Monday, December 31, 2012

2012's 20 Most Popular Posts on the Canterbury Tales blog


Here is a year in review. In case you missed them over the past year, below are the 20 most popular posts on Canterbury Tales blog, generating the most hits and comments (in order):
  1. Why You Should Wear the Miraculous Medal (most clicks of 2012)
  2. 2012's Top 10 Manly Gifts for your Husband, Father, Son, or Grandfather
  3. Padre Pio's Mysterious Encounters with Souls from Purgatory
  4. How to Spring a Soul from Purgatory in 4 Steps
  5. The Four Sins that Cry to Heaven (America Has Failed Four for Four)
  6. Clapping in the Liturgy? Pope Benedict weighs in... 
  7. Which Act of Contrition Should We Pray in Confession? 
  8. How the Stigmata of St Francis differed from that of St Pio (fleshy nails)
  9. Should We Say Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit? Is there a difference? 
  10. 6 Reasons Why Contraception is Sinful and Contrary to God's Will 
  11. Why did Jesus Christ ride a donkey on Palm Sunday? 
  12. The Apparition of Mary to Caesar Augustus at Christmas
  13. Top 10 Quotes from Saint Teresa of Avila 
  14. How Charlemagne Discovered the Relics of Saint Anne the Mother of Mary 
  15. The Incorruptible Tongue of St Anthony of Padua 
  16. If America were a fully Catholic country, here is what it might look like...(this was one of my favorites of 2012 because it ruffled the feathers of Commonweal Magazine - a publication that I loathe)
  17. Mary's Special Role for Those in Purgatory 
  18. Did You Know That a Bishop Processed the Holy Eucharist at University of Denver Prior to Presidential Debate? 
  19. About the Pope's Secret Cardinals in pectore
  20. The Dress Code for the Vatican - Should it be Universal?
Did you enjoy Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall in 2012? 

Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email

Christ Really Was Born Exactly 2013 Years Ago! The Chronology of Josephus Was Wrong


The following post is derived from Dr. Marshall's new book The Eternal City: Rome & the Origins of Catholic Christianity:

As you know, B.C. refers to “before Christ” and it is therefore confusing to hear scholars say that Christ was born in 4 B.C. This would mean that Christ was born four years before Christ. However, recent and more precise chronological studies have validated the traditional date of Christ’s birth at December 25 in 1 B.C.[i]

As way of background, the dating of B.C. (before Christ) and A.D. (anno Domini or year of the Lord) derives from the calculations of the Dionysius Exiguus. Exiguus means little, so he is often called Dionysius the Little. Dionysius was a Scythian monk living in Rome. He died in about A.D. 544. Incidentally, when you write dates, B.C. goes after the number and A.D. goes in front of it. For example:

754 B.C.
or
A.D. 1492

In Rome, Dionysius worked with the best Roman records and Church documents to compute the birth of Christ. This new computation divided time before and after Christ. Dionysius did not include a year zero. December 31 in 1 B.C. would have passed to January 1 in A.D. 1.

Now Dionysius identified Gabriel’s annunciation to the Virgin and the incarnation of Christ in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary on March 25 in the year 1 B.C. He recognized the birthday of Christ as being December 25 in the year 1 B.C. The circumcision of Christ, eight days after His birth, was on January 1 of A.D. 1. His crucifixion was in the year A.D. 33.

The Venerable Bede took up the dating scheme of Dionysius the Little in his Ecclesiastical History of the English People, and the rest is history. We still use his dating system to this day—B.C. and A.D.

Doubts over the birth year of Christ arose in the 1600s. Scholars became aware of the chronology provided by the Jewish historian Josephus. Josephus places the death of King Herod the Great in what Dionysius called 4 B.C. Since Herod tried to kill the infant Christ, then it would necessarily be the case that Christ would be born before the death of Herod. If Herod died in 4 B.C., then Christ would need to be born before 4 B.C. And so, ever since the seventeenth century, people have been claiming that Dionysius got it wrong and that Christ was born four years before Christ.

