoming the official religion up till the very tail end of the 19th century, when in 1899 liberal reforms began that significantly impacted the relationship between the Ecuadorian state and Church. Today a strong majority of Ecuadorians still identify as Catholic, though a smaller percentage than in generations past, and it seems the numbers are continuing to decline, though we're still talking about three out of every four Ecuadorians identifying as Catholic, and I say about because I saw numbers ranging from 69% to 94%, perhaps the most impressive range yet. Anyways, Luis was drawn to the Franciscan Order early, studying at their minor seminaries first in Azogues and  then in the Ecuadorian capital of Quito. He entered their novitiate while still a teenager, then got his philosophy and theology degrees from the Pontifical Catholic University of Ecuador, followed by a licentiate and then finally a doctorate in philosophy from the Antonianum, a Franciscan university in Rome named after Saint Anthony of Padua, an early Franciscan saint best known as the guy you pray to when you can't find your keys. Luis however was not lost, knowing where he was meant to be, and he took his final vows as a Franciscan in 1982 at the age of 26. The following year, he was ordained as a priest for the order, becoming Fr Cabrera. In the 80s, Fr. Cabrera served in several roles for the order including master of novices and member of the provincial council. The years 1990 to 1994 are listed on one source as “studies in Rome”, so it was probably then when he actually got his doctorate, given the normal timing of such things. Within a few years of his return to Ecuador, Fr. Cabrera was directing not one but two institutions for the Franciscan order, first the Franciscan Studies Center of Ecuador, and then simultaneously the “Cardenal Bernardino Echeverría” Philosophical-Theological Institute, named after a Cardinal who was, notably, still alive at that point. I'm not sure whether the seminary already had the name or added it later. Anyways, I can't get sidetracked with other Cardinals– Fr Cabrera also served as a professor at that institute, specifically professor of Franciscan Theology and Spirituality, and of course, more besides. In 2003, after serving as Provincial Minister of the Franciscans in Ecuador and the Executive Secretary of the Ecumenism Commission of the Ecuadorian Episcopal Conference, he went to Rome to serve as General Councillor of the Order of Franciscan Friars Minor and Head of the Franciscan Provinces of Latin America and the Caribbean. By this point, his titles have gotten to the stage where you're probably not too surprised to hear his phone ringing. Specifically, his white phone. Ring ring, it's Pope Benedict, calling to make him Archbishop of Cuenca. That's right, straight to Archbishop for Fr Cabrera, or rather, for Archbishop Cabrera, once he received his episcopal consecration in July 2009. Cuenca probably felt like home to Cabrera, namely because it was home; he was born in the Diocese of Cuenca a couple years before it was promoted to an Archdiocese, and though he was very clearly running in Franciscan circles for his career up to this point, still, there's no place like home. Cuenca's Catholic population didn't exactly boom when he was there, and the number of priests dropped so precipitously from 2013 to 2016 I double checked to make sure the boundaries of the Archdiocese hadn't changed, but apparently none of that concerned Pope Francis enough to stop him from transferring Archbishop Cabrera to the nearby Archdiocese of Guayaquil, making him spiritual head of Ecuador's main port and largest city, and yes, Quito is not the largest city in Ecuador, though it is where most of Ecuador's Cardinals have historically served. But the fact that there has never been a Cardinal as Archbishop of Guayaquil didn't stop Pope Francis from adding Archbishop Cabrera to his list of new Cardinals last month. And yes, well-informed hypothetical pedant, Bernardino Echeverría–the one the institute was named after–was nearly an exception, but by the time of his elevation he was no longer Archbishop of Guayaquil. In any event, whether Pope Francis keeps Cardinal-Elect Cabrera in Guayaquil or moves him to Quito, or does something else entirely, remains to be seen. For now we do know for sure that Ecuador is expected to have a Cardinal-elector for the first time in over a decade, ending a fairly significant drought for a country with its profile and Catholic demographics. After he is officially elevated on December 7th, Luis Gerardo Cardinal CABRERA HERRERA will be eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2035. Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be another one of the new Cardinals next week. Thank you for listening, God bless you all! Thanks, Joe!

IMAGE Vida Católica Mundial, CC BY 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Vicente BOKALIC IGLIC on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bbokalic.html    Vicente BOKALIC IGLIC on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/p/33395  2010 Vatican Biographical Summary of Vicente BOKALIC IGLIC (Italian)): https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2010/03/15/0147/00347.html  2010 Vincentian newsletter with Vicente BOKALIC IGLIC bio: https://cmglobal.org/en/files/2018/06/VT-2010-01-01-ENG-G.G.GAY_.pdf  1911 Catholic Encyclopedia article on the Congregation of Priests of the Mission (often called the Vincentians or Lazarites), “CM”: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10357a.htm 2024 Vincentian Family Office coverage of Vicente BOKALIC IGLIC's appointment as Primate of Argentina: https://famvin.org/en/2024/07/25/pope-francis-appoints-monsignor-bokalic-iglic-cm-as-primate-of-argentina/ NOTE: Free Adobe Podcast AI was used to help clean up some of the audio on this episode, as my setup and voice were both struggling this recording session but the show must go on. https://podcast.adobe.com/enhance# TRANSCRIPT   Hello everyone, welcome to Cardinal Numbers, a rexypod reviewing and ranking all the Cardinals of the Catholic Church from the Catacombs to Kingdom Come. Today we're looking at our third bishop from the list of new Cardinals Pope Francis will be officially elevating on December 7th 2024, and you probably heard my spiel ab out the date change last episode, so let's dive on in.   Vicente BOKALIC IGLIC was born on June 11th, 1952 in Lanús, Argentina, the city immediately south of Argentina's capital Buenos Aires, right across the Matanza River if my modest cartography has served me well.   In 1970, young Vicente signed up with the Congregation of the Mission, aka the Lazarites, also AKA the Vincentians. He's our first Vincentian here on the show, but he won't be the last, and honestly I've already written a bit of history for the Vincentians I've filed with the other gentlemen that I think I'll just leave in place there for future fun. If you happen to be a listener from the distant future and you happen to go listen to Cardinal Sauraphiel's episode next because you're a big fan of them and it's important to you that you hear my history of the Vincentians like now, but when you go there you hear something about how I had had a history of the Vicnentians in his episode but decided to skip it since Cardinal Bokalic Iglic wound up coming first and therefore the history is in his episode, well, that will give you some hints about how the sausage is made here–that is to say, badly,–and I will fix the error that came from me not double checking my own decisions. If that or anything else weird happens, just write in and I'll fix it.   While we're well clear of todays' real meat and potatoes, I might as well mention that young Vincente is going to be our *third* cardinal from Argentina, though you'd be forgiven for forgetting our first two because they're from the 2023 batch and that was a relative while ago at this point. But that fact does help underscore the reality that it would not be too wild to consider accusing Pope Francis of somewhat favoring his native land in his more recent consistories. Then again even with about a fifth of the new Cardinals coming from South America as a whole, the reality is even that larger than usual rate of representation comes shy of their share of the global Catholic population–if you're wondering, over one in four Catholics alive today live in South America.   Anyways let's get back to Vincente, who was ordained a priest–Father Bokalic–for the Vincentians in April of 1978, not long before his 26th birthday. He initially worked in a classic one-two combo post for young priests, directing youth ministry and vocations for the order. By 1981 he was Parochial Vicar of the parish of Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal, assuming I'm translating Nuestra Señora de la Medalla Milagrosa correctly, or at least better than I pronounced it. I don't always name parishes, so just know I'm doing that for a reason here. Starting in 1983, he began to serve the local Vincentian Seminary, first as formator–more vocation coordinating–and bursar–moneyman–and then as its head starting in 1987. In 1991, ten years after his first start there, Fr. Bokaglic returned to minister at Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal for a few years before recalling he belonged to a religious order with “Mission” in its name and apparently made a bit of an effort to travel beyond the neighborhoods of the capital, instead going to the outskirts of Argentina's *second* largest city, Cordoba. I'm sure it wasn't actually like he went from New York to LA even though I'm strongly implying that for comedic effect, either way for what it's worth his official title was “Missionary” at this point. By ‘97 he was doing another stint as the Superior of a Vincentian seminary, this time in San Miguel, a neighborhood of Buenos Aires, which may or may not be the same seminary he was running previously. Look, I'm working with what I have here.   From 2000 to 2003, he served as a missionary and a parish priest in the Diocese of Goya in the northeast of the country, but it was December 2003 when he really hit the medium leagues, becoming Provincial Superior for the Vincentians in Argentina. As a reminder, you can roughly think of a province as a given religious order's equivalent of a diocese, though provincial superior is not a specially consecrated role, unless I missed something, which is always possible. And frankly, generalities are dangerous in the world of religious orders, because while there are patterns, there are also differences from one order to next among the dozens of major religious orders worldwide. For example, the Vincentians describe Fr. Bokaglic's role here as “Visitor” rather than “Provincial Superior”, which is the term the Vatican used for the same stint.   In any event, in December 2009, Father Bokalic returned once again to the parish of Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal, which is where he was when Pope Benedict dialed his white phone and named him Auxiliary Bishop of Buenos Aires and Titular Bishop of Summa in Algeria. Naturally, the actual episcopal consecration was handled by the then-Archbishop of Buenos Aires, one Jorge Mario Bergoglio–the future Pope Francis.   A few years later, in his first year as Pope, Pope Francis transferred Bishop Bokalic to the Diocese of Santiago del Estero, which may have had some interest for nerds well versed in the ecclesiastical history of Argentina but not much beyond that until earlier this year, when it became apparent that Pope Francis or at least someone in his circle  a nerd well versed in the ecclesiastical history of Argentina because he promoted Santiago del Estero to an archdiocese and officially named now-Archbishop Bokalic Primate of Argentina. The history nerd connection here is that the primate of a country is traditionally the head of the oldest diocese in a country. In this case, yes, Santiago del Estero is at least arguably the oldest Diocese headquartered in Argentina, but that point is indeed arguable because it had ceased to exist for many years after its 1570 founding, vanishing from the late 17th century until its reconstitution apparently under a new name in 1910. That journey is definitely on the list of things I'll be exploring if Archbishop Bokalic makes it to the next round, along with the surprise of Pope Francis formally establishing a new primatial see in his native country, when, well, that's not something I would have expected Pope Francis to do, though he does like to surprise people. Of course with the promotion to Archbishop and new  Primatial title already in place by the time he was announced as a new Cardinal, the actual inclusion of Bokalic on the list of new Cardinals was significantly less surprising than it might otherwise have been.   One bit of flavor that came through several of my sources was Cardinal Bokalic's closeness to the poor. I didn't get the sort of specific examples I like to share, but it was a pretty consistent observation, so there's a bit of flavor for you.   Anyways, after he is officially elevated on December 7th, Vicente Cardinal BOKALIC IGLIC will be eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2032.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be another one of the new Cardinals next week. Thank you for listening, God bless you all, and thanks, Joe!

IMAGE Uriel jesusfb, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Carlos Gustavo CASTILLO MATTASOGLIO on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bcasmat.html   Carlos CASTILLO MATTASOGLIO on Gcatholic.org: https://gcatholic.org/p/62393  2019 Official Biographical Summary of Carlos Gustavo CASTILLO MATTASOGLIO (Italian): https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2019/01/25/190125a.html 2021 Catholic News Agency feature on Archbishop CASTILLO MATTASOGLIO: https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/248671/lima-archbishop-proposes-replacing-priests-with-laity-as-pastors  2024 Pillar Catholic coverage including Cardinal-Elect CASTILLO MATTASOGLIO: https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/who-are-latin-americas-new-cardinals  Cruxnow coverage of Catacos community situation: https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-americas/2024/04/peru-farmers-meet-lima-archbishop-amid-dispute-with-catholic-group  NOTE: Free Adobe Podcast AI was used to help clean up some of the audio on this episode, as my setup and voice were both struggling this recording session but the show must go on. https://podcast.adobe.com/enhance#  TRANSCRIPT GREGG: Hello everyone, welcome to Cardinal Numbers, a rexypod reviewing and ranking all the Cardinals of the Catholic Church from the Catacombs to Kingdom Come. Today we're looking at our second bishop from the list of new Cardinals Pope Francis will be officially elevating on December 7th 2024, the vigil of the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, because apparently the schedule was already too full for the 8th itself, despite that being the originally announced date of the consistory. Thankfully, through the magic of vigils, it's still falling on the same important feast day, but it's a glimpse into how closely guarded such things are until they are announced that the apparent scheduling conflict wasn't caught earlier. Anyways…   Carlos Gustavo CASTILLO MATTASOGLIO was born on February 28th 1950 in Lima, Peru. He's *our* first Cardinal from Peru, though of course that's not to be confused with being *the* first Cardinal from Peru. Not counting Carlos, there have been five Cardinals who were born in Peru, most of then, like Carlos, hailing from Lima specifically, including two who both happen to turn 80 this year, freeing up spots for more Peruvian electors in the college. Attentive listeners may also recall the case of Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, who, though originally from Chicago, spent much of his career in Peru before being called to Rome.   But enough about Peru's other Cardinals, let's get back to young Carlos, our Cardinal of the day. By 1968, he was 18 and studying at the Faculty of Letters and Social Sciences at the San Marcos Higher National University of Lima, eventually obtaining a bachelor's degree in social sciences, graduating in 1973. You may have noticed that that's not a seminary, but don't worry, Carlos rectified that with his next move, entering the Santo Toribio di Mogrovejo major seminary of the archdiocese of Lima. Soon enough he was sent to the Gregorian in Rome, getting a degree in philosophy in 1979 and one in theology in 1983. Finally, he was ordained a priest for the Archdiocese of Lima in 1984 at the relatively advanced age of 34.   Carrying on at the Gregorian, Father Castillo followed up with a licentiate and then a doctorate in 1987 before returning to Peru for decades of pastoral work at various parishes and posts. Accompanying his pastoral work, Father Castillo served as assessor of the National Union of Catholic Students as well as lecturing in theology at the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru. That last role brings some real spice to the conversation, as one bit that his Vatican bio just happens to leave off is the part where Father Castillo was suspended by the then-Archbishop of Lima Cardinal Juan Luis Cipriani in 2013  due to vague “allegations of heterodoxy” and slightly more specific “attacks on the ecclesiastical hierarchy”, that is, the bishops. BENJAMIN JACOBS: Mein Gott! What a twist! GREGG Yes indeed, cohost Ben from Wittenberg to Westphalia. It's funny you've been silent the last, oh I don't know, forty odd episodes, but I appreciate you giving a good reaction there Just when I really needed my cohost to step up. Anyways, I should say, Archbishop Cipriani *tried* to suspend him, but the University didn't enforce the ban, so Castillo kept teaching. I'msure there's more to this story, especially because six years later Archbishop Cipriani was helping consecrate Father Castillo as his successor as Archbishop of Lima. *That* was *probably* awkward.   We get a bit more insight on what now-Archbishop Castillo's “heterodoxy” may have looked like with some quotes from 2019, his first year as Archbishop: for example when he acknowledged “abortion is the destruction of a life” but indicated that “people should reflect and decide freely” rather than having legal bans and interference from the Church, which is definitely an eyebrow-raising take coming from a Catholic Archbishop. The old “attacks on the ecclesiastical hierarchy” charge might also be clarified when we see that he was also then calling for the Vatican to give him permission to quote “appoint families, couples or groups of spouses or lay older people to lead parishes.” You know, stuff generally very much reserved for priests.   One aspect of Archbishop Castillo's tenure that definitely made it onto Pope Francis' radar is his engagement with the Catacaos peasant farming community from Piura in the north of the country. You see, in a nutshell, developers are trying to seize control of their lands and drive them off. And when I say “their lands”, I mean like this farming community was established in 1578, so we're talking many generations. Unfortunately from what I can tell they may not have full proper legal title for the land, which any lawyer will tell you is bad news.      One of the groups attempting to take over the land is a Catholic group known as the Saint John the Baptist Civil Association, which could not be happy with the Archbishop posing for photos with a delegation from Catacaos, although that would have been a drop in the ocean compared with a video message from Pope Francis to Catacaos, in which the Holy Father said “I know what happened to you.” and “Defend your land, don't let it be stolen”, a deeply personal level of involvement in what comes across as a fairly tangential crisis for the Pope to be getting involved in, but then again it's disadvantaged folk--unabashedly his favorite demographic–in his old stomping grounds of Latin America. In any event, clearly Pope Francis *did* choose to get briefly involved to personally show his support for the Catacaos traditional farmers, alongside their more local ally, Archbishop Castillo. Whether this all put Archbishop Castillo on Pope Francis' red hat radar is an open question–it did go down earlier this year, so I'd say you can make a case for it, though I think a stronger case can be made for two other Peruvian Cardinals turning 80 and the Archbishopric of Lima being the most prominent see in the country.   Now, after I wrote my first draft of this, I went back and made a note that I should talk about Fr. Gustavo Guitérrez (whose name I am obviously botching here). Then, Fr. Guitérrez died. Now, I'm not saying I killed Fr. Guitérrez–the man was 96–but I'm taking it as a sign that rather than shoehorn in him and liberation theology here, I should do something more to mark the occasion. So, allow me a few month's time for research, as I definitely didn't have anything going, but sometime next year I'll be posting a special episode on Gustavo Gutiérrez and Liberation Theology on the main Popeular History feed. That'll also mark the last time I check off an episode from the original original request list, back in 2016 or so when I told my friends I was planning a Popeular podcast and asked for topic suggestions. I'm not saying I crossed everything else off the list, but I *am* saying I've lost track of the list and can't recall what else was on it to keep checking things off. It's a very special kind of milestone. In any event, when you eventually do hear that special, just recall that Cardinal CASTILLO MATTASOGLIO, was, like many others, influenced by Fr. Gutiérrez, a fellow cleric from Lima.   After he is officially elevated on December 7th, Carlos Gustavo Cardinal CASTILLO MATTASOGLIO will be eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2030.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be more Cardinal Numbers… well actually, later today, since this episode got put on hold last week due to my voice being a mess so we're doing a double header today. Anyways, thank you for listening, God bless you all! And thanks, Joe!

IMAGE James Bradley, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Angelo ACERBI on Catholic-Hierarchy.org https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bacerbi.html  Angelo ACERBI on Gcatholic.org https://gcatholic.org/p/6760  2024 Aleteia profile of Cardinal-Elect ACERBI https://aleteia.org/2024/10/09/oldest-cardinal-ever-named-will-support-pope-with-prayer  2024 Vatican News profile of Cardinal-Elect ACERBI https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2024-10/cardinal-elect-acerbi-appointment-diplomats.html?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1FkcEQXPlQQ0GisXPW3tDuVtGdsweDpgAMqxjBpHFijrWKH1SVwoJAxJI_aem_aNoXJ7ogQxgNqyZKZWwfGA  CathNews New Zealand's profile of Cardinal-Elect ACERBI: https://cathnews.co.nz/2024/10/07/former-nz-nuncio-angelo-acerbi-appointed-a-cardinal/  TRANSCRIPT Hello everyone, welcome to Cardinal Numbers, a rexypod reviewing and ranking all the Cardinals of the Catholic Church from the Catacombs to Kingdom Come. As part of our march to the Kingdom Come part, the years keep rolling on and the Holy Father keeps adding new Cardinals to… well I'd normally say to fill vacancies, but the reality this is the first time possibly in history where technically the College is already over capacity but here comes Pope Francis adding more new Cardinals anyways. Don't get too worked up about that, it's not a sudden departure as JPII and Benedict both went over the same theoretical limit. The Papacy is an absolute monarchy so constitutions are more like guidelines, though I'm still very curious what it will look like if there's ever a need for a conclave when the College is over capacity, something that seems all the more likely as Pope Francis continues to treat the maximum as a minimum and keeps hid apparent preference for having a consistory every year– the only full year he's skipped in his pontificate was 2021 due to COVID.   But enough about the generalities, we've got 21 new Cardinals to cover and only a couple months to do so! To be clear, for the sake of my sanity as I continue to juggle my various responsibilities, I've decided I'm *not* planning to cover all the new Cardinals in time for the consistory on December 8th, at least not on the main feed. I *do* have it down as a stretch goal for my Patreon supporters, getting them all the new cardinals in a more timely fashion but everyone will get the same content eventually. It's just going to take 21 weeks to cover the 21 new Cardinals on the main feed, and it'll be faster for my Patreon folks as a thank-you for the support without actually putting content behind a paywall- just a mild time delay. Fair enough? Look, if you're in a pinch and can't afford a Patreon subscription just write in and ask, I'm a softie and I've been there before, no sweat, I'll get you a link to whichever episode you like when it's ready, free. Again, you'd be getting it eventually anyway, so really you don't even need to do that, just have some patience.   Alright, enough admin, let's get talking about the first Cardinal-Elect on Pope Francis' list, and let's start at the beginning, nearly a hundred years ago.   Angelo Acerbi was born on September 23rd 1925 in Sesta Godano, part of the province of La Spezia in the Liguria region of Italy, basically due north–ok and a smidge east–of Corsica. Historically, the area was for many years part of the Republic of Genoa, but, look, Cardinal-Elect Acerbi is old but he's not *that* old. He is old enough though that he grew up under Benito Mussolini's Fascist dictatorship and may just remember some adult's reaction to the Lateran Treaty, but probably not, he was three at the time and that's a lot of geopolitical awareness to ask of a toddler. Then again, this is a future diplomat we're talking about here.   In any event, the most likely answer for what Angelo was doing as he came of age in Mussolini's Italy is “going to school”, in particular going to seminary, as he was ordained by the age of 22, becoming a priest for the Diocese of… well, somewhere. He seems to have been near the border of two dioceses, La Spezia and Pontremoli. Vatican News lists Pontremoli, so we'll go with that, you'd think they'd know. Part of what makes it not as clear as you'd think is he wasn't serving in the diocese for long. In 1956, about 8 years after his ordination, Fr Acerbi entered the diplomatic service of the Holy See, which was expanding outward now that it was no longer dominated by Italian politics, at least not quite so much. Of course, to be clear, part of that domination had been voluntary, part of what made Mussolini successful was his partners in the Church.   Probably the biggest question of the 20th century Papacy is the extent to which Pius XII was one of those partners, and we'll certainly be looking at that eventually, but for today's purposes Acerbi's overlap with the Pope of the Second World War is a brief couple years before Pius was succeeded by John XXIII of Second Vatican Council fame. I don't have any stories of Father Acerbi and the Council, certainly he was aware of it, but he doesn't seem to have been there, which makes sense as he wasn't a bishop yet and his diplomatic work would have been ongoing throughout. His early diplomatic portfolio included relations with Colombia, Brazil, France, Japan, and Portugal. It's possible his work in Colombia and Portugal overlapped with Papal trips there- Paul VI had kicked off the modern era of Papal travel in 1964 when he visited the Holy Land, the first Papal trip outside Italy since the time of Napoleon. Certainly Father Acerbi and Paul VI at least got together in 1974, when His Holiness appointed Father Acerbi as Pro-Nuncio to New Zealand and personally consecrated him Titular Archbishop of Zella, which as near as I can tell is an oasis in the middle of Libya. As a reminder, titular dioceses  have no function, it's just a way of giving an official jurisdiction to a bishop whose responsibilities won't actually include running a diocese. Oh, and if you're wondering, a Pro-Nuncio is actually one step *below* a regular Nuncio. It's a step above an Apostolic Delegate, which, well, he also became one of those at the same time. Not to New Zealand, but to the Pacific Ocean. Realistically of course, “the Pacific Ocean” is referring to a number of Pacific Island nations, many of which have their own nunciatures these days, though I still like to think of it as managing the Holy See's relations with Poseidon, God of the Sea.   The fifth Pope now-Archbishop Acerbi served was Pope Saint John Paul II, careful counters might wonder who the fourth Pope was but of course since they're careful counters they're probably already aware of the implied existence of John Paul the Second's immediate predecessor, John Paul I. But JPI didn't get up to much in his 33 days as Supreme Pontiff,  Which is why we've already blown past him so I can tell you that JPII made Archbishop Acerbi his Nuncio to Colombia in 1979, full-on Nuncio this time, and with him revisiting an area he had worked previously, keeping in mind Columbia was a possible overlap between Acerbi and Paul VI given Paul VI's trip and Acerbi's early work there.   Acerbi's decade-plus as Nuncio to Colombia overlaps with some serious drug and cartel times we'll look at more if he makes it to the next round. A particularly memorable stretch would have been the six weeks he spent as a hostage to Socialist guerrillas from that country's 19th of April movement.   In 1990, Aberbi was made Nuncio to Hungary, making him first on the restored diplomatic scene there after the fall of the Iron Curtain–Hungary hadn't had a nuncio since 1945. He continued on i n that role for seven years, simultaneously serving as Nuncio to Moldova starting in 1994, the same year Moldova adopted their current constitution.   From 97 to 2001, Archbishop Acerbi served in his presumably final diplomatic post, as the Nuncio to the Netherlands. I say presumably because, of course, Pope Francis is giving him a new role in a couple months, so who knows? Maybe he will be asked to step back into another nunciature. Then again, Cardinal-Elect Acerbi himself has already thrown cold water on that idea, noting that he expects to support Pope Francis, quote, “with prayer, as I do not see how else I can contribute given my old age”. Which, I mean, fair enough, he's 99.   But we're not quite done with our overview, because from 2001 to 2015, Archbishop Acerbi served as the Prelate of the Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta, a name which of course needs some unpacking– the Knights of Malta for short, they're a military religious order that originally was meant to protect pilgrims  to the Holy Land and wound up running Rhodes and Malta after the crusades, Rhodes until the Turks kicked them out and Malta until Napoleon kicked them out, at which point they moved to Rome. They're more about ceremony and charitable stuff than military stuff these days, and we actually came across them during our Patreon special on Cardinal Burke with Fry from Pontifacts if you need another reason to join Patreon. Don't worry, Cardinal Burke and the Knights of Malta will be popping up on the main feed again in due course. Anyways, as Prelate for the Order, the octogenarian Archbishop Acerbi's job was to oversee the priests of the Order, making sure they were doing their priest things right. The end of his tenure overlapped with the beginning of the aforementioned Cardinal Burke's time as their Cardinal-Patron by the way, if you were wondering about that.   Archbishop Acerbi retired from that role a few months before his 90th birthday, and hadn't been making many headlines since, most recently residing at the Casa Santa Marta on the Vatican grounds, which if that name rings a bell, yes, Pope Francis lives in Room 201 there. And it was Pope Francis who put Archbishop Acerbi back into the headlines last week, when he  dropped his name at his weekly Angelus last Sunday, which apparently the Acerbi was listening to, since he said that's how he found out about it. His reaction to the news has been as diplomatic as you might expect, refusing to make it about himself personally, quote:   "I believe the Pope wanted to give a sign of appreciation and recognition for the service that many old and new nuncios, as well as the staff of the nunciatures, are providing around the world"   As he is already over the maximum voting age of 80, Cardinal-Elect Angelo Acerbi will not be able to vote in future conclaves, though traditionally older Cardinals do participate in the preliminary gatherings and discussions that take place during the sede vacante period before the opening of the conclave itself.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening, God bless you all! Thanks, Joe!

LINKS Vatican News coverage of announcement: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2024-10/pope-francis-announces-consistory-for-creation-of-new-cardinals.html Crux coverage of the announcement: https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2024/10/pope-gives-nods-to-peripheries-and-pals-in-naming-21-new-cardinals  TRANSCRIPT Hey folks it's Gregg, bringing some Cardinews you've probably been expecting if you're interested enough in Catholic stuff to be listening to this. At his Sunday Angelus this week, Pope Francis announced that he would be creating a new batch of Cardinals on December 8th. I haven't worked out exactly how I'll be covering them schedule-wise, what with the added wild card of my new job (yay), but I do plan to introduce them all to you sooner rather than later and the fact that we just had a First Judgment capping off the most recent batch of existing Cardinals actually makes things pretty convenient, timing-wise.   Let's take a moment to briefly outline the new Cardinals, and then I'll leave you all in suspense for Sunday, or Saturday, or whenever it is I do Cardinal Numbers releases at this point. Probably Sundays now with my new work schedule.   Describing the new Cardinals as a whole, Pope Francis noted that “their origin reflects the universality of the Church, that continues to announce God's merciful love to all people.”   First up, we have future Cardinal Angelo ACERBI, a 99 year old Italian and former Apostolic Nuncio. He's almost certainly the oldest Cardinal at elevation in church history, beating Pope Francis' strong initial bid of the 98 year old Cardinal Capovilla back in 2014. Veteran Vaticanologist John Allen, Jr. already beat me to telling the joke that came to my mind in guessing that Pope Francis would round up a 100 year old guy in a future consistory just to really make a point. Next we have future Cardinal 74 year old Peruvian Archbishop Carlos Gustavo CASTILLO MATTASOGLIO, and by the way, if my pronunciation is off on this, well I'm doing my best to follow Pope Francis, because I figure he's probably got it relatively close. No pressure on him of course, it's not like this is probably the most important announcement of these cardinal's lives and they would prefer to hear their names said correctly.   After that, we have 72 year old Argentinian Archbishop Vicente BOKALIC IGLIC who, as a Vincentian, is the first but not last on the list from a religious order. After that, we have 68 year old Ecuadorian Archbishop Luis Gerardo CABRERA HERRERA, which is a fun name to say. He'll actually be 69 when the consistory rolls around, and he's a Franciscan.   After that we have future Cardinal Fernando Natalio CHOMALÍ GARIB a 67 year old Chilean Archbishop, and yeah, there's a fair amount of names on this list from South America. But then we start a brief Asian swing, with 65 year old Japanese Archbishop Tarcisio Isao KIKUCHI, a Verbite, who will actually be 66 when the consistory actually rolls around. Next, we finish that brief Asian tour with 65 year old Philippine bishop Pablo Virgilio SIONGCO DAVID, who apparently goes by the charming nickname “Ambo”. Then there's 68 year old Serbian Archbishop Ladislav NEMET another Verbite, that is the Society of the Divine Word by the way, I don't think we've come across them before, but we'll certainly be talking about them more after today. Then there's the 64 year old Brazilian Archbishop, Jaime SPENGLER the second Franciscan on the list. From Africa, we have a 63 year old Archbishop from the Ivory Coast by the name of Ignace BESSI DOGBO, at least that's how Pope Francis pronounced it, although to me it looks like  DOGBO Also representing the continent of Africa we have Jean-Paul VESCO, a 62 year old who was born in Lyon, France, who's serving as an archbishop in Algeria. He's a Dominican. After that we have a 62 year old Indonesian bishop by the name of Paskalis Bruno SYUKUR, the third Franciscan on our list, And we're not quite done with Franciscans, because the next name on the list of that of a Conventual Franciscan, a 61 year old Belgian prelate by the name of Dominique Joseph MATHIEU, who, believe it or not, is actually serving as an archbishop of the Islamic Republic of Iran. After that we've got a couple of Italians, first up the 57 year old Archbishop of Turn, Roberto REPOLE, Followed by the new Vicar General for the Diocese of Rome, 53 year old bishop Baldassare REINA, who will be 54 by the time of the consistory in December. Next on the list, closer to home for many of us though there are no Americans on the list, we have a 53 year old Archbishop of Toronto, Canada, future Cardinal Francis LEO. Next we have the Coadjutor Archpriest of the Papal Basilica Mary Major, Bishop Rolandas MAKRICKAS a 52 year old from Lithuania. And then, perhaps tying the gentleman representing Iran for the most surprising, we have 44 year old Mykola BYCHOK, a Ukrainian Greek Catholic Redemptorist who is heading the Eparchy of Saint Peter and Paul of Melbourne of the Ukrainians, so he's representing Australia, though obviously there's multinational ties there. His appointment basically indirectly confirms that Sviatoslav Shevchuk, who we've talked about before, will not be getting a red had under Pope Francis. Shevchuk, for his part, has been pretty diplomatic about it, expressing his cordial appreciation to Pope Francis. And I want to note again that Bychok is 44, he was born in the 80s. That's weird. I was born in the 80s. You've gotta go back over 50 years to find someone who was younger at their elevation to the cardinalate than he's gonna be. The remaining names on the list are all priests, not bishops, at least at this time. First, future Cardinal Timothy Peter Joseph RADCLIFFE, a 79 year old British Dominican who Pope Francis described simply as a “theologian” in his announcement, which will be interesting because based on his previous statements, he will probably be the most pro LGBT person in the College of Cardinals until Pope Francis gets around to nominating Fr James Martin. I kid, I kid. Seriously though, we will get into it, he's got some surprising views on that front. After that, there's a 59 year old Italian priest named Fabio BAGGIO who's currently the Under Secretary of the Dicastery for the Service of Integral Human Development, who also happens to be a Scalibrinian, rounding up our representatives from the religious orders. The last name on the list is the 51 year old Indian priest who has been helping plan Pope Francis' trips, George Jacob KOOVAKAD, who belongs to the Syro-Malabar Rite. Altogether, 11 of the 21, that is, most of them, are from religious orders, with lots of Franciscans, and notable, Pope Francis is tripling the number of Verbite Cardinals in history. There was one other before, who was elevated shortly after World War II and died in the 60s. 17 out of the 21 future Cardinals are under the age of 70, and there's certainly a huge age range with a 55 year gap between Bychok and Acerbi. As usual, most of the names are from the Latin Rite, but keep in mind in addition to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Bychok, Koovakad hails from the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church which now has two Cardinals, notably not including their new Major Archbishop who came onto the scene last year. That's enough for today, I'll see you all this weekend. Thank you for listening, God bless you all! Thanks, Joe!

