Per your remarks on language, the NT says “You cannot put new wine into old wine skins,” but to some extent that is what the NT does — it has a mix of the old ideas that the people had for reference points (sacrifice for example) and the new. The conversation shifted very slowly.
Take a lesson from the Vaticanites who have been centuries at their task of erasing the Bride/Mother. She is now two persons, and the Bride has become merely the People of God. And now the teaching is that Mother Mary was not able to get to heaven using her own power and needed an “Assumption.” It is not the deluge that makes a dent in the stone, but the steady drip-drip of millions of drips over eons.
Rather than having brides and bridegrooms (as did the Pagans prior to Christianity), and ontologically superior priests and infallible bishops (one step backwards for sure), Catholics should be taking a cue from Jesus and worshiping in Spirit and recognizing ‘the priesthood of all believers.’
The solution is not to plug women into established clerical roles but to make gender-equal roles that are somehow better. Yes, new wineskins, new language, invent our own future.
I have noticed a shift in language at NCR in the years I have been posting. What a remarkable development NCR is, historically! We are all language-shapers.
By “gender-equal” I do not mean “separate but equal.” Women being plugged into established clerical roles could be an interim solution; but I would hope for a better solution. I don’t know what sort of better roles could be fashioned in liturgy, but these new replacement roles should be open equally to all genders.
I don’t think we need to have brides or grooms as part of liturgy as there was very little mention of such in the NT.
I have no interest in being a priest or a preacher or minister, except as we all are ministering one to another.
Thanks for expanding those language frontiers.
May 10, 2016
Violet writes 
And Paul was not a priest so does that mean that any of us can pride ourselves on being “in persona Christi’?
Joseph, thank you so much for that history !! and I have saved it for future reference in my Word document for ‘in persona Christi.’ I thought of asking you for help and you read my mind !!
My Zerwick and Grosvenor tells me that the Greek for 2 Corinthians 2:10 can mean either “person” as a representative or it can mean “presence,” and the 40 plus BIblegateway translations tend to have one or the other. Probably 2 Corinthians 2:10 should read ‘in the sight of Christ’ as the NIV has it — my guess after trying to muddle through my Thayer Greek dictionary.
Despite the bread crumbs going back to Aquinas (and I don’t understand the last sentence in your quote) and back to 2 Corinthians 2:10, is it your impression also that this promotion of the idea of ‘in persona Christi’ is fairly recent? Did you see any emphasis on it going back the many decades you have been studying Catholicism?
‘In persona Christi’ is not an impediment to women priests unless Inter Insigniores (Pope Paul 6) is correct that “Christ himself was and remains a man.” The Christ would have to be more than just one man if The Christ has all the church — male and female — as members of The Christ. Some recognize this and we see ‘in persona Christi Capitis [head]’ referring to Jesus the head of The Christ. So [supposedly] a woman could not represent Jesus, the head and a male. But I have to question how any Church official could represent Jesus or The Christ. Aren’t we all supposed to be followers of Jesus? Not seeking the best seat. Not asking ‘Lord let him sit at your right hand’ ( Lk 11:43, Mt 20:21). My sense is that it is idolatry to claim to be a god-impersonator or claim to be as infallible as God is or claim to be Jesus’ right hand man.
Thanks again Joseph for your helping.
May 20, 2016
LikeLike
What comes across doesn’t make him look his best. But I do believe that reports are correct and representative and he is very consistent in his attitude towards women. My impression is that he is telling me I have to be less than I am, that I have to fulfill some role he imagines for all women, that I have to limit my choices, and deny the Spirit in me. All of which is just bias and it means I pay no attention to his views on any subject. I do believe I am a whole person (in God’s image) and not a mere “complement,” supplementary to all men. This “complementarianism” is a recent invention and nasty stuff. At least “wife is the heart and husband the head” was transparently ridiculous. This complementarianism is easily misunderstood and some women just lap it up. They are flattered to have a supposed “feminine genius” even though that is code for ‘not as good as male thinking.’ As far as I know there is no such thing as female thinking or male thinking, only good ideas and stupid ideas. Jamie gives a lot of quotes in her article above — all very consistent with what he has said before. I don’t think he is being misrepresented. If he doesn’t like how he appears to women, he certainly has the power to change that.
May 20, 2016
http://ncronline.org/blogs/grace-margins/its-time-be-honest-about-pope-francis-and-women
[May 19, 2016 NCR by Jamie Manson]
LikeLike
http://ncronline.org/blogs/grace-margins/its-time-be-honest-about-pope-francis-and-women
[May 19, 2016 NCR by Jamie Manson]
May 21, 2016
Has anyone noticed how unseemly this bridegroom stuff is?
The Pope says, “The Church is woman … she is a woman married to Jesus Christ, she has
her Bridegroom, who is Jesus Christ… . And a woman’s consecration makes her the very icon of the Church and icon of Our Lady.” We all know the Church is the “Bride” and we all know the Church is “Holy Mother Church.” So who exactly is the Bridegroom married to? A Bride who is a Mother. When the Pope says that the consecrated woman is the icon of the Church AND the icon of Our Lady, doesn’t that make Our Lady an icon of the Church? (a=b, a=c, therefore, b=c) Didn’t the Pope just make Mary into the Bride? But Our Lady is the “Mother of the Church,” not the Church (Catechism #963). And Our Lady is obviously the mother of Jesus Christ. However, I was stunned to come across this in the Catechism #2675: “. . . . the supplications and praises of the children of God to the Mother of Jesus, because she now knows the humanity which, in her, the Son of God espoused.” Espoused? Jesus married his mother’s humanity? Oh help.
