For those wishing to argue about the liturgical reform and.....
  • This is your thread.
    Thanked by 1a_f_hawkins
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 1,021
    Why is the Litany for the Easter Vigil so short in the Novus Ordo?
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,013
    @CCooze it is also short in the E.F. notice it is different to the full Litany sung at the Rogations and Epiphany etc.
  • davido
    Posts: 414
    Cause if it was longer, everyone would miss the end of The Ten Commandments on ABC after the vigil.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 627
    In fairness, that movie is absolutely epic.
  • I'll double check, but I think the litany is different in the pre-55 and the 62.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 7,845
    I enjoyed 'The Ten Commandments' multiple times, first at the theatre and then several times on the television. I thought that Carlton Heston was just the right one, even the inspired one for Moses. Years later I found out that he was an arch arch defender of the NRA and he become quite low in my estimation - indeed, I came to see him as pharaoh holding those two scepters - except the one was a pistol and the other a rifle. Sorry if we have any NRA fans here - i wish you well and am not judging or casting aspersions - but those were my personal sentiments. As for the movie itself, all of these sorts are memorable the first time or two, then they become disappointingly transparent.

    Incidentally, archaeological evidence of the Red Sea event and any Aegyptian host drowned and buried in it has yet to discovered.

    Ditto, Herod's slaughter of the Holy Innocents.

    What conclusions we should entertain in these matters is puzzling.
    Thanked by 1Schönbergian
  • CatholicZ09
    Posts: 72
    Was the washing of the feet from Holy Thursday’s Evening Mass of the Lord’s Supper always a thing? My grandmother and some of her friends swear to me that they “didn’t do it back in the day.” I’m not sure if it’s poor memory or if this really was the case.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • CatholicZ09,

    It has been in the rite for a very long time, but there are many reasons why it isn't actually included -- and mostly one reason why it is so prominent now.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,877
    Foot washing is optional and the priest can drop it, or so it was explained to me by the priest who dropped it.
    Thanked by 1CCooze
  • pfreese
    Posts: 68
    “Ditto, Herod's slaughter of the Holy Innocents”

    Herod had a brutal reign, especially towards the end (including but not limited to killing three of his own children). Bethlehem was also a relatively small town back then, so if the massacre is indeed historical, there were probably (only) around a dozen or so killed, which frankly would have paled in comparison to some of his other misdeeds at the time, to the point that it’s entirely plausible the limited number of then-contemporary historians may have just glossed over during such a crazy period. And to state the obvious, this is all just from the limited historical records that actually survived two thousand years in one of the most historically volatile regions in the world.
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,563
    "Maundy" (as in Maundy Thursday) is the older English term for "Mandatum" which is the first word sung at the ritual washing of the feet, Mandatum novum do vobis ut diligatis invicem sicut dilexi vos, and indeed the ritual is actually called in some circles by the term "maundy" (rather than something like "foot-washing").

    The rite was practiced from very early times, c. 380 in the Church at Milan, for example. As for its association with the Mass of the Lord's Supper, it goes back at least to the late 12th century, although not as a part of the Mass itself (a separate rite outside Mass on Holy Thursday). The rite was inserted into the mass in 1955 by Pope Pius XII.

    The Wikipedia article on Maundy (foot washing) contains much more information.
  • dad29
    Posts: 1,973
    Somehow, MJO, all your observations and questions, taken together, are NOT puzzling.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,877
    There were two Bethlehems and scholars debate over which one was actually the birthplace of Jesus.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/was-jesus-born-in-a-different-bethlehem/#:~:text=The town of Bethlehem of,moved to Nazareth up north.

    Also "Red Sea" is believed to be a mistranslation of "Reed Sea" which is much more narrow and more easily crossed.

    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 7,845
    I have known a priest or two who counseled the owners of their feet to wash them at home before coming to church.