Quinn is from Nobelesse Oblige! https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nobelesse-oblige/id1637021887 I mentioned Pope Predictor on X (formerly Twitter) https://x.com/pope_predictor?lang=en  Links to the relevant episodes: AVELINE (7/5/24) LANGLOIS (7/12/24) KAMBANDA (7/19/24) HÖLLERICH (7/26/24) LACROIX (8/3/24) GOH SENG CHYE (8/10/24) TAGLE (8/17/24) GRECH (8/24/24) RIBAT (8/31/24) WOELKI (9/7/24) ZUPPI (9/14/24) PAROLIN (9/21/24) 12 enter, 2 remain… Update: Cardinal Lacroix is back to active duty after an investigation by André Denis, retired Judge of the Superior Court of Quebec, and investigation which Denis says should be considered incomplete due to Lacroix's refusal to participate. This information *was* included in the Lacroix episode, but as mentioned in the recording, this was actually recorded before the episodes due to production schedules, so we didn't have the info at the time this was recorded but I figured I might as well update things here. Link to Vatican coverage of Lacroix update: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2024-05/investigation-finds-no-misconduct-by-cardinal-lacroix.html 

LINKS Intelligent Speech Conference (code POPEULAR): www.intelligentspeechonline.com The Holy Org Chart:  https://podcastaddict.com/the-popeular-history-podcast/episode/168461488 History in the Bible books link (they're all out now!): https://www.historyinthebible.com/books.html  Catchism: https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM  TRANSCRIPT Hey everyone, just wanted to let you know that I will be speaking at the Intelligent Speech conference in a few months. The conference will be taking place online on February 8th, 2025 and if you act now, you'll get the early bird price of $20, but we also do have a special offer for listeners of this podcast! When you buy your ticket, enter the promo code “POPEULAR” at checkout, that's popular but with an“e” for the pope pun, to receive an extra 10% off the already discounted ticket price– that's a great deal for all the content! So go to intelligentspeechonline.com to get your tickets today!   Welcome to the Popeular History Podcast: History through Pope Colored Glasses. My name is Gregg and this is episode 0.21i: Sayings of the Savior Part IX: What's One More?   All of these aught episodes are made to let us build our Pope-colored glasses so we can use the same lenses when we look at history together. If you're lost, start at the beginning!   Today, as promised, we wrap up our Sayings of the Savior series with some general takeaways and a roundup of topics I had originally planned to cover in previous episodes or as part of Sayings of the Savior but didn't get around to. You can think of this episode as a grab bag or a pit stop or whatever you like. Either way, no new Sayings of the Savior, just some new and possibly overdue takeaways from everything we've discussed so far.   First off, and this one is well overdue, there's the basic question of what an APOSTLE is. In Eastern Churches the word is often used more loosely, but in the West, which our Pope-Colored glasses tend to treat as default because frankly that's what the Popes have tended to do, the word Apostle refers to the Twelve Apostles, that early core group of followers of Jesus. The broader term for a follower of Jesus in his life is a DISCIPLE and sometimes it's still used for Christians today, like saying we're all called to be disciples, but if someone says “the disciples”, they mean a member of that first generation, folks who knew Jesus personally and who followed Him. If you want to know more than a hundred other terms for different roles and such within the Catholic Church, I came out with a Holy Org Chart episode last year that's linked in the show notes, and I named off all the apostles and their aliases early on on 0.20, which I'm not linking because I reference other worldbuilding episodes too often to give them that treatment but if you want them all together that's one of the things you can find on the custom playlists available at popEularhistory.com.   In a nutshell, the purpose of all the Gospel teachings we've been covering has been to teach us how to live rightly, and of course to make us *want* to live rightly, because knowing and doing are two different things. The process by which we develop and carry out a desire to live rightly is called CONVERSION, and the general code that can indicate what it is to live rightly is the MORAL LAW, or you could even simply call it the GOSPEL. Of course Jesus gave us the super summary version of what we should be doing with his two great commandments-love God and your neighbor, but of course you know Catholicism is a big fan of standardizing things and making lists, so let's go through some of the lists relevant to the ECONOMY OF SALVATION, that is, to God's plan for how the universe is going to work out ok. The economy of salvation, that master plan, is also sometimes called the DIVINE ECONOMY.   First list, the three Theological Virtues, namely Faith, Hope, and Charity. With a list of only three I'll be able to get away with offering some specific definitions as well, but just know that not all of the lists are so short. When you get a definition straight from the Bible it's worth using, so I'll use Saint Paul's definition of faith as “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Heb 11:1). Meanwhile, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I believe I've already introduced but just in case know that it's a big guide to Catholicism that I use to help build my framework, anyways the Catechism defines hope as the theological virtue by which we desire and expect from God both eternal life and the grace we need to attain it. Also when I say “the Catechism” I mean the universal one published under Pope John Paul II. Absolutely there has been more than one over the years but when folks simply say “the catechism”, that's the one they mean. And to put my cards on the table, it is my intention to give some airtime to every term the Catechism covers in its glossary in my worldbuilding episodes. Anyways, more on grace later, for now know that in Catholic lingo, the last theological virtue of charity isn't a handout, instead it's a form of love. Specifically, the Catechism defines “Charity” as “The theological virtue by which we love God above all things for His own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God.” In other words, charity is the key to fulfilling the Great Commandments and by extension morality in general.   The next list I should introduce you to as we take a big look at Catholic moral teaching is the Cardinal Virtues, namely Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, and Temperance. The Cardinal Virtues are fantastic tools for living a moral life. Prudence is what helps you determine the right thing to do in any given situation, justice is the firm resolve to act rightly in the interests of those that are not yourself, no matter the obstacles, fortitude is the grit and determination to carry on with the prudentially determined just path come what may, and temperance helps in that process by helping to keep you balanced in your approach, regulating the will and your passions, passions being on our list for further discussion shortly, in fact we might as well talk about the principal passions, since they do keep coming up when talking moral theology in a Catholic context.   You won't be too far off the mark if you think of the passions as emotions, but if you think of the term passive that will be especially helpful. They are forces that influence us as we go about our business. The simplest passion is love, which draws us to what we perceive as good, in contrast to hate, which repels us from what we perceive as bad. Related to these are desire and fear respectively, which are more about the act of being compelled or repelled, that moving sort of energy between us and what we love or hate. If we receive what we love, the relevant passion is joy, while if we encounter what we hate, we may face either sadness, if we are resigned, or anger, if we actively reject it, believing we can somehow get through what we hate to some loved good beyond. Ultimately the Church sees the passions as morally neutral: it is not good to love something if the thing that is loved is bad, meanwhile it is bad to hate something that is good. But if you love what is good and hate what is bad, that's good. I probably could have summarized that more clearly but in the end what matters most is how you respond to your passions than what your initial passions are. Feelings are natural and to be expected, what you are called to control is how you respond to those feelings.   When it comes to those responses, those concrete actions, the Catholic Church draws especially from the Beatitudes we covered in the Sermon on the Mount as inspiration for labeling not one but two sets of seven works of mercy: The Corporal Works of Mercy and the Spiritual Works of Mercy. By the way, taken collectively, the lessons from the Gospels can be called the Law of the Gospel.   Now, I hope you don't mind, but we're doing three lists of the extra special number seven today, and if I go into detail on each one we'll be dragging out what I was hoping to have be sort of a quick sort of pallet cleanser of an episode. So instead I'll simply list, the acts are fairly intuitive from their names anyways in these simple moral imperatives.   The corporal works of mercy, which we have on index cards around our home by way of reminder, are:   Feed the hungry. Give water to the thirsty. Clothe the naked. Shelter the homeless. Visit the sick. Visit the imprisoned. Bury the dead.   Meanwhile, the spiritual works of mercy are:   Instruct the ignorant. Counsel the doubtful. Admonish the sinners. Bear patiently those who wrong us. Forgive offenses. Comfort the afflicted. Pray for the living and the dead.   The third promised list of seven is the gifts of the Holy Spirit, as in, what you can expect from the action of the Spirit in your heart. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are:   Wisdom Understanding Counsel Fortitude Knowledge Piety and Fear of the Lord.   And ok, Fear Of the Lord isn't as straightforward a concept as the others. Basically, it's the awareness that God is much more than you, putting things into perspective.   In the end, our mission, should we choose to accept it, is to use these gifts and fruits and even passions to build these virtues and live a moral life. We cannot do that without God's help, which is where grace comes in, something we'll be circling back to more than once. That's because as discussed in Episode 0.1, we've all got the effects of Original Sin impacting us and our world, including concupiscence, which is a particular problem impacting our passions, inclining us towards sin–even after baptism wipes away original sin itself that particular effect of the fall remains, though the sacraments do lessen concupiscence in us, helping draw us to VIRTUE--moral choices--over VICE–immoral choices.   No one lives in isolation, time and again Jesus frames our salvation as a matter of how we interact with those around us, especially the less fortunate. Given this context, it's no surprise that racism is among the glossary terms in the Catechism, being defined as “unjust discrimination on the basis of a persons's race; a violation of human dignity, and a sin against justice.”   In a similar camp, the catechism's glossary covers three two-word concepts that start with “social” and are the sort of things where you might appreciate a trigger warning if you're the type that hates trigger warnings; namely “social sin”, “social justice”, and “social teaching”.   “Social sin” is listed as “the effect of sin over time, which can affect society and its institutions to create “structures of sin,”. If rampant generational inequality doesn't fall under this, I don't know what does.   “Social justice”, meanwhile, is something the Catechism defines as “the respect for the human person and the rights which flow from human dignity and guarantee it. Society must provide the conditions that allow people to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and vocation.”   Finally, the Catechism of the Catholic Church lists “social teaching” as “the teaching (social doctrine) of the Church on the truth of revelation about human dignity, human solidarity, and the principles of justice and peace; the moral judgments about economic and social matters required by such truth and about the demands of justice and peace.”   Of course, not all communities are so sweeping, and sometimes small actions can have the biggest impact of all. To this end, keep in mind your responsibility to those around you. One particular issue to avoid, and yes, you got me, I'm shoehorning another glossary term in here, is detraction, the “disclosure of another's faults and sins, without an objectively valid reason, to persons who did not know about them, thus causing unjust injury to that person's reputation”.   If you're doing good and avoiding evil, and firing on all cylinders with everything, know that you're doing so with God's help, but of course you already know that, because you have humility, right? Humility of course being defined as “the virtue by which a Christian acknowledges that God is the author of all good.” Anyways, with God's help, you stand a chance of reaching Beatitude, that is, the blessings of heaven. In fact, with God's help, should you choose to accept it, it's guaranteed.   So, there we have it. From the beatitudes to Beatitude in a nutshell, and I even got some definitional errands done along the way. Plus, even better, we've got time for Saint or Aint today!   SAINT OR AINT   At the end of the episode on Luke I gave a brief bio and your job was to determine whether they were a real early missionary saint or not, inspired by all the saints stories that sprang up over the years in connection with The Seventy disciples Jesus sent out in Luke. Answers ready?   Garius Stephanus: AINT A SAINT, those that didn't clock the name might be feeling a little silly, but that's alright, that one was of course a slightly embellished edition of a quick hagiography summoned by the phenomenal Garry Stevens of the History in the Bible podcast, who was kind enough to be our anniversary guest last year. Garry's actually wrapped up his show which is bittersweet. Bitter because, well, Garry's wrapped up his show, sweet because he's begun turning h is show into a series of books! The fourth book is out now, linked in the show notes , and the first three books are promised to follow, and yeah, you heard that right, he's doing that in that order. For the next round, we have a bit of a seafaring saint who definitely went to Turkey, Greece, and Malta and who may have gone to Spain, but that wasn't the end because he was traditionally martyred in Rome. He's traditionally depicted carrying a sword and a book, though sometimes pansies leave off the sword. You'll get your answers in the next worldbuilding episode next month, which, unbelievably, will not be another Sayings of the Savior episode, but instead starting out a whole new mystery of the rosary: the Transfiguration. So tune in next month for 0.22 Eye Has Not Seen.   Thank you for listening, God bless you all! Thanks, Joe!

An unscripted personal update, and then a quick chat about two Cardinals whose discussion is overdue. Who will advance?: Cardinal STURLA episode (10/4/2023): https://popeularhistory.podbean.com/e/daniel-fernando-cardinal-sturla-berhout-daniel-sturla-sdb/ Cardinal CLEEMIS (Thottumkal) episode (10/8/2023) https://popeularhistory.podbean.com/e/isaac-cardinal-thottumkal-baselios-cardinal-cleemis-elevated-nov-2012/

IMAGE Servus Tuus, CC BY-SA 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Bell sound: https://pixabay.com/sound-effects/church-bells-17005/ USCCB Angelus prayer link: https://www.usccb.org/prayers/angelus Latin text is the Vulgate of John 1:1-14: https://web.archive.org/web/20090201105716/http://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Biblia_Sacra_Vulgata_(Stuttgartensia)/Ioannes The English translation is the Douay-Rheims version (also John 1:1-14, of course): https://biblehub.com/drbc/john/1.htm  1:06 In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Hoc erat in principio apud Deum. Omnia per ipsum facta sunt: et sine ipso factum est nihil quod factum est: in ipso vita erat, et vita erat lux hominum: et lux in tenebris lucet, et tenebrae eam non comprehenderunt. Fuit homo missus a Deo, cui nomen erat Ioannes. Hic venit in testimonium, ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine, ut omnes crederent per illum. Non erat ille lux, sed ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine. Erat lux vera quae illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum. In mundo erat, et mundus per ipsum factus est et mundus eum non cognovit. In propria venit, et sui eum non receperunt. Quotquot autem receperunt eum, dedit eis potestatem filios Dei fieri, his, qui credunt in nomine eius: qui non ex sanguinibus, neque ex voluntate carnis, neque ex voluntate viri, sed ex Deo nati sunt. ET VERBUM CARO FACTUM EST, et habitavit in nobis: et vidimus gloriam eius, gloriam quasi Unigeniti a Patre, plenum gratiae et veritatis. 3:01   In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was made nothing that was made: in Him was life, and the life was the Light of men; and the Light shineth in darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to give testimony of the Light, that all men might believe through him. He was not the Light, but was to give testimony of the Light. That was the true Light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. He came unto His own, and His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, He gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in His Name, who are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. AND THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH, and dwelt among us: and we saw His glory, the glory as it were of the Only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