What do we make of all this? Well, either Josephus is correct or Dionysius is correct. Both cannot be right. Until recently most scholars agreed with Josephus because: A) Josephus lived in the century of Christ, B) Josephus was Jewish, and C) Josephus was a professional historian. Dionysius was just a monk living in Rome over five hundred years later.

However, there is now good reason for believing that Josephus got it wrong. Further studies of Josephus reveal that he was most certainly not consistent or accurate in dating several key events in Jewish and Roman history. In fact, Josephus contradicts verified history, the Bible, and even his own chronology about one hundred times. His dates are not very accurate. The French archaeologist, jurist, and historian Theodore Reinarch was one of the first to document the many factual and chronological errors of Josephus. Reinarch’s translation of Josephus is steadily interrupted by comments such as “this is a mistake” or “in another book his figures are different.”[ii]

The following is an example of the poor chronology of Josephus. Josephus records in his Jewish War that Hyrcanus reigned for thirty-three years. Yet in his Antiquities of the Jews, that Hyrcanus reigned thirty-two years.[iii] Yet in another place in his Antiquities, Josephus says that Hyrcanus reigned only thirty years. That’s three contradictory claims—two in the same book!

In his Jewish War, Josephus records that Aristobulus set the diadem on his head 471 years after the exile. Yet in his Antiquities, he says it was 481 years, a ten-year difference. By the way, modern historians now know that it was 490 years. Josephus is wrong on all accounts.

More examples could be supplied. The fact is that Josephus was sloppy with dates, especially when they regarded monarchs. So let us take a look at the dates he gives for King Herod. We discover that Josephus actually gave two contradictory dates for the death of Herod—4 B.C. and A.D. 7 or 8.
Josephus writes that Herod captured Jerusalem and began to rule in what Dionysius would call 37 B.C., and that Herod lived for 34 years after this. If you do the math, this means that Herod died in 4 or 3 B.C. Scholars site this as the authoritative proof that Jesus was born before 4-3 B.C.

However, Josephus records a different dating for the death of Herod elsewhere. In his Antiquities, Josephus writes that Herod was fifteen years old in what we would call 47 B.C. when Caesar appointed Hyrcanus as ethnarch.[iv] But, twice elsewhere Josephus states that Herod was seventy years old when he died. So if Herod was 15 in 47 B.C., that means he died at age 70 in either A.D. 7 or A.D. 8.
We have a serious discrepancy in the dates of Josephus—a window of more than ten years. Moreover, who really knows if either number is accurate given his mistakes on other historical dates? 

Why is this important? It reveals that we should not allow Josephus to have the last word on the chronology of Christ. Josephus’ dating of Herod’s death to 4 B.C. is truly only one version of his calculations. Why not use his date of A.D. 7 or 8? It is rather arbitrary for modern historians to endorse the date of 4 B.C.

The best way to date Herod’s death is by focusing on the testimony that Herod died a few months after a well-observed lunar eclipse. With modern astronomical models, we know that such a lunar eclipse occurred at Jerusalem before sunset on December 29 in 1 B.C. This would mean that Herod died sometime after A.D. 1. This lines up perfectly with the chronology of Dionysius the Little. This means that Christ was born on December 25 of 1 B.C. and that He was circumcised on January 1 of A.D. 1. 

Our Calendar is perfectly accurate!

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please read Dr. Taylor Marshall's new book: The Eternal City: Rome & the Origins of Catholic Christianity available in paperback and Kindle format.

  


[i] Hugues de Nanteuil, Sur les dates de naissance et de mort de Jésus, Paris: Téqui editions, 1988. Translated by J.S. Daly and F. Egregyi.  Paris, 2008.
[ii] de Nanteuil, 2008.
[iii] Josephus, Antiquities, 12.
[iv] Josephus, Antiquities, 14.

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Saturday, December 29, 2012

A Reader Asks: Why is This Blog Called 'Canterbury Tales'?