    Didn't HF Francis make history several years ago by washing a woman's feet?
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,563
    Yes. Pope Francis washed the feet of two women and Muslims at a juvenile detention center in Rome 2013.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 7,845
    Good for him!
    I think know that Jesus would have done the same.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen a_f_hawkins
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,396
    Wikipedia Royal Maundy.
    In the Middle Ages, English monarchs washed the feet of beggars in imitation of Jesus, and presented gifts and money to the poor. ...
    Although Mary I and Elizabeth I differed religiously, both performed elaborate Maundy ceremonies. Records from 1556 show that Mary washed the feet of forty-one poor women (reflecting her age) while "ever on her knees", and gave them forty-one pence each, as well as gifts of bread, fish, and clothing, donating her own gown to the woman said to be poorest of all. ... Charles II even attended during the plague years of 1661 and 1663. His brother and successor, James II performed the ceremony as well. Although there is a record of William III doing so in 1698, most sources state that James was the last to wash the feet of the poor himself, in 1685.
  • KARU27
    Posts: 129
    RE: Pope Francis washing the feet of the women, and the Muslim.
    I wonder if he had any other interaction with these people? Gave them help or counsel in some way?
    Otherwise it seems to me that he is using them as props, almost.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores
  • dad29
    Posts: 1,973
    I think know that Jesus would have done the same.


    Few of us KNOW the Mind of God. Good to know that one of them inhabits this forum!
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen tomjaw
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,563
    From an article by Gerard O’Connell in America, The Jesuit Review, March 25, 2016:
    “We are Muslims, Hindus, Copts, Evangelicals and Catholics, but we are all brothers and children of the same God who want to live in peace, integrated.” That is what Pope Francis told hundreds of asylum seekers at a center 25 miles from Rome, where he went on March 24 to draw the world's attention to the dramatic plight of refugees and migrants in Europe and elsewhere.

    He spoke briefly, without text at the Holy Thursday celebration held under a tent, before kneeling down and washing the feet of 12 of them—8 men and 4 women. Eleven of them were young migrants from six countries, including four Nigerian Catholic men, three Coptic women from Eritrea (two with babies in their arms), three young Muslim men—from Syria, Pakistan and Mali—and a young Hindu man from India. The twelfth was a young Italian woman who works at the center.

    “Gestures speak louder than words or images,” the 79-year old pontiff said after they had all listened to the Gospel account in which Jesus washes the feet of the apostles. “We heard of two gestures in that Gospel [story],” he told them: first, “Jesus who serves and washes the feet of the twelve, and he is the leader” and, second, “Judas who goes to the enemies of Jesus who do not want peace, and who give him money.”

    “Today too there are two gestures,” the pope said. “The first, here, all together, all brothers, Muslims, Hindus, Copts, Evangelicals and Catholics, all children of the same God, who want to live in peace.” The second, “three days ago, a gesture of war, of destruction, in a city of Europe, by people who do not want to live in peace.” But behind that gesture, as behind Judas, there were others.

    He recalled that “behind Judas there were those who had paid him to hand over Jesus to them.” And behind that other gesture, “there are the makers and traffickers in arms, who want war not brotherhood.”

    He repeated again, “there were two gestures: Jesus washed the feet, Judas sold Jesus for money.”

    Francis told the refugees, “You, we, are from different religions and cultures, but we are all children of the same Father, and brothers.” But “there are also those poor ones who buy arms to destroy brotherhood.”

    Today, he told them, “When I do the same gesture as Jesus who washed the feet of the twelve, when I wash your feet, then all of us together are doing a gesture of peace. We are brothers and we want to live in peace. That’s the gesture I will do.”

    Looking at them he said, “All of you have a story of so much suffering, but you also have a heart that is open, that wants brotherhood and peace.” And so, he said, “let us all together, each in their own religious language, pray to God and ask for brotherhood, peace and goodness”

    Many showed signs of profound emotion as he knelt down and washed their feet, some reached down to touch him, others wept, while hundreds looked on. After washing each one’s feet, he looked up and smiled, and when he came to the women with babies in their arms, he reached up and touched the newborns.

    After Mass, he thanked them for this beautiful moment, and said, "Let us remember, it is good to live together as brothers, with our cultures and traditions. And this has a name: peace and love." Then to their great delight, he went among the hundreds of migrants present and shook the hand of each and every one of them. He also greeted an Iman from a nearby Muslim community in Rome.

    His gesture was indeed powerful, more striking than words. It came a time of high tension in Europe not only because of the migrant and refugee crisis, the greatest humanitarian crisis to hit this continent since World War II as hundreds of thousands flee war and poverty, but also because of the violence that has spilled over from the conflicts in the Middle East and has already covered two major European cities in blood.
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 1,328
    Chris, the litany is doubled in the pre-1955 rite. We always double the first invocations to the Trinity and to Christ, even in the new form, but then after "Sancta Maria OPN" everything is sung once. Thus, in the old rite, the invocations are sung by one set of cantors, and their choir sings the responses, then the others repeat everything.

