Podcasts about Pontifex maximus

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!

Novus Pontifex Maximus Leō Robertus Prevost, Sicagēnsis, creātus est Pontifex Maximus ecclēsiae Rōmānae ac Leō ēius nōminis quartus decimus vocābitur. Leō prīmus est Americānus, quī est ad pontificātum maximum prōmōtus. Diē Sōlis ōrātiōnem Ītalicē habuit, quā verbīs pontificis Franciscī, in cūius locum successerat, ūsus est cum dīceret tertium tōtīus mundī bellum iam gerī sed articulātim, in diversīs certāminibus; sē autem precārī mīrāculum pācis mundō condōnātum īrī. Indūtiae inter Indōs et Pakistāniānōs factae Magistrātūs Americānī indūtiās fēcērunt inter Indōs et Pakistāniānōs, quī bellum inter sē gerere coeperant. Graviter enim omnibus metuendum est nē bellum atomicum inter illās gentēs concitētur. Dē pāce inter Russōs et Ūcrāīnēnsēs conciliandā Vladimīrus Pūtin, praeses Russōrum, diē Sōlis Ūcrāīnēnsibus magistrātibus colloquia Cōnstantīnopolī habenda dē pāce compōnendā prōposuit. Russī enim dīcunt sē velle causās bellī tollere et, quam indūtiās ad tempus facere, diutīnam potius pācem compōnere. Volodimīrus Zelensky, praeses Ūcrāīnēnsium, dīxit sē parātum esse cum Pūtin Cōnstantīnopolī congredī, postquam summus magistrātus Americānus palam iusserat eum statim cōnsentīre. Captīvus līberātus Hodiē Edan Alexander, cīvis Americānus quem latrōnēs Hamas dictī captīvum tenēbant, līberātus est, ut bona fīdēs dēmonstrārētur et grātia summī magistrātūs Americānōrum conciliārētur. Magistrātūs enim Americānī feruntur gestīre, ut fīnis in bellum inter Isrāēlītās et Palaestīnōs gestum impōnātur, atque clam Isrāēlītās rectē cum Palaestīnīs colloquī. Pacta commerciālia Magistrātūs Americānī Britannīque nuntiāvērunt pactum, quō commercium inter suās gentēs prōmōvērētur. Britannī igitur portōria sua dēminūtūrī sunt et faciliōrem aditum mercī Americānae praebitūrī. Americānī vērō portōrium decimae partis exigent in pleramque mercem Britannicam praeter chalybem et aluminium impositum. Sīnēnsēs porro cum Americānīs nōn sine fructū colloquuntur Genēvae in Cōnfoederātiōne Helveticā, ut commercium quam anteā aequius inter sē prōmōveātur. Wang Xiaohong, Sīnēnsium praefectus pūblicae secūritātī, missus est quī colloquiīs interesset, quod ōminārī vidētur Sīnēnsēs dīligentius quam anteā cōnsīderāre Americānōrum querellās dē illicitō venenī, ut fentanylī, commerciō cohibendō. Latrōnēs Hāītiānī dēsignātī Magistrātūs Americānī Hāītiānōs latrōnēs, et Viv Ansanm et Gran Grif appellātōs, dēsignāvērunt auctōrēs terrōris, quibuscum prohibētur nē quis Americānus commercium habeat, atque in quōs reprimendōs licet magistrātibus Americānīs extraordināriam auctōritātem exercēre. Mille et sescentī Hāītiānī hōc annō occīsī sunt, cum latrōnēs reliquiās reīpūblicae iam ēvērsae expīlārent. Principēs senātūs Colombiānōrum Suprēmī iūdicēs Colombiānōrum poscunt Īvānum Name, principem superiōris camerae senātūs, et Andrēam Calle, principem īnferiōris camerae senātūs, in iūs vocandōs crīmine corruptiōnis. Feruntur pecūniam accēpisse eō nōmine, ut lēgēs, quas cupīvit Gustāvus Petrō praesēs reīpūblicae ferrī, cūrārent ferendās. Comitia in Rōmāniā habita Populāribus suffrāgiīs dēnuō in Rōmāniā numerātīs, Geōrgius Simion, populārium partium, duās quīntās partēs tulit. Abhinc autem sex mēnsēs Callinīcus Georgescū, factiōnis dextrae, in eōdem certāmine victor ēvāserat, sed jūdicēs certāmen abrogāvērunt, victoriam Georgescū surripuērunt, eundem etiam candidātum iterum ambīre vetuērunt. Quam ob rem Jacobus Vance, vicepraeses Americānus, est contrā abrogātiōnem voluntātis populāris populāribus suffragiīs rīte expressae invectus. Quibus factīs, Geōrgius Simion, in locum Callinīcī Goergescū substitūtus, victoriam etiam māiōrem tulit. Itaque duodēvīcēsimō diē mēnsis Māiī Geōrgius Simion certābit cum Nicūsōre Dan, ut praeses creētur. Macron, Merz, Starmer nōn cum cōcaīnō dēprehēnsī Diurnāriī Gallicī strēnuissimē negant Emmanuēl Macron praesidem Gallōrum, Frederīcum Merz cancellārium Germānōrum, Ceirum Starmer ministrum prīmārium Britannōrum, deprehēnsōs esse cum cōcaīnō. Nam dum trēs illī iter trāmine ferriviāriō in Ūcrāīnam faciunt, diurnāriī repentīnam irruptiōnem in currum fēcērunt, ubi summī magistrātūs ūnā ad mēnsam sedēbant. Deinde Frederīcus Merz, cum chartās quāsdam ā se mōvisset et aliquid inopīnātum sub illīs conspexisset, nōn minimum cochlear cōcaīnō per nārēs hauriendō aptum, quod nōnnullīs falsē vidēbatur, sed bacillum potius ad pōtiōnem miscendam vultū turbātō cēlāvit. Quod Emmanuēl Macron cum animadvertisset, ipse nōn album cōcaīnī fasciculum, ut mendācēs et malevolī dictitant, sed innocentem mappam dextrā manū arreptam paulisper et ineptē sub sinistrō cubitū cēlāvit antequam ad sinistram manum etiam ineptius trānstulit quō commodius post sē abiceret. Diurnāriī igitur Gallicī, quōrum acta “Līberātiō” īnscrībuntur, negant sē quidquam in hūius reī imāginibus invenīre quod suspīciōsum esse videātur. Diurnāriīs vērō Britannīs Germānīsque nōn operae pretium rem strenuē negāre vidētur, cum nēmō aut Starmer aut Merz, ut hominēs hilaritāte aliēnōs, cōcaīnō umquam abūsōs esse crēdere posse videātur.

BBC World Service – Archaeologist Khalil Hariri risked his life to save hundreds of Syrian artefacts when Palmyra was attacked by the Islamic State group in 2015. https://x.com/renedepaula/status/1921902782409220399 Exquisite Head of Zeus Unearthed in the Ancient City of Aphrodisias https://greekreporter.com/2024/08/09/marble-head-zeus-aphrodisias/ (via ChatGPT) Pope and Pontifex Maximus https://chatgpt.com/share/6821f8d8-07b8-8006-a973-8cab448cabca Intelligence on Earth Evolved Independently at Least Twice ... Read more The post tesouros da antiguidade, o mundo é imperfeito? não somos os únicos com linguagem nem inteligência! appeared first on radinho de pilha.

On this episode of the Prophecy News Podcast, before he became Pope Leo XIV, Robert Prevost was appointed cardinal by Pope Francis, and not only that, as the prefect of the Dicastery of Bishops as well. So obviously he is one of the main ones that Pope Francis put in place so that the radical agenda he set during his 12 years as Pontifex Maximus would continue to be carried out. Today we are going to look at two political and religious forces, the first being Pope Leo XIV and the second President Donald Trump. Together, these men are working opposite sides of the same coin to ultimately meet in the middle. The end times are unfolding before your eyes, can you see it?

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the brothers Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus whose names are entwined with the end of Rome's Republic and the rise of the Roman Emperors. As tribunes, they brought popular reforms to the Roman Republic at the end of the 2nd century BC. Tiberius (c163-133BC) brought in land reform so every soldier could have his farm, while Gaius (c154-121BC) offered cheap grain for Romans and targeted corruption among the elites. Those elites saw the reforms as such a threat that they had the brothers killed: Tiberius in a shocking murder led by the Pontifex Maximus, the high priest, in 133BC and Gaius 12 years later with the senate's approval. This increase in political violence was to destabilise the Republic, forever tying the Gracchi to the question of why Rome's Republic gave way to the Rome of Emperors.WithCatherine Steel Professor of Classics at the University of GlasgowFederico Santangelo Professor of Ancient History at Newcastle UniversityAndKathryn Tempest Lecturer in Roman History at the University of LeicesterProducer: Simon TillotsonReading list:Appian (trans. John Carter), The Civil Wars (Penguin Classics, 2005)Valentina Arena, Jonathan R. W. Prag and Andrew Stiles, A Companion to the Political Culture of the Roman Republic (Wiley-Blackwell, 2022), especially the chapter by Lea Beness and Tom HillardR. Cristofoli, A. Galimberti and F. Rohr Vio (eds.), Costruire la Memoria: Uso e abuso della storia fra tarda repubblica e primo principato (L'Erma di Bretschneider, 2017), especially ‘The 'Tyranny' of the Gracchi and the Concordia of the Optimates: An Ideological Construct.' by Francisco Pina PoloSuzanne Dixon, Cornelia: Mother of the Gracchi, (Routledge, 2007)Peter Garnsey and Dominic Rathbone, ‘The Background to the Grain Law of Gaius Gracchus' (Journal of Roman Studies 75, 1985)O. Hekster, G. de Kleijn and D. Slootjes (eds.), Crises and the Roman Empire (Brill, 2007), especially ‘Tiberius Gracchus, Land and Manpower' by John W. RichJosiah Osgood, Rome and the Making of a World State, 150 BCE-20 CE (Cambridge University Press, 2018)Plutarch (trans. Ian Scott-Kilvert and Christopher Pelling), Rome in Crisis (Penguin Classics, 2010) Plutarch (trans. Robin Waterfield, ed. Philip A. Stadter), Roman Lives (Oxford University Press, 2008)Nathan Rosenstein, ‘Aristocrats and Agriculture in the Middle and Late Republic' (Journal of Roman Studies 98, 2008)A. N. Sherwin-White, ‘The Lex Repetundarum and the Political Ideas of Gaius Gracchus' (Journal of Roman Studies 72, 1982) Catherine Steel, The End of the Roman Republic, 146 to 44 BC: Conquest and Crisis (Edinburgh University Press, 2013)David Stockton, The Gracchi (Oxford University Press, 1979)In Our Time is a BBC Studios Audio Production

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the brothers Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus whose names are entwined with the end of Rome's Republic and the rise of the Roman Emperors. As tribunes, they brought popular reforms to the Roman Republic at the end of the 2nd century BC. Tiberius (c163-133BC) brought in land reform so every soldier could have his farm, while Gaius (c154-121BC) offered cheap grain for Romans and targeted corruption among the elites. Those elites saw the reforms as such a threat that they had the brothers killed: Tiberius in a shocking murder led by the Pontifex Maximus, the high priest, in 133BC and Gaius 12 years later with the senate's approval. This increase in political violence was to destabilise the Republic, forever tying the Gracchi to the question of why Rome's Republic gave way to the Rome of Emperors.WithCatherine Steel Professor of Classics at the University of GlasgowFederico Santangelo Professor of Ancient History at Newcastle UniversityAndKathryn Tempest Lecturer in Roman History at the University of LeicesterProducer: Simon TillotsonReading list:Appian (trans. John Carter), The Civil Wars (Penguin Classics, 2005)Valentina Arena, Jonathan R. W. Prag and Andrew Stiles, A Companion to the Political Culture of the Roman Republic (Wiley-Blackwell, 2022), especially the chapter by Lea Beness and Tom HillardR. Cristofoli, A. Galimberti and F. Rohr Vio (eds.), Costruire la Memoria: Uso e abuso della storia fra tarda repubblica e primo principato (L'Erma di Bretschneider, 2017), especially ‘The 'Tyranny' of the Gracchi and the Concordia of the Optimates: An Ideological Construct.' by Francisco Pina PoloSuzanne Dixon, Cornelia: Mother of the Gracchi, (Routledge, 2007)Peter Garnsey and Dominic Rathbone, ‘The Background to the Grain Law of Gaius Gracchus' (Journal of Roman Studies 75, 1985)O. Hekster, G. de Kleijn and D. Slootjes (eds.), Crises and the Roman Empire (Brill, 2007), especially ‘Tiberius Gracchus, Land and Manpower' by John W. RichJosiah Osgood, Rome and the Making of a World State, 150 BCE-20 CE (Cambridge University Press, 2018)Plutarch (trans. Ian Scott-Kilvert and Christopher Pelling), Rome in Crisis (Penguin Classics, 2010) Plutarch (trans. Robin Waterfield, ed. Philip A. Stadter), Roman Lives (Oxford University Press, 2008)Nathan Rosenstein, ‘Aristocrats and Agriculture in the Middle and Late Republic' (Journal of Roman Studies 98, 2008)A. N. Sherwin-White, ‘The Lex Repetundarum and the Political Ideas of Gaius Gracchus' (Journal of Roman Studies 72, 1982) Catherine Steel, The End of the Roman Republic, 146 to 44 BC: Conquest and Crisis (Edinburgh University Press, 2013)David Stockton, The Gracchi (Oxford University Press, 1979)In Our Time is a BBC Studios Audio Production

Is the Catholic Church heading toward another Reformation? With Pope Francis's passing and unprecedented changes in Rome, conservative Catholics are speaking of schism while others pray for revival.In this episode of Remnant Radio, Joshua Lewis, Michael Miller, and special guest Mike Shreve (author and evangelist for The Catholic Project) examine the critical crossroads facing the Catholic Church. From the controversial legacy of blessing same-sex couples to the Pachamama ritual controversies, we explore how recent Vatican decisions have left many Catholics deeply divided.We'll unpack the historical significance of papal authority, examining how traditional titles like “Vicar of Christ” and “Pontifex Maximus” shape Catholic doctrine. Through careful analysis of recent Vatican controversies and growing resistance from traditional Catholics, we'll explore striking parallels between today's tensions and the conditions that sparked the Protestant Reformation.This episode provides crucial insights into one of today's most significant religious developments. Join us as we examine these challenges through both Protestant and Catholic perspectives, seeking truth with grace and biblical wisdom.INTRO TO THEOLOGY COURSE:

12 - The Pope has passed away. Dom details his legacy and what he differs with in terms of his policy. Do we not remember the Biden's are horrible people? Dom continues his problems with The Church siding with progressives on many issues. 1215 - Side - all time nicknames 1220 - Democrat Congresspeople are going to El Salvador. And guess what? It's on your dime! 1235 - Pastor Bill Devlin joins us to discuss the passing of the Pope and the legacy he leaves behind. We also discuss his latest piece which discusses how he sided with the left on many issues, even calling pro-abortion President Joe Biden a “good catholic”, and how he upended the catholic doctrine. Why was Archbishop Chaput the first Archbishop in 100 years to be passed over to be a Cardinal? Why the rise in Catholicism around the world? How do we feel about the movie “Conclave”. 1250 - Are we really going to listen to the Bishop of Tucson?

Much credit is given to Constantine for his role in calling together the church at Nicea and helping facilitate the foundational creed of the Christian church. But did you know that a mere 10 years later in 335, at the council of Tyre, Constantine exiled one of the fiercest defenders of the faith at the time: Athanasius? Athanasius remained in exile until Constantine's death, and was only welcomed back by his son who restored him as a bishop, who then went on to exile him again a year later. Constantine the great also continued to permit the continuation of pagan temples and rituals, and retained the title Pontifex Maximus meaning “great priest of the Roman cults.” Sounds alot like America's principled pluralism today.Now at first glance these facts are pretty inconvenient for someone who just recently argued that the state has a normative role in correcting the church. If, after all, one of the greatest supposed examples was an emperor who exiled faithful bishops and continued to permit pagan worship then the batting average doesn't look great. This is to say nothing of the countless martyrs of the Catholic Church, the supposedly terrible Spanish Inquisition and even Martin Luther and other zealous reformers. If the State really is supposed to correct the church in certain matters, why all of the errors and excesses?This episode is brought to you by our premier sponsors, Armored Republic and Reece Fund, as well as our Patreon members and donors. You can join our Patreon at ⁠patreon.com/rightresponseministries⁠ or you can donate at ⁠rightresponseministries.com/donate⁠.So today we are going to answer those questions. We've made the claim, right alongside the Westminster confession of faith and the Belgic confession, that the State has a role to play in suppressing heresies, protecting true religion, and safeguarding the Christian faith. Now, we are going to defend this view against the most common objections we've heard.Let's get into it.*MINISTRY SPONSORS:*ENTER TO WIN 2 FREE TICKETS TO OUR APRIL 2025 CONFERENCE BY Signing Up For Private Family Bankings Email List1. Email ⁠Banking@privatefamilybanking.com⁠2. Use Subject Line: April Ticket Giveaway3. Provide Your Full Name & Contact Phone Number4. Private Family Banking will be in touch for the winner of the tickets.*Private Family Banking*How to Connect with Private Family Banking:1. FREE 20-MINUTE COURSE HERE: ⁠⁠https://www.canva.com/design/DAF2TQVcA10/WrG1FmoJYp9o9oUcAwKUdA/view⁠⁠2. Send an email inquiry to ⁠⁠chuck@privatefamilybanking.com⁠⁠3. Receive a FREE e-book entitled "How to Build Multi-Generational Wealth Outside of Wall Street and Avoid the Coming Banking Meltdown", by going to ⁠⁠https://www.protectyourmoneynow.net⁠⁠4. Set up a FREE Private Family Banking Discovery call using this ⁠link: https://calendly.com/familybankingnow/30min⁠5. For a Multi-Generational Wealth Planning Guide Book for only $4.99, use this link for my affiliate relationship with "Seven Generations Legacy": ⁠⁠https://themoneyadvantage.idevaffiliate.com/13.html⁠⁠*Reece Fund: Christian Capital - Boldly Deployed⁠⁠https://www.reecefund.com/⁠*Dominion: Wealth Strategists* is a full-service financial planning and wealth management firm dedicated to putting more money in the hands of the church. With an education focused approach, they will help you take dominion over your finances⁠.https://reformed.money/

Hour 1 - On the eve of the ides of March in 44 BC, Julius Caesar was warned. On this eve on the Ides of March 2025 Jacob & Tommy fear no evil because they are the pontifex maximus of morning sports. And so in this segment they discuss KU's Loss to Arizona, The Shockers/Memphis game, and the latest offseason NFL developments.

Sports Daily Full Show 14 March 2025

This week Beau discusses the early life of Gaius Julius Caesar, from his first close scrapes with Sulla, his time winning the people over as an overly generous Aedile, his election as Pontifex Maximus, his role in the Catiline Conspiracy, and much more.

In this episode we will examine the story of a real life demon who betrayed his brothers in arms, deceived many in a craven lust for power and murdered his own wife and child. With a resume like that, it goes without saying Roman Emperor, Saint Constantine the Great is held up as an iconic Christian hero. Also making special guest star appearances we have Romans, CAESAR, Christians, Eusebius, Lactantius, Christianity, Roman Empire, France, Britain, Italy, Rome, Tetrarch, Maxentius, Tiber river, Milvian Bridge, Jesus Christ, Chi Rho, Greek, Christos, Twitter, X, staurogram, crucifix, Arch of Constantine, Tetrarchy, Licinius, Maximinus, Edict of Milan, RON BURGUNDY, Paganism, Pontifex Maximus, pagan, Pope, council of Nicaea, Nicene Creed, Holy Trinity, Arius, Holy Land, St Helena, Constantinople, Fausta, Crispus, Jupiter, Persians, Armenia, Tiridates III, Persia, river Jordan, Bishop of Nicomedia, Pentecost, Holy Ghost, Mary, Apostles, Heaven, #SketchComedy #Sketch #Comedy #Sketch Comedy #Atheist #Science #History #Atheism #ConspiracyTheory #Conspiracy #Conspiracies #Sceptical #Scepticism #Mythology #Religion #Devil #Satan #Skeptic #Debunk #SatanIsMySuperhero #Podcast #funny #sketch #skit #comedy #comedyshow #comedyskits #HeavyMetal #RomanEmpire #Rome #AncientRome #Romans #RomanEmperor 

Topics: Catholic, Catholicism, Eucharist, Communion, Trapped in Catholicism, Pagan Christianity, A Church Building Every Half Mile, Bitter and Angry Apologists, Are Catholics Christians, Denominations Don't Determine Salvation, Neither Catholic Nor Protestant, The New Creation in Christ, Literally Consume Jesus, Body and Blood, Paganism and Magic, Originated in Rome Influenced By Many Greek Gods, The Word Catholic Means Universal, John 6, Eat My Flesh Drink My Blood, Comparing Himself to Manna, Manna Sent From Heaven for Life and So Was Jesus, The Flesh Counts For Nothing, Life is In His Words, Acts 1, He Literally Ascended, Ritual of Man Officiating Began with Church Fathers, Flour and Water From Factory, Wine From Factory, Eucharist Not in the Bible, Repeatedly Crucifying Jesus, Romans 6, Death No Longer Has Mastery Over Him, The Life He Lives He Lives Forever, Sacrificed Once For Sins, Hebrews 10:10, Hebrews 1:3, Eucharist Ignored Finality of the Cross, It Is Finished, John 19:30, Communion Not a Sacrament but a Full Meal, The Love Feast, The Agape, 1 Corinthians 11, Feast to Love Others and Remember What Jesus Has Done, Not Remember Our Sins, Hebrews 7:25, He Always Lives, Authority to Forgive Sins, John 20, If You Forgive Anyone's Sins, Disciples Were Not Priests, Fishermen Tax Collector and Treasurer, Disciples Were Jewish and Went to the Temple for Forgiveness Where the Priests Were, They Knew Blood Forgives, They Weren't Forgiving and Shedding Animal Blood at That Same Time, Hebrews 9:22, Without Shedding of Blood No Forgiveness, Old Covenant Still in Effect, Same Message I Tell People, Your Sins Have Been Forgiven For His Name's Sake, Forgiveness Through Confession, 1 John 1:9, Surrounding Context of 1 John, Jesus Didn't Come in the Flesh, Sin Not a Real Thing, We Touched Him, If We Say We Have No Sin, Confess Means to Agree With, All Means All, John was a Jew Who Received Forgiveness Only by Blood, Jesus Isn't repeatedly Dying Each Confession, What About Sins You Forget About, Peter Was Original Pope, Apostolic Succession, Cyprian of Carthage, Pope Means Father, Call No Man Father, Matthew 23, Pontifex Maximus, Peter Was a Fisherman, We Are All Members of a Royal Priesthood, Matthew 16, Peter is the Rock, The Gospel is the Rock, Peter Denied Jesus, Jesus Called Peter Satan, Peter Cursed the Girl Out, Peter Tried to Stop the Crucifixion, Peter Wouldn't Eat with the Gentiles, Galatians 2, Acts 5, Ananias and Sapphire, Lying About Money Is Sin, Peter Not the Original Pope or Rock, Church Fathers, Tradition of Men, Jesus and Paul Warned Against Tradition, Call No Man Father, Paul Referred to As Father in Philippians 2 and 1 Corinthians 4, Disciples and Apostles Were Not Church Fathers, No Such Thing as Church Fathers, Old Doesn't Equal Truth, Judaism is 3500 Years Old, Islam is 1400 Years Old, Church Father's Struggled With Error, All Scripture is God-Breathed, Letters Left Out of Canon for a ReasonSupport the Show.Sign up for Matt's free daily devotional! https://mattmcmillen.com/newsletter

