C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Aw, don’t spoil the joke
- Status
B
babochka
Guest
Aw, don’t spoil the joke
Sorry.
A
Alfonsus
Guest
First, liturgical calendar is not the same as anniversary calendar.
In the beginning, the Roman Church, along with the Eastern Churches, celebrate Christmas not only as celebration of Christ birth, but in the same day, it is commemorated also His Baptism in the Jordan and His first manifestation at the wedding feast at Cana. All in one day.
During the course of history, the celebration was prolonged in the West and the events were separated. More and more in the West, the celebration of Jesus’ birth overshadowed the rest of events within the Christmas season (such as the Adoration of the Magi, and Baptism of the Lord).
If you see the antiphons in the Liturgy of the Hours, the Epiphany of the Lord does not only commemorate the adoration of the Magi, but commemorates also His Baptism and His first manifestation. The antiphons are the residual trace of the original Christmas celebration in the West.
The antiphon of the Cantile of Zachary for Epiphany said like this (I translated it to English since my breviary is not in English):
“Today, the Heavenly Bridegroom is united with the Church, for in the Jordan Christ washed his people’s sins, the Magi bring offerings for the King’s wedding feast, and the guests are rejoiced for water became wine. Alleluia.”
Likewise during Vesper II, the antiphon for Magnificat said something like this:
“Today we celebrate three holy events. Today the Magi was led by a star to the manger. Today water was transformed into wine in the wedding feast. Today Christ is baptized by John in the Jordan for our salvation. Alleluia.”
So yes, 25 December is the liturgical celebration of Christ birth, the first of the whole Christmas season. But it is not the actual historical date of Jesus’ birthday, because in the beginning that day is not about His birth only, but a summary of His whole Theophany.
The “today” of Liturgical celebration celebrates the event in a time-wrapped way. In every Mass, “today” we celebrate Jesus birth, life, passion, death, resurrection, ascension, and reign. Liturgical today is always transcend linear historical time.
In the beginning, the Roman Church, along with the Eastern Churches, celebrate Christmas not only as celebration of Christ birth, but in the same day, it is commemorated also His Baptism in the Jordan and His first manifestation at the wedding feast at Cana. All in one day.
During the course of history, the celebration was prolonged in the West and the events were separated. More and more in the West, the celebration of Jesus’ birth overshadowed the rest of events within the Christmas season (such as the Adoration of the Magi, and Baptism of the Lord).
If you see the antiphons in the Liturgy of the Hours, the Epiphany of the Lord does not only commemorate the adoration of the Magi, but commemorates also His Baptism and His first manifestation. The antiphons are the residual trace of the original Christmas celebration in the West.
The antiphon of the Cantile of Zachary for Epiphany said like this (I translated it to English since my breviary is not in English):
“Today, the Heavenly Bridegroom is united with the Church, for in the Jordan Christ washed his people’s sins, the Magi bring offerings for the King’s wedding feast, and the guests are rejoiced for water became wine. Alleluia.”
Likewise during Vesper II, the antiphon for Magnificat said something like this:
“Today we celebrate three holy events. Today the Magi was led by a star to the manger. Today water was transformed into wine in the wedding feast. Today Christ is baptized by John in the Jordan for our salvation. Alleluia.”
So yes, 25 December is the liturgical celebration of Christ birth, the first of the whole Christmas season. But it is not the actual historical date of Jesus’ birthday, because in the beginning that day is not about His birth only, but a summary of His whole Theophany.
The “today” of Liturgical celebration celebrates the event in a time-wrapped way. In every Mass, “today” we celebrate Jesus birth, life, passion, death, resurrection, ascension, and reign. Liturgical today is always transcend linear historical time.
P
paperwight66
Guest
A gentle reminder that we must use terms as the church defines them. You are confusing the term ‘Immaculate Conception’ (the teaching that Mary was conceived /born without original Sin) with the Incarnation of Jesus.
It doesn’t affect the point you are making, that using the evidence of the Gospel of Luke and cross-referencing with astronomy, Christ’s birth wouldn’t have been in December.
P
patrick457
Guest
I always like pointing out the fact that the Armenian Church still keeps to the old Eastern date of January 6th. (And no, that doesn’t have anything to do with the Julian-Gregorian calendar differences.)
