Podcasts about Roman law

This Flashback Friday is from episode 312 published last April 10, 2013. Professor Richard Epstein, pioneering Libertarian legal scholar, joins Jason Hartman to explain how income inequality is good for society, but is very dependent on the methods used to produce the best outcome. The current methods our government are attempting to use are causing job losses, it blocks gains in trade, the need for further public assistance increases, which in turn increases taxes, “yet another implicit drain on voluntary transactions,” Richard illustrates. He provides examples to demonstrate the consequences of equality by egalitarian efforts of our government versus voluntary redistribution.  Listen for more details at:  www.JasonHartman.com.    Richard A. Epstein is the inaugural Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law at NYU School of Law. He has authored several books, including Design for Liberty: Private Property, Public Administration and the Rule of Law, The Case Against the Employee Free Choice Act, Supreme Neglect: How to Revive the Constitutional Protection of Property Rights, and many more. Richard has written numerous articles on a wide range of legal and interdisciplinary subjects. He has taught courses in administrative law, antitrust law, civil procedure, communications, constitutional law, contracts, corporations, criminal law, employment discrimination law, environmental law, food and drug law, health law and policy, legal history, labor law, property, real estate development and finance, jurisprudence, labor law; land use planning, patents, individual, estate and corporate taxation, Roman Law; torts, and workers' compensation.   He also writes a legal column, the Libertarian, found at http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/libertarian-archives, and is a contributor to Ricochet.com and the SCOTUS blog.     Follow Jason on TWITTER, INSTAGRAM & LINKEDIN Twitter.com/JasonHartmanROI Instagram.com/jasonhartman1/ Linkedin.com/in/jasonhartmaninvestor/ Call our Investment Counselors at: 1-800-HARTMAN (US) or visit: https://www.jasonhartman.com/ Free Class:  Easily get up to $250,000 in funding for real estate, business or anything else: http://JasonHartman.com/Fund CYA Protect Your Assets, Save Taxes & Estate Planning: http://JasonHartman.com/Protect Get wholesale real estate deals for investment or build a great business – Free Course: https://www.jasonhartman.com/deals Special Offer from Ron LeGrand: https://JasonHartman.com/Ron Free Mini-Book on Pandemic Investing: https://www.PandemicInvesting.com  

When you find yourself in a position of leadership, that position may require you to do things that are not easy for you to do that all comes with being a leader. A leader is called to make difficult decisions, not being influenced by the people, but being influenced by what is right and proper and good according to truth. To donate please visit us at: https://loveisrael.org/donate/ Checks may be sent to: LoveIsrael.org 6355 N Courtenay Parkway Merritt Island, FL 32953 Feel free to download our MyBibleStudy App on telephone https://get.theapp.co/yjjq we don't know how long we can post the teachings on YT https://www.instagram.com/mybiblestudyofficial/

When you find yourself in a position of leadership, that position may require you to do things that are not easy for you to do that all comes with being a leader. A leader is called to make difficult decisions, not being influenced by the people, but being influenced by what is right and proper and good according to truth. To donate please visit us at: https://loveisrael.org/donate/ Checks may be sent to: LoveIsrael.org 6355 N Courtenay Parkway Merritt Island, FL 32953 Feel free to download our MyBibleStudy App on telephone https://get.theapp.co/yjjq we don't know how long we can post the teachings on YT https://www.instagram.com/mybiblestudyofficial/

Recorded at the 2024 ELI (European Law Institute) Annual Conference held at the Kings Inns, Dublin, where Fifth Court presenters, Peter Leonard BL and Mark Tottenham BL, talk to ELI President, Professor Pascal Pichonnaz Professor Pichonnaz earned a Ph.D. that is in published form as ‘Habilitation', a large book on the Law of Set-off. He teaches Contract Law, European Consumer Law, Roman Law and European Private Law at the University of Fribourg. He has been a visiting professor at the universities of Liège, Pisa, Glasgow, Clermont-Ferrand, Rome II, and Paris II, as well as at the Center for Transnational Legal Studies in London.He is admitted to practice law and completed his LL.M. at the University of California (Berkeley). He is also active as an arbitrator in international and national disputes.Peter and Mark explain what has happened to the rundown on recent important cases. Listen to learn. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jonathan Ainslie is a law lecturer at the University of Aberdeen, with a focus on Roman Law. He joins the show to discuss free speech rules in the United Kingdom, and the broader topic of what role the government ought to play in protecting you from yourself. 

Episode: 3056 The Truth About Ingenuity.  Today, the truth about ingenuity.

About the Lecture: 800 years have passed since the death of Master Wincenty (ca. 1150–1223), called Kadłubek, the first Polish jurist known to us. In his outstanding literary work, the Chronicle of the Poles he told us about Poland forever. The success of Wincenty's political narrative was made possible by the fact that his Chronicle of the Poles was a history textbook until the 19th century, rewritten and interpreted by historians. The cultural code written there was thus introduced into the bloodstream of Poles. However, his work was also a rhetoric textbook at the Krakow Academy since the 15th century. Why? Wincenty told us about Poland using legal categories and this left its mark on our identity and mentality. Freedom and law, justice and mercy, solidarity and loyalty play in the Polish soul to this day. Wincenty is the first to apply the concept of a republic (res publica) to the Polish state. He treated the need to renew the spirit and introduce reforms seriously, but he knew that not everything that came from the West was Christian, and the rational customs of the ancestors should be respected. Two wings: faith and reason are the basis of his actions. He had an open mind, but also a practical sense and knew the Polish soul and its flaws well. To understand Poland and its political and cultural context even today, you have to understand Master Wincenty. About the Speakers: Dr. Grzegorz Blicharz is the Director of the Centre for Law Religious Freedom and Assistant Professor at the Department of Roman Law at the Faculty of Law and Administration of Jagiellonian University in Kraków. His work focuses on Roman law in comparative perspective, on comparative freedom of religion and freedom of speech, and especially on the impact of religious freedom on the development of private law and legal doctrine. He has held visiting appointments at the Institute of European and Comparative Law at the University of Oxford (2020) and at Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University (2021). Professor Franciszek Longchamps de Bérier is a professor law and the Head of the Department of Roman Law at the Faculty of Law and Administration of Jagiellonian University in Kraków. He also teaches at the Faculty of Law and Administration of the University of Warsaw. He has an LL.M. from Georgetown University. He is a Catholic priest and an expert on bioethics for the Polish Episcopal Conference as well as a member of the COMECE Legal Affairs Commission. For the past 20 years, he has also lectured and conducted research on U.S. freedom of speech and religion.

Click Here For VideoNew Year's Bash to Death... If we remain passive. Militas are NOT Malicious, they're protective. We cover: Roman Law in America? 1933 Bankruptcy, Living-Dead people, They Want You Dead, Treasury fraud, Elizabeth Clare Prophet, Michael Flynn, Kenneth Copeland blowing us, and Antony Sutton almost getting it right about Skull & Bones.Support the Effort: https://buymeacoffee.com/BaalBustersContact: baalbusters@outlook.comDiscover Hidden History, Reclaim Your Health & Purpose, SUBSCRIBEPriestcraft: Beyond Babylon is getting Great Feedback! 8.5x11 Paperback Hardcover & Kindle: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CNGX53L7/KOBO: https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/priestcraft-beyond-babylonBarnes & Noble: Priestcraft: Beyond Babylon in 6x9 and ebook: https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/book/1144402176Become a Patron. All the Cool Kids are doing it! https://Patreon.com/DisguisetheLimitsDR MONZO Products: https://drmonzo.kartra.com/page/shopDR MONZO ATB BOOK: https://drmonzo.kartra.com/page/ATBBookUSE CODE: BaalBusters15 for 15% OFF Dr. MONZO's store itemsGet Healthy with DR PETER GLIDDEN, ND https://leavebigpharmabehind.com/?via=pgndhealthGet KRATOM HERE: https://klaritykratom.com/?ref=BaalBustersSubmit Questions: https://buymeacoffee.com/BaalBusters or just Call-in!Have you tired TRY BLUE? https://tryblue.refr.cc/baalbusters for 17% Off!SHIRTS & MERCH https://my-store-c960b1.creator-spring.com/THIS CHANNEL IS INDEPENDENT and has no sponsors but YOUPatreon: https://patreon.com/DisguisetheLimitsHow We Survive: https://GiveSendGo.com/BaalBusters Support the Next Book in ProgressOR https://buymeacoffee.com/BaalBustersor JOIN Locals by Clicking the JOIN Button Beneath the video.AWESOME Hot Sauce: https://SemperFryLLC.com Use Code at site for 11% Off qualified purchasesTwitter: https://twitter.com/DisguiseLimitsInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/baalbusters/Telegram: https://t.me/BaalBustersStudiosSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3N7fqqG6MX84vKbANtxrWSThe Host, Daniel Kristos, is a US Coast Guard veteran, author, a father, small hot sauce business owner, researcher, personal trainer, avid reader, and independent Historical Detective.

It's an interactive session in the faculty lounge, as Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo submit to the annual tradition of answering listener questions. There's some serious legal analysis — can Donald Trump become president from behind bars? Can the 14th Amendment keep him off the ballot? What powers does Congress have to regulate abortion in the aftermath of the Dobbs case? But then we go to the deep cuts: Who are the greatest writers in the history of the Supreme Court? What's it really like behind closed doors in Washington? Will the populist swing in the Republican Party reshape the Supreme Court? And then, of course, someone had to ask Richard about Roman Law. Be careful what you wish for.

It's an interactive session in the faculty lounge, as Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo submit to the annual tradition of answering listener questions. There's some serious legal analysis — can Donald Trump become president from behind bars? Can the 14th Amendment keep him off the ballot? What powers does Congress have to regulate abortion in the aftermath of the Dobbs case? But then we go to the deep cuts: Who are the greatest writers in the history of the Supreme Court? What's it really like behind closed doors in Washington? Will the populist swing in the Republican Party reshape the Supreme Court? And then, of course, someone had to ask Richard about Roman Law. Be careful what you wish for.

In this episode, join Professor Dr. Paul J du Plessis, a distinguished authority on Roman Law at the University of Edinburgh, on a journey back in time. Unravel the profound impact of Roman law on modern legal systems, society, and human rights. Delve into intriguing courtroom orations and discover how the echoes of ancient Rome still resonate through the corridors of history. Tune in for a riveting discussion that sheds light on the enduring significance of Roman law in shaping the world we know today. [00:38] - About Dr. Paul J du Plessis Dr. J du Plessis is the professor of Roman Law School of Law at the University of Edinburgh.  He is the author of six books with publishers including Oxford University Press and Bloomsbury. Dr. Plessis is also a member of various organisations dedicated to the study of legal history. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tbcy/support

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 244. This talk is from the 2022 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society. Alessandro Fusillo (Italy), “Roman Law Reconsidered”. PFS 2022 Playlist.

The right of self-defense (also called, when it applies to the defense of another, alter ego defense, defense of others, defense of a third person) is the right for people to use reasonable or defensive force, for the purpose of defending one's own life (self-defense) or the lives of others, including – in certain circumstances – the use of deadly force. If a defendant uses defensive force because of a threat of deadly or grievous harm by the other person, or a reasonable perception of such harm, the defendant is said to have a "perfect self-defense" justification. If the defendant uses defensive force because of such a perception, and the perception is not reasonable, the defendant may have an "imperfect self-defense" as an excuse. General concepts – legal theory. Justification does not make a criminal use of force lawful; if the use of force is justified, it cannot be criminal at all. The early theories make no distinction between defense of the person and defense of property. Whether consciously or not, this builds on the Roman Law principle of dominium where any attack on the members of the family or the property it owned was a personal attack on the pater familias – the male head of the household, sole owner of all property belonging to the household, and endowed by law with dominion over all his descendants through the male line no matter their age. The right to self-defense is phrased as the principle of vim vi repellere licet ("it is permitted to repel force by force") in the Digest of Justitian (6th century). Another early application of this was Martin Luther's concept of justified resistance against a Beerwolf ruler, which was used in the doctrine of the lesser magistrate propounded in the 1550 Magdeburg Confession. In Leviathan (1651), Hobbes (using the English term self-defense for the first time) proposed the foundation political theory that distinguishes between a state of nature where there is no authority and a modern state. Hobbes argues that although some may be stronger or more intelligent than others in their natural state, none are so strong as to be beyond a fear of violent death, which justifies self-defense as the highest necessity. In the Two Treatises of Government, John Locke asserts the reason why an owner would give up their autonomy: ...the enjoyment of the property he has in this state is very unsafe, very insecure. This makes him willing to quit a condition, which, however free, is full of fears and continual dangers: and it is not without reason, that he seeks out, and is willing to join in society with others, who are already united, or have a mind to unite, for the mutual preservation of their lives, liberties and estates, which many call by the general name, property. In earlier times before the development of national policing, an attack on the family home was effectively either an assault on the people actually inside or an indirect assault on their welfare by depriving them of shelter and or the means of production. This linkage between a personal attack and property weakened as societies developed but the threat of violence remains a key factor. As an aspect of sovereignty, in his 1918 speech Politik als Beruf (Politics as a Vocation), Max Weber defined a state as an authority claiming the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within defined territorial boundaries. Recognizing that the modern framework of nations has emerged from the use of force, Weber asserted that the exercise of power through the institutions of government remained indispensable for effective government at any level which necessarily implies that self-help is limited if not excluded. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Friday, 7 July 2023   saying, “This fellow persuades men to worship God contrary to the law.” Acts 18:13   In the previous verse, the Jews had stood against Paul and brought him to the judgment seat of Gallio. Their words are now given, “saying, ‘This fellow persuades men.'”   The word translated as persuades is found only here in Scripture, anapeitho. It gives the sense of inciting, as if Paul is forming his own insurrection by teaching something that stirs up others. That incitement is then defined by them as “to worship God.”   This is the main subject of the incitement. It is not the worship of God itself, however, that they are up in arms about. Rather, it is the manner of doctrine by which Paul taught others to worship God. To fully define his supposed inappropriate worship, they next say, “contrary to the law.”   This is not directly speaking of the Law of Moses. Rather, Gallio is a Roman proconsul. Thus, the Jews are trying to say that Paul's doctrine is not in accord with Roman law. The worship of God through the Law of Moses was accepted as religio licita by Rome; it was considered acceptable under Roman Law.   The Jews, however, are saying that what Paul is teaching is not in accord with their law and therefore it is not in accord with Roman law. Hence, it must be religio illicita, meaning an illegitimate religious expression.   In other words, Judaism is the overall umbrella for worship by the Jews. Under that umbrella, there were many sects, such as the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes, etc. However, Paul was a Christian – a Christ follower. The Jews were attempting to disassociate this sect from the protection of the overall umbrella approved for the Jews. In doing so, the faith would be considered an unapproved form of worship by Rome, and thus “contrary to the law.”   Life application: What does it mean to be a true Jew? Paul explains it in Romans 2 –   “For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision? 27 And will not the physically uncircumcised, if he fulfills the law, judge you who, even with your written code and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; 29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.” Romans 2:25-29   A true Jew is a Jew who is not merely circumcised in the flesh, but who is also circumcised in the heart, by the Spirit, through faith in Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, replacement theologians take Paul's words and say, “We are circumcised in the heart and therefore we are true Jews.” This is a fallacy known as a category mistake.   A Gentile who believes rightly in Jesus is, in fact, circumcised in the heart. But this does not make him a Jew. He remains a Gentile. Paul never speaks of Gentiles as anything but Gentiles. He refers to Jews as Jews. This goes back to Romans 2:17 where he specifically begins to address the Jew. Paul is making a theological point about what it means to be a true Jew, not what it means for a Gentile to become a Jew through faith in Jesus.   Keep the categorical boxes straight. In so doing, you will not look ridiculous when making an absurd claim that you are something you are not. If you are a Gentile, you are a Gentile. Live with it.   Glorious God, thank You that because of faith in Jesus, each of us is precious in Your sight, whether we are Jews or Gentiles, men or women, rich or poor, or any other such earthly division. If we have called out by faith, accepting the gospel of Jesus, we are pleasing to You. What an honor and a blessing to be Your children because of that. Thank You, O God Amen.  

S. No.TimelineTreaty Between/ReignTreaty Regarding/Remarks1.2600 BCRulers of Ancient Sumerian Cities of Lagash and Umma (Modern Iraq) Border treaty defining boundary marks, found on a stone block.2.1200 BCEgyptian–Hittite Peace Treaty between Pharaoh Ramesses II of Egypt and King Ḫattušili III of the Hittites Establishment of Peace, Respect for Territorial Integrity, No State Aggression, Defensive Alliance3.800 BCProphet Isaiah of Ancient IsraelHe said that Agreements must be respected, even when made with the enemy. 4.Around same timeHellenistic/Greek CivilizationNumerous treaties linked the city-states together in a network of commercial and political associations5.Around 30 BC to 476 ADRoman EmpireJus civile – Early Law that applied only to Roman citizens.  Jus gentium – Simplified rules to govern the relations between foreigners and citizens. (Instrument – Preator Peregrinus)  Later on, jus gentium became the norm and jus civile took the backseat.  Natural Law was incorporated in the Roman Law to serve as the ultimate justification for jus gentium (rational principles common to all civilized nations). Legal Compilation – Corpus Juris Civilis – It contained the classical rules of Roman Law. 6.1000 ADEarly Islamic World Dar al-Islam – It is term used by Islamic Scholars that literally means house of Islam. It connotes all the countries that were under Muslim Sovereignty. Abu Hanifa is generally considered as the founder of this concept. In order to be a part of Dar al-Islam, certain requirements were laid down.  Aman – The law dealing with hospitality and safety of diplomats and foreigners. 