Maybe we need a commission to investigate what the Pope said and also to discover who is the Father of the Church. (And maybe come up with some better metaphors.)
Link to 2675
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P9F.HTM
LikeLike
Interesting point. The keys to the kingdom (Mt 16:19) is perhaps a mistranslation as it is inconsistent with the order of earth following heaven in the Lord’s Prayer. In Mt 18:18 the power to bind is given to the whole Church, not just one person (NIV footnotes make earth follow heaven in these verses). Peter may well have had that view on priesthood and I’m glad you pointed that out (1 Peter 2:5, 2:9). Peter was ostensibly scribed by Silas (1 Peter 5:12 and 2 Peter 3:1 (TNIV)).
May 22, 2016
LikeLike
While we know that Mary is the mother of the Church and the mother of Jesus (Catechism #963), it does get confusing to hear that the Church is Holy Mother Church and “she” is the Bride. Obviously the mother of Jesus is not the same mother as his Church-Bride. But do the Vaticanites all know this? Consider this error in the Catechism: #813 “there is . . . one virgin become mother, and I should like to call her ‘Church.’” While the Church has been called virgin and mother, she is not the only one, not unless you want the mother of Jesus to be his bride. In this next Catechism quote, Jesus marries his mother’s “humanity.” #2675: “. . . . the supplications and praises of the children of God to the Mother of Jesus, because she now knows the humanity which, in her, the Son of God espoused.” A first step would be to clean up the Catechism so that the mother is not the bride, and also eliminate all passages that have the bride confused with the mother (such as #773) or the bride compared to the mother (#2618) or the bride becoming more and more like the mother (#829, 972 and more??). These passages are unseemly and harken back to Pagan times when that savior’s mother was his bride.
Links to Catechism passages above
#963 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P2C.HTM
#773 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P27.HTM
#813, #829 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P29.HTM
#972 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P2C.HTM
#2618 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P93.HTM
#2675 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P9F.HTM
May 27, 2016
LikeLike
From the Vatican Catechism: “#219 God’s love for Israel is compared to a father’s love for his son. His love for his people is stronger than a mother’s for her children.” Did they really mean to say that a father’s love is greater than a mother’s love? Who knows. (Read it twice if you need to.)
I don’t think the Vatican is ready for mother-god.
I don’t ascribe gender to God. I do wonder if it is a good idea to think of God as a parent, as parents are only too human. Maybe we can give God a better name than Mother or Father.
If you call God “Father” and call God “holy,” and pray to holy father, then call the Pope “Holy Father,” does that mean he is like unto God?
May 27, 2016
LikeLike
What translation are you quoting for Colossians 1:24 “mortal frame”? It is not among the 50 plus on Biblegateway. It is not in the DRA. Do you agree that having respect for scripture and your readers means that you give a full citation including the translation if asked, and if you are offering a paraphrase, that you inform us of this?
May 27, 2016
LikeLike
Thanks for answering my question. How about that Knox Bible? “At the beginning of time the Word already was.” (Jn 1:1 (Knox)) Not exactly what the scripture says. It would seem that the Creation was initiated with God’s spoken Word, so how could the Word be in existence prior to the Creation? From the point of view of God, there is no time lag between the moment God speaks the Word and the Creation happens, and this happening (sprouting, flourishing, fruiting, and passing into timelessness) is instantaneous. Does the resulting fruit of humankind or “Son of Man” likewise speak a Word or even more than one Word? Is God limited as to how many Words It speaks? So how many Creations are out there? All happening instantaneously?
Do you have confidence in a translation, paraphrase really, that says Jesus appeared to the Eleven as does Jerome’s deutero? (1 Co 15:5 (Knox)) The Greek says Twelve. Didn’t Jesus have the wherewithal to appear to Judas? At least Knox lets Mary “magnify” the Ineffable instead of substituting “glorify” like some versions. So that tells us Mary is a Christ just as we all are.
Link http://www.newadvent.org/bible/joh001.htm
May 28, 2016
LikeLike
Oh why, oh why, do you sigh? Did you notice that while the English [Knox] has “the Word was God,” the Latin and the Greek both say, “God was the Word” (Jn 1:1 (Knox)). It does give you a different sense, doesn’t it? You don’t have much confidence in Jesus if you think he was not capable of visiting with Judas after he expired. I know Knox follows the Latin deutero in that instance. Is there an echo? How do you account for #2782 in the Catechism: “You who have become sharers in Christ are appropriately called ‘Christs.'” The Christ was initiated with a Word and is what we are all becoming. It is a process. The Christ has an output (think NT lamp metaphors here).
May 29, 2016
LikeLike
There is no such thing as a Harrowing as God did not make the ancient peoples wait around for Jesus. I doubt very much there is waiting in the domain of timelessness.