P
pnewton
Guest
History, science, sports, lots of things.
The Holy Father is a theologian. I am impressed that he still wants to dabble in such things with all that is on his plate, but hey, everyone needs a hobby. Our last two popes have been really amazing academians.
P
patrick457
Guest
I didn’t know that the manager was an animal lover.Really they should have done.
Let me correct that for you.
Tradition consists of two parts. Large T tradition, and small t tradition.
Large T - the Creed and the magisterium.
Small t - animals at the manager, three kings, Christmas day on Dec 25th.
For the record, the idea that an ox and a donkey was with the Holy Family is a very old (small-t) tradition which traces itself from Isaiah 1:3. “The ox knows its owner, and the donkey its master’s crib, but Israel does not know, my people do not understand.”
Another small-t tradition is that Jesus was actually born in a cave, something that is already attested in the Protoevangelium of James (mid-2nd century AD) and in the writings of Justin Martyr (ca. 100-165). This belief derives from Isaiah 33:16, which in the Greek Septuagint reads, “he will dwell in the high cave of a strong rock.” This identification is ostensibly supported by the underground cave within the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, which is believed to be the birthplace of Jesus. Even today the cave tradition continues to be very strong in the East.
Later in the West however, because the Vulgate version of that verse reads (as per the Hebrew) munimenta saxorum sublimitas eius, “the fortifications of rocks shall be his highness,” there was no prophecy to fulfill. So the cave tradition was largely forgotten in the West, and because of Luke’s mention of the ‘manger’ people seem to have just begun to assume that Jesus was born in a wooden, Western-style barn. Some early medieval artists made a compromise and portrayed both a cave and a wooden stable to accomodate both versions, but the cave was eventually done away with altogether in later medieval and Renaissance art.
I should point out that although people assume the presence of a barn because of the phatnē or ‘manger’, Luke’s text does not actually say anything about Jesus’ birthplace being a barn. On the contrary, archaeological evidence tells us that people in those days kept their animals inside their houses to protect them from the elements or theft (the animals’ presence in addition provided body heat for cool nights, access to milk for the daily meal and dung as a critical fuel source). One possible way of doing it was by dividing the house into two storeys: the animals would be at the lower level, while the family’s living quarters would be upstairs.
http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/5823/manger.png
This is related to the issue of translating the word katalyma as “inn” and imagining grouchy innkeepers turning away the holy couple. Many people (including me two to three years ago) have pointed out the fact that using the word “inn” in this particular case may be misleading. Rather than repeat all that here, I’ll just link to a handful of articles and one podcast:
This and this (by yours truly
)The Accommodations of Joseph and Mary in Bethlehem: Κατάλυμα in Luke 2.7, by Stephen C. Carlson
Was Jesus Born in a Stable? from Mark Goodacre’s NT Pod
There was “no room in the inn” by Denis Haack
T
thistle
Guest
In matters of faith and morals there have never been, are not and never will be errors in the Church teachings. To suggest otherwise would be foolish.
J
Joan_M
Guest
If you would simply read the book, you would learn what the Pope actually wrote, instead of taking as gospel the reporting of anti-Catholic media!
Read it. He did not “debunk” any myth.
C
centurionguard
Guest
Interesting; I’ve read about this before. But even a basement like foundation to hold a two-storey like structure is build under the earth in a sense.I didn’t know that the manager was an animal lover.
For the record, the idea that an ox and a donkey was with the Holy Family is a very old (small-t) tradition which traces itself from Isaiah 1:3. “The ox knows its owner, and the donkey its master’s crib, but Israel does not know, my people do not understand.”
Another small-t tradition is that Jesus was actually born in a cave, something that is already attested in the Protoevangelium of James (mid-2nd century AD) and in the writings of Justin Martyr (ca. 100-165). This belief derives from Isaiah 33:16, which in the Greek Septuagint reads, “he will dwell in the high cave of a strong rock.” This identification is ostensibly supported by the underground cave within the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, which is believed to be the birthplace of Jesus. Even today the cave tradition continues to be very strong in the East.