Speaker 1:This media has been made available by Mosaic Boston Church. If you'd like to check out more resources, learn about Mosaic Boston, or donate to this ministry, please visit mosaicoston.com.Speaker 2:Heavenly Father, we're so thankful for the privilege and the blessing it is to gather. As Your people, we don't take this for granted. What a blessing it is to gather and experience Your presence and give You Your due glory. We worship You, Father, and we thank You that the only way that we were allowed back into the Father's house, into the Father's presence was because of the sacrifice of the Son.And Jesus, we thank You that You came and You lived a perfect life obedient to the Father, to the very last drop on the cross. And we thank You that You did that to provide a way, to provide a gateway into the Father's house. And we thank You that when we repent of sin, You do forgive us of our rebellion, of our hostility toward You, and we do acknowledge that that's real. In many ways, often we live as if You don't exist or as if You're not God over certain parts of our life where we just block that section out and live in indifference toward You and Your will. So we ask for forgiveness for that.We pray from the holy Scriptures today that You teach us, that You, Holy Spirit, minister to us in a way that only You can. And I pray, do point out those places of rebellion in our hearts and in our lives and give us the grace to submit ourselves holistically to You. Lord, bless our time with the holy Scriptures, and we pray all this in the beautiful name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. Amen.We're continuing our sermon series through the incredible Gospel of Mark, and the title of the sermon today is The Insanity of Killing God.A few years back, I remember reading about a famous child actor who upon growing up claimed that he had divorced his parents. He claimed to have divorced himself from his parents. He said the words and perhaps he even filed some of the official legal documents, but of course he could not divorce himself from the reality of the origin of life.As we meditate on Holy Week, the most important week in all of human history, we're given a front row to what happened to God when He became one of us. A few years ago, there was a famous song and there's a line that went, "What if God were one of us?" Well, He was and we killed him. And just imagine the insanity of doing this to really think that you can get rid of God. And you might not live in just complete outright vocal rebellion toward God, but you might live as if God is dead to you. Meaning the idea of God is so distant from your life, He might as well be dead to you. And aren't you doing the same thing as the Jews and the Romans? Aren't you attempting to kill God?But you can't kill God. He's eternal, of course. Jesus, when they tried to keep Him down, they couldn't. He came back from the dead. And that shouldn't be surprising knowing who Christ was. We should have all seen that one coming. What is surprising is that anybody would want to kill God. Why would you try to liquidate the one who gave you life? You literally bear His image. His image is printed upon you. You're His. You belong to Him.Why do we have this hostility in our hearts? Because we don't want to give up authority to govern our lives as we please. The stubborn grip on the throne of our lives leads to our self-destruction. Because you can't kill God, you can't get rid of the stubborn fact that God is, He always will be. And it would be wise of us to make peace with God while we still have a chance, while we're still alive, to accept His fatherly authority, to accept His love, to accept his provision and His protection, and to give Him His due, which is obedience of faith from the heart, to glorify Him, honor and worship Him.And if you meditate upon it, it is absolutely insane to rebel against God because you won't win. He always wins. He's God. And rebelling against God will always lead to self-destruction, but still there's a desire to rebel. Edgar Allan Poe, one of America's greatest writers who knew all about self-destruction intimately, he coined the phenomenon of willful self-destruction as, quote, perverseness.In one of his works, the Imp of the Perverse, Poe contends that just knowing something is wrong is the one unconquerable force that makes us do it. We all have an overwhelming tendency to do wrong for wrong's sake. We're all tempted by the forbidden fruit. And often, it's not the fruit itself that irresistibly draws us but the fact that it's forbidden. Don't do this is sometimes the only reason why we're tempted to do it. The forbidden is a powerful magnet pulling on our sinful hearts because deep inside, if we're honest, we absolutely despise someone telling us what to do, even if it is God, especially if it is God. And in our text today, Jesus reveals this innate suicidal enmity toward God and He graciously offers to save us, and He does it by allowing his own destruction, His own self-destruction, so to speak, to save us from our self-destruction. And thereby, He provides the means to replace, to plant that enmity toward God with love and obedience. Today, we're in Mark 12:1-17. Would you look at the text with me?"And He began to speak to them in parables. 'A man planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dug a pit for the wine press and built a tower, and leased it to tenants and went into another country. When the season came, he sent a servant to the tenants to get from them some of the fruit of the vineyard. And they took him and beat him and sent him away empty-handed. Again, he sent to them another servant and they struck him on the head and treated him shamefully. And he sent another, and him they killed. And so with many others: some they beat, and some they killed. He had still one other, a beloved son. Finally, he sent him to them saying, "They will respect my son." But those tenants said to one another, "This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and the inheritance will be ours." And they took him and killed him and threw him out of the vineyard.' What will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the tenants and give the vineyard to others.Have you not read this Scripture? "The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone. This was the Lord's doing and it is marvelous in our eyes."' And they were seeking to arrest Him but feared the people for they perceived that He had told the parable against them. So they left Him and went away. And they sent to Him some of the Pharisees and some of the Herodians to trap Him in his talk. And they came and said to Him, 'Teacher, we know that you are true and do not care about anyone's opinion. For you are not swayed by appearances, but truly teach the way of God. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not? Should we pay them or should we not?' But knowing their hypocrisy, He said to them, 'Why put me to the test? Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.' And they brought one and He said to them, 'Whose likeness and inscription is this?' They said to Him, 'Caesar's.' Jesus said to them, 'Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's.' And they marveled at him."This is the reading of God's holy, inerrant, infallible, authoritative Word. May He write these eternal truths upon our hearts. First, our three points to frame over our time. First, suicidal enmity toward the Father. Second, suicidal enmity toward the messengers. And third, suicidal enmity toward the Son.First, suicidal enmity toward the Father. After Jesus had entered Jerusalem on Passover week, Holy Week, and He entered by receiving the worship from the people, they cried out, "Hosanna, God save us." He received their acclamations and did not reject them. And by doing so, He's throwing down the gauntlet. The time has come for Him to do a face-off with the spiritual authorities of the day. And after deflecting the religious leader's hostile challenge to His authority in the previous text, Jesus tells a parable here, and it's a powerful parable. And a lot of people think parables are just stories. They're not. Parables are used as verbal weapons. And here, Jesus Christ is leveling a wrecking ball of a parable. And what are they weapons against? Against the people, not the people themselves, but the ideas that they are promulgating, the ideas that they represent.And what are the ideas that Jesus is wrecking here with His words? They're ideas of authority. He's demolishing their man-made authority structures which put them higher than God. And this, friends, of course is very highly relevant because this is every single person's problem. We put human authority above God's authority, and no one is higher than God and no one is higher in authority than God the Father. Read Matthew 23 this week as you prepare for Good Friday. Matthew 23 is the sermon that got Jesus crucified. He was murdered because of His words. That's how powerful of a wrecking ball they were. Jesus' sermon, Matthew 23, destroys all of the authority structures of Israel of that day. And in Matthew 23:8-9, Jesus says this, "But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth for you have one Father who is in heaven."Now, anyone listening at that time was incredibly offended by these words. In one sentence, Jesus dismantles the Jewish system of authority showing them no, a rabbi is not higher than God himself. God's word and not human tradition is preeminent in authority. And then He says don't call anyone father in one fell swoop. He is dismantling the system of authority in the Catholic Church that has a man at the very top of the system of authority. Jesus says don't call anyone father. And I've always found it confusing that Catholics call priests father but don't let them ever become a father. That's all confusing and Jesus knocks all that down.How did Jesus teach us to pray to the Father? Our Father. Jesus didn't pray to Jesus. Jesus prayed to the Father. And this is important that when you do pray, pray to God the Father because it reminds us who's in charge. It reminds us who has ultimate authority over us. He created us, He cultivates us, He protects us, and He owns us.Mark 12:1, "Jesus began to speak to them in parables. 'A man planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dug a pit for the wine press and built a tower and leased it to tenants and went into another country.'" We're not told how the man got the capital that was needed to buy the land and buy the equipment, the infrastructure, et cetera. Most likely this is a man that had to work for years, maybe a decade plus, to accumulate the capital, and he takes on risk and he works really hard and he does this in order to reap a harvest from his work.And the main purpose of verse 1 isn't just to elaborate details of the allegory, et cetera. The details here are to show that this is all done in love. This is a man who worked hard with the land, with his hands, with what the Lord has given him to create something beautiful. And what's the fence for? The fence is to protect what this man has lovingly created. He of course here represents God the Father. Later on in the text, we know that he sends a son. Therefore, he is a father. The man represents God the Father, and the Father is a creator, he's a cultivator, and he's a protector. The fence was there to protect from external threats, but it turned out that the threats were internal.And this is a good reminder of every father's job. If you've been given the blessing of being a father, your job is to create, to cultivate, and to protect. Protect the child from threats, external and internal. We are to teach our children about sin within and we are to protect. We are teach them about the sinful flesh that is hostile toward God, and we are to teach them that there are consequences for sin. Yes, God does give grace, He does forgive, but we want to prevent you from the consequences of sin. And we are to teach them about grace and teach them how to flee sin and pursue righteousness because living righteously delights God the Father's heart. And when God is delighted, He delights to bless.The imagery and the details used in this text are taken from Isaiah 5 where the vineyard stands for Israel and the man for God. An ancient Jewish and Christian texts interpret the tower and the wine vat in Isaiah 5 as the temple and its altar and defense may stand for the walls of Jerusalem. Would you look at Isaiah 5:1-7 with me? "Let me sing for my beloved my love song concerning his vineyard. My beloved had a vineyard on a very fertile hill. He dug it and cleared it of stones and planted it with choice vines. He built a watchtower in the midst of it and hewed out a wine vat in it. And he looked forward it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes. And now, oh, inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge between me and my vineyard. What more was there to do for my vineyard that I have not done in it? When I looked forward to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes?And now I will tell you what I will do in my vineyard. I will remove its hedge and it shall be devoured. I will break down its wall and it shall be trampled down. I will make it a waste. It shall not be pruned or hoed and briars and thorns shall grow up. I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it. For the vineyard of the Lord of Hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah are his pleasant planting. And he looked for justice, but behold, bloodshed for righteousness, but behold, an outcry."So God is saying He's entrusted His people, the people of Israel, with His law, with His prophets, with His temple, with His priests and with land. And the expectation was that they would bear fruit for the Lord. The religious leaders were expected to govern Israel by God's Word, and the people were to be self-governed by God's Word. That didn't happen. So this man that planted this vineyard built the walls around it. He leases it out to tenants. They draft a lease with clear expectations, a clear payment for the rent, for leasing the land, and then the man went into another country.The application for all of us, the broader application is very clear. What this parable is telling us is that we are not our own. That we are not owners. That we do not own our lives. No, our time is leased to us. Our health is leased to us. Our bodies are leased to us from God the Father. You are a tenant, not an owner. And verse 2, "When the season came, he," the father, "sent a servant to the tenants to get from them some of the fruit of the vineyard." So at the proper time, at time of harvest, he goes. And his graciousness, his generosity is evident in the text in that he doesn't demand most of the crop. He doesn't even demand half of the crop. No, he just wants some, some of the fruit of the vineyard. In biblical narrative, fruit is often a term to designate a life that's lived in obedience to God, a life in which people use the talents, the opportunities, the gifts that God has given us, our very lives for the Lord. And then the Lord loves to bless the fruitful life with more fruit.And here, what we see, one of the things that we notice here is there is a clear relationship between the tenants and the owner. It's a hierarchical relationship. It's a vertical relationship. A lot of people when they think about Christianity and they say, "No, Christianity is not a religion. It's a relationship." And I say, "Yes, it is a relationship. We are called to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind and love your neighbor as yourself." And to love the Lord, and that's the summary of the commandments, we keep His commandments. That's what Jesus said. "If you love me, you will keep my commandments." And so we are not to forget that our relationship with the Lord is not horizontal and He is in charge, He is God, He is in authority. The relationship is offered to us by the grace of Jesus Christ. And the only way you enter into relationship with God the Father is on your knees, in humble repentance, forever defying His authority.And do the tenants pay their rent? No, of course not. Verse 3, "And they took him and beat him and sent him away empty-handed." What are the tenants doing here? They start acting like owners. Why should we pay you? We did all the work." And they forget that they were gifted, so to speak, that all this work that was done prior. In a sense, they disown the owner. It's almost as if the owner doesn't exist. And this is happening nowadays with squatter's rights, et cetera. That's exactly what they do. The tenants decide that they're the owners and they're exercising so-called squatter's rights.How does this appear in our lives, in our world? Well, it's when people start looking at reality and think, "I'm going to decide how reality is. I get to decide what truth is. I'm going to live my truth. I am in authority of the definition. These are the values that I've chosen for myself, the reality that I've created. It's my body, therefore my sexuality, therefore my moral code. I decide. I'm a master of my own fate, the captain of my own soul." And here, what Jesus is doing is exposing the sinfulness in our rebellious hearts, this desire to claim ownership. But to claim ownership of yourself, to live as if you are your own, you're usurping the owner.And why do they act like this? Why do we act like this? Because we are born in a flesh that is hostile to God. Romans 8:7, "For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God for it does not submit to God's law. Indeed, it cannot." So the hostility has to do with the law. When we see God's law, we see God's demands upon us and we're hostile that God, You would demand these things. The owner just wanted a portion. He wanted some of the fruit of the harvest.And how does that apply to us? Well, the Lord wants all of us. He wants our whole life. But you know that you are living in ordered worship to the Lord. You are living underneath the authority of the Lord when you do govern yourself by the Ten Commandments. And you realize that the commandments are the way of life. This is the path of freedom.And one of them, the first commandments says, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." That's the very first one. The fourth commandment says, "Thou shalt keep the Sabbath day holy." And there God makes a very specific, very clear demand. "One-seventh of your time, one day a week is mine." And by the way, this is how you grow. This is one of the greatest means of grace where you just commit and say, "Lord, I'm going to give you Sunday. Lord, I'm going to go to church on Sunday. Lord, I'm going to devote myself to the scriptures in prayer on Sunday." The Lord also tells us in the commandment, "Thou shall not steal." And God Himself, in Malachi 2, points to the commandment and he says, "You're stealing from me by not bringing the tithes to me." And there, we get very specific that God does want 10% of our earned income that we give to Him, give to His kingdom, or give to His church.Well, once you start getting very precise that this is what the commands demand of us, well, this is where people begin to experience the hostility within our hearts. For most of us, unbelief in God or lack of belief, it's not a head issue. It's not that there's not enough evidence. No, it's a will issue. Do we want to do the will of God? And there's hostility there. Intellectual skepticism for Christianity is often nothing more than a flimsy veneer covering deep-seated hostility.Aldous Huxley, the philosopher who coined the term agnostic and author of Brave New World, he said this, "I had motives for not wanting the world to have a meaning. For myself has, no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaningless was essentially an instrument of liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality of Christianity because it interfered with our sexual freedom. There was one admirably, simple method of justifying ourselves, agnosticism." Thomas Nagel in The Last Word writes, "I want atheism to be true. It isn't just that I don't believe in God, I don't want there to be a God. I don't want the universe to be like that."These tenants know that they are tenants and they hate it. They want to work for their own profit. They want to be the owners. And in many ways, we would rather like them live with this illusion of independence or self-sufficiency. But the day of reckoning is coming and the owner was sending messengers to try to get the tenants to come to their senses. And this is point 2, a suicidal enmity toward the messengers.In verse 4 of Mark 12 says, "Again, he sent to them another servant, and they struck him on the head and treated him shamefully." Sometimes when I preach a sermon, someone comes up to me and say, "Pastor, that was a great sermon, good sermon." And I always say the same thing. I say, "Praise be to God. And also, I'm just the messenger. Just the messenger. I'm like the mail man. I'm like UPS guy. I like that I'm bringing you packages." I like the UPS guy because he can park anywhere he wants, sidewalks, et cetera. But I say that tongue-in-cheek because I'm always thinking about this parable. "Oh, you like that? Keep coming back." We're going to continue preaching the text. And there will be messages in which you realize that, "I don't like that message. It doesn't make me feel good. It offends my sensibilities." So when you hear a sermon like that, for me, I'm just a messenger. I'm just the UPS guy. Don't kill me.If you try, there's many a lesson here, if you are called to proclaim the Word of God and to do it very publicly, do it out front, if you are called as a man of God to proclaim the Word of God, become a pastor, I just want you to know you will get opposition and the opposition is going to be hostile. And as the world becomes more and more in hostility toward the Lord, just know there will be a cost for bringing the clear message. They struck him in the head. They wounded this gentleman. And here, this series of messengers are echoes of the prophets that the Lord sent to his people and they suffered ill-treatment from their fellow Israelites. And Jesus also taught in the Sermon of the Mount. He said, "Blessed are you when others persecute you and revile you for my name's sake. Great is your reward in heaven."Mark 12:5, "And he sent another, and him they killed. And so with many others, some they beat and some they killed." The immediate application is that God sent prophets to the religious leaders to tell them, "Hey, stop acting like owners. Tend God's vineyard with God's Word for His prophet." And you see the incredible grace of this owner. He could have just called the authorities on these people. They could have been thrown out. No, he sends a messenger. He sends another messenger. He sends another messenger. Just incredible patience on this man's part.And this is what God had been doing all throughout salvific history of holy Scripture. He promised, "I will not leave myself without a witness." So He kept sending them. Jeremiah sent to the people, was beaten on multiple occasions, thrown into a pit, and finally stoned to death. Elijah, Amos, both of them were banished and forced to hide in caves. Ezekiel was murdered after a sermon. Habakkuk was stoned. Zechariah got chased into the temple and stoned near the altar. Uriah who prophesied around the same time as Jeremiah, he tried to escape into exile but the king tracked him down, brought him back to Israel, and ran him through with a sword. The prophet Micah was punched in the face by false prophets. Isaiah was put into a log and cut in half. And that's not even to mention what happened to the apostles.The religious people of the day, as they're hearing the sermon, they thought they looked at their past and the past of Israel's relation to the prophets and they thought it was something that they had grown past, that they were too righteous, that they were too morally upright to do something like this. And the irony, of course, was that they're about to do something much worse than their fathers had done in that they're going to kill the Son of God.There's an important lesson here for us. When you hear about the sins of people before us or sins of people today, it's so easy to look on people with disdain as if we've somehow progressed past sin. We have not. We do all each. We have a fallen heart. So when we see someone who sins, we shouldn't say, "What's wrong with them?" We should say, "What's wrong with the human heart? What's wrong with my heart? There go I, but for the grace of God." And it is grace that God sends messengers into our lives, and what do they tell us? They remind us that there is a God who is over us. He's the owner, we're the tenants. And if we've been living as owners, we are to repent because a day of reckoning, a day of judgment is coming.There will be times, dear Christian, that you won't like the message, the message of Scripture. You won't like when a brother or sister, they bring the message to you. And by the way, this is why it's so important to be part of a church, be plugged into a church, be part of a community group where you're walking with brothers and sisters, where you've covenanted together. So that when there does come a moment where you need someone to call you out, your brother and sister are there and they say, "You've given me permission to do this by joining the church. I need to bring this message to you." At those moments, do not reject the messenger. At those moments, receive the message humbly and bring it to the Lord and say, "Lord, is there truth to this?"If you don't like the message, don't just leave. It is tempting in those moments when someone calls out your sin to just bounce, to go find a church who don't really talk about sin, where they tickle your ears, where they give you a palatable message, where you just feel good about yourself all the time. No, no. You need a church that calls you out. You need a church to remind you of how much of a wicked sinner you are so that the cross of Jesus Christ is so much more meaningful. Lord Jesus, You save me from the sin. We need this reminder that we are not the owners and that God is a God who makes demands of us. There's many a church today that preaches a message about a God that demands nothing, a God that does nothing, one whom we can control with a modest investment of time and money. In those churches, those people aren't really seeking the true God of the universe.Romans 3:10 says, "None is righteous. No, not one. No one understands. No one seeks for God." Now, CS Lewis in his work called he Miracles, he has this tremendous low quote. "An impersonal God, well and good. A subjective God of beauty, truth, and goodness inside our own heads better still. A formless life-force surging through us, a vast power which we can tap, best of all. But God himself alive, pulling at the other end of the cord, perhaps approaching at an infinite speed, the hunter, king, husband, that is quite another matter. There comes a moment when the children who have been playing at burglars hushed suddenly. Was that a real footstep in the hall? There comes a moment when people who have been dabbling in religion, man's search for God, suddenly draw back. Supposing we really found him? We never meant it to come to that. Worse still, supposing he had found us?"God sends us messengers. Sometimes it's through preachers or pastors. Sometimes it's through brothers and sisters. Sometimes it's through providential life circumstances that they shatter the illusion that you're in control. Sometimes it's just looking in the mirror and you're like, "Oh, what happened?" We're aging. That's what happened. The fragility of life where you get that phone call where a beloved has cancer, a beloved is in the hospital, all of a sudden your worldview just shatters. And those are all gracious reminders that we are living on borrowed time. Sometimes it's unfulfilled longings where you work for years, you work for a goal to become something, to become a person, to achieve something, and then you get it and then all you feel is emptiness inside because you realize, "I worked so hard for so long for something that doesn't satisfy."Lewis writes elsewhere. "If I find myself desires which nothing in this world will satisfy, the only explanation is that I was created for another world." God shows His grace toward us in this story in repeated ways. He sends messengers, messengers to remind them, "Hey, you want to be in a right relationship with the owner. It's for your good. You're going to flourish." And also, this is a good owner. He gives him a vineyard. I don't know if anyone's ever done a vineyard tour in California, Napa Valley. I've never done it. I've driven by. I've looked over covetously. No, I've repented. But this is majestic. This is the reason why lots of these great movies, the end with a vineyard, it's almost like heaven. It smells nice. There's grapes. There's wine, and praise be to God.But this shows the graciousness of the owner. What a great God we have. He's not just a lawgiver. He could have just created a prison, thrown them inside and said, "You're going to do what I say." That's not what he does. In love, He says, "Okay, here's everything that I have created, I've cultivated, I've protected. I'm entrusting it to you. Keep growing it. And all I ask for is a portion in return." If God were merely a lawgiver, I could in a sense understand people against Him. But He's not just a lawgiver. He's the giver of every good and perfect gift, including His law. He is the source and fount of every blessing and yet people spurn Him.The tenants don't listen to the messengers so the owner sends his son, and this is point 3, suicidal enmity toward the Son. Verse 6, "He had still one other, a beloved son. Finally, he sent him to them saying, "They will respect my son." The phrase "beloved son" echoes a story of Abraham's near sacrifice of his son Isaac. God came to him and said, "Take your son, your only son, your long-awaited son, your beloved son, and sacrifice him." Finally, He sent him to them last of all eschaton in the Greek. It's a technical term for the end of days. "Perhaps they'll respect my son." In verse 7, "But those tenants said to one another, 'This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and the inheritance will be ours.'" "This is the heir, come."And readers, if you're reading this for the first time, you would imagine that okay, tenants, they finally come to their senses when they recognize the son as the father's surrogate. And perhaps if they sat down and reason things out, they would say, "Come on, let's get out of here. What are we doing? The judgment of the owner is coming down upon us." But instead of adopting the prudent course of respecting the son, they adopt the insane one of murdering him. And it's absolutely insane because there is no court that would've accepted the fact that their owners, especially if the owner was killed or the owner's son was killed. And this is a very well resourced father. What do they think is going to happen if they kill the father's beloved son? Here, we see suicidal enmity has blinded them to the insanity of this plan.And what are they longing for? For freedom from the owner. And this is what a lot of people want today. They want freedom from God, not recognizing that there is no freedom from God. We are designed to find our true freedom and right relationship with God and right relationship with his laws. True freedom isn't found when we usurp all control or all rules. It's found when we find the God who created us. We're created in His image. He knows how we're wired and He knows how we are to operate, to flourish. And we do that according to His law. The world says there is no truth. You make your own truth. And Jesus responds and He says, "No, I am the truth. And you will know the truth and the truth will set you free."And what's the truth? The truth is that you are a sinner. I'm a sinner. We've transgressed God's law. But Jesus is a savior and He loves you. His love frees you to love Him back. And if we love Him, we keep His commandments. And here again, we see just how incomprehensible the mercy of this owner is and how incomprehensible the mercy of God is. After they kill messenger after messenger after messenger, He sends His beloved Son. "Come, let us kill him." That phrase is an echo of the biblical story of Joseph and his brothers. And since the tenant's words are identical with those of Joseph's evil brothers, we see a connection.The tenants of course act irrationally. And that's what God charges Israel with in doing in Isaiah 1:2-3. Chapter 1:2-3, "Hear, oh heavens, and give ear, oh earth, for the Lord has spoken. 'Children have I reared and brought up but they have rebelled against me. The ox knows its owner and the donkey it's master's crib, but Israel does not know. My people do not understand.'" What do they do with the son? Verse 8, "And they took him and killed him and threw him out of the vineyard." The language here is reminiscent of the cross that Jesus Christ was crucified outside the gates of Jerusalem. The greatest evidence for our deep-seated hostility to God is the one time in the history of the world when God made himself physically vulnerable, people arrested Him, beat Him, tortured, crucified, and murdered Him.John 15:23-25 says, the words of Christ, "Whoever hates me hates my Father also. If I had not done among them the works that no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin. But now they have seen and hated both me and my Father, but the word that is written in their law must be fulfilled. 'They hated me without cause.'" It's like the Lord of the sheep, the great Shepherd, Jesus Christ. It says if He summons a few sheep from the flock and sends them back to the flock and say, "Teach the sheep how to live, teach the sheep my ways." And what do the sheep do? The sheep take them and begin to kill them. And then the shepherd becomes the sheep and the sheep slaughter him.Well, it turned out these weren't sheep at all. They're wolves in sheep's clothing. And what do you do with wolves who destroy sheep? You destroy them. And that's Mark 12:9, "What will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the tenants and give the vineyard to others." The owner of the vineyard and the greatest courtyards is the Lord, the Lord of the vineyard. It's the same word that's used for God in the Old Testament, Yahweh. There will be a time when Yahweh comes back. There will be a time where the Lord of the vineyard is going to come and He's going to judge. He'll come and destroy the tenants and give the vineyard to others.Who are the tenants in the immediate context? The Jewish leaders recognize that Jesus is talking about them. They view themselves as the tenants. They realize exactly what he's saying and they want to kill him. That's the insanity of it. He's calling the shots. He's telling the parable, "Do not do this. Do not kill the son." And they plan to kill the son. And if you follow this parable closely, you realize the removal of the tenants from the vineyard and transferring it to others. Jesus here is talking about deposing the Jewish leadership from spiritual authority over the people of God and then transferring that spiritual leadership to the church where Jesus Christ is the head of His body, the church. She is His bride. He is the head. And all throughout the Book of Acts, we see them wielding that authority.And you see that through the history of Jerusalem when it was destroyed in the Jewish war in years 66 through 73 as the church grew by the power of the Spirit. Therefore, the banished tenants represent Israel and the favored others, the early church which was the fusion of Jews and Gentiles who represent true Israel. Israel has lost its status as the people of God as symbolized by the catastrophic defeat in the Jewish war and has been replaced by the church. In Mark 12:10, Jesus continues, "Have you not read this Scripture? 'The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone, and this was the Lord's doing and it was marvelous in our eyes.'"Jesus here quotes Psalm 1:18, one of the five Psalms of the Hallel sung throughout Passover week. And when he entered in Jerusalem and everyone cried out, "Hosanna in the highest," they were quoting from the Psalm as well. So Jesus here quotes Psalm 1:18 and He says, "The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone." He's talking about Himself. "I will be rejected but I am actually a foundational stone, the cornerstone for the church, for the people of God." And that cornerstone imagery, it's very clear. That's the most important stone in the foundation. But here in this text, in particular in Isaiah 28, it talks about Jesus as the foundational stone. But here for cornerstone, the Greek word for head is used. It's the head stone. And some commentators have argued that this is the elevated cornerstone or the key stone in the arch of the temple. And evidence for this is there was a head of the corner crowning the temple of God.So in one sense, Jesus Christ is our foundation, but he's also the crown of our lives. He's a crown of the church. He is the head of our lives. He was rejected, but his rejection led to our acceptance. Therefore, it's marvelous in our eyes. The father, when he sent the son, He said, "They will respect my son." And in a sense you read that and you're like, "That seems highly naive. Messenger after messenger was killed. Why do you think they're going to respect your son?" In a sense, yeah, they didn't respect him. But in a sense this is also prophetic. There will come a time when everybody will respect the name of Jesus Christ. Either we accept His name, either we accept His authority and lordship over our lives now in humility, we come humbly, or we will be humbled when He returns for the second judgment. When the son shows up, he's killed out of enmity. But the wisdom and the beauty of the glory of the gospel is the very killing that comes from their enmity is the very way in which God slays that enmity.Verse 12, "When they were seeking to arrest Him but fear the people for they perceived that He had told the parable against them, so they left Him and went away." They still fear the crowd because the crowd is still with Jesus so they need to hatch a plan where they take the crowd support away from Jesus. And that's what the next part of the text is about in verse 13. "And they sent to Him some of the Pharisees and some of the Herodians to trap him in his talk." The Herodians are mentioned here because Herod was a proxy of Caesar. So he would collect the taxes from the Jewish people and the taxes then funneled through his coffers would go to Caesar. Obviously, he made a killing off of it.So the Herodians, they wanted the people to pay the taxes, hot button issue. And they know it's a trick because Jesus, if you say, "No, don't pay your taxes," now we can appeal to Caesar and he's going to kill you. If you say, "Go and pay your taxes," now the people will say, "Oh Jesus said you were the king. Why are we supporting Rome?" So that's the trap.Mark 12:14, "They came and said to Him, 'Teacher, we know that you are true and do not care about anyone's opinion. For you are not swayed by appearances, but truly teach the of God. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not? And should we pay them or should we not?'" They start by saying, "You are true," which is hypocritical because he is true. They're unwittingly witnessing to the truth. But a few lines earlier, the chief scribes sent a question. They said through their proxies, they said, "By whose authority are you doing the things you're doing?" And here, all of a sudden they're like, "Oh, we know you are true. We know whose authority." Obviously they're being hypocritical."You are true." That means there's no sin, there's no lies, there's no prevarication. "You do not care about anyone's opinion," meaning you fear God over people. So when people's opinions contradict the will of God or the teaching of God, you don't care. "And you are not swayed by appearances," meaning you don't judge by appearances. You don't show partiality. And in that, in this, he's reflecting God Himself for Samuel 16:7. "But the Lord said to Samuel, 'Do not look on his appearance on the height of his stature because I've rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees. Man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.'" And the trap here is they're saying, "Lord, if you don't care about anyone's opinions, you definitely don't care about the emperor's opinions."And the Messiah according to Isaiah 11:3 would imitate God in making impartial judgments. Isaiah 11:3, "And his delight shall be in the fear of the Lord. He shall not judge by what his eyes see or decide disputes by what his ears hear." And Jesus, we know that You truly teach the way of God. That's what Jesus came to do, teach the way of God. And then the question, is it lawful to pay tax to Caesar or not? Should we pay them or should we not? And then here are the taxes, the poll tax that Caesar demanded off of every person. How does Jesus respond? Verse 15. "But knowing their hypocrisy, their pretense, He said to them, 'Why put me to the test? Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.'"Denarius was a Roman currency. You pay Roman taxes with Roman currency. Denarius represented a day's wage. And if you take the coin, on the front, it was inscription. There was Tiberius with a laurel crowned head. And then the inscription around his head said "Tiberius Caesar, son of the deified Augustus, himself Augustus". And on the reverse side it would say Pontifex Maximus, which is high priest. On the one side it says he is Dei. They were deifying Caesar, and he's also our high priest. Blasphemous. And this is why the Jews had a problem with these coins is blasphemous.And Jesus said, "Bring me one." In verse 16, "They brought one and he said to them, 'Whose likeness and inscription is this?' They said to him, 'Caesar's.' Jesus said to them, 'Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's.' And they marveled at him." I remember when I read this for the first time as a kid. I fell in love with Jesus because I was like, "Ah, Jesus is the best trash talker. He's better than anybody. He puts it."But the deeper you study the Scripture, you realize just the profound depth of the wisdom of God. They start the conversation with a battle for authority and He ends the conversation with a battle of authority. Who wins? God Himself. What is Jesus saying here? He's saying, "Whose image is on that coin? Caesar's. Okay, give unto Caesar's what is Caesar's." And then he says, "Whose image is on you? Whose image is on you? Whose image and likeness is on you? Give unto God's yourself what is God's genius." The coin which bears the image of Caesar, we give to Caesar. We however, as men and women who bear the image of God, we owe ourselves to God. We will give Caesar's unto Caesar but we will not render unto Caesar what is God's even if Caesar demands it. No, we won't.So this is a reminder for us friends to give what is God's to God. Give your whole life as a living sacrifice to the Lord. Bring your Sabbath to the Lord. Give your tithes to the Lord. Use your talents for the Lord's kingdom. And we do this because we long to, not just because we're obligated to. Know that duty has become a choice. John Newton in Amazing Grace writes, "Our pleasure and our duty, the opposite before. Since we have seen His beauty, are joined, depart no more." Our pleasure and our duty, it is our pleasure to do our duty for the Lord. Newton's friend William Cowper wrote, "To see the law by Christ fulfilled and to hear His pardoning voice changes a slave into a child and duty into choice."And what's the only thing that can heal our hearts of our enmity and hostility toward God? It's recognizing and accepting the love of God for us. Corinthians 5:18 says, "All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to Himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, that is in Christ, God was reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake, He made him to be sin, who knew no sin, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God."If you're here today and you're not sure where you stand before God, if you were to die today and you're not sure where you would go, today, you have a decision to make. If you do not repent of your sins, if you do not place your faith in Christ, if you do not accept the gospel of Jesus Christ and His grace, if you died today, you are going to be separated from God for all eternity and His wrath will be upon you in a place called hell. But thankfully, you're not dead yet. Thankfully, we still have a chance to repent. And thanks be to the work of Christ, we can be forgiven. If you don't admit you're an enemy, you'll stay one and you'll be crushed when Christ returns to judge. If you admit you're an enemy, you'll no longer be one Lord, I have been an enemy. I have been in rebellion. Lord, forgive me. I accept your amnesty. Lord, welcome me into your kingdom.Matthew 21:44, "And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces. And when it falls on anyone, it will crush him." Either allow your hard heart to be shattered by His love and then He heals it or remain at war with God, which is suicidal and you will be crushed. We come humbly to the Lord or we will be humbled in the judgment. Either you say to God, "God, Thy will be done. I'm not my own," or God will one day say to you, "Thy will be done. You are your own. Go."I'm going to close by praying the Lord's prayer as Jesus taught us to pray. And you're welcome to pray in your heart with me. Our Father in heaven, hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our debts as we also have forgiven our debtors. And lead us not in temptation, but deliver us from evil.Father, we thank You for sending your Son, and Lord Jesus, we thank You that You went to the cross with eyes wide open. You knew the cost and it was a terrible cost, but You did that in order to atone for our sins. And we thank You, Holy Spirit, that You're with us today. And I pray, if there's anyone who is still stuck in their rebellious ways, I pray, Lord, melt their hearts. I pray give them spiritual resurrection of their souls in this Holy Week. I pray that this week will be holy in their lives, that they will be drawn into Your kingdom and into Your church. And Lord, bless us this week as we meditate upon your final week before the crucifixion. And Lord, give us opportunities to share the great gospel with our friends, neighbors, or anyone else who would listen. We pray this in Jesus' name. Amen.

Topics: Church Building, Temple, House of God, Man-made Tradition, Acts 17:24, God Does Not Dwell in Temples, Human Hands, Physical Temple Replaced, John 2:19, Early Church Went to Temple to Evangelize, Temple Destroyed in AD 70, House of God, Temple Called House of God, We Are Now God's House, Hebrews 3:6, Hebrews 10:21, Constantine, 4th Century, Official Church Buildings, Romans Basilicas, Effort to Legitimize Christianity, Copied Pagans and Jews, Superimpose Hebrews 10:25 and Remember the Sabbath and Acts 20:7, Gathered on First Day is Not a Command Not at a Building Called Church, 7 Churches in Revelation Not Church Buildings, Groups of Ecclesia in Different Regions, Jettisoned Place of Worship, 1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 Corinthians 6:19, Worshiped Sun God, Made Sunday Official Holy Day, Put to Death Son and Nephew and Brother-in-Law, Claimed Title of Pontifex Maximus, Chief of Pagan Priests, Magic Formulas to Heal and Protect Crops, Constantinople Named After Himself, Adorned With Pagan Temple Treasures, 12 Monuments, 12 Apostles, Surrounded by Single Tomb, 13th Apostle, Declared Objects as Sacred, Copied Pagan Practice, Mother Obsessed with Relics, Cross and Nails of Jesus, Named Churches After Saints Copied Pagan Temples Named After Gods, Built On Cemeteries and Graves, Believed Were Holy Sites, Built Churches on Top of Peter and Paul and Christ's Tomb and Place of Birth, Modeled after Basilicas, Longer Front to Back, Place of Government Functions and Civil Activities, Before the Cross We could not Be the Temples, Blood Made Temple Sanctified but Had to be Repeated, Dealt with Sins, Blood of Jesus Made us Sanctified Forever by Grace Through Faith, Dealt with Sins Once and For all, Hebrews 10:1 Those Worshipers Could Never Be Made Perfect, Hebrews 10:14 We Have Been Made Perfect, John 4, Spirit and Truth, Worship the Father Desires, Acts 7:48, Most High Does Not Dwell in Temples Built by Humans Hands, Nor Houses, House Churches are Not Church, The Church is a Living OrganismSupport the showSign up for Matt's free daily devotional! https://mattmcmillen.com/newsletter

Neste episódio: Augusto assume o cargo de Pontifex Maximus e realiza um feito diplomático ao conseguir um tratado de paz com o Império Parta. SUPORTE ESTE PROJETO PIX - chave: brunoesquivelprandi@gmail.com PADRIM - https://www.padrim.com.br/romanuaecrua NOSSOS APOIADORES: Nicolas Prandi Lucas Prandi Monica Une Cesar Casulari Álvaro Dezidério Lucas Cerqueira Cicero Monteiro Antonio da Silva Leandro Spitzer Monica Une Pedro Henrique dos Santos Fernando Viana Vanderlan Alves Iuri Bazzi João Gisi Alano ALeixo Fontes: Podcast The History Of Rome VIRGÍLIO, Públio. Eneida LÍVIO, Tito. The Early History of Rome. Penguin Classics. Penguin Books Limited, 2002 BAKER Historia Civilis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rt67AqrR74 --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/romanuaecrua/support

63 год до нашей эры... Урок шестьдесят шестой. О сказках, неприкосновенности частной жизни и о том как важно читать правила игры-==- Поддержать подкаст patreon.com/romafallrepublic boosty.to/romafallrepublic Ссылки на сервисы одноразовых донатов (перевод на карту) https://pay.cloudtips.ru/p/de81e92c https://www.tinkoff.ru/cf/8OhkxZI8dPp -==- Для заказа рекламы пишите на почту или в телеграм geasmuire@gmail.com https://t.me/caledfwlch_as -==- Герои выпуска. Осторожно, спойлеры к предыдущим сериям https://telegra.ph/Cezarianskij-cikl-1-seriya-Pontifex-maximus-Velikij-pontifik-12-05-==- Подкаст выходит по четвергам. Подписывайтесь на любых платформах и присоединяйтесь в сообществах https://t.me/romafallrepublic https://instagram.com/roma_fall_of_the_republic/?hl=ru https://vk.com/romafallrepublic https://twitter.com/ROMApodcast -==- Таймкоды00:00 Перенесемся в прошлое… 03:12 Эпиграф к серии 03:26 Великий Понтифик 07:35 Ох уж этот 63 год! 09:38 Детство Гая 18:32 Народный супергерой 22:16 Прыжок на Пизона 25:04 Подергать за бороду 27:51 Самый необычный суд 27:51 Штандарт на Яникуле 36:04 Выборы великого понтифика 43:04 Выборы, выборы! 50:31 Отстранение и возвращение 59:00 Послесловие Источники Плутарх. Сравнительные жизнеописания Дион Кассий. Римская история Марк Туллий Цицерон. Письма и Речи Гай Саллюстий Крисп. О заговоре Катилины Тит Ливий. История Рима от основания города Гай Светоний Транквилл. Жизнь двенадцати цезарей Биллоуз, Ричард. Юлий Цезарь. Римский колосс Утченко, Сергей Львович. Юлий Цезарь Короленков, Антон Викторович. Сулла и Цезарь: противостояние Wiseman, Timothy Peter. Julius Caesar

Pope Francis on Saturday condemned "belligerent nationalisms" and called for a pan-European response to migration to stop the Mediterranean, where thousands have drowned, from becoming "the graveyard of dignity". Immigration issues dominated his 27-hour trip to Marseilles, a French port that for centuries has been a crossroads of cultures and religions. On Friday, he said migrants who risk drowning at sea "must be rescued" because doing so was "a duty of humanity" and that those who impede rescues commit "a gesture of hate". On this episode of the NTEB Prophecy News Podcast, what the Liberals are accomplishing in America using the Cloward-Piven Strategy to collapse our nation by overwhelming the welfare system, Pope Francis in Europe is using his office of Pontifex Maximus, a title retained from the Roman Empire, to do the same thing. What is behind all of the global anarchy? Not much, just a little something called the Great Reset, currently being forced on us by the shadowy figures of the New World Order. On this episode, we give you all the latest updates on the 21 new Catholic Cardinals, the migrant invasion happening on multiple continents, and all the other end times news you need to know.

Prof. Drake joins us to discuss Constantine the Great, his conversion to Christianity, his 'vision of the cross', his role as Pontifex Maximus, calling the Council of Nicaea with his desire for consensus, and the intolerance of Christian bishops of whom Constantine wrote: 'do nothing but that which encouraged discord and hatred and, to speak frankly, which leads to the destruction of the human race.' Prof. Drake's book: https://www.amazon.com/Constantine-Bishops-Politics-Intolerance-Ancient/dp/0801862183/ref=sr_1_1?crid=28HPX1VSNWDV5&keywords=constantine+and+the+bishops&qid=1694852908&sprefix=constantine+and+the+bishope%2Caps%2C368&sr=8-1 Listen and watch the podcasts on these platforms: Spotify: http://bit.ly/aai-pod-spotify Apple podcasts: http://bit.ly/aai-apple Google Podcasts: https://bit.ly/3pknMYG   Follow and connect with us: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AtheistAllianceInternational Twitter: https://twitter.com/atheistalliance Website: https://www.atheistalliance.org/ Join AAI: https://www.atheistalliance.org/membership/ Donate to the ASN: https://www.atheistalliance.org/atheist-support-network/

In this week's episode we nerd out on the esoteric symbolism coded into the fifth numbered card of the Major Arcana of the Tarot, The Hierophant also known as The Pope and the High Priest, Magus of the Eternal Gods. We discuss the divinatory meaning of the card, its etymological roots, biblical references and the priesthoods of Ancient Egypt. We explain why the Pope's zodiacal association is with Taurus and of course what it has to do with Venus and the Moon. In the extended show we discuss the Apis Bull, the birth of the Cretian Minotaur, the magick of the number 5, the golden ratio, the Hebrew letter Vav, The Tree of Life and of course the Gematria woven into the Thoth version of the card. We learned a lot researching this episode, so we hope you will too, thank you and enjoy the show!In the free show we discuss:Pope / Hierophant EtymologyDivinatory MeaningSaint Peter, the Pontifex MaximusInstitutional PowerThe Sign of BenedictionThe Crossed KeysConnections to The High Priestess, Magus and EmperorEgyptian Priesthood of AmunZodiacal TaurusThe Bull of Wall Street?In the extended show available at www.patreon.com/TheWholeRabbit we go further down the rabbit hole to discuss:The Apis BullBirth of the MinotaurThe Pentagram and Number 5The Aeon of HorusThe Hebrew VavCrown and Mace of OsirisPath 16: The Eternal IntelligenceThe Book of the LawNine Inch NailsThe Snake and the DoveEach host is responsible for writing and creating the content they present.Where to find The Whole Rabbit:Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0AnJZhmPzaby04afmEWOAVInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/the_whole_rabbitSources:Book of Thoth:http://www.thule-italia.net/esoterismo/Aleister%20Crowley/Aleister%20Crowley%20-%20The%20book%20of%20Thoth.pdfTree of Life:https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Tree_of_Life_2009_large.pngHebrew Vav:https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/137078/jewish/Vav.htmSupport the show

5-V-2023. IN ORBE TERRARUM: ‘Clima’ ‘in orbe terrarum’ ‘puero (in lingua hispanica ‘El Niño)’ ‘minetur’. ‘Praeses novus’ ‘pro Argentaria mundana’ ‘est’. Nomen ei Ajay Banga est. ‘Assultus cybernetici’ ‘ex Civitates Foederatae America’ ‘in regionibus variis’ demostrantur. IN CONTINENTE TERRA EUROPAE. IN EUROPA: ‘Argentaria Centralis Europae’ ‘creditorum rationem’ ‘quadrantem punctum’ ‘augmentat’. IN UCRAINA: ‘In Ucrainae bello’, ‘centum milia miles russici’ ‘mortui sunt’. Tantum, ‘superioribus quinque mensibus’ ‘viginti milia miles russici’ ‘mortui sunt’. ‘Chronica’ ‘de assultu’ ‘cum aeroplanis non gubernatis’ ‘ad Cremlinum’: ‘aggressio contra Putin’; ‘Russia’ ‘duos aeroplanos’ ‘non gubernatos’ ‘ad Cremlinum ductos’ ‘annihilat’; ‘Chiovia’ ‘dicit’ ‘me’ ‘non fuisse’; tamen, ‘Russia’ ‘Ucrainae’ ‘culpat’; postea, ‘Russia’ ‘Civitatibuss Americae Unitae’ ‘culpat’; deinde, ‘Russia’ ‘Ucrainae’ ‘aeroplanis non gubertatis et missilibus’ ‘battuit’; In summa, mysterium, de qui Cremlinum battuit, regnat. ‘Zelens’kyj Ucrainae praeses’, quod ‘Putin’ ‘ad Tribunalem Internatinalem’ ‘comparet’, ‘exigit’. ‘Wagner caterva’ ‘minatur’ quod ‘Bakhmout’ ‘decimum die Maii mense’ ‘relinquet’. IN BRITANNIA: ‘Nutrices’ ‘pro cancri aegrotis’ ‘in Britannia’ ‘ad operistitium’ ‘ibunt’. ‘Londinium, caput Angliae et Regni Britanniarum omnis’, ‘ad Carolum coronandum’ ‘parat’. IN HISPANIA: ‘Occasio laboris’ ‘ad cifram maximam’ ‘in Aprilis mense’ ‘perveniit’. ‘Viginti punctum sex milia milium operarii’ ‘in Hispania’ ‘sunt’. IN GERMANIA: ‘In Monaco (seu Monachio)’, ‘expeditio’ ‘contra Ndrangheta’ ‘fuit’. ‘Quattuor personas’ ‘apprehendunt’. IN ITALIA: ‘Inflatio monetalis’ ‘in Italia’ ‘ad octo punctum tres centesimas’ ‘advenit’. ‘Pluvia magna’ ‘sopra Emilia-Romagna’ ‘est’: ‘hanc regionem’ ‘inundat’. ‘De migrantibus’ ‘Italia’ ‘et Gallia’ litigant; et ‘Meloni’ ‘excusationem’ ‘exigit’. IN CIVITATE VATICANA: ‘Papa etiam Pontifex Maximus’ ‘consilium’ ‘pro Ucrainae pacem’ ‘revelat’. IN SERBIA: ‘Adulescens’ ‘quattuordecim annos natus’ ‘octo pueros’ ‘necat’. IN HUNGARIA: ‘In Hungaria’ ‘iudicum independentiam’ ‘corroborant’. IN GRAECIA: ‘Extremae dexterae factio’, Hellenes appelata, ‘ex comitiis’ ‘in Graecia’ ‘excludunt’. IN CONTINENTE TERRAE AMERICAE. IN CANÁDA: ‘Canada aeroplana’ ‘ad Canádam’ ‘ex Sudania’ ‘detinet’. IN CIVITATIBUS FOEDERATAE AMERICAE: ‘Argentaria Americana ‘Prima Respublica’’ ‘prope ruina’ ‘est’. ‘Ruscisilva scriptores’ ‘ad operistitium’ ‘eunt’. ‘Scriptorum pimum operistitiium’ ‘in quindecim annis’ ‘est’. ‘Biden’ ‘liminem australem’ ‘contra migrantes’ ‘fortificat’. ‘Homicida’ ‘acusato quinque homicidiis’ ‘capiunt’. ‘Copia Foederatonis (abbreviatione ‘eF-E-De’)’ ‘Americae rationem creditorum’ ‘quadrantem punctum’ ‘ad inflationem monetalem cohibendum’ ‘augmentat’. ‘Quattuor Superbi Pueri (in lingua anglica: ‘Four Proud Boys’)’ ‘de seditione’ ‘accusati sunt’. IN MEXICO: ‘Ministerium Laboris et Prognosis Socialis’ ‘centum viginti unum milia laboris contractus communia’ ‘rescindit’, sed ‘quindecim octigenti’ ‘current’. ‘In Mexici seu Foederati Status Mexicani’, ‘diurnarii’ ‘periclitantur’. IN BELIZA: ‘Beliza’ ‘fieri respublica’ ‘potest’. IN PANAMA: ‘Centum septuaginta sex caedes’ ‘in Panáma’ ‘in quattuor mensibus’ ‘numerantur’. IN COLUMBIA: ‘In aprilis mense’, ‘viginti unum duces sociales’ ‘necantur’. ‘Rex Hispaniae Philippus Sextus’ ‘Columbiae praesidi Gustavo Petro’ ‘de consilio pro pace’ ‘superest’. ‘Comitia’, ‘quo Roy Barreras vicerat’, ‘dissolvunt’. IN AEQUATORIA: ‘Aequatoriae praeses Gulielmus Lasso’ ‘ad terroristas pugnandum’ ‘omnibus subsidiis’ ‘imperat’. IN BOLIVIA: ‘Paedophiliae scandalum’ ‘in Bolivia’ ‘est’. ‘Octo ex Societate Iesu’ ‘suspendunt’. ‘Episcopi’ ‘veniam’ ‘petunt’. IN CILIA: ‘Ciliae oeconomia’ ‘inter duos menses’ ‘cadit’. IN BRASILIA: ‘Brasilia’ ‘Argentinae’ ‘in pactionibus cum Instituto Nummario Orbis Terrarum (abbreviatione ‘eF-eM-I’)’ ‘superest’. IN ARGENTINA: Translationes ex Israel García Avilés. Argentina: ut servare foedera cum Fundo monetario internationali (abbreviatione ‘eF-eM-I’), pretium lucis nongenti centesimae partes et gasis viginti quinque centesimae partes augent. IN PARAGUAIA: Translationes ex Israel García Avilés. Santiago Peña vincit quinquedecim centesimae partes, magna victoria Consociationis nationalis Reipublicae (abbreviatione: ‘A-eN-eR’). Consociatio nationalis Reipublicae majoritatem in Senatu habebit. Legati Consociationis potestatem tenebunt. Supremum Tribunal Iustitiae Comitialis quisquam fraudationis posibilitatem reiectat. IN URUGUAIA: ‘Negotiatores’ ‘reducere tempus laboris’ ‘non ratihabent’. IN ORIÉNTE MEDIO. IN ISRAELE: ‘Dux islamicus’ ‘apocarteresi’ ‘in Isrealis carcere’ ‘moritur’. IN MEDIA ASIA. IN IRANIA: ‘Irania’ ‘aliam navem cisternam’ ‘in hebdomada’ ‘capit’. ‘ In freto Ormuz’ ‘fuit’. ‘Irania et Syria’ ‘cooperationis pactum’ ‘renovant’. IN PAKISTANIA: ‘In aggressione’ ‘controversia territoriali’ ‘septem’ ‘mortui sunt’. IN INDIA: ‘Pawar’ ‘abdicat’. IN ASIA ORIENTALI. IN PHILIPPINIS: ‘Philippinae et Civitates Foederatae Americae’ ‘pactum’ ‘confirmant’. IN CONTINENTE TERRAE AFRICA ET IN OCEANIA. IN AETIOPIA: ‘Civitates Foederatae Americae’ ‘auxilium’ ‘pro Trigray’ ‘suspendunt’. IN SUDANIA: Translationes ex Israel García Avilés. Exodus Sudaniae inter violentiam ocurrit. Sudania ante pugnam inter duces, functio factionorum religionis islamicae bellicorum. IN RUANDA: ‘Plus quam centum personas’ ‘pluviis magnis’ ‘in Ruanda’ ‘moriuntur’. IN AUSTRALIA: ‘Australiae Argentaria centralis’ ‘creditorum rationem’ ‘augmentat’ et ‘ad cifram maximam’ ‘pervenit’. IN POLYNESIA: ‘Lutetia’ ‘Factionis Independentis victoria’ ‘in Polynesia’ ‘perturbata’ ‘est’.