Transcript:Hello! This is Pastor Don of Christ Redeemer Church. Welcome to The Kingdom Perspective! Early Christians were known for their care of the weak and frail. This contrasted deeply with the callous Roman culture in which they lived. For example, the Law of the Twelve Tables, the earliest codification of Roman Law (c. 450-451 BC) required fathers to kill any deformed child. Though this Law was no longer in force during the rise of the church, its basic ethos continued to influence Roman culture. As a matter of fact, one historian notes that in one Roman village, “archaeologists found one hundred skeletons of infants less than a week old in the sewers under the Roman baths. The babies were unwanted or inconvenient, and so were literally flushed down the drain” (Why You Think the Way You Do, p. 34). Christians refused to participate in such practice. Following Holy Scripture, they knew that every human was made in the image of God, regardless of how weak, deformed, or “unwanted”. Moreover, since they held that God Himself had become a real human (bodily!) in Jesus Christ, the value they placed on the human body was elevated to previously unknown heights. The Gospel of Matthew speaks of the conception and birth of Jesus Christ saying: “that which is conceived in Mary is from the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:20). At the center of the gospel story is God Himself becoming a weak and helpless infant, even a hidden embryo. This radically altered the way Christians viewed the weak and frail and, thus, drove them to reject not only the common practice of infanticide, but also the common practice of abortion. As modern historian Rodney Stark put it: “…perhaps above all else, Christianity brought a new conception of humanity to a world saturated with capricious cruelty and the vicarious love of death....”   “…what Christianity gave to its converts was nothing less than their humanity.” ~Rodney Stark as quoted in PBS: Frontline: “From Jesus to Christ” Something to think about from The Kingdom Perspective. “Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet:     “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son,      and they shall call his name Immanuel”(which means, God with us). 24 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, 25 but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus..”~ Matthew 1:18-23 (ESV) Sources to consider:Law of the Twelve Tableshttps://www.britannica.com/topic/Law-of-the-Twelve-Tables The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History by Rodney Stark (Princeton University Press 2020). The Patient Ferment of the Early Church: The Improbably Rise of Christianity in the Roman Empire by Alan Kreider (Baker Academic 2016). Why You Think the Way You Do: The Story of Western Worldviews from Rome to Home by Glenn S. Sunshine (Zondervan 2009). The Didache (Chapter 2).

Tort Law and How It's Tied to Our Culture by M. Stuart Madden, ESQ.Tort Law & How It's Tied to Our Culture is a socio-legal history of the norms, customs, and eventual private laws for wrongs, or Tort. Oliver Wendel Holmes described law as "a grand anthropological document." This can be said with even greater force of Tort Law, the most dynamic field within the Common Law. Whether in the form of an unwritten lesson of a myth or folktales, or rendered as written law, Tort Law reflects a culture's superego, a guide to what individuals might forego doing in the interest of a community's safety, dignity and prosperity. The work provides an entertaining and scholarly tour of Tort Law from its beginnings in the unwritten oral traditions of folktale and myth, through the ancient law codes of Mesopotamia and the cohering work of the Greeks and the codifications of the Romans and later Gothic groups, to early religious recitations of behavioral ethics. Separate treatment is afforded the vital role of the Common Law in an increasingly statutory age, exemplary or punitive damages, and the congruence between the application of tort-type remedies in the English-speaking Common Law nations and the significant number of Civil Code nations applying law more directly descended from Roman Law and the Napoleonic Code. M. Stuart Madden is Past Distinguished Professor of Law, Pace University School of Law. B.A., University of Pennsylvania (1971); M.A. (History), London School of Economics and Political Science (1972); J.D., Georgetown University Law Center (1976). Elected Member, American Law Institute (2000-2011)https://www.amazon.com/Tort-Law-How-Tied-Culture/dp/1684862949/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1O9N69VRBYJ0M&keywords=Tort+Law+and+How+It%27s+Tied+to+Our+Culture+urlink&qid=1668893437&sprefix=tort+law+and+how+it%27s+tied+to+our+culture+urlin,aps,515&sr=8-1https://mstuartmaddenbooks.com/http://www.urlinkpublishing.comhttp://www.bluefunkbroadcasting.comroot/twia/51123url1.mp3 

Confabulating with Prof. Clifford Ando Ph.D., University of Michigan, 1996 Research Interests: Roman history; Roman religion; legal history; contemporary social theory; the history of political thought; metaphor and cognition Clifford Ando's research focuses on the histories of religion, law and government in the ancient world. His first book centered on the history of political culture in the provinces of the Roman empire, and he continues to write and advise on topics related to the provincial administration, the relationship between imperial power and local cultural change, and the form and structure of ancient empires. He has also written extensively on ancient religion. Significant themes were the connection of religion to empire and imperial government, especially in relation to pluralism and tolerance; and problems of representation in the use of objects in ritual. His current projects include a study of Latin as a language of the law and a study of legal theory in contexts of weak state power. He is also general editor of Roman Statutes: Renewing Roman Law, a collaborative project that will produce a new edition, translation and commentary on all epigraphically-preserved Roman laws. The project is supported by grants from the The Gladys Krieble Delmas Foundation, the Neubauer Collegium, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Recent Publications "Local citizenship and civic participation in the Western provinces of the Roman Empire." In Cédric Brélaz and H.G.E. Rose, eds., Civic Identity and Civic Partipation in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. Turnhout: Brepols, 2021. 39-63. "Performing justice in republican empire." In Katell Berthelot, Natalie B. Dohrmann, and Capucine Nemo-Pekelman, eds., Legal Engagement: The Reception of Roman Law and Tribunals by Jews and Other Inhabitants of the Empire (Rome: École française de Rome, 2021), 69-85 "The ambitions of government: sovereignty and control in the ancient countryside." In Harriet I. Flower, ed., Empire and Religion in the Roman World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021), 71-93 Editor, with Myles Lavan, Roman and Local Citizenship in the Long Second Century. New York: Oxford University Press, 2021 "Religious affiliation and political belonging from Cicero to Theodosius." Acta Classica 64 (2021) 9-28 Editor, with Marco Formisano, The New Late Antiquity: Intellectual Profiles. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter, 2021 "The children of Cain." In Rubina Raja, Jörg Rüpke, Emiliano Rubens Urciuoli, and Asuman Lätzer-Lasar, eds., Urban Religion in Late Antiquity (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2020), 51-67 "Disbelief and cognate concepts in Roman antiquity." Babett Edelmann-Singer, Tobias Nicklas, Janet Spittler, and Luigi Walt, eds. Sceptic and Believer in Ancient Mediterranean Religions. Wissenschaftlicher Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2020. 1-19 Editor, with William P. Sullivan, The Discovery of the Fact. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2020. "Hannibal's Legacy. Sovereignty and territoriality in republican Rome." In K.-J. Hölkeskamp, Sema Karataş, and R. Roth, eds. Empire, Hegemony or Anarchy? Rome and Italy, 201-31 BC. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2019. 55-81 --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/confabulating/support

Scripture and Questions for Study and Reflection:1. Read Matthew 5: 13. What does “You are the Salt of the Earth” mean to you? How would you describe the “salt” that reflects who you are as a follower of Christ? Are there individuals that God has placed in your life that you have avoided that could benefit from being flavored with “salt”? (God's grace and love)2. Read Matthew 5: 14-16. What does it mean to you to be the “Light of the World?”3. What happens when we as Christians, who are the light of the world, don't allow God to work in and through us? What happens when we try to keep God to ourselves? Is that like hiding His light? Do you let your light shine? Share the ways your light shines and glorifies God.4. There are quite a few passages in the Bible that talk about light. Read the following passages and reflect on how God is the light in your life.Psalm 18: 28, Psalm 119: 130, John 1: 1-9, John 8: 12 and 1 John 1: 5-7.5. Read Matthew 5: 38-41. Discuss each verse individually. Do any of these verses represent who you are or how you live your life? Might they encourage a change in your life?6. Pastor Diane shared the story of the Roman Law that allows the soldier to force a Jewish man to carry his backpack one mile? How did you feel when she shared about the Jewish man going two miles? How can this story help you to be more intentional about going the extra mile for someone?Prayer for the Week:God of the heavens and the earth, I praise You for your grace and love, your beauty, peace and care. Thank you that there isn't a day that goes by that you're not present in my life. Lord, on this day and every day, I humbly ask that you would remove my pride when it gets in the way of me going the extra mile to glorify you. I truly want to please you, Lord. Help me to be the salt of the earth and the light of the world in the little moments with the people who need it the most. As you lead...help me to follow. In your great name I pray. Amen.

The right of self-defense (also called, when it applies to the defense of another, alter ego defense, defense of others, defense of a third person) is the right for people to use reasonable or defensive force, for the purpose of defending one's own life (self-defense) or the lives of others, including – in certain circumstances – the use of deadly force. If a defendant uses defensive force because of a threat of deadly or grievous harm by the other person, or a reasonable perception of such harm, the defendant is said to have a "perfect self-defense" justification. If the defendant uses defensive force because of such a perception, and the perception is not reasonable, the defendant may have an "imperfect self-defense" as an excuse. General concepts – legal theory. Justification does not make a criminal use of force lawful; if the use of force is justified, it cannot be criminal at all. The early theories make no distinction between defense of the person and defense of property. Whether consciously or not, this builds on the Roman Law principle of dominium where any attack on the members of the family or the property it owned was a personal attack on the pater familias – the male head of the household, sole owner of all property belonging to the household, and endowed by law with dominion over all his descendants through the male line no matter their age. The right to self-defense is phrased as the principle of vim vi repellere licet ("it is permitted to repel force by force") in the Digest of Justitian (6th century). Another early application of this was Martin Luther's concept of justified resistance against a Beerwolf ruler, which was used in the doctrine of the lesser magistrate propounded in the 1550 Magdeburg Confession. In Leviathan (1651), Hobbes (using the English term self-defense for the first time) proposed the foundation political theory that distinguishes between a state of nature where there is no authority and a modern state. Hobbes argues that although some may be stronger or more intelligent than others in their natural state, none are so strong as to be beyond a fear of violent death, which justifies self-defense as the highest necessity. In the Two Treatises of Government, John Locke asserts the reason why an owner would give up their autonomy: ...the enjoyment of the property he has in this state is very unsafe, very unsecure. This makes him willing to quit a condition, which, however free, is full of fears and continual dangers: and it is not without reason, that he seeks out, and is willing to join in society with others, who are already united, or have a mind to unite, for the mutual preservation of their lives, liberties and estates, which many call by the general name, property. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

An overview of the reemergence of Roman law in Europe, medieval law, canon law, Gratian, and much more...

The Centre for English Legal History was delighted to host a valedictory lecture by David Ibbetson FBA, Regius Professor of Civil Law on 25th November 2022. The lecture was chaired by Dr Jonathan Morgan, and Professor Ibbetson was introduced by Mr Justice Foxton. While it will come as no surprise to learn that David will continue his research for years to come, this lecture marks his retirement from the Regius Professorship of Civil Law.

The Centre for English Legal History was delighted to host a valedictory lecture by David Ibbetson FBA, Regius Professor of Civil Law on 25th November 2022. The lecture was chaired by Dr Jonathan Morgan, and Professor Ibbetson was introduced by Mr Justice Foxton. While it will come as no surprise to learn that David will continue his research for years to come, this lecture marks his retirement from the Regius Professorship of Civil Law.

The Centre for English Legal History was delighted to host a valedictory lecture by David Ibbetson FBA, Regius Professor of Civil Law on 25th November 2022. The lecture was chaired by Dr Jonathan Morgan, and Professor Ibbetson was introduced by Mr Justice Foxton. While it will come as no surprise to learn that David will continue his research for years to come, this lecture marks his retirement from the Regius Professorship of Civil Law.

The Centre for English Legal History was delighted to host a valedictory lecture by David Ibbetson FBA, Regius Professor of Civil Law on 25th November 2022. The lecture was chaired by Dr Jonathan Morgan, and Professor Ibbetson was introduced by Mr Justice Foxton. While it will come as no surprise to learn that David will continue his research for years to come, this lecture marks his retirement from the Regius Professorship of Civil Law.

An overview of the Republican system of litigation. Bruce Frier's "The Rise of the Roman Jurists": https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691639567/the-rise-of-the-roman-juristsThomas & McGinn's "Ancient Law, Ancient Society": https://www.amazon.com/Ancient-Law-Society-Dennis-Kehoe/dp/0472130439Ernest Metzger's "Litigation in Roman Law": https://global.oup.com/academic/product/litigation-in-roman-law-9780198298557?cc=us&lang=en&Andrew Lintott's "The Constitution of the Roman Republic": https://www.amazon.com/Constitution-Roman-Republic-Andrew-Lintott/dp/0199261083Andrew Lintott's "Imperium Romanum": https://www.amazon.com/Imperium-Romanum-Administration-Andrew-Lintott/dp/0415093759T. Corey Brennan's "The Praetorship in the Roman Republic": https://www.amazon.com/Praetorship-Roman-Republic-Origins-122/dp/0195114590

A tort is a civil wrong that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm, resulting in legal liability for the person who commits a tortious act. Tort law can be contrasted with criminal law, which deals with criminal wrongs that are punishable by the state. While criminal law aims to punish individuals who commit crimes, tort law aims to compensate individuals who suffer harm as a result of the actions of others. Some wrongful acts, such as assault and battery, can result in both a civil lawsuit and a criminal prosecution in countries where the civil and criminal legal systems are separate. Tort law may also be contrasted with contract law, which provides civil remedies after breach of a duty that arises from a contract. Obligations in both tort and criminal law are more fundamental and are imposed regardless of whether the parties have a contract. While tort law in civil law jurisdictions largely derives from Roman law, common law jurisdictions derive their tort law from customary English tort law. In civil law jurisdictions based on civil codes, both contractual and tortious or delictual liability is typically outlined in a civil code based on Roman Law principles. Tort law is referred to as the law of delict in Scots and Roman Dutch law, and resembles tort law in common law jurisdictions in that rules regarding civil liability are established primarily by precedent and theory rather than an exhaustive code. However, like other civil law jurisdictions, the underlying principles are drawn from Roman law. A handful of jurisdictions have codified a mixture of common and civil law jurisprudence either due to their colonial past (for example Québec, St Lucia, Mauritius) or due to influence from multiple legal traditions when their civil codes were drafted (for example Mainland China, the Philippines, and Thailand). Furthermore, Israel essentially codifies common law provisions on tort. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Alex and Benjamin discuss Bartolus, a 14th century Italian jurist who used 6th century Roman law to legitimate the Italian city-states. Along the way, he develops the concept of "the city" as an abstraction, arguing that "the city is its own prince." This had substantial influence on later understandings of "the state."

with Pastor William Shifflett, visit his Good News Blog at: https://williams-good-word.org/ FREE BOOK OFFER, GO TO: https://biblebulldog.com/index.php/bibles-bulldogs-beards-podcast/ - LIMITED QUANTITY SO GET YOURS SOON! PART 2 - Sons of God - Chapter 10 - The Christian Life by Dr. Sinclair Ferguson “Adoption in the NT is probably to be seen against the background of Roman Law.” The Apostle Paul was a Roman citizen wasn't he? “Against the background of Roman Law adoption was thought of in terms of the benefits that the adopter received.” Do the highest privileges of the Christian life have our own happiness as their goal? The act of adoption. “In adoption there are two basic transactions. The old authority under which the individual stood had to be broken. He was then formally brought under the new authority.” When we were lost we needed to see our authority. - Living in sin, dead to God. “The dominion of sin has to be broken. Dead to Sin, Alive to God - This God has done in Christ.” 1 Corinthians 15:56-57 - The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Romans 5:20-21 - Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. “God inaugurates us into a new relationship with Himself by adopting us into His family and bestowing upon us the rights and privileges of true children of God.” Romans 6:1-14 - What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. 7 For one who has died has been set free from sin. 8 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. 10 For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. 11 So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions. 13 Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. 14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. The significance of adoption. “The way of salvation in the OT & NT are the same, by grace through faith.” “There is a profound difference between the clarity and fullness of revelation and experience in the days of the Old Covenant by contrast with the days of the New Covenant.” page 90-91 “But the main distinction lies in the character of fellowship with God” Jesus taught in Matthew 6:9 Pray then like this: “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be Your name.” and Matthew 6:31 “Therefore do not be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?' or ‘What shall we drink?' or ‘What shall we wear?' 32 For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. 33 But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.” Do you think that this “Father relationship” was a major stumbling block f --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/biblebulldog/message

Welcome to Episode 1037 Stevie Kim moderates Clubhouse's Ambassadors Corner – In this episode Ciro Pirone interviews Salvatore Avallone. These sessions are recorded from Clubhouse and replayed here on the Italian Wine Podcast! Listen in on this series as Italian Wine Ambassadors all over the world chat with Stevie and their chosen wine producer. Which producer would you interview if you had your pick? About about today's guest host: He is the Director of Italian Wines for Horizon Beverage Company, and a Vinitaly Italian Wine Ambassador. He grew up in Italy and has worked and travelled in England, Italy and the US. He has been based in the US since 1999 and completed his wine studies at Boston University, International Sommelier Guild, WSET, Wine Scholar Guild and North American Sommelier Association. To learn more visit: @divinoboston (Instagram) @vinofilosofia (Twitter) Ciro Pirone About today's guest producer: Salvatore Avallone's father created Villa Matilde in the 1960's after spending over 10 years of painstaking research to locate and identify the few remaining grape vines of the original strain that made the famous Falernum wine of Roman times. His father, Francesco Paolo, was a lawyer, a lifelong student of the Roman Empire and a professor of Roman Law at the University of Naples. He and his friends from the Dept of Agriculture at the University of Naples conducted an “ampelographical” study of the vines in all the small farms in the Caserta region where the famed Falernum wines had been grown. But the phylloxera epidemic of the late 1800's had wiped out the vines – all but a very few. The friends discovered 15 vines – 10 red (Aglianico and Piedirosso) and 5 white (Falanghina). With this small but precious start, the Avallone family embarked on a journey to create a modern expression of the greatest wine of ancient Rome, the Falerno del Massico. If you want to learn more visit: https://www.villamatilde.it/ More about the moderator Stevie Kim: Stevie hosts Clubhouse sessions each week (visit Italian Wine Club & Wine Business on Clubhouse), these recorded sessions are then released on the podcast to immortalize them! She often also joins Professor Scienza in his shows to lend a hand keeping our Professor in check! You can also find her taking a hit for the team when she goes “On the Road”, all over the Italian countryside, visiting wineries and interviewing producers, enjoying their best food and wine – all in the name of bringing us great Pods! To find out more about Stevie Kim visit: Facebook: @steviekim222 Instagram: @steviekim222 Website: https://vinitalyinternational.com/wordpress/ Let's keep in touch! Follow us on our social media channels: Instagram @italianwinepodcast Facebook @ItalianWinePodcast Twitter @itawinepodcast Tiktok @MammaJumboShrimp LinkedIn @ItalianWinePodcast If you feel like helping us, donate here www.italianwinepodcast.com/donate-to-show/