Later in the West however, because the Vulgate version of that verse reads (as per the Hebrew) munimenta saxorum sublimitas eius, “the fortifications of rocks shall be his highness,” there was no prophecy to fulfill. So the cave tradition was largely forgotten in the West, and because of Luke’s mention of the ‘manger’ people seem to have just begun to assume that Jesus was born in a wooden, Western-style barn. Some early medieval artists made a compromise and portrayed both a cave and a wooden stable to accomodate both versions, but the cave was eventually done away with altogether in later medieval and Renaissance art.
I should point out that although people assume the presence of a barn because of the phatnē or ‘manger’, Luke’s text does not actually say anything about Jesus’ birthplace being a barn. On the contrary, archaeological evidence tells us that people in those days kept their animals inside their houses to protect them from the elements or theft (the animals’ presence in addition provided body heat for cool nights, access to milk for the daily meal and dung as a critical fuel source). One possible way of doing it was by dividing the house into two storeys: the animals would be at the lower level, while the family’s living quarters would be upstairs.
http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/5823/manger.png
This is related to the issue of translating the word katalyma as “inn” and imagining grouchy innkeepers turning away the holy couple. Many people (including me two to three years ago) have pointed out the fact that using the word “inn” in this particular case may be misleading. Rather than repeat all that here, I’ll just link to a handful of articles and one podcast:
This and this (by yours truly
The Accommodations of Joseph and Mary in Bethlehem: Κατάλυμα in Luke 2.7, by Stephen C. Carlson
Was Jesus Born in a Stable? from Mark Goodacre’s NT Pod
There was “no room in the inn” by Denis Haack
I guess in someways I’m having trouble understanding the relevance of Pope speaking about the dates whether in years or months having to do with the celebration of Christ’s Birth which we today call Christmas. Catholic biblical scholars have long spoken about the dates surrounding Christ Birth not being exact. 2000 years is a lot of time to gets of the facts straight. I don’t see any importance in mentioning it. Of course once the grandiose media gets a hold of such talk from the Pope they like to re-arrange it into something more sensationalistic advocating heated debate and conjecture often to diminish the religious significance of Christ’s Birth.
T
TimothyH
Guest
Christmas is placed near the end of December for a very specific reason.
The Church placed the Feast of the Nativity of the Lord - Christmas - near the shortest day of the year (Dec 21) and placed the Feast of the Nativity of John the Baptist near the longest day of the year (June 21). The length of each day increases after the Christmas and length of each day decreases after the Feast of the Nativity of John the Baptist.
He must increase; I must decrease. (John 3:30)
John the Baptist himself said those words.
The Church places the feasts opposite each other so that days increase after Jesus’ birthday and decrease after John the Baptists birthday. The feasts are placed near the winter solstice when the sun is lowest in the sky and near the summer solstice when the sun is highest in the sky - increase and decrease.
The placement on the calendar is a teaching tool about the end of the age of the prophets and the start of the age of the Messiah and messianic fulfillment. It helped farmers and pagans understand.
-Tim-
The Church placed the Feast of the Nativity of the Lord - Christmas - near the shortest day of the year (Dec 21) and placed the Feast of the Nativity of John the Baptist near the longest day of the year (June 21). The length of each day increases after the Christmas and length of each day decreases after the Feast of the Nativity of John the Baptist.
He must increase; I must decrease. (John 3:30)
John the Baptist himself said those words.
The Church places the feasts opposite each other so that days increase after Jesus’ birthday and decrease after John the Baptists birthday. The feasts are placed near the winter solstice when the sun is lowest in the sky and near the summer solstice when the sun is highest in the sky - increase and decrease.
The placement on the calendar is a teaching tool about the end of the age of the prophets and the start of the age of the Messiah and messianic fulfillment. It helped farmers and pagans understand.
-Tim-
C
centurionguard
Guest
Agreed; however I don’t believe it was mere happenstance of Catholic Theolgians being the Early Fathers of the Church along with the Magisterium of slapping just any fixed date in the latter part of December. Historical evidence surrounding the Roman Census, the Jewish Festival, the account of Astronomers of the time period seeing the Great Star herolding the great event that lead the Three Wise men which even the Chinese make an ancient account of in their recorded history of a Great Western prophet and seeing the Star themselves. Many historical accounts bring focus to Christ’s Holy Birth even if there off a few years.