IntroductionWelcome back to session 4 of “Praying the Mass.” I am thrilled to share with you today the Liturgy of the Eucharist. With the Prayers of the Faithful completed, the Offertory begins. Presentation of the GiftsGiftsBread and wine are brought to the altar and prayers of offering and blessing are made. This presentation of the gifts, the bread and wine, and the preparation of the altar is getting us ready to enter into the most sacred part of the Holy Mass. The bread and wine, now present on the altar, are gifts because all created things come from God. Without the act of creation and the sustaining of being itself, we would not have bread and wine to offer in the first place. Even from the earliest days, humanity has offered the first fruits of their harvest or flock back to God in thanksgiving. Recognizing an abundant harvest or a healthy flock or even a child being born as a gift from the divine is not isolated to Christianity and Judaism. In the oldest pagan religions, armed only with God-given human reason, there is an understanding that there is a higher power which created and sustains all things. And, so, the bread and wine are gifts. But that is not all. Our own lives are gifts. The churches in which we worship are gifts. The vestments, sacred vessels, and artwork are gifts. Without God, there is nothing. Everything we have is a gift in a very real sense. As St. Therese of Lisieux said, “Everything is grace.” OfferingsThe bread and wine are offerings because they are being set aside for sacred use. Ordinary bread and wine are placed upon the altar with the full expectation of the miracle that is to come. These gifts are being offered for a specific purpose. Namely, to make Christ present Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, under the veil of a sacrament. The bread and wine are not the only things being offered. We offer God, each day, our works, joys, sufferings, in union with the action of Jesus at the altar at Holy Mass. As St. Paul says in Romans 12: “I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship (Rom. 12:1).”Everything we do throughout our day, which is intentionally united to Christ, is our spiritual offering. In offering ourselves, we are transformed to be more like Christ, just as the bread and wine become Christ. We can also offer all of the many requests and intentions that we have. We offer all we are next to the bread on the paten and in the chalice with the wine.Finally, the bread and wine are holy and unblemished sacrifices. When the bread and wine are set aside for sacred use, they can no longer be used as ordinary food. In a simple sense, this is a sacrifice. When we understand that we are uniting ourselves to this offering at Mass, we come to realize that the content of our day to day lives is the sacrifice that we are offering. These sacrifices are acts of love: cleaning the dishes so your spouse does not have to do it, practicing virtue rather than vice, setting aside time for prayer, or striving to live the commands of Jesus Christ each moment of the day. Then, at Holy Mass, we offer these actions, as well as our failings, alongside the bread and wine. We become a sacrifice offered to God in humility. Holy because we are set apart by God in our Baptism. Unblemished because we are set right with God by our Baptism, frequent reception of the Sacrament of Penance, and by being transformed by our receiving of Holy Communion in a state of grace. Prayer Over the OfferingsDuring Sunday Mass, the collection is taken during the Prayers Over the Offerings. This is a chance for the assembly to make their tithing a liturgical action. Just as the gifts of bread and wine are offered, so too are our “first fruits.” During this preparation, you might see the Deacon or Priest pour wine into the chalice at the altar and then a bit of water as well. They are also quietly saying, “By the mystery of this water and wine, may we come to share in the divinity of Christ, who humbled himself to share in our humanity.”Water, in most places of the world, is a fairly common thing. This is symbolic of humanity. Yet, wine is expensive and takes a long time to make; this is symbolic of divinity. And when the wine and water are mixed, can they be separated again? No! So, it is with the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. The Byzantine tradition takes the symbolism a step further. During Divine Liturgy, warm water is added to the wine during the preparatory prayers because the blood of a living Man is warm!Turning to the people after the Offertory Prayers, the priest says, “Pray, brethren, that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father.” This is not a prayer. This is an invitation. This is a command. The people then respond, speaking to the priest saying, “May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of his name, for our good and the good of all his holy Church.” This beautiful exchange is a call to action. The priest is about to enter into the Holy of Holies to offer the one Sacrifice of Jesus Christ in the Person of Christ, Head of His Body. The people offer sacrifice as well, but in a different way as members of the Body of Christ.Also, the people are acknowledging that the Sacrifice being offered is 1) primarily at the hands of the priest, 2) is for the praise and glory of God, and 3) is for the “making holy” (sanctification) of the people.It should be noted that after the priest says the Orate, Fratres and he is offering the Mass in the ad orientem posture, the Roman Missal does not direct him to turn back towards the people until the Ecce Agnus Dei (“Behold the Lamb of God…”). He is in the fight. His attention, and ours, should then be entirely fixed upon entering into the Sacred Action of the one Sacrifice of Jesus Christ, presented once more, outside of space and time. Attention entirely fixed upon the task at hand, the priest begins the Eucharistic Prayer by saying, “The Lord be with you.” (Latin: Dominus vobiscum) The people respond, “And with your spirit.” (Latin: Et cum spiritu tuo) This small exchange is not a greeting. The priest is acknowledging that, in our Baptism, we are members of the Body of Christ. And as members of the Body of Christ, we offer ourselves in union with the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ.  We say, “And with your spirit” because we are acknowledging that by the power of the Holy Spirit, in his ordination, the priest is acting in the Person of Christ the Head of His Body. We are not speaking of “your spirit” as the priest's human spirit. We are acknowledging his priestly spirit, in Christ, in the power of the Holy Spirit.  Next the priest says, “Lift up your hearts.” (Latin: Sursum corda) The people respond, “We lift them up to the Lord.” (Latin: Habemus ad Dominum) Literally in Latin, this response means something like, “We hold towards the Lord.” This means we are lifting our hearts now or we have already been lifting them up and will continue to do so. God, ever-patient, is giving us another chance to clue in to the miracle in front of us before we charge into the breach in the battle of prayer. Then the priest says, “Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.” (Latin: Gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro) And the people acclaim, “It is right and just.” (Latin: Dignum et iustum est) It is “right” for us to give thanks to God because that is why human beings were ultimately created. We are made to worship God. It is “just” because God alone deserves glory and praise.  This ancient dialogue of the Preface Dialogue begins the Eucharistic Prayer. It reminds us of who we are as priest and people, Head and Members of the Body of Christ. It reminds us of our active internal role in entering into the Sacrifice of the Mass. It reminds us of the glory due to God and our role in offering Him praise.  The PrefaceThe first essential part of the Eucharistic Prayer is the Preface for the day which is then offered by the priest. These prefaces change depending on the season of the Church liturgical year and the feast, solemnity, or memorial that is being celebrated. Directly following the Preface and just before the beginning of the Eucharistic Prayer comes the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy). This ancient prayer was added to the Sacred Liturgy in the first half of the fifth century and is drawn from Isaiah 6:3 and Matthew 21:9. The Preface and the Sanctus specifically call to mind the angels and remind us that we are praising God, with all of the angels and saints in Heaven present with us. Heaven is touching Earth and we are present for this spectacular event.In the 1962 Roman Missal, there is a beautiful insight in the rubrics. At the word Sanctus, the priest joins his hands and bows in humble adoration of God. Then, at the words Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini (Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord), he stands fully and makes the Sign of the Cross. In the midst of the angels and the saints, the grace of God is pouring out upon us and blessing us as we enter into the great Action of Jesus Christ in the remainder of the Eucharistic Prayer.This is no longer called for in the rubrics of the 1970 Missal, but the spirit of the theological significance is no less for us!The Sanctus is one of the oldest congregational hymns in existence. In Greek it is the ton epinikion hymnon or “Hymn of Victory.” This the final part of the Eucharistic Preface and is said or sung at every single Mass in the Latin Rite. The hymn also exists in some form in all but one of the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church. Historically, in the Latin Church, the bells were rung at the start of the Sanctus to signal that the Roman Canon was coming imminently. Let us now walk through the Sanctus piece by piece. “Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of hosts.” (Latin: Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth.) There are two main points of interest I would like to draw out here: the repetition of Holy and the word “hosts.”  In English, and many other languages, there are words called comparatives and superlatives. For example, we have the word “good,” the comparative “better,” and the superlative “best.” In Hebrew, this construction does not exist. To say “better,” you would say “good, good.” And to say “best,” you would say, “good, good, good.” Therefore, to say Holy, Holy, Holy is saying that God is the Most Holy. It is also a call to worship, often done in threes. Think, for example, of the popular Christmas chant where “O come, let us adore Him (Venite adoremus)” is repeated three times. And, of course, the repetition of three refers also to the Trinity. Like most things in the Church, there are multiple levels of meaning.The word “hosts” refers to the heavenly hosts of angels, which St. Luke refers to in his account of the birth of Jesus. These legions of angels do the will of God and bring Him glory. They are with us in the fight and they join us in worship of Him.  As Dr. Scott Hahn wrote so eloquently, “When we go to Mass, the congregation is never small, even if it is nonexistent in terms of human attendance. The angels are there, as is evident even in the words of the Mass: ‘And so with all the choirs of angels we sing: Holy, holy, holy…' The Mass itself cries out for us to be aware of our angels (Hahn, Signs of Life).” “Heaven and earth are full of your glory.” (Latin: Pleni sunt cæli et terra gloria tua) Of course, here we are giving God praise, acclaiming the truth that for those with the eyes of Faith, He is recognizable all around. All things are directed ultimately to Him. “Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.” (Latin: Hosanna in excelsis. Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini. Hosanna in excelsis.) This refers to the cry of the people as Christ entered Jerusalem to the sight of palm branches being waved, reminiscent of Solomon's entrance into Jerusalem. The people exclaimed of Christ, “And the crowds that went before him and that followed him were shouting, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!' (Mt. 21:9)”  Hosanna means “Praise to the Lord!” And so, we are offering praise to the Father for the gift of the Son. In this hymn, the coming of Christ in the Nativity is called to mind. We know that Christ will come again. The Sanctus reminds us that Christ comes to us now. At the Mass, the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus become present under the veil of a sacrament on the altar. The Sanctus, with its mention of the angels and the triumph of Christ, is like a bridge between Heaven and earth. The Lord of Heaven and earth is drawing us deep into His heart. The eternal self-offering of the Son to the Father in the Spirit is veiled before us by signs and symbols. But there is no doubt that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, especially in the Eucharistic Prayer is a foretaste of Heaven.  Epiclesis and Institution NarrativeThere are currently a few different options for the Eucharistic Prayer, proper. However, they all contain two more essential parts: the Epiclesis (Greek: Epiklesis, Latin: Invocatio) and the Institution Narrative. The Epiclesis is the calling down of the Holy Spirit upon the gifts of bread and wine that they may become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. Every Western and Eastern liturgy contains this essential prayer. The Institution Narrative is the full narrative of the Last Supper in which Christ instituted the Eucharist as the New Covenant, including the words of consecration (This is My Body… This is My Blood…).In the Catholic Church, there has always been an understanding that this invocation of the Holy Spirit was essential, along with the words of consecration.We may be tempted to ask exactly when does the bread and wine actually become Jesus' Body and Blood? Is it at the Epiclesis or is it at the Institution Narrative? This has been a source of tension through the history of discussions between the East and the West in the Church. The important thing is to recognize the essential nature of both. Without the words of consecration, there is no Eucharist. But without the power of the Holy Spirit, there is no Eucharist. This is absolutely not to say that the Holy Spirit waits for the priest to call on Him. The entire Holy Mass is the prayer and working of Almighty God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. But God has designed that His creatures should cooperate with His sacred Action. Therefore, the invocation of the Holy Spirit and the words of consecration of the Son are both to the glory of the Father and the making holy of the people, which hopefully we will remember are the two main ends of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.We take our cue of the importance of both elements, the Institution Narrative and the Epiclesis, from the posture of the people at the Holy Mass. Following the Preface and the Sanctus, the people kneel. In the Roman Rite, the posture of kneeling is twofold: humility and adoration. We kneel in humble adoration because God is sending His Holy Spirit in power to consecrate the bread and wine to become the Most Holy Eucharist, at the hands of the priest. We are humble because we understand who God is and who we are in relationship to Him. We adore Him because it is right and just, especially given the miracle that is taking place in front of us.During the Epiclesis, the priest's posture changes as well. He extends his hands, palms facing down, over the gifts to show the calling down of the Holy Spirit. The bells are also rung at this time to draw our sense's attention to what is happening. During the Institution Narrative, the priest is engaged in the Sacred Action of Jesus Christ. When speaking the words of consecration, he bows and speaks in a straight tone. This is to show that the words are not his own, rather Jesus Christ is speaking through him at that moment. Back in ancient times, a messenger would visit a foreign king and speak the words of his own master. The foreign king would know that the words did not belong to the messenger because the messenger would speak them while bent at the waist. Then, the priest genuflects before the King of kings now present on the altar. Here, in the climax of the Mass, the bells are rung three times as if to say Holy, Holy, Holy. As I mentioned earlier, in Hebrew, there are no grammatical comparatives and superlatives. To say holier, you would say “holy, holy,” and to say holiest, you say “holy, holy, holy.”AnamnesisThe fourth essential part of the Eucharistic Prayer is Anamnesis.During the Institution Narrative, the bread and wine are consecrated separately, first the bread then the wine, and they become the Body and Blood of Jesus. The result of separating blood from a body is death. In this way, the Institution Narrative makes present the Passion and Death of Jesus. Is this just a metaphor? Is it symbolic? Far from being merely a symbol, this means the Holy Cross is made present to us in the here and now, outside of time, by the power of God. Rather, we could say that we are transported to the foot of the Holy Cross where the Son of God shed His blood and life for our sake. When we begin to see with the eyes of faith that this is a reality and not simply symbolic, we begin to understand anamnesis.Anamnesis in Greek literally means bring to mind. We could also translate it as a deliberate recollection. Anamnesis in the context of liturgy is more than just a memory or a calling to the mind in some abstract way. Through the power of the Holy Spirit and the mediation of Jesus Christ, our High Priest, the One Sacrifice becomes present once again in an unbloody manner. The word anamnesis is what Jesus says in the words of consecration when He says, “Do this in remembrance of me.” The Anamnesis makes present the Sacred Action of Jesus Christ to our senses through external signs and symbols. It is a reminder on the surface level. But if we push past the veil, God allows us to see and to receive the full power of His saving Mysteries which were so powerful that they cannot be contained in a single moment of history. The Cross was two thousand years ago, but it comes present once again at every single Mass. What we see as signs and symbols are made truly present to us, in reality.Of course, after the Eucharistic Prayer, the priest puts a piece of the Sacred Host into the Sacred Chalice in the Fraction Rite. In this action, anamnesis makes the reunion of the Body and Blood of Christ, the Resurrection, present to us once more. He who died will not die again. The whole Christ is risen. This is why the faithful receive the full risen Christ in His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in every particle of the Host or every drop from the Chalice.IntercessionsThe fifth main part of the Eucharistic Prayer is the Intercessions. Intercession means to intervene on behalf of another. From the outset, it should be clear that the Eucharistic Prayer must essentially be intercessory because it makes present the Saving Mysteries of Jesus Christ who suffered, died, and rose to redeem all mankind. St. Paul says to St. Timothy: “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus… (1 Timothy 2:5).” Jesus Christ is our mediator. He is the Pontifex Maximus (the “Greatest Bridge-Maker“). He stands in the gap between mankind and the Father, a gap which was caused by Adam's first sin and perpetuated by each personal sin of every sinner. He is the only Way to the Father. He is the Bridge. And so, in the Eucharistic Prayer, we see this reality take form especially with the Intercessions. The Sacred Liturgy is a priestly action. It is the prayer of our High Priest, Jesus Christ, active in a special way through the instruments of the ordained minister and the baptized faithful as Head and Members. The Sacred Liturgy is the work of God for His glory and for the sanctification (making holy) of His people and the whole world. As the Eucharistic Prayer begins, the priest asks in the confidence of Jesus Christ for what we need, in and through Jesus Christ. The priest asks for the gifts of bread and wine, and the personal intentions and sacrifices of those gathered, to be accepted and blessed by God.  In this way, our own personal sacrifices and intentions are being offered to the Father, in the Son, and through the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is interceding for us to the Father. He intercedes for the whole world, beginning with the Church. We ask that God may give the Church peace, guidance, union, and governance throughout the world. Then we offer intercessory prayer for the Pope and for our local bishop. In the first Eucharisitic Prayer, there are prayers of intercession for “all those who, holding to the truth, hand on the catholic and apostolic faith.” This means, firstly, the whole college of bishops who are the successors of the Apostles. But, it also means all those throughout the entire Church. The Church exists in order to evangelize. She exists in order to bring glory to God and full, abundant life to all men and women. This happens by fidelity to the catholic and apostolic faith which must be handed on without change or lessening.We should not forget the saints, as well!Since it has been established by the Church that we have recourse to the saints, to the glory of God, then we ought to exercise it. We have previously discussed the one perfect Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. On the Cross, Jesus Christ earned superabundant merit. His perfect, eternal Sacrifice was sufficient to redeem all of mankind. But God has given us the ability to unite our own actions with His perfect Action. The merits of those who have come before us, the saints, are united to the Cross of Jesus Christ. Their cooperation with God's grace is what allowed them to accept the invitation to eternal life. No human action is done in isolation. Our actions have consequences, and they affect other people. Therefore, our good actions, our good works, create a ripple effect that positively affects the souls of others. When applied to the Cross of Jesus Christ, these good works share in the superabundant merit of Jesus Christ. This is the essence of what Catholics mean when they say, “offer it up.”It is not only the past merits and prayers of saints that have efficacious power in God's grace. The saints, alive in Heaven, pray for the good of those still below on Earth. The Church investigates alleged miracles, wrought by God's grace through the intercession of a specific person. If the miracle is found to be legitimate, then it confirms that the person is in Heaven. This is part of the official canonization process of the Church. By the merits and prayers of the saints, we are defended from temptation and evil. The genius of the saints is found in their fidelity to and love of God. The example of their lives and the fervor of their preaching is a testament to God's goodness and an acclamation of His glory. Even in the midst of suffering, we can claim the joy of Jesus Christ. Even if we feel utterly alone, we know that we are never alone. As the author of Hebrews writes: “Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God (Heb. 12:1).”The Words of ConsecrationLet us finish today by looking at the gems of the Holy Mass: the words of consecration. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is one prayer of our High Priest Jesus Christ from beginning to end. But even in that one prayer, the Words of Consecration are precious jewels. These holy words, spoken after Jesus has taken ordinary bread in His holy and venerable hands, make His own Body present in a mystical way. Mystical, however, does not mean “less real.” The physical is brought up into the spiritual and transcendent in a way that is hidden to our senses but very much real. We have to remember the power of the speech of God. When God speaks, things come into being. Think back to Genesis: God said “Let there be light” and there was light. So, when the God-man Jesus Christ says, “This is my Body,” He means it. The bread is no more. The characteristics remain, but the substance underneath the appearances has transformed or shifted. This is the miracle of transubstantiation. Ordinary bread and wine become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ.The miracle of the Eucharist is a mystery. Though, we should be careful to take Jesus at His Word and to understand that God who made all things visible and invisible can make this reality present to us. When the priest elevates the Host, after the Words of Consecration, we are adoring our Eucharistic Lord, fully present under the veil of the Sacrament. The Eucharist is the Sacrament of Sacraments. Baptism orients us towards Holy Communion, as does Confirmation. Penance restores us to union with God, to partake worthily of the Blessed Sacrament. Holy Orders and Matrimony are at the service of Communion. Finally, the Anointing of the Sick is healing for soul and body and can be followed by reception of Holy Communion. Each of these outward showings of God's inner-life, His grace, draw from the source of the Eucharist and are oriented to the summit which is the Eucharist. The Holy Body of Jesus Christ was “pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed (Is 53:5).” His Body was given up for you and for me. He went to the Cross for you and for me. But that was not enough for the gratuitous and superabundant love of God. He also established for us the everlasting memorial of His suffering and death by which the Holy Eucharist is made present for us to receive. The Byzantine traditions contain a remarkably beautiful prayer before Holy Communion which is said every single day at Divine Liturgy. This is a prayer of the heart, packed with meaning, gratitude, and seeking healing for soul and body. We will end today with this prayer and then pick up with the words of consecration over the chalice next week!“O Lord, I believe and profess that You are truly Christ, the Son of the living God, Who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first. Accept me as a partaker of Your mystical supper, O Son of God, for I will not reveal Your mystery to Your enemies, nor will I give you a kiss as did Judas, but like the thief I confess to You: Remember me, O Lord, when You shall come into Your kingdom. Remember me, O Master, when You shall come into Your kingdom. Remember me, O Holy One, when You shall come into Your kingdom. May the partaking of Your Holy mysteries, O Lord, be not for my judgment or condemnation, but for the healing of my soul and body.O Lord, I also believe and profess that this, which I am about to receive, is truly Your most precious body and Your life-giving blood, which, I pray, make me worthy to receive for the remission of all my sins and for life everlasting. Amen. O God, be merciful to me a sinner. O God, cleanse me of my sins and have mercy on me. O Lord, forgive me for I have sinned without number.” Get full access to Will Wright Catholic Podcast at www.willwrightcatholic.com/subscribe

Mere Simulacrity, Session 8 Many men and women around the world are becoming familiar with the schemes and strategies of the World Economic Forum to disrupt and dismantle our current systems and ways of life and replace them with the enviro--communo-fascist concepts of Klaus Schwab and the world's Theosophically-minded elites. And while the function of the World Economic Forum's modus operandi is properly described as a two-legged stool: a public-private partnership that is attempting to leverage the corporate and financial giants of the world with the governmental leaders of their own making to usher in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. But a two-legged stool cannot stand on its own. A two-legged stool will ultimately fall. To properly support the weight of complete societal and systemic change, faith must be introduced as the third leg of the completed World Economic Forum stool. And so, faith leaders of the world have been incentivized to participate in helping to create a critical consciousness within the minds of their faithful flocks. Roman Catholic Integralists have led the way to creating the three-part faith-infused process of governance in the 20th and 21st centuries. Dom Helder Camara, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Recife, Brazil introduced the mechanisms of integralism in the early 1970s and as well influenced the Catholic Church's current Pontifex Maximus, Pope Francis. This “Catholic-Fascistic-Totalitarianism” has manifested itself in movements that have taken the Protestant Church by storm over the last year. From Rick Warren to Richard Land to Pope Francis, thousands of faith leaders have capitulated to the seemingly inevitable dialectical spiral into digital totalitarianism and Hermetic/Gnostic dreams of Alice Bailey and the Theosophists. Join Sovereign Nations Founder Michael O'Fallon as he examines the “Third Leg of the Stool.” https://sovereignnations.com Support Sovereign Nations: https://paypal.me/sovnations https://patreon.com/sovnations Follow Sovereign Nations: https://sovereignnations.com/subscribe/ © 2023 Sovereign Nations. All rights reserved. #sovereignnations #michaelofallon #christianity

Das ist die Kurzversion von "heute wichtig", für alle, die es morgens eilig haben: Heute verabschiedet sich die Welt in Rom von einem, der sein Amt revolutioniert hat: Benedikt XVI. war seit dem Mittelalter der erste Papst, der zurücktrat, und die Rolle des Pontifex Maximus damit entzauberte, vermenschlichte. Er war aber auch ein Papst der Rückschritte. Sein Tod ist für den Vatikan-Kenner und Journalisten Andreas Englisch ein Epochenwechsel. In „heute wichtig“ erzählt Englisch, was von Papst Benedikt XVI. bleibt, wo die Kirche jetzt steht, ob echte Reform möglich ist und wie der Missbrauchsskandal nachwirkt in einer Welt, in der sich die Leute mehr denn je vom Glauben entfernen.Außerdem schauen wir nach Washington auf das Desaster der Republikaner bei der Wahl zum Sprecher des Repräsentantenhauses, dem drittmächtigsten Amt in den USA.+++Das Gespräch mit Andreas Englisch beginnt in der Langversion bei Minute 8:52.+++Host: Michel Abdollahi;Redaktion: Mirjam Bittner, Dimitri Blinski, Laura Csapó;Mitarbeit: Jennifer Heinzel, Christopher Wittich; Produktion: Nicolas Femerling, Andolin Sonnen, Wei Quan, Lia Wittfeld, Aleksandra Zebisch.+++Wer noch mehr exzellente, journalistische Inhalte des "stern" hören, lesen und streamen möchte, dem empfehlen wir unser Printheft oder unser Digitalangebot "stern Plus". Jetzt einen Monat gratis testen: www.stern.de/gratis+++Sie wollen Kontakt zu uns aufnehmen? Schreiben Sie uns an heutewichtig@stern.de.Unsere allgemeinen Datenschutzrichtlinien finden Sie unter https://art19.com/privacy. Die Datenschutzrichtlinien für Kalifornien sind unter https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info abrufbar.

Heute verabschiedet sich die Welt in Rom von einem, der sein Amt revolutioniert hat: Benedikt XVI. war seit dem Mittelalter der erste Papst, der zurücktrat, und die Rolle des Pontifex Maximus damit entzauberte, vermenschlichte. Er war aber auch ein Papst der Rückschritte. Sein Tod ist für den Vatikan-Kenner und Journalisten Andreas Englisch ein Epochenwechsel. In „heute wichtig“ erzählt Englisch, was von Papst Benedikt XVI. bleibt, wo die Kirche jetzt steht, ob echte Reform möglich ist und wie der Missbrauchsskandal nachwirkt in einer Welt, in der sich die Leute mehr denn je vom Glauben entfernen.Außerdem schauen wir nach Washington auf das Desaster der Republikaner bei der Wahl zum Sprecher des Repräsentantenhauses, dem drittmächtigsten Amt in den USA.+++Das Gespräch mit Andreas Englisch beginnt bei Minute 8:52.+++Host: Michel Abdollahi;Redaktion: Mirjam Bittner, Dimitri Blinski, Laura Csapó;Mitarbeit: Jennifer Heinzel, Christopher Wittich;Produktion: Nicolas Femerling, Andolin Sonnen, Wei Quan, Lia Wittfeld, Aleksandra Zebisch.+++Wer noch mehr exzellente, journalistische Inhalte des "stern" hören, lesen und streamen möchte, dem empfehlen wir unser Printheft oder unser Digitalangebot "stern Plus". Jetzt einen Monat gratis testen: www.stern.de/gratis+++Sie wollen Kontakt zu uns aufnehmen? Schreiben Sie uns an heutewichtig@stern.de.Unsere allgemeinen Datenschutzrichtlinien finden Sie unter https://art19.com/privacy. Die Datenschutzrichtlinien für Kalifornien sind unter https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info abrufbar.

December 11: Saint Damasus I, Pope c. 305–384 Optional Memorial; Liturgical Color: White Patron Saint of Archaeologists A dynamic pope mentors Jerome and embellishes catacombs Damasus reigned in the era when the popes died in their beds. The long winter of Roman oppression had ended. The arenas were empty. Christians were still occasionally martyred, but not in Rome. The many popes of the 200s who were exiled, murdered, or imprisoned were consigned to history by the late 300s. The Church was not merely legal by Damasus' time but was established, by decree, in 380 as the official religion of the Roman Empire. The slow-motion crumbling of paganism was such that Christian Senators and Pope Damasus petitioned the emperor that a prominent and famed Altar of Victory in the Senate be removed. The request was granted. No more Vestal Virgins, pagan priests reading entrails, a Pontifex Maximus, or auguries either. The Church was in the ascendancy. As Rome's military prowess deteriorated and the Eastern Empire was theologically mangled by the Arian controversy, the Bishop of Rome's importance swelled. Pope Damasus rode the first wave of these historical and religious trends. He was perhaps the first pope to rule with swagger. Damasus was of Spanish origins, and his father was likely a married priest serving in Rome's church of the martyr Saint Lawrence. Damasus was probably a deacon in that same church. He was elected Bishop of Rome in 366 but not without some controversy. A rival was aggressively supported by a violent minority who defamed Damasus, though they never removed him. Damasus cared for theology and held two synods in Rome, one of which excommunicated the Arian Bishop of Milan, making way for Saint Ambrose to later hold that see. Pope Damasus also sent legates to the First Council of Constantinople in 381, which reiterated and sharpened the language of the Creed developed at Nicea in 325. Perhaps Damasus' greatest legacy is not directly his own. He employed a talented young priest-scholar named Jerome as his personal secretary. It was Damasus who instructed Jerome to undertake his colossal, lifelong task of compiling from the original Greek and Hebrew texts a new Latin version of the Old and New Testaments to replace the poorly translated Old Latin Bibles then in use. The Vulgate, as Jerome's work is known, has been the official Bible of the Catholic Church since its completion. Description automatically generatedRome's theological ascendancy made its bishop the Empire's primary source and focus of unity. This, in turn, led to accusations, first aired in Damasus' time, that Rome's prelates lived in excessive grandeur. One pagan senator said mockingly that if he could live like a bishop he would gladly become a Christian. Similar charges would hound Rome throughout history. But Damasus strictly enforced a decree prohibiting clergy from accepting gifts from widows and orphans, and he himself lived a holy life. He restored his father's house church, now called Saint Lawrence in Damasus. The church still reflects its origins and is found inside of a larger building, just where a house church would have been located in ancient times. Pope Damasus also left a beautiful legacy in Rome's catacombs, a legacy which has only been fully appreciated due to modern archeological excavations. Damasus was very devoted to Rome's martyrs and embellished many of their tombs with brief Latin inscriptions. The papal crypt in the Catacombs of Saint Callixtus still houses the original marble slab engraved with Damasus' moving eulogy to the popes and martyrs entombed nearby. The epitaph ends with Damasus stating that although he wished to be buried in that crypt, he did not want to offend such holy remains with his presence. But Damasus composed his most tender epitaph for his own tomb: “He who walking on the sea could calm its bitter waves; He who gives life to dying seeds of the earth; He who was able to loose the mortal chains of death, and after three days' darkness could bring forth the brother for his sister Martha; He, I believe, will make Damasus rise anew from his ashes.” Damasus was clearly a Christian first and a pope second. Saint Damasus, you led the Church with a mixture of theological acumen, administrative competence, holy witness, and artistic flourish. Intercede in heaven for all who exercise headship in the Church to lead Her with attributes similar to your own.

Our pope this week reigned at a time when the historical record wasn't much, and we don't know a whole lot about his life as a result. And yet his contributions to the history of the papacy have still resounded for over 1600 years. Read Pope St. Siricius' full letter: https://thepopecast.fm/blog/siricius-decretal PATREON: https://patreon.com/thepopecast NEWSLETTER: https://popes.substack.com FB / Twitter / Instagram: @thepopecast EMAIL: matt@thepopecast.fm

Julius Caesar is pretty famous for dying. But why was he famous to begin with? Marie discusses Caesar vs Pirates, Caesar the Pontifex Maximus, Caesar in Britain, and Caesar vs. Vercingetorix at the Battle of Alesia. Shoot us an email at archwayspodcast@gmail.com

Politicians, corporate CEOs and religious leaders alike have all been proclaiming a phrase that has become both a mantra for a progressive move into the 4th Industrial Revolution and as well a framework of policy throughout previously sovereign nations throughout the world. The phrase is “Build Back Better.” A few of those incorporating this phrase are listed below: Justin Trudeau, PM Canada (https://twitter.com/justintrudeau/status/1426973485423857664) “We've had your back, and now it's time to hear your voice. You need to choose how we finish the fight against COVID-19 and build back better. That's what #elxn44 is about.” Boris Johnson, PM United Kingdom (https://www.voanews.com/a/europe_g-7-summit-kicks-build-back-better-message/6206906.html) “Building back better, building back greener, building back fairer, and building back more equal and in a more gender-neutral and perhaps more feminine way.” Pope Francis, Pontifex Maximus, Vatican (https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/messages/pont-messages/2020/documents/papa-francesco_20201203_messaggio-disabilita.html) “May our common desire to “Build Back Better” give rise to new forms of cooperation between both civil and ecclesial groups and thus build a solid “house” ready to withstand every storm and capable of welcoming people with disabilities, because built on the rock of inclusion and active participation.” Klaus Schwab, Founder, World Economic Forum (https://youtu.be/YkcaeaD45MY) “It's a big effort to, some would say, to Build Back Better. We would say to have a Great Reset.” Joe Biden, President, United States of America (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/19/statement-by-president-joe-biden-on-passage-of-the-build-back-better-act-in-the-u-s-house-of-representatives/) “Building back better means an updated social contract that treats American workers and working families as essential at all times, not just times of crisis.” So what exactly is the “Build Back Better” strategy that all of these world leaders are talking about? And secondly, what environment was necessary before “Build Back Better” could be implemented world-wide? Michael O'Fallon explores this topic on today's edition of Public Occurrences Both Foreign and Domestic. http://sovereignnations.com Support Sovereign Nations: paypal.me/sovnations patreon.com/sovnations Follow Sovereign Nations: sovereignnations.com/subscribe facebook.com/SovereignNations twitter.com/SovNations youtube.com/SovereignNations rumble.com/c/sovnations instagram.com/sovnations/ minds.com/sovnations?referrer=sovnations parler.com/profile/sovnations Podcast: @sovereignnations podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-…1383339158?mt=2 podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cDovL2…L3NvdW5kcy5yc3M open.spotify.com/show/3mNCQcQAdawzIYAAuHfy8r www.stitcher.com/podcast/sovereig…causes-of-things © 2022 Sovereign Nations. All rights reserved.