Hello and welcome to Lechem Panim. In our study of Acts chapter 18 we have been taking a look at Paul's ministry in Corinth. And it has been a tough season for Paul. Paul has been facing a lot of rejection, particularly from his own people. And so he no doubt was going through a time of deep discouragement. But God  came to Paul in that season and gave a promise. It says in… Acts 18:9-10 (NKJV)— 9 Now the Lord spoke to Paul in the night by a vision, “Do not be afraid, but speak, and do not keep silent; 10 for I am with you, and no one will attack you to hurt you; for I have many people in this city.” Promised Fruit— And so we see that Paul is encouraged by God's promise to be with him. But he is also encouraged by the fact that he will be safe because he is not alone there in Corinth. God has many people in this city. SATAN WANTS YOU TO FEEL ALONE— Now I have found that one of Satan's chief strategies that he works upon Christians is the feeling that we are alone. Because out of that feeling he can get us feeling depressed and can suppress our desire to push forward. What Satan doesn't want us to figure out is that there are other people just like us going through similar things; people who can be an encouragement and a strength to us. One of Satan's greatest strategies is to divide and conquer. And he does that first by driving apart people who are already in a relationship with one another, but he also does that by keeping people apart who might be able to pour grace and love and encouragement into one another's lives. And that is what he no doubt wants to do here with Paul. He wants Paul to feel alone, afraid, and therefore to go into protection mode. But God, defending Paul against that temptation, quickly stomps that snake and says “Don't be afraid. First of all, I'm with you, which is enough in itself. But also you are surrounded by unknown friends you haven't met yet who fear my name (or will soon, through your ministry) and who are going to be a source of protection for you.” And so instead of clamming up or leaving, Paul continues his ministry. It says in… Acts 18:11 (NKJV)—11 And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them. Converts in Corinth— And Paul's ministry bore tremendous fruit. He established a church there in Corinth. And just a few of those [who became Christians in Corinth were Phoebe (Romans 16:1—Cenchrea was the port city of Corinth), Tertius (Romans 16:22), Erastus (Romans 16:23), Quartus (Romans 16:23), Chloe (1 Corinthians 1:11), Gaius (1 Corinthians 1:14), Stephanas and his household (1 Corinthians 16:15), Fortunatus (1 Corinthians 16:17), and Achaicus (1 Corinthians 16:17).] Now the church in Corinth was not full of mighty and noble people (1 Cor. 1:26–31), but rather with sinners whose lives were transformed by the grace of God (1 Cor. 6:9–11). And not only was Paul's local ministry fruitful, but also his ministry of writing was as well, as during this time he also [wrote two letters to the believers in Thessalonica (the books of 1 and 2 Thessalonians).] The Unseen Hand— Now I would love to see the many ways that God protected Paul during this time. But you know, Paul probably knew very few of them. He probably didn't realize until he got to heaven the many ways God had His hand over his life. And the same is true of us. We don't get to see all the things we have been spared from; or the “could have been” disasters. And therefore Luke (the great historian) shares only one example of God's protection over Paul that he could clearly see and communicate; and it is one that is enormously significant, for reason's we will see in a few moments. A New Proconsul: Gallio— But first, the “governor” (proconsul) of Achaia (modern Greece) was a Roman senator by the name of Gallio. He served from A.D. 51-52 and was the brother of Seneca the philosopher. And when he comes into power during this time, the unbelieving Jews see this as an opportunity to try to manipulate Rome into declaring this new “Christian sect” illegal. And so they break the law [by attacking Paul and forcing him to go to court.] It says in… Acts 18:12-13 (NKJV)—12 When Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews with one accord rose up against Paul and brought him to the judgment seat, 13 saying, “This fellow persuades men to worship God contrary to the law.” The Best Speech Never Given— And what they were really charging Paul with was his [promoting a religion not approved by Roman Law.] And you have to understand that if you are going to understand the miracle of what will soon take place. They want to make Paul (and Christianity) the enemy of Rome. And this seems to be their go-to strategy, because [This was not the first time that fanatical Jews had tried to prove that Paul was breaking the Roman law.] They had tried similar tactics also in Philippi (Acts 16:19-24) and then in Thessalonica (Acts 17:6–7). But Paul knew his rights as a Roman citizen and was more than ready to defend himself. And he opens his mouth to deliver the best speech never given. That's right, Paul never had a chance to deliver it; because while God had commanded Paul to speak in verse 9, here He seems to step in and basically says, “Paul, I got this one.” And we see this in that instead of Paul making his defense, Gallio (the ROMAN PROCONSUL) makes his defense!!! It says… Acts 18:14-16 (NKJV)— 14 And when Paul was about to open his mouth, Gallio said to the Jews, “If it were a matter of wrongdoing or wicked crimes, O Jews, there would be reason why I should bear with you. 15 But if it is a question of words and names and your own law, look to it yourselves; for I do not want to be a judge of such matters.” 16 And he drove them from the judgment seat. An Unexpected Advocate— And so Gallio was not the fool these Jews took him to be and [immediately saw that the real issue was not the application of the Roman law but the interpretation of the Jewish religion, so he refused to try the case!] And so while [The Jews tried to force the Roman proconsul to declare the Christian faith illegal, …Gallio ended up doing just the opposite. {Because} By refusing to try the case, Gallio made it clear that Rome would not get involved in cases involving Jewish religious disputes. As far as he was concerned, Paul and his disciples had as much right as the Jews to practice their religion and share it with others.] Now it may come as a surprise, but that kind of response is very typical of the relationship between the Roman and Christian Church here in the book of Acts. Yes, the apostles were forbidden to preach (Acts 4:17-21; 5:40), but that was by the Jewish council, not a Roman one. In fact there is no evidence in the book of Acts that Rome ever did this. Actually, the opposite seems to have been the case. We see [in Philippi (Acts 16:35-40), Corinth, and Ephesus (Acts 19:31), the Roman officials were not only tolerant but almost cooperative.] And this was partially because of Paul. He [knew how to use his Roman citizenship wisely so that the government worked for him and not against him, and he was careful not to accuse the government or try to escape its authority (Acts 25:10-12).] Now this was not the end of the matter. It says in… Acts 18:17 (NKJV)— 17 Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment seat. But Gallio took no notice of these things. Sosthenes Beaten & Redeemed— Now what in the world is this all about? And who is this guy Sosthenes? What happened to Crispus, who is described as the synagogue ruler in the beginning of the passage. Well, remember Crispus had been converted to Christianity by Paul. And you can imagine how outraged many of the Jews were. What seems to have happened is that Crispus was removed from his position and replaced by a new synagogue ruler, a man by the name of Sosthenes. And it is this man who is attacked by the Greeks, who beat the tar out of him right in front of the proconsul, who simply looks the other way. Now we don't know exactly who was doing the beating. [The mob could have been Greeks venting their feelings against the Jews for causing turmoil, or the crowd may have included some Jews. In any case, they beat Sosthenes for losing the case and leaving the synagogue worse off than before.] Now the irony here is that [If this is the same Sosthenes mentioned by Paul in 1 Corinthians 1:1, then {apparently he too got converted, and the Jews had to find {yet} another ruler for their synagogue!] I would love to know how that all came about. Maybe somebody was there that day to pick Sosthenes up off the ground; maybe a Christian. Maybe it was Paul himself or Crispus who helped to wash his wounds, using it as an opportunity to share the love of Christ.     But whatever the case, what this shows us is that no matter how much Satan opposes us, because God is with us, those oppositions simply become God's opportunities to do something great. And so the central thrust of this passage is that God is both with us and is protecting us sometimes in seen but most often in unseen ways. And knowing that can give us the courage to “Fear not!” and speak boldly the name of Jesus. John Paton's Unseen Army— [John Paton was a missionary in the New Hebrides Islands. One night hostile natives surrounded the mission station, intent on burning out the Patons and killing them. Paton and his wife prayed during that terror-filled night that God would deliver them. When daylight came they were amazed to see their attackers leave. A year later, the chief of the tribe was converted to Christ. Remembering what had happened, Paton asked the chief what had kept him from burning down the house and killing them. The chief replied in surprise, "Who were all those men with you there?" Paton knew no men were present--but the chief said he was afraid to attack because he had seen hundreds of big men in shining garments with drawn swords circling the mission station.] Never Alone— Now you and I may feel alone when we live out Christ's call to be a light in the world. But what scripture always reminds us of is the “fact” that God is with us. And though He won't always shield us from pain and death, we can rest assured that His perfect plan for our lives will come to fruition if we (like Paul) remain obedient to speak out. And many people will be forever changed by your commitment to Christ. Psalm 121:7-8 (NKJV) 7 The Lord shall preserve you from all evil; He shall preserve your soul. 8 The Lord shall preserve your going out and your coming in From this time forth, and even forevermore. Let us therefore trust in the Lord this week. Amen.

By September 1158 Barbarossa had completed one of the shortest and most efficient Italian campaigns of the medieval period. He had set off from Augsburg in mid-July and by early September Milan had capitulated. By October, most troop contingents both those from north of the Alps and those of the communes were on their way home and all of Italy was his. Barbarossa meanwhile is not going home. He takes a tour of Lombardy, visits Monza where his uncle had been crowned king of Italy and then calls an Imperial Assembly on the fields of Roncaglia for November 11th. For the Italians this whole thing starts to look a little bit odd. Why is he still here? Milan has fallen, imperial honor has been restored and the army has returned home, so surely the emperor is going home too. There must be some domestic issue or feud or something that requires his presence up north. But it can't be helped; they show up as requested, hoping that all he wants is a last knees-up before going home. They are in for a shock. Barbarossa is going to unleash on them a new and unexpected weapon, more devastating than a trebuchet and more cunning than a Bohemian king, I talk of course of the professional lawyer and the Roman Law. The music for the show is Flute Sonata in E-flat major, H.545 by Carl Phillip Emmanuel Bach (or some claim it as BWV 1031 Johann Sebastian Bach) performed and arranged by https://www.windrep.org/Michel_Rondeau (Michel Rondeau) under https://imslp.org/wiki/Flute_Sonata_in_E-flat_major%2C_H.545_%28Bach%2C_Carl_Philipp_Emanuel%29 (Common Creative Licence 3.0). As always: Homepage with maps, photos, transcripts and blog: http://www.historyofthegermans.com/ (www.historyofthegermans.com) Facebook: @HOTGPod  Twitter: @germanshistory Instagram: history_of_the_germans Reddit: u/historyofthegermans Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/Historyofthegermans (https://www.patreon.com/Historyofthegermans)

In this podcast, Piotr Gorecki introduces the Reichskammergericht, the new central court created in 1495 by emperor Maximilian I, and the so-called “reception of Roman law” in the Holy Roman Empire.

This was an enumeration of former, unwritten laws, to bring about order and justice in society. God bless you! I really appreciate you listening! Please join us again!

This podcast deals with property and possession: differences and changes between classical Roman Law and the new legal concepts that emerged during the Middle Ages.

An introduction to Roman law throughout history as an ever-changing phenomenon, defined by Goethe as a “diving duck that sinks but always resurfaces”. The main feature of Roman law was its ability to transform and frame reality into legal abstraction and institutions.