IMAGE DESCRIPTION Oxyrhynchus Papyrus fragment with text of John 6:8-12. 3rd century. Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:POxy1596-III.jpg LINKS Words of Jesus ("All the Red Letter Scriptures"): https://www.jesusbelieverjd.com/all-the-red-letter-scriptures-of-jesus-in-the-bible-kjv/    Parallel Passages in the Gospels: https://www.bible-researcher.com/parallels.html#sect1     Miracles of Jesus reference list: https://sunnyhillschurch.com/3301/the-37-miracles-of-jesus-in-chronological-order/    Venetian folk tale of Saint Peter's mom: https://iamnotmakingthisup.net/5663/saint-peters-mom-bless-her-heart/ Judas Boo: https://pixabay.com/sound-effects/boo-6377/ Joke Rimshot: https://pixabay.com/sound-effects/rimshot-joke-funny-80325/ TRANSCRIPT   Welcome to the Popeular History Podcast: History through Pope Colored Glasses. My name is Gregg and this is episode 0.21h: Sayings of the Savior Part VIII: The Last Gospel   All of these aught episodes are made to let us build our Pope-colored glasses so we can use the same lenses when we look at history together. If you're lost, start at the beginning!   Today we continue our Sayings of the Savior series with a look at the Gospel according to John, covering everything Jesus said there that we haven't yet discussed–yes, still leaving off things like the miracles we did in 0.20 and the parables and other sayings we did in earlier Sayings of the Savior installments--once again leaving you in suspense right before the concluding few chapters discussing Jesus' death and such, which we'll cover as we finish the remaining mysteries of the rosary in future episodes of our Catholic Worldbuilding series.   Before we get into it, a quick reminder that the Gospel of John is the odd one out of the four canonical gospels, that is, the Gospels that made it into the Bible. There are other Gospels, but not others that the Catholic Church holds as part of Scripture, that is, the inspired word of God.   As you likely remember very well from the other episodes unless you're starting here for some reason, and if you're starting here because you don't know where to find the others you can check out the Catholic Worldbuilding section of my website, Popeularhistory.com, in any case, as you probably do recall the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are all known as synoptic gospels, that is, Gospels that should be read together, and clearly have a close relationship, with most of all of them being found in the rest of them. Luke Is the most unique, something like 35% of its material being standalone, much of that parables, some of that is Luke's memorable infancy narrative, while the approximately 20% of Matthew that's only in Matthew is a hodgepodge including Matthew's take on Jesus' infancy, and the 3ish % of material that's unique to Mark is… well Mark is the shortest Gospel so 3% of it isn't much but even so we haven't hit the most memorable bit of that small slice of the synoptics. We'll get there, but of course not yet because like I said today is about John. And I don't mean John Mark, the guy who wrote the Gospel of Mark, which really should be called John because you know, John is his actual first name, Mark's just a second part of it, anyways, uh yes so guy named John wrote half the gospels, don't worry about it, it's fine, one's the Gospel of Mark, one's the Gospel of John. I'm sure that's not confusing anything. Anyways, ignore the fact that I haven't said much about John yet today. I needed to give the Synoptics a bit of a collective farewell before we moved on and it seemed like a bit of statistics might be just the thing to get you all ready for me to change the topic.   Now, though John's Gospel (not John Mark's Gospel) isn't one of the synoptics, there are a few parallel areas I'll flag as we go, so don't think we're leaving the other Gospels behind entirely. Even if we tried, they're a big part of looking at history through Pope Colored glasses overall, which, in case you've forgotten, is the actual main plan for this podcast. Allegedly these worldbuilding episodes are just the background materials for that.   Overall, John stands out as the most theologically sophisticated of the Gospels, which has generally led scholars to argue it's the last-written of the bunch, a stance that actually aligns with tradition that credits the Gospel of John to, well, John, the longest-lived of the Twelve Apostles. Scholars, of course, aren't so sure about that specific attribution, as we've mentioned here and there they often like to think of a school of multiple authors writing the texts attributed to John, not just the Gospel but his three letters and the Book of Revelation.   In any event, that sophisticated theology is on full display right from the beginning of the text, and the opening verses of John, often called the Prologue, are extremely well known and influential within Christianity. Which I know is a given for pretty much every section of the Gospel texts, but I mean like even more so than the average Gospel text. As in, these verses used to be read as an epilogue to nearly every Mass, something that gave it the nickname of “The Last Gospel”.   Let's take it in:   JOHN 1:1-14 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. 6 There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God. 14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” GREGG First, I'll simply note that it would have been a straightforward enough matter for me to start the podcast here, rather than back in Genesis. In fact, the basics of Christian theology, the trinity I discussed in that first episode before launching into Genesis' actual narrative, all that is more at home in a discussion of these verses than in that creation story, because here is what makes Christian history: the Incarnation. The Word made Flesh. This word and flesh and light and darkness business is also a pretty natural tie-in to the oldest wrong theology in the history of Christianity, and it's fair enough that various commentators have seen hintings at gnosticism in the text of John's gospel. In fact, some have theorized that the Gospel of John was written as a refutation of Gnosticism, but of course I'm treating this as a start-from-scratch beginner friendly kit, so it wouldn't be right of me to just keep saying “gnosticism”, “gnosticism” without spelling out what that means. Oh, and speaking of spelling, it starts with a silent “G”, check out the transcript I'm now consistently creating for the show notes in the episode description if you'd like the full spelling. Gnosticism, in a nutshell, is the idea that the physical world is evil, created by a flawed God. To the gnostics, this evil, broken world is something to be rejected, to escape from. For many of the gnostics, Jesus is the servant of the higher God, and is our ticket out of the icky yucky material, fleshy world. The knowledge of the evil of the world and how to escape from it is the secret that gives gnosticism its name, “gnosis” being Greek for “knowledge”. Gnosticism had a habit of piggybacking off Judaism and Christianity, with Gnostics basically forming secret clubs within the already generally secret Christian communities. We'll talk plenty more about Gnosticism as we go, as it was a sort of theological cancer within the Church for many years, but there's your official high-level overview. Getting back to John 1, the first verse is probably the most famous: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The notion that Jesus has been around since the beginning, as outlined in this chapter, is ultimately what cemented the victory of Catholic theology over Arianism, another wrong belief found among some Christians, aka a heresy, this one teaching that Jesus is not God Himself but is simply a creature-an important creature sure but in the end still one of God's creatures and so not as exalted as God Himself. Like gnosticism, the The Arian refrain of “there was a time when he was not” cannot be be squared with John 1, hence the fundamental importance of The Last Gospel to Nicene Christianity. And yes, we'll talk about what “Nicene” Christianity is in the future, specifically in 0.24. But we'll need to get past the first verse of John to get there. The second verse, “He was with God in the beginning” really solidifies the anti-Arian interpretation, but believe it or not I'm actually not going to repeat the rest of the prologue, because ultimately this section, while very, very,  important to Christian history, isn't one of the sayings of the Savior we're focusing on in this series. So, when does Jesus show up? Well, after a focus on John the Baptist, Jesus appears in verse 36, and speaks in verse 38:  JOHN 1 38 Turning around, Jesus saw them following and asked, “What do you want?” They said, “Rabbi” (which means “Teacher”), “where are you staying?” 39 “Come,” he replied, “and you will see.” GREGG This particular calling is a favorite of the tv series The Chosen, which I know I've mentioned before but am not expecting to mention again, as we're heading out of their wheelhouse, at last as far as they've gotten up to this point. But it's worth checking out if you've got the time, and let's be honest, if you're listening to this, you probably do. What's next? Andrew and Simon Peter! JOHN 1 40 Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, was one of the two who heard what John had said and who had followed Jesus. 41 The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him, “We have found the Messiah” (that is, the Christ). 42 And he brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which, when translated, is Peter ). GREGG This section allows us to introduce the split between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, though first off, there's been many splits and resolutions in that relationship over the years, not just the one in 1054, and second, while there's not currently unity there's not as fundamental a split as there has been previously since the mutual excommunications were lifted sixty years ago. Oh, and we've also made some reference to the difference already, when we were talking about the differences in biblical canons back in 0.7. Anyways, that's all years in the future. For now, just know that the tie-in is that eventually St Andrew would be credited with founding the Church in what wouId become Constantinople, the chief see of Orthodoxy, while St Peter would go down as the first Bishop of Rome, the beating heart of Catholicism. Having Saint Andrew as the first-called of the two--and the first-called Apostle overall–is therefore a point of pride for Orthodoxy, and one that I daresay as I look through these pope-colored glasses is a sorely needed one given Peter's elevation on pretty much every count afterwards. Note that he's already picked up his Peter slash Rocky nickname, much earlier in John than in the other Gospels, for example in Matthew that didn't happen until Chapter 16. Before we move on, I want you to know that I tried to look into Peter and Andrew's mother, considering we featured Peter's mother-in-law already and therefore it would seem to be quite the oversight to skip his actual mother, especially since she was apparently also the mother of Saint Andrew. Plus, it happens to be Mother's day when I'm writing this. But it turns out there's surprisingly little tradition on Peter's mother. Google seems to think her name is Joanna, but she's definitely not the better-known Saint Joanna mentioned at a few points in the Gospels. In fact, she's not a saint at all, according to the one story I did find about her, from, and this is the actual name: iamnotmakingthisup.net. Which isn't exactly an authoritative source but it points to a Venetian folk tale that describes Saint Peter's mother as irredeemable to the extent that Saint Peter has no way to let her into heaven based on her deeds. Which to be clear is incorrect theology considering your deeds aren't what get you into heaven, but let's roll with it. Apparently there was a time she gave someone an onion, so she got to try to climb to heaven via a string of onion roots, an effort which failed but got her promoted to taking care of Heaven's used wine barrels, ‘cause Venice. Speaking of promotions, before Chapter 1 is out Jesus promotes two more randos to disciple status, first Philip, who He tells “Follow me”, and then Nathanael, who gets to hear “Here truly is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit.” When Nathanael asks Jesus how He knows him, Jesus replies, “I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you,” to which Nathanael replies “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.” Which leads us to Jesus's reply in the last couple verses: “You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You will see greater things than that.” 51 He then added, “Very truly I tell you, you will see ‘heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.” The next chapter begins with Jesus' first public miracle, the miracle of the wedding at Cana, turning water into wine to keep the party going, which we covered in our miracles roundup in 0.20. The next scene is Jesus driving the moneychangers from the Temple, another one that shows up much earlier in John than it did in the synoptics, and always a crowd pleaser. Here's John's version: JOHN 2 13 When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple courts he found people selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from  the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! Stop turning my Father's house into a market!” 17 His disciples remembered that it is written: “Zeal for your house will consume me.” 18 The Jews then responded to him, “What sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?” 19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.” 20 They replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” 21 But the temple he had spoken of was his body. 22 After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.” GREGG Considering John is already talking about the resurrection in Chapter 2, I guess my running gag of treating it as a spoiler is done. In John 3, we have the first appearance of Nicodemus, a man unknown to the Synoptics but a recurring figure in John's account. If you've ever heard the phrase “born-again Christian”, you've got this colorful exchange to thank for the imagery: JOHN 3  Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.” 3 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.” 4 “How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother's womb to be born!” 5 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.' 8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.” 9 “How can this be?” Nicodemus asked. 10 “You are Israel's teacher,” said Jesus, “and do you not understand these things? 11 Very truly I tell you, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. 12 I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? 13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.” GREGG If you're thinking, “gosh that last part sounds like crucifixion imagery”, good job reading ahead; if you're *not* thinking “gosh that last part sounds like crucifixion imagery”, perhaps It would be helpful if I reminded you that the bronze serpent Moses had lifted up in the wilderness was lifted up in a pole, and that anyone who looked at it, according to Numbers 21, was cured and saved from the “firey serpents” that were plaguing the grumbly Israelites at the time. Interestingly, at least to me, the dominant symbol of healthcare worldwide is another serpent on a pole, which more cautious scholars don't necessarily connect with Moses' bronze serpent as it's definitely a symbol of the Greek god Aesculapius so not a Hebrew slash Jewish thing directly, but still, serpents on poles associated with medicine has to be a relatively limited field. And yet, not as limited as you might think, as there is apparently a shocking amount of controversy over whether to use one serpent or two on a pole to symbolize healthcare. But let's get back to John 3, which doesn't assign any speaking lines to Jesus, though the next few verses are, like John's prologue, a reflection that's proven *quite* influential in the history of Christianity, especially John 3:16, which reads: JOHN 3 16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. GREGG The next verse hammers the same sort of anti-gnostic point we saw in the prologue: JOHN 3 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. GREGG So yay world! It's not all bad. Though it is pretty bad. Let's hear the rest of John's reflection without further interruption: JOHN 3 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God. GREGG The chapter finishes with a heavy emphasis on John the Baptist, during which John says “He must become greater; I must become less.” So we'll take that and run with it, keeping John as a side character and chasing the sayings of the Savior into chapter 4, another classic scene, this time it's the Samaritan woman at the well. The parenthetical thoughts you'll hear early on are part of John's account: JOHN 4 7 When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, “Will you give me a drink?” 8 (His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.) 9 The Samaritan woman said to him, “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?” (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.) 10 Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.” 11 “Sir,” the woman said, “you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? 12 Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his livestock?” 13 Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.” 15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water so that I won't get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water.” 16 He told her, “Go, call your husband and come back.” 17 “I have no husband,” she replied. Jesus said to her, “You are right when you say you have no husband. 18 The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true.” 19 “Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. 20 Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.” 21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.” 25 The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.” 26 Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.” GREGG We've spoken about Samaritans before, though it was during my daily show experiment, specifically in the context of Samaritans Deacon Philip baptized in Acts 8. In case you missed that, in a nutshell the Samaritans are traditionally descendents of the ten “lost” tribes left behind when Assyria invaded the Northern Kingdom of Israel, though the fact that they're generally called the “lost” tribes gives an indication of how that tradition is generally received outside the community. The mountain the Samaritan woman is referencing Is Mount Gerizim, in Samaritan tradition the holiest place on earth and the proper site of worship, never mind that Jerusalem Temple business. So, yes, there are some similarities and some differences between Samaritans and Jews. Oh, speaking of Jews, next time you're talking to a Christian antisemite, remind them that here we have Jesus saying, and I quote, “salvation is from the Jews”. Also note that the woman lied to Jesus and also  had five husbands before her current non-husband partner, which is probably not something Jesus approved of. And yet, no reproach is recorded. Because you don't have to be hammering people's faults all day, every day. Of course, we did stop at an odd point, with Jesus telling the woman–who Eastern Churches know as Saint Photine and consider not only a martyr but Equal to the Apostles, a level of veneration I genuinely wasn't expecting-anyways we left with Jesus telling the future Saint Photine He is the Messiah, and then I just cut things off. Why? Well, because my bible considered that the end of the section, but of course that just begs the question still. The reason we don't see her direct reply is the Apostles show up and interrupt things. Let's continue where we left off: JOHN 4 27 Just then his disciples returned and were surprised to find him talking with a woman. But no one asked, “What do you want?” or “Why are you talking with her?” GREGG Interesting the specific call out for what they didn't ask, perhaps John wants to draw attention to how Jesus was bucking normal expectations here but the disciples were used to it. Anyways, JOHN 4 28 Then, leaving her water jar, the woman went back to the town and said to the people, 29 “Come, see a man who told me everything I ever did. Could this be the Messiah?” 30 They came out of the town and made their way toward him. 31 Meanwhile his disciples urged him, “Rabbi, eat something.” 32 But he said to them, “I have food to eat that you know nothing about.” 33 Then his disciples said to each other, “Could someone have brought him food?” 34 “My food,” said Jesus, “is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work. 35 Don't you have a saying, ‘It's still four months until harvest'? I tell you, open your eyes and look at the fields! They are ripe for harvest. 36 Even now the one who reaps draws a wage and harvests a crop for eternal life, so that the sower and the reaper may be glad together. 37 Thus the saying ‘One sows and another reaps' is true. 38 I sent you to reap what you have not worked for. Others have done the hard work, and you have reaped the benefits of their labor.” 39 Many of the Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman's testimony, “He told me everything I ever did.” 40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they urged him to stay with them, and he stayed two days. 41 And because of his words many more became believers. 42 They said to the woman, “We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is the Savior of the world.” GREGG  One aspect of this section is it has confirmation that my Sayings of the Savior series will always be incomplete, which isn't a surprise, presumably Jesus said lots of things that weren't recorded, in fact John basically says as much towards the end of his Gospel. Perhaps he hit the Samaritans with more of his patented harvest metaphors. Whatever it was, he spent two days at it. After that, Jesus went on a healing spree with miracles I covered in 0.20, including one on the Sabbath that got him into trouble with the local Jewish leaders. Here's the aftermath of that starting in Chapter 5 Verse 16: JOHN 5 16 So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to persecute him. 17 In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. GREGG Jesus has a very lengthy response to this pushback, and it's another one that helped solidify Christian theology, so brace yourselves: JOHN 5 19 Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. 22 Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him. 24 “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life. 25 Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man. 28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done  what is evil will rise to be condemned. 30 By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me. 31 “If I testify about myself, my testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies in my favor, and I know that his testimony about me is true. 33 “You have sent to John and he has testified to the truth. 34 Not that I accept human testimony; but I mention it that you may be saved. 35 John was a lamp that burned and gave light, and you chose for a time to enjoy his light. 36 “I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to finish—the very works that I am doing—testify that the Father has sent me. 37 And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, 38 nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent. 39 You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, 40 yet you refuse to come to me to have life. 41 “I do not accept glory from human beings, 42 but I know you. I know that you do not have the love of God in your hearts. 43 I have come in my Father's name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. 44 How can you believe since you accept glory from one another but do not seek the glory that comes from the only God? 45 “But do not think I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. 46 If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. 47 But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?” GREGG The next chapter, chapter 6, opens with a couple extra familiar miracles- feeding the five thousand and walking on water- and then gets real. Like, really real. Like, prepping for some Eucharistic mysteries level real. And the Eucharistic theme is touched off by folks from the five thousand looking for more bread. When they pursue him across the lake, he gives them a big old talk about what Catholics are happy to identify as the Eucharist, which we'll obviously be talking more about as we go. JOHN 6 “Very truly I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw the signs I performed but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. 27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.” 28 Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?” 29 Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.” 30 So they asked him, “What sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31 Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.'” 32 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” 34 “Sir,” they said, “always give us this bread.” 35 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37 All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40 For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.” 41 At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42 They said, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven'?” GREGG It's worth noting how controversially this is landing. Let's continue: JOHN 6 43 “Stop grumbling among yourselves,” Jesus answered. 44 “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. 46 No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. 47 Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” 52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” GREGG Controversial for sure, but Jesus certainly shows no indication of a willingness to change analogy–or clarify that he's speaking metaphorically. So believers in the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist are perfectly willing to note that he must indeed be being literal here when he says this next part: JOHN 6 “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59 He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum” 60 On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?” 61 Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! 63 The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit and life. 64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. 65 He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.” 66 From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him. GREGG After letting many of his followers walk over this whole bread is flesh and you must eat it business, and given passages like this and the Last Supper it's no wonder most Christians are big on the Eucharist, anyways, after that, Jesus turns to the Twelve: JOHN 6 67 “You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve. 68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.” 70 Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!” 71 (He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, who, though one of the Twelve, was later to betray him.) GREGG It's always nice to see Peter stepping up, and it's always fun to queue up the boos when Judas Isacriot gets a mention . In the next section, chapter seven now, we see Jesus interacting with folks in the Feast of Booths aka the Festival of Tabernacles aka Sukkot. The scene naturally starts with Jesus declaring that he will do no such thing. JOHN 7 “My time is not yet here; for you any time will do. 7 The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify that its works are evil. 8 You go to the festival. I am not going up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come.” 9 After he had said this, he stayed in Galilee. GREGG Wait, didn't I promise Jesus at the Festival? What gives? Well, read on! JOHN 7 10 However, after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret. 11 Now at the festival the Jewish leaders were watching for Jesus and asking, “Where is he?” 12 Among the crowds there was widespread whispering about him. Some said, “He is a good man.” Others replied, “No, he deceives the people.” 13 But no one would say anything publicly about him for fear of the leaders. 14 Not until halfway through the festival did Jesus go up to the temple courts and begin to teach. 15 The Jews there were amazed and asked, “How did this man get such learning without having been taught?” 16 Jesus answered, “My teaching is not my own. It comes from the one who sent me. 17 Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own. 18 Whoever speaks on their own does so to gain personal glory, but he who seeks the glory of the one who sent him is a man of truth; there is nothing false about him. 19 Has not Moses given you the law? Yet not one of you keeps the law. Why are you trying to kill me?” 20 “You are demon-possessed,” the crowd answered. “Who is trying to kill you?” 21 Jesus said to them, “I did one miracle, and you are all amazed. 22 Yet, because Moses gave you circumcision (though actually it did not come from Moses, but from the patriarchs), you circumcise a boy on the Sabbath. 23 Now if a boy can be circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses may not be broken, why are you angry with me for healing a man's whole body on the Sabbath? 24 Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.” 25 At that point some of the people of Jerusalem began to ask, “Isn't this the man they are trying to kill? 26 Here he is, speaking publicly, and they are not saying a word to him. Have the authorities really concluded that he is the Messiah? 27 But we know where this man is from; when the Messiah comes, no one will know where he is from.” 28 Then Jesus, still teaching in the temple courts, cried out, “Yes, you know me, and you know where I am from. I am not here on my own authority, but he who sent me is true. You do not know him, 29 but I know him because I am from him and he sent me.” 30 At this they tried to seize him, but no one laid a hand on him, because his hour had not yet come. 31 Still, many in the crowd believed in him. They said, “When the Messiah comes, will he perform more signs than this man?” 32 The Pharisees heard the crowd whispering such things about him. Then the chief priests and the Pharisees sent temple guards to arrest him. 33 Jesus said, “I am with you for only a short time, and then I am going to the one who sent me. 34 You will look for me, but you will not find me; and where I am, you cannot come.” 35 The Jews said to one another, “Where does this man intend to go that we cannot find him? Will he go where our people live scattered among the Greeks, and teach the Greeks? 36 What did he mean when he said, ‘You will look for me, but you will not find me,' and ‘Where I am, you cannot come'?” 37 On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. 38 Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” 39 By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified. GREGG The rest of the chapter is devoted to describing various responses to this preaching, from believing Jesus and accepting Him as the Messiah to wanting to execute him. Here Nicodemus pops up, perhaps unsurprisingly recommending the authorities hear Jesus out. Chapter 8 starts out with something of a tense scene, with Jesus effectively being given power of life and death over a woman who had been caught in adultery–no mention of the man. This woman, like many others, is unnamed in the text. The most common tradition in my experience is to associate her with Mary Magdalene, but that seems to miss the mark on several accounts, not least that John seems to like spelling out connections like that like when we saw Nicodemus pop up again last chapter when he was not only called Nicodemus but also described as “Nicodemus who had gone to Jesus earlier”, which is pretty straightforward. Also, Mary Magdalene's reputation as a reformed prostitute–apparently first popularized by none other than Pope Gregory the Great–doesn't have much of a leg to stand on unless you confuse her with the other Mary of Martha and Mary fame. Anyways, Mary Magdalene or not–probably not–but Mary Magdalene or not, the woman's life is in Jesus' hands: JOHN 8 “3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground. 9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” 11 “No one, sir,” she said. “Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”” GREGG First off, note the presence of a call to repentance here, because my point earlier was not that it should never happen, but that it does not have to happen every time. This is also the only time we see Jesus writing, which I honestly probably wouldn't be pointing out if it weren't for the fact that we have no idea what he wrote. Like none. You tell me if you have ideas, Popeularhistory@gmail.com. One surprising bit about this passage is that apparently most Scripture scholars argue that it's a later addition, not an original part of the Gospel of John. An early addition, mind you, but an addition nonetheless. From the whole Pope-colored glasses perspective it doesn't matter, the canon of Scripture is settled and this passage is part of it. As we've discussed before, from a Catholic perspective the human authorship is theologically irrelevant. Of course, the number one use for this passage in Catholic water-cooler circles is a mariology joke: “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone”... *rock whizzes by*- mom! *drum sting* In verse 12, the scene shifts abruptly, possibly due to the later addition scenario I mentioned a minute ago. Let's pick back up without any gap, and see yet another passage of John's Gospel at pains to explain Christology, which just in case I haven't said it already is the mainstream Christian theological understanding of Christ. Anyways: JOHN 8 12 When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” 13 The Pharisees challenged him, “Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid.” 14 Jesus answered, “Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going. But you have no idea where I come from or where I am going. 15 You judge by human standards; I pass judgment on no one. 16 But if I do judge, my decisions are true, because I am not alone. I stand with the Father, who sent me. 17 In your own Law it is written that the testimony of two witnesses is true. 18 I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me.” 19 Then they asked him, “Where is your father?” “You do not know me or my Father,” Jesus replied. “If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” 20 He spoke these words while teaching in the temple courts near the place where the offerings were put. Yet no one seized him, because his hour had not yet come. GREGG It's interesting to see Jesus referencing court here, or at least the temple courts, because I've got to say there's no way the argument He's giving would hold up in court. I probably would be pretty skeptical myself if I were one of the Pharisees here. Then again, I definitely get the sense that He's not primarily talking for *their* benefit here. Anyways, let's continue: JOHN 8  21 Once more Jesus said to them, “I am going away, and you will look for me, and you will die in your sin. Where I go, you cannot come.” 22 This made the Jews ask, “Will he kill himself? Is that why he says, ‘Where I go, you cannot come'?” 23 But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24 I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.” 25 “Who are you?” they asked. “Just what I have been telling you from the beginning,” Jesus replied. 26 “I have much to say in judgment of you. But he who sent me is trustworthy, and what I have heard from him I tell the world.” 27 They did not understand that he was telling them about his Father. 28 So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. 29 The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him.” 30 Even as he spoke, many believed in him. 31 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” GREGG This is the high water mark for this group following Jesus. It goes very far downhill as we continue, and understandably as Jesus has some hard things to say. You might also detect some feelings Jesus has about His own fate: JOHN 8 33 They answered him, “We are Abraham's descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?” 34 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. 35 Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. 37 I know that you are Abraham's descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word. 38 I am telling you what I have seen in the Father's presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.” 39 “Abraham is our father,” they answered. “If you were Abraham's children,” said Jesus, “then you would do what Abraham did. 40 As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. 41 You are doing the works of your own father.” “We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.” 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don't you believe me? 47 Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.” GREGG Only after being called children of the devil do the Pharisees turn on Jesus here. Some might argue that they were never on his side to begin with, because that's how some similar accounts play out elsewhere in the Gospels, but there's no hint of that here, in fact quite the opposite, remember partway through this section John had noted that some of the Jews were starting to believe in Him and Jesus began speaking to them in particular. This is heavy stuff. Anyways: JOHN 8 48 The Jews answered him, “Aren't we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?” 49 “I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, “but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. 50 I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. 51 Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death.” 52 At this they exclaimed, “Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that whoever obeys your word will never taste death. 53 Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?” 54 Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. 55 Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.” 57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!” 58 “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” 59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds. GREGG So in the end, let it never be said that Jesus was unwilling to antagonize. Chapter 9 opens with a miracle, and the entire chapter is devoted to the fallout from that miracle. It was the case of a man who had been blind since birth, and we did cover the miracle itself and its immediate aftermath in our miracles series--now that we're making sure we hit all the sayings of the Savior it's time to cover a later portion of the chapter, after the Pharisees conduct an investigation that does not go well for the healed man. We're picking up in Verse 35: JOHN 9 35 Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, and when he found him, he said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” 36 “Who is he, sir?” the man asked. “Tell me so that I may believe in him.” 37 Jesus said, “You have now seen him; in fact, he is the one speaking with you.” 38 Then the man said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him. 39 Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.” 40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?” 41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains. GREGG The next chapter opens with one of the closest things John has to a parable, and it's a big one: The Good Shepherd. JOHN 10 “Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. 2 The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. 5 But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger's voice.” 6 Jesus used this figure of speech, but the Pharisees did not understand what he was telling them. 7 Therefore Jesus said again, “Very truly I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep. 8 All who have come before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep have not listened to them. 9 I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. They will come in and go out, and find pasture. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. 11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 The hired hand is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. 13 The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. 14 “I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me— 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. 17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.” GREGG The image of the Shepherd is all over Christianity. Priests are called pastors, bishops carry a shepherd's crook, and archbishops' pallia are made from the wool of lambs from Tre Fontane Abbey in Rome. Of course some overtones of the imagery predate Christ's parable, with the blood of the passover lamb marking Jewish door lentils since the Exodus. More on the Lamb of God soon. Later in the chapter, Jesus gets asked a pretty blunt question, and gives a pretty blunt answer: JOHN 10 “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.” 25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father's name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. 30 I and the Father are one. GREGG And, like last chapter, this declaration is not well received: JOHN 10 31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?” 33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.” 34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”'? 35 If he called them ‘gods,' to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God's Son'? 37 Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. 38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.” 39 Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp. 40 Then Jesus went back across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing in the early days. There he stayed, 41 and many people came to him. They said, “Though John never performed a sign, all that John said about this man was true.” 42 And in that place many believed in Jesus. GREGG All right, I need to address how I can possibly have hope for everyone when Jesus is walking around calling many of the people he interacts with children of the devil, as he did in chapter 7, and specifically not his sheep, as he does here. It's one thing to hope for universal salvation in the face of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, John's been hitting different. And yet in John 12:32 we'll hear Jesus say “I will draw all people to myself”. How do we get there from here? Well, ultimately, from a Christian perspective, the same way we get anywhere: by the grace of God. Not only at a higher level–the ”draw all people to myself” business is framed as being part of the Crucifixion–but also at a more intimate and personal level. Yes, I am suggesting that calling folks children of the devil is intimate and personal. When my children mess up, I parent them by clearly pointing out what they've done that's wrong and contrasting it to what they should be doing. It's not the warmest, fuzziest part of parenting, but it's an important part of parenting. I submit to you that Jesus is doing the same here. Of course in the end you may well not agree with me. That's to be expected. As long as you're getting something out of listening to all this, and presumably you are since you're a good chunk of the way through episode whatever, carry on. Let's get back to John's narrative. “If you do not believe me, believe the works”, Jesus said, and the next section, Chapter 11, is dominated by one of Jesus' most famous works, the resurrection of Lazarus. Of course we covered that among the miracles, and the Savior is silent outside of that portion, so on to Chapter 12, the anointing at Bethany. Those of you that listened to the daily show and Cardinal Numbers will recall the use I got out of the Martha/Mary dynamic, and I'm not the only one to use this Gospel scene as a parable. Let's go ahead and take it from the top, where it clearly ties in to the resurrection from the previous chapter: JOHN 12 12 Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 Here a dinner was given in Jesus' honor. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him. 3 Then Mary took about a pint of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus' feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume. 4 But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 5 “Why wasn't this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year's wages.” 6 He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it. GREGG Judas, Judas. Get yourself together, man. And so we set the stage for one of the most badly applied sayings of the Savior, see if you can spot it: JOHN 12 7 “Leave her alone,” Jesus replied. “It was intended that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial. 8 You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me.” GREGG The interpretation I'm referring to is the idea that because there will always be poor people we should do nothing to help those in poverty. Thankfully, that's straightforwardly rebutted by the beatitudes and by every parable that shows acts of compassion for the least among us as the way to love Christ. This section is, however, a reminder that the “sell the Vatican, feed the world” position is also wrong, not only economically–you'd feed the world for a day and then what–but spiritually as well. We're a physical people, the more our senses are engaged the more fully we can participate in liturgy. And yet for someone who has an allergy to incense, incense isn't going to help them worship, and for someone who has baggage associated with one style or another, they may be served more effectively by another approach. One of the most controversial things you'll hear me say is that there are multiple right answers as far as liturgy goes. Worship is made to draw people to Christ, and people are coming from different places. As long as it's within bounds according to the Church, God can and will supply what is lacking. And sorry for getting into a “what kind of Mass is best” discussion here, that's decidedly looking into the future,  but this passage features prominently in such discussions, and you all know I like teasing things before they properly emerge, so yes, get hype for 0.31: Guess Who's Coming to Dinner. John 12 continues with that standard sign that we're coming towards the end of Jesus' time on earth, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Jesus doesn't say anything in John's account, but it's a significant scene, so let's check out John's version: JOHN 12 12 The next day the great crowd that had come for the festival heard that Jesus was on his way to Jerusalem. 13 They took palm branches and went out to meet him, shouting, “Hosanna!” “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!” “Blessed is the king of Israel!” 14 Jesus found a young donkey and sat on it, as it is written: 15 “Do not be afraid, Daughter Zion;     see, your king is coming,     seated on a donkey's colt.” 16 At first his disciples did not understand all this. Only after Jesus was glorified did they realize that these things had been written about him and that these things had been done to him. 17 Now the crowd that was with him when he called Lazarus from the tomb and raised him from the dead continued to spread the word. 18 Many people, because they had heard that he had performed this sign, went out to meet him. 19 So the Pharisees said to one another, “See, this is getting us nowhere. Look how the whole world has gone after him!” GREGG The most particular feature is that last bit, with the frustrated Pharisees still getting a spotlight even among the triumph. John's account is really very interested in that conflict. The next section opens with a surprisingly long message chain: JOHN 12 20 Now there were some Greeks among those who went up to worship at the festival. 21 They came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida in Galilee, with a request. “Sir,” they said, “we would like to see Jesus.” 22 Philip went to tell Andrew; Andrew and Philip in turn told Jesus. 23 Jesus replied, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. 24 Very truly I tell you, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. 25 Anyone who loves their life will lose it, while anyone who hates their life in this world will keep it for eternal life. 26 Whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will be. My Father will honor the one who serves me. 27 “Now my soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour'? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. 28 Father, glorify your name!” GREGG Jesus is a bit less direct about predicting his death in John than He was in the synoptics, calling it his “glorification”, but it's definitely still there, with the talk of seeds dying to spread growth. You get the sense that it's not really His first choice with His own description of His troubled soul, something that parallels Luke 22:42, Jesus' prayer in the garden at Gethsemane, pretty closely. And, yet while we will discuss that scene and that prayer, we actually haven't gotten to it yet, as Luke has it as part of his overall Passion narrative, a passion narrative being something discussing Jesus' finale of life, patior being a Latin term meaning to suffer, or to endure. By my counting, and folks vary, we're not *quite* to John's passion narrative yet, but the overlap is a sign that we're really very close. Then, God the Father, apparently, speaks, in a first for John's Gospel as John skipped the voice-from-heaven part of Jesus' baptism: JOHN 12 Then a voice came from heaven, “I have glorified it, and will glorify it again.” 29 The crowd that was there and heard it said it had thundered; others said an angel had spoken to him. 30 Jesus said, “This voice was for your benefit, not mine. 31 Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out. 32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” 33 He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die. 34 The crowd spoke up, “We have heard f

IMAGE DESCRIPTION AND CREDIT: Claude Truong-Ngoc / Wikimedia Commons - cc-by-sa-4.0, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons LINKS St Peter's Colonnade Statues: https://stpetersbasilica.info/Exterior/Colonnades/Saints-List-Colonnades.htm   Vatican bio of Cardinal Parolin: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_parolin_p.html          Pietro Parolin on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2014.htm#Parolin       Cardinal Parolin on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/666        Cardinal Parolin on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bparolin.html               Secretariat of State on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/romancuria/d01.htm     Secretariat of State on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dxsta.html    Monsenior Parolin's Knighthood: https://www.quirinale.it/onorificenze/insigniti/161548  Cardinal Parolin speaking on behalf of Pope Francis at COP28 (English, via Vatican News): https://youtu.be/xF4AgpYjhws?si=NHmzgYqpdLtkaQlO    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Hey folks! Remember last episode when I said I reached out to the ladies from Pontifacts for comment on one of the colonnade statues that help frame Saint Peter's square? Well they got back to me on *several* of them, and it looks like we're going to have an ongoing segment for them we can refer back to whenever we have a Rome-born Cardinal, because I'm absolutely not going to miss the opportunity to have Bry and Fry judge some statues! So, welcome to Faciam Saintues, starting with the statue I'm retroactively associating with Cardinal Lojudice, that of St Gallicanus: FACIAM SAINTUE W/BRY AND FRY 1    This week of course we've got a double header, because they also covered our patron statue for Cardinal Zuppi, that of Saint Leonard of Noblac: FACIAM SAINTUE W/BRY AND FRY 2   All right, with that out of the way, let's get on with the show!   Welcome to Cardinal Numbers, a rexypod ranking all  the Cardinals of the Catholic Church we can get our hands on, from the Catacombs to Kingdom Come.    Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Pietro Parolin was born on January 17, 1955, in Schiavon, a community in the diocese of Vicenza, part of Italy's Veneto region. This is actually our third Cardinal from the Veneto region, if you remember Cardinals Marchetto and Gugerotti we laid Gugerotti's scene in fair Verona and Cardinal Marchetto was from Vicenza, the city that gives Pietro's home diocese its name. It's worth noting that Cardinal Marchetto was one of our three cardinals elevated this past year who were already over the age of 80, meaning Pietro will be our first actual Papal elector born in the diocese, which is fair enough because there's a lot more dioceses in the world than there are Papal Electors.   Anyways, Pietro was the son of Luigi Parolin, a hardware store manager, and his wife, and an elementary school teacher named Ada Miotti. Pietro was one of three children, having a sister, Maria Rosa, and a brother, Giovanni. At the age of 10 father Luigi died in a car accident, and young Pietro found a different kind of father in his pastor, who guided Pietro from altar serving to Vicenza seminary, which he entered in 1969 around the age of 14. Eleven years later, he was ordained as  priest for the Diocese of Vicenza at the age of 25.   Father Parolin got a couple years of pastoral work in before the Bishop decided to send him to Rome for additional studies in Canon law, presumably to put him to work for the Diocese but the trouble with sending promising young priests to Rome is sometimes Rome doesn't send them back. In 1986 he received his doctorate in Canon Law with a thesis on the Synod of Bishops, and that same year Fr Parolin entered the Diplomatic Corps for the Holy See–something I have to think wasn't *entirely* out of the blue, considering he had studied diplomacy at the Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy while working on his doctorate. Either way, he was on board, his bishop was on board, and the Vatican was most certainly on board. He was off to sunny Nigeria to serve as an adetto, which is apparently Vatican-speak for an attaché, which is in turn diplomacy speak for a generic staff member for the main diplomat, in this case, presumably, the nuncio. He was soon promoted to secretary, and then, following the normal custom of the Holy See's Diplomatic Corps, promptly switched gears to three years of diplomatic service in Mexico. He kept rising through the ranks, becoming a Monsignor, and eventually undersecretary of the section for the Relations with the States within the Secretariat of State, which is a mouthful. This section of Monsignor Parolin's bio is the first time in all these bios I saw an Interdicasterial Commission mentioned, the multidepartmental role he served there seems to have served him well given his future posts.   Like several of our Cardinals, Parolin is knighted, which is interesting because Italy doesn't even have a monarchy but yup, on June 24th 2005 he was named knight grand cross of the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic.   On August 17, 2009, Pietro Parolin joined the upper crust of the Holy See's diplomatic corps, being named as the full on Nuncio to Venezuela. I'm sure there are exceptions, but generally you don't get to be nuncio without being a bishop, and in this case Monsignor Parolin was no exception– he was announced as Titular Archbishop of Acquapendente that same day.   A few years later, in 2013, Pope Benedict resigned the Papacy and Pope Francis was elected to replace him. By August of that year Archbishop Parolin was named as Pope Francis' Secretary of State. At 58, he was certainly on the younger end for a person holding such a high office, the last person to be Secretary of State before their 60th birthday was Eugenio Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII. Dun dun dunnn… also, though it wouldn't be out of character for Pope Francis to ignore this rule, as Secretary of State Archbishop Parolin was canonically required to be made a cardinal whenever Pope Francis got around to nominating a fresh batch, which he did in February 2014. Parolin's name was at the top of the list, and I mean that literally, as we saw when we went through the 2023 consistory the new Cardinals are pretty much always listed by diplomatic precedence, or, you know, something along those lines.   Before he even took possession of his titular church, Pope Francis had nominated him to four dicasteries and the super-selective Council of Cardinals, where he's still a member- and his name is at the top of that list as well.   As Pope Francis' Secretary of State, part of Cardinal Parolin's job to run around with the giant scissors doing any ribbon cuttings and celebrations that might need done, for example in January 2017 he was named pontifical legate to the celebration of the 25th World Day of the Sick, and later that year he was named pontifical legate to the celebration of the eighth centenary of the consecration of the Basilica of the Cistertian Abbey of Casamari, Italy. The sheer quantity of such special missions nearly made me miss the fact that Pope Francis promoted him to the higher rank of Cardinal-Bishop in 2018. Most of the Cardinal-Bishops reach that venerable position at a late stage in their career indeed, with the only other Cardinal-Bishops who are still under 80 and thus eligible to serve as Papal Electors being Cardinal Tagle, who we discussed previously, and Cardinal Sako, the Chaldean Catholic Patriarch of Baghdad, who ranks as a Cardinal-Bishop automatically by virtue of being both a Cardinal and a Patriarch of a Sui Iuris–that is, self-governing–Catholic Church.   If I were picking the Italian I'd consider most likely to be the next Pope today, I'd pick Cardinal Parolin with little hesitation.    Cardinal Pietro Parolin is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2035.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening; God bless you all! Thanks, Joe!