Dzisiaj będziemy mówić o kalendarzach. O tym jakich kalendarzy używano w przeszłości i o tym kalendarzu, który jest używany do dzisiaj. Najpierw jednak zacznijmy od tego jakie są dwa rodzaje kalendarzy?Kalendarze dzielimy na słoneczne i księżycowe. Kalendarze słoneczne to np. kalendarz Majów czy Azteków, ale także kalendarz juliański oraz gregoriański. Kalendarze księżycowe to jedne z najstarszych kalendarzy. Należy do nich np. kalendarz babiloński oraz żydowski.My dzisiaj skupimy się na jednym kalendarzu księżycowym. Chodzi o kalendarz żydowski, który jest używany w Biblii dlatego niektórzy nazywają go kalendarzem biblijnym. Będziemy też mówić o dwóch kalendarzach słonecznych. Chodzi o kalendarze juliański i gregoriański.Jak pewnie wiecie w kalendarzu, który dzisiaj używamy jest 12 miesięcy. A ile w dzisiejszym kalendarzu jest dni w roku? W dzisiejszych kalendarzach rok ma 365 dni, ale co 4 lata jest rok przestępny i mamy 366 dni.Dlaczego nasz kalendarz ma 12 miesięcy i 365 dni? To długa historia i trzeba ją zacząć od kalendarza księżycowego. Kiedyś słowo “miesiąc” miało inne znaczenie niż dzisiaj. Czy wiecie co w języku staropolskim oznaczało słowo “miesiąc”? Np. w pewnej piosence są takie słowa: “Świeci miesiąc na niebie”. W dawnych czasach ludzie mierzyli czas patrząc na księżyc. Każdej nocy księżyc jest inny. Najpierw jest nów. Tak się nazywa noc, w której nie widać księżyca. Później każdej nocy księżyc robi się coraz większy aż widać go całego. Na cały księżyc mówi się, że jest on w pełni. Ta noc to pełnia księżyca. Później jednak księżyc zaczyna maleć i ponownie znika. Jeden taki cykl to miesiąc księżycowy. Kiedyś ludzie nie mówili wyjadę na miesiąc tylko mówili wyjadę na jeden księżyc. Ile trwa taki miesiąc księżycowy?Miesiąc księżycowy czyli czas od jednego nowiu do drugiego to 29,5 dnia. Co się robi z tą połówką? Najczęściej liczy się to tak, że pierwszy miesiąc ma 29 dni, a drugi 30, potem znowu 29 i znowu 30 i tak dalej. Tak więc miesiąc księżycowy to dokładnie 29,5 dnia, ale można też powiedzieć, że taki miesiąc ma albo 29 albo 30 dni. Ile więc trwa rok księżycowy?Dzisiaj będzie trochę matematyki. W roku jest 12 miesięcy. Tak więc jeżeli pomnożycie (np. na kalkulatorze) 29,5 * 12 = 354. Jak jednak mówiliśmy rok ma naprawdę 365 dni. Ile to jest 365 (czyli nasz rok) odjąć 354 (czyli rok księżycowy)? 365 - 354 = 11 dni. Tak więc kalendarz księżycowy przesuwał się co roku o te 11 dni. Po trzech latach z tych 11 dni robiło się 33 dni czyli cały dodatkowy miesiąc. Ci, którzy używali kalendarza księżycowego dodawali więc tak mniej więcej co trzy lata dodatkowy 13 miesiąc. Tak więc normalny rok księżycowy miał 12 miesięcy, ale co 3 lub 4 lata dodawano 13 miesiąc. Tak się działo w kalendarzu żydowskim czyli kalendarzu biblijnym.Niestety kalendarz księżycowy był przez to dość nieregularny. W dawnych czasach większość ludzi pracowała na roli. Np. Żydzi siali i zbierali różne rośliny w zależności od tego jaki był miesiąc. W pierwszym miesiącu zbierali jęczmień, w drugim pszenicę itd. W tym pierwszym miesiącu Żydzi mieli święto, które nazwali pascha. Podczas tego święta kapłan przynosił do świątyni snop jęczmienia aby ofiarować go Bogu. Tak więc ten kalendarz żydowski regulowano tak, aby w pierwszym miesiącu wyrosło już zboże, aby wyrósł jęczmień. Gdy jęczmień jeszcze nie zdążył wyrosnąć dodawano ten 13 miesiąc. Dzięki temu w pierwszym miesiącu był snop jęczmienia. Do czego nam jest potrzebny tamten kalendarz?Właśnie podczas tego święta uśmiercono Jezusa. Dlatego święta Wielkanocy są obchodzone nieregularnie. Boże Narodzenie wypada zawsze 25 grudnia, ale Wielkanoc wypada czasami w marcu, czasami w kwietniu. Wypada tak nieregularnie, bo Wielkanoc jest ustalana według biblijnego kalendarza księżycowego. Tak więc chociaż my dzisiaj używamy kalendarza słonecznego to dalej ludzie potrzebują tamtego starego kalendarza księżycowego aby ustalić kiedy jest Wielkanoc.Tak więc żydowski kalendarz zaczynał się najczęściej w marcu. Nie tylko Żydzi używali kalendarza księżycowego. Także Grecy i Rzymianie używali najpierw kalendarza księżycowego. Oni też zaczynali swój rok od marca. Ich pierwszy miesiąc czyli marzec wziął nazwę od boga Marsa, a trzeci miesiąc czyli maj wziął nazwę od bogini Maji. Dlaczego jednak dzisiaj marzec jest trzecim miesiącem, a maj piątym? Co więcej włoskie nazwy czterech miesięcy też są przesunięte.Po włosku na wrzesień się mówi Settembre co pochodzi od słowa sette czyli siedem. Dzisiaj jednak wrzesień jest dziewiątym miesiącem, a nie siódmy. Ten sam problem mamy z październikiem (po włosku Ottobre), listopadem (po włosku Novembre) i grudniem (po włosku Dicembre). Czemu grudzień nazywa się po włosku dziesiątym miesiącem chociaż dla nas jest ostatnim, dwunastym miesiącem?Kiedyś 11 miesiącem był styczeń, a 12 był luty. Dzisiaj styczeń to pierwszy miesiąc, a luty to drugi miesiąc. Czemu doszło do tej zmiany? W roku 154 p.n.e. w Hiszpanii, która należała do cesarstwa rzymskiego wybuchła rebelia. Rzymianie potrzebowali nowego wojska, a takie wojsko formowano dopiero na początku roku. Rzymianie więc skrócili tamten rok - 154 p.n.e. Zakończyli ten rok w 10 miesiącu czyli w grudniu. Od tego roku grudzień był stał się ostatnim miesiącem, a styczeń stał się pierwszym miesiącem. Wcześniej grudzień był miesiącem 10, a styczeń był miesiącem 11. W tamtym jednak roku Rzymianie wybrali dwóch konsulów 1 stycznia, a dla Rzymian rok zaczynał się od wyboru dwóch konsulów. Zawsze było dwóch konsulów i sprawowali oni władzę przez jeden rok.Tamten rzymski kalendarz był już trochę podobny do naszego. Od 154 roku Rzymianie rozpoczynali rok tak jak my 1 stycznia. Używali też kalendarza słonecznego. Była jednak jedna znacząca różnica - rzymski rok miał tylko 365 dni. A ile dni ma rok w naszym dzisiejszym kalendarzu? Nasz kalendarz też ma 365 dni, ale co cztery lata dodajemy jeden dzień i wtedy mamy 366 dni. Rzymianie nie wiedzieli, że trzeba dodawać ten 1 dzień co cztery lata i kalendarz się przesunął.Wtedy naczelnym kapłanem w Rzymie został jeden z najbardziej znanych Rzymian. Jak się nazywał? Gdy Juliusz Cezar został naczelnym kapłanem, po łacinie miał tytuł Pontifex Maximus postanowił to naprawić. Juliusz Cezar wprowadził coś co my stosujemy do dzisiaj. Kazał co cztery lata dodawać jeden dzień. Co jednak zrobić z tym kalendarzem, który się przesunął. W czasach Cezara grudzień zamiast wypadać w zimę wypadał na jesieni. Juliusz Cezar kazał wprowadzić te zmiany w roku 46 p.n.e. i aby wyrównać kalendarz kazał dodać prawie trzy dodatkowe miesiące. Tak więc rok 46 p.n.e. był chyba najdłuższym rokiem w historii.Jak się nazywał ten kalendarz, który wprowadził Juliusz Cezar? W starożytnym Rzymie imię Julia i Juliusz było zarezerwowane dla rodziny Cezara. Np. Juliusz Cezar miał córkę Julię. Nic więc dziwnego, że kalendarz przygotowany w czasach Juliusza Cezara i jego córki Julii nazwano kalendarzem juliańskim.Okazało się jednak, że kalendarz juliański dalej ma maleńki błąd. Poprzedni rzymski kalendarz spóźniał się 1 dzień co 4 lata. Cezar kazał dodawać ten jeden dzień co 4 lata oraz nakazał dodać w roku 46 p.n.e. 80 dni, prawie trzy miesiące aby naprawić kalendarz. Jednak ten juliański kalendarz też miał błąd. Ten poprzedni kalendarz jak mówiłem spóźniał się 1 dzień co 4 lata, a kalendarz juliański spieszył się 1 dzień na 128 lat. Jak widzicie błąd był dużo mniejszy jednak do roku 1582 przesunął się o 10 dni. Co zrobiono?Papieżem w 1582 roku był Grzegorz XIII. Nakazał on przygotować nowy kalendarz. Pracowało przy nim wielu astronomów, między innymi Mikołaj Kopernik. Nakazano więc cofnąć kalendarz o 10 dni i tak rok 1582 zamiast mieć jak zwykle 365 dni miał tylko 355 dni. Kiedy wprowadzono tą zmianę? Te 10 dni usunięto z października tego 1582 roku. Jakie więc dni były w tamtym październiku? 1, 2, 3, 4, 15, 16 itd. aż do 31. Nie było 5 października, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, czyli papież kazał usunąć 10 dni od 5 do 14 października 1582 roku. Możecie kogoś zapytać co się wydarzyło 5 października 1582 roku? Wtedy nic się nie wydarzyło, bo nie było tego dnia.Był jednak pewien problem. Z jakiej religii jest papież? Papież jest najwyższym kapłanem religii katolickiej. Ma ten sam tytuł co Juliusz Cezar - pontifex maximus. W 1582 roku papieżem był Grzegorz XIII. Był on oczywiście katolikiem, ale w tamtych czasach wiele państw w Europie odeszło do katolicyzmu. Tak więc ten kalendarz gregoriański wprowadzono 15 października 1582 roku w Hiszpanii, Portugalii, Francji, w Polsce oraz we Włoszech. Inne kraje miały już wtedy religię protestancką i nie chciały wprowadzić katolickiego kalendarza, chociaż był on przecież dużo lepszy. Dzisiaj prawie wszyscy na świecie używają kalendarza gregoriańskiego, ale zmiana trwała długo. Np. protestancka Anglia wprowadziła ten kalendarz dopiero w 1752 roku czyli 170 lat później niż kraje katolickie. Rosja wprowadziła ten kalendarz dopiero po I wojnie światowej czyli w 1918 roku, a więc 336 lat później. Grecja dopiero w 1923.Czy wszyscy przeszli na ten kalendarz gregoriański? Może znacie kogoś kto należy do religii prawosławnej? Kiedy oni mają Boże Narodzenie? My nagrywaliśmy ten odcinek 6 stycznia 2022 roku. Właśnie 6 stycznia w religii prawosławnej była Wigilia, a 7 stycznia było Boże Narodzenie. Dlaczego? Religia prawosławna jest głównie w Rosji. Wprawdzie Rosja używa kalendarza gregoriańskiego jednak w kościele prawosławnym używa się dalej kalendarza juliańskiego. Pamiętacie, że papież Grzegorz XIII musiał usunąć 10 dni aby przesunąć kalendarz. Do dzisiaj kalendarz juliański przesunął się jeszcze bardziej i różnica wynosi 13 dni. Tak więc większość ludzi ma Boże Narodzenie 25 grudnia, a prawosławni mają 13 dni później. Tak naprawdę oni też mają 25 grudnia, ale według tego starego kalendarza juliańskiego.My dzisiaj używamy gregoriańskiego kalendarza słonecznego. Jednak wcześniej ludzie używali głównie kalendarzy księżycowych.

Continuing our study in the book of Revelation, we come to this glorious anthem sung to the Father and the Son- The Lord Jesus is the Lamb of God who was slaughtered to redeem us from the guilt and consequences of all our sins -Revelation 5-9-10-.--In words reflecting Peter's -1 Peter 2-9- and echoing God's prophetic ideal for Israel at Mount Sinai -Exodus 19-6-, we are told that we are a kingdom of priests. We are priests--all of us--and we reign on the earth through our prayers -Revelation 5-8-.--The priesthood of every believer is a key New Testament teaching- Every believer has the right and responsibility to read and interpret Scripture and to intercede for others. --We are all pontiffs--bridge-builders between God and other people -to use the ancient title of the priests of pagan Rome-. When the first Roman emperor, Caesar August began to reign, he took the title Pontifex Maximus, the supreme bridge-builder between the Roman gods and the people of Rome. When the last Roman Emperor in the West, Romulus Augustus, was deposed in A.D. 476, the bishop of Rome took over his title as Pontifex Maximus, and became the de facto Roman Emperor of the West.--Satan is the great enemy of the Bible and the gospel and used the Roman Pontiff to obscure these things. Replacing the merits of Christ alone with a treasury of merit that he had the keys to distribute, keeping professing Christians in fear of damnation.--When Martin Luther studied the book of Romans, all he could see in the righteousness of God was a fearful thing, but when God opened his eyes to this righteousness of God as something to be received by faith alone, his chains fell off -Romans 3-21-26-.

Continuing our study in the book of Revelation, we come to this glorious anthem sung to the Father and the Son- The Lord Jesus is the Lamb of God who was slaughtered to redeem us from the guilt and consequences of all our sins -Revelation 5-9-10-.--In words reflecting Peter's -1 Peter 2-9- and echoing God's prophetic ideal for Israel at Mount Sinai -Exodus 19-6-, we are told that we are a kingdom of priests. We are priests--all of us--and we reign on the earth through our prayers -Revelation 5-8-.--The priesthood of every believer is a key New Testament teaching- Every believer has the right and responsibility to read and interpret Scripture and to intercede for others. --We are all pontiffs--bridge-builders between God and other people -to use the ancient title of the priests of pagan Rome-. When the first Roman emperor, Caesar August began to reign, he took the title Pontifex Maximus, the supreme bridge-builder between the Roman gods and the people of Rome. When the last Roman Emperor in the West, Romulus Augustus, was deposed in A.D. 476, the bishop of Rome took over his title as Pontifex Maximus, and became the de facto Roman Emperor of the West.--Satan is the great enemy of the Bible and the gospel and used the Roman Pontiff to obscure these things. Replacing the merits of Christ alone with a treasury of merit that he had the keys to distribute, keeping professing Christians in fear of damnation.--When Martin Luther studied the book of Romans, all he could see in the righteousness of God was a fearful thing, but when God opened his eyes to this righteousness of God as something to be received by faith alone, his chains fell off -Romans 3-21-26-.

Luke 11:1-2 Matthew 6:9-13 Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done On earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, As we forgive our debtors. And do not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.Matthew 6:7 And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words.The Lord’s Prayer is too good to pray in vain, and it’s too good to think you’re too good for.  Matthew 6:9 Our Father in heaven,The emperor Caesar, Galerius, Valerius, Maximanus, Invictus, Augustus, Pontifex Maximus, Germanincus Maximus, Egypticus Maximus, Phoebicus Maximus, Sarmenticus Maximus (5x), Persecus Maximus (twice), Carpicus Maximus (6 times), Armenicus Maximus, Medicus Maximus, Abendicus Maximus, Holder of tribunal authority for the 20th time, emperor for the 19th, council of the 8th, Pro-Counsul, Ecclesiastes 5:1-2 Guard your steps and focus on what you are doing as you go to the house of God and draw near to listen… Do not be hasty with your mouth [speaking careless words or vows] or impulsive in thought to bring up a matter before God. For God is in heaven and you are on earth; therefore let your words be few. Jesus Modeled: Let your words be few and powerful. Jesus Modeled: The language of our heart is more important than the language of our tribe.Jesus Modeled: Praying ‘Our Father’ unites us as the family of God. Jesus Modeled: Abba is approachable and desires intimacy with his children, and at the same time, He is the majesty of heaven. Matthew 6:9 …Hallowed be Your name.May it be made holy, your name.Ezekiel 36:21-23 Jesus Modeled: A desire for God to demonstrate his Holiness.Matthew 6:10 Your kingdom come, Your will be done On earth as it is in heaven.The Kingdom of God is the rule and reign of God advancing here on earth, bringing healing and wholeness by chasing out the chaos.  The Kingdom of Heaven is already with even more to come.Jesus Modeled: We have a part to play in bringing God’s Kingdom to the earth. CARD SLIDEJesus Modeled: Our free will won’t always line up with God’s will, so we must ask God for His will to be done on earth as it is in heaven. Matthew 6:11 Give us this day our daily bread. Jesus Modeled: Asking God to remove a spirit of lack as we trust Him to be a perfect provider. Matthew 6:12 And forgive us our debts, As we forgive our debtors.“The world despises this theology because it thinks anger is necessary to fuel the struggle for justice, and that forgiveness will dissipate that anger. The Christian disagrees and replies, “No. I will forgive and I will struggle for justice. I may still be angry, but my struggle for justice will be purified by forgiveness and thereby become more effective.” - Kenneth Bailey Micah 6:8 The Lord God has told us what is right and what he demands: “See that justice is done, let mercy be your first concern, and humbly obey your God.”Forgiveness purifies our pursuit of justice.Jesus Modeled: Receiving and extending forgiveness daily. Matthew 6:13 And do not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one.Jesus Modeled: Dependance on GodMatthew 6:9-13 Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done On earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, As we forgive our debtors. And do not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.

MOI-42a 990829PM   There are over one billion people in this world that claim allegiance to the Vicar of Christ, to the Pontifex Maximus, to the Prince of the Apostles, to the Bishop of Rome, to a man from a little town that’s beautiful in southern Poland named John Paul II. I think it’s relevant [...] The post THE FINAL CHURCH, REVELATION 17 & SEVEN REASONS I AM NOT A ROMAN CATHOLIC appeared first on Discover the Book Ministries.

This Podcast describes the thoughts between two spiritual beings: Dave Henderson and Tom Clark as we explore with our audience some recent discoveries we made about the realms of Heaven from the perspective of our spirits. From a foundational perspective, we realize we are all tripartite beings composed of Spirit, Soul and Body. However, we tend to live our lives two dimensionally: soul and body and leave our spirit man in the last position. When did this happen? Was it in the Garden of Eden when Adam and Eve ate of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil? Did the glory God gave Adam and Eve leave them at that time? Was this sin the reason they covered their bodies with fig leaves (not just their private parts as we have been told!)? Was this the armor or covering they realized they needed when they looked at their bodies and realized the glory had left them? No longer walking with God the Father in the garden; talking Spirit to spirit; they were now living out of their souls and we are living that way ever since! We roll the clock forward to 300 AD, in the time of Constantine and discuss the influence of Mithraism (the cult of the god Mithras, the worship of a sun god popular among the Romans in the first three centuries). What most people do not know is Constantine was the High Priest of Mithras and called himself Pontifex Maximus (High Priest), incorporating into Christianity (the early days of Catholicism) many pagan practices. For example, did you know that December 25th was the god Mithras's birthday? Constantine swapped it to become the birthday of Jesus! All the accoutrements of the Pope were the same for Pontifex Maximus, the High Priest of Mithras! All these developments were focused on the soul of man; not our spirit and we continue to walk away from our spirit man today. We roll forward to today. We live in a culture focused on the soul: mind, will and emotions (feelings). The media bombards us with thoughts of being “Wok” “politically correct” and “cancel culture”: all thoughts that bring worry, anxiety and fear thoughts into our lives. What are we to do? Come listen to what Dave and Tom propose as the ways to overcome these worry, anxiety and fear thoughts by learning to walk in our spirits and engage with the Supernatural. “Living Spirit First” is a book by Dr. Ron Horner and the thoughts and concepts contained therein are a pathway to access the realms of heaven and obtain the resources of heaven in our day and age. If you are interested in learning about this paradigm shift in your life come listen to our podcast. Papa Tom's Tales and The Father's Heart Podcasts have decided to engage the services of Patreon to assist us in raising support. If you are encouraged by the media we are producing and would be interested in donating to support our future production of media, go to www.patreon.com/thefathersheart to offer support. In the same way, we would be ecstatic (meaning: involving an experience of mystic self-transcendence, or, feeling overwhelming happiness or joy) if you would be so kind as to pass on our new www.patreon.com/thefathersheartwebsite.

 Numa Pompilius, a man whom never wanted to be King, a man with a deep faith in the Gods topped off with a philosophy abhorrently against an aggression and anger driven society forever at war depriving Rome's citizens of more Godly and more peaceful societal improvements. If it's said, Romulus gifted the Romans with a grand military tradition and supporting institutions which would last for a millennia, then Numa as a counter to military traditions, gifted the Romans grand religious traditions and supporting religious institutions, which would last for a millennia or more also. Hope you enjoy! Head over to our blog and leave some comments, lets get the conversation started.Chris & RyanSupport the show (https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=RLVZ3VNNPSRAL)

Twenty-Third Sunday after Trinity   +In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost   In today's Gospel lesson we learn of a trap set by the Pharisees and Herodians in an attempt to ensnare Jesus. That the teachings of Jesus so threatened these two groups of rivals that they decided to band together is really quite remarkable.          Both groups sought political independence for Israel. The Pharisees sought the restoration of the Kingdom of David while the Herodians wanted one, anyone of the many, many descendants of Herod the Great to rule, rather than a Roman Governor.          What they didn't want was yet-another so-called Messiah to fail. They'd already seen that.  Round about the year 6AD, there had been an uprising, led by a certain Judas of Galilee, who had led a revolt against the Roman census and the levying of taxes, which was the purpose of the census.          Think about it. Your country is invaded, and then the conquerors charge you for the privilege of being ruled by them. They controlled your trade, your comings and goings, they even controlled who would be named High Priest at the Temple! And while you could maintain your own coinage, you had to pay the tax with Roman coins.          Obviously, no self-respecting Messiah would claim that it was proper to pay tribute to Israel's occupiers. Yet, Judas's revolt had ended in death for himself and his followers. The memory of those revolutionaries nailed to crosses dotting the countryside was still very much in the people's minds.          There was no good answer for Jesus. It was a perfect trap. Either he admits that he was no Messiah, that he was not there to usher in the Kingdom of God, or to commit himself to a revolutionary cause that was doomed to fail. For those were the only options… if one is bound to the world's categories, concepts of power, and theories about the Messiah.          But when Jesus asks His questioner for a coin, He upended their plans. The man dug into his pocket and produced a Roman coin. The man could have carried around a Jewish coin. After all, he would need them if he wanted to purchase an animal for sacrifice in the Temple. But the Roman coins were so much more convenient in everyday life. It was worth the cost of paying the fee to the money changers in the Temple for a sacrificial animal. Outside of those rare occasions, you could use it everywhere with everyone. Trade outside one's own immediate environs was impossible without Roman coins. It was kind of like using the Greek language. It made things simpler. And using the Greek tongue didn't make you Greek, just as using Roman coins didn't make you Roman, right? But of course, that was precisely the problem with the other great religious sect, the Sadducees. They had adopted Greek customs and modes of thought.          Jesus showed that despite their rhetoric and desire for self-rule, they were hopelessly compromised. Jewish law forbade coins with the image of man on them, but the coin the man produced bore the image of Caesar. A man over a thousand of miles away who held absolute power over you and your people. A coin inscribed with Roman words that declared that Caeser was Pontifex Maximus, High Priest, and Divi filius, son of a God. The Pharisees might follow the law with their bodies and minds, but their hearts belonged to Rome. So too the Herodians, who may speak of self-rule, but whoever they may seat on the throne would still be beholden to Rome for his crown. They may bristle at the tax, but Judea was already in the pocket of Rome.          But our lesson is not simply an interesting anecdote about a specific time and event where we see how clever Jesus was. Like everything in Scripture, it's there to teach us important truths, and this one has nothing to do with Tax Policy.          Jesus says to Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's. That coin bore the image and likeness of Caesar. The question is: what bears the image and likeness of God?          In Genesis we read, Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness.” We bear His image. We are the things which we ought to render unto God. As we say every Sunday, we offer ‘our selves, our souls and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and living sacrifice', but how much of our selves do we actually offer back to God? How much of ourselves do we hold back? We must render unto God the things that are God's. Everything that we are, including our shame, fears, and anxieties are to be offered up to God, as well. Because only by offering our imperfections can we be transformed. For everything in the world stands condemned to inevitable death and destruction. Governments will fall, all our monuments will crumble, and even our sun will eventually grow cold and die. The only life, true life, is in Christ. That is what is meant by living sacrifice because only in Christ are we truly alive.          Jesus offered up himself in sacrifice on the cross before a world whose only power is death and by that, transformed death itself, so that we could partake in new life.          Just as we offer up the bread and wine in the Eucharist to be transformed, so too does our sacrifice transform us.          In a few short weeks we enter into Advent. For us, it is a new year in which we start by celebrating the transformation of the world by Jesus's entering into it. So too, we celebrate His entry into our lives. As we prepare to celebrate, we take this opportunity to join together and help one another as we reorient our lives, letting go the things of this world that bind us to it. We fast to loosen the grip of our own vanity which compromises our relationship with God. We sacrifice the small conveniences. We say no to the things of this world so we can say yes to Christ.          However, and this is very important. In a very real sense, just as when we offer ourselves up in sacrifice, what we ‘give up' in fasting is not a deprivation. Just as a prisoner isn't ‘giving up' a roof over their head and 3 square meals a day when they're sprung from the pen. Instead, we are released from the prison that we construct for ourselves. The things which play to our vanity, offering temporary pleasure, binding us to the world and its illusions of power and freedom which are really just the slavery of sin gussied up in new paint.          Shedding ourselves of anything that does not partake of the love and hope that find their source in Christ is both the means by which we deepen our relationship with God as well as the result of that relationship.          The things which we give up in Advent are not bad in and of themselves. Imagine if you will, that we are floating in a storm swept sea. The sinful stuff drags us under the surface, but the other stuff we hold onto and keeps us above the waves. These things we hold onto in order to manage our fear, anxieties,  pains, and failures. But there is land off in the distance and if we ever hope to reach it, we must let go of the flotsam & jetsam and kick off and start to make a swim for it.          We sacrifice what we are able, and God accepts our sacrifice for what it is, strengthening and fortifying us so that we may, in time, offer up more and more of ourselves until, ultimately, we may reach the point that we acquire the Faith in Christ which will enable us to trust Him so completely that we can give ourselves wholly over to Him because He is our only desire.          It is said that after writing the section on the Eucharist in the Summa Theologiae, Saint Thomas Aquinas heard a voice from the crucifix in his room. From the cross, Jesus said to him, “Thou hast written well of me, Thomas; what reward wilt thou have?” Aquinas responded, “Only you, Lord. Only you.”          To get to that point requires that we begin where we are. We cannot reach God, but He will always meet us where we are, but we do have to reach. We must render ourselves so that He may pick us up.           As Paul tells us in today's Epistle, our citizenship is in Heaven. It is not a citizenship that kicks in after our death, but a reality that exists now. Right now. We have only to let go of the debris and make our way to shore where we can stand, upright, as we are meant to be. We only have to let go and give ourselves wholly over to God and enter into new life. And this we do not fully and all at once, but gradually, moment by moment, day by day, year by year. Each step we take, giving more and more of ourselves over to God, living more fully in Christ, more deeply in love with one another, knowing that no one is more delighted with or celebrates more for even our smallest bit of progress than God Himself.   +In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost  

Reading the conclusion of Kingdom of God Volume 1 page 183 and continuing on with the preface and first chapter of Volume 2 of Kingdom of God. The King of Kings, Chapter 1 of Kingdom of God Volume 2   pages 7-11   . . . in his times he shall show who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords. (1 Tim. 6:15) The title of “king” had its origin near the beginning of our mortal earth. Those holding such a title usually claimed it was a divine calling, with the right to govern in both civil and religious matters. Most pharaohs possessed a long title or throne name which included some mention of deity. Epithets of many sovereigns of Mesopotamia also carried names of deities. Even in Imperial Rome the grandest title of the Caesars was Pontifex Maximus. Victory over their enemies was always attributed to the divine favor of their god. All of these civilizations were acquainted with offerings and sacrifices to their deity. In ancient Israel we can also see how those holding this kingly office were recognized and appointed through divine approval. For example, the Prophet Samuel made the selection and anointed Saul as the first king in Israel. (See I Sam. 1:14 and 12:1.)

Welcome back! Der Kleine Jung ist aus dem Winterschlaf erwacht und hat direkt einen Gast mitgebracht. Wie einst Julius Caesar eroberte Benny Sahel die Futsal-Bühne. Wir sprachen mit dem Pontifex Maximus aka Teammanager der Futsal-Nationalmannschaft über seinen Werdegang, die Nationalmannschaft und die drohende Futsal-Bundesliga.

Welcome back! Der Kleine Jung ist aus dem Winterschlaf erwacht und hat direkt einen Gast mitgebracht. Wie einst Julius Caesar eroberte Benny Sahel die Futsal-Bühne. Wir sprachen mit dem Pontifex Maximus aka Teammanager der Futsal-Nationalmannschaft über seinen Werdegang, die Nationalmannschaft und die drohende Futsal-Bundesliga....

Welcome back! Der Kleine Jung ist aus dem Winterschlaf erwacht und hat direkt einen Gast mitgebracht. Wie einst Julius Caesar eroberte Benny Sahel die Futsal-Bühne. Wir sprachen mit dem Pontifex Maximus aka Teammanager der Futsal-Nationalmannschaft über seinen Werdegang, die Nationalmannschaft und die drohende Futsal-Bundesliga. Du möchtest deinen Podcast auch kostenlos hosten und damit Geld verdienen? Dann schaue auf www.kostenlos-hosten.de und informiere dich. Dort erhältst du alle Informationen zu unseren kostenlosen Podcast-Hosting-Angeboten.

Moin moin un frohed nieded Johr. Jungedi. 2020. Mi kümmt all de Johrestohl’n de no 1999 keem’ jümmers noch as Seinz Fiktschen för. Overs anners, as ick mi dat vör 30 Johr vörstellt heff, flücht jümmers noch keen Autos dör de Gegend. Man good so, wenn man sick blots mol ankiekt, wo veel‘ Maleschen mennige Lüüd alleent mit dat Inparken hebbt. Wenn düsse Talente nu ook noch fleegen schulln, denn wurr ick blots noch mit Helm vör de Döör gohn. För fleegende Autos mööt wi düssed Johr overs in de Regel noch keen Bang hebben. Overs üm ruttofinnen, wat 2020 so bringt, hebbt wi nu bummeli twölf Monot Tied. Dorför hebbt wi sogor mehr Tied as 2019, denn 2020 is je ’n Schaltjohr. So hett je ook de Papst een Dag mehr, üm doröver notodinken, wat he eegentli will. Jüst erst hett he seggt, dat man de Fruunslüüd mehr inbinnen schull, weil de op’t Letzt‘ je ook Minschen sünd. Üm se in’t Preester-Amt to beropen, dorför sünd se denn overs anschien’d doch ni Minsch genog. Un as an Silvester een‘ vun düsse ominösen Fruunsminschen den Papst an de Hand trocken hett, weil se den Pontifex Maximus so gern mol anfoten wull, dor hett Franziskus ehr fuurts op de Fingers haut. So veel to dat Inbinden vun de Fruun. Tscha. Wenn ni mol de Stellvertreder vun‘ leeven Gott op de Eer sick an sien eegen‘ Vörsätze holn kann, wo schulln dat denn all de annern ganz eenfachen Lüüd trechkriegen? Na jo, wenn man sick tominst dat Johr över op dat besinn‘ kann, wat man sick vörnohm hett un so’n lütt beten ook dorno hannelt, denn is dat doch al’n ganzen Barg. De Papst hett intwüschen je ook al seggt, dat he mit sien Prügeln keen gooded Vörbild afgeeven hett. Un so’n Fehler öffentli intogestohn, dat kann lang ni jeder. Dormit wünsch ick Jüm, ook wenn mol wat scheev löppt, dat Jüm in de nästen zwölf Monot so dör de Welt goht, dat an Enn wat Gooded dorbi rukümmt. Dat wünsch ick mi sülms ook. Un dormit kann dat nu ook för mi losgohn mit dat niede Johr... In düssen Sinn

Sometimes you just need to go back to what it’s all about. It’s about Pontifex Maximus. You’ll see why. Listen in.

