What should we make of Pope Francis bowing when greeting people?

popequeen_2657382bWord is racing around the Catholic blogosphere that Pope Francis recently bowed to Queen Rania of Jordan.

Is this yet another stunning break with tradition on the part of Pope Francis?

Has he overturned 2,000 years of tradition?

Is this one of the signs of the apocalypse?

Is it no big deal?

Let’s look at the question . . .

 

According to the Telegraph

At the root of the current gbuzz is a story published by the British newspaper/website The Tablet.

It has the provocative headline:

Pope breaks with protocol by bowing to Queen Rania of Jordan

And it immediately says:

The Pope has broken yet another point of Vatican protocol by bowing when he met Queen Rania of Jordan.

You can see how they’re fitting this into the pre-existing narrative of Francis-the-iconoclast (“broken yet another point”).

It goes on to say:

As head of state at the Vatican, not to mention the leader of the world’s 1.2 billion catholics, protocol requires visitors to bow to him when they meet him at the Holy See.

But Francis, who has made the forgetting of formalities a trademark of his papacy, bowed when he met a smiling Rania as she visited the Vatican with her husband King Abdullah II on Thursday.

Okay, wait.

The first paragraph tells us that other people are supposed to bow to him. It doesn’t say anything about whether popes ever bow back.

One might suppose that they wouldn’t, at least historically . . .

“Up until the 19th century visitors would kiss the pope’s shoes, and the tradition is still that all visitors, women included, bow to him, but Francis behaves as he did before he became pope and is not interested in protocol,” a senior Vatican official told The Daily Telegraph.

Great. Now we have an unnamed Vatican official involved. Off-the-cuff remarks from them are always helpful in sorting out a news story. (Sigh.)

The bit about kissing the pope’s shoes “up until the 19th century” is interesting, but where does it say that popes don’t ever bow to people these days?

KEEP READING. 

 

Who was John the Baptist? (11 things to know and share)

What do we know about the mysterious John the Baptist? Here are 11 things to and share . . .
What do we know about the mysterious John the Baptist? Here are 11 things to and share . . .

John the Baptist is a mysterious figure in the New Testament.

He was famous in his own day, even before he became the herald of Christ.

We even know about him from outside the New Testament.

His memorial is August 29th, so it’s an excellent time to catch up on him.

Here are 11 things to know and share . . .

 

1) How was John the Baptist related to Jesus?

John was related to Jesus through their mothers. In Luke 1:36, Elizabeth is described as Mary’s “kinswoman,” meaning that they were related in some way through marriage or blood.

Most likely, it was a blood relationship, but neither a particularly close or distant one.

Elizabeth, being elderly, may have been an aunt, great-aunt, or one of the many types of “cousin.” The precise relationship cannot be determined.

This means that Jesus and John were cousins in one or another senses of the term.

 

2) When did John the Baptist’s ministry begin?

Luke gives us an extraordinarily precise date for the beginning of John’s ministry. He writes:

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar . . . the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness; and he went into all the region about the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins [Luke 3:1-3].

“The fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar” is most naturally understood as a reference to A.D. 29.

This is important also because Luke suggests that Jesus’ ministry began shortly after John’s did, which places the likely date of Jesus’ baptism in A.D. 29 or early A.D. 30.

 

3) Why did John come baptizing?

Scripture presents us with several reasons.

He served as the forerunner or herald of the Messiah and was to prepare for him by fulfilling an Elijah-like role by calling the nation to repentance.

In keeping with that, he baptized people as a sign of their repentance.

He also came to identify and announce the Messiah. According to John the Baptist: “I myself did not know him; but for this I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel” (John 1:31).

This identification was made when he baptized Jesus: “I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. I myself did not know him; but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God” (1:32-34).

 

4) How did John’s arrest affect Jesus?

KEEP READING.

The Weekly Francis – 25 August 2013

pope-francisThis version of The Weekly Francis covers material released in the last week from 7 August to 25 August 2013.