IMAGE CREDIT:  Quirinale.it, Attribution, via Wikimedia Commons LINKS St Peter's Colonnade Statues: https://stpetersbasilica.info/Exterior/Colonnades/Saints-List-Colonnades.htm   Vatican bio of Cardinal Zuppi: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_zuppi_mm.html         Matteo Maria Zuppi on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2019.htm#Zuppi      Cardinal Zuppi on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/47959       Cardinal Zuppi on Catholic-Hierarchy.org:  https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bzuppi.html              Archdiocese of Bologna on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/bolo0.htm?tab=info    Archdiocese of Bologna on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dbolo.html  St Leonard (Colonnade Statue): https://stpetersbasilica.info/Exterior/Colonnades/Saints/St%20Leonard-2/St%20Leonard.htm St Gallicanus (Colonnade Statue): https://stpetersbasilica.info/Exterior/Colonnades/Saints/St%20Gallicanus-1/St%20Gallicanus.htm  Community of Sant'Egidio website: https://www.santegidio.org/pageID/30704/langID/en/PROJECTS.html  Sant'Egidio reporting of conflict mediation and honorary Mozambique citizenship: https://archive.santegidio.org/pageID/3/langID/en/itemID/9207/The-honorary-citizenship-of-Mozambique-to-Andrea-Riccardi-and-Matteo-Zuppi.html Avvenire.it edition of Archbishop Zuppi's forward to the Italian edition of “Building A Bridge” (Italian): https://www.avvenire.it/chiesa/pagine/chiesa-e-persone-lgbt-sul-ponte-dellincontro  Advocate.com reporting on reactions to elevation of Cardinal Zuppi: https://www.advocate.com/religion/2019/9/06/lgbtq-friendly-cleric-named-cardinal-far-right-catholics-appalled#toggle-gdpr    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Hello! Quick note before we get started, first off, sorry that my voice is going to sound a little bit off for these next few cardinals, when I started the recording session, I was fine, now I am DEFINITELY feeling it, and am congested as all get out. But! The show does go on. Also, for those of you wondering what happened to the September edition of our worldbuilding episodes, well, it's still September, cool your jets! In the end, what happened is my episode on the Gospel of John got to mammoth proportions and is basically going to be a double episode. I took to Patreon to see whether I should split it up in two to keep it released on time, or keep it as, you know, one Gospel, one episode, and the vote was one Gospel, one episode. So, mega, you know, two-hour long episode on the Gospel of John will be coming later this month. With that, let's go! *THEME* Welcome to Cardinal Numbers, a rexypod ranking all  the Cardinals of the Catholic Church we can get our hands on, from the Catacombs to Kingdom Come.    Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Matteo Maria Zuppi was born on October 11, 1955 in Rome, Italy. I don't yet know whether for sure whether Rome is the most popular birthplace for Cardinals as one might suspect--, but I've got a growing certainty and it at least has to be up there. Accordingly, I want to start doing something a little different when we have cardinals born in Rome: let's assign them one of the 140 statues that top the collonades that frame Saint Peter's Square. Now, it's entirely possible that there might be more than 140 Rome-born Cardinals in history, and actually I can now update that to say I *know* that there are more than 140. And given that, we'll just simply find other statues in Rome after that, they're not exactly hard to come by.   Matteo's statue is Saint Leonard of Noblac, a 6th century founding abbot and hermit whose 10 foot 4 statue is probably a bit beyond lifesize and whose expression amused me enough that I immediately reached out to Pontifacts for comment.   But wait, Gregg, you say, because you are very observant, yes, good job, Matteo actually isn't our first Rome-born Cardinal, because, well first off he's not a Cardinal yet in our narrative he was literally just born but apart from that one of the very first Cardinals we talked about, Cardinal Lojudice, was also born in Rome. Which is why I assigned Matteo the *second* statue on the big list from stpetersbasilica.info, which, like every other link you might desire, can be found in the show notes. St Gallicanus was an early 4th century Roman senator, and possibly the first Christian Consul. His relics are at Rome in the church of Sant'Andrea della Valle.   Anyways, Matteo is the fifth of six children, and is the Great-grand nephew of Cardinal Carlo Confalonieri, who was elevated to the Cardinalate by Pope John XXIII a few months after his election in 1958. Though this is the first time we've had someone who we can confirm is a relative of another cardinal, it certainly won't be the last–the Roman Curia basically invented nepotism, after all.   That's not to say, by any means, that Matteo himself is lacking in credentials, as we'll see. While he was a high school student, he came across fellow Roman male Andrea Riccardi, who, at the venerable age of eighteen, founded a lay association dedicated to community service. In 1973 when Matteo came in contact with them the community had just moved into the Church of Sant'Egidio in Rome, which would give them their name: the Community of Sant'Egidio. From homeless children to AIDS patients to the elderly, from immigrants to addicts to prisoners, the Community of Sant'Egidio serves the poor and marginalized, and it's fair to say Matteo fell in with the right crowd in his youth.   After his first batch of higher education at La Sapienza University in Rome, where he specialized in Literature and Philosophy, Matteo entered into seminary studies with the Suburbicarian Diocese of Palestrina. I don't know that I've really gone into what a Suburbicarian Diocese is yet but the “suburb” part is a big hint, it's a diocese centered on one of the communities on the outskirts of Rome, in this case, Palestrina, and yes, that's the hometown of a famous composer if that rings a bell.   His se minary studies also included work at the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome, and then after his 1981 ordination he did yet further study at yet *another* institution of higher education in the Eternal City, this time obtaining a doctorate in letters and philosophy from the University of Rome with a thesis on the History of Christianity–a man after my own heart.   As a priest, Matteo–now Fr. Zuppi–served as vice-pastor of Santa Maria in Trastevere for nearly two decades until he became that parish's full-on pastor in 2000, a role he held until 2010. Of course this is the story of a future Cardinal who I've already told you is plenty qualified, so it won't surprise you to know that that's not all he was doing, not by a long shot. He simultaneously served as Rector of the church of Santa Croce alla Lungara from 1983 to 2012, and continued his association with the Community of Sant'Egidio, which had added the related fields of peacemaking end ecumenism to their portfolio–not as an afterthought either, but as a strong emphasis, as in Fr. Zuppi and the Community were instrumental in negotiations that ended a long civil war in Mozambique in 1992. As in, he was made an honorary citizen of that country by way of thanks, alongside Sant'Egidio founder Andrea Riccardi, popping up again.   While he was originally a priest of the Suburbicarian Diocese of Palestrina, astute listeners may have already noted that, much like the universities, all the parishes I've mentioned, including Sant'Egidio, are in Rome. It's fine, it's fine, he was incardinated into the Diocese of Rome back in ‘88, a sentence which gives me the opportunity to go on both a tangent about how the word inCARDinate is tied to the word CARDinal, both having a fundamental sense of a stationary position around which other things move, and also allows me to note that yeah, it's weird to call Rome a Diocese but in the end yup, officially Rome is a Diocese, rather than an archdiocese or Patriarchate or whatever you might expect. Of course it still acts as a metropolitan and as the principal see, but I expect it's tied to the whole first shall be last humility themed angle, servant of the servants of God sort of thing. And that's not to say that bishops of Rome aren't jealous of their status as the principle See of the entire world.   Anyways, Fr. Zuppi might be a good person to ask more about how all of that works, if you can get ahold of him with all else he has going on, because in 2012 his white phone rang and Pope Benedict made him an Auxiliary Bishop of Rome and titular bishop of Villanova. Rome has a bunch of auxiliaries, currently 7 by that specific title, presumably because the Church loves her numerology, and a few more bishops that help run things at something of a higher level with titles like Vicar General and Viceregent. Bishop Zuppi would not stay in the Diocese of Rome for much longer though, because in 2015 he was made the new Archbishop of Bologna, in the Emilia-Romagna region of what I think it's fair to call central north Italy.   As a pastor, Father–scratch that–Bishop–scratch that–Archbishop Zuppi has continued along the lines of emphasis he honed working with the Community of Sant'Egidio, focusing on real Pope Francis style stuff like the poor and marginalized. He authored books published in 2010, 2013, and 2019 on what I am told are “pastoral themes”, so stuff like that, but he's best known because of his personal involvement in one of the most hot-button of hot-button issues in the modern Church: LGBT issues. In 2017 American Jesuit priest Father James Martin wrote a book called Building a Bridge: How the Catholic Church and the LGBT Community Can Enter Into a Relationship of Respect, Compassion, and Sensitivity, which is pretty much what it sounds like. The next year, it was none other than Archbishop Zuppi who wrote a forward to the Italian edition, saying it was, quote “useful for encouraging dialogue, as well as reciprocal knowledge and understanding, in view of a new pastoral attitude that we must seek together with our L.G.B.T. brothers and sisters". He also noted that it would quote "help L.G.B.T. Catholics feel more at home in [I accidentally said “with”, my bad] what is, after all, their church", end quote, and it's worth noting that that second quotation was actually Archbishop Zuppi quoting Cardinal Kevin Farrell, the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Laity, Family and Life, so it's not like he was a lone voice in praising Father Martin's work.   Of course, I called this a hot-button issue, so praise was not universal. Many see Fr. Martin's work as an attempt to undermine Catholic teaching on gender and sexuality, despite Fr Martin's assurances that it is no such thing, and I admit Father Martin is even more comfortable pushing boundaries than I am, which is saying something. We'll see more conservative takes on this topic as we go, don't worry, this is not the last time we'll talk LGBT+ issues in the Church, but I've accidentally made this the longest episode of Cardinal Numbers to date so we should move on.   In 2019, Pope Francis made Archbishop Zuppi a Cardinal-Priest, assigning him a very special newly minted titular church, Sant'Egidio.   Since his elevation to the cardinalate, Cardinal Zuppi has gained more hats! In 2020 he was made a member of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See, and i n 2022, Pope Francis selected him as head of the Italian Bishop's Conference. In 2023 he was appointed as a justice of the Vatican City State Supreme Court, which took effect earlier this year, that's 2024 for archive listeners. And that's before we get to the Dicasteries, which we're just going to have to save for another day.   Cardinal Matteo Maria Zuppi is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2035.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers,  and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening; God bless you all! Thanks, Joe!

IMAGE DESCRIPTION By Reiner Diart - https://bilder.erzbistum-koeln.de/Erzbischof-Rainer-Maria-Kardinal-Woelki/Kardinal_Woelki_RGB_14 , CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=83254136  LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Woelki: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_woelki_rm.html        Ranier Maria Woelki on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2012.htm#Woelki     Cardinal Woelki on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/4248          Cardinal Woelki on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bwoel.html             Archdiocese of Cologne on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/koln0.htm?tab=info   Archdiocese of Cologne on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dkoln.html The History of Cologne podcast by Willem Fromm: https://podcastaddict.com/podcast/the-history-of-cologne/2535948  Catholic Education Resource Center's record of 2009 comments on abuse statistics by Archbishop Tomasi: https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/common-misconceptions/vatican-sets-record-straight-on-sexual-abuse.html  Tages Spiegel reporting on 2020 criticism of Cardinal Woelki from abuse commissioner: https://www.tagesspiegel.de/gesellschaft/panorama/missbrauchsbeauftragter-kritisiert-kolner-kardinal-woelki-scharf-4211776.html  2022 Catholic News Agency reporting on Cardinal Woelki submitting resignation: https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/250542/german-catholic-cardinal-woelki-submits-resignation-to-pope-francis-after-period-of-leave 2021 Gercke Report: https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:b48dfbcd-81c1-41d7-9ca2-62e01a4e5a11  2022 Union of Catholic Asia News reporting on Cologne abuse situation: https://www.ucanews.com/news/head-of-cologne-abuse-investigation-commission-resigns/99638  2023 National Catholic Register reporting on recent search of Cardinal Woelki's records by German law enforcement: https://www.ncregister.com/cna/german-cardinal-woelki-under-investigation-allegations-of-perjury-prompt-search-of-archdiocese  2014 profile of Cardinal Woelki (via Faith Matters- German): https://youtu.be/dudVMptuvZk?si=U3TLKelV_Q_yRdPh    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Cardinal Numbers, a rexypod ranking all the Cardinals of the Catholic Church we can get our hands on, from the Catacombs to Kingdom Come.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Please note that this episode includes a general discussion of the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church. I don't get graphic, but it's there.   Rainer Maria Woelki was born on August 18, 1956 in Cologne, Germany, which is in the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia on the western end of things. With well over a million residents, Cologne is Germany's fourth largest city and is on the short list of cities with their own dedicated longrunning history pod, The History of Cologne by Willem Fromm. Link in the show notes. (https://podcastaddict.com/podcast/the-history-of-cologne/2535948)   In his early 20s, Rainer did some obligatory military service as part of a unit called the Panzerartillerielehrbataillon. I *probably* would have mentioned his service even if it hadn't given me the opportunity to point out that Panzerartillerielehrbataillon is one word, but I guess we'll never know for sure because that was definitely a factor in my editing decisions for this episode.    Anyways, he was ordained a priest in 1985, at the age of 28, pretty much right on pace when you account for that military stint. As a priest of the Archdiocese of Cologne, he not only served in various chaplaincies, but also as private secretary of Cardinal Joachim Meisner, the then-Archbishop of Cologne.   From 1997 to 2003, Woelki served as director of a boarding school for seminarians. During this time he continued his studies, obtaining a Doctorate in Theology from the Pontificia Università della Santa Croce–that is, the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross–a school in Rome run by Opus Dei.   Presumably he stopped directing the boarding school in 2003 because his white phone rang- ring ring it's Pope John Paul II, here to make him titular bishop of Scampa and auxiliary bishop of Cologne. He was named a canon of Cologne's metropolitan Cathedral chapter later that year. He got involved in affairs for the German Bishops' Conference, serving on the Commission for vocations and ecclesiastical ministries; and on the Commission for science and culture. As you can see, or at least hear, the titles of offices in bishop's conferences start to read like Roman curial titles, which I suppose isn't too surprising.   Anyways in 2011 that white phone rang again and this time it was Pope Benedict XVI making Bishop Woelki the Archbishop of Berlin, which, given how much we've been going on about the Archdiocese of Cologne in this episode, might be a bit of a surprise but it can't have been completely out of the blue because Woelki was chosen by the Archdioceses' high metropolitan Cathedral Chapter, which, I admit, isn't something I'm super familiar with specifically but generally speaking Cathedral chapters have historically had a dominant influence in choosing who the bishop would be and that seems to be a custom that still has some staying power in some areas, particularly those with long traditions of doing things through Cathedral Chapters rather than in areas where things were set up air quotes “only” in in recent times–you know, in the last thousand years or so. So, you know, Europe. And in Eastern Catholic churches, whose traditions do not center Vatican appointments.   Anyways, yes, Berlin's Cathedral Chapter wanted Woelki,  and they got him, for a span.   In 2012, Archbishop Woelki became Cardinal Woelki, with Pope Benedict making him a Cardinal-Priest with the title of S. Giovanni Maria Vianney. At that point, he was the youngest member of the College of Cardinals, though by the end of the year that spot would be taken by Mar Cleemis, not to mention the also younger Cardinal Tagle.   Also in 2012, Cardinal Woelki was made a member of both the Congregation for Catholic Education and of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity. The next year, like the other Benedict appointees we've mentioned, Cardinal Woelki participated in the March 2013 conclave that elected Pope Francis.   In 2014, Cardinal Woelki was named member of the Congregation for the Clergy, and after three years as Archbishop of Berlin, he was transferred to his old home of the Cologne Archdiocese as its new Archbishop. The next year, because you can't keep a good Roman Curia down, he was named member of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See, effectively helping manage the Vatican's pocketbooks and keep things running financially.   More recently, the Archdiocese of Cologne generally and Cardinal Woelki specifically have been focal points in some of the more recent chapters of the ongoing sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church.    On the slight chance that some of my listeners are not aware of that topic in general, there have been thousands and thousands of cases of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests in the last century. One Vatican official put the total number of abusers among priests at between 1.5 and 5 percent, noting that the number was generally in line with other organizations, which is certainly an argument that can be made, but given that Jesus literally told His followers to “be perfect” (Mt 5:48), I don't think it's unreasonable to hold the shepherds of the Church He founded to a higher standard than society at large, and yeah, society at large should also be doing better when it comes to not sexually abusing minors.   I've talked about this before, and I'll talk about it again, not only because it's important to talk about it so efforts to sweep it under the rug fail–and there are such efforts, to be sure– but also because my intention is to talk about everything and this uncomfortable topic is part of “everything”. Plus you'd kind of have to go out of your way to avoid talking about it when talking about Cardinal Woelki. Not because anyone is suggesting he's an abuser himself, but because in 2020 he picked up the stink of a common and decidedly difficult to shake reputation especially particular to higher level clergy: a reputation of seeking to bury such stories when possible.   Right or wrong, the main catalyst for that reputation was a series of comments made by the Independent Commissioner for Issues of Child Sexual Abuse, one Johannes-Wilhelm Rörig. Among other things, Rörig said, quote “There are many indications that Cardinal Woelki may have made a massive mistake with regard to the participation of those affected, transparency and independence from processing”, end quote.   In particular, Rörig accused Cardinal Woelki of promising transparency and then not following through with it, referring in particular to an independent report on the abuse situation within the Archdiocese that Cardinal Woelki had commissioned but which he had prevented from going public, citing unspecified methodological issues and violations of personal rights.   To his credit, Cardinal Woelki did follow up and commission another report, the results of which he did make public in March 2021 in the 800-page Gercke report, linked, like everything else, in the show notes. That certainly was not the end of the matter though, and in September 2021, after an apostolic visitation–basically a Vatican audit– and what the Holy See described as “a long conversation” with the Pope, Cardinal Woelki went on sabbatical for several months, leaving the Archdiocese in the hands of an Apostolic Administrator.    Upon his return to active service in March 2022, Cardinal Woelki submitted his resignation to Pope Francis, who has not yet acted on the offer, though a 2021 Vatican statement did acknowledge Woelki had made quote “major mistakes”, end quote, especially when it comes to communication, and described a quote “crisis of confidence in the archdiocese”, end quote.   In addition to continuing his service in what's now the Dicastery for Promoting Christian Unity and the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See, Cardinal Woelki is also currently serving as a member of the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.   *Barring any changes to his status*, which is something I could always say but don't always say but am saying today *because reasons*, Rainer Maria Cardinal Woelki is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2036.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers,  and there will be more Cardinal Numbers  next week.. Thank you for listening; God bless you all! Thanks, Joe!

IMAGE DESCRIPTION Jeromeenriquez, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Ribat: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_ribat_j.html       John Ribat on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2016.htm#Ribat    Cardinal Ribat on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/2634          Cardinal Ribat on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bribat.html            Archdiocese of Port Moresby on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/pmor0.htm?tab=info  Archdiocese of Port Moresby on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dpomo.html   2020 Shalom World interview with Cardinal Ribat (English): https://youtu.be/WVx49GdMB0M?si=qIm5ptARu0aEJfKv       Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold! TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights. Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript. Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes. John RIBAT was born on February 9, 1957, in Volavolo, archdiocese of Rabaul, Papua New Guinea. As you may know, Papua New Guinea is an island nation, making John our fourth island-born Cardinal in a row, though Volavolo isn't actually on the island of New Guinea, instead, it's on the northern end of New Britain, the nation's second largest island. Ecologically, New Britain is that classic Oceanic mix of tropical rainforest and volcanos, to the extent that Rabaul, the provincial capital where John went to high school, now by and large sits under several meters of volcanic ash after a 1994 eruption. Don't worry, John was class of 70-something. After a bit of minor seminary preparation, John signed up with the Congregation of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart (M.S.C.)., a religious order founded in 1854 by a French priest. Of course, France is on the other side of the world from New Guinea, but “Missionaries” is right there in the name, and Rabaul and its volcano destroyed high school was actually their first oversees mission in 1882. John did his first vows in 1979, and was ordained a priest for the Sacred Heart Missionaries in 1985. He did pastoral work for the next six years, then started serving as a master of novices after some supplemental training. He alternated those roles through the 90s, and in the year 2000 he was called up from his work- now in Fiji- to serve as the Auxiliary Bishop of Bereina on the main island in Papua New Guinea.  In 2002 he dropped the Auxiliary part and became the full-on bishop of Bereina. Spiritually, a strong majority of Papua New Guineans identify as Christian, with the Roman Catholics representing between a quarter and a third of the total population, depending on who you ask. Various forms of Protestantism make up a larger group when viewed collectively, though Catholicism is the largest single group. Though Christianity is dominant, traditional animist customs and ancestor worship are also common in the country operating under or sometimes on the surface. In the case of the Bereina diocese, church records suggest a higher percentage of the local population is Catholic than the national average, over ⅔. In 2006 John Ribat was transferred to the capital see, running the Archdiocese of Port Moresby. According to my 2013 data, the first readily available during his tenure, the Archdiocese had 204,186 Catholics and, drumroll please, *six* diocesan priests. But old hands looking for a catch here have probably already called it, the keyword there is *diocesan* priests, as the Archdiocese also had a healthier total of 82 priests belonging to religious orders. Considering Archbishop Ribat is from a religious order himself, it's not too surprising, but it does draw attention to New Guinea's history as a significant focal point of the sort of missionary activity that missionary religious orders specialize in in recent years. Things are shifting in a logical pattern–in 1990 religious priests outnumbered diocesan in New Guinea four to one. Twenty-seven years later, they reached parity, and since then diocesan clergy have been gradually outpacing religious clergy in a trend that I expect to continue, though of course predicting the future is hard and honestly I don't have deep enough data at the moment to be especially confident, a statistical breakdown of clergy by religious order is on my to-do list here. Getting back to Archbishop Ribat, he was president of the Episcopal Conference of Papua New Guinea and Salomon Island from 2011 to 2014, and from 2014 to 2018 he was president of the Federation of the Conferences of the Catholic Bishops of Oceania (FCBCO). In 2016, Archbishop Ribat was made a Knight of the British Empire, which took me by surprise since I had it in my head that the Papuans had rejected the British monarchy at independence, but nope, turns out they're a commonwealth country with Charles III as their Head of State and God Save the King as their Royal Anthem. 2016 was also the year when Archbishop Ribat became eligible for this episode, with Pope Francis elevating him to the College as a Cardinal-Priest with the title of San Giovanni Battista de' Rossi–and yes that's a name church archeology fans will recognize but it's actually a 18th century priest and not the 19th century archeologist. I do seem to recall there is a connection between the two this time but I admit I've forgotten exactly what it was if so, either way I'm going to do a deeper dive on the titular churches and deaconries eventually so I'll get into that in more detail when we get there. Cardinal Ribat is the first Cardinal from the Sacred Heart Missionaries and also the first Cardinal from Papua New Guinea. In 2017, Pope Francis also added now-Cardinal Ribat to the Dicastery for the Service of the Integral Human Development, a role he has filled while continuing his service as the Archbishop of Port Moresby. John Cardinal RIBAT is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2037. Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening; God bless you all! Thanks Joe! Hey quick supplemental note from Gregg in case anyone's wondering, uh, yes, this was certainly recorded before we had the announcement of Pope Francis' upcoming trip to not only Papua New Guinea but also Indonesia, Timor Leste, that's East Timor, and Singapore. So he'll be on the road from September 2nd to September 13th of this year, which I believe is going to be his longest trip of his papacy. And then he's actually also going to be doing a quick European swingover to Luxembourg and Belgium from September 26th to the 29th so keep him in prayers for safe travels if you would be so kind, or, you know, thoughts if that's your thing, he's got a busy month ahead.

IMAGE CREDIT: Diocese of Gozo, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Grech: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_grech_m.html      Mario Grech on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2020.htm#Grech   Cardinal Grech on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/3529         Cardinal Grech on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bgrechm.html           Diocese of Gozo on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/gozo0.htm?tab=info  Diocese of Gozo on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dgozo.html 2023 English-language interview with Cardinal Mario Grech (via EWTN): https://youtu.be/5RCy0fNOyUE?si=6ZuVOX4XY_8D507q      Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Mario Grech was born on February 20, 1957, in Qala, Malta, Qala being a small community on the eastern edge of the island of Gozo, Gozo being the *second* largest island in Malta after, well, the Island of Malta, with Malta itself being a small island nation a bit south of Sicily. At a young age, the family moved to Ta' Kerċem, another small community on the same island.   Malta is an outsize name in the history of the Catholic Church, thanks to its hosting of the military order of Saint John of Jerusalem, aka the Hospitallers or more simply the Knights of Malta in the early modern period. Their holding out against Suleiman the Magnificent's Ottoman Empire–who, in fairness, had *successfully* kicked the Hospitallers out of the Greek Island of Rhodes earlier in his career–that success at the Great Siege of Malta was so famous that noted enemy of the Church Voltaire once said “Nothing is better known than the siege of Malta” (Annals of the Empire, 1753)   Also, to get this out of the way, there was recently a Maltese Cardinal by the name of Prosper Grech. I haven't seen it explicitly confirmed that the two Cardinals *aren't* related, but I haven't seen anyone suggest that they are either. So… maybe, but probably not? Grech *is* a common Maltese surname, to the extent that a random third party commenting on the passing of the older Cardinal also had the last name of Grech.   Anyways, let's actually talk about today's cardinal some, shall we? The island of Gozo has fewer than 40,000 people altogether, but in heavily Catholic Malta, that's enough to support a local seminary, which is where Mario went when he decided to start his priestly studies. Unusually, he did both his philosophy and theology studies at that same institution. It wasn't until after his 1984 ordination that he went further afield, being sent to Rome to study both canon and civil law at the Pontifical Lateran University. Following the pattern of some of our more bookish Cardinals, Father Grech then obtained a doctorate in canon law from the Angelicum.   While studying his doctorate and for a span after, Father Grech ministered at the cathedral, at the National Shrine of Tá-Pinu, and also served as a parish priest at the parish of Kercem. You're not going to be too surprised that he also taught canon law at the local seminary and held a number of roles within the Diocese of Gozo during this period as well.   In 2005 his white phone rang and Pope Benedict made him Bishop of Gozo. He was consecrated on January 22nd 2006, with his predecessor, Bishop Cauchi, serving as his principal consecrator. I got curious because by longstanding custom–and, well, canon law–new bishops are consecrated by three existing bishops to ensure apostolic succession, and there's only two dioceses in Malta. It turns out the retiring bishop Cauchi- who had ordained Mario Grech as a priest too, by the way– it turns out he was joined not only by the Archbishop of Malta but also by Malta's Apostolic Nuncio, which makes sense and eventually I'll come to expect that.   Bishop Grech has traveled a fair bit during his tenure, visiting emigrants from Malta living in the USA twice, and Australia once, along with a couple trips to South America.   From 2013 to 2016, Bishop Grech was President of the Episcopal Conference of Malta, which l, I mean, part of me says with just the two dioceses they would have had a hard time getting a euchre game going at their meetings, another part of me says there's probably a few more folks than I'm imagining if you count retired bishops and auxiliaries, and I don't know if they invite senior priests to take notes or what. Someone's got to bring the snacks, is all I'm saying.   Anyways, in 2016, Pope Francis published Amoris Laetitia, a post-synodal apostolic exhortation, in other words a Papal follow-up letter recapping the goings on of a synod, a gathering of bishops. In this case, the synod in question was the Synod on Family and the reason we're talking about Amoris Laetitia is because it seemed to open the door to communion for Catholics who had been divorced and then gotten civilly remarried, at least in certain cases and with careful discernment. That's getting into a theological issue, the finer points of which you could definitely spend a lot more time going into than I will here, but in short most Catholic bishops were and I think it's fair to say still are wary of allowing such an accommodation. I mean, I'm here for it, but I make no secret of being a big old softy when it comes to accommodations in general–and honestly I think it's fair to say Pope Francis has a similar mindset. But again, most bishops are of a more conservative bent. Except for our friend Bishop Grech, who was instrumental in helping implement exactly that sort of accommodation for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics–in certain cases, as specified– in Malta–though it's worth noting he's also on the record as being against divorce generally, which is pretty well expected of Catholic bishops. Just, you know, to be clear.   Anyways, Bishop Grech's time in Malta's surprisingly existent Bishops' Conference did not go to waste, because he also served on the Conference of European Churches (CEC) and the Commission of Bishops' Conferences of the European Union (COMECE). In 2019, he made the big time, being named the Pro-Secretary General of the Synod of Bishops–not for the Malta, not for the EU, but for the whole Catholic Church: a sufficiently big enough job that he stepped down as Bishop of Gozo in order to take it on.   The next year, he was named member of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity and in that same year–2020, if you lost count– he was named full on Secretary General of the Synod of Bishops, so the top dog post. A couple months later, Pope Francis gave him his red hat, making him a Cardinal deacon with Santi Cosma e Damiano as his deaconry.   The next year, Mario was also added to the The Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, the highest judicial authority in the Catholic Church apart from the Pope himself, should he choose to intervene, which he usually doesn't, but, you know, he could.   As a dedicated Curial Cardinal, Cardinal Grech also serves on the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, as well as the Dicastery for Bishops.   Mario Cardinal Grech is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2037.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers,  and there will be more Cardinal Numbers tomorrow. Thank you for listening; God bless you all! Thanks, Joe!

IMAGE CREDIT AND DESCRIPTION: Perrant, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, Archbishop of Manila, during the display of St. Caesarius's relics at Manila Cathedral. Image digitally brightened (and cropped, but all the images I use are cropped, so take that for granted). LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Tagle: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_tagle_la.html     Luis Antionio Gokim Tagle on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2012-ii.htm#Tagle  Cardinal Tagle on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/3166        Cardinal Tagle on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/btaglelag.html          Archdiocese of Manila on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/mani0.htm?tab=info         Archdiocese of Manila on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dmanp.html Pope_Predictor on X: https://x.com/pope_predictor?lang=en  500 YOC (Years of Christianity) video with Cardinal Tagle (English): https://youtu.be/Qre_7cf05VQ?si=_oCde2TKTAQuBJXY     Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Luis Antonio Gokim Tagle was born on June 21, 1957 in Manila, the capital and second largest city of the Philippines, located on Luzon, the large island that makes up most of the north of the country.   When you're born in a city comparable to New York, there's no need to go far to get your education. Of course, some do, but Luis kept things local through ordination, while still maintaining the norm of getting your philosophy and theology pieces of seminary training at separate institutions.   By 25, Father Tagle was a priest for the Archdiocese of Manila, serving as a pastor in a parish south of Manila proper and as a spiritual director at a nearby seminary. By the venerable age of 26, he was serving as rector of the seminary- the San Carlos Diocesan Seminary of Imus.   Father Tagle, who prefers to go by his nickname Chito, did go further afield in 1985, studying in Rome and the Catholic University of America, where he got a doctorate in theology in 1991. Having a doctorate didn't make him too big for his britches, he resumed pastoral work, carrying on into the new millennium doing that and various special roles within the Diocese–and some work on the global scale as well, serving on the International Theological Commission from 1997 to 2002.   In 2002, he was elected Bishop of Imus, that “south of Manila proper” area where his first pastoral assignment had taken place. His principal consecrator was Cardinal Sin, who, thankfully, spoke English and knew darn well he had a funny name for a Cardinal, taking to calling his lodgings “the house of Sin”. But enough about that, I need to stay focused on Tagle's rising star, because obviously, he's not done yet.   In 2011, Chito was made Archbishop of Manila. It's hard to think of a posting more likely to get you a red hat in the globalized Church than Manila. And it may be kind of weird to hear me talk about the globalized church given catholic has always meant universal and the Catholic Church has always been a big broad thing, but the reality is that for a good long while thanks to colonialism and other factors the college of Cardinals was primarily a European affair, with conclaves as recently as the 1922 election of Pius XI having only European participants. But the focus of the Church has shifted, the lens has widened, and it's hard to ignore the fact that over 92 million Catholics live in the Philippines. Actually, I suppose it's not *that* hard to ignore that fact, since it used to be something pretty well ignored, but since 1960 Manila has always had a Cardinal, or at least if the Cardinal of Manila had just died, their successor would get a red hat in the next consistory. So naturally, as Archbishop of Manila, Chito was made a Cardinal when Pope Benedict created new Cardinals in February 2012, right?   Well, yes, but actually no, because his predecessor–not the wonderfully named Cardinal Sin but the guy between them, Cardinal Rosales--was still a Cardinal under the age of 80 and therefore even though he had retired from active service as the bishop he was still eligible to participate in any future conclaves, and it wouldn't do to have two Cardinals representing Manila in one conclave. Of course that's all conjecture but I'm far from the first to propose that logic and the pattern of being reluctant to make someone a Cardinal as long as their predecessor is still around as a voting Cardinal does seem to check out when you look at the data.   In any event, Cardinal Rosales turned 80 later in 2012 and Archbishop Tagle was on Pope Benedict's surprise supplemental November consistory towards the end of that year. I won't go too far down the rabbit hole of interpreting that supplemental consistory as an early warning sign of Pope Benedicts' shocking [retirement] announcement a few months later, but, well, that *is* a thing that happened, and so, like Baselios Cardinal Cleemis we talked about right before I went on hiatus, Chito found himself participating in the 2013 conclave that elected Pope Francis.   Now, I know we're going to have lots more opportunities to talk about papal conclaves as we go. So ideally I'd ease you into this conversation. But the reality is Cardinal Tagle is currently the odds-on favorite to become Pope after the next conclave, and while that's far from a guarantee–conclaves are famously unpredictable--its not something I'd feel right, you know, not mentioning. So with that out of the way, keep that in mind as we go. By the way, feel free to follow @pope_predictor on the platform formerly known as Twitter, or wherever else you and/or they might be using by the time you listen to this. Their papability index isn't the only thing out there projecting Tagle as the favorite, but they're one of the more engaging and they said I could call them a friend of the show so there you have it.   Anyways, Cardinal Tagle is fluent in speaking his native Tagalog language, as well as English and Italian. He can also read Spanish, French, Korean and Latin.   Staying in 2013, he was made a member of the Pontifical Council for the Family and of the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerants, as well as the Congregation for Education. But why stop there? In 2014, he was named member of the Pontifical Council for the Laity and also the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.   In 2015, the good folks at Caritas must have seen him looking bored, because they went and made him their president, and he was also added to the Pontifical Council Cor Unum. I'm not going to spell out every post he's held but I did want to give you an idea. By 2020 his curial responsibilities had reached the point where he resigned the Archbishopric of Manila and became a full time curial Cardinal. The pivotal appointment there was his appointment as the Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples. 2020 was also the year where he reached a height not yet obtained by any other cardinal we've discussed so far: he was elevated to the status of Cardinal-Bishop, which yes, historically had something to do with one being both a Cardinal and a Bishop, but nowadays Cardinal Priests and even Cardinal Deacons are typically bishops too so the distinction is a bit more nuanced. In the end, it's the highest tier within the college of Cardinals. There are currently a dozen Cardinal Bishops, which, it should be noted, is more than there used to be.   I'm well past word count at this point. I'll simply note that in terms of his current titles, Chito is a member of seven Dicasteries–nearly half of them, there are sixteen by my count—and two of the Vatican's financial oversight groups with unwieldy names. And, of course, more besides.   Luis Antonio Gokim Cardinal Tagle is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2037.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening; God bless you all! Thanks, Joe!