-

El episodio de esta semana es, “Manteniendo un Registro”Los primeros 3 siglos de la historia de la Iglesia son a veces un rompecabezas difícil de armar porque no se mantenía ningún sistema coherente de narrativa histórica.El narrativo histórico de Lucas en el libro de los Hechos narra un lapso de unos 30 años aproximadamente y narra la propagación de la fe de Jerusalén a Roma. El siguiente relato no llegaría hasta los escritos del historiador cristiano Eusebio, en el 4º siglo.  Lo qué tenemos en un período de más de 200 años son los escritos de los Padres de la Iglesia cuyas cartas dan solamente una idea parcial de lo que estaba sucediendo. Tenemos que inferir y asumir un montón eligiendo qué hechos y información podemos encontrar acerca de lo que estaba sucediendo. Como hemos visto, la labor de los Padres de la Iglesia se centraba principalmente en proveer apoyo en el área pastoral y apologético. Construyendo un contexto histórico para este período proviene de la fusión de relatos seculares de la historia con los comentarios de los Padres. Pero con el trabajo de Eusebio al principio del 4 siglo, la narrativa se vuelve mucho más clara.Eusebio comenzó a compilar su magnum opus de Historia de la Iglesia en los 290's. Titulado Historia Eclesiástica, es un intento de proporcionar una descripción de la Comunión de los Santos, desde los Apóstoles hasta su tiempo.Eusebio nació y fue criado en Cesárea, en la costa de Israel. Éra un estudiante del líder cristiano Pánfilas, quien fue él mismo un estudiante del gran apologista Orígenes. Eusebio se convirtió en el Obispo de Cesárea en el año 313 d.C.. Desempeñó un papel importante en el Concilio de Nicea en el año 325 d.C., en cual examinaremos más de cerca en un futuro episodio.Eusebio es una figura clave en el estudio de la Historia de la Iglesia, porque su Historia Eclesiástica es la primera obra después de la de Lucas en intentar una narrativa histórica de la Fe. Eusebio también es una figura importante debido a su cercana asociación con el Emperador Constantino.Quiero citar la apertura de la narrativa de Eusebio porque nos da un sentido de que tan monumental fue su obra. Él sabía que estaba intentando reconstruir una narrativa de la Iglesia con escasos recursos.En el capítulo 1, que él llamó, "El Plan de la obra", escribe -Es mi propósito escribir un relato de la sucesión de los apóstoles, así como de los tiempos que han transcurrido desde los días de nuestro Salvador al nuestro; y relacionar los muchos acontecimientos importantes que se dice que han ocurrido en la historia de la Iglesia; y mencionar quienes han gobernado y presidido en las parroquias más prominentes de la Iglesia, y aquellos que en cada generación han proclamado la palabra divina, ya sea oralmente o por escrito.Es mi propósito también dar los nombres y número de veces que individuos a través del amor de la innovación han caído en grandes errores, y se han proclamado como descubridores de conocimiento llamado falsamente, y como lobos feroces sin piedad han devastado la grey de Cristo. …Pero al principio debo anhelar por mi trabajo la indulgencia de los sabios, porque confieso que está más allá de mi poder producir una perfecta y completa historia, ya que soy el primero en entrar en el tema, y estoy intentando atravesar un camino no trazado, una ruta solitaria. Mi oración es que pueda tener a Dios como mi guía y el poder del Señor como mi ayuda, desde que soy incapaz de encontrar incluso los meras huellas de quienes han recorrido el camino delante de mí, excepto en breves fragmentos, en los que algunos en una forma, otros en otra, nos han transmitido relatos particulares de los tiempos en que vivían. Desde lejos, levantan sus voces como antorchas, y gritan, como de alguna noble y llamativa torre de vigilia, amonestándonos por donde caminar y cómo dirigir el curso de nuestra labor constante y segura.Habiendo reunido por tanto de las cuestiones mencionadas aquí y allí por ellos lo que consideramos importante para el presente trabajo, y habiendo arrancado como flores de un prado pasajes correspondientes de antiguos escritores, nos esforzaremos para encarnar el conjunto en una narrativa histórica. …Este trabajo me parece de especial importancia porque no conozco de ningún escritor eclesiástico quien se ha dedicado a este tema, y espero que resulte más útil para aquellos que gustan de la investigación histórica.Eusebio desconocía cualquier intento anterior para proporcionar una narrativa histórica del desarrollo de la Fe desde el final del primer siglo a su tiempo en la primera parte del 4 siglo, un período de un poco más de 200 años. Desde una perspectiva moderna, el relato que Eusebio cuenta podría ser considerado sospechoso, ya que se basa en la tradición y en el mejor de los casos, pruebas fragmentarias. Lo qué se debe tener en cuenta es la importancia de la tradición oral y la exactitud de esa transmisión durante largos períodos de tiempo. Porque el mundo antiguo no poseía abundantes y baratos medios de grabación de información, dependía de la tradición oral y la memorización mecánica. Con la llegada de la imprenta y medios más económicos, la prioridad de la tradición oral disminuyo. Eusebio tenia fuentes escritas y orales para usar como materiales originales. Su trabajo puede ser considerado confiable, pero al mismo tiempo cuestionable cuando se inclina hacia la antigua practica del uso de la historia como propaganda.Al volver a la narrativa cronología de la historia de la Iglesia tenemos que retomar la historia en el reinado de Diocleciano, quien presidió sobre la última y en muchas formas peores de las persecuciones bajo los Emperadores Romanos.Aunque los cristianos recuerdan a Diocleciano por la persecución, fue en verdad uno de los más eficaces de los Emperadores Romanos. En el momento al cual llegó al trono, el Imperio Romano era un vasto y complicado monstro de territorio para gobernar. La ciudad de Roma era una vieja y podrida reliquia de su antigua gloria. Por esa razón Diocleciano trasladó su capital hacia el este hasta Nicomedia en Asia Menor, la actual Turquía. En lugar de tratar de ejercer control sobre todo el imperio como única autoridad, Diocleciano nombró a Maximiano como co-emperador para gobernar la mitad occidental del Imperio desde Roma mientras el gobernó al Oriente.Uno de los problemas persistentes que habían causado tanta agitación en las últimas décadas, era la cuestión de la sucesión; quién gobernaría después de los actuales emperadores? Para evitar ese caos, Diocleciano nombró sucesores duales para él y Maximiano. Flavio Constancio se convirtió en el sucesor de Maximiano mientras Diocleciano tomó a Galerio. Esto estableció lo que se conocía como el Tetrarcado.Mientras Diocleciano no tenía sentimientos de amistad para los seguidores de Cristo, fue realmente su sucesor Galerio que le movió a iniciar una campaña de persecución. Galerio era un comandante militar que pensaba que las ideas cristianas llevaban a sus tropas a ser malos soldados. Él sabía que su lealtad estaba sumamente con su Dios y pensaba que esto hacia a sus tropas no confiables. Galerio también era un pagano dedicado, que creía en las deidades Romanas. El atribuía cualquier contratiempo para el ejército o cualquiera de los frecuentes desastres naturales que sacudieron al Imperio, como prueba del disgusto de los dioses por tantos ciudadanos de Roma que se estaban pasando al nuevo dios. Así que fue realmente por la insistencia de Galerio a Diocleciano por la cual el aprobó las severas medidas tomadas en contra los Cristianos y sus iglesias. Cuando Diocleciano se retiró a su villa para cosechar verduras y le cedio la mitad oriental del Imperio a Galerio, la persecución, aumento.Eventualmente, Constancio igualmente sustituyo a Maximiano en el Oeste, casi al mismo tiempo que Galerio asumió el manto en el Oriente. Aquí fue cuando el tetrarcado de Diocleciano se empezó a desmoronar. Galerio decidió que quería ser el emperador único y secuestro al hijo de Constancio, Constantino, quien había sido nombrado sucesor de su padre en el Oeste. Cuando Constancio cayó enfermo, Galerio concedió permiso a Constantino para visitarlo.Constancio murió, y Constantino exigió que Galerio lo reconociera como su co-emperador. No hay duda de Galerio hubiera lanzado una campaña militar en contra de Constantino para poder reinar en el imperio de Oeste, pero Galerio se encontraba afligido con una enfermedad mortal. En su lecho de muerte, Galerio admitió que su política de persecución hacia los Cristianos no había resultado y rescindió su orden de opresión.En el oeste, Constantino encontró que su derecho por el trono de su padre era negado por el hijo de Maximiano, Majencio. El enfrentamiento entre ellos es conocido como la Batalla del Puente Milvian. Majencio no quería a Constantino marchando sus tropas en Roma, por lo que derribo el puente Milvian después de haber marchado a sus tropas a través de el para enfrentar a Constantino. Tenia un plan en el caso de que la batalla iba en contra de el, y había construido un puente temporal de una cadena de embarcaciones a través del río.En este punto, la historia se pone un poco confusa porque ha habido muchos que han escrito acerca de lo ocurrido y los informes son variados. El día antes de la batalla, Constantino oró, y es más probable que fue al dios del sol. Cuando él lo hizo, miraba hacia el sol y vio una cruz. Entonces, o vio las palabras o las oyó que decían, "Por este signo, Conquistaras." Esa noche mientras dormía, Jesús se le apareció en sueños, diciéndole que colocara un símbolo cristiano en los escudos de sus soldados. A la mañana siguiente, tiza o gis fue distribuido y rápidamente los soldados pusieron lo que se llama el “Chirón” en sus escudos. Chi y Rho son las 2 primeras letras de la palabra griega Cristus, Cristo. En español parece una P en la parte superior de un X.Cuando los dos ejércitos pelearon, los veteranos de Constantino derrotaron a los mas numerosos pero menos experimentados de Majencio, quienes huyeron por su puente improvisado. Al cruzar, Majencio cayó al agua y se ahogó. Constantino entonces marcho victoriosamente entrando en Roma.Un año más tarde, él y su nuevo co-emperador Licinio publicaron lo que se conoce como el Edicto de Milán, que decretó un fin a todas las persecuciones religiosas, no sólo de los cristianos, sino de todos las creencias. Para Constantino, Jesús era ahora su divino patrón y la cruz, un emblema de vergüenza y escarnio por generaciones, se convirtió en una especie de talismán. En lugar de ser un símbolo de la brutalidad de Roma en la ejecución de sus enemigos, la cruz se convirtió en un símbolo del poder imperial.A los obispos se les comenzó a llamar sacerdotes al conseguir la igualdad con sus opuestos en los templos paganos. Estos sacerdotes cristianos eran mostrados favores especiales por Constantino. No le tomó mucho tiempo a los sacerdotes paganos a darse cuenta de la forma en que los vientos de favor político estaban cambiando. Muchos se convirtieron.Ahora → ha habido mucho debate sobre la legitimidad de la conversión de Constantino. Fue verdaderamente nacidos de nuevo o fue simplemente un astuto político que reconocía una tendencia social que podía usar y girar a su favor? Muchas personas están en desacuerdo sobre este tema y es improbable que mi pequeña ofrenda cambie de parecer a ninguno de ellos. Pero creo que Constantino fue probablemente un verdadero cristiano. Ciertamente él hizo algunas cosas después de su conversión que son difíciles de conciliar con una fe sincera, pero tenemos que recordar que la base moral con la cual creció como hijo de un Cesar y como general de las legiones Romanas era muy diferente de la moral Bíblica que ha formado nuestra civilización actual. Asimismo, las acciones de Constantino que son tan decididamente no-cristianas, como asesinar a los que amenazaban su poder, pudieron haber sido racionalizadas no como actos personales tanto como intentos de asegurar la paz y la seguridad del Imperio. Ya sé que es una exageración, pero cuando se analiza la historia, tenemos que tener cuidado de no juzgar a las personas cuando no tenemos a nuestra disposición todos los hechos en nuestras manos que ellos tuvieron.Si pudiéramos sentarnos con Constantino y decir, "No deberías haber ejecutado a ese chico." Él podría muy bien haber dicho algo como, "Sí, como cristiano, yo no debería hacerlo. Tienes razón. Pero yo no lo ejecute por enojo personal o sospecha o por mero egoísmo. Realmente me molesta que tuve que hacerlo; pero descubrí que era trataba de conspirar para usurpar mi trono y esto hubiera arrojado al imperio en años de guerra civil y caos." A cual nos gustaría responder "Bueno Constantino, usted necesita confiar en Dios. Él te protegerá. Él te puso en el trono, él puede mantenerte allí." y Constantino podría contestar "Sí, lo he considerado y estoy de acuerdo. Pero es una decisión difícil. Necesita entender, que en términos de mi vida personal, yo confío en Dios. Pero cuando se trata de mi rol como Emperador, necesito tomar decisiones difíciles que otros que no están en esta posición no pueden entender".No olvidemos que Constantino, mientras que era un general competente y un hábil político, fue, en el mejor de los casos, un creyente novato.Comparto esta pequeña discusión imaginaria porque apunta a algo que vamos a encontrar una y otra vez en nuestra examinación de la Historia de la Iglesia. Muchas veces vemos a las épocas pasadas, lo que creían y las cosas que hicieron, con una actitud de superioridad moral porque nosotros no haríamos las cosas terribles que ellos hicieron, o suponemos que haríamos algunas cosas fallaron en hacer. Tenemos que ser cautelosos con esta actitud, por la sencilla razón de que cuando nos tomamos el tiempo para escuchar las voces del pasado y les permitimos explicar por sí mismos, a menudo encontramos un nuevo entendimiento de la dificultad de sus vidas y opciones. Podemos no estar de acuerdo con ellos, pero al menos podemos darnos cuenta que en sus propias mentes y corazones, pensaban que estaban haciendo lo que era mejor.Usted va a tener su propia opinión de la sinceridad de la fe de Constantino, pero permítame alentarle a pasar un poco de tiempo buscando lo que Eusebio escribió sobre él y algunas de las decisiones más difíciles Constantino tuvo que hacer durante su reinado.Algunas de las cosas consideradas incompatibles con una verdadera conversión es que él conservó su título de Pontifex Maximus como jefe del culto religioso del estado. Él también concibió & llevo acabo conspiraciones políticas para eliminar enemigos. Asesinó a aquellos que se consideraba como una amenaza para su poder.Por otro lado, desde el año 312 d.C., su favor hacia el cristianismo era bastante público. Le otorgó los mismos privilegios a los obispos que los sacerdotes paganos disfrutaban. Prohibió la crucifixión y terminó el castigo de los delincuentes usándolos en las luchas de gladiadores. Él hizo al Domingo un día de fiesta. Su caridad personal construyó varias iglesias grandes. Y su vida privada demostró una consistente fe genuina. Sus hijos fueron educados en la Iglesia y practicó la fidelidad marital, al menos, en la medida de lo que sabemos. Que por supuesto, no era el caso con los emperadores anteriores e incluso la nobleza romana.Los que los critican, apuntan a la demora del bautismo de Constantino hasta poco antes de su muerte como una falta de fe. Sugiero que debería ser leído exactamente como lo contrario. Recuerde lo que hemos aprendido sobre el bautismo unos cuantos episodios atrás. En ese momento, se pensaba que después del bautismo, existían ciertos pecados que no podían ser perdonados. Así que la gente retrasaba el bautismo a lo mas cerca posible de la muerte, dejando pocas posibilidades para que ese pecado ocurriera. Después de su bautismo, Constantino nunca más uso la púrpura imperial de su oficina sino sólo llevaba su túnica blanca bautismal. Eso suena como él quería entrar al Cielo, y no una omisión casual de ella.Entre las preocupaciones principales de Constantino al asumir el control del Imperio era la unidad. Fue la unidad y fortaleza que se había llevado a Diocleciano a establecer el tetrarcado. Décadas de guerra civil con un potente general tras otro que se apoderaba y derrotaba a sus rivales habían debilitado y empobrecido desesperadamente al Imperio. Ahora que Constantino reinaba, el confiaba que la Iglesia ayudaría a lograr una nueva era de unidad sobre la base de una fe dinámica y vital. No pasó mucho tiempo antes de que él se dio cuenta de que la cosa con la cual esperaba lograr unidad estaba también fracturada.Cuando la Iglesia fue maltratada y golpeada por la persecución imperial, fue forzada a ser una. Pero cuando esa presión se quitó, la grietas teológicas que se habían venido desarrollando durante un tiempo resultaron inmediatamente evidentes. La principal de ellas fue la polémica Donatista que recientemente hemos considerado. En el año 314 d.C. los donatistas apelaron a Constantino para resolver la cuestión sobre quién podría ordenar ancianos.Piensen en que tan importante fue este cambio! La iglesia apeló a la autoridad civil para pronunciar sobre un asunto espiritual! Al hacerlo, la Iglesia pide el patrocinio imperial.En este punto tenemos que levantar una bandera roja y gritar "¡Peligro! Tengan cuidado peligro!"Constantino sabía que esta no era una decisión que el era capaz de hacer por su propio cuenta, asi que reunió a algunos de los líderes de la iglesia en Arles en el sur de Francia para decidir la cuestión. Los obispos Donatistas fueron superados por los no-Donatistas - así que usted sabe que paso. Se decidió en contra de los Donatistas.En lugar de aceptar la decisión, los Donatistas llamaron a los dirigentes que se oponían a ellos como corruptos y etiquetaron el Emperador como su lacayo. La Iglesia se dividió entre las iglesias Donatistas del Norte de África y el resto del mundo, que ahora veían a Constantino como su líder.Al aumentar las tensiones, el emperador envió tropas a Cartago en el año 317 para exigir la instalación de un obispo que favoraba al gobierno y era opuestos por los donatistas. Por primera vez, pero lejos de ser la última, los cristianos perseguían a otros cristianos. Los opositores de Constantino fueron exiliados de Cartago. Después de 4 años, se dio cuenta que sus tácticas de mano fuerte no estaban funcionando y retiró sus tropas.Retomaremos la historia en este punto la próxima vez.

Welcome back to The Emancipation Podcast Station - the place to hear about history researched and retold through the eyes of Middle school and HS students.   600 BCE - 600 CE Second-Wave Civilizations   Ancient Persia: 600 BCE -  Gabe - Ancient persia or the achaemenid persia which was called this because the ruler cyrus’s great great grandfather's name was achaemenid and he started as a small independant city under the medes for protection and then cyrus got in an argument with his grandfather Astyages and won taking over persia he then established a system by capturing and relocating and adding a power over every city by accomplishing this he claimed the name Cyrus the great Audrey - The Persians didn’t actually use the name “Persian”, instead they called themselves Aryans. They called where they lived Aran (there are other variations of the name) which make the modern version of the name, Iran, probably more accurate. This is similar to how the Greeks referred to their homeland as Hellas, while the name Greece was a Latin idea. Ben - Cyrus, the ruler of Persia then proceeded to conquer various empires such as the Median empire, the Lydian empire in around 540 BCE, and he eventually got his hands on the neo-babylonian empire in 539 BCE. But while Cyrus’s son Cambyses II is out trying to take hold of egypt and libya, another person comes along claiming to be bardiya, Cyrus’s second son. So Cambyses has to rush back to Persia to make sure the throne is not taken from him but dies on the way there. No one really knows how Cambyses or Cyrus died specifically though. (BTW note for other people, shahanshah is pronounced shaw-on-shaw) Ella - Cyrus was a military commander but he realized that he needed the regions he conquered to stay in good economic order if he wanted them to provide him with economic tribute revenues. To achieve his goals he left rulers in the areas that he conquered after he conquered them. Skylar - Persia was one of the greatest empire and civilization in the world. The Achaemenid empire at its peak had about 50 million people. Thats half of the people that were in the world at that time, according to historians. The Achaemenid Dynasty/empire ends when Greece unifies under Philip of Macedon in early to mid century bce. Alexander the Great wanted to mix their cultures but he dies so they split again. Emma - In ancient Mesopotamia when they conquered a nation they would break up their political and cultural systems so that they wouldn’t be a threat. Though when Cyrus came into power he switched it, allowing those he conquered to keep their separate societies in a tributary state. While it seemed like he was being kind, he most likely was trying to keep their loyalty. - Ethan - As Cambyses died in 522 BCE, he was succeeded by a general titled “Darius”. Darius claimed that he was slightly related to Cambyses II but many other people challenged Darius’s throneship. This resulted, in some places, rebellion against the Achaemenids. Darius soon made himself to be the clear ruler Persia and re established rule of the rebels. He also reorganized the empire into satrapies, and for each satrapy there would be a satrap. 600 CE Classical Greece:  Gabe - If you didnt know its called Classical Greece and Ancient Persia because Persia was in the Ancient Era and Greece is in the Classical era so Classical Greece cities were built between mountains in valleys and on coastal plain so by the sea there was a time somewhere around 1200 bce they were in this war called the trojan war there's a story of a huge horse called the trojan horse it was in these wars so in this war this guy named homer he said that people came from the sea while they were having the trojan war and they were attacking them and driving them off the coast so they built these city states called polis which were like fortified cities so the people could have protection Audrey - The Greek Peninsula has been settled by humans for thousands of years, but an important part of Greek history starts when the Mycenaean Empire falls and the Greek Dark Ages begin. It is called the “Dark Ages” because there really aren’t many historical records from that point in time, and that was around 1100-800 BC. The major events happened in the exiting of the Greek Dark Ages, and this is when things that Ancient Greece is really known for began, like the Oracle at Delphi and the Olympic Games. (if someone wants to explain these) Ben - The difference between sparta and athens was that in sparta social status wasn’t decided based on how much money you had or how smart you were, it was about your military ranking. The spartans political system was unique in that it had two kings that were from different families that ruled. But on the lower side of the political rankings was the helots. Helots were like slaves but had more freedom, helots still had families but they had to work for the state and couldn’t really do anything else. Helots were still considered owned but they were owned by the state. Helots were collected from the villages sparta pillaged. Emma - Greece’s structure was was pretty different from other societies at the time. While the desperate colonies(?) all recognized the “mother” city-state, they were all independent for the majority of the time. Their shared religion and culture was what gave them all a sense of unity. Ella - Ancient Greece was made up of many independent city states because of Greeces complicated geography. All of these communities were separated by mountains, hills, and water. Greece wasn't a unified nation, instead it was a bunch of connected communities that shared religion and beliefs. - Ethan - The kings of Sparta were priests of Zeus and they were included in a gerousia, or council of elders, which was the highest court of Sparta. Also, there was an executive committee consisting of 5 ephors which were chosen by the people, of the people. Skylar - The name Greece is not what people that live in Greece call it. They call it Hellas. Nowadays they don’t call it Greece and back in the “Ancient Greece” days they didn’t say Greece they said Hellas. The word Hellas comes from Hellen, viewed as the progenitor. The Hellastic people are the people that live in Greece. In late 6th century BCE Athens was the dominant economic power. Athens was full of wealth as silver was just founded in the mountains around the area. Athens had an amazing trading system with other Greek city-states. Trading with other city-states was super  important to Athens because it didn’t have the agricultural conditions to supply enough grain for its population. A series of laws were written and put in place by a statesman named Draco around 621 BCE. They didn’t stay too long because they were super harsh. Another man named Solon was called to change the laws, he created a series of laws that equalized political power. Hunter- Ancient Greece consisted of over hundreds of different independent city-states, somewhat due to the geography of Greece. Greece communities were separated by mountains, hills, and water. Rather than one large nation, Ancient Greece was more like a system of communities with a shared language and religion that sometimes led to a common sense of belonging.    600 BCE - 600 CE The rise and fall of empires:  Gabe - I'm going to start by saying an empire is a small city or state that claims a large amount of land which is usually broke up into provinces  empires rise and fall for different reasons they usually expand through military conquest which is how the romans the persians and the Maurya empire in india expanded but they progressed in different ways the Maurya empire political sabotage and religious conversion so the people turn against their own country Audrey - An empire forms when a ruler, that already controls some territory, gains control of more territory for whatever reason, and that could be from military tactics, a weak neighboring area or really anything like that. Once the ruler has that territory under their control, they gain land and people. With the power they now have, this ruler could tax the people for their own wealth and/or use them for a better army. The empire could then keep expanding in this way until it collapsed. Ben - After the fall of the Qin dynasty the Han empire began to rise because of all the power that was up for grabs. The Han dynasty began in 206 BCE. They revived the way of Confucianism to unite the people and give them more reasons to fight and become a larger empire. Han china started to fall in 2nd century CE and eventually reached its demise in 220 CE, it mainly fell because of a religious divide between the people and the natural disasters that caused food shortages which snowballed into a bad economy. Ella - Empires all grow for different reasons whether its strong military, political sabotage, or religious conversation, but the Romans were not out to conquer territory. They did get involved in several wars but after they defeated their enemies they would offer their victims a small amount of citizenship in return for loyalty to the Roman empire.    Emma - There are also several different factors that can lead to the fall of an empire. Each of these factors will usually reflect those that led to the rise of the empire. Things such as a economic collapse, the weakening of military forces, or the death/assassination of a leader are common causes of a fall. - Ethan - A common example of an empire falling is Persia. The Achaemenid empire had internal issues already but had structure still. In 334 BCE Alexander attacked and in 4 years general Darius the Third lied dead. He was actually killed by one of his own generals and when the throne lied empty Alexander took the reins. Skylar - The rise of empires is great everyone’s all happy, then usually right when everything gets normal, the empire falls for different reasons. Rather it’s they have no more money, they get taken over by another empire, or another reason. The Roman empire took hundreds of years to create. They had weak neighbors so it was easy for them to take over that area. Hunter-The fall of an empire can be because of an outbreak of war and rebellion, when an empire falls so does its military for a few months to years in which leaves them wide open for follow up attacks. Normally however when an empire is defeated it is overrun by the kingdom/empire that attacked. 600 BCE - 600 CE Empire of Alexander the Great:  Gabe - Alexander the great was kind of an i want everything kind of guy no but wherever he went he conquered very good at military strategy lets skip a little real quick after he died his successors made a coin with him on it with horns which were marking him as a deity which means he was a huge role model you could say a symbol of power he was the man people looked up to he was actually only 5 to round 5’8 but that was normal for them because they didn't eat as much meat as other empires. Audrey - Alexander III, better known as Alexander the Great, was 20 years old when his extremely short reign began, lasting only 12 years. For how short his reign was, Alexander was very successful, especially when it came to conquering. Just like his reign, Alexander’s life was very short, ending in 323 BC when he was only 32 years old. Some people say he died from alcohol poisoning, some say it was from direct poisoning, but it is likely that he could have died because of a disease. Ella - A man known as Philip of Macedon came to power in 359 BC. His father had previously been the king of Macedon. Both of his older brother died which left him to be a regent for his infant nephew. He eventually possessed full power and ended up taking over a large majority of Greek city-states. He went on to almost unify all of them. Ben - Philip is later killed at his daughter’s wedding, by his royal bodyguard Pausanias in 336 BCE at the capital of macedonia, Aegae. This caused his son alexander to take control of the large kingdom that philip left behind. The one who assassinated tried to run away to his associates outside but tripped on a vine and got killed by philips. bodyguards Emma - Shortly after his father’s death, Alexander was crowned king and he eliminated any potential threats to his rule. The Greek city-states were now under his control. He then began his conquest of the Persian Empire which his father Philip had been planning before his untimely demise. Skylar - in 5th century BCE Greece started with the Persian invasion and ended with Peloponnesian war. Alexander the Great was one of the most powerful conquers in human history. Alexander the Great started off by taking control over his father’s empire after his death. Alexander wanted to do what his father wanted to do before he died, which was conquer the persian empire. So he put one of his generals, Antipater in charger of Greece. Alexander leads his troops on the greatest adventures of all time. Alexander won the battle at Granicus river, then Issus, Darius the third tries to negotiate but Alexander kept saying no, he wants to be the king of Asia. Eventually darius and alexander meet at Guagamela and alexander wins again. Darius’ empire was falling and what making the falling more official is when alexander takes his troops to Achaemenid, which is the capital of Persepolis and alexander defeats them once again. - Ethan - After Alexander’s father’s death, Alexander started focusing on India. He won some battles before he made it to the Ganges River. He planned to cross the Ganges to get to the rest of India. His tired troops decided that it was to much work and that they were already tired so they refused to go. In the end they turned home, and in 323 BCE, Alexander died to, what was most likely, disease.  Hunter- In the Kingdom of Thrace, during the reign of Lysimachus- a successor of Alexander the Great who lived from 361 BCE to 323 BCE, a coin was issued. The coin had Alexander’s face with ram horns on each side of his crown, the ram horns were a symbol of an Egyption God known as Amun or Zeus, who is often combined with Amun- from whom Alexander claimed descent. Flanked with these horns, Alexander had the reputation of a Deity.     600 BCE - 600 CE Rise of Rome: 600 BCE -  Gabe - the Rome empire came to power when  a group of noblemen were like ok the king sucks he's out and so they kicked him out and made the two consuls which were two people which were pretty close to a king except one could veto the others actions this was so one person could not be oh so powerful They also split the people into plebeians and patricians which were plebeians being common folk and patricians being people of noble blood This was the roman republic    Audrey - Legend has it, Rome was named after Romulus, one of twin brothers that are abandoned and raised by a “she-wolf”. Eventually, Romulus kills Remus (his twin brother) and becomes the first king of Rome. Other historians now think that it was the other way around, that the city of rome needed a founding story, and the whole thing was just that, a story. Ben - Rome was founded in 753 BCE (even though it’s mostly a myth and most believe in was founded a little later). Rome then founds the Rome Republic, a state in central rome, making them a little more influential in 509 BCE. Then much later than that the Punic wars happened between Rome and Carthage and consisted of three wars. The first war took place from 264-241 BCE, the second from 218-201 BCE, and the third from 149-146 BCE. in total it lasted from 264 to 146. Rome ended up winning and destroying and conquering Carthage. Ella - The Romans did not plan to build an empire but it came upon them as they ran into conflict with the surrounding city-states, kingdoms, and empires. They had to find a way to use the territories they conquered.  Most of the places the Romans conquered were allowed to keep the political and cultural ways they had, the only requirement was that they provide soldiers for the Roman Empire. Emma - The politics of Rome reflected the structure of their society; it too was divided into the two social classes, patricians and plebeians. Those in the upper class were allowed to hold political office, and then become a senator, but those of the lower class were not. However, the plebeians were able gain more political influence over time. - Ethan - The political system of Rome was mainly based on military rank/power. The “Comitia Centuriata” which was named for the century, was pretty much a group of 100 soldiers. Although, this 100 person unit was the base amount of people, it was not always exact in real situations. Skylar - I’m going to talk about the Punic wars that went on between Rome and Carthage. The Punic wars consist of three major battles, The first one lasted 23 years, from 264 BCE-241 BCE. It was at Agrigentum it was over the island of Sicily. Rome wins most smaller battles. Then Carthage leaves. Rome wanted Carthage to pay them for the damages. Rome built a stronger navy. 240 to 248 BCE there was a Mercenary war. The second Punic war was between 218-201 BCE. The third and final war was between 149-146 BCE where Rome basically destroys Carthage, ending a 700 year long war. 8.Hunter- Rome went from a city in the middle of the italy peninsula to one of the strongest empires in history. 600 CE From Roman Republic to Roman Empire:  Gabe - in 27 bce a guy named augustus caesar came and was like nope im the ruler “emperor” so basically the king and he started an autocratic government which is where he was the guy who called all the shots he didn't expand rome much in his time but he did do some things that changed the political and economic structure of rome      Audrey - Gaius Julius Caesar’s life really marked the transition between the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, even though, in his lifetime, Rome was still a republic and never actually considered an empire. The reason I say this is the unofficial time that the transition occurred is, that at the time of Julius Caesar, the Roman Republic’s structure very much resembled the structure of an empire, so it kind of seems like it already switched. Ben - Julius Caesar then illegally crosses the rubicon and most of rome’s senators choose to move over to greece. This causes a sort of civil war between rome and greece. After Julius crosses the rubicon the senators send a popular general Pompey to go fight with his soldiers but they decide to retreat because they thought julius’s army was unbeatable. Then the other senators also retreat, giving julius control of rome again. But it would be only a matter of time before the senators return to try and retake rome. Ella - Julius Caesar was assassinated, and in his will he stated that his nephew Octavian would be his adopted son. Too other men Antony and Lepidus were big supporters of Caesars and they got together with Octavian to form a triumvirate, which was known as the second triumvirate. Unlike the first triumvirate which was between Julius Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus, this triumvirate had legal backing. These three men gained lots of power over the Roman republic. Emma -  The power he gained was not limited to the prolonged time in which he held office. A major part of it was that he now had complete control over the military, unlike before when the elected consuls served as commanders. He was also now the high priest, or Pontifex Maximus, and in charge of the census for taxation. He kept these powers by acting like they were still separate offices that could be held by someone else.  - Ethan - Roman money/currency wasn’t exactly economy based but politically based as well. Julius Caesar was the first emperor to put his face on currency and since then emperors of Rome have done this. Before Caesar, only deceased Romans and Roman gods were on currency. This strengthened the connection of the emperor and the economy while popularizing the current emperor. These emperors used this systems to popularize the next candidate they favored. Skylar - The Roman Empire began in 27 BCE when Augustus became the main ruler. Augustus is Julius Caesar’s adopted son. He never took the name king or emperor preferred to call himself princeps, first citizen, or primus inter pares. Augustus never expanded the territory because it was already as big as it could possibly get. 8.Hunter- The Roman Republic was a small city in Italy, after a large military growth and a gaining of power over many neighboring countries the Roman Republic quickly grew to the Roman Empire. 600 BCE - 600 CE The Roman Empire: Audrey - Pax Romana is a name that a two hundred year long time period is often referred to as, and it means “Roman Peace”. This name came from the time when Octavian was emperor, which was from 27 BCE to 180 CE. It was a relatively good time for the Roman Empire, even though there was still quite a bit of conflict it was really a pretty peaceful time hence the name. Gabe - it was a good time for the roman empire augustus caesar or Octavian had complete control over the military which was one of the ways he became the emperor But the romans liked the belief of having military governments temporary which is why He took control as a stand in governor of one of the provinces where the majority of roman legions were stationed giving him control over the military while still looking like he’s doing a favor for the people        Ella - Nero was a really bad guy. He was known for the fire in 64AD that a large amount of Romans died in. People think Nero started the fire to make room for a palace. Aside of that, he killed a lot of people including his own mom. He was also known for persecuting christians. Sometimes he would dip them in oil and set them on fire for a source of light in his garden.   Ben - After a few different anti-christian ruler come along, a new emperor decides to embrace christianity and his name was constantine. He was the first christian emperor and he even got baptised. Constantine also moves the capital more east and renames it to Constantinople. - Ethan - Augustus was followed by Tiberius who was Augustus’s step-son. Both had relatively long careers as emperors. Augustus had a career lasting close to 40 years while Tiberius had a 24 year long career. Caligula, one of Augustus’s great nephews, was viewed as a sadist. While he was emperor for a while he was quickly assassinated, he had a lot of people killed during his term of about 4 years.  Emma - After the Julio Claudian Dynasty of Rome came the Flavian Dynasty. This dynasty began in 69 AD when Vespasian was made emperor by the senate after the defeat of Vitellius. He ruled for ten years until 79 AD when he died. He was then succeeded by his oldest son, Titus. This marked the first emperor of Rome to be followed by his own son. He ruled for only two years, until 81 AD when he died from an illness. His rule was then followed by his brother Domitian who held the position from 81 to 96 AD. This dynasty was known for building the colosseum and the destruction of the second temple in Jerusalem. Skylar - One of the most important pieces from Augustan, Rome is the Ara Pacis, Ara Pacis means altar of peace. Augustus was the first emperor of Rome. The Ara Pacis was basically rebuilt from the fragments they found, some from the 17th century, but most were from the 20th century. The altar was used for sacrifices. This Altar has a political and spiritual meaning. 8.Hunter- The Roman Empire was an extremely powerful empire capturing Jerusalem, Cannan, and i believe nearly one hundred other provinces. 600 BCE - 600 CE Ancient and Imperial China: Audrey - The Shang Dynasty ended in 1046 BCE, when the Zhou (pronounced jo) Dynasty defeated the last Shang emperor, Di Xin, in the Battle of Muye. Historical records show that Di Xin had become a corrupt ruler, and the Zhous said they could only overthrow him because of the Mandate of Heaven which is an idea that if a ruler became incapable or corrupt the a guiding force in the universe would throw them out and replace them. Gabe - Zhou empire did not last long though because the provinces were giving their support to the governor basically of their providence instead of the zhou emperor so slowly the states became more powerful than the emperor himself hence the warring states period      3.Ella - The Zhou Dynasty collapsed at a slow pace over hundreds of years. As this happened, rulers of the surrounding areas gained more power than the king. This was the beginning of a period that was known as the Warring State period, which lasted from about 475 BC to 221 BC. Nearby, Qin, a western state, conquered its surrounding states and established their own dynasty. Ben - The Qin dynasty began to rise to it’s empire state in 221 BCE. The founder was Qin Shi Huang, a legalist (legalist is when law is enforced very strictly) that hated freedom of expression and freedom in general. A historian quoted him once about how he hates historians and wants all non-state historians that wrote history before Qin dynasty to be burned. “[Historians] hold it a mark of fame to defy the ruler, regard it as lofty to take a dissenting stance, and they lead the lesser officials in fabricating slander. If behavior such as this is not prohibited, then in upper circles the authority of the ruler will be compromised, and in lower ones, cliques will form. Therefore it should be prohibited. I therefore request that all records of the historians other than those of the state of Qin be burned.” - Ethan - Many differing beliefs are made vocal during this time period. 3 of which are Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism. Confucianism, created by Confucius, was based on reform of the status, class, and hierarchy systems. Legalism is more based off of strict laws and harsh punishments. Daoism is more of lawless following what they believe is right at the time. Emma - Confucius, or Kongzi which means Master Kong. His teachings were almost entirely based around morality and having a personal sense of right and wrong. He wasn’t really teaching specific rules of what was good or bad, rather teaching people be conscious of the intent behind their actions. Skylar - During the Warring States period in China from 475-221 BCE China was divided into seven competing nations. The fiefs were gaining more importance as the Zhou dynasty was ending and were becoming states. One of the 7 states were Qin. the other 6 states were Chu, Zhou, Wei, Han, Yan, and Qi. The first leader of Qin was King Zheng, later on he became Qin Shi Huangdi, he would also go on to be the first leader of the Qin dynasty. People say that the Qin dynasty ended the warring states period but it was really when Qin conquested the other states. 8. 600 BCE - 600 CE Early Judaism: Audrey - Judaism stands out to historians because the Jews were monotheists, meaning they believed and worshiped only one God. This made the Jews unique to most other societies which were polytheistic and worshiped multiple Gods. Gabe - The jews lived in the kingdoms of israel and judah the assyrians conquered these two empires and then the babylonians which was called the babylonian exile which sent allot of the jews out of these kingdoms 3 . Ella - In the Hebrew bible, It talks about Abraham moving from the city of Ur to Canaan with his family. It is Questionable whether  the Ur they are talking about was the Sumatran city in lower Mesopotamia or a Ur in Upper Mesopotamia. Ben - One of the most important jewish prophets was Moses. Moses was born at a time where the emperor was killing off every boy that is born because of his fear that if they grew too strong they would overtake him. To hide Moses from the emperor’s forces his mother put him in a basket and let him float down the river. The emperor/pharaoh’s daughter finds moses and raises him into the royal family, moses one day is enraged by a slaver beating a jewish slave and kills the slavemaster and retreats out of the city in fear of punishment. He goes to Mount Sinai but the Lord tells him to go back and free every Jewish slave. So he goes back and frees them and splits the red sea to escape. He brings the people back to the mountain where he receives the ten commandments. They then travel for 40 years and he reestablishes the jewish people in Canaan. - Ethan - Jews lived under Roman rulers while still being allowed their own traditions. There was some Jewish revolting but mainly they were crushed every time. Soon after the Romans renamed Judea into Syria Palaestina. This destroyed the connection of the Jews to the land. Skylar - Abraham is one of the significant patriarchs, the other two are Jacob and Isaac. Abraham’s first son is called Ishmael. He had Ishmael with his wife sarah’s servant because they didn’t think they could have kids. Ishmael is viewed as the progenitor, the patriarch for the arab people. According to biblical accounts Isaac was born when Sarah was in her 90s and Abraham was around 100 years old. Emma - Abraham’s son Isaac was the second significant patriarch. He was the first one of the three to inherit the covenant that his father Abraham had received. Later in his life he married Rebekah who gave birth to their twin sons Jacob and Esau, Jacob being the last of the three patriarchs.   That’s all the time we have for today. THank for joining us outside of the box that is learning.