Tonight we are going to tell you a tale. A superb tale. A tale as old as time that takes us from the beginnings of civilization until today. This tale will thrill you and chill you. It may elicit feelings of dread and sadness. It may make you angry.  At times it may make you uneasily laugh like the friend at school that was kicked in the balls but couldn't show his weakness. It's a subject that people continually argue about and debate with savage ferocity. Tonight we are talking about executions! We'll talk about the methods and the reasons behind executions throughout the years. Then we'll talk about some famous executions, as well as some of the more fucked up ones. And by fucked up, we mean botched. Bad stuff. This episode isn't meant to be a debate for or against executions but merely to discuss them and the crazy shit surrounding them. So with all that being said, Let's rock and roll!           Capital punishment has been practiced in the history of virtually all known societies and places. The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes.  The Code of Hammurabi was one of the earliest and most complete written legal codes and was proclaimed by the Babylonian king Hammurabi, who reigned from 1792 to 1750 B.C. Hammurabi expanded the city-state of Babylon along the Euphrates River to unite all of southern Mesopotamia. The Hammurabi code of laws, a collection of 282 rules, established standards for commercial interactions and set fines and punishments to meet the requirements of justice. Hammurabi's Code was carved onto a massive, finger-shaped black stone stele (pillar) that was looted by invaders and finally rediscovered in 1901. The text, compiled at the end of Hammurabi's reign, is less a proclamation of principles than a collection of legal precedents, set between prose celebrating Hammurabi's just and pious rule. Hammurabi's Code provides some of the earliest examples of the doctrine of “lex talionis,” or the laws of retribution, sometimes better known as “an eye for an eye the greatest soulfly song ever!   The Code of Hammurabi includes many harsh punishments, sometimes demanding the removal of the guilty party's tongue, hands, breasts, eye, or ear. But the code is also one of the earliest examples of an accused person being considered innocent until proven guilty. The 282 laws are all written in an “if-then form.” For example, if a man steals an ox, he must pay back 30 times its value. The laws range from family law to professional contracts and administrative law, often outlining different standards of justice for the three classes of Babylonian society—the propertied class, freedmen, and slaves.   A doctor's fee for curing a severe wound would be ten silver shekels for a gentleman, five shekels for a freedman, and two shekels for a slave. So, it was less expensive when you were a lower-class citizen. Penalties for malpractice followed the same scheme: a doctor who killed a wealthy patient would have his hands cut off, while only financial restitution was required if the victim was a slave. Crazy!   Some examples of the death penalty laws at this time are as follows:         If a man accuses another man and charges him with homicide but cannot bring proof against him, his accuser shall be killed. Holy shit.         If a man breaks into a house, they shall kill him and hang him in front of that same house.          The death penalty was also part of the Hittite Code in the 14th century B.C., but only partially. The most severe offenses typically were punished through enslavement, although crimes of a sexual nature often were punishable by death. The Hittite laws, also known as the Code of the Nesilim, constitute an ancient legal code dating from c. 1650 – 1500 BCE. The Hittite laws were kept in use for roughly 500 years, and many copies show that other than changes in grammar, what might be called the 'original edition' with its apparent disorder, was copied slavishly; no attempt was made to 'tidy up' by placing even apparent afterthoughts in a more appropriate position.    The Draconian constitution, or Draco's code, was a written law code enforced by Draco near the end of the 7th century BC; its composition started around 621BC. It was written in response to the unjust interpretation and modification of oral law by Athenian aristocrats. Aristotle, the chief source for knowledge of Draco, claims that he was the first to write Athenian laws and that Draco established a constitution enfranchising hoplites, the lower class soldiers. The Draconian laws were most noteworthy for their harshness; they were written in blood rather than ink. Death was prescribed for almost all criminal offenses. Solon, who was the magistrate in 594 BCE, later repealed Draco's code and published new laws, retaining only Draco's homicide statutes.   In the 5th century B.C., the Roman Law of the Twelve Tables also contained the death penalty. Death sentences were carried out by such means as beheading, boiling in oil, burying alive, burning, crucifixion, disembowelment, drowning, flaying alive, hanging, impalement, stoning, strangling, being thrown to wild animals, and quartering. We'll talk more about that later. The earliest attempt by the Romans to create a code of law was the Laws of the Twelve Tables. A commission of ten men (Decemviri) was appointed (c. 455 B.C.) to draw up a code of law binding on patrician and plebeian and which consuls would have to enforce. The commission produced enough statutes to fill ten bronze tablets.    Mosaic Law codified many capital crimes. There is evidence that Jews used many different techniques, including stoning, hanging, beheading, crucifixion (copied from the Romans), throwing the criminal from a rock, and sawing asunder. The most infamous execution of history occurred approximately 29 AD with the crucifixion of that one guy, Jesus Christ, outside Jerusalem. About 300 years later, Emperor Constantine, after converting to Christianity, abolished crucifixion and other cruel death penalties in the Roman Empire. In 438, the Code of Theodosius made more than 80 crimes punishable by death.    Britain influenced the colonies more than any other country and has a long history of punishment by death. About 450 BC, the death penalty was often enforced by throwing the condemned into a quagmire, which is not only the character from Family Guy, and another word for dilemma but in this case is a soft boggy area of land. By the 10th Century, hanging from the gallows was the most frequent execution method. William the Conqueror opposed taking life except in war and ordered no person to be hanged or executed for any offense. Nice guy, right? However, he allowed criminals to be mutilated for their crimes.    During the middle ages, capital punishment was accompanied by torture. Most barons had a drowning pit as well as gallows, and they were used for major as well as minor crimes. For example, in 1279, two hundred and eighty-nine Jews were hanged for clipping coins. What the fuck is that you may be wondering. Well, Clipping was taking a small amount of metal off the edge of hand-struck coins. Over time, the precious metal clippings could be saved up and melted into bullion (a lump of precious metal) to be sold or used to make new coins. Under Edward I, two gatekeepers were killed because the city gate had not been closed in time to prevent the escape of an accused murderer. Burning was the punishment for women's high treason, and men were hanged, drawn, and quartered. Beheading was generally accepted for the upper classes. One could be burned to death for marrying a Jew. Pressing became the penalty for those who would not confess to their crimes—the executioner placed heavy weights on the victim's chest until death. On the first day, he gave the victim a small quantity of bread, on the second day a small drink of bad water, and so on until he confessed or died. Under the reign of Henry VIII, the number of those put to death is estimated as high as 72,000. Boiling to death was another penalty approved in 1531, and there are records to show some people cooked for up to two hours before death took them. When a woman was burned, the executioner tied a rope around her neck when she was connected to the stake. When the flames reached her, she could be strangled from outside the ring of fire. However, this often failed, and many were burnt alive.   In Britain, the number of capital offenses continually increased until the 1700's when two hundred and twenty-two crimes were punishable by death. These included stealing from a house for forty shillings, stealing from a shop the value of five shillings, robbing a rabbit warren, cutting down a tree, and counterfeiting tax stamps. However, juries tended not to convict when the penalty was significant, and the crime was not. Reforms began to take place. In 1823, five laws were passed, removing about a hundred crimes from the death penalty. Between 1832 and 1837, many capital offenses were swept away. In 1840, there was a failed attempt to abolish all capital punishment. Through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, more and more capital punishments were abolished, not only in Britain but also all across Europe; until today, only a few European countries retain the death penalty.   The first recorded execution in the English American colonies was in 1608 when officials executed George Kendall of Virginia for supposedly plotting to betray the British to the Spanish. In 1612, Virginia's governor, Sir Thomas Dale, implemented the Divine, Moral, and Martial Laws that made death the penalty for even minor offenses such as stealing grapes, killing chickens, killing dogs or horses without permission, or trading with Indians. Seven years later, these laws were softened because Virginia feared that no one would settle there. Well, no shit.   In 1622, the first legal execution of a criminal, Daniel Frank, occurred in, of course, Virginia for the crime of theft. Some colonies were very strict in using the death penalty, while others were less so. In Massachusetts Bay Colony, the first execution was in 1630, but the earliest capital statutes did not occur until later. Under the Capital Laws of New England that went into effect between 1636-1647, the death penalty was set forth for pre-meditated murder, sodomy, witchcraft, adultery, idolatry, blasphemy, assault in anger, rape, statutory rape, manstealing, perjury in a capital trial, rebellion, manslaughter, poisoning, and bestiality. A scripture from the Old Testament accompanied early laws. By 1780, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts only recognized seven capital crimes: murder, sodomy, burglary, buggery, arson, rape, and treason. And for those wondering, The Buggery Act of 1533, formally An Act for the punishment of the vice of Buggerie, was an Act of the Parliament of England that was passed during the reign of Henry VIII. It was the country's first civil sodomy law.   The Act defined buggery as an unnatural sexual act against the will of God and Man. This term was later determined by the courts to include only anal penetration and bestiality.   The New York colony instituted the so-called Duke's Laws of 1665. This list of laws directed the death penalty for denial of the true God, pre-meditated murder, killing someone who had no weapon of defense, killing by lying in wait or by poisoning, sodomy, buggery, kidnapping, perjury in a capital trial, traitorous denial of the king's rights or raising arms to resist his authority, conspiracy to invade towns or forts in the colony and striking one's mother or father (upon complaint of both). The two colonies that were more lenient concerning capital punishment were South Jersey and Pennsylvania. In South Jersey, there was no death penalty for any crime, and there were only two crimes, murder, and treason, punishable by death. Way to go, Jersey Raccoons!   Some states were more severe. For example, by 1837, North Carolina required death for the crimes of murder, rape, statutory rape, slave-stealing, stealing banknotes, highway robbery, burglary, arson, castration, buggery, sodomy, bestiality, dueling where death occurs, (and this insidious shit), hiding a slave with intent to free him, taking a free Negro out of state to sell him, bigamy, inciting slaves to rebel, circulating seditious literature among slaves, accessory to murder, robbery, burglary, arson, or mayhem and others. However, North Carolina did not have a state prison and, many said, no suitable alternative to capital punishment. So, instead of building a fucking prison to hold criminals, they just made the penalty for less severe crimes punishable by death. What the shit, North Carolina?!?   The first reforms of the death penalty occurred between 1776-1800. Thomas Jefferson and four others, authorized to undertake a complete revision of Virginia's laws, proposed a law that recommended the death penalty for only treason and murder. After a stormy debate, the legislature defeated the bill by one vote. The writing of European theorists such as Montesquieu, Voltaire, and Bentham had a significant effect on American intellectuals, as did English Quaker prison reformers John Bellers and John Howard.   Organizations were formed in different colonies for the abolition of the death penalty and to relieve poor prison conditions. Dr. Benjamin Rush, a renowned Philadelphia citizen, proposed abolishing capital punishment. William Bradford, Attorney General of Pennsylvania, was ordered to investigate capital punishment. In 1793 he published “An Enquiry How Far the Punishment of Death is Necessary” in Pennsylvania. Bradford strongly insisted that the death penalty be retained but admitted it was useless in preventing certain crimes. He said the death penalty made convictions harder to obtain because in Pennsylvania, and indeed in all states, the death penalty was mandatory. Juries would often not return a guilty verdict because of this fact, which makes sense. In response, in 1794, the Pennsylvania legislature abolished capital punishment for all crimes except murder “in the first degree,” the first time murder had been broken down into “degrees.” In New York, in 1796, the legislature authorized construction of the state's first prison, abolished whipping, and reduced the number of capital offenses from thirteen to two. Virginia and Kentucky passed similar reform bills. Four more states reduced their capital crimes: Vermont in 1797 to three; Maryland in 1810, to four; New Hampshire in 1812, to two and Ohio in 1815 to two. Each of these states built state penitentiaries. A few states went in the opposite direction. Rhode Island restored the death penalty for rape and arson; Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Connecticut raised death crimes from six to ten, including sodomy, maiming, robbery, and forgery. Many southern states made more crimes capital, especially for slaves. Assholes.   The first profound reform era occurred between 1833-1853. Public executions were attacked as cruel. Sometimes tens of thousands of eager viewers would show up to view hangings; local merchants would sell souvenirs and alcohol. Which, I'm not sure if I hate or absolutely love. Fighting and pushing would often break out as people jockeyed for the best view of the hanging or the corpse! Onlookers often cursed the widow or the victim and would try to tear down the scaffold or the rope for keepsakes. Violence and drunkenness often ruled towns far into the night after “justice had been served.” People are fucking weird, dude. Many states enacted laws providing private hangings. Rhode Island (1833), Pennsylvania (1834), New York (1835), Massachusetts (1835), and New Jersey (1835) all abolished public hangings. By 1849, fifteen states were holding private hangings. This move was opposed by many death penalty abolitionists who thought public executions would eventually cause people to cry out against execution itself. For example, in 1835, Maine enacted what was in effect a moratorium on capital punishment after over ten thousand people who watched a hanging had to be restrained by police after they became unruly and began fighting. All felons sentenced to death would have to remain in prison at hard labor and could not be executed until one year had elapsed and then only on the governor's order. No governor ordered an execution under the “Maine Law” for twenty-seven years. Though many states argued the merits of the death penalty, no state went as far as Maine. The most influential reformers were the clergy, of course. Ironically, the small but influential group that opposed the abolitionists was the clergy.    Ok, let's talk about electrocution. Want to know how the electric chair came to be? Well, Electrocution as a method of execution came onto the scene in an implausible manner. Edison Company, with its DC (direct current) electrical systems, began attacking Westinghouse Company and its AC (alternating current) electrical systems as they were pressing for nationwide electrification with alternating current. To show how dangerous AC could be, Edison Company began public demonstrations by electrocuting animals. People reasoned that if electricity could kill animals, it could kill people. In 1888, New York approved the dismantling of its gallows and the building of the nation's first electric chair. It held its first victim, William Kemmler, in 1890, and even though the first electrocution was clumsy at best, other states soon followed the lead.   Between 1917 and 1955, the death penalty abolition movement again slowed. Washington, Arizona, and Oregon in 1919-20 reinstated the death penalty. In 1924, the first execution by cyanide gas took place in Nevada, when Tong war gang murderer Gee Jon became its first victim. Get this shit. The frigging state wanted to secretly pump cyanide gas into Jon's cell at night while he was asleep as a more humanitarian way of carrying out the penalty. Still, technical difficulties prohibited this, and a special “gas chamber” was hastily built. Other concerns developed when less “civilized” methods of execution failed. In 1930, Mrs. Eva Dugan became the first female to be executed by Arizona. The execution was botched when the hangman misjudged the drop, and Mrs. Dugan's head was ripped from her body. More states converted to electric chairs and gas chambers. During this time, abolitionist organizations sprang up all across the country, but they had little effect. Several stormy protests were held against the execution of certain convicted felons, like Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who were convicted of spying on behalf of the Soviet Union. The couple was convicted of providing top-secret information about radar, sonar, jet propulsion engines, and valuable nuclear weapon designs. At that time, the United States was supposedly the only country with nuclear weapons. Convicted of espionage in 1951, they were executed by the United States federal government in 1953 in the Sing Sing correctional facility in Ossining, New York, becoming the first American civilians to be executed for such charges and the first to receive that penalty during peacetime. However, these protests held little opposition against the death penalty itself. In fact, during the anti-Communist period, with all its fears and hysteria, Texas Governor Allan Shivers seriously suggested that capital punishment be the penalty for membership in the Communist Party.   The movement against capital punishment revived again between 1955 and 1972.   England and Canada completed exhaustive studies which were largely critical of the death penalty, and these were widely circulated in the U.S.  Death row criminals gave their moving accounts of capital punishment in books and films. Convicted robber, kidnapper, and rapist Caryl Chessman, published “Cell 2455 Death Row” and “Trial by Ordeal.” Barbara Graham's story was utilized in the book and movie “I Want to Live!” after her execution. She was executed in the gas chamber at San Quentin Prison on the same day as two convicted accomplices, Jack Santo and Emmett Perkins. All of them were involved in a robbery that led to the murder of an elderly widow.  Television shows were broadcast on the death penalty. Hawaii and Alaska ended capital punishment in 1957, and Delaware did so the following year. Controversy over the death penalty gripped the nation, forcing politicians to take sides. Delaware restored the death penalty in 1961. Michigan abolished capital punishment for treason in 1963. Voters in 1964 abolished the death penalty in Oregon. In 1965 Iowa, New York, West Virginia, and Vermont ended the death penalty. New Mexico abolished the death penalty in 1969.   The controversy over the death penalty continues today. There is a strong movement against lawlessness propelled by citizens' fears of security. Politicians at the national and state levels are taking the floor of legislatures and calling for more frequent death penalties, death penalties for more crimes, and longer prison sentences. Those opposing these moves counter by arguing that harsher sentences do not slow crime and that crime is slightly or the same as in the past. FBI statistics show murders are now up. (For example, 9.3 persons per 100,000 were murdered in 1973, and 9.4 persons per 100,000 were murdered in 1992, and as of today, it's upwards of 14.4 people per 100,000. This upswing might be because of more advanced crime technology, as well as more prominent news and media.   Capital punishment has been completely abolished in all European countries except for Belarus and Russia, which has a moratorium and has not conducted an execution since September 1996. The complete ban on capital punishment is enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (EU). Two widely adopted protocols of the European Convention on Human Rights of the Council of Europe are thus considered a central value. Of all modern European countries, San Marino, Portugal, and the Netherlands were the first to abolish capital punishment, whereas only Belarus still practices capital punishment in some form or another. In 2012, Latvia became the last EU member state to abolish capital punishment in wartime.   Ok, so now let's switch gears from the history of capital punishment and executions in general and get into what we know you beautiful bastards come here for. Let's talk about some methods used throughout the years, and then we'll talk about some famous executions and some fucked and messed up ones.   Methods:   We've discussed a few of these before, but some are so fucked up we're going to discuss them again.   Boiling To Death:   A slow and agonizing punishment, this method traditionally saw the victim gradually lowered — feet-first — into boiling oil, water, or wax (although uses of boiling wine and molten lead have also been recorded).   If the shock of the pain did not render them immediately unconscious, the person would experience the excruciating sensation of their outer layers of skin, utterly destroyed by immersion burns, dissolving right off their body, followed by the complete breakdown of the fatty tissue, boiling away beneath.   Emperor Nero is said to have dispatched thousands of Christians in this manner. At the same time, in the Middle Ages, the primary recipients of the punishment were not killers or rapists but coin forgers, particularly in Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. In Britain, meanwhile, King Henry VIII introduced the practice for executing those who used poison to commit murder.   Shockingly, the practice is believed to have been carried out as recently as 2002, when the government of Uzbekistan, led by Islam Karimov, was alleged to have tortured several suspected terrorists to death by boiling.   The Blood Eagle:   A technique ascribed to ancient Norse warriors, the blood eagle, mixed brutality and poetic imagery that only the Vikings could. First, the victim's back would be hacked open, and the skin ripped apart, exposing the spinal column.   The ribs would then be snapped from the spine and forcibly bent backward until they faced outwards from the body, forming a pair of bloody, shattered eagle's wings. As a horrifying finale, the lungs would then be pulled from the body cavity and coated with stinging salt, causing eventual death by suffocation.   There is some question whether this technique was ever actually used as the only accounts come from Norse literature. Odin did this shit, you know it.   Several scholars claim that the act we know of today is simply a result of poor translating and misunderstands the strong association of the eagle with blood and death in Norse imagery. That said, every account is consistent in that in each case, the victim is a nobleman being punished for murdering his father.   The good news for any poor soul who might have suffered this brutal death? The agony and blood loss from the initial wounds would probably have caused them to pass out long before the lungs were removed from their bodies.    Impalement:   Most famously used by Vlad the Impaler, 15th-century ruler of Wallachia (in present-day Romania) and inspiration for Count Dracula, the act of impalement has a long, grim history. While images tend to depict people skewered through the midsection and then held aloft — in a manner that would almost certainly bring about a rapid death — the actual process was a much longer, horrifically drawn-out ordeal.   Traditionally, the stake would be partially sharpened and planted, point up, in the ground. The victim would then be placed over the spike as it was inserted partway into the rectum or vagina.   As their body weight dragged them further onto the pole, the semi-greased wooden stake would force its way up through their body, piercing organs with agonizing slowness as it eventually penetrated the entire torso, finally tearing an exit wound through the skin of the shoulder, neck or throat. Holy shishkabob. Or bill. Or Karen.   The earliest records of the torture come from 1772 B.C. in Babylon, where the aforementioned King Hammurabi ordered a woman be executed in this way for killing her husband. But its use continued until as recently as the 20th century when the Ottoman government employed the technique during the Armenian genocide of 1915-1923. Which is super fucked up.   According to some accounts, it could take the victim — exposed, bleeding, and writhing in tormented agony — as long as eight whole days to die. Oh my hell!   Keelhauling:   Walking the plank might not be the most pleasant of deaths, but it seems moderately more humane than the other favored maritime punishment of keelhauling.   A punishment that often ended in death due to the severity of the wounds sustained (or was simply carried out until the point of death), it saw the victim, legs weighted and suspended from a rope, dropped from the bow of the ship, and then rapidly pulled underwater along the length of the hull — and over the keel (the beam that runs longitudinally down the center of the underside to the stern.   In the age of old, old wooden sailing ships, the hull of a vessel would generally be coated in a thick layer of barnacles, whose shells could be rock hard and razor-sharp.   As the drowning sailor was yanked relentlessly through the saltwater, these barnacles would strip the skin from his body, gouging out raw chunks of flesh and even, by some accounts, tearing off whole limbs or severing the head.   If the sailor was still alive, they might be hung from the mast for 15 minutes before going in again. In some cases, the victim would have an oil-soaked sponge — containing a breath of air — stuffed into their mouth to prevent a “merciful” drowning.   Employed mainly by the Dutch and the French from the 1500s until it was abolished in 1853, accounts of its use date back to Greece in 800 B.C.   The Roman Candle:   Many of the worst execution methods ever devised involve fire — from burning witches at stake in medieval Britain to roasting criminals alive in the hot metal insides of the brazen bull in Ancient Greece — but few match the sheer lack of humanity as the Roman Candle.   A rumored favorite of the mad Roman Emperor Nero, this method saw the subject tied to a stake and smeared with flammable pitch (tree or plant resin), then set ablaze, slowly burning to death from the feet up.   What sets this above the many other similar methods is that the victims were sometimes lined up outside to provide the lighting for one of Nero's evening parties.   Being Hanged, Drawn, And Quartered:   First recorded in England during the 13th century, this unusually extreme — even for the time — mode of execution was made the statutory punishment for treason in 1351. Though it was intended to be an act of such barbarous severity that no one would ever risk committing a treasonous act, there were nevertheless plenty of recipients over the next 500 years.   The process of being hanged, drawn, and quartered began with the victim being dragged to the site of execution while strapped to a wooden panel, which was in turn tied to a horse.   They would then experience a slow hanging, in which, rather than being dropped to the traditional quick death of a broken neck, they would instead be left to choke horribly as the rope tore up the skin of their throat, their body weight dragging them downwards.   Some had the good fortune to die at this stage, including the infamous Gunpowder Plot conspirator Guy Fawkes, who ensured a faster death by leaping from the gallows.   Once half-strangled, the drawing would begin. The victim would be strapped down and then slowly disemboweled, their stomachs sliced open, and their intestines and other significant organs hacked apart and pulled — “drawn” — from the body.   The genitals would often be mutilated and ripped from between their legs. Those unlucky enough to still be alive at this point might witness their organs burned in front of them before they were finally decapitated.   Once death had finally claimed them, the recipient's body would be carved into four pieces — or “quartered” — and the parts sent to prominent areas of the country as a warning to others.   The head would often be taken to the infamous Tower of London, where it would be impaled on a spike and placed on the walls “for the mockery of London.”   Rat Torture:   As recently depicted in that horrible show, Game Of Thrones, rat torture is ingenious in its disgusting simplicity. In its most basic form, a bucket containing live rats is placed on the exposed torso of the victim, and heat is applied to the base of the bucket.   The rats, crazy with fear from the heat, tear and gnaw their way into the abdomen of the victim, clawing and ripping through skin, flesh, organs, and intestines in their quest to escape.   Possessing the most powerful biting and chewing motion of any rodent, rats can make short work of a human stomach. Along with the unimaginable pain, the victim would also suffer the sick horror of feeling the large, filthy creatures writhing around inside their guts as they died.   While associated with Elizabethan England — where the Tower of London was said to have housed a “Dungeon of Rats,” a pitch-black room below high watermark that would draw in rats from the River Thames to torment the room's inhabitants — the practice has been used far more recently.   General Pinochet is said to have employed the technique during his dictatorship of Chile (1973-1990), while reports from Argentina during the National Reorganization Process in the late 1970s and early '80s claimed victims were subjected to a version in which live rats — or sometimes spiders — were inserted into the subject's body via a tube in the rectum or vagina….yep.   Bamboo Torture   Forcing thin shards of bamboo under the fingernails has long been cited as an interrogation method, but bamboo has been used to creatively — and slowly — execute a person, too. Allegedly used by the Japanese on American prisoners of war, it saw the victim tied down to a frame over a patch of newly sprouting bamboo plants.   One of the fastest-growing plants in the world, capable of up to three feet of growth in 24 hours, the sharp-tipped plants would slowly pierce the victim's skin — and then continue to grow. The result was death by gradual, continuous, multiple impalements, the equivalent of being dropped on a bed of sharpened stakes in terrible slow motion.   Despite the practice having roots in the former areas of Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) and Siam (now Thailand) in the 19th century, there are no proven instances of it being used during WWII.   It's certainly possible, however, and it has been shown that the technique, among the worst execution methods ever, works: A 2008 episode of MythBusters found that bamboo was capable of penetrating a human-sized lump of ballistic gelatin over three days.   https://m.imdb.com/list/ls059738828/