    The 1955 rite allows for the Mandatum to be sung outside of Mass, but the collect was supposed to be sung versus populum after 1960. In any case, it is done after Vespers, sometimes long after Vespers but before Compline and Tenebrae, in the traditional rite, and normally in the chapter house, or at least another chapel away from the church; if not, then one altar is left unstripped for this rite.

    Incidentally, archaeological evidence of the Red Sea event and any Aegyptian host drowned and buried in it has yet to discovered.

    Ditto, Herod's slaughter of the Holy Innocents.

    What conclusions we should entertain in these matters is puzzling.


    Nothing except that what is proposed in Scripture is true and that we hold it as historical truth. In any case, we know that something happened in Egypt, though scholars are not quite sure what corresponds to the Exodus.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • Jackson,

    The custom in many places was for the king and members of the royal house to wash the feet of beggars, and so washing the feet of inmates at a juvenile detention center would have been quite fitting -- if not at all appropriate for the Maundy Thursday ritual within the context of Mass.

    One problem with washing the feet of a Muslim woman or girl is that it puts her life directly at risk from Muslim men, although she hasn't accepted and professed the Catholic faith. IF she were becoming Catholic, instead of being a pawn in this game, I would be less blunt in my criticism.

    Publicity stunts of this kind aren't good for the participants or for the observing public.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,563
    Just to be clear, the Muslims whose feet were washed by Pope Francis were all men. The four women whose feet were washed were three Coptic Christians and an Italian.

    And I do not at all feel that this was a publicity stunt. Don't pretend to know the mind of the Pope (or anyone else), please.
  • Charles,

    I will, at your inspiration, double check the articles published at the time, but my recollection is that there was such a splash because he did wash the feet of Muslim women.

    IF His Holiness was participating in a ritual washing of feet outside of Mass, and not intending to be an extension of Mass, in the manner of Queen Mary Tudor, then my appraisal of the situation is in error.

    The choice of washing women's feet within the context of Mass was, is, and always will be a stunt, a way of saying "See, the dusty old rules don't trouble me! Women are equal, too, and if you don't think this is ok., there's something wrong with you."

    I lost my job in a choir over this, years ago.
    Thanked by 1dad29
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,563
    Chris,

    In the article quoted above and published the day after the event, it is written (emphasis added): "He spoke briefly, without text at the Holy Thursday celebration held under a tent, before kneeling down and washing the feet of 12 of them—8 men and 4 women. Eleven of them were young migrants from six countries, including four Nigerian Catholic men, three Coptic women from Eritrea (two with babies in their arms), three young Muslim men—from Syria, Pakistan and Mali—and a young Hindu man from India. The twelfth was a young Italian woman who works at the center."
  • KARU27
    Posts: 129
    2013 incident, not 2016. When he had only been pope for a couple of weeks. He went to a youth prison.
    https://theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/28/pope-francis-women-feet-washing
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,563
    Indeed, the first instance was in 2013 (I forgot to check back further). Two of the twelve were Muslims, and two of the twelve were women. It is not said that the two Muslims and the two women were the same.