IMAGE Archcomms, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Goh https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_goh_w.html        William Goh Seng Chye on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2022.htm#Goh      Cardinal Goh on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/51831       Cardinal Goh on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bgoh.html        Archdiocese of Singapore on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/sing0.htm?tab=info        Archdiocese of Singapore on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dsngp.html 2013 Singapore News interview with the new bishop (archived via Archive.org): https://web.archive.org/web/20130224030700/http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1255881/1/.html  2022 Vatican News interview with Cardinal-Elect Goh: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2022-07/interview-meet-the-first-future-cardinal-of-singapore.html 2022 Catholic News Singapore coverage of World Day of Migrants and Refugees w/Archbishop Goh https://catholicnews.sg/2022/10/16/building-the-future-with-migrants/  Website of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei: https://cbcmsb.org/about/  2016 english-Language reminiscing from then-Archbishop Goh: https://youtu.be/XigJFfXDg3Y?si=xZsFrWbyzaij-kFA    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   William GOH SENG CHYE was born on June 25, 1957 in Singapore, an island city-state in southeast Asia just off the Malay Peninsula, which was at the time still a British crown colony, but which would soon begin self-rule. I mentioned Singapore when discussing Cardinal Francis, who was born just across the strait in neighboring Malaysia. In fact, I even referenced today's Cardinal, saying I would be covering him in November, but of course things changed a bit since then and I expect you'll forgive me if I don't wait until this November to avoid being wrong about that.   Anyways, as if to underscore how close all of Singapore is to its larger neighbor, William did the philosophy half of his seminary training in Malaysia and the theology half in Singapore. Shortly before his 28th birthday, he was ordained as a priest for the Archdiocese of Singapore, and yes, if you guessed that the Archdiocese of Singapore is actually the only diocese in Singapore, you'd be correct. We looked at the somewhat similar case of tiny Luxembourg a couple episodes ago, but there are differences here, most notably in terms of population density- Singapore is less than a third the size of Luxembourg, but has over eight times the population. The island is basically one big city, home to nearly six million souls. Also, unlike Luxembourg, most of those souls aren't Catholic, with the Church claiming 170,000 adherents, or a little over 3% of the population.   The first five years of William's priesthood were spent as a pastor in one of Singapore's 32 Catholic churches. As a colonial legacy, Masses in Singapore are typically said in English, and yes Cardinal Goh's English is fine. Oops, sorry, I'm supposed be calling him Father Goh for this part so you can pretend to be surprised. My bad. Anyways, his Mandarin is also fine, for what it's worth.   Father Goh made his way to Rome and studied at the Pontifical Gregorian University for the next couple years, winding up with a licentiate in theology. Upon his return to Singapore it was back to pastoral work as well as a professorship at the local seminary. By 2005, he was serving as rector.   On December 29th, 2012, Father Goh was selected as the Coadjutor Archbishop of Singapore, which would normally mean he would become the new Archbishop within the next few months, and in this case meant yes, he became the new Archbishop about five months later.   When he became coadjutor, he had the following to say, quote:   "I would like to pay particular attention to the young people because this is the important lot of people in the church. They are vibrant, they are creative, they are full of energy, so the church needs to reach out to these young people, so I would like to meet them too, and to understand their aspirations and how they can contribute to the growth of the church.”   End quote. Unusually, Archbishop Goh also had a role in the secular government of Singapore, serving on the Presidential Council for Minority Rights from 2015 to 2018.   Speaking of minority rights, when it comes to migrants Archbishop Goh has been supportive, hosting special masses and saying things like, quote:   “Be inclusive and always be available and generous with your time and talents to help others grow and flourish, especially the migrants. Only then will we be able to build God's Kingdom where fraternity may flourish.”   End quote. Anyone vaguely familiar with Pope Francis knows he's got a soft spot for migrants, and sharing that sense is a good way to get on his good books. One way or another, Pope Francis made Archbishop Goh Singapore's first Cardinal in 2022. Later that year, he appointed him to the Dicastery for Laity, Family and Life.   William Cardinal GOH is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2037.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers,  and there will be more Cardinal Numbers soon. Thank you for listening; God bless you all! Thanks Joe! [NOTE: Joe is our first Patreon subscriber, and hosts Prime Factors. Check it out here: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2Yk91r75zwnP036vPm0wgI?si=jdPB80FPRJO7g-rd1LnjcA]

LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Lacroix https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_lacroix_gc.html       Gérald Cyprien Lacroix on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2014.htm#Lacroix   Cardinal Lacroix on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/24599      Cardinal Lacroix on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/blacrgc.html       Archdiocese of Québec on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/queb0.htm?focus=24599&tab=info       Archdiocese of Québec on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dqueb.html ISPX website: https://ispx.org/en-assemblee-pour-sengager-totalement/  National Catholic Register abuse allegation coverage: https://www.ncregister.com/cna/canadian-cardinal-lacroix-named-in-sexual-abuse-lawsuit  Reuters abuse allegation coverage: https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canadian-cardinal-temporarily-steps-down-after-lawsuit-alleging-abuse-2024-01-26/  America Magazine coverage of abuse investigation and Cardinal Lacroix's return to ministry: https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2024/07/23/quebec-cardinal-vatican-abuse-248430  2020 Salt and Light interview with Cardinal Lacroix (English): https://youtu.be/SvPhxY34AuA?feature=shared    IMAGE CREDIT: CNS photo/Philippe Vaillancourt, Presence, via America Magazine. Imaged cropped. IMAGE SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION: Cardinal Gerald C. Lacroix of Quebec walks with his crosier following a Dec. 12 Mass for the opening of the Holy Door in Notre-Dame Cathedral. https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2017/06/21/canadian-cardinal-spent-9-years-colombian-war-zone-now-he-serves-new-periphery Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Before we do, I have a note from last week's episode, courtesy of attentive listener Christine de Pizan, who asked about the fifteenth century Cardinal Louis de Luxembourg when I described Cardinal Höllerich as Luxembourg's first Cardinal. After getting over my elation that someone as cool as Christine listens to my podcast, and apparently listens closely, I dug into the matter and quickly found not one not two but three and nearly four such “de Luxembourg” Cardinals, all listed as French by my sources. The question is fair, where did they get the de Luxembourg thing? Well, if you go back through the generations, according to Christine who was kind enough to help answer her own question, they're all descendants of  Henry V, Count of Luxembourg, who looms fairly large in Luxembourger history, and who I reckon could fairly be called Luxembourgish himself. The de Luxembourg Cardinals are certainly worth mentioning when talking about the history of Catholic Cardinals in connection to Luxembourg, and I look forward to diving into their stories eventually. But by their day, well, I am comfortable continuing to count them as French for now, given their strong connections and daily life in France. The question of national equivalency gets fuzzier and fuzzier the further back you go, enough that I've considered dropping it as a focal point, but in the end people do pay close attention to the national makeup of the College of Cardinals, so it's worth discussing, even if it gets murky. So thank you again Christine for drawing the de Luxembourg Cardinals to my attention, you inspired me to spend a fair amount of time working on my Cardinals database this week, which is always a pleasure, so thank you for that and for listening as well. I also should note that an accusation of abuse of a minor was made against today's Cardinal, Cardinal Lacroix, after I wrote my original summary of his life..Cardinal Lacroix, who categorically denies the allegations, temporarily stepped aside from his duties as a result in January of this year, returning to duty just last month, in July of 2024, after an investigation by a retired judge concluded with no evidence being found to support a canonical trial. The judge did note that the investigation should be considered incomplete, given that Cardinal Lacroix's accuser refused to participate, I'm guessing there's a trust issue, though the investigating judge also described Cardinal Lacroix;s record as “impeccable”.   Anyways, without further ado, let's get into it.   Gérald Cyprien Lacroix was born on July 27th, 1957 in Saint-Hilaire de Dorset, a community in the far south of Canada's Québec Province. His parents were farmers who moved the family to New Hampshire when he was 8 years old, and he finished his childhood in New England. In 1975, presumably after turning 18 though possibly a bit before, he joined the Secular institute Pius X, or ISPX. Presumably he heard about it in part because it was founded in Manchester, New Hampshire, where he went to high school. The ISPX should not be confused with the SSPX, which we'll talk about sometime in the future. As for the Secular Institute part, we're basically talking following the evangelical counsels–you know, poverty, chastity, and obedience–that you normally see in a monastic setting without the monastery part, so there's a focus on living in the world rather than in community.   The ISPX is headquartered in Québec, the land of Gérald's birth, and he went back that way about this time. He didn't jump immediately into seminary though, taking the “secular” part of “secular institute” to heart and working for a restaurant, then as a graphic designer at a publishing house. In 1980 he took a year to do missionary work at a clinic for the poor in Columbia–service to the poor being a special focus of the ISPX. On his return he began studying at the Université Laval, a public university rather than the seminaries you may have come to expect.   The ISPX must have liked what he was doing, because in 1982 they made Gérald their Secretary-General when he was a 25 year old college student who made his perpetual vows that same year. It's not clear what his duties were as Secretary-General, normally as we've seen when it comes to Church stuff secretary is actually a fairly high posting, but I don't get the sense that this was like being Secretary-General at, say, the UN. It definitely wasn't the top post, I can say that much.    He held other posts in the Institute, becoming counselor of the General Counsel in 1985. Presumably that was an advancement, and soon he was Director General of one of their centers for spiritual formation.   In 1988, he was ordained a deacon in New Hampshire, then a few months later a priest in Québec, so very much a two-worlds scenario. Or rather, three worlds, because from 1990 to 2000 he was back serving in Columbia, carrying out tasks from assisting at a local parish to acting as a radio host, presumably in Spanish, though Gérald was also comfortable in English and French because of his background. While in Columia he also established nine houses for the ISPX, and yeah I know I said what made the ISPX a secular institute was a focus on living in the world rather than in community but, well, it's complicated. You still want to have a stable situation and base of operations, so even secular institutes still have religious houses. It goes back to that constant Martha and Mary discussion, as it always does.   Nine houses sounds like good growth for the order, and it seems they agreed, because in 2001 Father Lacroix became the top man for sure, the Director General, and that's how I know Secretary General was apparently not the top job.   Usually I can have more confidence about the inner workings of the religious orders we're discussing because, frankly, they're older and bigger. In the case of the ISPX, I mean, the Church has only formally recognized the concept of a Secular Institute since 1947-which is an odd thing to read on the website of a Secular Institute founded eight years before that in 1939, but hey, these things usually do start at the local level and then bubble up.   In 2008, deep into his second four-year term running the ISPX, Father Lacroix was established as a member of the Executive Council of the World Conference for the Secular Institutes. The following year, 2009, he was made an Auxiliary Bishop of Québec, becoming Titular Bishop of Ilta because as you may recall auxiliary bishops tend to become titular bishops of defunct diocesesA as a way of emphasizing the one-diocese one-bishop model while still allowing for additional admin help in larger sees.   At the time, the Archbishop of Québec was Cardinal Marc Ouellet, though not for much longer as Cardinal Ouellet was made Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, a Curial post of sufficient intensity that he left the Archdiocese for Rome full time. You won't be surprised to learn that the conveniently placed Auxiliary Bishop Lacroix was chosen to succeed him in the post, nor will you be surprised that Pope Francis made him a Cardinal in 2014, during his first consistory. That same year, he was made a member of the Congregation for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and the Societies of Apostolic Life, which makes sense given his background, as well as the Pontifical Councils for Interreligious Dialogue and for Culture. Later, in 2020, he was added to the Council for the Economy, and finally, just last year,, Pope Francis added him to both the Dicastery for Culture and Education and his elite Council of Cardinals. Considering Cardinal Hollerich also made his way onto the Council of Cardinals at the end of our last episode, you'd be forgiven for thinking everyone and their brother is a member, but no, there are only nine members, all Cardinals. Considering there are currently 236 Cardinals, it's an exclusive club within an exclusive club, though I'm sure Pope Francis wouldn't call it that. An advisory body within an advisory body, is that better?   Anyways, unless he resigns early or something, which I am not predicting, Cardinal Lacroix is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2037.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