Angelus

Messages

Motu Proprio

Speeches

Papal Tweets

  • “We cannot be Christians part-time. If Christ is at the center of our lives, he is present in all that we do.” @pontifex, 19 August 2013
  • “An excellent program for our lives: the Beatitudes and Matthew Chapter 25.” @pontifex, 21 August 2013
  • “Lord, teach us to step outside ourselves. Teach us to go out into the streets and manifest your love.” @pontifex, 23 August 2013
  • “Don’t be afraid to ask God for forgiveness. He never tires of forgiving us. God is pure mercy.” @pontifex, 25 August 2013

Other Documents

Note: Due to problems with using copyrighted material from the Vatican the eBook version of The Weekly Francis has been suspended. For users of the previous ebook volume I have some suggestions for alternatives on how to best read these documents especially on mobile platforms.

The Weekly Francis – 18 August 2013

popefrancis

This version of The Weekly Francis covers material released in the last week from 15 August to 17 August 2013.

Note: Not many links this week since several documents have not been translated to English yet.

Homilies

Papal Tweets

  • “To be children of God, and brothers and sisters to one another: this is the heart of the Christian experience.” @pontifex, 13 August 2013
  • “Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, and guide us on the way that leads to Heaven.” @pontifex, 15 August 2013
  • “We cannot sleep peacefully while babies are dying of hunger and the elderly are without medical assistance.” @pontifex, 17 August 2013

Note: Due to problems with using copyrighted material from the Vatican the eBook version of The Weekly Francis has been suspended. For users of the previous ebook volume I have some suggestions for alternatives on how to best read these documents especially on mobile platforms.

Did Jesus Exist? An Alternate Approach

jesus_calls_610x300Did Jesus exist?

Discussions of this subject often begin by looking at references to Jesus in early Christian sources.

Either that or they look for references to Jesus in early non-Christian sources.

But there’s another way of looking at the question that is often ignored . . .

 

The Standard Approach

Jesus is obviously mentioned in early Christian sources, such as the gospels, the other writings of the New Testament, and the works of the early Church fathers.

Because these are Christian sources, though, their evidence is sometimes discounted, and so an appeal is made to references in early non-Christian sources that mention Jesus.

He is mentioned, for example, in the writings of a number of Roman writers who lived in the early 100s. He’s also mentioned, somewhat more controversially, in the writings of the first century Jewish historian, Josephus.

But an objection is sometimes made to these sources as well: It is suggested that they don’t represent independent evidence for the existence of Jesus, because the authors in question only know about Jesus from what they have learned from Christians.

In some cases, this may be true. In other cases, it may not be true. Some of these authors may have had access to records that conveyed information about Jesus independent of the Christian movement.

But suppose that they didn’t. Suppose that all of the information presented in these sources is ultimately derived from Christian sources.

This does not leave us at an impasse, because there is another approach to the question that we can take.

 

References to Christianity

Instead of looking, in the first instance, for references to Jesus, we can look at references to the Christian movement itself and see what we can learn about it.

Of course, the same sources that refer to Jesus tend to refer to the Christian movement. That means that we can quickly establish a number of quite early references to Christianity.

It is mentioned by:

  • Suetonius, writing around A.D. 121
  • Tacitus, writing around A.D. 116
  • Pliny the Younger, writing in A.D. 110 or 111
  • The Emperor Trajan, writing back to Pliny in A.D. 110 or 111
  • And Josephus, writing around A.D. 93

The inclusion of Josephus in this list is not dependent on the famous Testimonium Flavianum found in his Antiquities 18:3:3.

Even setting aside that reference, which is partially corrupted, Josephus elsewhere refers to Jesus having followers (noting that he “was called Christ”) in a passage for which we have no evidence of manuscript corruption (Antiquities 20:9:1).

We thus have multiple references for the existence of a Christian movement that date to the end of the first century and the beginning of the second.

 

Geographical Spread

These same references indicate a considerable geographical spread for the movement.

Josephus is writing about events in Judaea, which other sources also indicate was the origin point of the movement.