    Added:
    Ah, some clarification: "The 12 inmates included two girls, one Italian Catholic and one of Muslim origin, local prison ombudsman Angiolo Marroni said ahead of the ceremony."
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 7,845
    The truly beautiful aspect of this thread is the unbridled compassion and holiness on display.. It reminds one of the horrible instance of the Samaritan woman at the well to whom Jesus spoke and promised the water of life. Yet another sin in his baggage of sin that stuck in the craw of pharisee and 'traditional' Jews alike, and led to his execution. Or, were all these things just, um, what was the word - ah, 'stunts'. stunts and publicity opportunities? How mean that our pope cannot ever gesture to those in need without certain people labeling it a 'publicity stunt'. This is just plain mean hearted. I admire HF Francis for his social teachings, backed up by personal example. More, all of us, should 'go and do likewise'. True, he is a liturgical disappointment, for which we are all sorry, but he exemplifies a genuine Franciscan service to the poor and less fortunate - teaching a social conscience that rarely has been so consciously and purposefully requested of the Church. I see him as a true Catholic, of unquestioned orthodoxy, yet one who has a mind of his own (a real person) and says what he thinks, and doesn't always say what he is 'supposed to'. This is refreshing and inspiring. We have far too many pharisees in the Church today - which is nothing new. They've always been there and will always be there to calcify the faith with merciless legalism and codification, and pay lip service to the sort of people whom Jesus cared most about - the ones we don't want sitting next to us in church, or even in our churches. Ostriches!
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 627
    Brethren, let us be at peace on Easter Day! Save your bickering for another time.
    Thanked by 3CHGiffen CharlesW dad29
  • pfreese
    Posts: 68
    Beautifully put MJO, thank you. And a Happy Easter to all!
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,013
    The problem with the Mandatum was the novelty of adding it to Mass, so it is now seen as part of a reenactment of the last supper. This causes all sort of problems as seen in some of the above posts.
    Traditionally this was more an example of humility, just as Our Lord washed the feet of his disciples, the Master serving the servant. So the king washed the feet of his subjects, the lord washed the feet of those subject to him, the Bishop washed the feet of his canons, the abbot the feet of the monks, my parish priest would wash the feet of his altar boys.
    Washing the feet of the beggars of Rome is a sign of humility, but random people from the streets are easily forgotten. Washing the feet of the college of Cardinals, people that you work with intimately, people under an oath of obedience to you, washing their feet is far more symbolic and far closer to the example of our Blessed Lord.
    I will also note that when this ceremony was added to Mass, rules were added, true humility also involves obedience. As Our Blessed Lord taught (and illustrated in the scriptures of the last few days) obedience to the rule of law is important even if you are the source of all Law.
  • davido
    Posts: 414
    The more comments I read on the Internet, the more respect I lose for people...

    IF the pope demonstrated doctrinal orthodoxy, and IF he wasn’t constantly blurring the lines between socialism and Catholicism, then perhaps his other teachings would be easier to understand.
    Thanked by 2CharlesW tomjaw
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,172
    "Reed Sea“


    Wow… a MIRACLE!

    The entire Egyptian army drowned in two feet of water! None survived!
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 7,845
    Tomjaw -
    Your argument just above here is filled with logic and makes real sense in relation to our bonds with those around us and immediately subject to us. I can imagine, though, that such ritual bonds (reminiscent of and not very different from the feudal liege-lord system - which the Church embraced with glee) often become pro forma and may be lacking in soul. When, in addition to the observed rituals with those in ones' 'household' I believe that going out on the street, or to hospitals, or prisons, and sharing these powerful gestures, these acts of love by none other that the pope himself towards 'the least of these' is nothing but praiseworthy, nothing but Christian life put into practice - not just within the marbled halls of the Vatican amongst those who 'wear soft clothing', but to those in prison, hunger, sickness, 'or any other adversity of mind, body, or estate'. We all know that upon being asked 'Lord, when did we do thus and so to you' his answer was 'if ye have done it unto the least of these ye have done it unto me'. There is love in washing one's cardinal's feet, but also a ritual restricted to a privileged few church grandees. There is no mere ritual but pure love in washing the feet of a prisoner, an Hindu, a poor woman, a wayward youth, Our Lord would no doubt have blessed such works - within or out of ritual acts. For our Holy Father to make these gestures is an example to all of just who the Churches treasures are. St Laurence knew.

    There are many things that we do that don't exactly follow in lock step with what our Lord did, but which honour him, live out his cares, and fulfill his word, often with greater power and efficacy than just 'following orders'. Such evolutions fit perfectly with the very concept of 'development' which St John Henry Newman worked out for the church. There are endless ways of fulfilling the Gospel, and all of them are not bound to the Chruch's treasure of ritual, legalism, and canon law. (Ineed, ritual, legislation, and canon law sometimes obstruct such fulfillment.)

    I am reminded of a certain one of those infamous 'Thirty nine Articles' which have for centuries been put in the back of the BCP. These articles are a gross embarrassment to Anglo-Catholics, and a scepter of authority for those who are anything but Anglo-Catholics. One of the more controversial ones reads 'The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshiped'. This illustrates not only the contentions of the Reformation era, but, more importantly, how we have often throughout history 'done things that were not "ordained" by Christ'. - but yet have done them in his honour. The matter of veneration of the Sacrament is an excellent example. The article does happen to be correct - Christ did not ordain any of these things. BUT, he gave the Sacrament to us and we love it so much, so dearly, we believe so irrevocably that it is what he said it was that we do reserve, carry it about doing honour to it in procession, bend the knee before it, and contemplate our compassionate God before it. What a gift, and we, in love of him and his gift do all whose things by which we adore - even though Christ did not 'ordain' that we should do so.

