Skip to main content

Advent Series - December 24 - Last One

+
JMJ


December 24


Yesterday we talked about how the Greeks took over Judea, and how the Machabees fought the Greek Seleucids.

Judah Machabeus and his brothers belonged to the Hasmonean family. The Hasmoneans continued to rule Judea and for some time, Judea was independent. The territory of Judea expanded northward to include 2 non-Jewish regions; Sumeria and Idumaea.

During this time, the Jews were mainly concerned with keeping their independence, and the purity of the Jewish religion. 

The Pharisees and the Saducees came into existence, as well as the Sanhedrin.
The Sanhedrin was a council of 71 Jewish leaders who made important decisions.

Meanwhile, the Roman Empire had grown very powerful. So far, Judea was on friendly terms with Rome, but things were about to change.

The leader of Judea died and his 2 sons fought over who would become the next ruler. An Idumean named Antipater saw his chance to gain power. Antipater made a deal with the Romans to take over Judea.

In 62 B.C. the Roman Army entered Jerusalem. In 47 B.C. Judea officially became a Roman province, and Antipater (who himself was not a Jew) was put in charge as Rome’s procurator.

This was prophesied by Jacob (Israel) when he said, 


“The sceptre shall not be taken away from Juda, nor a ruler from his thigh, till he come that is to be sent, and he shall be the expectation of nations.” (Genesis 49:10)

By this time Rome had expanded to include most of the known world. Julius Caesar was the Roman ruler, but he would be assasinated in 44 B.C. (“Et tu, Brute!”)
Julius Caesar’s grand nephew and heir; Octavian took over leadership with Mark Antony.

In 37 B.C. Antipater’s son, Herod succeeded his father as procurator.
Although he worked for Rome, Herod made everyone call him “King Herod the Great”.

Meanwhile, Mark Antony (and Cleopatra) began fighting Octavian over who would rule Rome. Octavian won and took the name Caesar Augustus in 27 B.C. Caesar Augustus ruled from 27 B.C. to A.D. 14.

St. Jerome said that this was the first time that the world was truly united and there was no war. The Romans built roads connecting every country, and everyone spoke Latin. Conditions were just right for the spreading of the Gospel.

“And it came to pass, that in those days there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that the whole world should be enrolled…and Joseph also went up from Galilee out of the city of Nazareth into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem…to be enrolled with Mary his espoused wife, who was with child.” (Luke 2)

Our Lord was from the line of King David. Like King David, He was born in Bethlehem and would later rule (from the cross) in Jerusalem.

“And it came to pass that when they were there, her days were accomplished, that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him up in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.”

Our Lord was placed in a “manger” (a place for feeding), in the town of Bethlehem, which means “House of Bread”. This prefigures the Holy Eucharist. Jesus is the Bread of Life; Who comes to us in Holy Communion.

“And there were in the same country shepherds watching, and keeping the night watches over their flock. And behold an angel of the Lord stood by them, and the brightness of God shone round about them…And the angel said to them: Fear not; for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy…For, this day, is born to you a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord” (Luke 2)

Rulers may fight for power and kingdoms rise and fall, but God does not change.

May the Infant Jesus; the Eternal Word made flesh; bless you on His birthday!




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay.  Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

 + JMJ    An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'.  Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like.  No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included.  I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith.  While...

Rorate-Caeli URGENT: Pope tells Italian Bishops he plans to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum

 + JMJ  Now THIS is probably the most important news item in the last two years - yes I place this above the pandemic. I'm only surprised by how long it took for this to surface during this pontificate. I hope and pray that it is false or that if it comes to pass that somehow some good will arise out of the ashes of Summorum Pontificum. P^3  Courtesy of Rorate-Caeli URGENT: Pope tells Italian Bishops he plans to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum (Updated) Update (May 26): Rorate's additional sources in Rome have confirmed this Wednesday that Francis has indeed a text on Summorum Pontificum lined up, which has been developed for months, but what is not known at this point is if the text is just about a more limited take on the Summorum application questionnaire (first revealed by us in the spring of 2020) or about an overhaul of Summorum Pontificum in general: drafts could be dealing with both matters. It is also not impossible for a text to come ou...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective

Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection.  The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements.  So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.