But Suetonius and Tacitus write about the movement existing at Rome as well.

And Pliny the Younger indicates that it was widespread in Bithynia (in modern northern Turkey).

 

A Recent Movement

Another notable fact about the Christian movement is that it was of recent origin.

This is something also indicated by the same sources, who place its origin in the first century.

Josephus links Jesus to his “brother” James, who died in A.D. 62 (Antiquities 20:9:1).

Pliny is at a loss for how to deal with this religious movement, which is so new that the way to deal with its members is still in the process of being established (Letters 96).

Suetonius specifically says that Christians were a new movement (The Twelve Caesars: Nero 16).

And Tacitus says that Jesus was “executed during the rule of Tiberius by the procurator Pontius Pilate” (Annals 15:44).

All of this points to a first century date for the origin of the movement.

 

The Christians Agree

The earliest Christian sources agree with all this. They acknowledge that Christianity began in the first century.

This is significant, because it would not be in the early Christians’ interests to claim this.

Newness is not, on balance, a desirable trait in promoting a religion.

It is much easier to promote a religion if you can claim antiquity for it.

That’s why even religions of indisputably recent origin—including Scientology, Mormonism, and the New Age movement—invariably link themselves to some form of supposed ancient wisdom.

And the early Christians did this, pointing the origins of their movement in Judaism.

They pointed to this as a way of offsetting the fact that their movement had its particular origin just a few years earlier.

We can thus take their testimony of a recent origin as credible, for if the Christian movement had been older, they would have claimed that it was older.

 

Narrowing the Range

We can narrow the range of Christian origins further, though.

Pliny indicates that some of the people he interviewed had been Christians as many as twenty years previously. Working backward from when he was writing, that would suggest Christians in Bithynia by A.D. 90.

Tacitus and Suetonius both speak of Christians being in Rome during the reign of Nero (A.D. 54-68), and Suetonius possibly alludes to them being there during the reign of Claudius (A.D. 41-54; see The Twelve Caesars: Claudius 25).

When we turn to Christian sources, we find Luke indicating that John the Baptist began his ministry in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar (Luke 3:1), which is most naturally taken as a reference to A.D. 28.

This is significant because all four of the gospels indicate that the Christian movement began after the ministry of John the Baptist had begun.

 

A Rapidly Spreading Movement

These sources thus allow us to discern a portrait of a rapidly spreading movement.

It apparently began in the Roman province of Judaea some time in or after A.D. 28.

It spread as far as Rome no later than A.D. 54-68 (and quite possibly earlier).

And it had spread to Bithynia no later than A.D. 90.

This portrait is derived from just a few sources. If we were to allow other first and second century sources to speak, it would be easy to show that the movement was in other places as well, including Syrian Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, Thessalonica, Philippi, and many other locations.

What we see is thus a movement that went from not existing to being dramatically spread around the Roman world in just a few decades.

This tells us something important about the early Christian movement . . .

 

It Was Organized

Movements do not spread that way unless they are organized.

This was particularly the case in the ancient world, where travel was slow, difficult, dangerous, and often expensive.

The spread of Christianity was not an accident. It was the result of a deliberate strategy of evangelization that required significant organization.

This tells us something else . . .

 

It Had Leaders

Organization requires leaders. There have to be people organizing the movement and arranging for its message to spread.

The book of Romans expresses this need from a Christian viewpoint as follows:

Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

But how are they to call on one in whom they have not believed?

And how are they to believe in one of whom they have never heard?

And how are they to hear without someone to proclaim him?

And how are they to proclaim him unless they are sent? [Rom. 10:13-15].

 

Developing Organization

Early Christian writings reveal quite a bit about how the Christian movement was organized and how its organization developed during the first century of its existence.

We see it quickly being organized into local groups known as churches.

These had local officers including bishops, priests, and deacons.

The churches themselves, though, tended to be planted, especially in the early days, by individuals known as apostles and evangelists.

The sources we have—including the documents of the New Testament, the writings of the early Church Fathers, and even spurious writings like the Gnostic gospels—indicate that the earliest work was done by those officials who were called “apostles.”