Welcome back to The Emancipation Podcast Station - the place to hear about history researched and retold through the eyes of Middle school and HS students.   600 BCE - 600 CE Second-Wave Civilizations   Ancient Persia: 600 BCE -  Gabe - Ancient persia or the achaemenid persia which was called this because the ruler cyrus’s great great grandfather's name was achaemenid and he started as a small independant city under the medes for protection and then cyrus got in an argument with his grandfather Astyages and won taking over persia he then established a system by capturing and relocating and adding a power over every city by accomplishing this he claimed the name Cyrus the great Audrey - The Persians didn’t actually use the name “Persian”, instead they called themselves Aryans. They called where they lived Aran (there are other variations of the name) which make the modern version of the name, Iran, probably more accurate. This is similar to how the Greeks referred to their homeland as Hellas, while the name Greece was a Latin idea. Ben - Cyrus, the ruler of Persia then proceeded to conquer various empires such as the Median empire, the Lydian empire in around 540 BCE, and he eventually got his hands on the neo-babylonian empire in 539 BCE. But while Cyrus’s son Cambyses II is out trying to take hold of egypt and libya, another person comes along claiming to be bardiya, Cyrus’s second son. So Cambyses has to rush back to Persia to make sure the throne is not taken from him but dies on the way there. No one really knows how Cambyses or Cyrus died specifically though. (BTW note for other people, shahanshah is pronounced shaw-on-shaw) Ella - Cyrus was a military commander but he realized that he needed the regions he conquered to stay in good economic order if he wanted them to provide him with economic tribute revenues. To achieve his goals he left rulers in the areas that he conquered after he conquered them. Skylar - Persia was one of the greatest empire and civilization in the world. The Achaemenid empire at its peak had about 50 million people. Thats half of the people that were in the world at that time, according to historians. The Achaemenid Dynasty/empire ends when Greece unifies under Philip of Macedon in early to mid century bce. Alexander the Great wanted to mix their cultures but he dies so they split again. Emma - In ancient Mesopotamia when they conquered a nation they would break up their political and cultural systems so that they wouldn’t be a threat. Though when Cyrus came into power he switched it, allowing those he conquered to keep their separate societies in a tributary state. While it seemed like he was being kind, he most likely was trying to keep their loyalty. - Ethan - As Cambyses died in 522 BCE, he was succeeded by a general titled “Darius”. Darius claimed that he was slightly related to Cambyses II but many other people challenged Darius’s throneship. This resulted, in some places, rebellion against the Achaemenids. Darius soon made himself to be the clear ruler Persia and re established rule of the rebels. He also reorganized the empire into satrapies, and for each satrapy there would be a satrap. 600 CE Classical Greece:  Gabe - If you didnt know its called Classical Greece and Ancient Persia because Persia was in the Ancient Era and Greece is in the Classical era so Classical Greece cities were built between mountains in valleys and on coastal plain so by the sea there was a time somewhere around 1200 bce they were in this war called the trojan war there's a story of a huge horse called the trojan horse it was in these wars so in this war this guy named homer he said that people came from the sea while they were having the trojan war and they were attacking them and driving them off the coast so they built these city states called polis which were like fortified cities so the people could have protection Audrey - The Greek Peninsula has been settled by humans for thousands of years, but an important part of Greek history starts when the Mycenaean Empire falls and the Greek Dark Ages begin. It is called the “Dark Ages” because there really aren’t many historical records from that point in time, and that was around 1100-800 BC. The major events happened in the exiting of the Greek Dark Ages, and this is when things that Ancient Greece is really known for began, like the Oracle at Delphi and the Olympic Games. (if someone wants to explain these) Ben - The difference between sparta and athens was that in sparta social status wasn’t decided based on how much money you had or how smart you were, it was about your military ranking. The spartans political system was unique in that it had two kings that were from different families that ruled. But on the lower side of the political rankings was the helots. Helots were like slaves but had more freedom, helots still had families but they had to work for the state and couldn’t really do anything else. Helots were still considered owned but they were owned by the state. Helots were collected from the villages sparta pillaged. Emma - Greece’s structure was was pretty different from other societies at the time. While the desperate colonies(?) all recognized the “mother” city-state, they were all independent for the majority of the time. Their shared religion and culture was what gave them all a sense of unity. Ella - Ancient Greece was made up of many independent city states because of Greeces complicated geography. All of these communities were separated by mountains, hills, and water. Greece wasn't a unified nation, instead it was a bunch of connected communities that shared religion and beliefs. - Ethan - The kings of Sparta were priests of Zeus and they were included in a gerousia, or council of elders, which was the highest court of Sparta. Also, there was an executive committee consisting of 5 ephors which were chosen by the people, of the people. Skylar - The name Greece is not what people that live in Greece call it. They call it Hellas. Nowadays they don’t call it Greece and back in the “Ancient Greece” days they didn’t say Greece they said Hellas. The word Hellas comes from Hellen, viewed as the progenitor. The Hellastic people are the people that live in Greece. In late 6th century BCE Athens was the dominant economic power. Athens was full of wealth as silver was just founded in the mountains around the area. Athens had an amazing trading system with other Greek city-states. Trading with other city-states was super  important to Athens because it didn’t have the agricultural conditions to supply enough grain for its population. A series of laws were written and put in place by a statesman named Draco around 621 BCE. They didn’t stay too long because they were super harsh. Another man named Solon was called to change the laws, he created a series of laws that equalized political power. Hunter- Ancient Greece consisted of over hundreds of different independent city-states, somewhat due to the geography of Greece. Greece communities were separated by mountains, hills, and water. Rather than one large nation, Ancient Greece was more like a system of communities with a shared language and religion that sometimes led to a common sense of belonging.    600 BCE - 600 CE The rise and fall of empires:  Gabe - I'm going to start by saying an empire is a small city or state that claims a large amount of land which is usually broke up into provinces  empires rise and fall for different reasons they usually expand through military conquest which is how the romans the persians and the Maurya empire in india expanded but they progressed in different ways the Maurya empire political sabotage and religious conversion so the people turn against their own country Audrey - An empire forms when a ruler, that already controls some territory, gains control of more territory for whatever reason, and that could be from military tactics, a weak neighboring area or really anything like that. Once the ruler has that territory under their control, they gain land and people. With the power they now have, this ruler could tax the people for their own wealth and/or use them for a better army. The empire could then keep expanding in this way until it collapsed. Ben - After the fall of the Qin dynasty the Han empire began to rise because of all the power that was up for grabs. The Han dynasty began in 206 BCE. They revived the way of Confucianism to unite the people and give them more reasons to fight and become a larger empire. Han china started to fall in 2nd century CE and eventually reached its demise in 220 CE, it mainly fell because of a religious divide between the people and the natural disasters that caused food shortages which snowballed into a bad economy. Ella - Empires all grow for different reasons whether its strong military, political sabotage, or religious conversation, but the Romans were not out to conquer territory. They did get involved in several wars but after they defeated their enemies they would offer their victims a small amount of citizenship in return for loyalty to the Roman empire.    Emma - There are also several different factors that can lead to the fall of an empire. Each of these factors will usually reflect those that led to the rise of the empire. Things such as a economic collapse, the weakening of military forces, or the death/assassination of a leader are common causes of a fall. - Ethan - A common example of an empire falling is Persia. The Achaemenid empire had internal issues already but had structure still. In 334 BCE Alexander attacked and in 4 years general Darius the Third lied dead. He was actually killed by one of his own generals and when the throne lied empty Alexander took the reins. Skylar - The rise of empires is great everyone’s all happy, then usually right when everything gets normal, the empire falls for different reasons. Rather it’s they have no more money, they get taken over by another empire, or another reason. The Roman empire took hundreds of years to create. They had weak neighbors so it was easy for them to take over that area. Hunter-The fall of an empire can be because of an outbreak of war and rebellion, when an empire falls so does its military for a few months to years in which leaves them wide open for follow up attacks. Normally however when an empire is defeated it is overrun by the kingdom/empire that attacked. 600 BCE - 600 CE Empire of Alexander the Great:  Gabe - Alexander the great was kind of an i want everything kind of guy no but wherever he went he conquered very good at military strategy lets skip a little real quick after he died his successors made a coin with him on it with horns which were marking him as a deity which means he was a huge role model you could say a symbol of power he was the man people looked up to he was actually only 5 to round 5’8 but that was normal for them because they didn't eat as much meat as other empires. Audrey - Alexander III, better known as Alexander the Great, was 20 years old when his extremely short reign began, lasting only 12 years. For how short his reign was, Alexander was very successful, especially when it came to conquering. Just like his reign, Alexander’s life was very short, ending in 323 BC when he was only 32 years old. Some people say he died from alcohol poisoning, some say it was from direct poisoning, but it is likely that he could have died because of a disease. Ella - A man known as Philip of Macedon came to power in 359 BC. His father had previously been the king of Macedon. Both of his older brother died which left him to be a regent for his infant nephew. He eventually possessed full power and ended up taking over a large majority of Greek city-states. He went on to almost unify all of them. Ben - Philip is later killed at his daughter’s wedding, by his royal bodyguard Pausanias in 336 BCE at the capital of macedonia, Aegae. This caused his son alexander to take control of the large kingdom that philip left behind. The one who assassinated tried to run away to his associates outside but tripped on a vine and got killed by philips. bodyguards Emma - Shortly after his father’s death, Alexander was crowned king and he eliminated any potential threats to his rule. The Greek city-states were now under his control. He then began his conquest of the Persian Empire which his father Philip had been planning before his untimely demise. Skylar - in 5th century BCE Greece started with the Persian invasion and ended with Peloponnesian war. Alexander the Great was one of the most powerful conquers in human history. Alexander the Great started off by taking control over his father’s empire after his death. Alexander wanted to do what his father wanted to do before he died, which was conquer the persian empire. So he put one of his generals, Antipater in charger of Greece. Alexander leads his troops on the greatest adventures of all time. Alexander won the battle at Granicus river, then Issus, Darius the third tries to negotiate but Alexander kept saying no, he wants to be the king of Asia. Eventually darius and alexander meet at Guagamela and alexander wins again. Darius’ empire was falling and what making the falling more official is when alexander takes his troops to Achaemenid, which is the capital of Persepolis and alexander defeats them once again. - Ethan - After Alexander’s father’s death, Alexander started focusing on India. He won some battles before he made it to the Ganges River. He planned to cross the Ganges to get to the rest of India. His tired troops decided that it was to much work and that they were already tired so they refused to go. In the end they turned home, and in 323 BCE, Alexander died to, what was most likely, disease.  Hunter- In the Kingdom of Thrace, during the reign of Lysimachus- a successor of Alexander the Great who lived from 361 BCE to 323 BCE, a coin was issued. The coin had Alexander’s face with ram horns on each side of his crown, the ram horns were a symbol of an Egyption God known as Amun or Zeus, who is often combined with Amun- from whom Alexander claimed descent. Flanked with these horns, Alexander had the reputation of a Deity.     600 BCE - 600 CE Rise of Rome: 600 BCE -  Gabe - the Rome empire came to power when  a group of noblemen were like ok the king sucks he's out and so they kicked him out and made the two consuls which were two people which were pretty close to a king except one could veto the others actions this was so one person could not be oh so powerful They also split the people into plebeians and patricians which were plebeians being common folk and patricians being people of noble blood This was the roman republic    Audrey - Legend has it, Rome was named after Romulus, one of twin brothers that are abandoned and raised by a “she-wolf”. Eventually, Romulus kills Remus (his twin brother) and becomes the first king of Rome. Other historians now think that it was the other way around, that the city of rome needed a founding story, and the whole thing was just that, a story. Ben - Rome was founded in 753 BCE (even though it’s mostly a myth and most believe in was founded a little later). Rome then founds the Rome Republic, a state in central rome, making them a little more influential in 509 BCE. Then much later than that the Punic wars happened between Rome and Carthage and consisted of three wars. The first war took place from 264-241 BCE, the second from 218-201 BCE, and the third from 149-146 BCE. in total it lasted from 264 to 146. Rome ended up winning and destroying and conquering Carthage. Ella - The Romans did not plan to build an empire but it came upon them as they ran into conflict with the surrounding city-states, kingdoms, and empires. They had to find a way to use the territories they conquered.  Most of the places the Romans conquered were allowed to keep the political and cultural ways they had, the only requirement was that they provide soldiers for the Roman Empire. Emma - The politics of Rome reflected the structure of their society; it too was divided into the two social classes, patricians and plebeians. Those in the upper class were allowed to hold political office, and then become a senator, but those of the lower class were not. However, the plebeians were able gain more political influence over time. - Ethan - The political system of Rome was mainly based on military rank/power. The “Comitia Centuriata” which was named for the century, was pretty much a group of 100 soldiers. Although, this 100 person unit was the base amount of people, it was not always exact in real situations. Skylar - I’m going to talk about the Punic wars that went on between Rome and Carthage. The Punic wars consist of three major battles, The first one lasted 23 years, from 264 BCE-241 BCE. It was at Agrigentum it was over the island of Sicily. Rome wins most smaller battles. Then Carthage leaves. Rome wanted Carthage to pay them for the damages. Rome built a stronger navy. 240 to 248 BCE there was a Mercenary war. The second Punic war was between 218-201 BCE. The third and final war was between 149-146 BCE where Rome basically destroys Carthage, ending a 700 year long war. 8.Hunter- Rome went from a city in the middle of the italy peninsula to one of the strongest empires in history. 600 CE From Roman Republic to Roman Empire:  Gabe - in 27 bce a guy named augustus caesar came and was like nope im the ruler “emperor” so basically the king and he started an autocratic government which is where he was the guy who called all the shots he didn't expand rome much in his time but he did do some things that changed the political and economic structure of rome      Audrey - Gaius Julius Caesar’s life really marked the transition between the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, even though, in his lifetime, Rome was still a republic and never actually considered an empire. The reason I say this is the unofficial time that the transition occurred is, that at the time of Julius Caesar, the Roman Republic’s structure very much resembled the structure of an empire, so it kind of seems like it already switched. Ben - Julius Caesar then illegally crosses the rubicon and most of rome’s senators choose to move over to greece. This causes a sort of civil war between rome and greece. After Julius crosses the rubicon the senators send a popular general Pompey to go fight with his soldiers but they decide to retreat because they thought julius’s army was unbeatable. Then the other senators also retreat, giving julius control of rome again. But it would be only a matter of time before the senators return to try and retake rome. Ella - Julius Caesar was assassinated, and in his will he stated that his nephew Octavian would be his adopted son. Too other men Antony and Lepidus were big supporters of Caesars and they got together with Octavian to form a triumvirate, which was known as the second triumvirate. Unlike the first triumvirate which was between Julius Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus, this triumvirate had legal backing. These three men gained lots of power over the Roman republic. Emma -  The power he gained was not limited to the prolonged time in which he held office. A major part of it was that he now had complete control over the military, unlike before when the elected consuls served as commanders. He was also now the high priest, or Pontifex Maximus, and in charge of the census for taxation. He kept these powers by acting like they were still separate offices that could be held by someone else.  - Ethan - Roman money/currency wasn’t exactly economy based but politically based as well. Julius Caesar was the first emperor to put his face on currency and since then emperors of Rome have done this. Before Caesar, only deceased Romans and Roman gods were on currency. This strengthened the connection of the emperor and the economy while popularizing the current emperor. These emperors used this systems to popularize the next candidate they favored. Skylar - The Roman Empire began in 27 BCE when Augustus became the main ruler. Augustus is Julius Caesar’s adopted son. He never took the name king or emperor preferred to call himself princeps, first citizen, or primus inter pares. Augustus never expanded the territory because it was already as big as it could possibly get. 8.Hunter- The Roman Republic was a small city in Italy, after a large military growth and a gaining of power over many neighboring countries the Roman Republic quickly grew to the Roman Empire. 600 BCE - 600 CE The Roman Empire: Audrey - Pax Romana is a name that a two hundred year long time period is often referred to as, and it means “Roman Peace”. This name came from the time when Octavian was emperor, which was from 27 BCE to 180 CE. It was a relatively good time for the Roman Empire, even though there was still quite a bit of conflict it was really a pretty peaceful time hence the name. Gabe - it was a good time for the roman empire augustus caesar or Octavian had complete control over the military which was one of the ways he became the emperor But the romans liked the belief of having military governments temporary which is why He took control as a stand in governor of one of the provinces where the majority of roman legions were stationed giving him control over the military while still looking like he’s doing a favor for the people        Ella - Nero was a really bad guy. He was known for the fire in 64AD that a large amount of Romans died in. People think Nero started the fire to make room for a palace. Aside of that, he killed a lot of people including his own mom. He was also known for persecuting christians. Sometimes he would dip them in oil and set them on fire for a source of light in his garden.   Ben - After a few different anti-christian ruler come along, a new emperor decides to embrace christianity and his name was constantine. He was the first christian emperor and he even got baptised. Constantine also moves the capital more east and renames it to Constantinople. - Ethan - Augustus was followed by Tiberius who was Augustus’s step-son. Both had relatively long careers as emperors. Augustus had a career lasting close to 40 years while Tiberius had a 24 year long career. Caligula, one of Augustus’s great nephews, was viewed as a sadist. While he was emperor for a while he was quickly assassinated, he had a lot of people killed during his term of about 4 years.  Emma - After the Julio Claudian Dynasty of Rome came the Flavian Dynasty. This dynasty began in 69 AD when Vespasian was made emperor by the senate after the defeat of Vitellius. He ruled for ten years until 79 AD when he died. He was then succeeded by his oldest son, Titus. This marked the first emperor of Rome to be followed by his own son. He ruled for only two years, until 81 AD when he died from an illness. His rule was then followed by his brother Domitian who held the position from 81 to 96 AD. This dynasty was known for building the colosseum and the destruction of the second temple in Jerusalem. Skylar - One of the most important pieces from Augustan, Rome is the Ara Pacis, Ara Pacis means altar of peace. Augustus was the first emperor of Rome. The Ara Pacis was basically rebuilt from the fragments they found, some from the 17th century, but most were from the 20th century. The altar was used for sacrifices. This Altar has a political and spiritual meaning. 8.Hunter- The Roman Empire was an extremely powerful empire capturing Jerusalem, Cannan, and i believe nearly one hundred other provinces. 600 BCE - 600 CE Ancient and Imperial China: Audrey - The Shang Dynasty ended in 1046 BCE, when the Zhou (pronounced jo) Dynasty defeated the last Shang emperor, Di Xin, in the Battle of Muye. Historical records show that Di Xin had become a corrupt ruler, and the Zhous said they could only overthrow him because of the Mandate of Heaven which is an idea that if a ruler became incapable or corrupt the a guiding force in the universe would throw them out and replace them. Gabe - Zhou empire did not last long though because the provinces were giving their support to the governor basically of their providence instead of the zhou emperor so slowly the states became more powerful than the emperor himself hence the warring states period      3.Ella - The Zhou Dynasty collapsed at a slow pace over hundreds of years. As this happened, rulers of the surrounding areas gained more power than the king. This was the beginning of a period that was known as the Warring State period, which lasted from about 475 BC to 221 BC. Nearby, Qin, a western state, conquered its surrounding states and established their own dynasty. Ben - The Qin dynasty began to rise to it’s empire state in 221 BCE. The founder was Qin Shi Huang, a legalist (legalist is when law is enforced very strictly) that hated freedom of expression and freedom in general. A historian quoted him once about how he hates historians and wants all non-state historians that wrote history before Qin dynasty to be burned. “[Historians] hold it a mark of fame to defy the ruler, regard it as lofty to take a dissenting stance, and they lead the lesser officials in fabricating slander. If behavior such as this is not prohibited, then in upper circles the authority of the ruler will be compromised, and in lower ones, cliques will form. Therefore it should be prohibited. I therefore request that all records of the historians other than those of the state of Qin be burned.” - Ethan - Many differing beliefs are made vocal during this time period. 3 of which are Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism. Confucianism, created by Confucius, was based on reform of the status, class, and hierarchy systems. Legalism is more based off of strict laws and harsh punishments. Daoism is more of lawless following what they believe is right at the time. Emma - Confucius, or Kongzi which means Master Kong. His teachings were almost entirely based around morality and having a personal sense of right and wrong. He wasn’t really teaching specific rules of what was good or bad, rather teaching people be conscious of the intent behind their actions. Skylar - During the Warring States period in China from 475-221 BCE China was divided into seven competing nations. The fiefs were gaining more importance as the Zhou dynasty was ending and were becoming states. One of the 7 states were Qin. the other 6 states were Chu, Zhou, Wei, Han, Yan, and Qi. The first leader of Qin was King Zheng, later on he became Qin Shi Huangdi, he would also go on to be the first leader of the Qin dynasty. People say that the Qin dynasty ended the warring states period but it was really when Qin conquested the other states. 8. 600 BCE - 600 CE Early Judaism: Audrey - Judaism stands out to historians because the Jews were monotheists, meaning they believed and worshiped only one God. This made the Jews unique to most other societies which were polytheistic and worshiped multiple Gods. Gabe - The jews lived in the kingdoms of israel and judah the assyrians conquered these two empires and then the babylonians which was called the babylonian exile which sent allot of the jews out of these kingdoms 3 . Ella - In the Hebrew bible, It talks about Abraham moving from the city of Ur to Canaan with his family. It is Questionable whether  the Ur they are talking about was the Sumatran city in lower Mesopotamia or a Ur in Upper Mesopotamia. Ben - One of the most important jewish prophets was Moses. Moses was born at a time where the emperor was killing off every boy that is born because of his fear that if they grew too strong they would overtake him. To hide Moses from the emperor’s forces his mother put him in a basket and let him float down the river. The emperor/pharaoh’s daughter finds moses and raises him into the royal family, moses one day is enraged by a slaver beating a jewish slave and kills the slavemaster and retreats out of the city in fear of punishment. He goes to Mount Sinai but the Lord tells him to go back and free every Jewish slave. So he goes back and frees them and splits the red sea to escape. He brings the people back to the mountain where he receives the ten commandments. They then travel for 40 years and he reestablishes the jewish people in Canaan. - Ethan - Jews lived under Roman rulers while still being allowed their own traditions. There was some Jewish revolting but mainly they were crushed every time. Soon after the Romans renamed Judea into Syria Palaestina. This destroyed the connection of the Jews to the land. Skylar - Abraham is one of the significant patriarchs, the other two are Jacob and Isaac. Abraham’s first son is called Ishmael. He had Ishmael with his wife sarah’s servant because they didn’t think they could have kids. Ishmael is viewed as the progenitor, the patriarch for the arab people. According to biblical accounts Isaac was born when Sarah was in her 90s and Abraham was around 100 years old. Emma - Abraham’s son Isaac was the second significant patriarch. He was the first one of the three to inherit the covenant that his father Abraham had received. Later in his life he married Rebekah who gave birth to their twin sons Jacob and Esau, Jacob being the last of the three patriarchs.   That’s all the time we have for today. THank for joining us outside of the box that is learning.

Todas las curiosidades de JULIO CESAR, uno de los personajes más importantes de la HISTORIA. Cayo Julio César fue un líder militar y político romano de la era tardorrepublicana. Nacido en el seno de la gens Julia, una familia patricia de escasa fortuna, estuvo emparentado con algunos de los hombres más influyentes de su época, como su tío Cayo Mario, quien influiría de manera determinante en su carrera política. En 84 a. C., a los 16 años, el popular Cinna lo nombró Flamen Dialis, cargo religioso del que fue relevado por Sila, con quien tuvo conflictos a causa de su matrimonio con la hija de Cinna. Tras escapar de morir a manos de los sicarios del dictador, fue perdonado gracias a la intercesión de los parientes de su madre. Trasladado a la provincia de Asia, combatió en Mitilene como legado de Marco Minucio Termo. Volvió a Roma a la muerte de Sila en 78 a. C., y ejerció por un tiempo la abogacía. En 73 a. C. sucedió a su tío Cayo Aurelio Cota como pontífice, y pronto entró en relación con los cónsules Pompeyo y Craso, cuya amistad le permitiría lanzar su propia carrera política.? En 70 a. C. César sirvió como cuestor en la provincia de Hispania y como edil curul en Roma. Durante el desempeño de esa magistratura ofreció unos espectáculos que fueron recordados durante mucho tiempo por el pueblo. En 63 a. C. fue elegido praetor urbanus? al obtener más votos que el resto de candidatos a la pretura. Ese mismo año murió Quinto Cecilio Metelo Pío, Pontifex Maximus designado durante la dictadura de Sila, y, en las elecciones celebradas para sustituirle, venció César. Al término de su pretura sirvió como propretor en Hispania, donde capitaneó una breve campaña contra los lusitanos. En 59 a. C. fue elegido cónsul gracias al apoyo de sus dos aliados políticos, Pompeyo y Craso, los hombres con los que César formó el llamado Primer Triunvirato. Su colega durante el consulado, Bíbulo, se retiró para así entorpecer la labor de César que, embargo, logró sacar adelante una serie de medidas legales, entre las que destaca una ley agraria que regulaba el reparto de tierras entre los soldados veteranos.

Todas las curiosidades de JULIO CESAR, uno de los personajes más importantes de la HISTORIA. Cayo Julio César fue un líder militar y político romano de la era tardorrepublicana. Nacido en el seno de la gens Julia, una familia patricia de escasa fortuna, estuvo emparentado con algunos de los hombres más influyentes de su época, como su tío Cayo Mario, quien influiría de manera determinante en su carrera política. En 84 a. C., a los 16 años, el popular Cinna lo nombró Flamen Dialis, cargo religioso del que fue relevado por Sila, con quien tuvo conflictos a causa de su matrimonio con la hija de Cinna. Tras escapar de morir a manos de los sicarios del dictador, fue perdonado gracias a la intercesión de los parientes de su madre. Trasladado a la provincia de Asia, combatió en Mitilene como legado de Marco Minucio Termo. Volvió a Roma a la muerte de Sila en 78 a. C., y ejerció por un tiempo la abogacía. En 73 a. C. sucedió a su tío Cayo Aurelio Cota como pontífice, y pronto entró en relación con los cónsules Pompeyo y Craso, cuya amistad le permitiría lanzar su propia carrera política.? En 70 a. C. César sirvió como cuestor en la provincia de Hispania y como edil curul en Roma. Durante el desempeño de esa magistratura ofreció unos espectáculos que fueron recordados durante mucho tiempo por el pueblo. En 63 a. C. fue elegido praetor urbanus? al obtener más votos que el resto de candidatos a la pretura. Ese mismo año murió Quinto Cecilio Metelo Pío, Pontifex Maximus designado durante la dictadura de Sila, y, en las elecciones celebradas para sustituirle, venció César. Al término de su pretura sirvió como propretor en Hispania, donde capitaneó una breve campaña contra los lusitanos. En 59 a. C. fue elegido cónsul gracias al apoyo de sus dos aliados políticos, Pompeyo y Craso, los hombres con los que César formó el llamado Primer Triunvirato. Su colega durante el consulado, Bíbulo, se retiró para así entorpecer la labor de César que, embargo, logró sacar adelante una serie de medidas legales, entre las que destaca una ley agraria que regulaba el reparto de tierras entre los soldados veteranos.

Todas las curiosidades de JULIO CESAR, uno de los personajes más importantes de la HISTORIA. Cayo Julio César fue un líder militar y político romano de la era tardorrepublicana. Nacido en el seno de la gens Julia, una familia patricia de escasa fortuna, estuvo emparentado con algunos de los hombres más influyentes de su época, como su tío Cayo Mario, quien influiría de manera determinante en su carrera política. En 84 a. C., a los 16 años, el popular Cinna lo nombró Flamen Dialis, cargo religioso del que fue relevado por Sila, con quien tuvo conflictos a causa de su matrimonio con la hija de Cinna. Tras escapar de morir a manos de los sicarios del dictador, fue perdonado gracias a la intercesión de los parientes de su madre. Trasladado a la provincia de Asia, combatió en Mitilene como legado de Marco Minucio Termo. Volvió a Roma a la muerte de Sila en 78 a. C., y ejerció por un tiempo la abogacía. En 73 a. C. sucedió a su tío Cayo Aurelio Cota como pontífice, y pronto entró en relación con los cónsules Pompeyo y Craso, cuya amistad le permitiría lanzar su propia carrera política.? En 70 a. C. César sirvió como cuestor en la provincia de Hispania y como edil curul en Roma. Durante el desempeño de esa magistratura ofreció unos espectáculos que fueron recordados durante mucho tiempo por el pueblo. En 63 a. C. fue elegido praetor urbanus? al obtener más votos que el resto de candidatos a la pretura. Ese mismo año murió Quinto Cecilio Metelo Pío, Pontifex Maximus designado durante la dictadura de Sila, y, en las elecciones celebradas para sustituirle, venció César. Al término de su pretura sirvió como propretor en Hispania, donde capitaneó una breve campaña contra los lusitanos. En 59 a. C. fue elegido cónsul gracias al apoyo de sus dos aliados políticos, Pompeyo y Craso, los hombres con los que César formó el llamado Primer Triunvirato. Su colega durante el consulado, Bíbulo, se retiró para así entorpecer la labor de César que, embargo, logró sacar adelante una serie de medidas legales, entre las que destaca una ley agraria que regulaba el reparto de tierras entre los soldados veteranos.

Partial Transcription http://www.thetaleofrome.com/rome-007 Hello, this is Abel, in Beijing, China. Welcome to my podcast. The Tale of Rome, Episode 7 — Ancus Marcius Founds Ostia. Last week we saw the life and death of Tullus Hostilius, the third king of Rome, and we also saw how Rome itself became a synonym of war. In fact, Rome—again, became all the things nobody wanted to have in a neighbor. This week’s episode deals with the fourth king of Rome, a man named Ancus Marcius. Ancus Marcius was a man with many different and sometimes contrasting aspects. For one, he was the son of Numa Marcius, who in turn was elected by Numa Pompilius to become Rome’s very first Pontifex Maximus, which we talked about in Episode five. […] We also cannot reliably assess all these events, and their dates. Anecdotes, above all, are to be read as a tale, and rather than taking them as pure facts, they serve the purpose of answering questions of the origins of Rome to the romans that lived centuries later, as well as trying to teach morals. As a perfect example of these quite incredible mess-ups with dates, we have that Numa Pompilius, the now well-known second king of Rome, was born on April 21st of the year 753 BC, which just so happens to be the day Rome was founded. Come on! Don’t make me laugh! The other thing that we can kind of be sure of, is that one of the major jobs Ancus Marcius had to do, was to transcribe all those documents left by Numa Pompilius, about the religious ceremonies of Rome, since the third king of Rome, Tullus Hostilius ignored that job completely. […]

Hello, this is Abel, in Beijing, China. Welcome to my podcast. The Tale of Rome, Episode 5 — Numa, the God Whisperer. Last week we talked about the end of Romulus, the first king of Rome. And then I went on a rant about, first—the seven kings of Rome, and then—how people like to get their history bits served in… well, bits. Finally, we got to the part where Rome was—for the first time ever, needing a successor to the throne. This successor, the second king of Rome, could not have been more different from the first one. He used to talk to the gods, and his name was Numa Pompilius. [...] Numa knew that the future of Rome would be filled with wars, as soon as he would be gone, and he knew that if a king would also be a Pontifex Maximus, religious services all over Rome would suffer, because such king would obviously give priority to war over all other things. So, Numa solved this by simply setting in stone that kings or any future type of supreme rulers of Rome could not be elected to the office of Pontifex Maximus, while they reigned with the city. He simply explained that the gods would punish Rome with plagues, floods, earthquakes, and all other kinds of disasters, if ever a king was elected to that office, and if ever the services to the gods were not properly done. And in fact, the office of the Pontifex Maximus was left in peace by rulers for centuries. It wasn't until the first emperor of Rome, Augustus dared to take the office of chief priest of Rome in his own hands, that Numa's rule was being respected. And that should speak volumes. Furthermore, the office itself still exists today. That's right, the institution created by Numa Pompilius is currently being exercised by the Vatican's Pope, as the head of the Catholic Church, and that's a tradition that's been unbroken for some 2,600 years, now. [...]

El 7 de diciembre es la festividad de San Ambrosio de Milán, un personaje histórico que más allá de su condición de santo, milita por derecho propio entre los forjadores de Europa, entre los grandes responsables de que nuestra historia sea como es y no de otra manera. Ambrosio nace en el año 340, si bien no está claro si lo hace en Tréveris, en Arles o en Lyon, en una familia romana cristiana que contaba ya con mártires entre sus miembros. Su padre, Ambrosio como él, era prefecto en la Galia. El menor de tres hijos, son sus hermanos Sátiro y Marcelina, que recibe el velo de las vírgenes de manos del Papa Liberio (352-366). A la muerte de su padre, cuando Ambrosio tiene catorce años, la familia vuelve a Roma y allí profundiza en el estudio del derecho. Ancius Probuslo lo nombrará gobernador consular de Liguria y Emilia, con residencia en Milán, ciudad en la que cuando el obispo arriano Auxencio muere en 374, Ambrosio es elegido su sucesor por aclamación. Se da la circunstancia de que Ambrosio era catecúmeno, es decir, que aunque se formaba para ser bautizado, todavía no lo estaba –el bautismo de infantes no era aún la regla general-, y en consecuencia, no era elegible para el episcopado. Pero ante la confirmación del nombramiento por el Emperador Valentiniano, Ambrosio recibe el sacramento que le inicia en la Iglesia y ocho días después, el 7 de diciembre, día en que celebramos su fiesta, es consagrado obispo. A partir de ese momento lleva a cabo una vida muy austera. Se despoja de todos sus bienes terrenales, come frugalmente, gana gran reputación como predicador, y sus sermones, pronunciados sin guión previo, son escuchados por multitudes. Como obispo, a Ambrosio toca enfrentar tres grandes procesos: por un lado, dentro de la propia Iglesia, la formulación del dogma y la lucha contra las herejías, que no son pocas: el novacianismo, contra el que escribe “Sobre la penitencia”; el macedonismo; o Joviniano, a quien condena en el sínodo de obispos que convoca en 390. Pero por encima de todas, el arrianismo que, como se sabe, cerca estuvo de convertirse en la fórmula prevaleciente del cristianismo y dominó la corte de muchos de los emperadores con los que Ambrosio hubo de convivir, así Justina, así Valentiniano II, aunque también, gracias precisamente a su influencia, también convivió con otros clasificables como católicos (sepa pinchando aquí, como la Iglesia comienza a ser conocida como “católica”), así Graciano, así Teodosio. Por otro lado, la lucha contra el paganismo y la definitiva cristianización del Imperio, algo para lo que va a contar con la inestimable colaboración de un español, el Emperador Teodosio, que es, más aún que Constantino, el verdadero cristianizador de la vida romana. Ambrosio ataca de plano los centros en los que se hace fuerte el paganismo: en 384 consigue la retirada de la Estatua de la Victoria del Senado; en 393 obtiene de Teodosio la prohibición de los Juegos Olímpicos. San Ambrosio impide la entrada de Teodosio en la catedral de Milán. Anton Van Dick (1620). Y en tercer lugar, se implica de lleno en el proceso que domina la época, la lucha por la primacía entre el poder temporal y el poder religioso que, gracias en buena medida a su labor, se inclina hacia éste último. En el 382 consigue que el Emperador Graciano deje de utilizar el título Pontifex Maximus, que pasará a la Iglesia. Pero el momento estelar en esta batalla viene marcado por la excomunión que impone a su por otro lado amigo, el mismísimo Emperador Teodosio, a causa de la represión sobre los ciudadanos de Tesalónica -algunas fuentes hablan de siete mil muertos- por destruir una sinagoga, la cual no le levantará hasta que el emperador haga pública penitencia de su pecado. Un proceso éste de superposición del poder religioso sobre el poder civil que puede parecer escandaloso mirado con los ojos contemporáneos, pero que tuvo su sentido en un Imperio que procedía a su definitiva cristianización y que no dejará de tener muy positivas consecuencias para el mismo y para la civilización grecorromana, como por ejemplo, cuando ante las invasiones barbáricas del s. V, toda la resistencia romana se despliegue desde el papado, ante la descomposición del poder imperial. Ambrosio deja escrita una amplia obra exegética, si bien la mayor parte de ella son homilías y comentarios orales llevados a escrito por sus oyentes. Así, nos han llegado una serie de comentarios al Antiguo Testamento, un “Comentario sobre San Lucas” (“Expositio in Lucam”) que seguramente acompañó a un comentario sobre cada uno de los evangelistas, y un llamado “Ambrosiater”, comentario sobre trece epístolas de San Pablo, que sin embargo, parece ser un apócrifo. Entre las de tipo moral destaca “De officiis ministrorum” inspirada en Cicerón, y “Sobre las vírgenes” para su hermana Marcelina, virgen ella misma como ya se ha dicho. Sobre los sacramentos escribe “De mysteriis”. Son famosos sus discursos como “De excessu fratris sui Satyri” (378) a la muerte de su hermano Sátiro, sus discursos funerario sobre Valentiniano II (392) y sobre Teodosio el Grande (395), o su “Discurso contra el intruso arriano, Auxencio” (“Contra Auxentium de basilicis tradendis”), al que como hemos dicho arriba, sucedió en la sede episcopal milanense. Junto a todo ello, los llamados “Dieciocho himnos ambrosianos”, y aunque su autoría ambrosiana ha sido puesta en entredicho, al Obispo de Milán se le atribuye la creación del género de la himnología. La primera edición de los trabajos de Ambrosio saldrá de la imprenta de Froben en Basilea, en 1527, bajo la supervisión de Erasmo de Rotterdam. En 1580, el Cardenal Montalto, futuro Sixto V, realiza una nueva edición más completa. Tumba de san Ambrosio junto a San Gervasio y San Protasio Ambrosio tendrá una relación muy cercana con los grandes personajes de su época. De hecho, es él quien bautiza a San Agustín. Con el Emperador Teodosio (pinche aquí para conocerlo todo sobre este gran español, santo de la Iglesia ortodoxa) su relación es tan próxima que se halla junto a él en su lecho de muerte. Poco tiempo le sobrevivió, pues dos años después, el viernes santo del 4 de abril de 397, fallecía a la edad de 57 años. Se cuenta que las horas previas a su muerte las pasó con los brazos extendidos como crucificado, y que, de hecho, se le apareció Jesús. Será enterrado en su basílica, al lado de los santos mártires Gervasio y Protasio, cuyas reliquias había descubierto él. En el año 835 las reliquias de los tres santos son colocadas por uno de sus sucesores, Angilberto, en un sarcófago bajo el altar, donde son descubiertas en 1864. Cátedra de San Pedro sostenida por San Ambrosio y tres santos más San Ambrosio fue un hombre respetadísimo en la Iglesia de su tiempo, tanto como el propio Papa tal vez. Su “Vida” será escrita al poco de su muerte por su secretario, Paulino, a sugerencia de San Agustín. Más adelante le dedica también una biografía el importante historiador de la Iglesia, Baronio. De él dice San Agustín que “era una de esas personas que dice la verdad, la dice bien, juiciosamente, agudamente, y con belleza y fuerza de expresión” (De doct. christ., 4, 21). Junto a San Agustín, San Jerónimo y San Gregorio forma parte del cuarteto de primeros doctores de la Iglesia nombrados por el Papa Bonifacio VIII (1294-1303), y junto con San Agustín, San Juan Crisóstomo y San Atanasio, sostiene la Cátedra del Príncipe de los Apóstoles en la tribuna de San Pedro, en Roma. Fuente texto: Religión en libertad Vidas de Santos y Beatos. Los videos se encuentran en www.magnificat.tv

Terminamos el que ha sido un gran año progresivo de la mejor forma posible: recibiendo la visita de buenos e ilustres amigos. Subterranea se engalana para recibir al gran Carlos de la Fuente, director y editor del fanzine 'El Chamberlin', además de ser el "Pontifex Maximus" de Radio Mirage y uno de los mayores especialistas en rock progresivo hispano. Una visita largamente esperada y que confiamos se repita con frecuencia. Y no ha querido perderse tan magnífico evento uno de los colaboradores subterraneos que más se ha echado de menos debido a su larga ausencia: el sin par, sin igual (y de paso sin vergüenza)... ¡Moloko! Un animado programa con interesantes charlas y debates, y por supuesto buena música. Os traemos novedades de bandas españolas que han publicado trabajos recientemente: N3xus, Mesodesma Project, One of These Days & Thee Heavy Random Tone Colour Lab, así como el tercer trabajo en común de nuestros queridos y admirados Manoel Macia y Rafael Pacha. De Venezuela nos llega otra de las bandas que están contribuyendo a elevar cada vez más si cabe el nivel del Rock Progresivo iberoamericano, Ficcion. Además escucharemos algo del nuevo proyecto del ex-batería de Anglagard, Mattias Olsson, que se prensenta con el nombre de Walrus. El equipo de Subteranea espera disfrutéis del programa y os desea lo mejor de lo mejor para el nuevo año.

