Skip to main content

Advent Series - December 24

 

+
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

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.

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...

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

Doctrinal Preamble April 15, 2012 vs Protocol 1988

+ JMJ Reproduced below are the Doctrinal Preamble of Bishop Fellay (2012) and Protocol of Archbishop Lefebvre (1988) for comparison. Perhaps when I have time I will add detailed commentary.  Now, given that Archbishop Lefebvre stated that there was nothing wrong with the 1988 text of the protocol, comparing it with that of Bishop Fellay ... where's the problem? Are as  Kaesekopf of Suscipedomine wrote : ...can someone explain why trads would reject this? Or rather, why a sedeplenist trad (who accepts the validity of the NO) would reject this?  Update: To make a comparison easier,  I have inserted the comparable elements of the Protocol developed by Archbishop Lefebvre with that of Bishop Fellay.  I have also included my own commentary in blue . Last thought, when I first read the preamble I thought ... ok so what's the problem?  Now I that I've read it again ... I still ask: What's the problem?  It was based on the Protocol signed by Ar...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3