The Greek term for apostle—apostolos—conveys the idea of someone who has been sent, which raises a question . . .

 

Who Did the Sending?

Movements tend to have founders—especially highly organized movements.

Any time you have a sizeable, well-organized movement, there is often a single figure at its inception who played a key role in setting it up, developing its vision, and putting in place the leaders who carried it forward.

Even in movements that form when a number of similarly-minded movements come together and merge, there is usually a single figure who takes the prime leadership role.

So when we see Christianity as a geographically diverse organization that spread remarkably quickly and had leaders known as apostles (“sent ones”) founding local congregations, it’s only natural to look at the movement and ask whether it, too, had such a founding leader.

According to the early Christians, it did, and it is here that we encounter the figure of Jesus.

 

Jesus of Nazareth

The earliest accounts we have agree that Jesus of Nazareth founded the Christian movement, recruited and trained its earliest leaders, and then sent them out as his apostles.

This is simply what you would expect of an organization that displayed the sudden appearance and growth of the Christian movement, and there is no good reason to reject the movement’s own account of its origins on this point.

The sudden appearance and rapid growth of Christianity points to a level of organization and motivation that is most naturally explained by the movement having a single, recent, and charismatic founder.

 

Not Unique to Christianity

This reasoning does not apply just to Christianity. It also applies to other movements that suddenly appear and grow quickly.

For example, it applies to Islam.

Islam did not exist prior to the early A.D. 600s, and within the first 150 years of its existence it spread dramatically, ranging all the way through North Africa, to the Middle East, to India (with a European foothold in Portugal and Spain).

That kind of expansion required organization.

In Islam’s case, the organization was political and military, but it still pointed to the existence of a single, recent, charismatic founder—Muhammad—who established the movement, provided its vision, and gave it its early organization and motivation.

 

The Reality of Jesus

You would expect a movement that began and then spread far and wide in only a few decades to have a founder, and—absent very strong evidence to the contrary—it does not make sense to reject the movement’s claim about who its founder was.

From non-Christian sources alone, we could have predicted that Christianity likely had a founder who lived some time in the first half of the first century.

When we find Christian sources agreeing with this and identifying that founder as Jesus of Nazareth, we have reason to credit this claim and to conclude: Jesus of Nazareth existed.

The Weekly Francis – 11 August 2013

The Weekly Francis – 11 August 2013

This version of The Weekly Francis covers material released in the last week from 19 May to 11 August 2013.

The Weekly Francis is a compilation of the Holy Father’s writings, speeches, etc which I also post at Jimmy Akin’s The Weekly Francis. Jimmy Akin came up with this idea when he started “The Weekly Benedict” and I have taken over curation of it.

Angelus

Homilies

Messages

Speeches

Papal Tweets

  • “The light of faith illumines all our relationships and helps us to live them in union with the love of Christ, to live them like Christ.” @pontifex, 5 August 2013
  • “With his coming among us, Jesus came close to us and encountered us; also today, through the Sacraments, he encounters us.” @pontifex, 7 August 2013
  • “We are all jars of clay, fragile and poor, yet we carry within us an immense treasure.” @pontifex, 9 August 2013
  • “One cannot separate Christ and the Church. The grace of Baptism gives us the joy of following Christ in and with the Church.” @pontifex, 11 August 2013

Note: Due to problems with using copyrighted material from the Vatican the eBook version of The Weekly Francis has been suspended. For users of the previous ebook volume I have some suggestions for alternatives on how to best read these documents especially on mobile platforms.

What did Jesus mean when he said not to judge others? (10 things to know and share)

What did Jesus mean when he said not to judge others? Here are 10 things to know and share . . .
What did Jesus mean when he said not to judge others? Here are 10 things to know and share . . .

Jesus famously said, “Judge not, lest ye be judged.”

Today, some people use this to shut down conversations when the subject turns to sexual morality.

“Didn’t Jesus say not to judge others?” they ask. “Who are you to judge?”

Did Jesus mean his words to be used this way?