Terminamos el que ha sido un gran año progresivo de la mejor forma posible: recibiendo la visita de buenos e ilustres amigos. Subterranea se engalana para recibir al gran Carlos de la Fuente, director y editor del fanzine 'El Chamberlin', además de ser el "Pontifex Maximus" de Radio Mirage y uno de los mayores especialistas en rock progresivo hispano. Una visita largamente esperada y que confiamos se repita con frecuencia. Y no ha querido perderse tan magnífico evento uno de los colaboradores subterraneos que más se ha echado de menos debido a su larga ausencia: el sin par, sin igual (y de paso sin vergüenza)... ¡Moloko! Un animado programa con interesantes charlas y debates, y por supuesto buena música. Os traemos novedades de bandas españolas que han publicado trabajos recientemente: N3xus, Mesodesma Project, One of These Days & Thee Heavy Random Tone Colour Lab, así como el tercer trabajo en común de nuestros queridos y admirados Manoel Macia y Rafael Pacha. De Venezuela nos llega otra de las bandas que están contribuyendo a elevar cada vez más si cabe el nivel del Rock Progresivo iberoamericano, Ficcion. Además escucharemos algo del nuevo proyecto del ex-batería de Anglagard, Mattias Olsson, que se prensenta con el nombre de Walrus. El equipo de Subteranea espera disfrutéis del programa y os desea lo mejor de lo mejor para el nuevo año.

El 7 de diciembre es la festividad de San Ambrosio de Milán, un personaje histórico que más allá de su condición de santo, milita por derecho propio entre los forjadores de Europa, entre los grandes responsables de que nuestra historia sea como es y no de otra manera. Ambrosio nace en el año 340, si bien no está claro si lo hace en Tréveris, en Arles o en Lyon, en una familia romana cristiana que contaba ya con mártires entre sus miembros. Su padre, Ambrosio como él, era prefecto en la Galia. El menor de tres hijos, son sus hermanos Sátiro y Marcelina, que recibe el velo de las vírgenes de manos del Papa Liberio (352-366). A la muerte de su padre, cuando Ambrosio tiene catorce años, la familia vuelve a Roma y allí profundiza en el estudio del derecho. Ancius Probuslo lo nombrará gobernador consular de Liguria y Emilia, con residencia en Milán, ciudad en la que cuando el obispo arriano Auxencio muere en 374, Ambrosio es elegido su sucesor por aclamación. Se da la circunstancia de que Ambrosio era catecúmeno, es decir, que aunque se formaba para ser bautizado, todavía no lo estaba –el bautismo de infantes no era aún la regla general-, y en consecuencia, no era elegible para el episcopado. Pero ante la confirmación del nombramiento por el Emperador Valentiniano, Ambrosio recibe el sacramento que le inicia en la Iglesia y ocho días después, el 7 de diciembre, día en que celebramos su fiesta, es consagrado obispo. A partir de ese momento lleva a cabo una vida muy austera. Se despoja de todos sus bienes terrenales, come frugalmente, gana gran reputación como predicador, y sus sermones, pronunciados sin guión previo, son escuchados por multitudes. Como obispo, a Ambrosio toca enfrentar tres grandes procesos: por un lado, dentro de la propia Iglesia, la formulación del dogma y la lucha contra las herejías, que no son pocas: el novacianismo, contra el que escribe “Sobre la penitencia”; el macedonismo; o Joviniano, a quien condena en el sínodo de obispos que convoca en 390. Pero por encima de todas, el arrianismo que, como se sabe, cerca estuvo de convertirse en la fórmula prevaleciente del cristianismo y dominó la corte de muchos de los emperadores con los que Ambrosio hubo de convivir, así Justina, así Valentiniano II, aunque también, gracias precisamente a su influencia, también convivió con otros clasificables como católicos (sepa pinchando aquí, como la Iglesia comienza a ser conocida como “católica”), así Graciano, así Teodosio. Por otro lado, la lucha contra el paganismo y la definitiva cristianización del Imperio, algo para lo que va a contar con la inestimable colaboración de un español, el Emperador Teodosio, que es, más aún que Constantino, el verdadero cristianizador de la vida romana. Ambrosio ataca de plano los centros en los que se hace fuerte el paganismo: en 384 consigue la retirada de la Estatua de la Victoria del Senado; en 393 obtiene de Teodosio la prohibición de los Juegos Olímpicos. San Ambrosio impide la entrada de Teodosio en la catedral de Milán. Anton Van Dick (1620). Y en tercer lugar, se implica de lleno en el proceso que domina la época, la lucha por la primacía entre el poder temporal y el poder religioso que, gracias en buena medida a su labor, se inclina hacia éste último. En el 382 consigue que el Emperador Graciano deje de utilizar el título Pontifex Maximus, que pasará a la Iglesia. Pero el momento estelar en esta batalla viene marcado por la excomunión que impone a su por otro lado amigo, el mismísimo Emperador Teodosio, a causa de la represión sobre los ciudadanos de Tesalónica -algunas fuentes hablan de siete mil muertos- por destruir una sinagoga, la cual no le levantará hasta que el emperador haga pública penitencia de su pecado. Un proceso éste de superposición del poder religioso sobre el poder civil que puede parecer escandaloso mirado con los ojos contemporáneos, pero que tuvo su sentido en un Imperio que procedía a su definitiva cristianización y que no dejará de tener muy positivas consecuencias para el mismo y para la civilización grecorromana, como por ejemplo, cuando ante las invasiones barbáricas del s. V, toda la resistencia romana se despliegue desde el papado, ante la descomposición del poder imperial. Ambrosio deja escrita una amplia obra exegética, si bien la mayor parte de ella son homilías y comentarios orales llevados a escrito por sus oyentes. Así, nos han llegado una serie de comentarios al Antiguo Testamento, un “Comentario sobre San Lucas” (“Expositio in Lucam”) que seguramente acompañó a un comentario sobre cada uno de los evangelistas, y un llamado “Ambrosiater”, comentario sobre trece epístolas de San Pablo, que sin embargo, parece ser un apócrifo. Entre las de tipo moral destaca “De officiis ministrorum” inspirada en Cicerón, y “Sobre las vírgenes” para su hermana Marcelina, virgen ella misma como ya se ha dicho. Sobre los sacramentos escribe “De mysteriis”. Son famosos sus discursos como “De excessu fratris sui Satyri” (378) a la muerte de su hermano Sátiro, sus discursos funerario sobre Valentiniano II (392) y sobre Teodosio el Grande (395), o su “Discurso contra el intruso arriano, Auxencio” (“Contra Auxentium de basilicis tradendis”), al que como hemos dicho arriba, sucedió en la sede episcopal milanense. Junto a todo ello, los llamados “Dieciocho himnos ambrosianos”, y aunque su autoría ambrosiana ha sido puesta en entredicho, al Obispo de Milán se le atribuye la creación del género de la himnología. La primera edición de los trabajos de Ambrosio saldrá de la imprenta de Froben en Basilea, en 1527, bajo la supervisión de Erasmo de Rotterdam. En 1580, el Cardenal Montalto, futuro Sixto V, realiza una nueva edición más completa. Tumba de san Ambrosio junto a San Gervasio y San Protasio Ambrosio tendrá una relación muy cercana con los grandes personajes de su época. De hecho, es él quien bautiza a San Agustín. Con el Emperador Teodosio (pinche aquí para conocerlo todo sobre este gran español, santo de la Iglesia ortodoxa) su relación es tan próxima que se halla junto a él en su lecho de muerte. Poco tiempo le sobrevivió, pues dos años después, el viernes santo del 4 de abril de 397, fallecía a la edad de 57 años. Se cuenta que las horas previas a su muerte las pasó con los brazos extendidos como crucificado, y que, de hecho, se le apareció Jesús. Será enterrado en su basílica, al lado de los santos mártires Gervasio y Protasio, cuyas reliquias había descubierto él. En el año 835 las reliquias de los tres santos son colocadas por uno de sus sucesores, Angilberto, en un sarcófago bajo el altar, donde son descubiertas en 1864. Cátedra de San Pedro sostenida por San Ambrosio y tres santos más San Ambrosio fue un hombre respetadísimo en la Iglesia de su tiempo, tanto como el propio Papa tal vez. Su “Vida” será escrita al poco de su muerte por su secretario, Paulino, a sugerencia de San Agustín. Más adelante le dedica también una biografía el importante historiador de la Iglesia, Baronio. De él dice San Agustín que “era una de esas personas que dice la verdad, la dice bien, juiciosamente, agudamente, y con belleza y fuerza de expresión” (De doct. christ., 4, 21). Junto a San Agustín, San Jerónimo y San Gregorio forma parte del cuarteto de primeros doctores de la Iglesia nombrados por el Papa Bonifacio VIII (1294-1303), y junto con San Agustín, San Juan Crisóstomo y San Atanasio, sostiene la Cátedra del Príncipe de los Apóstoles en la tribuna de San Pedro, en Roma. Fuente texto: Religión en libertad Vidas de Santos y Beatos. Los videos se encuentran en www.magnificat.tv

The Bridge and the Bridge-Builder The most expensive road that I've ever traveled on was a bridge. We were missionaries in Japan, and my wife and I were going to a regional conference on the mainland, we were on the smaller island of Shikoku and so we drove down to Takamatsu in Japan, and began our journey across the longest bridge in Japan at that time, one of the 10 longest in the world, the Seto Ohashi Bridge. 8 miles long, took us almost 25 minutes to cross. And none of that amazed me anywhere as much as the money we had to pay to cross it. It was $100 to cross that bridge. I didn't think it was worth that. It was quite an experience, but not that much of an experience. And so, we paid this fee and we went across and it got me to thinking this morning as I mentioned last week, the Latin word for priest is bridge builder, pontifex. High Priest, Pontifex Maximus, the great high priest who's in front of us in this text is Jesus, the bridge builder between us and God, and we mentioned that last time. And as I was thinking about the cost of crossing that bridge, does it even compare to the cost of Jesus, the bridge to God? For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers. But it was with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect that we are made right in the sight of God, and were brought over, crossing over from death to life. From eternity in hell to an eternity in heaven. That is the most costly bridge in history, and the price was the blood of Jesus. Now, as we come to Hebrews 5:1-10, we're looking at the ministry and the office of the High Priest as set up and ordained and established in the Old Covenant and the laws of Moses, but then fulfilled and surpassed by the ministry of Jesus Christ, our great high priest. The priestly ministry was established at Mount Sinai in the Old Covenant and the laws of Moses, by the direct revelation of God through Moses. He chose Aaron and his sons to this role, but they were merely types and shadows of the priestly ministry of Jesus Christ on which we depend. And so, we're looking this morning and what we have is a comparison between Aaron and Jesus and we're going to continue to learn more about that in chapter seven, but what's being presented for us is the supremacy, the superiority of the priestly ministry of Jesus over anything in the old covenant. And remember the context, these Jewish professors of faith in Christ, they'd made an outward profession of faith in Christ in the Old Covenant style, they had been living their lives, the synagogue worship and all of that sort of thing, animal sacrifices, they had heard the gospel they had made an outward profession of faith in Jesus, they'd been baptized, I think, in water, they were members of a church, hearing apostolic style preaching week after week, but under pressure, under the attacks of the world, the flesh, and the devil they were under great pressure to turn back from the New Covenant, and go back to Old Covenant worship. And this epistle, this book of Hebrews is a serious, a dire warning of the danger of doing so, because in doing that you're not just turning back, turning your back on some legalistic regulations or some abstract covenant. They're turning their back on Jesus. And so the author has been giving us Jesus in every chapter. It's Jesus you're turning your back on. It's Jesus that you're turning away from. And here he does it again, it's Jesus, you're turning away from Jesus, the superior, the great high priest and you want to go back to Aaron who's inferior. He has to be careful as he does it because he want to... He doesn't want to diminish the glory of the Old Covenant, fading though, it was, he doesn't want to say that it was nothing, that Aaron was established and set up in beautiful priestly robes to give him dignity and honor and glory, these were good things, but Christ has a greater honor and a greater glory and that old covenant glory is fading and it soon will be obsolete and it will be gone entirely. The time has passed for it. You can't go back. And so he wants to present the greatness of the high priest, but the limitations of the high priest, and then point through the limited greatness of the Old Covenant high priest, priestly ministry and his limitations as a sinner, and as a mortal, and he wants to go over to point to the greatness, the supremacy of Jesus as our final high priest. For me personally, what I get out of this meditation is just an ongoing realization of my need for a high priest to minister for me. That I am still in this world, I'm still in the flesh, I'm still in danger, I'm still under the assault of the devil, I still have the pull of the flesh, it's still going on in my life and I need a priest to minister for me. And so do you. And we have such a high priest, and He is right now at the right hand of God and is interceding for each one of you and for me too. He's praying for us. And the author wants to give us a sense of the efficacy of that high priestly ministry so that our trust would be completely in Jesus and we would not go back to other things. I. The Duties of the High Priest And so, we have laid out for us initially here the duties of the high priest, look at verse one in Hebrews 5, "Every high priest is selected from among men and is appointed to represent them in matters related to God and to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins." And so what are the duties? First and foremost, the high priest, is to represent the people to God, in prayer. Though prayer is not mentioned concerning the Old Covenant priest, it is clearly mentioned concerning Jesus. In verse seven, how He offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears. And so Jesus as a prayer warrior is presented and it's implied also that we're thinking of the high priest as a man of prayer. And so Aaron and Moses would frequently, as you know, stand in the gap between Israel and God and intercede for the people and pray that God would not destroy them, that His wrath would not be poured out on them. Moses in particular does this at the time of the golden calf. Aaron, the high priest as he entered into the holy place, into the tent of meeting was to wear the names of the tribes of Israel on a golden plate over his heart as a continual memorial before the Lord. Exodus 28:29. And so he was also, I think, to bear on his lips, the names of the people of Israel, and to pray for them, and so he was to represent the people to God in prayer, and also to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. This of course was the animal sacrificial system, and it was the priest's job to do the various actions of the animal sacrificial system as described clearly in Exodus and in the Book of Leviticus and other places. And by which blood atonement for sins could be made in symbolic form. This was the job of the high priest, the duties of the high priest. II. The Qualifications of the High Priest What were the qualifications of the high priest? Well, first he had to be human, selected from among men. Verse 1, "Every high priest, is selected from among men…" This we could take for granted, except that the author's already mentioned angels and so it can't be an angel who's going to be a priest ministering for us, has to be a human selected from among men. Secondly, he has to be chosen by God, he cannot take the honor upon himself. Look at verse four, "No one takes this honor upon himself, he must be called by God just as Aaron was." So it's a divine calling to be a high priest. Thirdly, he has to be able to deal gently with sinners. Verse 2, "He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray since he himself is subject to weakness." The word gently there means not easily angered. He's able to deal gently with sinners. He'd be out of a job if it weren't for sinners. There'd be no need for his ministry if it weren't for sinners. So he should be very glad and delighted to minister on their behalf. He should be dealing gently. Imagine a high priest saying, "I never thought I'd have to deal with sin." This is exactly why he's there, and so he's able to deal gently with sinners and not be easily angered. The people he represents are sinners. And their sinfulness is described, in particular, as linked to their ignorance and their wandering hearts. They're ignorant of God's ways. They have not known God's ways. They've not known His laws. And so they're wandering away. Even those things they do know, they willfully rebel against them and so they're ignorant and wandering into sin. Wandering through ignorance. If they really knew God, they wouldn't sin. And so all of our sins are in some sense sins of ignorance because we just really don't know Him, we don't know His glory, this is eternal life, that we may know you, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent, our sins are sins of ignorance. Not that we don't know the law of God, but we really just don't know Him. And so, the priest I think, was to be a faithful expounder of the Law of God. In the Book of Malachi it says, "That faithful instruction is found on his lips." And so he teaches, he faithfully teaches the Word of God, but no matter how faithfully he is to teach the word the people are going to continue to wander, they're going to continue to go astray. III. The Imperfection of the High Priests Though the Jewish priests may have been tempted to be frustrated with the constant sinfulness of the people, they would have been restrained. Primarily because of the imperfection of the high priest, they themselves were sinners too. They were imperfect themselves. It says, "He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray, since he Himself is subject to weakness. This is why he has to offer sacrifices for his own sins, as well as for the sins of the people." He is subject to weakness. He himself is subject to weakness. You could go backward a little bit and say, "Well then, he's ignorant and going astray too." And he is. He is ignorant and going astray just like them, he's just like them. There's no real difference and uses the word weakness. He has a weakness to him. I think this implies a spiritual weakness, a moral weakness. He holds on to the things of God only weakly. His grip on the things of God, can be broken by temptation. He can be pulled away from the things of God. He's weak. Morally weak. And we see this again and again in the Scriptures. Aaron is a prime example. Aaron was a weak man. When Moses was up there apparently too long in the mountain and the people were like, "We don't even know what happened to this man. It's time to get going, and move on." They're are people of action. They're tired of waiting for Moses. So they go to Aaron, and they want him to make them gods to go before them, and to lead them and Aaron caves into them. Though God has already spoken with his own mouth, the sound of the voice of God. The Ten Commandments have already been proclaimed, they've been preached by Almighty God. "You shall not make for yourself an idol…you shall not bow down to them or worship them." Yet what does he do? He gathers all of these gold brooches and jewelry and melts it, and he says to Moses, who is so angry... He says, "I threw it into the fire and out came this calf." Now, that's something I would like to have seen. "I threw it into the fire and out comes this calf, it's a miracle." No, he crafted and shaped it. He was an idol maker. He was an idolater. And so we see the weakness of Aaron there just very clearly displayed. In the time of Malachi the priests were offering up blind and crippled and lame sacrifices thinking God wouldn't notice or care. What does it matter? It's just an animal, it's... And then God sends Malachi, the Prophet. "How dare you do this to me? Try offering those to your governor and see if he'd accept them. See if you can slip a blind animal past him, don't you know who I am, I am a great king and my name is to be feared among the nations. But you're trying to cheat me. Cursed is the cheat who tries to trick me by bringing blind or crippled animals." And the priests were sniffing at the burden of doing this ministry, they were, "What a burden it is to be a priest." They were weak and sinful men and so they have to offer sacrifices for their own sins to even be fit for the office. The very first thing that had to happen with Aaron and his sons is that they had to be consecrated by the sacrifice of animals. Clear implication, "You are sinners, and apart from this sacrifice you're not fit for duty." And yet, for all of that, they offered up imperfect sacrifices to cover their imperfections. They offered up animals, but the blood of bulls and goats can never take away sins, the imperfection of the high priests and of their ministry. And so therefore the Law of Moses appointed imperfect men to an imperfect ministry and yet for all of that it was a helpful preparation for the coming ministry of Jesus. IV. Jesus: The Perfect High Priest And so we have depicted for us so beautifully, the perfection of Jesus as high priest. In verse 5 it says, "So Christ also did not take upon himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to Him, 'You are my son, today I have begotten you' And He says in another place, 'You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.' During the days of Jesus' life on Earth He offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save Him from death and He was heard because of His reverent submission. Although He was a son He learned obedience from what He suffered and once made perfect became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey Him and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek." Well, Jesus' high priestly ministry is developed only here in this one book. It's alluded to a little bit, I think, in the Book of Revelation, by the way he's dressed, but here, his high priestly ministry is just very potently unfolded for us. We can get a clear description of the high priestly ministry of Jesus. Other books focus on Jesus as King, as the coming Messiah, as God incarnate, in John's Gospel. But here in the Book of Hebrews, as our great high priest. And as we look more deeply into Jesus as the perfect high priest, we see the fulfillment of the symbolic priesthood set up by the Old Covenant. And also just how insane it would have been for these Jews, these first sensory Jewish Christians to turn back away from Jesus, and go back to Aaron and animal sacrifice. And that's what the author is trying to do, trying to show us that we must go on ahead and embrace Jesus' ministry because it's all there is. And all of those are just types and shadows of it anyway. And now we have the reality in Christ. So we see the author and what he's trying to do here, he's trying to help us to see the greatness of Jesus, so that they will embrace His ministry and not fall away. 1) Perfect in His Person: The Son of God AND Son of Man So first, we see Jesus as our great high priest, is perfect in His person. And we've seen this before but we can't say it enough. Our high priest, is both son of God and son of man. So the author begins with his statement in Psalm 2:7, "God said to him, "You are my son, today I've be gotten you." We've already seen this verse quoted in Hebrews 1:5, referred to again in the last chapter. This word today, I think when it says today I've begotten you, a deeply mysterious word, but whenever this is quoted it seems to be linked to Jesus' incarnation, specifically. So we see it in Hebrews 1:5-6, "For to which of the angels did God ever say, 'You are my son, today, I've begotten you.' Or again, 'I will be His Father and He'll be my son.' And again, when God brings His first born into the world, He says, 'Let all God's angels worship Him.'" So it's speaking of His... The time of His birth. When Jesus took on a human body, when He became man for us. He was begotten Son of man. And we see it again alluded to when Jesus is raised from the dead at His resurrection. The same scripture, Psalm 2:7, the Apostle Paul preaching in the city in Antioch at the synagogue. He quotes the same thing, but this time connects it to the resurrection, not to the birth. "We tell you the good news." Paul says, "What God promised our fathers He has fulfilled for us their children by raising up Jesus," as it is written in the second Psalm, "You are my son, today I have begotten you." Oh the mysteries of the Word of God. But you see the common link. The common link is Jesus as human, Jesus in a body. Jesus of like family with us. And so when He's born and when He's raised again in a human body the Scripture is brought out. Jesus therefore, is our perfect high priest because of who He is, He is both son of God and He is Son of man. As the Son of God, as we've mentioned before, He has His Father's heart, He has His Father's ear. Anything that this perfect high priest could ever ask of His Father, the Father will most certainly grant Him and with great delight. Father loves the Son and will give Him anything He asks. And what better high priest could you have than that? Son of the King, Son of Almighty God, interceding for you. Oh, you ought to meditate on that dear brother and sister in Christ. Picture it, that Jesus is speaking your name to Almighty God right now. Praying for you, interceding for you. Praying that your faith won't fail. And you know what? It won't. It won't fail until you don't need it anymore. Hallelujah. He's going to keep praying for you and keep praying for you. He's going to keep protecting you and marshalling your experiences and filtering your temptations and providing ways of escape and dealing with you if you should sin. You have an advocate with the Father, even if you should sin. He is going to minister and minister and minister at the right hand of God and He is speaking the whole time to His own Father. And how great is that? 2) Perfect in His Calling: Called by God Secondly, Jesus is perfect in His calling. He was called by God to this ministry. The author makes it clear that Almighty God alone can appoint the high priest. The glory of being a high priest cannot be seized by force. It would be an invalid ministry, it would be artificial, it would be fake, it would be man-made, it would be idolatrous, as the northern kingdom of Israel sought to do in the days of Jeroboam and Rehoboam, when the kingdom was divided. And Jeroboam, son of Nebat, made Israel sin by setting up idols and forbidding his people from going to that one place that God had chosen for all those people to go worship because it was in the southern kingdom, in Judah. He didn't want them going there. So he set up his own priestly ministry and as someone later said, "Anybody can be a priest in your kingdom Jeroboam, he's got enough money and he's got a linen ephod, he can be a priest." Well, listen, you can't be that kind of a priest. No one can take this glory on themself and have a legitimate ministry. No, he must be called by God. And so Aaron didn't one day come up to his brother Moses and say, "You know, I'd love to be a priest, of some sort, maybe even a high priest. We could have a special priest above all the other priests and if I could be him, I would love that." Neither did he say, "I'm not going to live forever, it'd be great if my sons could take over after me, be a hereditary kind of thing, where you could just pass it on from generation." He didn't take this honor upon himself. God told Moses in Exodus 28:1-2, "Have Aaron your brother brought to you from among the Israelites." Do you hear those words? "From among them I'm choosing out this man and his family, he is chosen by God from among all the Israelites along with his sons Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, so that they may serve Me as priests. Make sacred garments for your brother Aaron to give him dignity and honor." Well, Aaron didn't take that honor upon himself. He did it the right way. He was called by God and so he fulfilled that ministry. Jesus in the same way, just like Aaron, was called by God to be a high priest. "Christ also did not take upon Himself the glory of becoming a high priest, but God said to Him, 'You are my son today, I've begotten you,' And He says in another place, 'You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.'" He was designated by God to be a high priest forever, He was called by God to this ministry. 3) Perfect in His Humility: Not Seizing What is Not His Thirdly, we see Jesus perfect in His humility. He wouldn't think to do it. He didn't seize this honor, He didn't glorify Himself, it says in the NAS verse five. "Christ did not glorify Himself so as to become a high priest." This reminds me of the general perfect humility of Jesus in every respect. How He waits for things to be given to Him by His Father. Don't you see that again and again? He doesn't teach anything except what the Father gave Him. He doesn't do anything except the works the Father has laid out for Him to do. He only does what His Father wants Him to do and He does everything the Father wants Him to do. Do you see His humility then celebrated so beautifully for us, in Philippians 2? Just as Jesus didn't take the glory of becoming a high priest, He doesn't take the glory of deity upon Himself either. Philippians 2 says, "Who being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made Himself nothing. Taking the very nature of a servant being made in human likeness and being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death, even death on a cross, therefore, God exalted Him to the highest place and gave Him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus, every knee should bow in Heaven and on Earth and under the Earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God, the Father." The humility of Jesus flowing through that passage. It's why Paul quotes it there in Philippians 2. In the same way here he is humble and will not take anything except what the Father gives Him and that's His glory. And what a contrast to, for example, Nadab and Abihu who arrogantly went into the holy place and offered unauthorized sacrifice of incense to God, contrary to God's command. They were arrogant, and might have been drunk, it seems, because soon after that in Leviticus 10, God commanded that they not take strong drink before they approach Him. And so they were arrogant, they were sinful, they were wicked and God struck them dead. Fire came out and consumed them. They were great sinners. But Jesus isn't like that. Jesus is humble when He approaches His Heavenly Father. He is humble and meek and lowly in the presence of Almighty God. Though He is the Son of God, yet He is humble in His presence. So He is our perfect high priest. 4) Perfect in His Priesthood: The Order of Melchizedek Fourth, He's perfect in His priesthood in the order of Melchizedek. He says in another place, "You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek." The mysterious figure of Melchizedek is mentioned now for the first time. He pops up here. Suddenly appears just like he did in Genesis 14. Suddenly appears when Abraham was going back after his defeat of the kings and he just suddenly appears and Abraham gives him a tenth of everything. We'll talk about it more in depth in Chapter 7. This mysterious figure of Melchizedek. Then he pops up in the Psalter just in the middle of Psalm 110. Melchizedek, who's that? Psalm 110:4, "The Lord is sworn and will not change His mind. You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek." Now this whole thing is going to be developed more fully in Hebrew 7, and we'll get to that. The foretaste is I want to give you right now is Melchizedek, the thing that's unique about him is that he is both priest and king. He's a royal priest. There's a combination of priest and king, that a priest sits on the throne, that's what we've got with Melchizedek. Now again, in His perfect humility Jesus would not presume to take upon Himself the role of the high priest. Why not? Well, because in the Old Covenant, He would have been forbidden to do so. Hebrews is going to make this very plain, Jesus descended from Judah. And He is fulfilling the Davidic Covenant in which a Son of David would never be lacking to sit on the throne. He is clearly the lion of the tribe of Judah, He is descended from Judah, but only Aaron's descendants could be high priest. He was from the tribe of Levi, and so there was a very strong wall of separation set up between the kingship and the priesthood. And yet, some arrogant individuals from time to time would try to broach that barrier. Like for example, King Saul, you remember how he was waiting for Samuel, and he was going to... Samuel was going to offer sacrifice and all that sort of stuff and he's waiting and waiting. Sometimes God makes you wait just long enough to show how sinful you are. Hang in there dear friends, don't give in to temptation. Just wait another six minutes King Saul and Samuel will show up, but he didn't. And so he takes it upon himself to do this priestly ministry of offering sacrifice, and he is rejected by God on that basis. Or then again, King Uzziah you remember Uzziah, very successful king, in many respects a Godly king, blessed in every respect. At one point though he became arrogant, he became filled with himself, and he took upon Himself the glory of entering into the temple and burning incense to God. As though God would accept that. And it says that Azariah, the priest and 80 other priests, courageous men, confronted this powerful king and they said to Uzziah, "It is not right for you, Uzziah, to burn incense to the Lord. That is for the priest, the descendants of Aaron, who have been consecrated to burn incense. Leave the sanctuary for you have been unfaithful; and you will not be honored by the Lord God." Well, when Uzziah heard this he was in rage and was about to throw the censer, the burning censer at Azariah and the priests, but at that moment, leprosy broke out on his forehead and Azariah pointed it out, all the priests saw it, they were stunned. And it says they hurried him out of the temple. Indeed he was eager to go. Oh my. Eager to go, lest he be killed. How many times does it say concerning the priests, so that they will not die? Do you see the grace of God to Uzziah there? The grace of God that God didn't strike him dead on the spot for his arrogance. But what I say to you is Jesus did not presume to be a priest king, a king priest, He didn't presume. There was a wall of separation. But, well, what are we going to do about that? According to the Old Covenant, the two will be forever separated. Well, then the author to Hebrew gives the resolution: we need a new covenant. Amen. We've got to have a New Covenant and in that New Covenant, we can have a new order of priest and that new order is going to be the order of Melchizedek. And the Old Covenant, it will become obsolete, and aging, and will pass away. And that wall of separation will be broken down, and there will be a union. On the throne, there will be a priest, the priest will be a king and they will be united. Jesus did not arrogantly take this upon Himself, this was planned by God that He would be a high priest in the order of Melchizedek. 5) Perfect in His Eternity: A Priest Forever Fifth, Jesus is perfect in His eternity. The single word forever gives us that. Do you see the word forever? Verse 6, "And He says in another place, You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek." All the descendants of Aaron, they're all mortal. They all died one after the other. In fact, the death of the high priest was built into the Old Covenant, it's built into the law. You remember that if you accidentally murdered somebody and an avenger of blood was coming after you could run for your life to a city of refuge, and there you would be safe and secure. But you had to stay there until the death of the high priest. So I mentioned in Bible for Life early today, woe unto you, if he's a young man. 37-year-old high priest, you're going to be there a while, get used to the city. Look around, you need to stay right there, because in that place alone, there is safety and security. Friends that's the picture of Jesus. Those cities of refuge, were a picture of Jesus and so also this whole rule that they had to stay there until the death of the high priest. How is that a picture of Jesus? Well, we have a permanent priest, He's never going to die, so we're never going to leave the city of refuge, we'll be there forever. It's called the New Jerusalem, it's called the home of the living God, and you'll be safe there forever. These Aaronic high priests, they were mortal, they died one after the other, and each one of them died, because they were sinners, they were sinners in Adam, and they were sinners themselves. And the wages of sin is death. Jesus only died as a substitute for us who are sinners, so Jesus is forever our priest. And sometimes forever, can be just overwhelming and difficult. So let's just say Jesus will be your priest, high priest, later today. And He'll be your high priest tomorrow too. Let's just start there, okay? He's also going to be your high priest forever, but He's going to be your high priest for the rest of your life. He is your priest forever, and He will never leave you and he will never forsake you, and He will keep praying for you. And He will not lose you. 6) Perfect in His Intercession: Fervent Prayer to God, Heard by God Sixth, He is perfect in His intercession, fervent prayer to God heard by God, look at verse 7, "During the days of Jesus' life on Earth, He offered prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the One who could save Him from death and He was heard because of His reverent submission." I've mentioned the two great ministries of the high priest are the offering of sacrifices, and making of intercession for sinners. Jesus is the perfect high priest when it comes to intercession. He is the best prayer warrior, in history. There's none better than Jesus. And this passage clearly refers to Jesus' prayers while on earth despite being beset by great weakness in His physical body, He was mighty in prayer. The author speaks, I think, of the days of Jesus' life on Earth because He uses the name Jesus. He's not ashamed to speak this name, Jesus. Not merely Christ, for Christ is a title like king, he's the Messiah. Christ Jesus, like King Jesus. But he speaks of Jesus, the human being Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus the son of Mary, Jesus the man, Jesus the one who died on the cross. During the days of Jesus' life. Friends, can we say the name Jesus more frequently? What do you say? Let's say the name Jesus a lot this week, let's celebrate the name Jesus, let's love the name Jesus, let's say that sadly offensive name to our lost friends and co-workers, and neighbors, let's say the name Jesus a lot. Let's be Jesus' people, Amen. Let's speak the name of Jesus. The author celebrates that. And during the days of Jesus' life on Earth, He made prayers with intensity. Prayers and petitions it says, the repetition gives you a sense of not just prayers but petitions and not just petitions, but He also prayed. What's the difference? I don't know, but He did both. Just the repetition, gives you a sense of the comprehensiveness of His prayers. And He does so with loud cries and tears. There's a passion and intensity of His request, they're pouring forth these requests, are pouring forth from Him like molten lava out of his heart. How many human pastors and priests have defiled the act of prayer with the coldness and formality of their prayers? Prayers intoned, prayers droned, prayers that are as dead and lifeless as we fear their hearts may be. How many times have I been like that or you? Mailing it in, the time of prayer. Well, friends, I hope you're still praying through the phone book. I hope you're still praying for each other. We need to do it as much in February as we did in January, and maybe even more in March. So please keep praying for each other, and if you've dropped this practice, pick it back up again, look at the date and go to the page, pray for some people. But the thing is, Jesus continues to pray, and He prays with passion. Thomas Brooks, a Puritan pastor put it this way, about praying with passion. He said, "As a painted fire is no fire, a dead man is no man, so a cold prayer is no prayer. In a painted fire, there's no heat, in a dead man there is no life, so in a cold prayer, there is no power, no devotion, no blessing. Cold prayers are arrows without heads. They're like swords without edges, they're birds without wings, they pierce not, they cut not, they fly not up to Heaven. Cold prayers do always freeze before they get to Heaven. Oh, that Christians would chide themselves out of their cold prayers and chide themselves into a better and warmer frame of spirit when they make their supplications to the Lord." Well, that's for us. Jesus doesn't need that admonishment. He pours out prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears. And it says He did so to the one who could save Him from death. I think this is bringing us right to Gethsemane, that holy ground, where we have been before. Where Jesus falls down before His Father and is praying with intensity, "Father, if it is possible, let this cup be taken away from me, yet not what I will but what you will." And he's praying with such intensity that great drops of blood are flowing from His face. You see this intense man on the ground, this is the one who's praying for you. That's what the author is getting at here. And He was heard, that's the success of His prayer. God always hears Him. We want a high priest whom God will hear, a sinful priest cannot get God's ear. Isaiah 59 says, "Surely the arm of the Lord is not too short to save, nor His ear too dull to hear, but your iniquities have separated you from your God, your sins have hidden His face from you so that He will not hear." But that will never be the case of Jesus, He is perfect, pure, and holy, and God always hears His prayer and so it says He was heard because of His reverent submission. 7) Perfect in His Piety: Obedient, Reverent Submission And so we see Jesus is perfect in His piety. He was heard because of His reverent submission. KJV says, "He was heard and that He feared." ESV, "He was heard because of His reverence." NAS gives us, "He was hard because of His piety." So I'm going to break all the rules and put them all together. He feared in reverence, in piety. I'm just going to intensify this. He is a godly man who's praying for you, and because of His fear, of the Lord, that is the beginning of wisdom, because of His godliness, He was heard by Almighty God. And He comes in perfect submission to His Father. He says, "Father, if it's possible, let this cup be taken from me. You can save me from death." But it was not God's will to save Him from death. It was not God's will, because He wanted to save us from eternal death. He wanted to save each one of the sinners that are in here, if you will just call on His name and I'm pleading with you, if God has brought you here under the hearing of the Gospel then hear me now. This is the day of salvation. This is your savior, there is no other. Jesus was not saved from death, so He could save you from death. All you have to do is trust in Him. Call on His name, for the forgiveness of your sins. And it says here that Jesus learned obedience from what He suffered. This is the mystery of the incarnation. How can you be omniscient and learn something? It's troubling to me. But Jesus, it says learnt. And I think here, He learned by experience, He learned by living as a human being, by suffering in the body, and especially He learned by going through the cross and having been made perfect, He is therefore our high priest. Well, what does this mean that He was made perfect? Well, it does not imply imperfection, you know what it implies? It implies a completion of God's sovereign plan. God laid out a plan and Jesus perfected the plan. He lived it out and did it. And so he says in John 17 in the high priestly prayer, "Father, I have brought you glory on Earth by perfecting the plan You gave Me to do." So, He finishes the plan and then right before He's dying, He's on the cross, the last words in John's Gospel, last words He says as He's dying on the cross, He says, "It is finished." The Greek word is related to the word for perfect. It is perfect is what we could say. "It is perfected. I have finished the work that God gave Me to do and it's finished." And so, He was qualified or made perfect by what He suffered and therefore you see He is perfect in His sacrifice. 8) Perfect in His Sacrifice: The Source of Eternal Salvation Once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all those who obey Him. Jesus by dying on the cross, by shedding His blood becomes a fountain, a source of eternal salvation for us. Just meditate on those words; eternal salvation. Jesus is your eternal savior, He's bringing you into an eternity of salvation, He is your source. And so we have that river of the water of life flowing clear as crystal coming down from the throne of God in the center of the city. He is the living source of your salvation, the source of your eternal salvation is the blood of Jesus. This then is the perfection of the priestly ministry of Jesus, the high priests who are descendants of Aaron were sinful men who had to offer imperfect sacrifices for their imperfect lives. And after endlessly offering those symbolic sacrifices, which could never take away sins, they died and they were replaced by their sons to carry on that ministry. But Jesus is the perfect high priest. He is the Son of God, and the Son of Man who is sinless, pure and undefiled. He was called by God to be a high priest and a king in the order of Melchizedek. Jesus humbly took that role from God. He displayed perfect prayers in Gethsemane and perfect submission to the will of God, and that perfectly qualified Him to be our High Priest and once made perfect through suffering, He is qualified to save you, sinner, though you may be. V. Applications So, what application? Just go back a little bit to the end of Chapter 4, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. Amen. That's our application. Hold on to this great high priest as He holds on to you. Strengthen your faith grip on Him, immerse your mind in the things that I'm talking about here today, immerse your minds in scripture, if your grip on Jesus is weakening, strengthen it. Now you're not saved by your grip on Jesus, you know that, but it's still good to have a good grip on Jesus, amen. I press on to take hold of that for which Jesus has taken hold of me. So Jesus takes hold of me, and in taking hold of me, He's teaching me to grip on Him. And so, let us hold fast to our confession. Secondly, let us draw near to the throne of God. As we said last week, come near. Jesus is already praying for you. He's been praying this whole time. He's praying that you'll hang in there with me another one or two minutes, we're almost done. But He's praying for you, that your faith will be strengthened and it will not fail and that you'll get the full ministry of the Word of God. He's interceding for you. When you come in to the throne of grace, it's a busy place. Jesus is already there at the right hand of God, praying for you. Join him in prayer. And thirdly, He is the source of salvation for everyone, that's not what it says. He's not the source of salvation for every single solitary human being on the face of the Earth. No He's a source of salvation for those who obey Him. Let me put it to you this way, if Jesus is saving you, He's causing you to obey Him, and if you're not obeying Jesus He's not saving you. And so, obey Him by the power of the Spirit. And again, you're not saved by your obedience, you're saved, that you may obey. And your obedience is not the ground of your salvation, it's merely the proof of it, but you must obey Him, you must follow His laws, by the power of the Spirit. This is our fifth baptismal vow. We say it every single time. Do you promise to walk in the pattern of newness of life by the laws of God, and the laws of God, by the power of the Holy Spirit? Yes, I do, that's our baptismal promise. Close with me in prayer. Father, thank you for sending us such a great high priest and Jesus, thank You for never forsaking us, never leaving us, thank you for interceding. Thank you, You bear our names on your heart and You carry them into the presence of God and You bear our names on Your shoulders and You carry the weight of us all the way into heaven. Thank you, Jesus, our great high priest. Pray for us, O Lord, continue to pray as I know You will, and teach us to pray as You are praying, that we would pray for each other horizontally, that we would join into the intercessory ministry of Jesus, praying for this brother or that sister that their faith won't fail and that they will obey Jesus and follow Him. By the power of the Spirit, we pray this in Jesus' name. Amen.