Episode: 3056 Truth About Ingenuity.  Today, the truth about ingenuity.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 371. This is my presentation (audio only) at the Austrian Economics Discord Conference: “The Enduring Importance of the Austrian School,” Austrian Economics Discord Server (Jan. 8–9, 2022). My presentation was “Law: Decentralized and Centralized" (Jan. 8, 2022). Other speakers included: - Jeff Deist - Walter Block - Peter Klein - Per Bylund - Patrick Newman - Jonathan Newman - Matthew McCaffrey Youtube: https://youtu.be/2_w1_9uQc74 Original Youtube Related links: Kinsella, “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer 1995) Summary version: “Legislation and Law in a Free Society,” Mises Daily (Feb. 25, 2010) Another Problem with Legislation: James Carter v. the Field Codes (Oct. 14, 2009) KOL221 | Mises Brasil: State Legislation Versus Law and Liberty KOL368 | Legislation vs. Law, with Robert Breedlove, of the “What is Money” Show KOL199 | Tom Woods Show: The State's Corruption of Private Law, or We Don't Need No Legislature KOL001 | “The (State's) Corruption of (Private) Law” (PFS 2012) KOL129 | Speech to Montessori Students: “The Story of Law: What Is Law, and Where Does it Come From?” Further resources: Is English Common Law Libertarian? (Powerpoint; PDF) Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Watson, Alan, The Importance of “Nutshells” Herman, Shael, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law The Story of Law, by John M. Zane (I haven't finished it yet but liked what read so far) (also online) Arthur Hogue, The Origins of the Common Law

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 371. This is my presentation (audio only) at the Austrian Economics Discord Conference: “The Enduring Importance of the Austrian School,” Austrian Economics Discord Server (Jan. 8–9, 2022). My presentation was “Law: Decentralized and Centralized" (Jan. 8, 2022). Other speakers included: - Jeff Deist - Walter Block - Peter Klein - Per Bylund - Patrick Newman - Jonathan Newman - Matthew McCaffrey Youtube: https://youtu.be/2_w1_9uQc74 Original Youtube Related links: Kinsella, “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer 1995) Summary version: “Legislation and Law in a Free Society,” Mises Daily (Feb. 25, 2010) Another Problem with Legislation: James Carter v. the Field Codes (Oct. 14, 2009) KOL221 | Mises Brasil: State Legislation Versus Law and Liberty KOL368 | Legislation vs. Law, with Robert Breedlove, of the “What is Money” Show KOL199 | Tom Woods Show: The State's Corruption of Private Law, or We Don't Need No Legislature KOL001 | “The (State's) Corruption of (Private) Law” (PFS 2012) KOL129 | Speech to Montessori Students: “The Story of Law: What Is Law, and Where Does it Come From?” Further resources: Is English Common Law Libertarian? (Powerpoint; PDF) Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Watson, Alan, The Importance of “Nutshells” Herman, Shael, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law The Story of Law, by John M. Zane (I haven't finished it yet but liked what read so far) (also online) Arthur Hogue, The Origins of the Common Law

Download Titus & Philemon We are in the Church Stream today reading from the Lexham English Bible. 7streamsmethod.com | @7StreamsMethod | @serenatravis | #7Streams | Donate Commentary by Dr. Drake Travis Titus was an apprentice and disciple of Paul and a soul that Paul had the utmost trust in. He was a greek that Paul himself had converted to following Christ. He was with Paul in Ephesus; a highlight of Paul's ministry years. Paul later sends Titus to Corinth to quell problems that Paul couldn't find time to deal with further...this is a great indication of the trust that Paul had in Titus. Titus was instrumental in gathering the offerings that Paul took to Jerusalem. He was a sage that did great work for the church in Crete. The similarities we read in Titus and I Timothy are because Titus in Crete and Timothy in Ephesus are dealing with very similar issues for which Paul has similar advice.  You're not "seeing double" in your hearing.  Paul is saying things virtually a second time.  You may get the same feeling when we are reading what sounds like ditto material going through the gospels.  You didn't accidentally flip backward in the pages and you are not in the twilight zone. T - 1 - Paul's life is coming to a close and he is getting more and more fixated (wondrously so) on eternal life. Eternal life was a grand motivation to Paul and has been throughout his ministry.  His next urgent message is that Titus plant elders throughout the Church of Crete so that there be an orderly body of believers on the island.  Christendom was the antidote for the culture that had bedeviled Crete for centuries. The scallywag nature of the population was legendary. Even some the so called Christian teachers on Crete were more committed to the dark heritage they grew up in v.s. blessed faith that Paul and Titus had explained to them. The indictment of liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons, etc. is Paul quoting Epimenides from around 575 B.C.  He had little positive to say about the Cretans about 500 years before Paul quotes him about these same people.  Let's put it this way, they needed Titus' input badly. - 2 - Titus has sterling advice for all ages, both genders, every class of citizen and basically his advice is the needed recipe for transforming the culture of Crete along with saving the souls of the Cretan people.  There is simply no argument against an exemplary life and Titus wants believers to exercise the power of exemplary lives for a witness and to strengthen the power of evangelism upheld by right living. - 3 - The Cretans believers also received instruction to be supportive of their civil leaders. Nonstop rebellion and under-handedness had been the Cretan trademark long enough. Paul wanted Christian believers to lead the way in being cooperative and gracious all the more.  He lastly reminds to not be involved in senseless arguments about law, old doctrines, and genealogies.  That was a trademark of the trolling "circumcision group".  They thought they could pull their stunts authoritatively so because they were the 11th generation great grand nephew of the prophet Zephaniah or some other 'blue-blood'.  Paul thought all this contention was nonsense - and rightly so.  I.e., Titus is basically saying, "hey, act like a Christian!" Philemon was a property owner and Onesimus was actually Philemon's property; Philemon was the master and Onesimus was his slave.  Paul dives right into a touchy subject today and his writing here has much to teach even today in a world where 2020 A.D. is fast approaching and there are in upwards of 200 million slaves currently on earth!  In about 60 A.D. Paul had departed Colossae where Philemon was living. Five years or so later, Onesimus seems to have stolen some of Philemon's property and stowed away to Rome.  Onesimus happened upon Paul who led him to Christ.  There was great admiration for Paul and Paul loved Onesimus like a son.  Paul wrote this book "Philemon" and had Onesimus hand deliver it back Philemon; his master. Paul urges mercy, forgiveness, he strongly hints at releasing him when he welcomes him back - telling Philemon to be as warm as a dear relative to Onesimus.  This is in great contrast to what is known of Roman Law that requires that this runaway slave Onesimus be executed.  Paul's antidote to current law IS The Gospel. And as with all other aspects of the gospel, it's a better way to live than current law the world over. The Thread Through the Streams The impression that surfaced each day this week could be articulated, "Can you believe it? Can you believe what is going on here? Can you believe what we are witnessing? What on earth is going on?!" -in Numbers Balaam is setting off to do something he shouldn't be doing and is stopped by an angel that he doesn't see, which is halting a donkey that he does see- because the donkey sees the angel and Balaam doesn't. He shames himself by ignorance and rage at a donkey that has more sense than he does - THEN he sees the angel!  He had to be thinking, "I can't believe what is going on here!" -In Chronicles this week David is putting in place all the tens of thousands of staff before he passes and they commence on construction of the Temple. This "rollcall" must have had them all buzzing in anticipation.  Here goes boys!  We're getting ready to start real soon here.  The Temple was the greatest endeavor and we begin on this soon... -The Psalms' finale~ is a virtual foretaste of heaven. Imagine being on the Temple Mount as thousands sang this together at the top of their voices as David's life is in its final chapter! -Ezekiel, about 400 years after David was enthroned sees the destruction of Jerusalem and the burning of the Temple in a vision we would label "high definition" - several years before it actually happened. You might say "Ezekiel saw it first!"  He had to be in awe of what he was witnessing. -Habakkuk is incredulous and aghast as the Babylonian/Chaldeans are bearing down on Judah. His appeal to God is desperate. God's answer must have left Habakkuk feeling numb.  "Am I hearing things?? God? Really?  Habakkuk realizes the greater truth in our reading next week. But this week, he is in disbelief of what is going on. -Luke tells the story of the Resurrection in ch. 24.  The women at the tomb can't believe that their Lord is not there.  The two on the road to Emmaus can't believe that it was Him who was there!  They heard Him, they welcomed Him, they ate with Him...and he vanished.  They run back to the disciples who can't believe anything. Then Jesus appears and, ... it must be a ghost. Hey, the gospel continues to stun the world! -Titus has the marvelous task, with Paul's backing, to transform the Island of Crete and he gets started upon it.  Philemon receives the initial document that sends the first shock waves leading to the emancipation of slaves everywhere.  It goes way beyond apparent slavery.  Paul wants Philemon to be free too of resentment, vague thoughts of retribution, pay back, the darkness of Roman Law that requires Onesimus to be executed.  God's mercy has a much better way.  And Philemon is living at the intersection of world history where slavery is normal, and freedom in Christ is the Way. What shall Philemon do?  What a joyous time to obey a brand new order!

When ‘Have to’ turned into ‘Want to’ Galatians 2:15-21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. -2 Corinthians 5:21 Because of what Christ did for me in His death and resurrection, I don’t have to worry about measuring up ever again – what I “have to do” before God has now given way to what “I want to do” for God! The reason we needed saving: we “have to” measure up but failed V. 15-19 The word Law can refer to: the first 5 books of the O.T.; the entire O.T.; the Mosaic Law God gave at Mount Sinai, including the 10 commands; Roman Law; the Law of Christ to love one another; the law of sin that believers deal with. In Galatians Paul is dealing with the mindset he used to have as a Pharisee, that justification before God could only come by obeying Israel’s civil law. But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine. -1 Timothy 1:8-10 Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said “You shall not covet.” -Romans 7:7 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. -Romans 7:12 Paul’s old approach to the law was like how many conscientious students approach taking a test at their school. For whoever shall keep the whole law, but stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. -James 2:10 Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them. But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for ‘the just shall live by faith.’ -Galatians 3:10-11 Those who are crucified with Christ now live by “want to” instead of “Have to” V. 20-21 Look at Galatians 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. -Galatians 2:20 Having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances… -Ephesians 2:15a And you, being dead in your trespasses…He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken them out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. -Colossians 2:13-14

If you enjoyed the show & would like to support us, a donation of any size would be greatly appreciated and would mean so much! XMR Donations Accepted :) 49GdSCVTTE4TaDknDFn95QGc3mn3g7JZiPKX6QM7ZpuE5cscRFuGNhnjATKnjDHY7tNUQMM63n24uPYbj1AXFBk5KUPnDrL Thanks for tuning in! If you want to help support the show, buy a bag of Gratuitas Antigua Coffee or some Macadamia Oil at https://gratuitas.org TODAY'S

Jesus is confronted while teaching in the Temple. The Scribes and Pharisees come to him with a woman taken in adultery for they want to discredit him in front of public who have gathered to hear him. The Mosaic Law and the Roman Law could be a problem for the resolution of this test by those who opposed him. The out come is only as the Son of God could bring to pass. The accusers and the pitiful woman used as a pawn are all amazed at his answer. The question is should they stone the woman-

Pack a lunch because this is the longest session we’ve ever held in the faculty lounge. In the final Law Talk of the Trump Administration, we break down all the events of the last week: Congress’s attempt to stymie the tallying of the electoral vote, the role of the Vice President, whether President Trump should be removed from office, a seeming breakdown in the chain of command, and a reaction to the president’s attempt to pressure Georgia’s Secretary of State. Then it’s on to the incoming Biden Administration, as the professors react to Merrick Garland’s nomination to be Attorney General, the push for statehood for Puerto Rico and Washington D.C., and the prospect of Justice Breyer’s retirement from the Supreme Court. Then we cap it all off with the professors’ final judgments on the Trump Administration. All that, plus breaking news from Twitter and McDonald’s and … less-than-breaking news from the annals of Roman Law.

Pack a lunch because this is the longest session we’ve ever held in the faculty lounge. In the final Law Talk of the Trump Administration, we break down all the events of the last week: Congress’s attempt to stymie the tallying of the electoral vote, the role of the Vice President, whether President Trump should be removed from office, a seeming breakdown in the chain of command, and a reaction to the president’s attempt to pressure Georgia’s Secretary of State. Then it’s on to the incoming Biden Administration, as the professors react to Merrick Garland’s nomination to be Attorney General, the push for statehood for Puerto Rico and Washington D.C., and the prospect of Justice Breyer’s retirement from the Supreme Court. Then we cap it all off with the professors’ final judgments on the Trump Administration. All that, plus breaking news from Twitter and McDonald’s and … less-than-breaking news from the annals of Roman Law.

We need to talk about legal education. As the last couple of episodes of our podcast have demonstrated, preserving the rule of law depends to a large quantity on people working in legal professions. What prosecutors, judges, attorneys, and, to a large degree, people working in the executive branch have in common, is a law degree. This means that we have to turn to legal education itself in order to find answers to the question how rule of law systems may remain or become resilient against authoritarian backsliding. Are current legal education systems in the EU equipped for this task? How are they affected by the turn to authoritarianism and illiberalism in a number of member states? And what are intrinsic shortcomings of academic and professional legal education?   This is what LENNART KOKOTT discusses with our distinguished guests: ANNA KATHARINA MANGOLD, a professor of European Law at the Europa-University Flensburg, a member of the Education Committee of the German Women Lawyers' Association, and an Associate Editor of Verfassungsblog covering anti-discrimination and gender issues, GABOR ATTILA TOTH, he writes primarily about the fields of human rights and constitutional theory, with a current focus on the legal attributes of authoritarianism. He teaches law at the University of Debrecen and bioethics at the Semmelweis University in Budapest, ATTRACTA O'REGAN, a solicitor and barrister, Head of Law Society of Ireland Professional Training and rule of law advisor to the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE), and JAKUB URBANIK, Chair of Roman Law and the Law of the Antiquity at Warsaw University.

Ulpian was a Roman jurist, who became quite influential during the rule of the Severan Dynasty. He was considered one of the great legal authorities of his time, and his writings and thoughts formed the basis of the Western Roman Empire. Guest: Dr Zachary Herz (Assistant Professor, Classics, University of Colorado Boulder)

Jesus faced several trials on the Passover before His crucifixion before Jewish authorities and Roman authorities. These trials were contrary to both Jewish and Roman Law. In this episode Arnie and Fred discuss what the Bible says about these trials by primarily reading the record in sequence as best we can determine. It is evident from the record that the Jewish authorities conspired for about a year on how they could kill Jesus. We discuss that conspiracy as well as the arrest and each incident of Jesus before the Jewish and Roman authorities. Take about 30 minutes to listen in on this Bible discussion.

In episode three we will examine the unwritten Spartan legal code, so coercive that one historian has described it as a "human molding" system, We will also look at the creation and enduring legacy of Rome's first written code of laws, the Twelve Tables, Last, we will examine the origins and practice of law in Classical Athens and Republican Rome. 

Richard Epstein fans know that, when it comes to legal analysis, all roads lead to Rome. For years we’ve been ribbing Richard about his propensity to analyze current legal disputes through the prism of Roman law. Now we’ve finally buckled to the pressure and given him an entire episode on the topic. In this show, Richard explains why Roman Law remains relevant today; why it made especially valuable contributions on the topic of water law; how a failure to understand Roman law has weakened Supreme Court decisions; and what the connection is between the Romans and the Anglo-American legal tradition.  