    Clearly, Newman's 'development' theory, which the Church embraced whole heartedly,
    is perfectly a propos to this embarrassing BCP Article. It also sets a precedent, a ground for development. In light of the above it is but a step to wash not only the feet of the popes very rich underlings (and they are rich, very rich!), but to do so to 'the least of these'. Somehow, the latter manages, to me, to be more Christlike.


  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,877
    Francis, Francis, Francis. The Nile and tributaries have changed course numerous times. We don't know there was two feet of water there at that time. We are not even sure which pharaoh was on the throne or when it exactly was. One prominent archaeologist has maintained for some years that Egyptian dating is off and the reason we don't find traces of some of the Bible characters, such as Joseph, is that we look for them in the wrong time period and in the wrong places. Some of the events, such as good old Noah, may have been a retelling of Sumerian legend. Everything in the Bible is not fact. Only Protestants of the evangelical stripe hold that it is.

    Another mistranslation resulted in thinking the hanging gardens were at Babylon. They never were there but were at Ninevah. English translators really were off on some elements of their translations.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 7,845
    Very good, Charles -
    And further, modern, scholarship for quite some time has asserted that the Jews were not slaves in Aegypt, but some species of 'guest workers' who were well paid, well housed, and well fed. What caused the rupture I do not know, but, clearly, some adjustment betwixt history and Biblical account is appropriate. This may, or may not, explain the absence of archaeological evidence to support some of the Jewish accounts of things.
    And, the Sinai is not that big. How did a whole nation wander around in it for forty (forty!) years before reaching the promised land, which wasn't that far away. Some symbolic language would seem to be at work here. Without meening so much as a nano-bit of ill will towards our friends and brothers, the Jews, it does often seem that they have a peculiar gift for hyperbole, grandiose and exaggerated gestures. And it now seem that Isaiah and Jeremiah were both multiple persons, and it goes on. With regard to some things we may never know what is truth and what is fable. But still and all, none of us can ever say greater words than those of Judith (if she said them) - Spem in alium nunquam habui. Thank you Judith, and thank you Thomas.

    My view on such discrepancies is the same as my view of science-proven evolution, namely, if that's how it got here that's how God did it. We may get the details wrong some time, as with evolution and Galileo, but however is was done it was the world of God. Our details do not have to be the real ones.

    It is especially interesting that scientists, such as Hawkings of recent fame (brilliant man, may he rest in peace) have averred that the laws of physics governing the universe show that there is no need for God. This is, of course, an ill founded fable, ignoring a few facts to the contrary, start with man, without whom the universe would be pointless, utterly void of meaning, and anything that is must ipso facto have a reason that is observed and appreciable by sentient beings. The universe was made for us. Further, it is the height of folly for physicists to think that they can measure, capture, or get their hands on God by means of their theorems and scientific instruments. If God cannot be sensed by human senses (and he cannot be) he is certainly not sensible by instruments of any sort. God simply IS, He is Pure Being beyond the touch of the most sophisticated theories and instruments. God simply IS, as he told Moses, I AM WHO AM. That's all - except for the works of his believers and the work done through them - in a world that was made for them. However it was made, no matter what our scientists discover about it it was made by God, and continues bot be with us as co-creators.

    So, if the Bible is off here and there, if this or that didn't really happen, or is in the worn century or epoch it is meaningless. Human error exists. Some details in the Bible may be wrong, or may not have happened at all. For reason? The common errors that humans make in recording their histories events and/or their significance.

    I was once told of a priest who was serving on a battlefield of WWI. As he came to pray over a fallen soldier, the soldier's buddy said something like 'oh, you needn't do that, father, he didn't believe in God", to which the priest said in the blink of an eye, 'well he does now'. And so will it be with all naysayers - peace be upon them.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,172
    The Nile and
    Bhahahahaha... Teflon is so non-stick.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,877
    That must be another of those dire prophetic warnings since it doesn't make a lot of sense. LOL
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,877
    A couple of sources for anyone interested. On possible errors in Egyptian dating and Bible figures, "A Test of Time" (two volumes) by David M. Rohl.

    "The Mystery of the Hanging Garden of Babylon," by Stephanie Dalley.