Jesus did not descend into a sort of “Hades,” rather just “descended” into his burial.
Jesus did not necessarily limit himself to visiting the living apostles, although I agree that among the 500, all were still alive (1 Co 15:6 (Mounce)). Did you notice in that chapter that there are 12 apostles (not 11) and in addition, there are other apostles? That is certainly implied. Maybe these others were not males (ahem).
I cannot follow what you say about Catechism #2782. Maybe we have all existed eternally with God and are all God-spin-offs and are all initiated into a developing Christhood with a Word, and that is the point of “in the beginning was the Word” (Jn 1:1), unless you feel a need to worship Jesus. Better to follow him.
May 30, 2016
LikeLike
http://ncronline.org/news/people/can-women-rejoin-ranks
I recommend Phyllis Zagano be appointed chair of the commission to study women deacons.
May 31, 2016
LikeLike
May 31, 2016
http://ncronline.org/blogs/francis-chronicles/francis-comic-strip-233
I’m still trying to figure out if Gabriella is a ‘complementary woman’ with a ‘feminine genius.’ I will guess yes, since that would be the Pope’s kinda woman. Why does she wear that scarf? Why isn’t she trying to find her husband or family? Shouldn’t she let her husband or other male relative speak for her? Is she allowed to speak to other men? Maybe the scarf means she is indeed complementary “just like a strawberry on a cake.” I don’t think Gabby the scarf-girl is ready to take on that pompous and pontificating crew. I don’t think she can free them from their roles as oppressors until she is able to free herself from her own submissive attitude. Is Gabby going to recommend that we women be required to wear a head covering in church? A Kleenex if nothing else like a scarf or a veil is available. If the Pope likes her, then I don’t. Nice that you have her sitting at the head of the table though. Hey Pat — I wish you well in your retirement !!! Have fun!
LikeLike
June 1, 2016
http://ncronline.org/news/people/can-women-rejoin-ranks
Too bad I can’t reply to you on that other page that has closed where you said something about male symbols on the altar. You do know? that candlesticks are required to be on the altar or alongside (on high holder-posts) when Mass is said (per Wiki). Just recently a fascinating article in The Atlantic about a discovered Neanderthal cave with two large stone circles. (And I will add . . . stone posts also.) The first representation of the Bride and Bridegroom?? But did the Neanderthals let their females participate in whatever ritual went on in the cave? Maybe not if their females were complementary. Where are circles in a church? Rose window and baptismal font and dome. And we all know the Church is like a welcoming womb.
link to article and photo
http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/05/the-astonishing-age-of-a-neanderthal-cave-construction-site/484070/
link to wiki candles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altar_candle
LikeLike
http://ncronline.org/blogs/simply-spirit/it-time-free-mary-and-let-god-have-her-own-maternal-face
If you take a close look at the Catechism, you just have to say thank heavens for the Protestants and the Nones who have some sense. The tradition being preserved in the Catechism is not Pauline. It is not Gospel. It is something entirely other and certainly not the best in Pagan tradition. I wonder if JP-I was trying to move away from that to something better?
June 2, 2016
LikeLike
http://ncronline.org/blogs/francis-chronicles/francis-comic-strip-234
Since you brought up the subject, I have to wonder if the beanies and the tonsures could have evolved as a way of hiding a relative lack of male pattern baldness (if such there was) within the asexual communities, and warding off any discrimination that might have ensued as a result of too much hair?? (An interesting topic to research.)
There probably is a reason for scarves other than subjugation of women: keeping off the sun in the desert, protection from sand storms, keeping off disease vector mosquitoes. Personally I think scarves are uncomfortable and don’t wear ’em. And if I did wear one here in redneck Baptist country, I would certainly bring ‘unwanted attention’ to myself.
June 2, 2016
LikeLike
I do suspect this article is parody with lines culled from the traddie commenters here at NCR. Is this guy for real? This is flypaper for y’all. What on earth is “the philosophy of gender” where “men typically value and build things, while women value and build relationships”? This philosophy insults both men and women equally.
June 2, 2016
LikeLike
Do you have a citation for your alternative “strawberry” quote? See article by David Gibson, Religion News Service, Dec 11, 2014: “When Pope Francis this month wanted to highlight his appointment of several women to a blue-ribbon theological commission, he called the female theologians ‘strawberries on the cake.'”
link
http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/seven-reasons-some-women-wince-when-pope-francis-starts-talking
June 3, 2016
LikeLike
Oh that’s interesting. Thanks, Monica! That is entirely different from calling the women strawberries. Rather he says there is not enough, as in “not enough strawberries on a cake.” I think I may have to stop complaining about being a strawberry. Isn’t that true when you think about it — there are never enough strawberries on a cake.
June 3, 2016
*******
My notes follow
from Monica
from Corriere della Sera, Dec 5, 2014: “Francesco si rivolge alla commissione teologica internazionale, riunita in Vaticano, parla della «maggiore presenza delle donne» nel gruppo di studiosi ma poi alza lo sguardo dal testo scritto, salta l’aggettivo «significativa» e aggiunge a braccio: «Ancora non basta, sono le fragole sulla torta. Bisogna fare di più».