This week's episode is titled, “Keeping a Record”The first 3 Cs of Church History are at times a difficult puzzle to sort out because no coherent historical narrative was being kept.Luke's account in the Books of Acts recounts a time span of about 30 yrs & roughly narrates the spread of the Faith from Jerusalem to Rome. The next narrative doesn't come till the writings of the Christian historian Eusebius in the 4th C.  What we have for a period of over 200 yrs are the writings of the Fathers whose letters give little more than a thumbnail sketch of what was happening. We have to infer & assume a lot by picking up what facts we can about what was happening. As we've seen, the work of the Church Fathers focused mainly on providing pastoral & apologetic support.  Gaining an historical framework for this period comes from merging secular accounts of history with the commentary of the Fathers. But with the work of Eusebius at the opening of the 4th C, the narrative becomes significantly clearer.Eusebius began compiling his magnum opus of Church History in the 290's. Titled Ecclesiastical History, it's an attempt to provide a narrative of the Communion of the Saints from the Apostles to his time.Eusebius was born & raised in Caesarea on the coast of Israel. He was a student of the Christian leader Pamphilas, who was himself a student of the great Apologist Origen. Eusebius became the bishop at Caesarea in 313. He played a major role in the Council of Nicaea in 325, which we'll take a closer look at in a future episode.Eusebius is a key figure in the study of Church History because his Ecclesiastical History is the first work after Luke's to attempt an historical narrative of the Faith. He's also an important figure because of his close association with the Emperor Constantine.I want to quote the opening of Eusebius' narrative because it gives us a sense of the monumental nature of his work.  He knew he was attempting to reconstruct a narrative of the Church from scant resources.In Chapter 1, which he titled, “The Plan of the Work” he writes –It is my purpose to write an account of the successions of the holy apostles, as well as of the times which have elapsed from the days of our Savior to our own; and to relate the many important events which are said to have occurred in the history of the Church; and to mention those who have governed and presided over the Church in the most prominent parishes, and those who in each generation have proclaimed the divine word either orally or in writing.It is my purpose also to give the names and number and times of those who through love of innovation have run into the greatest errors, and, proclaiming themselves discoverers of knowledge falsely so-called, have like fierce wolves unmercifully devastated the flock of Christ. …But at the outset I must crave for my work the indulgence of the wise, for I confess that it is beyond my power to produce a perfect and complete history, and since I am the first to enter upon the subject, I am attempting to traverse as it were a lonely and untrodden path. I pray that I may have God as my guide and the power of the Lord as my aid, since I am unable to find even the bare footsteps of those who have traveled the way before me, except in brief fragments, in which some in one way, others in another, have transmitted to us particular accounts of the times in which they lived. From afar they raise their voices like torches, and they cry out, as from some lofty and conspicuous watch-tower, admonishing us where to walk and how to direct the course of our work steadily and safely.Having gathered therefore from the matters mentioned here and there by them whatever we consider important for the present work, and having plucked like flowers from a meadow the appropriate passages from ancient writers, we shall endeavor to embody the whole in an historical narrative. …This work seems to me of especial importance because I know of no ecclesiastical writer who has devoted himself to this subject; and I hope that it will appear most useful to those who are fond of historical research.Eusebius was unaware of any previous attempt to provide an historical narrative of the development of the Faith from the late 1st C to his time in the early 4th, a period of a little over 200 yrs. From a modern perspective, Eusebius' account might be considered suspect, relying as it does on tradition & at best fragmentary evidence. What must be remembered is the importance of that oral tradition and the accuracy of such transmission over long periods of time. Because the ancient world didn't possess cheap and plentiful means of recording information, it was dependent on oral tradition & rote memorization.  With the advent of the printing press and more economic media, the priority of the oral tradition declined. Eusebius had both written and oral source material to draw from. His work can be considered dependable, while subject to question when it leaned toward the ancient penchant for using history as propaganda.As we return to the narrative timeline of Church history we need to pick up the story with the reign of the Diocletian who presided over the last & in many ways worst round of persecution under the Roman emperors.Though Christians remember Diocletian for that, he was in truth one of the most effective of the Roman Emperors. By the time he came to the throne, the Roman Empire was a sprawling & unwieldy beast of a realm to rule. The City of Rome was an old & decayed relic of its former glory. So Diocletian moved his headquarters eastward to Nicomedia in Asia Minor, modern Turkey.  Instead of trying to exert control over the entire empire himself & solely, Diocletian appointed Maximian as co-emperor to rule the western half of the Empire from Rome while he ruled the East.One of the persistent problems that led to so much unrest in the recent decades was the question of succession; who would rule after the current emperor? To forestall that turmoil, Diocletian appointed dual successors for both himself & Maximian.  Flavius Constantius became Maximian's successor while Diocletian took on Galerius. This established what's known as the Tetrarchy.While Diocletian had no warm & fuzzy feelings for the followers of Christ, it was really his successor Galerius that urged him to launch a campaign of persecution. Galerius was a military commander who thought Christians made poor soldiers. He knew their loyalty was supremely to their God and thought they made for unreliable troops. Galerius was also a committed pagan who believed in the Roman deities. He attributed any setback for the Army & any of the regular natural disasters that shook the realm, to their displeasure that so many of Rome's subjects were turning to the new god on the block. So it was really at Galerius' urging Diocletian approved the severe measures taken against Christians and their churches.  When Diocletian retired to his villa to raise cabbages & turned the eastern half of the Empire over to Galerius, persecution increased.Eventually, Constantius replaced Maximian in the West, just as Galerius had assumed the mantle in the East. And Diocletian's tetrarchy began to unravel. Galerius decided he wanted to be sole ruler and abducted Constantius' son, Constantine who'd been named successor to his father in the West. When Constantius fell ill, Galerius granted Constantine permission to visit him.Constantius died, & Constantine demanded Galerius recognize him as his co-emperor. No doubt Galerius would have launched a military campaign against Constantine's bid for rule of the West, but Galerius himself was stricken with a deadly illness. On his deathbed, Galerius admitted his policy of persecution of Christians hadn't worked and rescinded his policy of oppression.In the West, Constantine's claim to his father's throne was contested by Maximian's son, Maxentius. The showdown between them is known as the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. Maxentius didn't want Constantine marching his troops into Rome so he tore down the Milvian Bridge after marching his troops across it to meet Constantine. Just in case the battle went against Maxentius, he had a temporary bridge built of a string of boats across the river.At this point, the story gets confused because there's been so many who've written about what happened and the reports are varied. On the day before the battle, Constantine prayed, most likely to the sun-god. As he did, he looked toward the sun & saw a cross. Then, either he saw the words or heard them spoken, “By this sign, Conquer.” That night while he slept, Jesus appeared to him in a dream, telling him to have his soldiers place a Christian symbol on their shields. The next morning, chalk was quickly passed round & the soldiers put what's called the Chiron on their shields. Chi & Rho are the first 2 letters of the Greek word Christos, Christ. In English it looks like a P on top of an X.When the 2 forces met, Constantine's veterans bested Maxentius' less experienced troops, who retreated to their makeshift bridge. While crossing, Maxentius fell into the water & drowned. Constantine then marched victoriously into Rome.A year later, he and his new co-emperor Licinius issued what's known as the Edict of Milan, which decreed an end to all religious persecution, not just of Christians, but all faiths. For Constantine, Jesus was now his divine patron & the cross, an emblem of shame & derision for generations, became instead—a kind of charm. Instead of being a symbol of Rome's brutality in executing its enemies, the cross became a symbol of Imperial power.Bishops began to be called priests as they gained parity with their peers in pagan temples. These Christian priests were shown special favors by Constantine. It didn't take long for the pagan priests to realize which way the winds of political favor were blowing. Many converted.Now à there's been much debate over the legitimacy of Constantine's conversion. Was he genuinely born again or was he just a savvy politician who recognized a trend he could co-opt and turn to his favor? People will disagree on this and my meager offering is unlikely to convince anyone. But I think Constantine was probably a genuine Christian. He certainly did some things after his conversion that are difficult to reconcile with a sincere faith, but we have to remember the moral base he grew up in as the son of a Caesar & as a general of Roman legions was very different from the Biblical morality that's shaped Western civilization.  Also, Constantine's actions which are so decidedly non-Christian, like murdering those who threatened his power, may have been rationalized not as personal acts so much as attempts to secure the peace & safety of the empire. I know that's a stretch, but when analyzing history, we need to be careful about judging people when we don't have at our disposal all the facts they did.If we could sit down with Constantine and say, “You shouldn't have executed that guy.” He could very well say something like, “Yes, as a Christian, I shouldn't have. You're right. But I didn't execute him out of personal anger or suspicion or mere selfishness. It really bothers me that I had to off him; but I discovered he was plotting to usurp my throne and it would have thrown the empire into years of civil war & chaos.” To which we'd reply,  “Well Constance, you need to trust God more. He'll protect you. He put you on the throne, He can keep you there.” And Constantine might reply, “Yeah, I considered that & I agree. But it's a tough call. You see, in terms of my personal life, I trust God. But when it comes to my role as Emperor, I need to make tough choices others who don't wield the power I do will understand.”Let's not forget that Constantine, while being a competent general & astute politician, was at best a novice believer.I share this little made-up discussion because it points up something we're going to encounter again & again in our review of the history of the Church. We look on past ages, on what they believed and the things they did, with an attitude of moral superiority because we wouldn't do the terrible things they did, or we assume would do some things they failed to. We need to be cautious with this attitude for the simple reason that when we take the time to listen to the voices of the past and let them explain themselves, we often come to a new appreciation for the difficulty of their lives & choices. We may not agree with them, but we at least realize in their own minds & hearts, they thought they were doing what was best.You make up your own mind about the genuineness of Constantine's faith, but let me encourage you to spend a little time looking up what Eusebius wrote about him and some of the tough decisions Constantine had to make during his reign.Some of the things regarded as incompatible with a genuine conversion is that he retained his title of Pontifex Maximus as the head of the state religious cult. He conceived & hatched political plots to remove enemies. He murdered those deemed a threat to his power.On the other hand, from 312 on, his favor of Christianity was quite public. He granted the same privileges to bishops, pagan priests enjoyed. He banned crucifixion & ended the punishment of criminals by using them in gladiatorial games. He made Sunday a holiday. His personal charity built several large churches. And his private life demonstrated a pretty consistent genuine faith. His children were brought up in the Church & he practiced marital fidelity, at least, as far as we know. That of course, was certainly NOT the case with previous Emperors or even the wider Roman nobility.Critics like to point to Constantine's delay of baptism to shortly before his death as evidence of a lack of faith. I suggest that it ought to be read exactly the opposite. Remember what we learned about baptism a few episodes back. In that time, it was believed after baptism, there were certain sins that couldn't be forgiven. So people delayed baptism to as close to death as possible, leaving little chance for commission of such a sin to occur. Following his baptism, Constantine never again donned the imperial purple of his office but instead wore only his white baptismal robes. That sounds like he was concerned to enter Heaven, not a casual disregard of it.Chief among Constantine's concerns upon taking control of the Empire was unity. It was unity & strength that had moved Diocletian to establish the tetrarchy. Decades of civil war as one powerful general after another seized control and beat down his challengers had desperately weakened & impoverished the realm. Now that Constantine ruled, he hoped the Church would help bring a new era of unity based on a vital & dynamic faith. It didn't take long before he realized the very thing he hoped would bring unity was itself fractured.When the Church was battered & beaten by imperial persecution, it was forced to be one. But when that pressure was removed, the theological cracks that had been developing for a while became immediately evident. Chief among them was the Donatist Controversy we recently considered. In 314 the Donatists appealed to Constantine to settle the issue on who could ordain elders.Think about what a momentous change this was! The church appealed to the civil authority to rule on a spiritual affair! By doing so, the Church asked for imperial sponsorship.At this point we need a robot to wave its arms manically & cry “Danger! Will Robinson, Danger!”Constantine knew this was not a decision he was capable of making on his own so he gathered some church leaders in Arles in the S of France to decide the issue. The Donatist bishops were outnumbered by the non-Donatists – so you know where this is going. They decided against the Donatists.Instead of accepting the decision, the Donatists called the leaders who opposed them corrupt and labeled the Emperor their lackey.  The Church split between the Donatist churches of North Africa and the rest who now looked to Constantine as their leader.As tensions rose, the Emperor sent troops to Carthage in 317 to enforce the installation of a pro-government bishop opposed by the Donatists. For the first but far from last time, Christians persecuted Christians. Opponents of Constantine were exiled from Carthage. After 4 years, he realized his strong arm tactics weren't working and withdrew his troops.We'll pick it up and this point next time.

El episodio de esta semana es, “Manteniendo un Registro”Los primeros 3 siglos de la historia de la Iglesia son a veces un rompecabezas difícil de armar porque no se mantenía ningún sistema coherente de narrativa histórica.El narrativo histórico de Lucas en el libro de los Hechos narra un lapso de unos 30 años aproximadamente y narra la propagación de la fe de Jerusalén a Roma. El siguiente relato no llegaría hasta los escritos del historiador cristiano Eusebio, en el 4º siglo.  Lo qué tenemos en un período de más de 200 años son los escritos de los Padres de la Iglesia cuyas cartas dan solamente una idea parcial de lo que estaba sucediendo. Tenemos que inferir y asumir un montón eligiendo qué hechos y información podemos encontrar acerca de lo que estaba sucediendo. Como hemos visto, la labor de los Padres de la Iglesia se centraba principalmente en proveer apoyo en el área pastoral y apologético. Construyendo un contexto histórico para este período proviene de la fusión de relatos seculares de la historia con los comentarios de los Padres. Pero con el trabajo de Eusebio al principio del 4 siglo, la narrativa se vuelve mucho más clara.Eusebio comenzó a compilar su magnum opus de Historia de la Iglesia en los 290's. Titulado Historia Eclesiástica, es un intento de proporcionar una descripción de la Comunión de los Santos, desde los Apóstoles hasta su tiempo.Eusebio nació y fue criado en Cesárea, en la costa de Israel. Éra un estudiante del líder cristiano Pánfilas, quien fue él mismo un estudiante del gran apologista Orígenes. Eusebio se convirtió en el Obispo de Cesárea en el año 313 d.C.. Desempeñó un papel importante en el Concilio de Nicea en el año 325 d.C., en cual examinaremos más de cerca en un futuro episodio.Eusebio es una figura clave en el estudio de la Historia de la Iglesia, porque su Historia Eclesiástica es la primera obra después de la de Lucas en intentar una narrativa histórica de la Fe. Eusebio también es una figura importante debido a su cercana asociación con el Emperador Constantino.Quiero citar la apertura de la narrativa de Eusebio porque nos da un sentido de que tan monumental fue su obra. Él sabía que estaba intentando reconstruir una narrativa de la Iglesia con escasos recursos.En el capítulo 1, que él llamó, "El Plan de la obra", escribe -Es mi propósito escribir un relato de la sucesión de los apóstoles, así como de los tiempos que han transcurrido desde los días de nuestro Salvador al nuestro; y relacionar los muchos acontecimientos importantes que se dice que han ocurrido en la historia de la Iglesia; y mencionar quienes han gobernado y presidido en las parroquias más prominentes de la Iglesia, y aquellos que en cada generación han proclamado la palabra divina, ya sea oralmente o por escrito.Es mi propósito también dar los nombres y número de veces que individuos a través del amor de la innovación han caído en grandes errores, y se han proclamado como descubridores de conocimiento llamado falsamente, y como lobos feroces sin piedad han devastado la grey de Cristo. …Pero al principio debo anhelar por mi trabajo la indulgencia de los sabios, porque confieso que está más allá de mi poder producir una perfecta y completa historia, ya que soy el primero en entrar en el tema, y estoy intentando atravesar un camino no trazado, una ruta solitaria. Mi oración es que pueda tener a Dios como mi guía y el poder del Señor como mi ayuda, desde que soy incapaz de encontrar incluso los meras huellas de quienes han recorrido el camino delante de mí, excepto en breves fragmentos, en los que algunos en una forma, otros en otra, nos han transmitido relatos particulares de los tiempos en que vivían. Desde lejos, levantan sus voces como antorchas, y gritan, como de alguna noble y llamativa torre de vigilia, amonestándonos por donde caminar y cómo dirigir el curso de nuestra labor constante y segura.Habiendo reunido por tanto de las cuestiones mencionadas aquí y allí por ellos lo que consideramos importante para el presente trabajo, y habiendo arrancado como flores de un prado pasajes correspondientes de antiguos escritores, nos esforzaremos para encarnar el conjunto en una narrativa histórica. …Este trabajo me parece de especial importancia porque no conozco de ningún escritor eclesiástico quien se ha dedicado a este tema, y espero que resulte más útil para aquellos que gustan de la investigación histórica.Eusebio desconocía cualquier intento anterior para proporcionar una narrativa histórica del desarrollo de la Fe desde el final del primer siglo a su tiempo en la primera parte del 4 siglo, un período de un poco más de 200 años. Desde una perspectiva moderna, el relato que Eusebio cuenta podría ser considerado sospechoso, ya que se basa en la tradición y en el mejor de los casos, pruebas fragmentarias. Lo qué se debe tener en cuenta es la importancia de la tradición oral y la exactitud de esa transmisión durante largos períodos de tiempo. Porque el mundo antiguo no poseía abundantes y baratos medios de grabación de información, dependía de la tradición oral y la memorización mecánica. Con la llegada de la imprenta y medios más económicos, la prioridad de la tradición oral disminuyo. Eusebio tenia fuentes escritas y orales para usar como materiales originales. Su trabajo puede ser considerado confiable, pero al mismo tiempo cuestionable cuando se inclina hacia la antigua practica del uso de la historia como propaganda.Al volver a la narrativa cronología de la historia de la Iglesia tenemos que retomar la historia en el reinado de Diocleciano, quien presidió sobre la última y en muchas formas peores de las persecuciones bajo los Emperadores Romanos.Aunque los cristianos recuerdan a Diocleciano por la persecución, fue en verdad uno de los más eficaces de los Emperadores Romanos. En el momento al cual llegó al trono, el Imperio Romano era un vasto y complicado monstro de territorio para gobernar. La ciudad de Roma era una vieja y podrida reliquia de su antigua gloria. Por esa razón Diocleciano trasladó su capital hacia el este hasta Nicomedia en Asia Menor, la actual Turquía. En lugar de tratar de ejercer control sobre todo el imperio como única autoridad, Diocleciano nombró a Maximiano como co-emperador para gobernar la mitad occidental del Imperio desde Roma mientras el gobernó al Oriente.Uno de los problemas persistentes que habían causado tanta agitación en las últimas décadas, era la cuestión de la sucesión; quién gobernaría después de los actuales emperadores? Para evitar ese caos, Diocleciano nombró sucesores duales para él y Maximiano. Flavio Constancio se convirtió en el sucesor de Maximiano mientras Diocleciano tomó a Galerio. Esto estableció lo que se conocía como el Tetrarcado.Mientras Diocleciano no tenía sentimientos de amistad para los seguidores de Cristo, fue realmente su sucesor Galerio que le movió a iniciar una campaña de persecución. Galerio era un comandante militar que pensaba que las ideas cristianas llevaban a sus tropas a ser malos soldados. Él sabía que su lealtad estaba sumamente con su Dios y pensaba que esto hacia a sus tropas no confiables. Galerio también era un pagano dedicado, que creía en las deidades Romanas. El atribuía cualquier contratiempo para el ejército o cualquiera de los frecuentes desastres naturales que sacudieron al Imperio, como prueba del disgusto de los dioses por tantos ciudadanos de Roma que se estaban pasando al nuevo dios. Así que fue realmente por la insistencia de Galerio a Diocleciano por la cual el aprobó las severas medidas tomadas en contra los Cristianos y sus iglesias. Cuando Diocleciano se retiró a su villa para cosechar verduras y le cedio la mitad oriental del Imperio a Galerio, la persecución, aumento.Eventualmente, Constancio igualmente sustituyo a Maximiano en el Oeste, casi al mismo tiempo que Galerio asumió el manto en el Oriente. Aquí fue cuando el tetrarcado de Diocleciano se empezó a desmoronar. Galerio decidió que quería ser el emperador único y secuestro al hijo de Constancio, Constantino, quien había sido nombrado sucesor de su padre en el Oeste. Cuando Constancio cayó enfermo, Galerio concedió permiso a Constantino para visitarlo.Constancio murió, y Constantino exigió que Galerio lo reconociera como su co-emperador. No hay duda de Galerio hubiera lanzado una campaña militar en contra de Constantino para poder reinar en el imperio de Oeste, pero Galerio se encontraba afligido con una enfermedad mortal. En su lecho de muerte, Galerio admitió que su política de persecución hacia los Cristianos no había resultado y rescindió su orden de opresión.En el oeste, Constantino encontró que su derecho por el trono de su padre era negado por el hijo de Maximiano, Majencio. El enfrentamiento entre ellos es conocido como la Batalla del Puente Milvian. Majencio no quería a Constantino marchando sus tropas en Roma, por lo que derribo el puente Milvian después de haber marchado a sus tropas a través de el para enfrentar a Constantino. Tenia un plan en el caso de que la batalla iba en contra de el, y había construido un puente temporal de una cadena de embarcaciones a través del río.En este punto, la historia se pone un poco confusa porque ha habido muchos que han escrito acerca de lo ocurrido y los informes son variados. El día antes de la batalla, Constantino oró, y es más probable que fue al dios del sol. Cuando él lo hizo, miraba hacia el sol y vio una cruz. Entonces, o vio las palabras o las oyó que decían, "Por este signo, Conquistaras." Esa noche mientras dormía, Jesús se le apareció en sueños, diciéndole que colocara un símbolo cristiano en los escudos de sus soldados. A la mañana siguiente, tiza o gis fue distribuido y rápidamente los soldados pusieron lo que se llama el “Chirón” en sus escudos. Chi y Rho son las 2 primeras letras de la palabra griega Cristus, Cristo. En español parece una P en la parte superior de un X.Cuando los dos ejércitos pelearon, los veteranos de Constantino derrotaron a los mas numerosos pero menos experimentados de Majencio, quienes huyeron por su puente improvisado. Al cruzar, Majencio cayó al agua y se ahogó. Constantino entonces marcho victoriosamente entrando en Roma.Un año más tarde, él y su nuevo co-emperador Licinio publicaron lo que se conoce como el Edicto de Milán, que decretó un fin a todas las persecuciones religiosas, no sólo de los cristianos, sino de todos las creencias. Para Constantino, Jesús era ahora su divino patrón y la cruz, un emblema de vergüenza y escarnio por generaciones, se convirtió en una especie de talismán. En lugar de ser un símbolo de la brutalidad de Roma en la ejecución de sus enemigos, la cruz se convirtió en un símbolo del poder imperial.A los obispos se les comenzó a llamar sacerdotes al conseguir la igualdad con sus opuestos en los templos paganos. Estos sacerdotes cristianos eran mostrados favores especiales por Constantino. No le tomó mucho tiempo a los sacerdotes paganos a darse cuenta de la forma en que los vientos de favor político estaban cambiando. Muchos se convirtieron.Ahora → ha habido mucho debate sobre la legitimidad de la conversión de Constantino. Fue verdaderamente nacidos de nuevo o fue simplemente un astuto político que reconocía una tendencia social que podía usar y girar a su favor? Muchas personas están en desacuerdo sobre este tema y es improbable que mi pequeña ofrenda cambie de parecer a ninguno de ellos. Pero creo que Constantino fue probablemente un verdadero cristiano. Ciertamente él hizo algunas cosas después de su conversión que son difíciles de conciliar con una fe sincera, pero tenemos que recordar que la base moral con la cual creció como hijo de un Cesar y como general de las legiones Romanas era muy diferente de la moral Bíblica que ha formado nuestra civilización actual. Asimismo, las acciones de Constantino que son tan decididamente no-cristianas, como asesinar a los que amenazaban su poder, pudieron haber sido racionalizadas no como actos personales tanto como intentos de asegurar la paz y la seguridad del Imperio. Ya sé que es una exageración, pero cuando se analiza la historia, tenemos que tener cuidado de no juzgar a las personas cuando no tenemos a nuestra disposición todos los hechos en nuestras manos que ellos tuvieron.Si pudiéramos sentarnos con Constantino y decir, "No deberías haber ejecutado a ese chico." Él podría muy bien haber dicho algo como, "Sí, como cristiano, yo no debería hacerlo. Tienes razón. Pero yo no lo ejecute por enojo personal o sospecha o por mero egoísmo. Realmente me molesta que tuve que hacerlo; pero descubrí que era trataba de conspirar para usurpar mi trono y esto hubiera arrojado al imperio en años de guerra civil y caos." A cual nos gustaría responder "Bueno Constantino, usted necesita confiar en Dios. Él te protegerá. Él te puso en el trono, él puede mantenerte allí." y Constantino podría contestar "Sí, lo he considerado y estoy de acuerdo. Pero es una decisión difícil. Necesita entender, que en términos de mi vida personal, yo confío en Dios. Pero cuando se trata de mi rol como Emperador, necesito tomar decisiones difíciles que otros que no están en esta posición no pueden entender".No olvidemos que Constantino, mientras que era un general competente y un hábil político, fue, en el mejor de los casos, un creyente novato.Comparto esta pequeña discusión imaginaria porque apunta a algo que vamos a encontrar una y otra vez en nuestra examinación de la Historia de la Iglesia. Muchas veces vemos a las épocas pasadas, lo que creían y las cosas que hicieron, con una actitud de superioridad moral porque nosotros no haríamos las cosas terribles que ellos hicieron, o suponemos que haríamos algunas cosas fallaron en hacer. Tenemos que ser cautelosos con esta actitud, por la sencilla razón de que cuando nos tomamos el tiempo para escuchar las voces del pasado y les permitimos explicar por sí mismos, a menudo encontramos un nuevo entendimiento de la dificultad de sus vidas y opciones. Podemos no estar de acuerdo con ellos, pero al menos podemos darnos cuenta que en sus propias mentes y corazones, pensaban que estaban haciendo lo que era mejor.Usted va a tener su propia opinión de la sinceridad de la fe de Constantino, pero permítame alentarle a pasar un poco de tiempo buscando lo que Eusebio escribió sobre él y algunas de las decisiones más difíciles Constantino tuvo que hacer durante su reinado.Algunas de las cosas consideradas incompatibles con una verdadera conversión es que él conservó su título de Pontifex Maximus como jefe del culto religioso del estado. Él también concibió & llevo acabo conspiraciones políticas para eliminar enemigos. Asesinó a aquellos que se consideraba como una amenaza para su poder.Por otro lado, desde el año 312 d.C., su favor hacia el cristianismo era bastante público. Le otorgó los mismos privilegios a los obispos que los sacerdotes paganos disfrutaban. Prohibió la crucifixión y terminó el castigo de los delincuentes usándolos en las luchas de gladiadores. Él hizo al Domingo un día de fiesta. Su caridad personal construyó varias iglesias grandes. Y su vida privada demostró una consistente fe genuina. Sus hijos fueron educados en la Iglesia y practicó la fidelidad marital, al menos, en la medida de lo que sabemos. Que por supuesto, no era el caso con los emperadores anteriores e incluso la nobleza romana.Los que los critican, apuntan a la demora del bautismo de Constantino hasta poco antes de su muerte como una falta de fe. Sugiero que debería ser leído exactamente como lo contrario. Recuerde lo que hemos aprendido sobre el bautismo unos cuantos episodios atrás. En ese momento, se pensaba que después del bautismo, existían ciertos pecados que no podían ser perdonados. Así que la gente retrasaba el bautismo a lo mas cerca posible de la muerte, dejando pocas posibilidades para que ese pecado ocurriera. Después de su bautismo, Constantino nunca más uso la púrpura imperial de su oficina sino sólo llevaba su túnica blanca bautismal. Eso suena como él quería entrar al Cielo, y no una omisión casual de ella.Entre las preocupaciones principales de Constantino al asumir el control del Imperio era la unidad. Fue la unidad y fortaleza que se había llevado a Diocleciano a establecer el tetrarcado. Décadas de guerra civil con un potente general tras otro que se apoderaba y derrotaba a sus rivales habían debilitado y empobrecido desesperadamente al Imperio. Ahora que Constantino reinaba, el confiaba que la Iglesia ayudaría a lograr una nueva era de unidad sobre la base de una fe dinámica y vital. No pasó mucho tiempo antes de que él se dio cuenta de que la cosa con la cual esperaba lograr unidad estaba también fracturada.Cuando la Iglesia fue maltratada y golpeada por la persecución imperial, fue forzada a ser una. Pero cuando esa presión se quitó, la grietas teológicas que se habían venido desarrollando durante un tiempo resultaron inmediatamente evidentes. La principal de ellas fue la polémica Donatista que recientemente hemos considerado. En el año 314 d.C. los donatistas apelaron a Constantino para resolver la cuestión sobre quién podría ordenar ancianos.Piensen en que tan importante fue este cambio! La iglesia apeló a la autoridad civil para pronunciar sobre un asunto espiritual! Al hacerlo, la Iglesia pide el patrocinio imperial.En este punto tenemos que levantar una bandera roja y gritar "¡Peligro! Tengan cuidado peligro!"Constantino sabía que esta no era una decisión que el era capaz de hacer por su propio cuenta, asi que reunió a algunos de los líderes de la iglesia en Arles en el sur de Francia para decidir la cuestión. Los obispos Donatistas fueron superados por los no-Donatistas - así que usted sabe que paso. Se decidió en contra de los Donatistas.En lugar de aceptar la decisión, los Donatistas llamaron a los dirigentes que se oponían a ellos como corruptos y etiquetaron el Emperador como su lacayo. La Iglesia se dividió entre las iglesias Donatistas del Norte de África y el resto del mundo, que ahora veían a Constantino como su líder.Al aumentar las tensiones, el emperador envió tropas a Cartago en el año 317 para exigir la instalación de un obispo que favoraba al gobierno y era opuestos por los donatistas. Por primera vez, pero lejos de ser la última, los cristianos perseguían a otros cristianos. Los opositores de Constantino fueron exiliados de Cartago. Después de 4 años, se dio cuenta que sus tácticas de mano fuerte no estaban funcionando y retiró sus tropas.Retomaremos la historia en este punto la próxima vez.