Who cares if there were animals present or not. For anyone to say there were no angels present during Christ’s Birth sounds absolutely ludicrous. Its like someone saying numerous uncountable angels of God are not present during Mass or Jesus not present in the Eucharist. Jesus promised us the Holy Spirit. We have been given the Gift of Faith, the Gift of the “One True Church” and its teachings founded on Peter the Rock.
Only the humble and simple-minded see the ineffable richness and supernal beauty of the Christmas story.
Z
zab
Guest
There is a difference in saying “There is no evidence of animals being present” and “There were no animals present”. Likewise, regarding the quote from the news articles *-“He also debunks the claim that angels sang at the birth, a staple theme of Christmas carols.” *The news article did not quote the pope, but I suppose he was saying or implying, like the former statement above, that there is no evidence that angels could be seen singing at the birth of Jesus. That is not to say that no angels were there.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Cool, I didn’t know that.I always like pointing out the fact that the Armenian Church still keeps to the old Eastern date of January 6th. (And no, that doesn’t have anything to do with the Julian-Gregorian calendar differences.)
Revised Julian Christmas?
P
patrick457
Guest
No, Surb Tsnund really falls on January 6th (January 18th in the Gregorian).Cool, I didn’t know that.
Revised Julian Christmas?
The thing is that the commemoration of the Nativity on December 25th was originally a Western custom (as per the Chronography of 354) that was slowly adopted in the East starting from the 4th-5th century. At that time, the Nativity was commemorated alongside other events of Jesus’ life in January 6th, during the feastday we now call Epiphany/Theophany. Even in the beginning of the 5th century, Saint John Cassian mentioned that Egyptian monasteries were still celebrating the Nativity and Baptism together on 6th January, in contrast with the West, where both feasts have their own separate dates. (Conference 10.2)
In the country of Egypt this custom is by ancient tradition observed that— when Epiphany is past, which the priests of that province regard as the time, both of our Lord’s baptism and also of His birth in the flesh, and so celebrate the commemoration of either mystery not separately as in the Western provinces but on the single festival of this day, — letters are sent from the Bishop of Alexandria through all the Churches of Egypt, by which the beginning of Lent, and the day of Easter are pointed out not only in all the cities but also in all the monasteries.
The very first mention we have of an Eastern commemoration of the Nativity in December 25th was from a sermon by St. Gregory of Nazianzus, then archbishop of Constantinople, around the 380s: he calls this day, wherein “the holy nativity of Christ” is commemorated, “the Theophany” (which is now the common Eastern term for the January 6 feast). On January 6 and 7, he preached two more sermons, wherein he declared that the celebration of the birth of Christ and the visitation of the Magi had already taken place, and that they would now commemorate His Baptism. His later successor, St. John Chrysostom, further popularized and promoted this idea, and eventually most of the Churches in the East, except for Armenia, came to adopt the date (maybe due to the mighty influence of Constantinople?)
1
1AugustSon7
Guest
Yes, I think the Pope (and the Vatican) deliberately allows the secular press to misread things, as it at least brings Christianity into the secular forum and raises debate and interest.
As for the animals in the manger, they have an important place doctrinally because it reinforces the idea of Christ as real or true food. The manger was, of course, where animals were refreshed for the next day’s jounrey; by extension, viaticum.
A manger or trough is a feeder of carved stone, wood, or metal construction used to hold food for animals (as in a stable).
M
Mike30
Guest
P
patrick457
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Manger
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
http://www.welcometohosanna.com/LIFE_OF_JESUS/JESUS_LIFE_PIX/NAZARETH_VILLAGE_HOME_INT.jpg
Manger
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
http://www.welcometohosanna.com/LIFE_OF_JESUS/JESUS_LIFE_PIX/NAZARETH_VILLAGE_HOME_INT.jpg
A
april32010
Guest
santa claus is still coming on the 25th ,right ? :christmastree1:
P
patrick457
Guest
You mean St. Nicholas didn’t come on December 6th?
Personally I’m waiting for either Olentzero, St. Basil, the Befana or the Magi. - Status