Google translate
Francis addresses the International Theological Commission, gathered in the Vatican, speaks of “the presence of women” in the group of scholars, but then looks up from the written text, skip the adjective ‘significant’ and adds to arm: “Still not enough, are strawberries on the cake. We must do more ‘
[Francis speaks of “the presence of women” in the group of scholars, and adds “Still not enough, are strawberries on the cake. We must do more.” (Google translator) ]
Monica has: “(Women theologians) are too few, like the strawberries on a cake. There must be more.”
LikeLike
Of course it is fiction. Interesting that Wiki/Cybele places the Galli priests (who self-castrated and who dressed like women) in Roman cities well into the Empire’s Christian era. Model or predecessor?
Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybele
June 4, 2016
LikeLike
Interesting. I had typed ‘their house of cards is a prison for them’ but then erased before I posted as I thought no one would understand.
June 5, 2016
LikeLike
This reminds me of the magic words, “Open sesame!” But does God want us to be automatons ‘praying as the Pagans do,’ and trying to magically force God to bring us goodies because we have done the ritual right (with the priest “acting in the person of Christ the Head,” and blah, blah), or are we supposed to be living in the Kin_dom where we include our ‘neighbor’ even if she is female, and worship in Spirit? We are all the Bridegroom because we are all members of His body and not one of us is a ‘Head,’ except Jesus himself. We are all the Bride as People of God. The people in the pews are both Bride AND Bridegroom. There is no longer male or female. Anyone, male or female, can image this amazing new creation that is the Christ. When will the ‘ontologically superior’ types at the Vatican finally get it?
June 5, 2016
LikeLike
My view is we know next to nothing of what the first Christians believed because the Gospel (4 books) and the entire New Testament (except James?) is Pauline. Paul and his followers scarcely mention the Bride and Bridegroom, because they are trying to lead Pagan people away from that. Like you Pro, I do see a mean streak of patriarchy beginning in history long before; however, there were traditions within Paganism that needed to be reformed, such as incestuous deities, self-castration, and ritual sex with prostitutes in temples. If there were not still human sacrifice in the backwoods, then what was the urgent need for Jesus as the ‘one and only human sacrifice’? So women welcomed the reform. I speculate that Paul was the leader or spokesperson for a group of women who were reformers. I looked up ‘Mithraism in Tarsus.’ What did Paul the Pharisee actually believe as he melded elements of Paganism to monotheism for consumption by ‘Gentiles’? I really see Paul overall as a good guy — although abrasive. Some of his interest in resurrection does seem genuine.
link http://jdstone.org/cr/files/paulandthepaganreligionofmithraism.html
June 5, 2016
LikeLike
It is devastating to lose someone to a cult.
LikeLike
Virgin birth and resurrection are considerably older than Sparta, but no doubt they had their own version. I think Paul was just an opportunist taking advantage of popular trends towards monotheism, against sacrifice, and against circumcision. He wrote to a Christian church in Rome that was already established before he got there so he was not its founder. It has always puzzled me how the Jews suddenly gave up their priesthood and sacrifice. How did that happen? Just about the time that Christians were doing the same thing — having gatherings with no priests and no sacrifice (other than a “remembrance.”) The Jews could have continued with sacrifice even without their Jerusalem temple as they had sacrifice before the temple. Paul’s Roman connection is very puzzling — how odd that the ‘tent maker’ merits an escort with 470 Roman soldiers (Acts 23 (NIV)).
June 5, 2016
LikeLike
Thanks for that link Pro, ” human sacrifice has never become a part of our [Jewish] heritage.” So when Paul contrived a Jesus as “the one and only” human sacrifice, the Jews knew that story for what it was and didn’t accept it. Another book that has Paul, not as heir to Jesus but a counter-force, is The Lost Gospel by Simcha Jacobovici (of Talpiot fame) and Barrie Wilson — a page turner for sure and best seller. They propose that the Gnostic branch was started by Mary the Magdalene and that the Paulists were a counter-reform. I find it hard to believe that the first Christians could trust someone who had tried to kill them, and Galatians makes it clear that Paul had very little to do with Peter and James. I also find it puzzling that Paul had so little respect for Jesus (and for the Father) as to turn Jesus into a sacrifice of appeasement. Paul would have known that the Father does not accept human sacrifice. Paul would have known that Jews do not “drink Blood.” I prefer to remember Jesus with respect and admiration.