If not, what did he mean?

Here are 10 things to know and share . . .

 

1) Not a cover for immoral behavior in general

It’s clear that Jesus did not intend his words to be used as a cover for immoral behavior.

He did not mean them to be used as a conversation stopper to shut down attempts to admonish people engaged in immoral behavior.

In fact, Jesus himself did rather a lot of admonishing regarding proper moral conduct.

That is, in fact, the subject of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7), in which the saying occurs.

 

2) Not even a cover for sexual misbehavior

Jesus had quite a bit to say about sexual immortality as well—noting, for example, in the Sermon on the Mount that even being mentally unfaithful was a sin:

You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart [Matt. 5:27-28].

 

3) Not a prohibition on admonishing others

Jesus did also not intend his words to be used to stop others from admonishing others when they are committing sinful behavior.

Jesus himself told his ministers:

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you [Matt. 28:19-20].

That would include teaching his commands regarding sexual morality.

Also, admonishing sinners is a spiritual work of mercy that we are to engage in:

My brethren, if any one among you wanders from the truth and some one brings him back, let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins [Jas. 5:19-20].

 

4) Not an endorsement of moral relativism

Taking Jesus’ teaching out of context, one might try to use it as a pretext for moral relativism—the idea that all moral judgments regarding the conduct of others are to be suspended and each person is to be allowed to define what is morally good for himself.

This is clearly ruled out by what we’ve already seen regarding Jesus’ own teaching on morality and on the need to proclaim them to others.

We do not define moral truth for ourselves. Moral relativism is a false position that is incompatible with the Christian faith.

It is also incompatible with itself. Like all forms of relativism, it is self-contradictory.

If it is wrong to make moral judgments regarding the behavior of others then it would be wrong to judge others for judging!

So what did Jesus mean?

KEEP READING.

1st Thoughts on the 12th Doctor

capaldi
Peter Capaldi has been cast as the 12th Doctor Who

So it has now been announced that Peter Capaldi will be the new Doctor Who.

I must confess that I don’t know much about Capaldi, but I do have a couple of initial thoughts.

 

The Right Man for the Part?

The first is that I’m glad they cast a man instead of a woman for the part.

The latter, while not out of keeping with what they’ve established about timelord biology, would have been a net negative for the show.

Changing the sex of your main character is not something to be done lightly.

In this case, doing so would have:

  • felt like artificial “stunt casting” done out of slavish political correctness,
  • invited endless discussions of sex that would have overshadowed what the program is about,
  • invite endless and unflattering comparisons to the performances of previous Doctors, and
  • made the show feel unfamiliar and different on a bunch of levels.

The time to something like that, if you’re going to do something like that, is not when a show is at the peak of its popularity–which this one is. It has never had a bigger audience, globally.

The time to do radical shakeups in a show’s formula is when it’s about to get cancelled or when it’s just being revived after a hiatus.

 

Regressing to the Mean

My second thought is that I’m glad that they went with an older actor to play the Doctor.

I’d been (mildly) concerned about the increasing youth of the actors who have been cast for the part. The current, 11th Doctor (Matt Smith), was the youngest ever.

While I don’t mind young actors in the part (I liked Smith, as well as Peter Davison, who was only 30 when he was cast as the 5th Doctor), there was a clear trend toward younger actors, and the show was in danger of becoming too young-actor oriented.

We were nearing a point at which the apparent age of the Doctor needed to regress to the mean.

I mean, could an 18-year old Doctor even try to bring the gravitas needed for the part without looking foolish (as well as teenage angst-y)?

Just for fun, I did a quick table of the ages of the various actors who have played the Doctor at the time they got the part:

doctor who ages 1

This chart covers the twelve actors who have been cast to play the role on television on an ongoing basis (even though McGann’s incarnation didn’t get picked up for a regular series).

It does not include actors cast for movies, webisodes, or on a purely temporary basis (such as John Hurt, who is playing the “mystery incarnation” of the Doctor, whose story will be explored in the 50th anniversary special).