IMAGE DESCRIPTION: Saint Luke the Evangelist. Russian Eastern Orthodox icon from Russia. 18th century. Wood, tempera. Via Wikimedia Commons. https://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/ultraviolet-light-reveals-scientists-hidden-bible-passage-1500-years-later (for Luke) Unique passages: https://www.julianspriggs.co.uk/pages/UniquePassages  Thanks Biblehub.com's parallel chapters tool. Words of Jesus ("All the Red Letter Scriptures") https://www.jesusbelieverjd.com/all-the-red-letter-scriptures-of-jesus-in-the-bible-kjv/    Parallel Passages in the Gospels https://www.bible-researcher.com/parallels.html#sect1     The Eye of the Needle (crossword/sudoku feedback): https://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-25583,00.html#:~:text=The%20%22Eye%20of%20the%20Needle,in%20order%20to%20enter%20heaven   Camel needle w/Aquinas citation (of Anselm of Canterbury)-- Anselm of Canterbury as cited in Catena Aurea, Thomas Aquinas, CCEL Edition. https://classictheology.org/2021/10/12/through-the-eye-of-an-actual-needle-the-fake-gate-theory/    The Widow's Mite: https://numismatics.org/pocketchange/the-poor-widows-mite/    Miracles of Jesus reference list: https://sunnyhillschurch.com/3301/the-37-miracles-of-jesus-in-chronological-order/    TRANSCRIPT   Welcome to the Popeular History Podcast: History through Pope Colored Glasses. My name is Gregg and this is episode 0.21g: Sayings of the Savior Part VII: A Look at Luke.   All of these aught episodes are made to let us build our Pope-colored glasses so we can use the same lenses when we look at history together. If you're lost, start at the beginning!   Today we continue our Sayings of the Savior series with a look at Luke, covering everything Jesus said in that Gospel that we haven't yet discussed–so leaving off things like the miracles we did in 0.20 and the parables and other sayings we did in earlier Sayings of the Savior installments- so we'll be leaving you in suspense right before the concluding few chapters discussing Jesus' death and His (spoiler alert) resurrection, which we'll cover as we finish the remaining mysteries of the rosary in future Catholic worldbuilding episodes.   We already covered the first three chapters of Luke gradually from Episode 0.14 to Episode 0.19, and we'll cover the last three chapters as we talk through the Passion and the Resurrection (oops, spoilers). Which leaves Luke chapters 4 through 21 as our focus for today.   Luke 4 starts with the Temptation in the Desert. As you know by now, it's not unusual to find parallel scenes in the Gospels, especially in the so-called synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and fitting with that pattern, we saw a version of this scene in Matthew, and it actually made an appearance in Mark as well, though the Mark version was so abbreviated it didn't actually assign any dialog to Jesus or Satan so I didn't zoom in on it–after all, this is Sayings of the Savior.   Anyways, let's see Luke's temptation scene and note what differences we see from Matthew's version.   In the first temptation, Matthew has Satan referring to multiple stones Jesus could turn into bread after his 40 day fast, while Luke has just one stone. I'm sure there's commentary that discusses this difference--it's the Bible, there's commentary for everything– but unlike the Mark episode, I'm not going to go into quite that level of detail with Luke. It's worth noting that when Christ responds with   LUKE "It is written: 'Man shall not live on bread alone.'”   GREGG he leaves off the second half of the quote from Deuteronomy 8:3   “but on every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD.”   which Matthew had included.   Then, the second and third temptation we saw in Matthew are reversed. In Luke, Satan first tells Jesus he can give him all sorts of power if He worships him, which, I mean, I guess things would have been pretty different if Jesus had taken him up on that. Like, serious plot twist. But nah. He says   LUKE “It is written: 'Worship the Lord your God and serve him only”   GREGG and then the third temptation in Luke's ordering is the testing of God's protection of Jesus. Rather than seeing if God will save Him, Jesus says:   LUKE: It is said: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'”   GREGG After seeing the devil off, Jesus begins his traveling and preaching ministry and soon enough winds up in his hometown. This is a scene that showed up in Matthew and Mark as well, the one where Jesus notes that no prophet is welcome in his hometown. In Luke it's more thorough and frankly dramatic. Long quote ahead, let's get into it:   LUKE 4 16He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read,   17and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:   18"The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free,   19to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.”   20Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him.   21He began by saying to them, "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”   22All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. "Isn't this Joseph's son?" they asked.   23Jesus said to them, "Surely you will quote this proverb to me: 'Physician, heal yourself!' And you will tell me, 'Do here in your hometown what we have heard that you did in Capernaum.'"   24"Truly I tell you," he continued, "no prophet is accepted in his hometown.   25I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah's time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land.   26Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon.   27And there were many in Israel with leprosy in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed--only Naaman the Syrian.”   28All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this.   29They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him off the cliff.   30But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way.   GREGG   So, just to recap, we have Jesus preaching a bit of a softball passage from Isaiah, promising good news to the poor. That was a long quote, so let's hear just that passage as a refresher:   “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor”   The good news part is clear enough In terms of freedom and healing, but what is the year of the Lord's favor mentioned?   By all accounts it's the Jubilee year described in Leviticus 25. You know how the seventh day is the Sabbath, a day of rest for the people? Well the seventh year was a “day”of rest for the fields, where they were to lie fallow, that is, go untilled and unworked, letting nature take its course for a year. Crops could not be harvested in an organized way, though what grows could be casually consumed by the owners, or by the needy,  or really by anyone, or by animals. Going further, personal debts among the people of Israel were cancelled in a levelling move. This custom is still in force in much of Israel, where it is called the Shmita. Of course, following the quasi-precept of “two Jews, three opinions”, application slash abrogation of this practice varies.   Anyways, the Jubilee year was not the seventh year, the Smhita I mentioned, but rather the fiftieth year, being the year after the seventh set of seven years, because symbolism. In the Jubilee year, things were even more intense, for instance going beyond personal debt forgiveness to returning sold land to the tribe of origin and to freeing Israelites who had sold themselves into slavery, basically a factory reset for society.   But note, this was only enslaved Israelites who were to be freed in the Jubilee year, the “year of the Lord's favor”. And this is where we turn back to Luke 4, because Jesus pivots the conversation away from the people of Israel to the fringes and even beyond the borders of Jewish society, to Sidon and Syria. But sending the good news to the gentiles is quite a bridge too far for his audience, who prepare to kill him in their rage. Like I said, quite the scene, and it's easy to understand why skeptics might place it as having been written after Christianity had already begun to spread among the gentiles and catch flack for doing so on the home front. My main narrative episodes haven't gotten far, but we've already started to see some of that tension, and it will only grow.   Of course, I've committed to getting my Catholic Worldbuilding stuff done before I dive back into the main narrative stuff, and to do that we need to get through the rest of Luke, and to do *that* we at least need to get through the rest of Luke 4.   After escaping the assembled mob, apparently by miraculous means of some kind because it simply says He walked right through the crowd, Jesus proceeds to do other miracles in towns around the region. The people who lived near Peter's mother-in-law must have really appreciated the assist, because in stark contrast to his hometown reception they tried to keep him from leaving. He responded:   LUKE 4 “I must proclaim the good news of the kingdom of God to the other towns also, because that is why I was sent.”   GREGG Luke 5 opens with Jesus calling his disciples to follow Him. We covered the miraculous catch of fish that got Peter on board when we did our roundup of miracles, and other assorted miracles carry us through to Verse 27, when we have the Call of Matthew, known to Luke as Levi.   Matthew vs. Levi Is worth a minute. Matthew is the more common name for this disciple, and may have been his Christian name. But Levi is the name preferred here in Luke and also in Mark. One explanation I saw in multiple places is that Matthew is a Greek name while Levi is Hebrew, an explanation that suffers from being wrong, as Matthew is Hebrew for “gift of God”. A perhaps more successful explanation is that Matthew was a Levite, you know, someone from the Tribe of Levi, and things got a bit garbled. Or there was a name change that just didn't get recorded in Scripture or in any other tradition for that matter..   Matthew and Levi being separate individuals seems to be the least popular theory, so regardless of the particulars, your takeaway from this should be the same as it was when we talked about this last episode: they're the same person.   Either way, here's the call of Matthew *cough* Levi:   LUKE 5 27Jesus went out and saw a tax collector by the name of Levi sitting at his tax booth. "Follow me," Jesus said to him, 28and Levi got up, left everything and followed him.   GREGG OK, maybe I didn't need to go into all that detail for two words of Jesus, but hey, what's done is done, so “follow me” across a few more verses, where Jesus gets questioned about the company He's chosen to keep:   LUKE 5 Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” 31Jesus answered them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”   GREGG That's good news for us sinners, I can tell you that much.   Luke 5 finishes with some parables, which we covered in the Parables roundup earlier in this series, so on to Luke 6, which opens with the grain-picking scene we've seen a couple of times already. SYNOPTIC ROUNDUP, you know the drill [airhorn], except I'm skipping rehashing the other two accounts, just, you know, general reminder that synoptic parallels are a thing.   Anyways, let's get another dose of that “Lord of the Sabbath” action:   LUKE 6 1One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and his disciples began to pick some heads of grain, rub them in their hands and eat the kernels. 2Some of the Pharisees asked, "Why are you doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?” 3Jesus answered them, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? 4He entered the house of God, and taking the consecrated bread, he ate what is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.” 5Then Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”   GREGG Oh yeah, good stuff. Check my Matthew and Mark episodes if you want more commentary on it, I want to buckle down and get to John. Of course by that I mean John the Baptist, whose inquiry  gives us of the next section we need to cover. Of course, as is so often the case with these synoptic Gospels, this isn't actually a whole new section. This next chunk closely matches a parallel passage in Matthew 11. If you want to follow along, in Matthew it's the start of that Chapter, while in Luke we're at chapter 7 verse 18:   LUKE 7 18John's disciples told him about all these things. Calling two of them, 19he sent them to the Lord to ask, "Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else? 20When the men came to Jesus, they said, "John the Baptist sent us to you to ask, 'Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?'” 21At that very time Jesus cured many who had diseases, sicknesses and evil spirits, and gave sight to many who were blind.   GREGG Oh look there's a batch of miracles that didn't make it into my miracles roundup, at least not directly. It's pretty vague, and it's unique to Luke. This small difference is exactly the sort of thing that gets analyzed to try to understand the relationship between Matthew and Luke, and like every other bit of Scriptural analysis you can find someone taking pretty much any conceivable stance. In any case, the reference to those timely miracles helps set the stage for the next verse, which is back to closely paralleling Matthew:   LUKE 7 22So he replied to the messengers, "Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor. 23Blessed is anyone who does not stumble on account of me.”   24After John's messengers left, Jesus began to speak to the crowd about John: "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed swayed by the wind? 25If not, what did you go out to see? A man dressed in fine clothes? No, those who wear expensive clothes and indulge in luxury are in palaces. 26But what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. 27This is the one about whom it is written: "'I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.' 28I tell you, among those born of women there is no one greater than John; yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.”   GREGG Now, I went back and checked my commentary on Matthew's version of this scene, and it was basically nothing. Which is fair, I was pretty deadline-crunched at the time and knew I'd be revisiting it here. But it's definitely worth noting that both passages have John the Baptist, who Jesus proclaims as a great, or even the greatest, prophet, both passages have this spiritual giant publicly uncertain about whether Jesus is the Messiah.   You could perhaps argue this was a ruse, but John seems to have been a straight shooter- that's why he's sending delegates from prison after all rather than asking himself. So it seems to be a genuine question. Which means if you're under the impression that having faith or even being the greatest prophet ever automatically means you have no remaining questions and can see all of God's plan perfectly, apparently not. After all, John had been the one ministering at Jesus' baptism, where Heaven had opened and the Spirit had come down as a dove and God's own voice had told Jesus: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”   And yet now John is asking, publicly: “Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?"   There's a lesson in there on vulnerability and openness to God's plan. Or perhaps a lesson in how everyone can encounter uncertainty, no matter how certain their role seems. We'll see Jesus go even further in questioning during the Passion narrative when the time comes.   Skipping a few verses of parenthetical commentary that can only be found in Luke, let's pick back up at Luke 7 verse 31:   LUKE 7 31Jesus went on to say, "To what, then, can I compare the people of this generation? What are they like? 32They are like children sitting in the marketplace and calling out to each other: "'We played the pipe for you, and you did not dance; we sang a dirge, and you did not cry.' 33For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and you say, 'He has a demon.' 34The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and you say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.' 35But wisdom is proved right by all her children.”   GREGG If you aren't willing to listen, you'll find any excuse to dismiss the message. But the wise will be shown by making the right choice.   After wrapping that up, Jesus goes on a bit of a parable tour until he winds up with a bit more family awkwardness In Luke 8:19:   LUKE 8 19 Now Jesus' mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. 20 Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting CORRECT  to see you.”   21 He replied, “My mother and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into practice.”   GREGG Ouch, but also yay, Jesus doesn't put His earthly family above others. Which is good news If you didn't start out as His family, though it might sting a little if you did.   The rest of Luke 8 is a bunch of previously-discussed miracles, so we're on to Luke 9:   LUKE 9 9 When Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to drive out all demons and to cure diseases, 2 and he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal the sick. 3 He told them: “Take nothing for the journey—no staff, no bag, no bread, no money, no extra shirt. 4 Whatever house you enter, stay there until you leave that town. 5 If people do not welcome you, leave their town and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.” 6 So they set out and went from village to village, proclaiming the good news and healing people everywhere.   GREGG This Isn't the first or even the second time we've seen these basic marching orders, but it actually is the last as John is, well, a very different Gospel, as we'll see in our next worldbuilding episode.   Anyways, after feeding the 5,000 we get to verse 18, where Luke's version of Peter's confession begins. As with Mark, don't get too excited:   LUKE 9 18 Once when Jesus was praying in private and his disciples were with him, he asked them, “Who do the crowds say I am?”   19 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, that one of the prophets of long ago has come back to life.”   20 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”   Peter answered, “God's Messiah.”   21 Jesus strictly warned them not to tell this to anyone.”   GREGG   So that's three for three on synoptic Gospels having Peter describe Jesus as the Messiah. Only Matthew did the keys thing, though. Also note the messianic secret trope popping up again- Jesus will apparently reverse his gag order after the Passion, because the Book of Acts- which was also written by Luke, or at least by whoever wrote Luke, will be all about telling everyone Jesus is the Messiah.   Immediately after that exchange, Jesus starts talking about his future, and it's not rosy:   LUKE 9 22 And he said, “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.”   23 Then he said to them all: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me. 24 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will save it. 25 What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit their very self? 26 Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.   27 “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.”   GREGG This is all closely paralleling Matthew, and Mark as well, though as usual Mark was a bit shorter, skipping the last verse about some standing there not tasting death before they see the Kingdom. Again, you can see why early Christians were basically a doomsday cult expecting the end sooner rather than later. Certainly *your* end will come, so, you know, keep that in mind.   We're going to skip the transfiguration since that's its own mystery of the rosary with its own episode, and there's another miracle account after that. So skipping along, come with me to Luke 9:43:   LUKE 9 While everyone was marveling at all that Jesus did, he said to his disciples, 44 “Listen carefully to what I am about to tell you: The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men.” 45 But they did not understand what this meant. It was hidden from them, so that they did not grasp it, and they were afraid to ask him about it.   GREGG If my episode on Mark is still fresh in your mind, you may already predict where this is going, as this particular section is a close Mark and Luke parallel. Matthew split things up in different ways but for both Mark and Luke the conversation with a child and being the greatest in the kingdom follows immediately after Jesus states what will become of him, leaving the disciples too afraid to ask.   Let's carry on with the next verse:   LUKE 9 46 An argument started among the disciples as to which of them would be the greatest. 47 Jesus, knowing their thoughts, took a little child and had him stand beside him. 48 Then he said to them, “Whoever welcomes this little child in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. For it is the one who is least among you all who is the greatest.”   GREGG The next verse is a bit of a random aside, but an important one as I mentioned before when it came up in Mark:   LUKE 9 49 “Master,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we tried to stop him, because he is not one of us.”   50 “Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “for whoever is not against you is for you.”   GREGG Skipping ahead to verse 57, we have some stray sayings that underline the urgency of following Christ:   LUKE 9 57 As they were walking along the road, a man said to him, “I will follow you wherever you go.”   58 Jesus replied, “Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.”   59 He said to another man, “Follow me.”   But he replied, “Lord, first let me go and bury my father.”   60 Jesus said to him, “Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of God.”   61 Still another said, “I will follow you, Lord; but first let me go back and say goodbye to my family.”   62 Jesus replied, “No one who puts a hand to the plow and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God.”   GREGG A bit harsh, but Jesus is like that sometimes.   Luke 10 opens with an long section on Jesus' next project, sending out seventy-two disciples, or seventy according to some manuscripts. Some may recall a previous seventy vs seventy-two discussion when we talked about the Septuagint, and I expect there's a reason for that parallel, but either way that's not the particular rabbit hole I want to go down here today. Instead, I want to note that we can have some fun with this Luke-only passage, and that we wouldn't be the first to do so.   You see, seventy is a long but not completely impractical number of folks to list off, and while Luke doesn't give names, there are plenty of extrabiblical sources assigning names and biographical details to some or all of the seventy. This passage discussing Jesus sending out seventy disciples was especially useful for ancient or wannabe ancient dioceses that couldn't trace back to a specific Apostle. Instead, lo and behold, turns out their founder was one of the unnamed seventy. Boom presto, a biblical founder!   Of course that's the skeptical read, it could well be that some such stories are true. But there are enough names assigned to the 70 that they certainly aren't *all* true, kind of like how there are at least four heads of John the Baptist floating around. In the end, as a reminder, Catholics are generally free to believe or disbelieve in the authenticity and or efficacy of any particular relic or tradition as long as they accept the fundamental teachings and authority of the Catholic Church.   In terms of the promised fun we can have, I'd like to announce a little side project, a game where I share a story of someone spreading Christianity and the next episode we'll discuss whether it's real or made up and what the sources are.   We'll start that at the end of this episode. For now, let's hear about the seventy slash seventy-two:   LUKE 10 After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go. 2 He told them, “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field. 3 Go! I am sending you out like lambs among wolves. 4 Do not take a purse or bag or sandals; and do not greet anyone on the road.   5 “When you enter a house, first say, ‘Peace to this house.' 6 If someone who promotes peace is there, your peace will rest on them; if not, it will return to you. 7 Stay there, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house.   GREGG Someone tell the Jehovah's Witnesses…   LUKE 10 8 “When you enter a town and are welcomed, eat what is offered to you. 9 Heal the sick who are there and tell them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.' 10 But when you enter a town and are not welcomed, go into its streets and say, 11 ‘Even the dust of your town we wipe from our feet as a warning to you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God has come near.' 12 I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.   13 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. 14 But it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you. 15 And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted to the heavens? No, you will go down to Hades.   16 “Whoever listens to you listens to me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me.”   17 The seventy-two returned with joy and said, “Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name.”   18 He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. 19 I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to overcome all the power of the enemy; nothing will harm you.    GREGG That verse is the root of some of the quirky snake-handling churches in Appalachia by the way…   LUKE 10 20 However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.”   21 At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this is what you were pleased to do.   22 “All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”   23 Then he turned to his disciples and said privately, “Blessed are the eyes that see what you see. 24 For I tell you that many prophets and kings wanted to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.”   GREGG   Those last two verses touch on an interesting discussion throughout Church history, namely the fate of those who lived before the time of Christ.   Could they be saved? Observant Jews of the time, yes, certainly. But those who never encountered Christianity or Judaism because of when or where they lived historically has proven a bit of an awkward question for the Church. The “well you better go tell them” impulse has long served to recruit missionaries, but on the other end many did and do argue that it hardly seems fair to expect folks to follow what through no fault of their own they've never been exposed to. Granted it's less of an issue nowadays when very few folks worldwide haven't at least heard of Christ, but the question remains. Certainly the Catholic Church insists that all humans who are saved are saved through Christ, there's no other way. And yet the Church also affirms that God is not bound by time, as evidenced by the defined belief required of all Catholics in the Immaculate Conception, where the Blessed Virgin Mary was preserved from all stain of sin from the moment of her conception. Obviously that took place before the Incarnation, so it's not like the years going from BC to AD is a firm barrier for the saving action of Christ in the eyes of the Catholic Church. Indeed, by implication, the previously mentioned Jews who awaited the grand opening of heaven were able to do so by the work of Christ according to the Church, though given how many horrible things have been done to Jews in the name of Christ through the years that isn't something that tends to be emphasized.   In the end, I think you probably know me well enough by now to correctly guess that I land on the hopeful end of this discussion. By one means or another, all through Christ, I hope for all. But to be very clear, that's my hope, and for what it's worth. Pope Francis' hope as well according to a recent interview, but it's not established Church teaching.   Skipping past the parable of the Good Samaritan, let's go to verse 38 for Martha and Mary, an exchange that's my go-to analogy for the two basic types of service to the Church, with Martha being the “active” type and Mary the “contemplative”.   LUKE 38 As Jesus and his disciples were on their way, he came to a village where a woman named Martha opened her home to him. 39 She had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord's feet listening to what he said. 40 But Martha was distracted by all the preparations that had to be made. She came to him and asked, “Lord, don't you care that my sister has left me to do the work by myself? Tell her to help me!”   41 “Martha, Martha,” the Lord answered, “you are worried and upset about many things, 42 but few things are needed—or indeed only one. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her.”   GREGG   The first part of Luke 11 covers Luke's take on the Our Father-covered in 0.21b- and the Friend at Midnight covered in our parables roundup. So skip along to Verse 9, which parallels Matthew's Sermon on the Mount, so it will sound familiar:   LUKE 11 9 “So I say to you: Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 10 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.   11 “Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? 12 Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? 13 If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!”   GREGG Skip ahead again, this time to verse 24, because verses 14-23 were covered under miracles:   LUKE 24 “When an impure spirit comes out of a person, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. Then it says, ‘I will return to the house I left.' 25 When it arrives, it finds the house swept clean and put in order. 26 Then it goes and takes seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there. And the final condition of that person is worse than the first.”   27 As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.”   28 He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”   GREGG There's a reminder that relapsing can be worse than the initial lapse, and a nice compliment session preserved only in Luke. But then the tone shifts, and the rest of the chapter has parallels in Matthew:   LUKE 11 29 As the crowds increased, Jesus said, “This is a wicked generation. It asks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah. 30 For as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so also will the Son of Man be to this generation. 31 The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with the people of this generation and condemn them, for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon's wisdom; and now something greater than Solomon is here. 32 The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and now something greater than Jonah is here   GREGG Then there's a comparatively light lamp analogy, which I kind of covered during the Sermon on the Mount commentary, but not in its entirety, so I'm giving it all to you here:   LUKE 11 33 “No one lights a lamp and puts it in a place where it will be hidden, or under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, so that those who come in may see the light. 34 Your eye is the lamp of your body. When your eyes are healthy, your whole body also is full of light. But when they are unhealthy, your body also is full of darkness. 35 See to it, then, that the light within you is not darkness. 36 Therefore, if your whole body is full of light, and no part of it dark, it will be just as full of light as when a lamp shines its light on you.”   GREGG And now as we get back to a more challenging tone, and as Jesus targets the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law specifically, I want to give the same general note that I gave for the parallel verses in Matthew: do not take these verses out of context to justify antisemitism, which has no place in the Catholic Church, or really in the world. For one thing, keep in mind Jesus is a Jew speaking to fellow Jews here.   Anyways, let's continue: LUKE   37 When Jesus had finished speaking, a Pharisee invited him to eat with him; so he went in and reclined at the table. 38 But the Pharisee was surprised when he noticed that Jesus did not first wash before the meal.   39 Then the Lord said to him, “Now then, you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness. 40 You foolish people! Did not the one who made the outside make the inside also? 41 But now as for what is inside you—be generous to the poor, and everything will be clean for you.   42 “Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.   43 “Woe to you Pharisees, because you love the most important seats in the synagogues and respectful greetings in the marketplaces.   44 “Woe to you, because you are like unmarked graves, which people walk over without knowing it.”   45 One of the experts in the law answered him, “Teacher, when you say these things, you insult us also.”   46 Jesus replied, “And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them.   47 “Woe to you, because you build tombs for the prophets, and it was your ancestors who killed them. 48 So you testify that you approve of what your ancestors did; they killed the prophets, and you build their tombs. 49 Because of this, God in his wisdom said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and others they will persecute.' 50 Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all.”   GREGG Let's take a moment to reflect on that last line: “this generation will be held responsible for it all”. It's surprisingly harsh, even for a surprisingly harsh Jesus, for Him to hold the generation he was talking to responsible for all the blood of all the prophets that has been shed from the beginning of the world. But there it is. I can see a case being made for these verses as part of a theological justification for original sin, though really the key verse for that is Romans 5:12, which we'll talk about later. Either way, given the emphasis on “this generation”, I don't think that's what's going on here, as original sin doesn't like, target specific generations.   So, what's up? Why is Jesus focusing in on the present generation, at least the present generation as of His lifetime?   Well, there's the key. It's His generation. Jesus is there, and all of the sin of history, past, present, and future, will be brought to account through Him.   Jesus, as always, is the answer. It's not that the world was especially sinful in the first century AD. But the answer to all sin was walking the earth then. *That* is why it's a generation that deserves a particular singling out.   Of course, that reflection- my own theological musing I should say, which is a dangerous thing to do and I defer to any correction that may come my way– anyways that reflection should not detract from the straightforward fact that Jesus is really taking the Pharisees and Teachers of the law to task here   LUKE 11 52 “Woe to you experts in the law, because you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering.”   53 When Jesus went outside, the Pharisees and the teachers of the law began to oppose him fiercely and to besiege him with questions, 54 waiting to catch him in something he might say.   1Meanwhile, when a crowd of many thousands had gathered, so that they were trampling on one another, Jesus began to speak first to his disciples, saying: "Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy   2There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known.   3What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight, and what you have whispered in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the roofs   GREGG Fortunately no one in our day falls into religious hypocrisy anymore, right? …right?   Anyways, the next few verses, once again paralleled with Matthew, put things into context, while weaving in hints of future persecution:   LUKE 12 4 “I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. 5 But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after your body has been killed, has authority to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him. 6 Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten by God. 7 Indeed, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows. 8 “I tell you, whoever publicly acknowledges me before others, the Son of Man will also acknowledge before the angels of God. 9 But whoever disowns me before others will be disowned before the angels of God. 10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. 11 “When you are brought before synagogues, rulers and authorities, do not worry about how you will defend yourselves or what you will say, 12 for the Holy Spirit will teach you at that time what you should say.” GREGG After a break for a parable, the overall theme resumes in verse 22:   LUKE 12 22 Then Jesus said to his disciples: “Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat; or about your body, what you will wear. 23 For life is more than food, and the body more than clothes. 24 Consider the ravens: They do not sow or reap, they have no storeroom or barn; yet God feeds them. And how much more valuable you are than birds! 25 Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to your life? 26 Since you cannot do this very little thing, why do you worry about the rest?   27 “Consider how the wild flowers grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you, not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 28 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today, and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, how much more will he clothe you—you of little faith! 29 And do not set your heart on what you will eat or drink; do not worry about it. 30 For the pagan world runs after all such things, and your Father knows that you need them. 31 But seek his kingdom, and these things will be given to you as well.   32 “Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom. 33 Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. 34 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.   GREGG Did you catch one of the most challenging things Jesus says?   “Sell your possessions and give to the poor”   This isn't the only place Jesus says that, but it hits a little harder when he's giving it as general counsel rather than as specific advice to a rich young man looking for specific advice on how to live well. If you have more than you need, your excess needs to go to those who lack. You will ultimately have to account not only for what you did, but what you didn't do. If you've seen Schindler's List, think of his regret after all he's done, that he didn't sell the car to do more. When your life is done, what regrets will You have?   I know I need to do more, part of this project is to remind myself of that and to embarrass myself publicly for my shortcomings. Listen to Jesus' message, don't get hung up on the messenger.   A few parables take us forward to verse 49, a source of top notch dad jokes about our matchless king. But Jesus goes beyond that, preaching division. His message is hard, it will not be universally popular.   LUKE 12 49 “I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed! 51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52 From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”   54 He said to the crowd: “When you see a cloud rising in the west, immediately you say, ‘It's going to rain,' and it does. 55 And when the south wind blows, you say, ‘It's going to be hot,' and it is. 56 Hypocrites! You know how to interpret the appearance of the earth and the sky. How is it that you don't know how to interpret this present time?   57 “Why don't you judge for yourselves what is right? 58 As you are going with your adversary to the magistrate, try hard to be reconciled on the way, or your adversary may drag you off to the judge, and the judge turn you over to the officer, and the officer throw you into prison. 59 I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.”   LUKE 13 13 Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2 Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? 3 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. 4 Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”   GREGG That excerpt took us into Luke 13, which continues with parables and a miracle until verse 23, which is, frankly, basically the start of another parable, but not one I covered in the parables roundup so we'll do it here.   LUKE 13 23 Someone asked him, “Lord, are only a few people going to be saved?”   He said to them, 24 “Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to. 25 Once the owner of the house gets up and closes the door, you will stand outside knocking and pleading, ‘Sir, open the door for us.'   “But he will answer, ‘I don't know you or where you come from.'   26 “Then you will say, ‘We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.'   27 “But he will reply, ‘I don't know you or where you come from. Away from me, all you evildoers!'   28 “There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. 29 People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God. 30 Indeed there are those who are last who will be first, and first who will be last.”   GREGG I recently saw one of the first verses in that passage cited as pointing towards the idea of Hell being full. After all,   “many I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to.”   Is fairly clear, and even accounting for Jesus' action as the owner of the house, in this and elsewhere ultimately those who are out on the cold are truly out in the cold. As much as I freely admit I don't get the logic of hell being populated, I also freely admit that the idea of it being empty is an exegetical stretch given passages like this. In the end, God reigns and I do not. I know what God asks of me, and I do it. As much as I like to know and to talk, I accept that I don't have and cannot have all knowledge.   Anyways, Jesus continues with a lament over Jerusalem we saw in Matthew, which Luke supplies with a little more context:   LUKE 13 31 At that time some Pharisees came to Jesus and said to him, “Leave this place and go somewhere else. Herod wants to kill you.”   32 He replied, “Go tell that fox, ‘I will keep on driving out demons and healing people today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will reach my goal.' 33 In any case, I must press on today and tomorrow and the next day—for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem!   34 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 35 Look, your house is left to you desolate. I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.'”   GREGG And now with that note looking to Jesus' future- something he definitely keeps doing throughout the Gospels- we have something of an intermission, because Luke 14, 15, and 16 are all so full of parables that we've already covered along with all of Jesus' words from those chapters. Luke 17 opens with yet another parable, and then a miracle, so we're actually regrouping at Luke 17:20, where Jesus talks about the upcoming kingdom and talks about the end times, always fuel for a discussion, though I am skeptical about how productive such discussions are, given how Jesus opens the discussion by noting that the coming of the kingdom cannot be observed. And really, if there's something you'd be doing differently if you knew the world was ending--honestly that's probably something you should be doing *now*, because your life will end very soon in the grand scheme of things, and you can't rule out today.   Anyways, let's resume:   LUKE 17 20 Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, 21 nor will people say, ‘Here it is,' or ‘There it is,' because the kingdom of God is in your midst.”   22 Then he said to his disciples, “The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, but you will not see it. 23 People will tell you, ‘There he is!' or ‘Here he is!' Do not go running off after them. 24 For the Son of Man in his day will be like the lightning, which flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other. 25 But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation.   26 “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. 27 People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.   28 “It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. 29 But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.   30 “It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. 31 On that day no one who is on the housetop, with possessions inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. 32 Remember Lot's wife! 33 Whoever tries to keep their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life will preserve it. 34 I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. 35 Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.” [36]   [KJV] 36Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.   37 “Where, Lord?” they asked.   He replied, “Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather.”   GREGG Oh, hope you don't mind me throwing in a little bit more KJV there. I would have announced it in advance but I was kind of on a roll with that transition and didn't want to kill the vibe. I'm no scripture scholar but my guess is the reason the KJV keep having verses the NIV is skipping is because back in the day folks were more reluctant to identify a passage as an addition due to manuscript evidence, you know, just in case. Better safe than sorry. But again, I'm no expert. Now, if I ever do get a budget for this beyond basic hosting fees I do have an expert in mind, so periodic reminder I do have a Popeular Patreon kicking around somewhere.   In any event, that's it for Luke 17, and we can basically skip the first half of Luke 18, since that's a couple parables and related stuff we've already addressed.   In Luke 18 verse 18, we've got a familiar question, not only familiar because it already came up in both Matthew and Mark, but it's actually already come up in Luke as well, as part of the runup to the parable of the Good Samaritan. That parable was split off from the other synoptics, being present only in Luke despite being extremely famous. But this time around, the passage is a close parallel to both Matthew and Mark. Let's go!   LUKE 18 18 A certain ruler asked him, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 19 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. 20 You know the commandments: ‘You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.'” 21 “All these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said. 22 When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” 23 When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was very wealthy. 24 Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! 25 Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” 26 Those who heard this asked, “Who then can be saved?” 27 Jesus replied, “What is impossible with man is possible with God.” 28 Peter said to him, “We have left all we had to follow you!” 29 “Truly I tell you,” Jesus said to them, “no one who has left home or wife or brothers or sisters or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God 30 will fail to receive many times as much in this age, and in the age to come eternal life.” GREGG We treated the “eye of the needle” thing almost embarrassingly thoroughly last episode, so refer back to my Mark commentary for detail on that. The ending simply promising a much greater reward for giving things up to follow Jesus is a mild tweak of the “first shall be last” thing we saw concluding this passage in Matthew and Mark, for what it's worth.   Next up, Jesus gives the third prediction of his death he's given in Luke:   LUKE 18   31 Jesus took the Twelve aside and told them, “We are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled. 32 He will be delivered over to the Gentiles. They will mock him, insult him and spit on him; 33 they will flog him and kill him. On the third day he will rise again.”   34 The disciples did not understand any of this. Its meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about.   GREGG Jesus predicts his death three times in each of the synoptic Gospels, so that being the third and final prediction is a sign we're getting close.   Chapter 18 finishes with a miracle, so we're on to Chapter 19, which opens with the second account of Jesus calling a tax collector to follow him present in Luke. And unlike the call of Matthew slash Levi, this call of Zaccheus is *only* present in Luke.   LUKE 19 19 Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through. 2 A man was there by the name of Zacchaeus; he was a chief tax collector and was wealthy. 3 He wanted to see who Jesus was, but because he was short he could not see over the crowd. 4 So he ran ahead and climbed a sycamore-fig tree to see him, since Jesus was coming that way.   5 When Jesus reached the spot, he looked up and said to him, “Zacchaeus, come down immediately. I must stay at your house today.” 6 So he came down at once and welcomed him gladly.   7 All the people saw this and began to mutter, “He has gone to be the guest of a sinner.”   8 But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”   9 Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. 10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”   GREGG I mentioned a bit ago we were getting close to the end of things for today, and another sign that we're getting close is that the next thing we get to cover, after skipping another parable, is Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem, which is liturgically covered in the Palm Sunday observances that kick off Holy Week, aka the week leading up to Easter Sunday. Let's hear what Luke has to say, starting at verse 28:   LUKE 19 28 After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. 29 As he approached Bethphage and Bethany at the hill called the Mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, 30 “Go to the village ahead of you, and as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 31 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?' say, ‘The Lord needs it.'”   32 Those who were sent ahead went and found it just as he had told them. 33 As they were untying the colt, its owners asked them, “Why are you untying the colt?”   34 They replied, “The Lord needs it.”   35 They brought it to Jesus, threw their cloaks on the colt and put Jesus on it. 36 As he went along, people spread their cloaks on the road.   37 When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen:   38 “Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!”   “Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!”   39 Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples!”   40 “I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.”   41 As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43 The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you.”   45 When Jesus entered the temple courts, he began to drive out those who were selling. 46 “It is written,” he said to them, “‘My house will be a house of prayer'; but you have made it ‘a den of robbers.'”   47 Every day he was teaching at the temple. But the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the leaders among the people were trying to kill him. 48 Yet they could not find any way to do it, because all the people hung on his words.   GREGG From the classic handwaive of “the master has need of it” to the admittedly brief account of Jesus driving the moneychangers out of the Temple, there's a lot of good stuff in there, but nothing especially new, all things we basically saw in Matthew and Mark.   Similarly, the opening verses of Luke 20 are also close parallels of the other synoptic gospels. But hey, you know the drill, let's hear Luke tell it:   LUKE 20 One day as Jesus was teaching the people in the temple courts and proclaiming the good news, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, together with the elders, came up to him. 2 “Tell us by what authority you are doing these things,” they said. “Who gave you this authority?”   3 He replied, “I will also ask you a question. Tell me: 4 John's baptism—was it from heaven, or of human origin?”   5 They discussed it among themselves and said, “If we say, ‘From heaven,' he will ask, ‘Why didn't you believe him?' 6 But if we say, ‘Of human origin,' all the people will stone us, because they are persuaded that John was a prophet.”   7 So they answered, “We don't know where it was from.”   8 Jesus said, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things.”   GREGG The next few verses are taken up by the Parable of the Talents, so we'll skip that and go on to more close synoptic parallel passages starting in Verse 20. If you're wondering, we're parallelling Matthew 22 and Mark 12 here:   LUKE 20 20 Keeping a close watch on him, they sent spies, who pretended to be sincere. They hoped to catch Jesus in something he said, so that they might hand him over to the power and authority of the governor. 21 So the spies questioned him: “Teacher, we know that you speak and teach what is right, and that you do not show partiality but teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. 22 Is it right for us to pay taxes to Caesar or not?”   23 He saw through their duplicity and said to them, 24 “Show me a denarius. Whose image and inscription are on it?”   “Caesar's,” they replied.   25 He said to them, “Then give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's.”   26 They were unable to trap him in what he had said there in public. And astonished by his answer, they became silent.   GREGG Yes, as you'll recall, giving God what is God's means giving God everything, but at the same time, like, pay your taxes.   The parallels continue with the next section   LUKE 20 Some of the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Jesus with a question. 28 “Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. 29 Now there were seven brothers. The first one married a woman and died childless. 30 The second 31 and then the third married her, and in the same way the seven died, leaving no children. 32 Finally, the woman died too. 33 Now then, at the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”   34 Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36 and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection. 37 But in the account of the burning bush, even Moses showed that the dead rise, for he calls the Lord ‘the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' 38 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.”   39 Some of the teachers of the law responded, “Well said, teacher!” 40 And no one dared to ask him any more questions. 41 Then Jesus said to them, “Why is it said that the Messiah is the son of David? 42 David himself declares in the Book of Psalms: “‘The Lord said to my Lord:     “Sit at my right hand 43 until I make your enemies     a footstool for your feet.”' 44 David calls him ‘Lord.' How then can he be his son?” GREGG   Yes, all closely paralleling Matthew 22 and Mark 12 still, both of which we've discussed. For what it's worth, John is going to be something quite different.   In any event, the last bit of Luke 20 is absent from Matthew, only parallelled in Mark 12:   LUKE 20 45 While all the people were listening, Jesus said to his disciples, 46 “Beware of the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. 47 They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. These men will be punished most severely.”   GREGG Luke 21 opens with another section we that we didn't see in Matthew but covered in Mark, namely the Widow's Offering:   LUKE 21 As Jesus looked up, he saw the rich putting their gifts into the temple treasury. 2 He also saw a poor widow put in two very small copper coins. 3 “Truly I tell you,” he said, “this poor widow has put in more than all the others. 4 All these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on.”   GREGG I do love the message there, namely that God sees and accounts for effort when it comes to our actions, including our giving. Like I said, the Widow's Offering was in Mark too so I went into some more detail last episode.   As the chapter continues, the parallels with Matthew resume, now in Matthew Chapter 24, and Mark 14. Overall the theme is the end times, fairly appropriate given the transition to the Passion that will come in the next chapter    LUKE 21 Some of his disciples were remarking about how the temple was adorned with beautiful stones and with gifts dedicated to God. But Jesus said, 6 “As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down.”   7 “Teacher,” they asked, “when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?”   8 He replied: “Watch out that you are not deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am he,' and, ‘The time is near.' Do not follow them. 9 When you hear of wars and uprisings, do not be frightened. These things must happen first, but the end will not come right away.”