June 6, 2016
link to article on Jewish sacrifice http://www.beingjewish.com/unchanged/sacrifices.html
why no sacrifice today http://www.beingjewish.com/unchanged/rebuild.html
LikeLike
Clearly the inference in the New Testament is that we are all the Second Person collectively with Jesus as our Example. And the emphasis is on Jesus’ servant leadership, while hierarchy is deplored. Such thinking would have been anathema to the Roman Empire and to its successor. . . . As for a “hooked X,” if you mean the “Λ” and the “υ” symbol, I have seen some of these in my younger days while out hiking, and most recently in a Windows 10 photo. It means the Bride and the Bridegroom. . . . Much older than Jesus time I would guess. Link to photo below — you should see a little “Λ”-shaped cave within a cave and the “υ” to the right. Out in the ocean, the two rocks have the same motif?? You can bring this photo to your lock screen on your Windows 10 ((Go to Settings > Personalization > Lock screen. Under Background, select Picture – if you want to add it.)). And the chi-rho? Same thing?
link https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/itpro/windows/whats-new/windows-spotlight
June 6, 2016
LikeLike
Thanks for those links. I suspect that most of the X and V and Λ symbols in North America were put there by natives as there are so many of these symbols. A date can be added to a rock long after the symbol. Of course, the Templars could have had the same or similar symbol. I’ve seen hooked X’s as a repeating pattern, which may be similar to the spiral wave design, both symbolizing regeneration or rebirth? I have only seen one other υ. People were sailing the oceans before Columbus — that is why there are pyramids all over (book “Voyages of the Pyramid Builders”) with that Λ shape.
As for my mind, at first I did not see the little cave in a cave. But eventually I did. The NT author(s) mock their readers with “seeing they do not perceive” (paraphrase Acts 28:26 and four similar passages). Yesterday I realized there are a lot of numbers in Acts and I found my 20th example of Sower’s Sevens in Acts 28. So I can ‘see blue.’ Sower’s Sevens can be extracted from many sacred texts written over hundreds of years. The presence of the number sets tells us the texts are less than literal, and most importantly, number sets that span multiple books of the Gospel tell us that these books were under the control of one party early on. A single hand had to devise a cross-book number set otherwise it would not likely produce the Sower’s Sevens. For example, the six stories of the loaves and fishes comprise a single number set that yields the factor of 70 x 7 — the Sower’s Sevens.
Check out Acts 26:28 where the NRSV footnote reveals that the king may really be asking, “Quickly you will persuade me to play the Christian?” So who is “playing the Christian?” See the blue?
Pro, I did very much like your metaphor of ocean waves! I have to agree with you that there is no hope for female inclusion in the priesthood. The Vaticanites have a very peculiar idea about the priest being “in the person of Christ the Head.” But there is no one a Head but Jesus himself.
June 7, 2016
LikeLike
I don’t understand what you’re saying. Sower’s Sevens is not ‘symbolism.’ It is math. Calculations are done to produce a certain numerical factor. Perhaps you thought that since I mentioned numbers in the Bible, I was talking about numerology, that is, assigning occult meaning (like ‘good luck’) to numbers. Not at all. If you do learn about Sower’s Sevens perhaps you can explain to me how I am failing to communicate.
I would be interested to learn how they dated that stone. Maybe if I click around some more I will discover it. Very interesting how they dated these other stones — recently a fascinating article in The Atlantic about a discovered Neanderthal cave with two large stone circles. (And I will add . . . stone posts also.) Did the Neanderthals allow their females participate in whatever ritual went on in the cave? Maybe not if their females were ‘complementary.’ link to article and photo
http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/05/the-astonishing-age-of-a-neanderthal-cave-construction-site/484070/
June 7, 2016
LikeLike
Well Pro, I did search and I found much information on the Kensington Rune Stone but not the scientific testing I was looking for. Can you help with that? Did Scott Wolter write a paper? I am quite interested now that I have been able to pull Sower’s Sevens out of the inscription. The numbers work as Viking numbers. If Templars, what language and what numbers? Maybe it wouldn’t work then. This will be my 21st example of Sower’s Sevens and if the year 1362, then far later in history than my previous latest, 7th century. I’m not bored at the moment.
June 7, 2016
LikeLike
Thanks for all that, Pro. Well, I suppose the Templars could have been among Norsemen and speaking and writing Norse (if that is the correct term), and yet the design of the Kensington Rune Stone with its numbers could be Templar. Interesting that the Sower’s Sevens solution for the rune is very similar to that I found in ‘Of Aseneth,’ the Syriac version. A Mary Virgin is apparently mentioned on the rune.
Since the Sower’s Sevens came from the Near East?? it would seem to be something the Templars would know of since they had been there, not so much Vikings or Norsemen??
I doubt the Statue of Liberty has Sower’s Sevens as a matter of record since Sower’s Sevens is a term I invented. The statue has 7 rays on her head. But Sower’s Sevens are hidden so you don’t see them until you do the math. Odds of success are 1 in 49, so a solution is a home run.
I don’t have a problem with Europeans in North America before Columbus (neara.org — chambers and such).
June 7, 2016
LikeLike
. . . see if the math description for the Statue of Liberty involves numbers from the Sower’s parables, that is, 100-60-30 and 30-60-100. These are the numbers that unlock the sevens with some simple arithmetic. With this rune stone apparently from the year 1362, I feel more confident that there may be people living today who do know about what I call Sower’s Sevens. Although if they are Masons (heirs to Templar mysteries??) they won’t tell me what they know. I definitely need a communication strategy to tell academics, media, and other vested interests that I have made a discovery.
NCR walks a fine line on some issues and I suppose, often has to wait for its readers to catch up, especially on womenpriests.