The University of Cambridge hosted the Twelfth International Roman Law Moot Court Competition between 26 and 30 March 2019 at Trinity College, with the Final held at Ely Cathedral. The Moot was conducted under the auspices of the Centre for English Legal History in the Faculty of Law. The International Roman Law Moot Court Competition is a collaboration between the University of Oxford, the University of Cambridge, the Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, the Universität Wien, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, the Université de Liège, the Universität Trier and the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. This video features the semi final between teams from Université de Liège, and Universität Wien. For more information about the competition see: https://www.irlm.law.cam.ac.uk

The University of Cambridge hosted the Twelfth International Roman Law Moot Court Competition between 26 and 30 March 2019 at Trinity College, with the Final held at Ely Cathedral. The Moot was conducted under the auspices of the Centre for English Legal History in the Faculty of Law. The International Roman Law Moot Court Competition is a collaboration between the University of Oxford, the University of Cambridge, the Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, the Universität Wien, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, the Université de Liège, the Universität Trier and the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. This video features the semi final between teams from Université de Liège, and Universität Wien. For more information about the competition see: https://www.irlm.law.cam.ac.uk

Episode 2 of the Roman Law series. Focuses on the Roman Empire, specifically Romulus, Servius and Tarquin.

The introductory episode of the Roman Law series. Please excuse my error at the start when I say 'video' rather than 'episode'. Thanks

The recent Ontario election provides us with another opportunity to ask: What is our obligation, as Christians, to government? What perspective does the Bible give us about politics, prime ministers, and such? In Luke 20:19-26, Jesus encounters spies sent by the religious leaders. Their intent was to trip him up over a question of Roman Law, specifically the paying of tribute to Caesar. As expected, Jesus' answer is both brilliant and provocative. On its face, it is a simple response, but complex in its application in our lives. “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's” has tremendous implications for all who follow Christ. It speaks to our interaction and involvement with government, demanding an answer to this question: What should I “render to Caesar”? In his response, Jesus presses us to be devoted to the holy and eternal rather than the profane and temporal. In essence, he tells us what our obligations to government and, of course, to God should be while we live on this earth. The timing of this message, within days of the election, is perfect. As we look at the passage, we will identify a number of principles that will help us see our biblical obligations as citizens of both the Province of Ontario (render to Caesar) and the Kingdom of God (render to God). Download Sermon Curriculum Sermon Notes The Gospel of Luke | Pt. 5 Render to Caesar Pastor Todd Dugard // Luke 20:19–26 June 9–10, 2018 I must be devoted to the holy and eternal rather than the profane and temporal. • My earthly obligations are… • My heavenly obligations are…

The recent Ontario election provides us with another opportunity to ask: What is our obligation, as Christians, to government? What perspective does the Bible give us about politics, prime ministers, and such? In Luke 20:19-26, Jesus encounters spies sent by the religious leaders. Their intent was to trip him up over a question of Roman Law, specifically the paying of tribute to Caesar. As expected, Jesus’ answer is both brilliant and provocative. On its face, it is a simple response, but complex in its application in our lives. “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” has tremendous implications for all who follow Christ. It speaks to our interaction and involvement with government, demanding an answer to this question: What should I “render to Caesar”? In his response, Jesus presses us to be devoted to the holy and eternal rather than the profane and temporal. In essence, he tells us what our obligations to government and, of course, to God should be while we live on this earth. The timing of this message, within days of the election, is perfect. As we look at the passage, we will identify a number of principles that will help us see our biblical obligations as citizens of both the Province of Ontario (render to Caesar) and the Kingdom of God (render to God). Download Sermon Curriculum Sermon Notes The Gospel of Luke | Pt. 5 Render to Caesar Pastor Todd Dugard // Luke 20:19–26 June 9–10, 2018 I must be devoted to the holy and eternal rather than the profane and temporal. • My earthly obligations are… • My heavenly obligations are…

Creekside Bible Church Podcast

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 221. This is my first speech at Mises Brasil's 2017 “V Conferência de Escola Austríaca” [5th Austrian School Conference], Mises Brasil, Universidade Mackenzie, São Paolo, Brazil (May 12–13, 2017): “State Legislation versus Law and Liberty.” The Q&A is included even though the questions are in Portugese; most answers should make sense given the context. This is a recording from my iPhone; video and higher quality audio will be linked later. Update: See also Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society. The Youtube is here: The slides that I use are embedded below. Slides used for Mises Brasil: My original slides: Further resources: KOL001 | “The (State's) Corruption of (Private) Law” (PFS 2012) KOL129 | Speech to Montessori Students: “The Story of Law: What Is Law, and Where Does it Come From?” KOL199 | Tom Woods Show: The State's Corruption of Private Law, or We Don't Need No Legislature “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer 1995), p. 132.1 Condensed version: Legislation and Law in a Free Society,” Mises Daily (Feb. 25, 2010)  Is English Common Law Libertarian? (Powerpoint; PDF) Further reading: Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Watson, Alan, The Importance of “Nutshells” Herman, Shael, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law The Story of Law, by John M. Zane (I haven't finished it yet but liked what read so far) (also online) Arthur Hogue, The Origins of the Common Law

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 221. This is my first speech at Mises Brasil's 2017 “V Conferência de Escola Austríaca” [5th Austrian School Conference], Mises Brasil, Universidade Mackenzie, São Paolo, Brazil (May 12–13, 2017): “State Legislation versus Law and Liberty.” The Q&A is included even though the questions are in Portugese; most answers should make sense given the context. This is a recording from my iPhone; video and higher quality audio will be linked later. The Youtube is here: The slides that I use are embedded below. Slides used for Mises Brasil: My original slides: Further resources: KOL001 | “The (State’s) Corruption of (Private) Law” (PFS 2012) KOL129 | Speech to Montessori Students: “The Story of Law: What Is Law, and Where Does it Come From?” KOL199 | Tom Woods Show: The State’s Corruption of Private Law, or We Don’t Need No Legislature “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer 1995), p. 132.1 Condensed version: Legislation and Law in a Free Society,” Mises Daily (Feb. 25, 2010)  Is English Common Law Libertarian? (Powerpoint; PDF) Further reading: Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Watson, Alan, The Importance of “Nutshells” Herman, Shael, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law The Story of Law, by John M. Zane (I haven’t finished it yet but liked what read so far) (also online) Arthur Hogue, The Origins of the Common Law

Marc Canham @marc_canham is a composer whose work spans film, video games, and art. His compositions have been remixed and re-interpreted by UNKLE, Amon Tobin, and Diplo, and he has also worked with artists such as Nathan Johnson, Philip Glass, Iggy Pop, Paul Hartnoll, and Baaba Maal. Wassily Wassilyevich Kandinsky was a Russian painter and art theorist. He is credited with painting one of the first recognised purely abstract works. Born in Moscow, Kandinsky spent his childhood in Odessa, where he graduated at Grekov Odessa Art school. He enrolled at the University of Moscow, studying law and economics. Successful in his profession—he was offered a professorship (chair of Roman Law) at the University of Dorpat—Kandinsky began painting studies (life-drawing, sketching and anatomy) at the age of 30. View this episode's image here. Subscribe, rate and review on

Greetings to all the 9Mind Sacred Sisters out there and tho we be a small Klan of intelligent, powerful and virtuous women. Our dislike of Pale Barbaric Patriarchy makes us a threat to men as a collective and a threat to them as individuals, Therefore I must always greet this very small and sacred group of enlightened women with peace, protection, prosperity and indeed Wisdom to we and those we express love for. African American blk males often put forth unfounded and illogical arguements under the label of consciousness or scholarship that the Sad and oppressive life most of them exist under here in the USA is a all Female Black Matriarchy which if it was true would not be a negative culture. However these opinions are not true so to argue an untruth and then blame or point fingers of accusations at a racial group of women who have never been collectively FREE  since the coming and conquest of the Americas by European Barbarians now having reposiitioned themselves as Business men and as powerful political Heads due to immense wealth that was acquired during their ungodly barbaric period of Humane Trafficking of Free Black Bodies they renamed SLAVES. Black women have yet to address the fact that their Blk female Ancestors never where set free at any time in this land. Not by law, legislation, man or civil rights. To think SWIRLING will somehow put all BW born under this awful legacy in a better State is erroneous and lacking the long term SOLUTION to their real COMPLAINTS, which is the denial of their rights to have under PATRARCHY what white women have under same system which is PROTECTION and the sharing of resources. Roman Patriarchy is a system where only Roman women are allowed the protection of the STATE. Non Roman women are viewed as nothing but property to be exploited and monetized by the males of society. Patriarchal Marriage is used to afford a women the protection that Roman Law otherwise will not

The plan for globalization may be traced back to ancient times. But in recent years it has been a purpose of the Secret Society known as the Jesuits. There plan for takeover of the world is in their own doctrine, as well as publicized in their own Jesuit Universities. We discuss the plan for globalization, the takeover of Vatican, the rule of Roman Law to use as a means to culturalize us, and the Luciferian agenda for a New World Order.

The plan for globalization may be traced back to ancient times. But in recent years it has been a purpose of the Secret Society known as the Jesuits. There plan for takeover of the world is in their own doctrine, as well as publicized in their own Jesuit Universities. We discuss the plan for globalization, the takeover of Vatican, the rule of Roman Law to use as a means to culturalize us, and the Luciferian agenda for a New World Order.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 199. I discussed legislation and law  with Tom Woods on his show today, Episode 557: Ep. 557 The State's Corruption of Private Law, or We Don't Need No Legislature 17th December 2015 Ever since we learned in school how a bill becomes a law, we've absorbed the idea that it's normal for law to be imposed from the top down. But it's possible, and indeed the historical norm, for law to emerge in a completely different, more libertarian-friendly way. Join me for a great conversation with Stephan Kinsella! Transcript below. Youtube version: More description from Tom's shownotes: Related Links “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society” (PDF) by Stephan Kinsella Liberty and Law (PDF), by Giovanni Sartori “The State's Corruption of Private Law,” by Stephan Kinsella “Another Problem with Legislation: James Carter and the Field Codes,” by Stephan Kinsella Related Books Law, Legislation, and Liberty, vol. 1: Rules and Order, by F.A. Hayek Freedom and the Law, by Bruno Leoni Books by the Guest Against Intellectual Property International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution: A Practitioner's Guide Protecting Foreign Investment Under International Law: Legal Aspects of Political Risk For some more related posts/resources: “Legislation and Law in a Free Society,” Mises Daily (Feb. 25, 2010) “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer 1995) Another Problem with Legislation: James Carter v. the Field Codes Kinsella & Rome, Louisiana Civil Law Dictionary (Quid Pro Books, 2011) Regret: The Glory of State Law KOL001 | “The (State's) Corruption of (Private) Law” (PFS 2012) Hayek, Law, Legislation and Liberty, vol. 1 John Hasnas, The Myth of the Rule of Law David Kelley & Roger Donway, Laissez Parler: Freedom in the Electronic Media (linked here) Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law (pdf) Shael Herman, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law Idem, The Importance of “Nutshells”, AJCL, 1994 Why Airwaves (Electromagnetic Spectra) Are (Arguably) Property Transcript The State's Corruption of Private Law, or We Don't Need No Legislature Stephan Kinsella, interviewed by Tom Woods The Tom Woods Show, Dec. 17, 2015 Transcript 00:00:00 TOM WOODS: The Tom Woods Show, episode 557. 00:00:03 INTRO: Prepare to set fire to the index card of allowable opinion.  Your daily dose of liberty education starts here, the Tom Woods Show. 00:00:13 TOM WOODS: Hey everybody.  Welcome to another episode of the show.  Stephan Kinsella is back with us again.  There are so many episode topics I could cover with Stephan Kinsella, and today we're talking about law and legislation.  Is it possible to think of law other than as something that's imposed from the top down by a bunch of legislators on society?  That's what we want to talk about because it's important, has important ramifications, and I thought I haven't done it yet.  Doggone it; it's episode 557.  Let's do it. 00:00:48 Stephan Kinsella is a libertarian legal theorist.  He has pioneered in the study of intellectual property.  I'm going to link to all kinds of material about Stephan at tomwoods.com/557.  You can find out more about him at stephankinsella.com.  Let me remind you because there's been a little bit of confusion.  I am giving away a free autographed book.  You can look through my book selection at tomwoods.com/books.  I am giving away a free autographed and personalized book to people who buy gift subscriptions to libertyclassroom.com this year, only for gift subscriptions. 00:01:28 It's like when you go to Chili's, which I don't recommend, but if you go to Chili's and you buy a $25 gift card, they give you a $5 gift card, it's that kind of principle.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 199. I discussed legislation and law  with Tom Woods on his show today, Episode 557: Ep. 557 The State’s Corruption of Private Law, or We Don’t Need No Legislature 17th December 2015 Ever since we learned in school how a bill becomes a law, we’ve absorbed the idea that it’s normal for law to be imposed from the top down. But it’s possible, and indeed the historical norm, for law to emerge in a completely different, more libertarian-friendly way. Join me for a great conversation with Stephan Kinsella! About the Guest Stephan Kinsella is a registered patent attorney, lecturer, and author. He is the Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom, Founding and Executive Editor of Libertarian Papers, and blogger at The Libertarian Standard. Special Offer Get a FREE signed and personalized Tom Woods book for yourself when you buy a loved one a subscription to LibertyClassroom.com by Christmas. Drop me a line after buying and let me know what book you’d like and where I should send it. Related Links “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society” (PDF) by Stephan Kinsella Liberty and Law (PDF), by Giovanni Sartori “The State’s Corruption of Private Law,” by Stephan Kinsella “Another Problem with Legislation: James Carter and the Field Codes,” by Stephan Kinsella Related Books Law, Legislation, and Liberty, vol. 1: Rules and Order, by F.A. Hayek Freedom and the Law, by Bruno Leoni Books by the Guest Against Intellectual Property International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution: A Practitioner’s Guide Protecting Foreign Investment Under International Law: Legal Aspects of Political Risk For some more related posts/resources: “Legislation and Law in a Free Society,” Mises Daily (Feb. 25, 2010) “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer 1995) Another Problem with Legislation: James Carter v. the Field Codes Kinsella & Rome, Louisiana Civil Law Dictionary (Quid Pro Books, 2011) Regret: The Glory of State Law KOL001 | “The (State’s) Corruption of (Private) Law” (PFS 2012) Hayek, Law, Legislation and Liberty, vol. 1 John Hasnas, The Myth of the Rule of Law David Kelley & Roger Donway, Laissez Parler: Freedom in the Electronic Media (linked here) Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law (pdf) Shael Herman, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law Idem, The Importance of “Nutshells”, AJCL, 1994 Why Airwaves (Electromagnetic Spectra) Are (Arguably) Property

The building blocks of the medieval Church were the theology of Peter Lombard, Canon Law of Gratian, and the Papacy as Court of Appeal. The Church system centralized control to treat people equally. As the Church imposed its law on society, it came into conflict with the ancient tribal law of the states. Two hundred years before the Reformation there was a Reception of Roman Law. The result was that secular law was superior to the Church's Law on its own principles. The Church dealt with a perceived defective legal system while claiming infallibility. The one exception was England which did not accept Roman Law because England had a functioning bureaucracy.

