The Minor, Trivial Stuff Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter patrick457
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Any idea about when we in the Roman Church began to lose the physicality of prayer as exemplified in St. Dominc’s 9 Ways? The Christian East still retains this; any idea as to what happened with us?
 
Let’s file this under “didn’t know what I was missing.”

Today my pastor told us that in Jesus’ time, the giver of a wedding feast sent out the invitations ahead of time, but did not include a date. Thus, the guests would be called when the feast was ready.

Second, he said that wedding cloaks were given to the guests. Can anyone verify this?
 
“Scallop shell: the sea shell, especially the scallop shell, is the symbol of Baptism, and is found frequently on Baptismal fonts. The dish used by priests to pour water over the heads of catechumens in Baptism is often scallop-shaped. The scallop, too, is a symbol for the Apostle James the Greater.”
The Camino de Santiago de Compostela is way-marked with symbols of scallop shells all the way to the burial-place of Saint James the Greater.
 
Beastiaries: Are fairly minor and trivial. Have they any value in the modern world? What did they mean? Would I be wasting my time producing one? :hmmm::coffeeread:
 
Spirithound said:
Let’s file this under “didn’t know what I was missing.”

Today my pastor told us that in Jesus’ time, the giver of a wedding feast sent out the invitations ahead of time, but did not include a date. Thus, the guests would be called when the feast was ready.

Second, he said that wedding cloaks were given to the guests. Can anyone verify this?
Click to expand...
Hmm…thanks for the heads up. Will look into it. 🙂
 
You said:
Beastiaries: Are fairly minor and trivial. Have they any value in the modern world? What did they mean? Would I be wasting my time producing one? :hmmm::coffeeread:
Click to expand...
Well, bestiaries in the medieval period served as a sort of compendium listing various beasts and insects of the land, creatures of the sea and birds of the air, real or imagined, their supposed charasteristics, and the symbolism associated with them. Admittedly medieval bestiaries are of little practical use nowadays IMHO since a number of information, say about the supposed behavior of certain animals or even the existence of certain creatures, which the ancients took as fact in ancient times actually turned out to be either flat-out wrong/fictional, or heavily exaggerated/distorted.

Still, the allegorical explanations could still be of some value for the Christian reader if one wished to understand symbolism. Just my opinion. 😊
 
patrick457 said:
Well, bestiaries in the medieval period served as a sort of compendium listing various beasts and insects of the land, creatures of the sea and birds of the air, real or imagined, their supposed charasteristics, and the symbolism associated with them. Admittedly medieval bestiaries are of little practical use nowadays IMHO since a number of information, say about the supposed behavior of certain animals or even the existence of certain creatures, which the ancients took as fact in ancient times actually turned out to be either flat-out wrong/fictional, or heavily exaggerated/distorted.

Still, the allegorical explanations could still be of some value for the Christian reader if one wished to understand symbolism. Just my opinion. 😊
Click to expand...
You might be right. But the medieval illustrations are more attractive than scientific illustrations.
 
Spirithound said:
Let’s file this under “didn’t know what I was missing.”

Today my pastor told us that in Jesus’ time, the giver of a wedding feast sent out the invitations ahead of time, but did not include a date. Thus, the guests would be called when the feast was ready.

Second, he said that wedding cloaks were given to the guests. Can anyone verify this?
Click to expand...
Yes, it does seem that wedding events were planned far in advance.

I did read in a book called Oriental Customs, Traditions & Social Life by H. Clay Trumbell (pp. 34-35) about a custom where the father of the bridegroom (or the mother of the bride) would send out messengers for the invitations, providing them with new suits of clothing as well as lamps and oil for the invited.

Customs vary in different regions concerning wedding festivities and the invitations to them, as well as concerning betrothals. But quite generally among the wealthier classes these festivities cover a week or more. It was so in the days of Jacob, when Laban urged his son-in-law not to interrupt that week’s rejoicings merely because he had been given the wrong woman for a wife (Gen. 29:27). And “so used the young men to do,” in Samson’s time, as we are told in the Bible record (Judg. 14:10-12). So, also, are the young men and their friends accustomed to do in Egypt and Arabia and Syria to-day.