June 8, 2016
LikeLike
I believe it suggests that Paul is playing the Christian. Possibly, Acts has lines like this to jar the mature reader — the reader gets tweaked in order to gain awareness and not fall into idolatry (worship of dogma). You get a question. You don’t necessarily get an answer.
In Acts 17:23 mention is made of an “unknown god,” and Paul proceeds to explain that he knows all about God. Pretty funny scene.
Acts 28:11, Paul sails in the ship “with the ‘Heavenly Twins’ as a figurehead” (Mounce), one brother mortal, the other divine (twins with two different fathers, story of Castor and Pollux). So the author of Acts is saying, it’s been done before. In other words, the idea of Jesus giving immortality to his brothers is not new. Pollux did it for Castor.
A classic is, “Pilate was amazed that [Jesus] was already dead” (Mark 15:44 (NABRE)). The NRSV smooths this into “Pilate wondered” so you don’t get the full effect.
Also notice the back and forth re Barabbas. Both the Nazorean and Barabbas have the first name Jesus. In John 19:5 Pilate says, “Behold the man,” (the one in the purple robe). Then Pilate goes inside to talk to Jesus (19:9). Oh? Which Jesus? An exhilarating adventure to try to figure out which Jesus gets crucified by reading all 4 books of the Gospel in differing translations.
June 8, 2016
LikeLike
Hey Pro, You were a good influence on me. After I got the Sower’s Sevens (70 x 7) out of the Kensington Rune Stone, I went looking for them in the 21st century and found them at the Vatican. Per your hint re Freemasons (thanks), I checked wiki and that group likes to discuss the Temple of Solomon. So I headed off to the Temple (1Kings and 2Chronicles) and found more Sower’s Sevens. The algorithms there are repeated in that 7th century sacred text, and upon further investigation I found them in Amoris Laetitia and Laudato Si, not in the texts themselves but rather in the formatting of chapter-items. Which begs the question of whether the hidden sevens have been kept secret from ‘laypersons’ – as the sevens demonstrate that many passages in the Bible are less than literal. But with talking donkeys and snakes we already knew it was not literal. Pro, I’ve been careful to test my method (Google ‘How to Use the Sower’s Parables Numbers Et Cetera.’ By revealing they know about Sower’s Sevens, the Vaticanites surely undermine their claim to infallibility.
June 22, 2016
LikeLike
As far as I can tell, no one has commented on the above photo where Pope Paul VI is carried on a ceremonial throne on the shoulders of men.
Why am I reminded of Jesus being hoisted onto a donkey’s colt and riding it into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday (Luke 19:28-40)? Gosh, did the King of kings ride a donkey? Why didn’t his followers think to put him on a throne and carry him on their shoulders?
But no one is waving palm leaves in the photo. And none of the men in the photo look happy, not even the one in the pointy hat holding a staff topped with an emblem of a carcass hanging from a tree. (Wasn’t Jesus’ whole life of significance, not just his manner of dying? Does God need butchery and blood and sacrifice, or does God invite us to communion and eventual resurrection?)
At least I can have a moment of gratitude thinking that Pope Francis would never do anything so silly as to allow himself to be paraded around on a throne. Maybe things do change for the better after all.
June 30, 2016
http://ncronline.org/news/people/despite-vatican-ii-my-clergy-professors-werent-allowed-say
LikeLike
I was also reminded of those scenes where villagers carry a 2 ton?? statue of the Madonna on their shoulders parading through the town, with faces contorted in agony, and sweat dripping down. My reaction is that a pope is not the Madonna. I also have a reaction that people should not be carrying other people, or carrying their trains (Burke), or pulling a rickshaw, not unless the person is disabled and needs that help. What is your impression — wouldn’t it be terrifying for an old man to be hoisted so high and have to fear tumbling out of his ‘throne’ if one of the porters should happen to stumble? You couldn’t pay this old woman to ride perched like that. He looks like he is about ready to tumble out.
July 2, 2016
LikeLike
Obviously the weeds and wheat do not represent people — no person is 100 percent good or 100 percent bad. Weeds and wheat may represent the duality we all live in, not that I would blame my circumstances on an “evil one.” I basically don’t like the idea that the Creation has Fallen or that we are enduring some sort of Cosmic Calamity, although that may be true. Rather, the tares and wheat may represent a jumble of “good” and less preferred thoughts held in mind which will be sorted out at some appropriate moment, so that some personal enlightenment may be attained. In no way would Jesus teach that people are “bad” and that you should be judgmental. People are forgiven! The Kin_dom is at hand! Rejoice.
June 30, 2016
[a reply points out that Jesus called people ‘whitened sepulchers’ and that is judgmental. Add – Or at the end of our lives, the mistakes that we have made may be wiped out, purged, deleted, whatever, out of memory, out of existence, so that we may be only ‘wheat’]
LikeLike
What Paul wrote likely had very little to do with the historical Jesus. What the Vatican does has probably next to nothing to do with the historical Jesus, and they do him no honor by having him be a Pagan god. That big Papal crown is on their flag along with the ‘keys’ — Matthew 16:19 re keys is for Peter, and Matthew 18:18 and 18:19 is for the rest of us. Wherever there are Sower’s Sevens in Vatican documents, I suppose that makes the documents holy? I have to wonder how long people can keep on playing ‘let’s pretend.’ Let’s pretend we know what a god is and why there is evil. Then make up a whole bunch of rules and rituals to go along with that. Yeah, people will come to sniff the incense and gaze at the statues, and it gives them something they desperately need. But how can being indoctrinated to hate other people who are supposedly ‘fallen,’ and to think of one’s own self as being a ‘sinner’ ever really satisfy? Makes me so grateful for the Daily Word by Silent Unity. At least that is cheerful. The Divine is wherever there are people. My journey is happening wherever I am. Where is your avatar?