IMAGE CREDIT: Photo : Guy Wolff / Église catholique à Luxembourg LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Höllerich https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_hollerich_jc.html      Jean Claude Höllerich on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2019.htm#Hollerich  Cardinal Höllerich on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/47061     Cardinal Höllerich on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bholleri.html      Archdiocese of Luxembourg on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/luxe0.htm?focus=47061&tab=info      Archdiocese of Luxembourg on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dluxe.html  National Catholic Register coverage of Cardinal Höllerich on church teaching on Homosexuality: https://www.ncronline.org/news/quick-reads/top-eu-cardinal-calls-change-church-teaching-gay-relationships  2022 National Catholic Register coverage of Cardinal Pell calling for Cardinal Höllerich's censure: https://www.ncregister.com/blog/cardinal-pell-calls-on-vatican-to-correct-2-senior-european-bishops-for-rejecting-church-s-sexual-ethics  Crux Now reporting on Cardinal Höllerich's appointment as Relator General for the Synod on Synodality: https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2021/07/pope-names-relator-general-for-2023-synod  Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold! TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights. Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript. Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes. Jean Claude Höllerich was born on August 9, 1958 in Differdange, Luxembourg. Sandwiched at the intersection of Belgium, France, and Germany, Luxembourg isn't exactly large but for what, it's worth, Differdange is on the southwestern corner of things. He actually grew up in Vianden, which is clear on the opposite northeast end of the country, a full hour's drive away. Anyways, Jean Claude went to Rome relatively early on in his journey, once he decided to pursue the priesthood he began studying at the Pontifical Gregorian University. He formally joined the Jesuit Order in 1981, doing his novitiate in Namur, Belgium, followed by a couple years of pastoral training back home in Luxembourg, then actually on to Japan and I'll bet you didn't see that one coming. But yes from 1985 to 1989 he studied Japanese, not only the language but the culture as well, accompanied of course by theological studies, which he capped off back closer to home in Germany. By the time of his 1990 ordination Father Höllerich was deep into studying German language and literature, winding up with his second licentiate, by which point he was already a decade into his teaching career. His early teaching had been focused on forming seminarians, but by 1994 he was settled in at Sophia University in Tokyo, where his focus was European studies. He gradually built his portfolio at that university, becoming student chaplain in 1999, then rector of the school's Jesuit community as well as vice-rector for general affairs and students at the school as of 2008. I should also note that he took his final vows as a Jesuit during all that, in 2002. In 2011, the Archbishop of Luxembourg–aka the *only* Roman Catholic bishop of Luxembourg–retired. There has never been a non-Luxembourger Archbishop and there are only so many Luxembourger priests of the right age with the right qualifications-don't get me wrong I do think Father Höllerich was surprised but maybe just a bit less surprised than others we've talked about when he was named as the next Archbishop. In a nice touch given Höllerich's history, the Archbishop of Tokyo joined the Archbishop of Cologne and the Archbishop Emeritus of Luxembourg in consecrating him on October 16, 2011. In his role as Archbishop–and even before– he was frequently involved in side projects like bringing the Catholic Scouts of Europe to Luxembourg and serving as President of the Catholic Bishops Conferences of Europe's Commission for youth. In 2018, he was elected president of the Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the European Union (COMECE). In 2019, Pope Francis named him as a Cardinal-Priest, assigning him the titular church of San Giovanni Crisostomo a Monte Sacro Alto and making him the first Luxembourger Cardinal. Cardinal Höllerich has gained a reputation for being progressive–by Catholic standards–calling for lay empowerment and women deacons and being relatively LGBT+ affirming. On the latter topic, here's an eyebrow-raising quote: "I believe that the sociological-scientific foundation of this teaching is no longer correct," End quote.  In this he found himself at odds with the late Cardinal Pell, who publicly called for Pope Francis to condemn Höllerich's quote “wholesale and explicit” end quote rejection of Church teaching on sexuality. He's also the highest ranking Church official I've ever seen to openly express a willingness to consider full on women's ordination, not just the more common willingness to restore an unordained diaconate for women but openness to full-on women priests. Given his progressive streak, it's not terribly surprising that Cardinal Höllerich's appointment as Relator General for the Synod on Synodality got a lot of attention generally and concern from more conservative commentators specifically. The Synod on Synodality–officially the 16th Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops but Synod on Synodality is what's caught on so that's what we're rolling with–the Synod on Synodality is a rolling conversation that was originally supposed to wrap up in 2022 but it got pushed back to 2023 and then extended to a two-year program that started about a year ago and will conclude this October. A synod is a gathering of bishops, and therefore a synod on synodality is something of a meeting on meetings, but it's had a large amount of interest especially when someone like Höllerich was setting up the discussion topics, including increasing the participation of women and the laity in the life of the Church and being more pastoral slash welcoming to LGBT+ individuals. Right now I can tell you that I expect more movement on including women and laity in Church governance- it's already happened with the Synod itself, with laity including women having a voting role in the Synod on Synodality itself, a noteworthy departure from the Church's administrative tradition. But don't get too riled up about women deacons, much less women priests, or significant changes on the LGBT+ front, because by all accounts major shifts on those higher profile fronts are, simply put, not likely. In 2020, Pope Francis named Cardinal Hollerich as a member of the Pontifical Council for Culture and then added him to the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialog a few months later. In September 2021 he was named as one of the two vice presidents of the Council of the European Bishops' Conferences (CCEE), and last but certainly not least in earlier this year Pope Francis added Cardinal Höllerich to his special kitchen cabinet “Council of Cardinals”, the same body where his erstwhile critic Cardinal Pell had served until his passing. Jean Claude Höllerich is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2038. Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Kambanda https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_kambanda_a.html     Aontoine Kambanda on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2020.htm#Kambanda  Cardinal Kambanda on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/52193    Cardinal Kambanda on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bkamb.html     Archdiocese of Kigali on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/kiga0.htm?tab=info     Archdiocese of Kigali on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dkiga.html Official Vatican summary of JPII's 1990 visit to Rwanda (and other African nations): https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/travels/1990/travels/documents/trav_est-africa.html  2004 BBC timeline of the Rwandan Genocide: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3580247.stm  Caritas Internationalis official website: https://www.caritas.org/  Athanase Seromba, genocidal priest: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna16189347  Seromba upsate: https://alchetron.com/Athanase-Seromba  2001 Washington Post reporting on Rwandan nuns jailed for role in genocide: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2001/06/09/rwandan-nuns-jailed-in-genocide/fce3308b-3e6e-4784-8490-0887f69c7a39/  VOA News coverage of 2016 Rwandan Bishops' Conference statement acknowledging and apologizing for complicity in the genocide: https://www.voanews.com/a/rwanda-genocide-catholic-bishops/3605319.html  Reaction to 2019 Rwandan Bishops' Conference statement: https://cisanewsafrica.com/rwanda-bishops-apologize-for-calling-for-release-of-convicts-of-genocide/  2022 English-language video interview with Cardinal Kambanda (via The New Times/Pacis TV): https://youtu.be/yadR0vD1EW4?si=J5nJHxHCLjFMd0z7    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold! IMAGE CRED: By David Neuvere - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=126027927  TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Antoine KAMBANDA was born on November 10, 1958 in Nyamata, Rwanda, which is today part of the country's Eastern Province. Rwanda has somewhat famously had ethnic tensions between two out of three of their main tribes, the Hutu and the Tutsi. Antoine and his family were Tutsi, and, well, content warning, because today's episode includes a genocide.   Antoine studied internationally right from the start, doing primary schooling in neighboring Burundi and Uganda, followed by secondary school in somewhat more distant Kenya. His seminary training took place back in Rwanda, and in 1990 he was ordained a priest for the Archdiocese of Kigali, Kigali being Rwanda's Capital. He was actually personally ordained by Pope Saint John Paul II during his 1990 visit to Rwanda.   Fortunately for him Father Kambanda decided to pursue further studies and so left for the Alphonsian Academy in Rome in 1993, I say fortunately because while he was studying abroad his parents and five of his six siblings were killed during the 1994 Rwandan Genocide during which half a million people were butchered and hundreds of thousands more were raped, predominately Tutsi but also a fair number of Hutu and Twa who were less than enthusiastic about joining the murderous Hutu militias. And those are the more conservative estimates, the 2003 Constitution of Rwanda lists the death toll at over a million.   Let's just take a moment to pray, you can do reverent silence if that's your thing but my wife and I are going to say a quick Hail Mary.   In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, amen.   ***Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.   Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.***   In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, amen.   For what it's worth I didn't plan for this to be a rough stretch, as a reminder I'm doing these cardinals in age order. Tomorrow's episode doesn't have a death toll.   As weird as it feels to get back to a normal narrative after that, get back we should, and Father Kambanda got back to things as well, obtaining a doctorate in moral theology in 1999 and taking on teaching at a minor seminary while also serving as the director of Caritas for the diocese. Caritas, a Latin term most often translated as “charity” but more strongly conveying the sense of selfless love, is an international confederation of organizations that effectively serves as the Catholic Church's in-house clearinghouse for charity initiatives, if I'm allowed to put it that way. Catholic Relief Services, for example, is one of the founding members of Caritas Internationalis, with 0 points going to anyone who can correctly guess what internationalis means.   In 2005, Father Kambanda began the first of two seminary rectorships, and we'll jump ahead to 2013, that's when he was elected bishop of Kibunga.   As a bishop, he joined his brothers in a difficult admission: The Catholic Church had been part of the genocide. Sure, the one Catholic Bishop who was formally charged with war crimes had been cleared, but he had also refused to shelter those who had sought refuge, and indeed many of the massacre sites were the churches themselves, including in the case of Father Athanase Seromba–and I mean seriously, fast forward 15 seconds if you need to–the hutu priest who ordered his church bulldozed when it was housing thousands of refugees, personally showing the driver the weakest points of the church, and by some accounts helping massacre remaining survivors found in the rubble.   In case you're speed listening or tuned out for a minute, just as a reminder I am not currently talking about our cardinal of the day, a Tutsi who was studying in Rome at the time of the genocide and whose family was by and large slaughtered. But I don't want to gloss over the Church's involvement in the genocide–an involvement which our Cardinal acknowledges as we will see. So we're looking at the tough cases, because I hope to God none of them are ever made Cardinals or we'd talk about them then.   Father Seromba was found guilty of genocide and originally sentenced to 15 years. He appealed to the tribunal, which found that oh yes, they had indeed failed to carry out justice in his case, upgrading his sentence to life imprisonment upon further review.   There's more to say about the Seromba case, especially how he was hidden by church authorities after fleeing, and I'll say more about it if Cardinal Kambanda makes it to the next round, but for today I want to get back to Kambanda, because he isn't even a Cardinal yet in our narrative.   In 2016, Bishop Kambanda cosigned a major statement from the Rwandan Bishop's Conference apologizing for the complicity of the Rwandan Catholic Church as an institution in the genocide, stating, quote:   “Forgive us for the crime of hate in the country to the extent of also hating our colleagues because of their ethnicity. We didn't show that we are one family but instead killed each other.” End quote   The statement, which was read in parishes across the country, was generally well received, though of course there are wounds that words cannot heal and there were understandable questions about why it took 22 years for such a statement to be made. A later statement asking for some clemency for elderly and infirm convicted perpetrators was less well received, though honestly pretty on-brand for the Catholic Church in terms of mercy. By that time, Bishop Kambanda was Archbishop Kambanda, having been transferred to Rwanda's principle see of Kigali.   In 2020, Pope Francis made Archbishop Kambanda Rwanda's first Cardinal, also naming him a member of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples later that year. The next year, Pope Francis also added him to the Congregation for Catholic Education, and the year after that, 2022, he became head of the Rwandan Bishops' Conference for a three-year term. More recently, in February of 2023, he was added to the Dicastery for Culture and Education. So, he's definitely not sitting around.   Antoine Kambanda is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2038.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers,  and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Langlois https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_langlois_c.html    Chibly Langolis on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2014.htm#Langlois   Cardinal Langlois on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/2868   Cardinal Langlois on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/blangc.html    Diocese of Les Cayes on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/lesc0.htm?tab=info    Diocese of Les Cayes on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dlesc.html    2014 Salt and Light Media write up of Cardinal-Elect Langlois https://slmedia.org/blog/meet-the-cardinals-chibly-langlois-les-cayes-haiti  2014 NCR article on Cardinal-Elect Langlois: https://www.ncronline.org/news/people/haitis-new-cardinal-known-tireless-worker-advocate-people  1983 Spokesman Review article on JPII's visit to Haiti: https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=6tkvAAAAIBAJ&pg=7222,4661909  CNA reporting on 2021 earthquake: https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/248690/cardinal-injured-priest-dead-after-earthquake-in-haiti  Churchinneed.org reporting on 2021 Haitian bishops' statement: https://www.churchinneed.org/haiti-bishops-issue-urgent-appeal-for-unity/  Jamiaca Observer reporting on 2022 Haitian bishops' statement: https://www.jamaicaobserver.com/latest-news/haitian-bishops-call-for-peace-condemn-violence-and-gang-warfare/ September 2023 Haitian bishop's statement on genocide by criminal gangs: https://international.la-croix.com/news/world/haitian-bishops-call-on-world-to-stop-genocide-by-criminal-gangs/18362 Donate to Haitian relief: https://www.unicef.org/appeals/haiti    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Cardinal Numbers, a rexypod ranking all the Cardinals of the Catholic Church we can get our hands on, from the Catacombs to Kingdom Come.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Chibly LANGLOIS was born on November 29, 1958, in La Vallée, a community in the diocese of Jacmel, Haïti, located on the Tiburon Peninsula that forms much of the island nations' southern territory. Barring future appointments, Chibly Langlois is the only Haitian cardinal, so let's briefly look at the island nation's history while we're here.   Haiti was the result of the only successful slave rebellion in history, making it a 19th century pariah with no diplomatic recognition or formal trade relations until the populace literally paid for themselves to compensate for the lost air quotes "property", something which they could only afford using the international equivalent of payday loans to predatory lenders. The end result of this is that Haiti is, to this day, one of the poorest countries on earth. It has also had a range of issues establishing an effective and stable government, considering it started from basically nothing, coupled with general hostility from the international community at large, having about two centuries of rule by fiat mixed with coups, a situation which has only begun to change in the last few decades.   When Chibly was born, the dictator of the day was François "Papa Doc" Duvalier, who would be succeeded by his son, Jean-Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier. The Duvalier regime became more repressive after a coup attempt a few months before Chibly's birth, so the family got to deal with that in addition to being no exception to the general poverty.   The oldest of four, Chibly entered seminary in 1985, shortly before a 1986 uprising put Baby Doc Duvalier into exile. Incidentally, one of the factors that may have contributed to that uprising was a 1983 visit by none other than Pope John Paul II, where the Supreme Pontiff publicly told the leader of the majority-Catholic country that quote "things must change in Haiti" end quote.   Chibly Langlois was ordained in 1991 at the age of 32, becoming a priest for his home diocese of Jacmel. He held a few diocesan roles right off the bat, including serving as vicar for the cathedral, then in 1994 he went off to Rome for further study, obtaining a Licentiate in theology from the Pontifical Lateran University.    Like many Cardinals, Fr Langlois also served as a seminary professor, teaching pastoral theology from 2000 to 2004. In 2004, he was elected bishop of Fort-Liberté, where he served until 2011, when he was transferred to head the Diocese of Les Cayes. Later that year, he became head of Haiti's bishops conference, a role he'd fill till 2017.   In 2014, Pope Francis announced that he would be elevating Bishop Langlois to the Cardinalate, in the first of what would become Francis' many surprising red-hattings. Cardinal Langlois is Haiti's first Cardinal, and Pope Francis passed over both of the countries' archbishops in the process. The announcement was made on the fourth anniversary of a devastating 2010 earthquake that had killed more than 2% of Haiti's population, including one of the archbishops, and left another 15% of the population homeless. Cardinal Langlois had carried on his general focus on social justice and the poor in his efforts to aid in the aftermath, and the timing of the announcement on the anniversary was seen as no coincidence given his name appearing on the list.   Nor was that Cardinal Langlois' last earthquake, he himself was injured in a separate 2021 earthquake that killed three in the priestly residence where he was staying. He also suffered a broken arm in a 2022 car accident. And though I don't want this episode to just be a laundry list of bad things that happened to Cardinal Langlois and his country, I should also note that the Cardinal has been co-signing statements from Haiti's bishops' conference decrying a quote "descent into hell" end quote as they said  in 2021, then quote "murderous madness of hatred, of contempt for life” end quote in 2022, and just two months ago their statement included a reference to "genocide" of defenseless civilians by criminal gangs. So, to put it mildly, Cardinal Langlois and his brother bishops want you to know that things are once again not great in Haiti.   In fact, since the time I made my original notes here, Haiti's government fell again after the acting President who had not taken promised steps to install a successor was refused access back into the country. Whatever the transition will be is still playing out, with violence among armed gangs being even more common than usual.   What can you do? Well, there's a UNICEF fundraising link for relief to Haitian children in the comments. You can also pray, I'm not one to mock thoughts and prayers. If you're going to hop on a plane with relief stuff like a new Roberto Clemente–there's a story, dude should be canonized–let me know and I'll encourage listeners to support your mission. You can spread awareness more generally in some small way, hoping increased attention will eventually bring the aid you can't bring personally. I don't pretend any of those options will have much effect, and I know they're all subject to ridicule from cynics. C'est la vie. I'll let you figure out the best response for you, with a note that anything is better than nothing, though keep in mind you can't do everything.   Chibly Langlois is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2038.   Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening; God bless you all!

LINKS Vatican bio of Cardinal Aveline https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_aveline_jm.html   Jean-Marc Noël Aveline on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda): https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2022.htm#Aveline   Cardinal Aveline on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/p/55034  Cardinal Aveline on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/baveline.html   Archdioces of Marseille on Gcatholic.org: http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/mars0.htm?focus=55034&tab=info   Archdioces of Marseille on Catholic-Hierarchy.org: https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dmarf.html   2019 France3 interview with Archbishop Aveline: https://france3-regions.francetvinfo.fr/provence-alpes-cote-d-azur/bouches-du-rhone/marseille/entretien-defis-du-nouvel-archeveque-marseille-mgr-jean-marc-aveline-1708884.html 2023 CruxNow coverage of an interview with Cardinal Aveline: https://cruxnow.com/pope-in-marseille-live-coverage/2023/09/ahead-of-papal-visit-marseille-cardinal-stresses-balance-on-immigration  2023 La Croix International write-up on Cardinal Aveline:  https://international.la-croix.com/news/religion/jean-marc-aveline-the-french-cardinal-who-has-the-popes-ear/18350  Vatican.va description of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue (PCID): https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_pro_20051996_en.html    Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed. As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com  If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!   TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Popeular History, history through Pope-colored glasses.   Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.   Today we're discussing a current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.   Jean-Marc Noël Aveline was born on December 26th, 1958 in Sidi Bel Abbès, a community in the province of the same name found in northern Algeria, about 75 kilometers from the Mediterranean. At the time, Algeria was officially part of France– not a French colony, mind you, but at least in theory a full-on constituent part of France that just happened to be in North Africa rather than Europe. That was a very active topic, as Algeria was in the midst of a brutal civil war that was a major catalyst for the change from the Fourth French Republic to the present Fifth Republic, a change that took place that same year of 1958.   After the war, Algeria became independent and Jean-Marc's family, including his two sisters, relocated back to the European side of things, moving to Marseille in 1966 in a move that one source described as painful, a pain that can be weighed in the context of a quarter million dead Algerians from the war according to the minimum French estimates, with estimates exceeding a million deaths also being common.   Anyways, Jean-Marc was one of our primary vocation cases, entering seminary while still a teen and being ordained in 1984 at the age of 25 as a priest for the Archdiocese of Marseille. He was soon embedded in parish life at Saint Peter and Paul Parish as well as the vocations efforts for the Archdiocese, looking to attract and bring up the next generation of priests. Of course he served in various roles at different institutes along the way, from teaching to directing, you know the drill. He picked up a Licentiate in Philosophy and In 2000 he earned a Doctorate in Theology as well.   His breakout year came in 2007 when he became Vicar General for the Archdiocese, being called up from parish life to that next level of service. Concurrently from 2008 to 2012 he served as a consultor to the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, which was his first Curial post but would not be his last. For reference, the PCID has about 50 consultors who serve in an advisory capacity.   In late 2013 Father Aveline was elected as an Auxiliary bishop of Marseille, becoming Titular Bishop of Simidicca because that's what happens with Auxiliary bishops. Auxiliary Bishop Aveline served alongside the Archbishop until the latter's retirement in 2019, at which point Bishop Aveline became Archbishop Aveline.   Marseille has always been a port city, ever since its days as a Greek colony, and recall Archbishop Aveline himself was something of a migrant, having been born across the Mediterranean in modern Algeria. So it's not too surprising that the plight of migrants, one of Pope Francis' biggest priorities, is also a central issue for Archbishop Aveline, though he's not as emphatic on the matter as Pope Francis is. Of course, it would be hard to be *more* emphatic on that particular matter than Pope Francis.   In July 2022, Pope Francis appointed Archbishop Aveline to the Dicastery for Bishops. Given that fact and the fact that it's not unusual for the second largest city in France to have a Cardinal, I don't think his inclusion in that year's August consistory would have been too surprising, but you never know. He could have wound up like the Patriarch of Venice, walking around looking like a Cardinal presumably because those were the only clothes in the Patriarchate's wardrobe after a long tradition of promotion only to be without an official red hat over a decade into things.   Jean-Marc Noël Aveline is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2038.   There's plenty more we can discuss about today's Cardinal, including the drama with one of his suffragan dioceses that's currently forbidden from ordaining new priests. We may indeed come back to Cardinal Aveline in the future, as today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, a Popeular project covering all the Cardinals of Church history to determine who's the most eminent Eminence of all. There will be more Cardinal Numbers in the coming weeks, culminating with the First Judgment where I sit down with some company and decide who among the Cardinals we've discussed in this batch should make it to the next round for a deeper dive.   Always remember, the best thing you can do to help Popeular History grow is tell your friends!   Thank you for listening, God bless you all!