Slavery and divination were both acceptable in Roman Law. Paul, however, represented another law, the Law of the Kingdom. Human trafficking, divination, and demon possession were just not acceptable. When he did something about it on the streets of Philippi he was accused of disturbing the peace.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 129. This is a lesson/lecture I presented to a group of "Upper Elementary" Montessori students today at my son's school, The Post Oak School (Upper El includes 4th, 5th, and 6th grade students, and there were also a few third graders visiting from lower el, who are moving up next year). The students (25 or 30 or so) sat in a group at my feet, and were polite and interested the whole time. They asked many very intelligent and fun questions. I tried not to get too complicated, but did speak in fairly frank and sophisticated terms, tried not to talk down to them or dumb the talk down too much, and almost all of them hung in there till the end. The original plan was to speak for 40 or so minutes then take questions for another 15 or so, but we ended up going about an hour and 7 minutes, and then during lunch I had throng of students throwing more questions at me for another half hour. What amazing students; what an amazing school and educational approach. (This is one reason I love the Montessori approach; see my Montessori, Peace, and Libertarianism.) I included here only the main talk and Q&A, not the lunch banter. (An article prepared by 6th graders in the class, describing the lecture, appears in the first couple of pages of this issue of the class newsletter.) I think this talk is suitable for kids from ages 9 to 16 or so. The notes I used and handed out are reproduced below, with a few links added. For more background on these topics, see the links below, as well as my short article Legislation and Law in a Free Society, adapted from my 1995 JLS article Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society, which contains detailed references; and my more detailed speech The (State's) Corruption of (Private) Law, from the 2012 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society. Update: Some people have asked me for further recommended readings, in legal history, etc. Unfortunately my library is packed away in boxes now for a renovation so I cannot peruse my legal theory/history titles, but from memory and some other notes I have, here are some suggested readings related to the talk. Some of my own personal favorites first: Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Watson, Alan, The Importance of “Nutshells” Herman, Shael, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law The Story of Law, by John M. Zane (I haven't finished it yet but liked what read so far) (also online) Arthur Hogue, The Origins of the Common Law See also my post Book Recommendations: Private, International, and Common Law; Legal Theory, and also: The Greatest Libertarian Books and  Other Top Ten Lists of Libertarian Books. For some others: A History of American Law, 2d. ed., 1985, Lawrence M. Friedman Trakman, Leon E., The Law Merchant: The Evolution of Commercial Law Oliver Wendell Holmes, The Common Law Buckland, W.W. & Arnold D. McNair, Roman Law and Common Law: A Comparison in Outline The Bramble Bush: On Our Law and Its Study, by Karl N. Llewellyn Jhering, Dr. Rudolph von, The Struggle for Law Harold J. Berman, Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition. “The latter is one of the greatest books (not just of law, but of any subject) I've ever read; and the former is full of interesting argument and facts. Berman also has a sequel, published a few years ago, that carries the story through the Protestant Reformation, but I haven't read it yet. I venture to recommend it, sight unseen, on the strength of my admiration of its predecessor.” (Thanks to Robert Higgs.) Alan Watson, The Making of the Civil Law Rosalyn Higgins: Problems and Process: International Law and How We Use It Giovanni Sartori, Democratic Theory Merryman, John Henry, The Civil Law Tradition: An Introduction to the Legal Systems of Western Europe and Latin America, 2d. ed.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 129. This is a lesson/lecture I presented to a group of "Upper Elementary" Montessori students today at my son's school, The Post Oak School (Upper El includes 4th, 5th, and 6th grade students, and there were also a few third graders visiting from lower el, who are moving up next year). The students (25 or 30 or so) sat in a group at my feet, and were polite and interested the whole time. They asked many very intelligent and fun questions. I tried not to get too complicated, but did speak in fairly frank and sophisticated terms, tried not to talk down to them or dumb the talk down too much, and almost all of them hung in there till the end. The original plan was to speak for 40 or so minutes then take questions for another 15 or so, but we ended up going about an hour and 7 minutes, and then during lunch I had throng of students throwing more questions at me for another half hour. What amazing students; what an amazing school and educational approach. (This is one reason I love the Montessori approach; see my Montessori, Peace, and Libertarianism.) I included here only the main talk and Q&A, not the lunch banter. (An article prepared by 6th graders in the class, describing the lecture, appears in the first couple of pages of this issue of the class newsletter.) I think this talk is suitable for kids from ages 9 to 16 or so. The notes I used and handed out are reproduced below, with a few links added. For more background on these topics, see the links below, as well as my short article Legislation and Law in a Free Society, adapted from my 1995 JLS article Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society, which contains detailed references; and my more detailed speech The (State’s) Corruption of (Private) Law, from the 2012 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society. Update: Some people have asked me for further recommended readings, in legal history, etc. Unfortunately my library is packed away in boxes now for a renovation so I cannot peruse my legal theory/history titles, but from memory and some other notes I have, here are some suggested readings related to the talk. Some of my own personal favorites first: Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Watson, Alan, The Importance of “Nutshells” Herman, Shael, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law The Story of Law, by John M. Zane (I haven't finished it yet but liked what read so far) (also online) Arthur Hogue, The Origins of the Common Law See also my post Book Recommendations: Private, International, and Common Law; Legal Theory, and also: The Greatest Libertarian Books and  Other Top Ten Lists of Libertarian Books. For some others: A History of American Law, 2d. ed., 1985, Lawrence M. Friedman Trakman, Leon E., The Law Merchant: The Evolution of Commercial Law Oliver Wendell Holmes, The Common Law Buckland, W.W. & Arnold D. McNair, Roman Law and Common Law: A Comparison in Outline The Bramble Bush: On Our Law and Its Study, by Karl N. Llewellyn Jhering, Dr. Rudolph von, The Struggle for Law Harold J. Berman, Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition. “The latter is one of the greatest books (not just of law, but of any subject) I’ve ever read; and the former is full of interesting argument and facts. Berman also has a sequel, published a few years ago, that carries the story through the Protestant Reformation, but I haven’t read it yet. I venture to recommend it, sight unseen, on the strength of my admiration of its predecessor.” (Thanks to Robert Higgs.) Alan Watson, The Making of the Civil Law Rosalyn Higgins: Problems and Process: International Law and How We Use It Giovanni Sartori, Democratic Theory Merryman, John Henry, The Civil Law Tradition: An Introduction to the Legal Systems of Western Europe and Latin America, 2d. ed.

Pontius Pilate, the fifth Roma Procurator/Governor of Judea, was in charge of keeping the peace and making sure Roman Law was enforced, was now in Jerusalem. During the Passover week, Pilate left his home in Caesarea and went to Jerusalem to keep order in the midst of the large crowds of people. It was at this time that Pilate ended up before Jesus! But, Pilate could not make his own descisions unless, of course, it meant the best for this "wishy-washy" Procurator. Dr. Randy shares five characteristics of the indecisiveness of this inordinately evil man.

Hematite magic scarab gem with a"uroborus" serpent. Protective gem.(1st century CE, Roman Egypt)Today we delve into the world of magic! Nicola Mureddu discusses first Roman and then early Christian perceptions of magic in this article, and delves into the key powers, beliefs, and figures in both systems. Of special concern is Simon Magus--Simon the Magician--a first century CE convert to Christianity who engaged in magic and made many claims as to his own powers before being ultimately defeated by St. Peter. The article provides a basic understanding of some key ideas and sources in respect to ancient magic in the early empire into the fourth century CE.PDF of the Article: Here. Journal Issue: Here. Feedburner Link: Here.iTunes Page: Here. For a broader overview of magic and its criminalization in the Roman empire [in text form], I would suggest James Rives' wonderful article on "Magic in Roman Law."

Professor Richard Epstein, pioneering Libertarian legal scholar, joins Jason Hartman to explain how income inequality is good for society, but is very dependent on the methods used to produce the best outcome. The current methods our government are attempting to use are causing job losses, it blocks gains in trade, the need for further public assistance increases, which in turn increases taxes, “yet another implicit drain on voluntary transactions,” Richard illustrates. He provides examples to demonstrate the consequences of equality by egalitarian efforts of our government versus voluntary redistribution.  Listen for more details at:  www.JasonHartman.com.    Richard A. Epstein is the inaugural Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law at NYU School of Law. He has authored several books, including Design for Liberty: Private Property, Public Administration and the Rule of Law, The Case Against the Employee Free Choice Act, Supreme Neglect: How to Revive the Constitutional Protection of Property Rights, and many more. Richard has written numerous articles on a wide range of legal and interdisciplinary subjects. He has taught courses in administrative law, antitrust law, civil procedure, communications, constitutional law, contracts, corporations, criminal law, employment discrimination law, environmental law, food and drug law, health law and policy, legal history, labor law, property, real estate development and finance, jurisprudence, labor law; land use planning, patents, individual, estate and corporate taxation, Roman Law; torts, and workers' compensation.   He also writes a legal column, the Libertarian, found at http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/libertarian-archives, and is a contributor to Ricochet.com and the SCOTUSblog.  

Roman Law for Dummies: the Summa Perusina and Legal Learning in Early Mediaeval Italy Part of the Cambridge Late Antiquity Network Seminar series

Today's host(s): Scot Landry and Fr. Chris O'Connor Today's topics: Pope Benedict's visit to Germany Summary of today's show: Scot and Fr. Chris read two very different addresses from Pope Benedict XVI in his visit to Germany last week, to the Parliament and to young people. To Parliament he called them to remember that the root of law is a respect for human rights and dignity born out of the natural law. To young people, he called them to live as saints, joy-filled and reflecting the light of Christ; not dour, boring, and naïve caricatures of unhappy and unsmiling and far apart from us. 1st segment: Scot and Fr. Chris talked about the ailing Red Sox and whether more prayers in New England are going up to God for them. They also discussed how the seminarians at St. John Seminary get involved in sports. Fr. Chris said they have formed four intramural teams and will compete for the Rector's Bowl. He said it's important because exercise clears our heads and helps us to think and pray better. It's also good competitive spirit and fosters community. In October, they also have a softball tournament versus the seminarians at Blessed John XXIII Seminary, who the St. John's seminarians affectionately call the Relics. There was also recently the Family Day at St. John's. Fr. Chris celebrated the Mass and saw how prayer works. Seven or eight years ago there were just 28 men and today there are more than 80. At this family day, the refectory was filled with family of all kinds. Scot said most priests describe their family experience as their first seminary, which makes it so difficult for the men whose parents aren't supportive of their vocation. Scot said Pope Benedict went home to his native Germany over the past half-week. He's been writing for years about the crises of Europe losing its Christian roots. Scot thinks it's a highlight for the Pope to be able to go to his homeland and address these issues. Fr. Chris said Pope Benedict carried important messages back with him. Scot noted that Pope John Paul's first return to Poland after his election was described as nine days that changed the world. Perhaps this is Pope Benedict's five days that changed Europe. 2nd segment: Scot said the Pope's most significant address in Germany was reflections on law to the German Parliament. Scot said he was pushing back against any kind of secularism that tries to minimize the importance or place of faith in society. At this moment I turn to you, distinguished ladies and gentlemen, not least as your fellow-countryman who for all his life has been conscious of close links to his origins, and has followed the affairs of his native Germany with keen interest. But the invitation to give this address was extended to me as Pope, as the Bishop of Rome, who bears the highest responsibility for Catholic Christianity. Fr. Chris said the Pope made clear that he is coming as the Vicar of Christ, St. Peter's successor, and he had something to share with the leaders of this powerful nation. Scot said Americans can imagine the Pope standing in the well of the House in Congress addressing the same audience as the State of the Union. He began with a reflection from the Book of Kings: In the First Book of the Kings, it is recounted that God invited the young King Solomon, on his accession to the throne, to make a request. What will the young ruler ask for at this important moment? Success – wealth – long life – destruction of his enemies? He chooses none of these things. Instead, he asks for a listening heart so that he may govern God's people, and discern between good and evil (cf. 1 Kg 3:9). Through this story, the Bible wants to tell us what should ultimately matter for a politician. His fundamental criterion and the motivation for his work as a politician must not be success, and certainly not material gain. Politics must be a striving for justice, and hence it has to establish the fundamental preconditions for peace. Naturally a politician will seek success, without which he would have no opportunity for effective political action at all. Yet success is subordinated to the criterion of justice, to the will to do what is right, and to the understanding of what is right. Success can also be seductive and thus can open up the path towards the falsification of what is right, towards the destruction of justice. “Without justice – what else is the State but a great band of robbers?”, as Saint Augustine once said. We Germans know from our own experience that these words are no empty spectre. We have seen how power became divorced from right, how power opposed right and crushed it, so that the State became an instrument for destroying right – a highly organized band of robbers, capable of threatening the whole world and driving it to the edge of the abyss. To serve right and to fight against the dominion of wrong is and remains the fundamental task of the politician. At a moment in history when man has acquired previously inconceivable power, this task takes on a particular urgency. Man can destroy the world. He can manipulate himself. He can, so to speak, make human beings and he can deny them their humanity. How do we recognize what is right? How can we discern between good and evil, between what is truly right and what may appear right? Even now, Solomon's request remains the decisive issue facing politicians and politics today. How do we determine what is right from what appears right? What is the foundation of law? Fr. Chris said you can see where Pope Benedict is going already. There are three major arguments in philosophy: Truth vs. opinion, nature vs. convention, appearance vs. reality. Those are the arguments Pope Benedict is setting up here. Scot also noted that the Holy Father references the evil of the Nazis that Germans remain very aware of. He also said so clearly: Man can destroy the world and manipulate humanity. Fr. Chris said Pope Benedict is making clear to politicians that their role is not to do what is expedient or popular but to do the common good by upholding the dignity of every human person. For most of the matters that need to be regulated by law, the support of the majority can serve as a sufficient criterion. Yet it is evident that for the fundamental issues of law, in which the dignity of man and of humanity is at stake, the majority principle is not enough: everyone in a position of responsibility must personally seek out the criteria to be followed when framing laws. For most laws, the sense of the majority is a fine basis for what makes a good law. But on the fundamental issues of life and the dignity of the human person, majority rule is not sufficient. Fr. Chris said the truth must prevail, even if everyone is doing something other than the truth. Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Fides et Ratio makes it clear that truth is not built on consensus. Every person has a conscience and if it's properly formed and working, then it can lead us to the truth. Scot said our Declaration of Independence affirms that we have inalienable rights that come from God, not the state. How do we recognize what is right? In history, systems of law have almost always been based on religion: decisions regarding what was to be lawful among men were taken with reference to the divinity. Unlike other great religions, Christianity has never proposed a revealed law to the State and to society, that is to say a juridical order derived from revelation. Scot said the Pope is comparing it to Sharia law in Muslim societies, where civil law is religious law. Christianity has never proposed that. Fr. Chris said Christianity proclaims the truth and leaves the creation of laws to politicians. Instead, it has pointed to nature and reason as the true sources of law (common sense) – and to the harmony of objective and subjective reason, which naturally presupposes that both spheres are rooted in the creative reason of God. Christian theologians thereby aligned themselves with a philosophical and juridical movement that began to take shape in the second century B.C. In the first half of that century, the social natural law developed by the Stoic philosophers came into contact with leading teachers of Roman Law.[2] Through this encounter, the juridical culture of the West was born, which was and is of key significance for the juridical culture of mankind. This pre-Christian marriage between law and philosophy opened up the path that led via the Christian Middle Ages and the juridical developments of the Age of Enlightenment all the way to the Declaration of Human Rights and to our German Basic Law of 1949, with which our nation committed itself to “inviolable and inalienable human rights as the foundation of every human community, and of peace and justice in the world”. Fr. Chris said he is making clear that law has to involve reason and has to be explained to people in ways they can understand. If it's not explainable to people or violating the common good, it creates chaos and tension within the community. Scot said advocacy of human rights doesn't just have its basis in Christian theology, but in natural law which predates the Church. 3rd segment: Scot said Pope Benedict is so forceful on this issue, not just because he thinks it undermines Christianity, but that it will also destroy society as a whole. The idea of natural law is today viewed as a specifically Catholic doctrine, not worth bringing into the discussion in a non-Catholic environment, so that one feels almost ashamed even to mention the term. Scot said for almost two millennia, when the Church taught something that came through common sense and the natural law, it was never seen as specifically Catholic. Now secularists claim that any reference to natural law is code for Christianity. Pope Benedict is drawing a clear distinction. Fr. Chris said so many people tell us to leave our faith at the door to the public square, but Pope Benedict says natural law is beyond religion. Scot said natural is based on “nature”. Scot gave the example that saying traditional nuclear families are ideal for raising children is natural law, not Christian theology. Let me outline briefly how this situation arose. Fundamentally it is because of the idea that an unbridgeable gulf exists between “is” and “ought”. An “ought” can never follow from an “is”, because the two are situated on completely different planes. Scot said “is” is how things are and “ought” is how things should be. Fr. Chris said what is (truth) versus how man takes it (convention). Scot said the “ought” is what are our values and where do we want to go as a society. When there is no objective values to build on, how can any decision stand? There are always belief systems in place in the public square and today it's often atheism that's antagonistic toward any theistic belief system. Fr. Chris said Cardinal Seán recently said in the early Church we fought over big theological ideas. Today we find ourselves battling against ideas over what it means to be human and what it means to be free. The Holy Father talks about positivism, a philosophy that says we don't need God, but that man will always be better and do good. [T]he positivist understanding of nature has come to be almost universally accepted. If nature – in the words of Hans Kelsen – is viewed as “an aggregate of objective data linked together in terms of cause and effect”, then indeed no ethical indication of any kind can be derived from it. Fr. Chris said this way of thinking claims that people do bad things because they are hardwired for it and we just need to find the right chemical to fix it. A positivist conception of nature as purely functional, as the natural sciences consider it to be, is incapable of producing any bridge to ethics and law, but once again yields only functional answers. The same also applies to reason, according to the positivist understanding that is widely held to be the only genuinely scientific one. Anything that is not verifiable or falsifiable, according to this understanding, does not belong to the realm of reason strictly understood. Hence ethics and religion must be assigned to the subjective field, and they remain extraneous to the realm of reason in the strict sense of the word. Where positivist reason dominates the field to the exclusion of all else – and that is broadly the case in our public mindset – then the classical sources of knowledge for ethics and law are excluded. This is a dramatic situation which affects everyone, and on which a public debate is necessary. Indeed, an essential goal of this address is to issue an urgent invitation to launch one. Scot said the Holy Father seeing the roots of how thinking develops over time, the foundations of what makes us what we are will undergo fundamental deterioration if we don't discuss how reason goes into making good law in these democracies. Fr. Chris noted that it was Nietzche's philosophy of the Super Man that influenced Hitler to launch the Third Reich. Marxism and Nietzchism are positivist philosophies that see Christianity and all religion as the enemy. Positivists say to live now in this life because their is no afterlife. At this point Europe's cultural heritage ought to come to our assistance. The conviction that there is a Creator God is what gave rise to the idea of human rights, the idea of the equality of all people before the law, the recognition of the inviolability of human dignity in every single person and the awareness of people's responsibility for their actions. Our cultural memory is shaped by these rational insights. To ignore it or dismiss it as a thing of the past would be to dismember our culture totally and to rob it of its completeness. The culture of Europe arose from the encounter between Jerusalem, Athens and Rome – from the encounter between Israel's monotheism, the philosophical reason of the Greeks and Roman law. This three-way encounter has shaped the inner identity of Europe. In the awareness of man's responsibility before God and in the acknowledgment of the inviolable dignity of every single human person, it has established criteria of law: it is these criteria that we are called to defend at this moment in our history. He has called Europe to defend those criteria. The idea that God created us gave rise to the concept of human rights and inviolable dignity before the law. Fr. Chris said we live in positivism where we go along and forget where we came from, the principles that formed our nation-states. He's saying Don't forget your roots, who made you, and where you come from. Pope John Paul in Fides et Ratio said, Reason and faith are the two lungs of one body and both are essential to every human person, because both have come from God. Scot said the Church doesn't tell us just to blindly accept teaching, but to internalize it and think it through, asking God's help so we can embrace the teaching because it's true, not just because someone in authority says so. Fr. Chris said our faith can withstand any approach of reason. It's a natural part of reason to come to understanding. 4th segment: Scot said Pope Benedict's address to the youth has garnered the most attention in the Catholic world. Dear friends, again and again the very notion of saints has been caricatured and distorted, as if to be holy meant to be remote from the world, naive and joyless. Often it is thought that a saint has to be someone with great ascetic and moral achievements, who might well be revered, but could never be imitated in our own lives. How false and discouraging this opinion is! There is no saint, apart from the Blessed Virgin Mary, who has not also known sin, who has never fallen. Dear friends, Christ is not so much interested in how often in our lives we stumble and fall, as in how often with his help we pick ourselves up again. He does not demand glittering achievements, but he wants his light to shine in you. He does not call you because you are good and perfect, but because he is good and he wants to make you his friends. Yes, you are the light of the world because Jesus is your light. You are Christians – not because you do special and extraordinary things, but because he, Christ, is your life, our life. You are holy, we are holy, if we allow his grace to work in us. Scot said this address is extremely down to earth in comparison. It's a wonderful, warm address that we're all called to be saints and tells us how to live holiness by letting Christ shine through and joy-filled, in the world and connected, not boring and naïve. Fr. Chris said he captures sanctity. We're called to be saints, which means to enjoy the beatific vision in heaven with God our Father. Every saint has a past and every sinner a future. Pope Benedict reminds us of the great mercy of Christ. Scot said many modern saints, including those might be canonized at some point, in their biographies you see them desire to tell the whole story, warts and all, to show how often they turned back to the mercy of God. The saint knows they don't fall less than others; they just recognize that God picks them up each time. Fr. Chris recalls in the biography of St. Therese of Lisieux how there was a sister in the convent who drove her crazy, but she showed so much love to the nun that she believed that Therese loved her best. Saints are called to take the hand of the Lord, cling to it and walk as He does. Dear friends, this evening as we gather in prayer around the one Lord, we sense the truth of Christ's saying that the city built on a hilltop cannot remain hidden. This gathering shines in more ways than one – in the glow of innumerable lights, in the radiance of so many young people who believe in Christ. A candle can only give light if it lets itself be consumed by the flame. It would remain useless if its wax failed to nourish the fire. Allow Christ to burn in you, even at the cost of sacrifice and renunciation. Do not be afraid that you might lose something and, so to speak, emerge empty-handed at the end. Have the courage to apply your talents and gifts for God's kingdom and to give yourselves – like candlewax – so that the Lord can light up the darkness through you. Dare to be glowing saints, in whose eyes and hearts the love of Christ beams and who thus bring light to the world. I am confident that you and many other young people here in Germany are lamps of hope that do not remain hidden. “You are the light of the world”. Where God is, there is a future! Amen. Scot said Pope Benedict would say the same to all of us: Dare to be saints. Fr. Chris said don't be afraid to make sacrifices and renunciations. We can never outdo God in his generosity, love and goodness. All He asks is that we live in him and follow him. Scot said the crisis of faith in the Church is because we don't have enough saints, average everyday person who turns to God each day asks to be his vessel. With just a few saints in Boston we would change the perception of the Church in society. Scot noted how so many people at the Celebration of the Priesthood last week said that priests' holiness have inspired them to live a deeper faith.