July 1, 2016
LikeLike
I’m not in favor of stifling language, or ideas that are inflexible and leaky like old wineskins. Kin_dom is just right.
LikeLike
I rather doubt that Matthew 17:20-21 is a parable, as it is a teaching tacked onto a demonstration by Jesus of how to move mountains. It does no honor to Jesus, a Jew, to make him into a Roman god, and the Gospel, which draws its supposed legitimacy from the antiquity of Hebrew religion, does not make Jesus into a god; rather just makes allusions to Pagan imagery, virgin birth, bride and bridegroom, etc. However, it would seem the Gospel is, at least at some level, really serious about the concept of resurrection. Jews know that their God is One and that is why they don’t subscribe to god-junior. Also, they know Yahweh would never accept a human sacrifice — this deliberate?? error in the Gospel (Jesus as human sacrifice) lets the Jews know the Gospel is not for them. I think the following, from Daily Word April 28, 1997, while perhaps overly optimistic?? is a valid interpretation of Matthew 17:20-21: “Spirit moves through me as the wisdom and strength to do what I need to do. In touch with the one Power in the universe, I realize unlimited potential. My goals are attainable, new ideas flood my mind, and I am guided to the right solutions. I welcome each day with joy and expectation, for I am lifted in spirit by my belief in the power of God to see me through. With faith, I believe that all things are possible.” . . . Pro is right, you should start to move mountains as Jesus taught.
July 7, 2016
LikeLike
I don’t look to Vaticanism for interpretations of the Bible. Per Mt 17:20, the Mounce interlinear has because of “poverty of your faith” instead of “you of little faith” as do most translations on Biblegateway . . . . . So what is this poverty that is an impediment to moving mountains? Perhaps a poverty of attitude that does not perceive the Love that is always for us, never opposed. The Love that is Abundance. I never did like the interpretation that made for straining to have more and more faith, when all that is needed is to ‘let go and let God’ (move that mountain). In Matthew 17:20-21, verse 21 is relegated to a footnote by the NRSV as being of possibly later origin. It does seem overstated. It advises the reader to make a greater effort to achieve results by fasting. But using Jesus’ formula, moving mountains is done by having an attitude of gratitude. As for your history lesson which may all be true, the Sower’s Sevens show me that at one time, early on, the four books of the Gospel were under the control of a single party (editor/writer) as there are cross-book number sets which yield a hidden factor, 70 x 7, also found in many passages in the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, etc.
July 8, 2016
LikeLike
What is the point of belonging to a church when no two people think alike?
LikeLike
Is this Balaam’s talking donkey? (“Am I not your donkey, which you have ridden all your life to this day?” (Num 22:30)) Who have I known all my life?
LikeLike
It was an article entitled, “Despite Vatican II, my clergy professors weren’t ‘allowed to say that.'” Hey Bro, we were talking about moving mountains but I think you weren’t really interested. It does call into question why Jesus asked others to help remove the stone from the tomb of Lazarus (Jn 11:39), as such is smaller than a mountain. I don’t recall Jesus removing any mountains. Luke 11:34 (footnote NIV) has another unconventional translation — this one with “generous.” Perhaps the same idea of having the proper attitude. I’m not sure having more “belief” would help move a mountain. Belief in what? The word “faith” is even worse as there are so many definitions of it. Plenty of mountains around here.
July 14, 2016
LikeLike
Pope John Paul II apologized for the excesses of the Inquisition. By the Vatican’s own count, “in the Inquisition’s heyday Germany killed more male and female witches than anywhere else, with some 25,000 people being put to death.” In Spain, it says, only 1.8 percent of the 125,000 interrogated were killed, but when I do the math, that comes to 2,250 people killed!! and presumably many more tortured (800 page, six-year Vatican report). “Vatican ‘dispels Inquisition myths’,” (notice quotes in title) by Verity Murphy, BBC News Online, June 15, 2004. The Vatican was a terrorist organization for many centuries.
July 25, 2016
LikeLike
https://www.ncronline.org/news/vatican/francis-institutes-commission-study-female-deacons-appointing-gender-balanced
This study has everything to do with women priests. The commission cannot review the history of women deacons without sorting through the history of women priests. That is because the terminology for these offices is murky. Read or skim through the book, “Ordained Women in the Early Church; A Documentary History,” by Madigan and Osiek, 2005. The Catholic Biblical Quarterly is quoted on the back cover, “Finally, readers have a single compendium in English of the evidence that women did hold church office as deacon, presbyter, and bishop, not simply as spouses of male officeholders and not in hεrεtical sects but in their own right and in the Catholic Church.”