https://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/ultraviolet-light-reveals-scientists-hidden-bible-passage-1500-years-later (for Luke) Unique passages: https://www.julianspriggs.co.uk/pages/UniquePassages  Bibleref.com commentary on Mark 6:5: https://www.bibleref.com/Mark/6/Mark-6-5.html  Thanks Biblehub.com's parallel chapters tool.   Words of Jesus ("All the Red Letter Scriptures") https://www.jesusbelieverjd.com/all-the-red-letter-scriptures-of-jesus-in-the-bible-kjv/    Parallel Passages in the Gospels https://www.bible-researcher.com/parallels.html#sect1     The Eye of the Needle (crossword/sudoku feedback): https://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-25583,00.html#:~:text=The%20%22Eye%20of%20the%20Needle,in%20order%20to%20enter%20heaven   Camel needle w/Aquinas citation (of Anselm of Canterbury)-- Anselm of Canterbury as cited in Catena Aurea, Thomas Aquinas, CCEL Edition. https://classictheology.org/2021/10/12/through-the-eye-of-an-actual-needle-the-fake-gate-theory/    The Widow's Mite: https://numismatics.org/pocketchange/the-poor-widows-mite/    Miracles of Jesus reference list: https://sunnyhillschurch.com/3301/the-37-miracles-of-jesus-in-chronological-order/ LINK BIBLEREF.COM MENTIONED IN CHAPTER 8 SECTION (“Can't” do miracles in hometown- keyword absolute for lookup)   Welcome to the Popeular History Podcast: History through Pope Colored Glasses. My name is Gregg and this is episode 0.21f: Sayings of the Savior Part VI: Messages from Mark.   All of these aught episodes are made to let us build our Pope-colored glasses so we can use the same lenses when we look at history together. If you're lost, start at the beginning!   In previous worldbuilding episodes, we looked at quite a few of Jesus' words: the sermon on the mount and the sermon on the plain, plus all the Parables and miracles on our list, and his sayings closely tied to all those.   All that made for a good start, but if we're going to look at the sayings of the Savior, we should be comprehensive to avoid cherry-picking. So we spent the last of these worldbuilding episodes going chapter by chapter through the first gospel in order of appearance, the Gospel of Matthew, up until things caught up with where our rosary themed tour of the New Testament will carry on when we get to the next mystery. I am aware that what was once upon a time supposed to be a couple quick background episodes introducing my listeners to, well, all of Catholicism has ballooned wildly into wheels within wheels, but hey, I wouldn't have it any other way.   Anyways, next up in the traditional ordering is the Gospel of Mark, so that's our mission today. We'll go chapter by chapter, glossing over what we've already discussed and focusing on the Sayings of the Savior, since, you know, that's the deal here.   MARK 1 opens with a description of Jesus' cousin John the Baptist, and you'll never guess what John does to Jesus when He shows up. Actually you probably will because I was trying to set you up with a fake out where John refuses to baptize Jesus but it turns out that initial refusal is in Matthew but is absent from Mark's generally sparse account. Anyways, we get Jesus' first words in Mark only after he's baptized and had an express version of the temptation in the desert. Sometime after John was arrested, we're told Jesus preached a message that sounded a lot like what John had been saying,   MARK 1:15 “The time has come,” … “The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!”   GREGG Of course we just got a bit meta, since “Good news” is where the word Gospel comes from. A very “Begun, the Clone Wars have” moment. This urgent call to repentance has been a consistent refrain throughout Christian history, with the good news bring that repentance really can lead to reconciliation with God. Shoutout 0.1 if you need a refresher on why such a reconciliation is needed in the Catholic perspective.   Having begun to declare the Good News, Jesus the Christ soon picks out folks to help him, starting, like all good missions, with a pun. Talking to two fishermen, the brothers Simon and Andrew, Jesus says   MARK 1:   Follow me, and I will make you become fishers of men   GREGG When I covered this section in Matthew- we're deep in parallels here- I stuck with my usual NIV translation. Not because I'm an NIV snob, but because the New International Version is the one that shows up first on biblegateway.com and it's good enough, especially when I'm doing a LOT of scripture quoting like I have been with this series.   But because the NIV went for inclusivity, they translated the line as “make you fish for people”, which simply isn't as smooth a pun. I did check with my toddler-level skills and it looks to me like the pun is present in the Greek, so it's worth calling out. Jesus' humor is often downplayed, which is a shame.   If you're wondering why I'm going on about this, well, honestly, Mark is short and we've already covered most of what's there in Matthew. So we might as well take our time. There's plenty there, to be clear, I don't want angry letters from scholars whose primary focus is Mark saying I'm dismissing it offhand.   Alright, enough dilly dallying, what's next? Jesus calls more fishermen–the sons of Zebedee, James and John–but His actual words and possible new pun are not recorded. The next time he speaks he's talking to a demon in one of the healing miracles we discussed in 0.20, followed by another miracle–the healing of Simon's mother in law–later in the same chapter. Then, after assorted other miracles, Jesus goes out to pray by Himself in what's described as a quote unquote “desolate place”. When His disciples track Him down and tell Him everyone is looking for Him, He says   MARK 1:38 Let us go somewhere else--to the nearby villages--so I can preach there also. That is why I have come.   GREGG Though Jesus' disciples did in fact say no to Him on a downright alarming number of occasions, they went along with His plan this time, and another montage of undescribed healings and exorcisms finishes off with the healing of a grateful leper who ignores Jesus' command to tell no one. Mark 1 concludes with Jesus getting mobbed with requests for miracles as a result.   Chapter 2 opens with the healing of the paralytic who had been let in via the roof–a great bit of drama, but something we already covered under our review of miracles. After that, He called His tax collector disciple, who we got to know as Matthew in the Gospel of, well, Matthew, but who's listed as Levi here and in Luke. Using different names in different contexts was absolutely a thing,  but both Matthew and Levi are Hebrew names so the usual Greek vs Hebrew divide doesn't seem to be the culprit here, and what's more neither Mark nor Luke explicitly identify Levi with the apostle Matthew, though the inference isn't a terrible reach over all.   In the end, our main hook in this particular series is the actual sayings of the Savior, and this calling is carried out with a simple “follow me”, so perhaps we shouldn't dive into it too much.   After taking out a section of parables we covered in 0.21c as part of a SYNOPTIC ROUNDUP, we arrive at Mark 2:23, notably without leaving the SYNOPTIC ROUNDUP room because you can also follow along in Matthew 12 and Luke 6. As a reminder if you're rusty on Jewish customs, the Sabbath rest begins Friday at sundown and continues through the day on Saturday. Picking grain as we're going to see here would be considered working on the day of rest and therefore a violation.   MARK (2:23-2:28, NIV)) 23 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain.   24 The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”   25 He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need?   26 in the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions."   27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.   28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”   GREGG this section is one of the earlier signals of what would become a core piece of Christianity: its distancing from the Law of Moses. There are still aspects of continuity, for example most Christians including Catholics actually do still maintain *a* day of rest, just Sunday rather than Saturday and they'll generally skip the night before business though some of that has carried over in the form of vigil practices, as we'll see when we get there.   Anyways, I've always thought those last couple lines were pretty baller, and it turns out they're one of the few bits unique to Mark, so let's go ahead and hear them again:   QUOTE The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath. END QUOTE   This bold claim lies at the heart of what will in time lead to the followers of Christ being seen as a religion separate from Judaism, which is fair enough but also don't sleep on just how much that takes, given there's such a thing as secular Jews and Jewish atheists. There have been other messiah movements in Jewish history; though they fizzled out it's not much of a stretch to imagine a world where Christianity is still seen as part of a wide tent Judaism, indeed there is still a common heritage. But there are absolutely differences as well, principally, of course, centered around Jesus, the Son of Man, Lord of the Sabbath.   That other part   “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”   is the context for the start of the next chapter, serving as a good reminder that, while convenient for finding your place, chapter and verse divisions are not part of the original texts of the Bible, so it's important to not treat them as fences where you have to stop. You see, in Mark 3 we have the healing of the man with a withered hand in the synagogue on the Sabbath:   MARK 3 2 Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath. 3 Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, "Stand up in front of everyone.” 4 Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent.   GREGG I mean, it's a bit of a false dichotomy perhaps, are those really the only two options? But obviously I'm siding with Jesus here, mark me down as pro-healing when one can heal. And yeah, we actually already covered that exchange when we talked about the miracle in our miracles roundup, but the words are important there and Mark is short so forgive me for fitting it in here too.   Mark 3 continues with Jesus dealing with crowds now that word is getting around due to His miracles, and simultaneously He's ordering demons not to share the apparent secret that He is quote “the holy one of God”. We don't have his exact words in commanding the demons here so there's more room for interpretation than usual but the general take on these sort of passages is that it's tied to His time not having yet come to be revealed as the Messiah. Of course, unless I missed something, the specific instances where Jesus talks about His time having not yet come are in the Gospel of John, so reading that into Mark is something most modern scholars wouldn't go for- especially since the general consensus is Mark came first by a fair stretch- but that sort of quibble wasn't much of a barrier for most of the history of Christians reflecting on Scripture, so the traditional interpretation is what it is and I don't think it's too much of a reach.   After telling assorted demons to hush up, Jesus appoints the Twelve Apostles starting in verse 13, no direct quotes there so no need to tarry though interested folks are always welcome to check out the naming differences between the Gospels.   Starting in verse 20 we have the house divided parable, covered in our parables series a few episodes back, then in verse 28 we hit “the unpardonable sin” section, and believe it or not it's not being a weeb, it turns out it's, well, let's let Jesus explain:   MARK 3 28 Truly I tell you, people can be forgiven all their sins and every slander they utter, 29 But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin."   GREGG When we covered the parallel text of this in Matthew 12–seriously, over 90% of Mark is parallelled in Matthew–I focused on the idea of the sin against the Spirit as being despair. But Mark's telling has a bit of context that has lead to another popular interpretation, especially among–Catholics cover your ears– *whispers* Protestants.   MARK 3 30He said this because they were saying, "He has an impure spirit.”   GREGG Using that verse, which at a glance is simply explaining why Jesus said what He said, the passage is taken to mean that rejecting Jesus as the Son of God slash Savior slash Messiah is the sin against the Spirit being referred to here. And though I called out Protestants specifically a minute ago, it's not like that interpretation is unheard of within Catholicism, typically it's a both/and sort of thing, accepting the despair angle and the “ya'll need Jesus” angle. Nor are the two interpretations unrelated, as someone wholly given to despair will have a hard time accepting Jesus' offer of salvation.   Of course, when I speak of accepting Jesus' offer of salvation, now I really AM getting into the fundamental faith vs works discussion. That's faith and works in the context of salvation from sin. We'll be getting into it in more detail in future episodes, but as an overview all major forms of Christianity agree that faith in the saving power of Jesus Christ is fundamentally necessary for salvation. The disagreement comes in whether anything else plays any role- “anything else” being summed up under the umbrella term of “works”, or it might help to rephrase the question as whether our actions have any meaning when it comes to our salvation.   For Catholics, the answer is yes, while for most Protestants, the answer is no. Generally speaking when there are fights about it, Protestants will take the position that your works having meaning, as Catholics argue is the case, means that you can save yourself through your works. Some people do think that, of course, but not Catholics, at least not Catholics who know their onions, as the Catholic Church condemned that position as a heresy over thousand years before Protestantism became a thing. However, the Church is far from perfect, and in the time of Martin Luther, whose teachings are typically seen as the spark that ignited the Protestant Reformation, it's clear that some within the Church were comfortable blurring the lines for financial gain.   I've got more on faith vs works and Catholicism vs Protestantism planned for future episodes, and I don't want to bury that conversation where no one will look for it, so let's leave that there for now and get back to Mark, with chapter 3 verse 31 to 35   MARK   31 Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.” 33 "Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked. 34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother.”   GREGG Thanks to the Marian doctrine of Our Lady's perpetual virginity we discussed back in episode 0.14, the surprising fact that Jesus doesn't immediately attend to his family members isn't the most discussed aspect of this passage when it comes to Catholicism. No, that would be the fact that Jesus' brothers, the Greek term is Adelphoi, show up. Generally these are understood as Jesus' half brothers, via his earthly father Saint Joseph from a previous marriage.   As for the question of whether Jesus just kind of blew off his family here, half brothers or cousins or full brothers or whoever was there with Mary, while I can see how you might get that impression, it's not like His every action is recorded. It's entirely possible that He checked in with them after making a quick positive observation- one that I don't want to lose in the rest of this analysis so I'll repeat it:   MARK 3 “35 Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother.”   GREGG   Anyways, as is the custom with Mark, we're on to the next scene in a hurry, launching into Mark 4 with the next verse as a classic transition:   MARK 4 1 Again Jesus began to teach by the lake.   GREGG I'm not going to go into detail about what He taught by the lake here, because Chapter 4 is made up entirely of miracles and parables we've already covered in 0.20 and earlier in 0.21, respectively. We've got the Parable of the Sower, then the Lamp on a Stand, then the Growing Seed and the Mustard Seed, capped off by Mark's account of Jesus calming the storm at sea.   Similarly, Mark 5 is a string of by-now familiar miracles- and if any don't seem familiar you know by now Miracles are in one of the 0.20 episodes, right? The Gerasene Demoniac, the Bleeding Woman, Jairus' Daughter, they're all there, and in Mark 5 too.   Mark 6 give us a bit more food for thought on Jesus' local life and family dynamic. A sign of how things hit differently at home, it's worth a long quote:   MARK 6:1-6 6 Jesus left there and went to his hometown, accompanied by his disciples. 2 When the Sabbath came, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were amazed.   “Where did this man get these things?” they asked. “What's this wisdom that has been given him? What are these remarkable miracles he is performing? 3 Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.   4 Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town, among his relatives and in his own home.” 5 He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. 6 He was amazed at their lack of faith.   GREGG Many of Jesus' sayings have become proverbial, and while it's not in the level of turning the other cheek, “a prophet is not without honor except in his own town” has some popularity. It does seem to speak to a common truth of celebrities.   I do like the touch that He was unable to do any miracles there except for the miracles which He did do, which evidently still failed to impress. Of course, the idea of Jesus being *unable* to do miracles is theologically interesting, since He's, you know, God. Of course, God does seem to have had some trouble dealing with iron chariots back in Judges 1:19, so maybe there is some precedent.   But we've got our Pope-colored glasses on, so not only is Jesus God but God is omnipotent, so it's fair to ask: what gives? It could be that old favorite, the translation issue, but I admit my personal Greek skills are basically at the naming barnyard animals level, so I decided to bring in an expert to verify. An expert by the name of bibleref.com, linked in the show notes. Their commentary on the passage notes that in the parallel passage in Matthew, it simply says Jesus “did not” perform many miracles in his hometown, which isn't as controversial though of course it's always fair to ask why God doesn't just fix everything for everyone since he's all good and all knowing and all powerful. But that popular question isn't where we're at today because apparently it's not a translation issue, Mark 6:5 does specifically say Jesus *could not* perform the miracles in the Greek according to the commentary. But it goes on to note that there can be multiple senses of inability, like how you can't touch the ball when playing soccer, or football for my non-US listeners, and yeah, I'm not counting goalies. Anyways, obviously you can physically touch the ball, but you cannot in the sense that it's against the established rules of the game. If that's the sense, it makes some sense that Jesus quote unquote “can't” perform miracles in His hometown because His miracles are supposed to draw people to Him and they aren't having that effect at home. At least not much, keep in mind he did do some miracles there according to Mark, so in any event the whole “can't” thing definitely isn't absolute.   Of course, I personally find it awful to think that God would play games with our salvation- hence my quasi-universalism. I get respecting our free will, but I also know He's omnipotent and isn't going to give up on us, no matter how much we try to give up on ourselves if there's another chance we can get He's going to give that to us. But we have to accept at some point, so don't think I'm downplaying the urgency there.   Anyways, let's get back to Mark 6, now in Verse 8 where He's sending the disciples out in pairs with the following instructions:   MARK 6:8-11   8 Take nothing for the journey except a staff--no bread, no bag, no money in your belts.   9 Wear sandals but not an extra shirt.   10 Whenever you enter a house, stay there until you leave that town.   11 And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.”   GREGG As you should by now have come to expect, these instructions do have a parallel in Matthew that we covered in the last worldbuilding episode. But it's not as close a parallel as you might think. Often, as we've talked about before, parallels in the synoptic gospels are so close that you'd get dinged for plagiarism, with maybe a word being changed here or there. But here, it basically reads like two different people were told to write down a speech shortly after they finished hearing it. Which, I mean, matches tradition, for what it's worth. The most obvious difference is that Mark's telling skips Matthew's bit about only going to Jewish households, forbidding visits to Gentiles or Samaritans. Though as we've seen Mark's Jesus was already laying the groundwork for some serious reframing of Mosaic Law by taking on the title of Lord of the Sabbath, I think on the whole it's more likely that in Mark's account that's simply taken as a given and perhaps left off for brevity rather than this being a separate incident or its absence being a sign that the disciples were to ignore those cultural barriers at this stage.   The rest of Mark 6 is taken up by his narrative of the death of John the Baptist, where, unusually for the Gospels, Jesus is offstage, and then there's two banner miracles, the Feeding of the 5000 and Jesus walking on water.   Which brings us to Mark 7, which has Jesus… let's see… excoriating the Jewish authorities… then calling a woman a dog… and let's not forget giving someone a wet willy.   Don't believe me? Let's go.   MARK 7   1The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus 2and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. 3(The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. 4When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.) 5So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?” 6He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: "'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. 7They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.' 8You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.” 9And he continued, "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! 10For Moses said, 'Honor your father and mother,' and, 'Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.' 11But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)-- 12then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”   GREGG Note that while there's a close parallel between these passages and Matthew 15, Mark is apparently much more concerned with explaining Jewish custom to his audience, suggesting the intended audience is not Jews themselves.   The rest of the chapter we've covered before, from the Parable of the Heart of Man to the two miracles that give the tibits I teased earlier. Jesus calls the syrophoenician woman a dog in the runup to healing her servant, and he totally heals a deaf guy via wet willy at the end of the chapter. But I already covered both of those in 0.20c, so check them out there for more.   So that means we're on to Chapter 8, which opens with… another miracle! Turns out Jesus did a lot of those! Who knew?   That's the feeding of the four thousand, but you know the drill, we're skipping that and on ahead to verse 12, where Jesus is responding to a group of Pharisees asking for a sign.   MARK 8:12 He sighed deeply and said, "Why does this generation ask for a sign? Truly I tell you, no sign will be given to it."   GREGG Ok. Remembering that by a sign here they mean a miracle, we've got the guy known for working miracles getting annoyed at requests for miracles. Why? You'd think He'd be all about that. Is it another sort of hometown situation, where folk's lack of faith is an impediment?   Well, kind of sort of. But not quite.   In the parallel passage from Matthew 16, which I admit I kind of glossed over last time because I was excited to get to the Papally significant Matthew 16:18, Jesus calls those asking for a sign “a wicked and adulterous generation”, which can help explain why Jesus is refusing the request–after all even in Mark's shorter version their motives are implicitly questioned, with Jesus asking why they're asking for a sign.   The typical interpretation goes that Jesus is refusing the request for a sign because the Pharisees have the wrong *motives* in asking. Unlike those in His hometown, they seem to believe Jesus can work miracles, but they just want to see a show, they aren't interested in Jesus' message beyond that. And Jesus for His part, is interested in signs *for the sake of* His message, He isn't there to entertain.   These various passages that show Jesus specifically not working miracles could be taken to suggest some embarrassment by the authors about Jesus' miracles not being as renowned as they would like, forcing them to give explanations for why that's the case. I can definitely picture some neckbeard arguing if God wanted to make everyone believe he'd make miracles known to all and be undeniable. Which is a reasonable enough thought except unless God removes free will, there's never going to be such a thing as undeniable anyways.   In the next few verses, Jesus warns against the teachings of the Pharisees and Herod. Though technically the “teachings” part isn't spelled out in Mark, so it could be He's actually meaning to go in another direction with things than He does in Matthew's version, though I think their teaching or at least their general influence is His most likely target. Let's hear it and regroup after.   MARK 8 14-15 14The disciples had forgotten to bring bread, except for one loaf they had with them in the boat.   15"Be careful," Jesus warned them. "Watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod.”   GREGG Certainly He isn't talking about literal bread, as is evidenced from His reaction. Also, it's interesting that Mark warns against Herod's yeast specifically, while Matthew leaves Herod off in favor of tossing in the Sadducees to accompany the Pharisees. If Mark is the rougher, earlier version as most scholars currently argue–and as I'm inclined to believe looking at the two side by side these last few months–then it seems like one can argue Matthew's account has been modified to perhaps be a little more authority-friendly in this case, keeping in mind the Herodians were the client-kings in charge of the area in Jesus' day. Check out 0.13 on the Hasmoneans for more on that.   After a miracle interlude–healing the blind man in a two-step process where the miracle is evidently incomplete at first–a fairly intriguing Mark-only one that is arguably sanitized out of other accounts, but one we already covered so I'm not getting back into it today– anyways after that we hit Mark's account of Peter's testament, you know, with the binding and loosing and the keys and all that. Except actually *without* all that in Mark's version.   Here's the whole exchange as Mark tells it:   MARK 8:27-30 27Jesus and his disciples went on to the villages around Caesarea Philippi. On the way he asked them, "Who do people say I am?” 28They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets.” 29"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Peter answered, "You are the Messiah.” 30Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him.   GREGG Like I said, not a key in sight. Peter does give the critical answer, but none of what would become the principal text for the Papacy is presented here. And again, if you consider Mark as the older account, as most scholars do, it's fair to raise an eyebrow at that. Yet in the end, one way or another, we have a Pope, and I do think there's something to be said for the unifying force of the role. After all, if no one is Pope, then everyone is Pope. But I digress.   Of course, poor Peter can only wish he were simply downplayed in Mark 8. The reality is he does pop up again later in the chapter, in a familiar but unflattering way:   MARK 8:31- 31He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. 32He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. 33But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. "Get behind me, Satan!" he said. "You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”   GREGG So there you go. If you want to make a case for the Pope not always being right, there's an easy one. Not everyone gets called Satan by, well, God. Of course, there's a surprising amount of room where you can accept Papal Infallibility *and* the idea that the Pope isn't always right, but we'll get to that in time.   The chapter finishes with Jesus reflecting on what his stated fate means for his followers, and it's, uh, not the cheeriest image. It bleeds into chapter 9 so don't put your Bible down too quickly If you're following along.   MARK 8:34-9:1   34Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: "Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 35For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it. 36What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? 37Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? 38If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels. CHAPTER 9 1And he said to them, "Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.   GREGG Goodness, Jesus, it's hard for me to keep my running joke of treating the Crucifixion as a spoiler when you're literally telling your disciples to take up their crosses before it actually happens. Oh well.   Mark 9 continues with The Transfiguration, but like I mentioned in our Matthew discussion, that's it's own mystery of the rosary that we haven't gotten to yet, so pardon me and I'll skip that here too.   After that, we have a miracle- the boy with an unclean spirit that can only be driven out by prayer and fasting. So on to verse 30, where we have more talk of the upcoming Passion:   MARK 9:30-32 “30They left that place and passed through Galilee. Jesus did not want anyone to know where they were, 31because he was teaching his disciples. He said to them, "The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise.” 32But they did not understand what he meant and were afraid to ask him about it.   GREGG Jesus was speaking pretty plainly here, so it's not immediately clear why the disciples didn't understand what Jesus meant, but it's probably related to the way Jesus keeps telling folks either to talk or not to talk about things. There's definitely a focus on pacing the spread of the Good News throughout the Gospels, especially in Mark, and it seems like a supernatural barrier to the Apostles' understanding here would fit in with that.   The fear of asking is more easily explained: if someone you know is really good at making predictions and you're pretty sure they just predicted something awful, you may well be hesitant to confirm that with them.   Being hesitant to talk about stuff with Jesus carries us into the next few verses, where Jesus apparently puts His omniscience to good use in a wonderfully passive-aggressive way:   MARK 9: 33-35 33They came to Capernaum. When he was in the house, he asked them, "What were you arguing about on the road?" 34But they kept quiet because on the way they had argued about who was the greatest. 35Sitting down, Jesus called the Twelve and said, "Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all.”   GREGG The first will be last is one of Jesus' recurring themes, and the whole “I'm-pretty-sure-I-heard-you-but-since-you-won't-confirm-I'm-just-going-to-respond-indirectly approach reminds me of dealing with the drama of children, though I suppose a lot of things remind me of interacting with children these days given my current life situation, and that approach is not necessarily one that exclusively applies to children. Either way, Jesus does bring children into the conversation as His next move.   MARK 9:36-37 36He took a little child whom he placed among them. Taking the child in his arms, he said to them, 37"Whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me does not welcome me but the one who sent me.”   GREGG That passage is one of the more often-remembered portions of the Gospels, in part because it's in all three synoptics [air horn], but also in part because it's a handy pastoral lesson to push back on folks who might complain about the presence of children in worship services. As they say, if no one in your church is cryin', it's dyin'.   Next up we have some verses you might wish had been left off if you've ever gotten tired of hearing “in Jesus' name” a lot:   MARK 9:38-41 38"Teacher," said John, "we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.” 39"Do not stop him," Jesus said. "For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40for whoever is not against us is for us. 41Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward.   GREGG Personally I'm thankful for that passage, because I'm a big supporter of ecumenism and cooperation, and “whoever is not against us is for us” is an immensely helpful sentiment in that context.   For the next section, where Jesus gets pretty intense, there are several verses that simply aren't present in my go-to NIV version, presumably for bible nerd manuscript reasons. Now, the point of the Sayings of the Savior series is to make sure we cover *everything* Jesus said in the canonical scriptures, and those verses are speaking lines for Jesus, so that won't do. Thankfully the King James version has us covered, so I'm going to switch to that for those verses.   So you can tell the difference easily, I'll be switching to a guest narrator as well. Lebron James hasn't responded to my calls, so the King James Version of the King James Version will have to wait, but my brother has come in clutch for podcast purposes. PJHERE MARK 9:42-48 42"If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in me--to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea. 43If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. [NIV leaves off verse 44 “44Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”-KJV] 45And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. [NIV leaves off verse 46 “46Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”-KJV] 47And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, NIV leaves off verse 48 “48Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”-KJV]   GREGG So yeah, by “verses” I kind of meant “one verse used as a refrain”, but it's officially verses 44, 46, and 48, so I am technically correct, which I'm told is the best kind of correct.   Thanks to the reference to “leading little ones astray”, the great millstone imagery has had some use in response to the sexual abuse crisis, though the most commonly cited of these evocative instructions is plucking out the eye, thanks in no small part to the frequency of admonitions against pornography in the online era. Cutting off the hand is also referenced, while I think most folks if they're being honest won't even necessarily recall cutting off the foot is among the scenarios mentioned.   Anyways, Jesus finishes this section with a few salty verses that initially bear a strong resemblance to Matthew 5:13- the salt of the earth bit from the Sermon on the Mount. I'm thinking I might have actually pointed these verses out when I was going over that due to the similarity, but just in case, here they are:   MARK 9:49-50 49Everyone will be salted with fire 50"Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt among yourselves, and be at peace with each other.”   GREGG “Have salt among yourselves” is an unusual turn of phrase, the typical interpretation of this Mark-only phrase is that Christians are supposed to bring out the best in one another, the way salt brings out the best in food.   We're now entering Mark 10, which- surprise surprise, has close parallels to Matthew 19 and 20. I'm not going to give the Matthew sections as a side by side, partly because we've already covered them independently, partly because this episode is already going to be one of my longest despite Mark being the shortest Gospel. But it's worth giving it a thorough treatment since scholars tend to think it's the oldest and also because if I'm going to go all-out it might as well be with the shortest of the bunch. You know, for efficiency.   Anyways…   MARK 10:1-12 1Jesus then left that place and went into the region of Judea and across the Jordan. Again crowds of people came to him, and as was his custom, he taught them. 2Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” 3"What did Moses command you?" he replied. 4They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.” 5"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. 6"But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' 7For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” 10When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”   GREGG This version of Jesus' teaching on marriage and divorce notably does not include the exception for adultery we saw in Matthew's account. Additionally where Matthew focused on Eunuchs for the kingdom–and other kinds of Eunuchs–Mark concluded with that extra condemnation of divorce, with remarriage as adultery.   In the next passage, the conversation changes direction:   MARK 10:13-16 13People were bringing little children to Jesus for him to place his hands on them, but the disciples rebuked them. 14When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” 16And he took the children in his arms, placed his hands on them and blessed them.   GREGG We'll meet the Church Father who was allegedly one of the children in this scene as we go about our big timeline, once we get through this worldbuilding and go into that. But for now, it's time for one of the most inconvenient passages in the Gospels, at least if you're rich.    MARK 10:17-31 17As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 18"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone. 19You know the commandments: 'You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, you shall not defraud, honor your father and mother.'” 20"Teacher," he declared, "all these I have kept since I was a boy.” 21Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” 22At this the man's face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth. 23Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!” 24The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! 25It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” 26The disciples were even more amazed, and said to each other, "Who then can be saved?” 27Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.” 28Then Peter spoke up, "We have left everything to follow you!” 29"Truly I tell you," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel 30will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age: homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields--along with persecutions--and in the age to come eternal life. 31But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”   GREGG There is a surprisingly thorough and ranging discussion of the whole “eye of the needle” bit in the digital edition of the British newspaper The Guardian, in the Nooks and Crannies section of their Notes and Queries page. Which I think makes it the most random thing I've cited here, but hey, it's got it all so let's get a sampling going:   First, the original query: The Guardian.com “I recently read that one of the gates into Jerusalem was named "The Eye of the Needle," and was quite tricky to negotiate, since it was quite small. Does this mean that when Jesus said "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven," He meant that, far from being impossible, it was merely tricky?” Dara O'Reilly, London, UK   GREGG The first reply is a fairly representative take on the gate theory:   GUARDIAN The interpretation that seems to make sense is this. The "Eye of the Needle" was indeed a narrow gateway into Jerusalem. Since camels were heavily loaded with goods and riders, they would need to be un-loaded in order to pass through. Therefore, the analogy is that a rich man would have to similarly unload his material possessions in order to enter heaven. Rick, Brighton Uk   GREGG But then the plot thickens, as William Elsom of the UK is having none of it:   GUARDIAN No. The failure is in the translation. The original word that should have been translated was "camella" which means rope. (presumably Greek, but I am open to this being corrected.) "It is easier for a rope to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven" makes more sense as a comparison. William Elsom, UK   GREGG There's something of a scholarly telephone game going on in the background, as basically every “mistranslation” take offers a variation on the root word and apparent correct meaning. Which is fairly normal for translations especially when there are different alphabets involved, but still, I chuckled.   GUARDIAN I am currently studying the Aramaic language and indeed the word "gamla" (transliterated) does mean both "camel" and "thick rope." Assuming the original manuscript with that teaching of Jesus was recorded in Aramaic and later translated to Greek, the translator may have been familiar with only the "camel" definition of the word. I have not been able to find any reliable information on a city gate called "The Eye of the Needle." -Xakk, FL USA   GREGG As much as I hate agreeing with someone who spells Zach Xakk–though presumably that's a choice his parents made– anyways as much as I hate to admit it, this overall take seems the most likely to this non-Aramaic specialist. The general meaning is still the same, it's not something you're going to get done.   It's also worth noting that at least as of the return from the Exile, if the Book of Nehemiah is to be believed, there was no “Eye of the Needle” gate in Jerusalem. And I can state that with confidence because as longtime listeners will recall, I had a whole special episode devoted to the topic from July 2020 entitled “Literally A Detailed Description of the Gates of Jerusalem and Who Fixed Them in the Time of Nehemiah”, which, despite being exactly what it says it is, has been a pretty popular episode. In any event, it *could* be that an Eye of the Needle gate was established at a later point, though really the whole gate thing feels like wishful thinking on the part of the rich or the would-be rich to me.   Of course, as you might expect, there are also literalists who agree it's wishful thinking and would rather cut to the chase. Plus people like my man David:   GUARDIAN The translation is irrelevant. We all know in our hearts we cannot love money above God.   David Porter, Orangevale, US   GREGG Let's conclude with my favorite take:   GUARDIAN “Blessed are the cheesemakers?” Mike Conn, San Francisco,    GREGG After the second Gate-Gate scandal we've come across in this show (shoutout Samson if you've forgotten), we arrive at Jesus' third prediction of His own death in Mark   MARK 10:32-34 32They were on their way up to Jerusalem, with Jesus leading the way, and the disciples were astonished, while those who followed were afraid. Again he took the Twelve aside and told them what was going to happen to him. 33"We are going up to Jerusalem," he said, "and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death and will hand him over to the Gentiles, 34who will mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him. Three days later he will rise.”   GREGG Mark gives no record of the Apostles' reaction to this third prediction, unless the next verse is the actual reaction, which is a hilarious thought because it would be shockingly tone deaf. But yeah, it's the very next verse without any transition except the word “then”, so you can certainly read it that way:   MARK 10:35-45 35Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. "Teacher," they said, "we want you to do for us whatever we ask.” 36"What do you want me to do for you?" he asked. 37They replied, "Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory.” 38"You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?” 39"We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, 40but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared.” 41When the ten heard about this, they became indignant with James and John. 42Jesus called them together and said, "You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 43Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 44and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. 45For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.   GREGG It turns out James and John, the Sons of Zebedee, have massive… cojones. But in the end their reward is understood to be martyrdom–perhaps not what they had in mind, they certainly seem to have had more of an earthly kingdom in mind.   In any event, here we have more of the “first will be last” motif popping up, and Scriptural background for why the Pope is considered, at least in theory, the “Servant of the Servants of God”.   Mark 10 finishes up with the healing of the blind Bartimaeus, so it's on to Mark 11, with Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem:   MARK 11:1-11 1As they approached Jerusalem and came to Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two of his disciples, 2saying to them, “Go to the village ahead of you, and just as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 3If anyone asks you, 'Why are you doing this?' say, 'The Lord needs it and will send it back here shortly.'” 4They went and found a colt outside in the street, tied at a doorway. As they untied it, 5some people standing there asked, "What are you doing, untying that colt?” 6They answered as Jesus had told them to, and the people let them go. 7When they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their cloaks over it, he sat on it. 8Many people spread their cloaks on the road, while others spread branches they had cut in the fields. 9Those who went ahead and those who followed shouted, "Hosanna!" "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!” 10"Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David!" "Hosanna in the highest heaven!” 11Jesus entered Jerusalem and went into the temple courts. He looked around at everything, but since it was already late, he went out to Bethany with the Twelve.   GREGG We'll talk more about Palm Sunday in the future, for now just know that this scene is the basis for that. It's also a sign that Jesus is approaching the end of His earthly ministry, though we've still got another couple chapters for today after we finish this one.   We'll skip verses 12-14 as that's the cursing of the fig tree we covered under miracles--and that's right, it's a non-healing miracle. At least His target is a tree and not a human as happens in some of the apocrypha.   Which brings us to Mark's version of the scene with the moneychangers in the Temple:   MARK 11:15-18 15On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple courts and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, 16and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts. 17And as he taught them, he said, "Is it not written: 'My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations'? But you have made it 'a den of robbers.'” 18The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching. 19When evening came, Jesus and his disciples went out of the city.   GREGG Mark's somewhat abbreviated account leaves off Him making a whip, which is a loss, but hey, the core is there. As a reminder, and yes, I'll say this every time, just remember when someone asks “what would Jesus do” that flipping tables is absolutely a valid option.   Then, we're back to the fig tree, seeing the result of the curse on the way out, and this is extra special because this is actually an extended Mark only reflection. Including another King James specific verse that the NIV leaves off. Let's hear it!   MARK 11:20-26 20In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. 21Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!” 22"Have faith in God," Jesus answered. 23"Truly I tell you, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in their heart but believes that what they say will happen, it will be done for them. 24Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. 25And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins." [NIV omits but KJV has] 26But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.]   GREGG Of course, when I said “Mark exclusive”, that may have been a bit of an oversell, because while the now-proverbial “faith to move mountains” doesn't appear in Matthew's fig tree discourse, it does line up closely to another section, Matthew 17:20, several chapters before Matthew's fig tree. As for the rest, the sentiment is overall familiar, but worth repeating so I'll say it again:   MARK 11:25-26 if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins." [NIV omits but KJV has] 26But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.]   GREGG Next up we've got an attempted trap that Jesus turns around, Bugs Bunny style.   MARK 11:27-33 27They arrived again in Jerusalem, and while Jesus was walking in the temple courts, the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders came to him. 28"By what authority are you doing these things?" they asked. "And who gave you authority to do this?” 29Jesus replied, "I will ask you one question. Answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I am doing these things. 30John's baptism--was it from heaven, or of human origin? Tell me!” 31They discussed it among themselves and said, "If we say, 'From heaven,' he will ask, 'Then why didn't you believe him?' 32But if we say, 'Of human origin' . . . " (They feared the people, for everyone held that John really was a prophet.) 33So they answered Jesus, "We don't know." Jesus said, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things."   GREGG Mark 12 opens with the Parable of the Tenant Farmers, which I personally prefer to call the Parable of the Bad Tenants since I think just calling them farmers ignores the amount of murdering they do in the parable. But anyways, we're not covering it here, ‘cause parable. So on to Verse 13:   MARK 12:13-17 13Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. 14They came to him and said, "Teacher, we know that you are a man of integrity. You aren't swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not? 15Should we pay or shouldn't we?" But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. "Why are you trying to trap me?" he asked. "Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” 16They brought the coin, and he asked them, "Whose image is this? And whose inscription?" "Caesar's," they replied. 17Then Jesus said to them, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." And they were amazed at him.   GREGG This tax exchange, which we saw in Matthew and we'll see again in Luke (SYNOPTIC ROUNDUP AIRHORN?) is intended to be a sort of sting operation, with the expected result being Jesus objecting to the tax and therefore being guilty of rebellion against the Roman government. But I don't think Jesus even needed to tap into His omniscience here, they were acting pretty suspicious with the leading flattery and line of questioning. Plus, what does God ultimately need money for?   In the end, of course, everything we have ultimately comes from God, so while I mentioned it with Matthew it's worth mentioning again now- when we give Caesar what is Caesar's and God what is God's, God gets everything.   Next up we've got Jesus fielding yet another insincere question from religious authorities, this time from the Sadducees:   MARK 12:18-27 18Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 19"Teacher," they said, "Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. 20Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. 21The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. 22In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. 23At the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?” 24Jesus replied, "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 25When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 26Now about the dead rising--have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the account of the burning bush, how God said to him, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? 27He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!”   GREGG That last bit– “You are badly mistaken!” is a Marcan flourish that helps emphasize Mark's generally less Pharisee-slash-Sadducee–friendly stance, underlining the intensity of Jesus' disagreement with them.   The next section is the part about The Greatest Commandment which we used to open the Sayings of the Savior, so check out 0.21a for that. Then we have a theological question apparently designed to further undermine the Credibility of the Teachers of the Law. This time around, it's Jesus who picks the fight,   MARK 12:35-40 35While Jesus was teaching in the temple courts, he asked, "Why do the teachers of the law say that the Messiah is the son of David? 36David himself, speaking by the Holy Spirit, declared: "'The Lord said to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet."' 37David himself calls him 'Lord.' How then can he be his son?" The large crowd listened to him with delight. 38As he taught, Jesus said, "Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, 39and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. 40They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. These men will be punished most severely.”   GREGG “The large crowd listened to him with delight”, we're told, as Jesus excoriated the religious establishment of His day. Sounds like a political rally almost. No wonder He was condemned as a revolutionary.   The last scene in Mark 12 is one we haven't seen before- it's one of the few passages in Mark not paralleled in Matthew- and it's one of my favorites:   MARK12:41-44 41Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents. 43Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything--all she had to live on.”   GREGG This scene is generally called the Widow's Mite, not because “mite” was the term for small copper coins in ancient Judea–though they would retroactively be called mites–and not because the mite was the term for small copper coins in 17th century England where the King James Bible was produced, though they would pick up that name, but rather because the King James translation used a Dutch term for some small denomination coins that had originally been picked up for Biblical use by William Tyndale.   For once, I'll spare you a deeper rabbit hole, and move on from the names of coins to the lesson of the coins.   I mentioned before this passage is one of my favorites. While I appreciate the challenge behind Jesus' admonition to be perfect that we saw in Matthew, here we see that if all you have isn't much, God still sees the effort and meaningful sacrifice. There's something comforting in that for extremely inadequate folks like myself.   On the other hand, there's the lesson that giving out of your abundance may be mathematically and physically helpful but it's not spiritually significant. It's the right thing to do, of course, but an even better thing than giving your excess is to give beyond just your excess.   “But I need the rest”, you might argue. And it's certainly true, you may well have just reasons for keeping some aside. It would be irresponsible of me to sell all my worldly possessions and go live in a cave, as even if my wife signed onto it we've got kids too young to voluntarily renounce the world, it's our responsibility to care for them.   So, where's the line? When do we go from taking care of our responsibilities at home to hoarding?   Well, if you have any money, you should be giving. It doesn't have to be all you have, especially if you've got responsibilities to those in your household, but it should absolutely be more than nothing, and everything is best.   Ultimately Christians are not to see money as theirs to use how they see fit, as something they've earned. That simply isn't a Christian mentality. Money is a means by which you can help others–those you have primary responsibility for first, like your children, and those in need should be prioritized urgently as well. The Church speaks of the “preferential option for the poor”.   I'm not saying you need to become a shell of a human, doing nothing for yourself and allowing your own mental and physical health to collapse- though certainly some saints lives point in that direction. But putting yourself first is something that needs to be balanced against your ability to be a blessing to those around you.   This isn't the last time I'll bring up this sort of thing by any means, and it looks like I avoided one tangent only to go into another, so let's get back to Mark, now in Chapter 13, which opens with a prophesy of the destruction of the Temple, then flows into a description of the End Times– keep in mind from the Christian perspective time has not only a beginning but an end–that parallels Matthew.   It's understandable to want to read this as being written after the actual historical destruction of the Temple in 70AD, but as I argued in my chat with Garry Stevens last June, it's not like it was hard to see such a calamity coming during Jesus' life, Rome was already in control of a rebellious Judea with the Temple as a potential center of nationalist resistance. And that's of course if you discount the possibility of actual prophecy, which, remember, we're making our Pope-colored glasses, so Jesus actually prophesying Is the most straightforward explanation. Either way, a post 70AD dating for Mark is really pushing the outward edge of scholarly dating for the work, keeping in mind scholars tend to argue it's the oldest of the Gospels.   Without further ado, here's a long quote, going from Mark 13:1 to 27.   MARK 13 1As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, "Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!” 2"Do you see a

TRANSCRIPT Good evening, Happy Feast of Saints Peter and Paul, and welcome back to Popeular History! That's right, we're officially off hiatus, starting next week you can expect a short Cardinal Numbers episode every Saturday and a longer Popeular History worldbuilding episode every month. As I continue to get a feel for the rhythms of family life that seems like a doable schedule, especially since most of the work for the remainder of the year is already done. Alleluia! I also have some special stuff for you today. First off, I want to wish a very happy birthday to Cardinal Seán O'Malley of Boston. This birthday is bittersweet, because the next conclave is officially losing a real one as Cardinal O'Malley is 80 today and is therefore automatically no longer a Cardinal Elector. This brings the total number of current Cardinal Electors to 125, and for what it's worth I am fully expecting another consistory for the creation of new Cardinals to be announced later in the year once that's in danger of dropping below 120. When I call Cardinal O'Malley “a real one”, naturally that's partially a reference to the fact that he's a Buckeye, partially a reference to the fact that he's one of the few bearded churchmen in the Latin Rite, partially because of the amazing nature of being able to see him mowing the lawn in his habit, and partially because he was the fixer brought in to bring Boston out of the mess it was in scandal wise after the troubled tenure of Cardinal Law. One day I will get to covering Cardinal O'Malley and the other older Cardinals in Cardinal Numbers, but for now my focus for that show is on covering the younger cardinals who will participate in the next conclave when the time comes. By the way, Cardinal Numbers now somewhat accidentally has its own feed again. I wasn't financially prepared to have two podcast feeds active, but I forgot to cancel the subscription, so might as well roll with it! All my content will be posted right here on the Popeular History Feed of course, but Cardinal Numbers specific content will also be posted on the Cardinal Numbers feed so that can also develop as a standalone rexypod, which was the original intent. There is also officially a bit of Paton-exclusive content now! But don't worry, I'm not paywalling knowledge, that goes against my principles as a librarian. We'll see some early access situations, sure, but there is never going to be something for you to learn that's only going to be on my Patreon feed. Instead, it's going to be more pure fun extension stuff like the episode I just posted where Fry from Pontifacts kindly agreed to be subjected to my look at Cardinal Burke and give her live reactions! She also managed to get me talking a little more loosely than I normally would. It was a great time and I'm looking forward to making more content for my Patreon Patrons, if I ever get any of those to make more content for! Hint hint. Patreon.com/popular, go check it out!   Finally, I've decided that I've been sitting on the Habemus Pointsam recordings Bry and I have already made for too long, in part because I always worry files will just disappear. So the rest of today's show will be the draft pilot for that mini rexypod. Get ready for some foolishness and categories in 3…, 2…, 1… HABEMUS POINTSAM RECORDING

FUNDRAISING LINK: www.Patreon.com/popeular  TRANSCRIPT Hello everyone, Welcome to Popeular History, or to Cardinal Numbers, whichever feed you happen to be listening to! The good news, as you can infer from that first sentence, is the separate feed for Cardinal Numbers is back live well ahead of schedule! The bad news is it's because I forgot I had it set to auto-renew and it was absolutely not worked into Popeular History's *extremely* modest budget. Which means it's time for an emergency fundraiser! That little whoopsie set me back $108, aka $9/mo for a year, so until that shortfall is covered, anyone who goes to Patreon.com/popeular and helps out by signing up as a monthly donor during this state of emergency will get an extra bonus in the form of a special thank you in every episode I release as long as you continue to make a monthly donation. If you continue for years, my thanks will continue for years. Normally that's a top-tier bonus, but I'm making it available to all who sign up as monthly donors today because of the miniature financial crisis I've created for myself. So yes, this is a great offer but it is also a limited time one, once I've got the immediate need covered thanks to a few helpful folks I will officially end the fundraiser by removing this episode from my podcast feeds and even more officially will post an update to Popeularhistory.com. So go to patreon.com/popeular and sign up if you've got a few extra bucks a month you can throw my way. No extra steps are required to participate in the emergency fundraiser, the extra thank-yous will go to everyone who signs up to monthly support during this admittedly self-inflicted critical fundraising period and will continue as long as they support the show monthly at any level. Of course you can also have the shoutout assigned to someone else if you like. Thank you!