Fr. Larry answers the oft-asked question; 'How many times can I receive communion in one day?'  He also tells us how many times a priest can celebrate mass, answers an intern's question, and even discusses the philosophy behind Roman Law!

This episode continues our series examining the impact Christianity had on history & culture. Today we take a look at how the Faith impacted the world's view of women.Contemporary secular feminism came about because of the Christian Gospel's elevation of women. As with so many other privileges and liberties, as well as the prosperity many in the Western world enjoy; they find their origin in a Biblical view of the world and Mankind's place in it. But as secularism gained traction in the 20th C and God was increasingly pushed from the public square, privilege became entitlement, liberty devolved to license, and greed turned prosperity into massive debt. All because the moral base that made them possible was forfeited in favor of the fiction told by secularism.Radical feminism is a grand case in point. Feminists would never have been able to mount their attack on what they deem the subjugation of women were it not for the Christian elevation of women in the first place. They never would have had the platform to make demands were it not for the Biblical worldview Christianity ensconced in Western civilization.In Gal. 3:28 the Apostle Paul wrote, “There is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” In Ephesians 5 where he defines the roles of husband & wife in marriage, Paul tells husbands to love their wives as they do themselves. Peter tells husbands to treat a wife tenderly & with great care as he would a delicate & precious vase. This seems like common sense, but ONLY because what Paul & Peter instruct has shaped our view of marriage and a husband's duty to his wife. We don't realize what an utterly radical assignment that was to men living in the 1st C.At that time, Jewish men placed far less honor on women. One of the prayers some Jewish men prayed went, “Lord, I thank You I was not born a Gentile, a woman, or a dog.”  In the Greek and Roman world, wives were esteemed as little better than servants. A wife was a social convention by which a man raised legitimate heirs for the family name and fortune. But when it came to affection and pleasure, many men kept mistresses or visited temple prostitutes. Generally speaking, a wife had little honor in her husband's esteem and had little claim on his attention or affections.[1]When Paul told husbands to love their wives as Christ loves the Church in Ephesians 5, he elevated the wife to a place she'd not had before.In 1 Peter 3:7 we read— “Husbands, dwell with your wife with understanding, giving honor to her, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered.”When Peter told a Christian husband to honor his wife as he would a precious and delicate vase, this was nothing less than radical social revolution. The idea that a man would take the time to understand his wife was new and novel. And it was precisely for values like this Christians were accused by their critics of upsetting the social order and turning the world upside down. [2]Imagine that! Because Christian men loved and served their wives, they were hated and persecuted. Why? Because they were monkeying with a system that had been in place for hundreds of years. Who knows what chaos might ensue if men started honoring their wives!Now, I know what some feminists would say at this point because I've already heard it; “What about Peter & Paul's instruction that a wife is to submit to her husband? See?! They're just misogynist keepers of the tradition of a male-dominated society.”Not exactly. In fact, not even close. Just as both Peter & Paul defied all cultural sensitivities of their day by calling men to love their wives sacrificially, & seek daily to understand and honor them, what they said to women in their roles as wives was JUST as revolutionary. Let me explain . . .In Ephesians 5:22-24 the Apostle Paul says a wife's submission to her husband is patterned after her submission to Christ. In v24, he says she's to submit “in everything,” meaning it's more than mere outward compliance. It goes deeper than just a tight-lipped surrender.All of us need to understand that submission deals more with the posture of our hearts than with our actions. Before Paul moves to the roles of wives & husbands in Eph. 5, he speaks of the principle of mutual submission all believers are to hold. He then goes on to describe how men are to submit to those God has placed in authority over them at work and in the government. [3]A lot of people think submission merely means giving in outwardly while inwardly they harbor resentment and defiance toward the one they're supposedly submitting to. Their attitude is, “Okay, I'll do what you say—but I still think you're a jerk.”In order to understand what Paul meant when he wrote that a wife is to submit “in everything”, let's think about the cultural setting in which Paul wrote this.In the Greco-Roman world of the 1st C, it was universally accepted that wives submitted to their husbands. Men were the undisputed rulers of their homes.  Paul wrote this letter to the Church in the city of Ephesus governed by the Roman Law known as paterfamilias. This law gave the male head of household absolute authority over his wife, children and servants.  He could beat and even put them to death if he wished, and the law was loath to interfere.[4]So why would Paul call wives to something that was already so much an accepted part of life? Telling a wife to submit to her husband was like telling her to breathe. It was that obviousness that would move them to look closer and realize what he was really saying.The clue to what he means is in the grammar. The verb ‘submit' is in the middle voice. Paul says a wife is to "place herself in submission." What he calls for isn't merely a resigned outward compliance because of force.  He calls for a heart attitude of godly deference. The wife is to submit to her husband on the inside as well as on the outside.Please don't miss this because it's the key to understanding the mind-blowing revolution Paul brought. He's saying to the women of his day, “You've been yielding outwardly because you had no choice. You have no power in society so you have to comply with your husband's wishes. But now God gives you this voluntary choice, this act of will rather than legal requirement & forced compliance. You can submit from your heart too.”This is what he means by “in everything” in verse 24.  “Submit in everything: in your actions, in your heart, in your speech, even you body language.”Rather than seeing Paul as some kind of male chauvinist seeking to cruelly subjugate women, realize he was giving them a power they'd never known before. It was the power to choose for themselves. He was making decision-makers of those who had been forbidden to make real decisions before.While this truth may have been obscured for modern readers of the Bible, it it was certainly not lost to the men & women of the 1st C who when they installed these things in their homes found a new level of life , meaning, purpose & joy they'd never known before. And it was the beauty & excellence of their lifestyle that was so attractive to their unbelieving peers & saw them come into the faith by the hundreds, then thousands. Even though persecution by hostile authorities was still a regular occurrence.Simply put – search the annals of the Greeks & Romans and you will find nothing that comes close to this marital ethic, or any other culture of the ancient world. Honest secular historians admit that the arrival of Jesus was THE turning point in the history of women and that the Gospel marked a sea change in women's status in society.[1] John MacArthur, Jr., Different by Design, (Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1994) 53[2] Acts 17:6[3] Ephesians 6 & Romans 13[4] Paterfamilias • Originally called by the Latin title of paterfamilias, the father evolved into the patron of Roman Republican and early Imperial society. The father of the Roman family had the power over everyone and everything in the home. He could sell his wife or children into slavery and order their deaths at will. [© 1999-2002 Bible History Online (http://www.bible-history.com)]

We're changing gears a bit to begin a series of podcasts considering the impact Christianity has had on the world. We'll unpack how the Faith has left its imprint on society. The Title of this episode is The Change - Part 1: The Sanctity of Life.Knowing my fascination with history and especially the history of Rome, a few years ago, someone recommended I watch a mini-series that aired on a cable network. While it was dramatic historical fiction, the producers did a good job of presenting the customs & values of 1st C BC Roman culture. While the series was suspenseful & entertaining, it was difficult to watch because of the brutality that was commonplace. And it wasn't put in merely for the sake of titillation or to make the shows more provocative. It was an accurate depiction of the time. More than once, I found myself near tears, broken over just how lost the world was. Several times I said out loud, "They needed Jesus!"Exactly! THAT was the very era Jesus was born into & the culture the Gospel spread in. How desperately the Roman Empire needed the life-affirming message the Early Church preached & lived.There's an old saying, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” When the early Christians came to Rome, we can be thankful they DIDN'T do what the Romans did. On the contrary, slowly but surely, with fits & starts, they eventually transformed the Greco-Roman world from rank paganism to a more or less Biblical worldview. Nowhere was that seen more clearly than in the change that was made to the sanctity of human life.During the early days of the Roman republic, the high value put on the family unit formed a moral base that lent a certain weight to the value of the individual. But as the idea of the State grew during the late republic, then blossomed in the Empire, people were evaluated in terms of what they could contribute to the State. That meant people on the bottom of the social scale had little to no value. The poor, women, and slaves became chattel; property to be used. Life became cheap. And the pagan gods bequeathed no real moral virtue into the Roman world. They were understood to be whimsical & selfish at the best of times, cruel in the worst.The Christian value of the sanctity or specialness of human beings was based in the Jewish view of man as created in God's image. There was a healthy Jewish population in the City of Rome itself & scattered throughout other major cities of the Empire. Early on, the unique Jewish view of man had infiltrated the Roman world where ever Jews were to be found. So different was this view of man from the paganized Greco-Roman worldview that many of the more enlightened Greeks & Romans had begun attending Jewish synagogues. If they stayed, they became known as God-fearers; Gentiles who believed in the God of the Bible, but hadn't become full converts to Judaism by being circumcised, baptized, & keeping kosher. They occupied a section in many synagogues, sitting by themselves to hear the teaching of Scripture. The book of Acts tells us some of Paul's most fruitful work was in this God-Fearer section of the synagogue.The Jewish idea of men & women being created in God's image took on new potency when the Gospel was preached, for it told of God becoming man. And becoming a man so He could go to the cross to ransom lost men & women; translating them from a destiny in hell to the glory of heaven. All this spoke of God's view of the value of human beings. If He would endure the passion & cross, it meant life was of inestimable value. Rather than life being cheap, it was to be honored and protected at all costs, regardless of its station or quality.One way the early Christian demonstrated this was the church's opposition to the widespread practice of infanticide. It was common to expose unwanted children soon after birth, either by drowning or leaving them on exposed where the elements or wild beasts would finish them. They were left to die for physical deformities, for being of the wrong sex, or simply because the parents couldn't afford another mouth to feed.Abandoning unwanted infants was quite common in the Greco-Roman world. In fact, the founding myth of Rome begins with 2 infant boys being tossed into the Tiber River. Romulus & Remus both survived to be suckled by a she-wolf, then raised by an elderly shepherd. It was their later struggle that founded the city of Rome, named for one of the brothers - Romulus.So in the city of Rome itself, parents would regularly leave unwanted children at the base of the Columna Lactaria. In later times, Roman parents would abandon their infants there to show grief over some national calamity, like the death of a beloved emperor. To put that in modern terms, imagine someone dropping off their 2 week old infant at a memorial for 9/11 - and just walking away; thinking that somehow shows solidarity with everyone's shock & grief. Yet that's what many Romans did with their newborns when calamity struck.Greeks also practiced infanticide by abandoning infants. They did so because it was woven into their mythology. The well-known Greek tragedy Oedipus Rex revolves around Oedipus who at only 3 days was abandoned by his father King Laius of Thebes. Ion, founder of Ionia was abandoned as an infant by his mother. Poseidon, Aesculapius, & Hephaistos were all abandoned infants. Even Paris who started the Trojan War was abandoned as a child. In Sparta, every newborn was brought before the elders for inspection. If the child was deemed weak in any way, it was abandoned.As shocking, is realizing in all the literature come to us from that time, nowhere is there a shred of evidence infanticide was wrong, or even questioned.Infanticide wasn't practiced just among the Greeks & Romans; other ancient societies practiced it as well. Plutarch said the Carthaginians had made infant sacrifice a regular occurrence. When building a new house or wall, they mixed the blood of an infant with the mortar, thinking it made the wall stronger. If a wealthy family had no new-born to offer, they'd buy one off a poor mother. Though we don't have a record of what was on the 12 Tablets that formed the basis of Roman Law & civilization, we know a good deal of what was in them from the quotes of later Romans. Cicero says it was part of Roman law to expose deformed infants. In the 1st C AD, Seneca, remarks in passing, without batting the proverbial eye, that deformed infants were routinely drowned. Infanticide was so common in the later Greek era that in the 2nd C BC, Polybius blamed a population decline on it. Because infanticide was so common, large families among both Greeks & Romans was rare. An inscription found at Delphi reveals that in a 2nd C sample of 600 families, only 1% had more than 1 daughter! Infanticide was practiced in India, China, Japan, Africa, the rainforests of Brazil, among the Inuit, & among the native North & Central  Americans.Early Christians balked not at calling infanticide, murder. To them, infants were creatures of God who bore His image no less than their mature counterparts. They'd heard of Jesus' attention to little children in Matthew 19. That passage is interesting because the disciples thought the children approaching Jesus weren't worthy of His august attention. In their attitude toward the little ones, contrary as it was to Jesus' own perspective, we catch of glimpse of how the Greco-Roman culture had influenced them. The pre-Roman Jewish culture put a huge emphasis on children. They were regarded as a great blessing from God. Children were God's promise of a future! Yet in the disciples' shooing the children away from Jesus, we see how the Greco-Roman devaluing of life had infected them.We ought to reflect on how the modern abortion debate may have affected our valuation of human life. The parallels to the current population decline among ethnic Europeans ought to be obvious & a sign of how the Judeo-Christian worldview has been gutted from Western civilization.The Didache, the standard catechism used by the Church in the 1st C tells Christians, "You shall not commit infanticide." It's condemned in the Epistle of Barnabas, written about 130. In AD 222, the 1-time slave turned bishop of Rome, Callistus expressed his dismay at the widespread practice of exposing unwanted infants.It was this & the very vocal Christian opposition to it that helped fuel the persecution the early church faced in so many places around the Empire. The Romans placed great stock in tradition and looked with suspicion on anyone who sought to change it. The Christians were doing just that with their radical ideas about how to treat the unwanted.While Christians opposed infanticide, they were unable to do anything about it as a social policy while they were an outlawed group. It wasn't until the Edict of Milan in AD 313 that they were able to even speak to official policy. Then, only 60 years later Emperor Valentinian, at the urging of Basil of Caesarea, outlawed the wicked practice of infanticide.But while they waited for the laws to change, early Christians didn't sit on their hands. They regularly went out to the hillsides where children were left exposed and took them into their homes, raising them as their own children. In Rome, Bishop Callistus organized people to roam the streets in the late evening, looking for abandoned children. He then placed them in the homes of parents wanting them. As far as we know, this was the first organized adoption agency, even though it was done on the sly. The famous martyr Polycarp's protégé, Benignus of Dijon, recused & nurtured abandoned little ones, ministering to the needs of children who'd been deformed because of botched abortions. Afra of Augsburg, a notorious prostitute before her conversion to Christ, began a ministry to the abandoned children of prisoners, thieves, smugglers, pirates, runaway slaves, and all sorts of ne'er-do' wells.No one should get the impression from this that following Valentinian's outlawing of infanticide & child-abandonment, there was an immediate, overnight end to the practice. Far from it. People in Europe & the Eastern Empire continued to off their off spring in large numbers. And Christians continued to adopt them. But as the influence of the Christian worldview spread, there was a deep & fundamental shift that took place in the way people viewed human life; all of it from cradle to grave. And where that respect for life settled in, infanticide evaporated. It got to the point where a single abandoned infant became a shocking event the news of which spread like wild-fire. And when desperation moved some young mother to abandon her child, where did she leave it? Not on a hillside to let it die. No. She left it on the doorstep of the local church because she knew her child would be taken care of.So it ought to be with the deepest kind of grief that we hear now about newborns being left in dumpsters & gas station restrooms. It seems we've regressed, not progressed; devolved, not evolved. Society has at any rate. And to think - there are people who actually rejoice that the Christian worldview has been cut loose from modern society.We have abortion, which is really just an earlier form of infanticide. Partial birth abortion isn't even that! If a woman doesn't make the appointment to rid herself of the unwanted before it's born, no problem; when in Rome, do as the Romans do.What's next? Gladiatorial combat? Oops - too late. // Slavery? Again, too late. It's already here.We'll be taking a look at many more ways the Christian Faith has impacted culture & civilization in the weeks to come.