August 2, 2016
LikeLike
It would be interesting to learn how they address cases where it is not clear if the woman was functioning as presbyter or deacon or deaconess or widow. Of course the commission can refrain from commenting. I wonder if their proceedings will be secret until they report. I thought you might like to be reading about the lives of these early women church leaders as you told me a long time ago you liked to read about saints.
August 3, 2016
LikeLike
August 3, 2016
High praise and thanks to Pope Francis for coming through and establishing the commission to study women deacons, which will also study women presbyters as these two streams of history cannot be separated.
Also high praise for his June 3 decree regarding making a Church feast day for Mary Magdalene, whom the Vatican press release has called “Apostle of the Apostles” per Aquinas. When I see #1577 in the Vatican Catechism has, “The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the Twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return,” I have to ask if the Twelve serve a function which naturally would include the Apostle Mary Magdalene? Or maybe even the Apostle Junia? (Romans 16:7) Or the Apostle Andronicus? Or the Apostle Paul? Or the Seventy who were also “appointed” (Luke 10:1)? And thus with this foundation, maybe bishops will allow women to be bishops so that the apostleship of Mary Magdalene and Junia may be “an ever-active reality.” Interesting that Mary Magdalene is not being honored as Bride, but as Apostle. So maybe all the clericalist nonsense about how the priest is “ontologically superior” because he is the image of maleness and playing the role of the “Bridegroom” can be eliminated (and it is mostly of recent vintage). The priest is an extension of the bishop who supposedly derives his mission from Apostles. The priest is not a Bridegroom. Only Jesus is the Bridegroom. Only Jesus is the high priest. I am very hopeful that Francis truly understands women may be apostles and what this means.
https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/global-sisters-group-thanks-francis-creating-commission-women-deacons
https://www.ncronline.org/news/vatican/francis-institutes-commission-study-female-deacons-appointing-gender-balanced
LikeLike
If they decide to finally acknowledge that women can be deacons, they had better also simultaneously acknowledge that women can be priests. No creating female ghettos. Francis has admitted that women are fully capable of being priests, presumably that means fully human and fully baptized. He said there cannot be women priests, but “not because women don’t have the capacity” (Jamie Manson NCR, September 28, 2015). I get a sense of satisfaction knowing that the wrongs against Mary Magdalene have finally been righted after umpteen centuries by upgrading her feast day. Nora, what a wonderful idea to have a vigil.
August 3, 2016
LikeLike
The authors are Kevin Madigan of Harvard University, and Carolyn Osiek retired from Texas Christian University. People can have nicknames though. The book has too much detail for me to read through it now but I skimmed. Fascinating to get a sense of how things have changed in the Church.
LikeLike
Jesus “appointed” both the Twelve and the Seventy. Same Greek verb for appointed. So all these are apostles. (But the Twelve sit on 12 thrones judging Israel in the last days.) I would posit that the 70 are the foundation of the priesthood. LFA told me to compare Luke 22:35 and Luke 10:1-4. When you do that it is obvious that at least some of the 70 are present at the Last Supper and are among those “disciples” told by Jesus to “do this in memory of me.” The key is who is without “purse, bag, sandals.” NRSV
OK this is fascinating. In the Greek Orthodox Church there are 70 apostles. This page (link below) is titled, “70 Holy Apostles” and it makes clear that 70 is the “number of apostles which the Lord chose,” and it makes it clear ALL the apostles were at Pentecost. This same website, which is the official site of the Greek Orthodox Church in the US, also has Junia as an apostle.
Apostle Junia at http://www.goarch.org/chapel/saints_view?contentid=58
Definition of 70 at http://www.goarch.org/chapel/saints_view?contentid=369
August 4, 2016
LikeLike
August 4, 2016
I seem to recall you wrote about the Greek Orthodox Church so maybe you can explain this to me. I notice they have “70 apostles.” Are the 70 the foundation of the priesthood or are the 12 the foundation of the priesthood for the Greek Orthodox? Please check my previous post for the links and further explanation. I hope you can enlighten me. I also notice they have Junia as “apostle” so they have at least one female apostle. Or do they think Junia is male?
[Sarasi wrote in reply
Hi Violet, yes, there are 70 who are considered to be part of the large group that were sent forth to do the work of the Lord. Junia is one of them and no, she has not gotten a makeover as a male. The 12 are considered the original appointees of the church community and the foundation of the priesthood.
When Orthodox want to argue for keeping the priesthood all male they use the same tired arguments they use in the RC church–the incarnate Logos as male, the maleness of the apostles, and the bride and bridegroom.
Fortunately, not everyone is in that camp.]
LikeLike
Thank you for answering my questions, Sarasi. I appreciate your thoughtful reply and your help. We need to learn from the Eastern Churches and I wish NCR had an authoritative journalist writing about that other half of Christendom, just as they have BT writing about Protestants. As far as I know, the traditions pertaining to the 70 are unknown in Vaticanism, and we should know about such. Sometimes I wonder if the Apostle Junia played not only a “prominent” role but maybe also a pivotal role in establishing Christianity. At least the Greek Orthodox make her a saint, unlike the RC Church which ignores her.
August 4, 2016
LikeLike