In some cases the father of the bridegroom sends out a number of his friends to bear invitations to those whom he would have as guests, giving to every one of these messengers a new suit of clothing for the occasion; and at the same time he sends a lamp with olive oil for its filling to every one whom he invites to the wedding festivities. Similarly, in some cases the mother of the bride provides new garments for the women messengers by whom she sends invitations to her women friends. Sometimes, again, the invitations are sent with less formality, and without any such outlay for new garments and lamps. Invited guests send gifts to the house of the bridegroom in advance of their coming, and the gifts sent to or with the bride are made as prominent as possible in their display.

From James M. Freeman’s Hand-book of Bible Manners and Customs (1834, p. 363):

691.—DOUBLE INVITATIONS.
XXII, 8. Sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding.
This double invitation was customary among the wealthy in giving entertainments, and is still observed in some parts of the East. The invitation is given some little time in advance, as with us, and when the feast is ready a servant comes again with the announcement of the fact. Esther invited Ahasuerus and Haman to a feast, and when it was ready the king’s chamberlains were sent to notify Haman. Compare Esther v, 8; vi, 14. The custom also finds illustration in the parable of the Great Supper narrated by Luke, which some expositors consider identical with this, though others treat the two accounts as belonging to separate parables. The narrative in Luke says: “A certain man made a great fupper, and bade many: and sent his servant at supper-time, to say to them that were bidden, Come, for all things are now ready.” Luke xiv, 16, 17. Here the two invitations are distinctly marked. Additional interest is given to this parable by the fact that the second invitation was given only to those who had accepted the first.

Admittedly these two sources are quite old, but I think they’re reliable in this regard nevertheless.
 
What shape would the bread have been, that Jesus used at the Last Supper? Did they have pots and pans and molds that they could bake in the fire?
 
Real bread was usually baked at neighborhood ovens, because you want a hot, even oven with plenty of fuel for that. (And there’s kosher regulations.)

Something quick, like cakes you could bake in the ashes or very thin unleavened bread, you could bake at home. But anything you were going to eat on a day of rest, you had to cook beforehand. (Hence matzo bread today being like crackers – it doesn’t spoil.)

Anyway, what you usually need to bake bread is a big flat surface. Most ancient oven designs assume that you just slide the dough into a hot oven, bake it, and slide the bread out.

Here are some ancient Roman oven pictures from Pompeii. Keep clicking “forward” to see more details of their innards. Middle Eastern ovens were sometimes made of brick like this, and sometimes (more primitively) of adobe, or just plain clay. They often had the dome shape you see inside. (Indian tandoori ovens are similar, too.)
 
To Patrick457:
This review of Jodi Magness’ book by Rami Arav seems to suggest that Yadin was wrong about the tunics being Jewish, because he says the clavi were wore only by the Roman aristocracy, and that Pliny the Younger was misquoted about everyone wearing clavi.
academia.edu/676836/Clavi_and_non-clavi_Definitions_of_various_bands_on_Roman_textiles
There’s also this paper that says the opposite (I think) but I’m not sure because I haven’t read it all and it doesn’t respond to Arav.

Edit: the second paper uses the Egyptian mummy portraits as evidence that everyone had clavi, but I’m still putting the review up for reference.
 
Aizensama said:
To Patrick457:
This review of Jodi Magness’ book by Rami Arav seems to suggest that Yadin was wrong about the tunics being Jewish, because he says the clavi were wore only by the Roman aristocracy, and that Pliny the Younger was misquoted about everyone wearing clavi.
academia.edu/676836/Clavi_and_non-clavi_Definitions_of_various_bands_on_Roman_textiles
There’s also this paper that says the opposite (I think) but I’m not sure because I haven’t read it all and it doesn’t respond to Arav.

Edit: the second paper uses the Egyptian mummy portraits as evidence that everyone had clavi, but I’m still putting the review up for reference.
Click to expand...
Not exactly a response to that, but see also this.
 
Hi all

The good vibe for everybody.
Problems of health blogging me at home (for the moment) I take of come here, participate a little good grow has all !

Peace out, Anna from Faxless Payday Loans!
 
patrick457 said:
Not exactly a response to that, but see also this.
Click to expand...
Not to be nitpicky but if the tunics they’ve found did belong to Jews, then why does the Nazereth Villiage still dress in the traditional biblical clothing we’re all familiar with?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top