    Fascinating stuff!
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,172
    Rohl::: that theology is a piece of work
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,877
    Rohl has interesting points and he does indicate some connections to take seriously. As he rightly maintains, the Egyptian archaeologists are rather consumed by their own conclusions and are unwilling to consider any other positions. That doesn't mean he is wrong.

    Dalley is retired from Oxford but she is one of the few people in the world who knows the ancient language and can read cuneiform. I would take her very seriously as a genuine scholar.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,172
    https://www.newyorker.com/news/on-religion/richard-rohr-reorders-the-universe

    Not the Jesus we Think he is...

    Rohr argues that the spirit of Christ is not the same as the person of Jesus. Christ—essentially, God’s love for the world—has existed since the beginning of time, suffuses everything in creation, and has been present in all cultures and civilizations. Jesus is an incarnation of that spirit, and following him is our “best shortcut” to accessing it. But this spirit can also be found through the practices of other religions, like Buddhist meditation, or through communing with nature. Rohr has arrived at this conclusion through what he sees as an orthodox Franciscan reading of scripture. “This is not heresy, universalism, or a cheap version of Unitarianism,” he writes. “This is the Cosmic Christ, who always was, who became incarnate in time, and who is still being revealed.”


    Good luck with that... Catholicism brands this as syncretism... warning... do not go there.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,877
    Interesting. I had never heard of Rohr.
    Thanked by 1francis
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,172
    Interesting... I never heard of rohl... my misreading... will look up rohl

    Hope it will be more promising
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,877
    Rohl did an interesting 3-part television series which premiered in 1995, "A Test of Time: The Bible From Myth to History." He holds a University College London degree in Egyptology and Ancient History. He is also Chairman of the Institute for the Study of Interdisciplinary Sciences and President of the Sussex Egyptology Society. He provided a new chronology for Ancient Egypt and a fresh understanding of biblical history.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • a genuine scholar.


    My dear departed father (if I recall correctly) could read cuneiform. In his old age, he had forgotten more than I have ever learned, to the point that his knowledge was truly encyclopedic. As a present I got him one year the 4 Gospels and the Psalter in Anglo-Saxon English and, quite predictably, he loved them. He and Tolkien never knew each other, but I think they would have had respect for each other because of their love of England and their love of (what the rest of us consider) arcane languages. The last book he read was the collected correspondence of Thomas More and Erasmus of Rotterdam.

    He helped me to understand something of the writing of Hans Urs Von Balthasar, but I didn't have the background to keep up with the Medieval Latin.

    My eldest son, married just a week before my father died, commented that permission to go browsing through Grandpa's library was a dream come true.

    He loved the music of William Byrd both because it was beautiful (it "had something to say") and because Byrd was connected to his alma mater.

    Nevertheless, there were topics he couldn't wrap his mind around, great scholar that he was.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 7,845
    How richly were you blessed to have such a learned father, Chris - and with an English soul to boot. I have the earliest English prose psalter and the Stowe Psalter, which I enjoy deciphering, if only with minimal success even though I studied Anglo-Saxon while at university. I'm sure that it was, indeed, a rare treat to get to enter into grandpa's library.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,396
    Nothing new to see - I lapped this up when it was newly published (I was 13)
    [Velikovsky] ... proposed a revised chronology for ancient Egypt, Greece, Israel, and other cultures of the ancient Near East. The revised chronology aimed at explaining the so-called "dark age" of the eastern Mediterranean (c. 1100–750 BC) and reconciling biblical history with mainstream archaeology and Egyptian chronology.
    In general, Velikovsky's theories have been ignored or vigorously rejected by the academic community. Nonetheless, his books often sold well and gained an enthusiastic support in lay circles, often fuelled by claims of unfair treatment for Velikovsky by orthodox academia. The controversy surrounding his work and its reception is often referred to as "the Velikovsky affair".
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,877
    Interesting, but I had not heard of Velikovsky or his chronology. Rohl never addressed a new chronology for the ancient Near East. He dealt with a calendar miscalculation for Ancient Egypt during one relatively short time period. He may be right, who knows? There were pharaohs recently discovered from the really early days of Egypt that no one knew even existed. We don't have all the answers about that civilization.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • CatherineS
    Posts: 580
    But what do folks do if they only believe in Christian things that have been confirmed by scientific experiment and archaeological surveys? What about the Resurrection? What about the Virgin birth? The Ascension? Among myriad other things...