Now here’s a chart showing what I mean about the Doctor-getting-younger trend:

doctor who ages 2

As you can see, until Capaldi’s casting as the 12th Doctor, there was an unmistakable trend toward casting younger actors.

Of course, there were ups and downs, but the overall trend toward younger doctors is unmistakable.

We needed to regress to the mean, and they did that in a big way by casting a 55-year old (that also being the age that the 1st Doctor was when the series began).

In a way, the series is returning to its roots, with the Doctor as a man of mature years rather than a twenty-something romping around space and time.

 

Getting Darker?

My third thought concerns the way that Capaldi will play the role and what kinds of stories he will be offered.

I’d have a better sense of this if I knew more about his work, but I suspect that we’ll see a couple of things that will be different than Matt Smith’s Doctor and other recent Doctors.

For one, I suspect that he will play the part more seriously–and be given fewer zany antics (though there will be some of those).

Matt Smith apparently patterned aspects of his performance off Patrick Troughton’s 2nd Doctor (who is, perhaps, my all-time favorite Doctor), and I’ve seen some online suggesting that Capaldi may come across more like Jon Pertwee’s less-playful, more action-oriented 3rd Doctor.

So this transition may feel a bit like the transition from Troughton to Pertwee, which would be fine by me.

I also suspect that the performance and the show will be getting darker because we’re apparently at the Doctor’s (allegedly) final incarnation.

Timelords can only regenerate 12 times under normal circumstances, meaning 13 incarnations total.

Assuming John Hurt’s Doctor is a previous incarnation (either pre-Hartnell or during the gap between McGann and Eccleston, when the Time War occurred) then Capaldi is the timelord’s 13th incarnation (even though he’s only the 12th “Doctor”).

That means that when it comes time to replace Capaldi there will likely be a big, pathos-filled story in which he is miraculously freed from the 12-regeneration limit.

They’ve already indicated that this can be done, as the timelords offered the Master a whole new cycle of regenerations (another 12) back in the 25th anniversary special. And, even without their help, the Master managed to get several more regenerations, leading to his appearances in the current revival of the program.

They’ll do the same for the Doctor–somehow–but they will probably (and should) milk the approaching, apparent end of his life for the drama it naturally contains.

That means that the 12th Doctor’s time should have the Shadow of Death hanging over it.

It also may have the shadow of the Valeyard hanging over it, if they don’t pay that off in the 50th anniversary special.

And, as much as I’ve enjoyed some of the zaniness Matt Smith brought to the role, some aspects of the 11th Doctor’s run were over the top (particularly Steven Moffat’s fairy tale-inspired series finales).

I’ve already been enjoying the more serious feel of the show that arrived with Clara Oswald becoming the main companion, which harks back to the way the show felt in its–uh–first incarnation (1963-1989), and the arrival of Peter Capaldi as the Doctor may bring back more of that classic Who feeling.

The Weekly Francis – 4 August 2013

pope_francis_mass_20130314124558_640_480This version of The Weekly Francis covers material released in the last week from 10 July to 4 August 2013.

Angelus

Homilies

Messages

Speeches

Papal Tweets

  • “I am back home, and I assure you that my joy is much greater than my exhaustion!” @pontifex, 29 July 2013
  • “What an unforgettable week in Rio! Thank you, everyone. Pray for me. #Rio2013 #JMJ” @pontifex, 29 July 2013
  • “Now, young friends, we must continue to live day by day all that we have professed together at WYD.” @pontifex, 30 July 2013
  • “Dear young friends, it is worth wagering one’s life on Christ and on the Gospel, risking everything for great ideals! #Rio2013 #JMJ” @pontifex, 31 July 2013
  • “The security of faith does not make us motionless or close us off, but sends us forth to bear witness and to dialogue with all people.” @pontifex, 2 August 2013

Note: Due to problems with using copyrighted material from the Vatican the eBook version of The Weekly Francis has been suspended. For users of the previous ebook volume I have some suggestions for alternatives on how to best read these documents especially on mobile platforms.