Today is the feast day of St Thomas Becket and appropriately enough, a reader of Canterbury Tales named Jessica writes with a question:
I deeply appreciate this blog and have become an avid follower! I recently stumbled upon this post after often wondering why you choose the name Canterbury Tales, because I always thought surely it can't be after Chaucer's Canterbury Tales??? I am a convert to the faith and also have it against me that grew up in a public school (and a low performing one at that).  
My memory of Canterbury Tales almost 15 years ago now was that the overall message we took away was that based on the large number of characters and their often silly stories that Chaucer was suggesting it's not possible to arrive at any definite truth or reality about the Church. That's gotta be wrong or you wouldn't call your Traditional Catholic blog Canterbury Tales... 
Thanks again for the great information on this blog!
So why is the blog called Canterbury Tales?

It's called "Canterbury Tales" for a number of reasons.

It's called Canterbury Tales because its a blog about pilgrimage. As you know Canterbury Tales by Chaucer is a collection of stories told by pilgrims traveling to the relics of Saint Thomas Becket - a martyr of fidelity to the Pope against the tyranny of the English King Henry II.

My wife and I have a devotion to Saint Thomas Becket as a defender of the Papacy and the Catholic Faith. One of our sons is named "Becket" after the great martyr.

Also, I'm a convert from Anglicanism. The irony is that Canterbury is still the "capital" of Anglicanism. Yet Canterbury is only significant because it was the first English diocese recognized by Rome (by St Gregory the Great to be specific). Canterbury also has significance because of the relics of Becket. The glory of Anglicanism (Canterbury) is only glorious because of the glory of its true Mother (Rome).

ad Jesum per Mariam,
Taylor

PS: I'm curious as to whether there are there any readers out there who have read this blog from way back in 2003. It used to be called "Ecclesia Anglicana." If so please leave a comment. It was renamed "Canterbury Tales" in 2006 when I became Roman Catholic.

To learn about how I came to realize how important Rome is for Christianity and why I left Anglicanism to become a Roman Catholic, please see my brand-new book: The Eternal City: Rome & the Origins of Catholicism:



Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Friday, December 28, 2012

The Holy Innocents and the Aborted Babies: Is it a False Analogy?


Imagine that you live in Bethlehem and you're a Jewish mother or father. You have heard all the wonderful news. A star appeared over your town. Wealthy kings from the East came bearing gifts and the shepherds of the region are telling everyone about a recent apparition of angels. There was a mysterious and humble couple living in a cave, but now they're gone. Everyone is confused but knows that something wonderful has happened in Bethlehem.

You have five children and the youngest is a one and a half year old son. His name is Jonathan. As a faithful Jew, you circumcised him on the eighth day. That morning, the soldiers of Herod enter the town unexpected. They break into your house and immediately slay your beautiful little boy. They leave his bloody body on the floor of your home.

The death of children is one of the most sorrowful experiences of humanity. These mothers and fathers were not comforted like the mother of her seven sons in Maccabees. They did not know that their children were the proto-martyrs of the Messiah. They did not yet understand this tragedy. No doubt, they were comforted in some mystical way by the prayers of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Saint Joseph, and the intercession of Christ their Lord. Moreover, their holy children would be interceding for them. Nevertheless, it was a terribly sad day that was followed by many burials.

Many today connect the mystery of the Holy Innocents to the tragedy of abortion. This is a false analogy and we should be careful not to make it. There are a number of reasons why the analogy does not hold.

The Holy Innocents were circumcised (the Old Testament equivalent of baptism). Their parents had included the Holy Innocents within the covenant and religion of God. Aborted children are not baptized by desire, by blood, or by sacramental water baptism. Pope Sixtus V issued an Apostolic Constitution in 1588 on this subject of abortion:
“Noticing that frequently by various Apostolic Constitutions the audacity and daring of most profligate men, who know no restraint, of sinning with license against the commandment “do not kill” was repressed; We who are placed by the Lord in the supreme throne of justice, being counseled by a most just reason, are in part renewing old laws and in part extending them in order to restrain with just punishment the monstrous and atrocious brutality of those who have no fear to kill most cruelly fetuses still hiding in the maternal wombs. Who will not detest such an abhorrent and evil act, by which are lost not only the bodies but also the souls?” {Pope Sixtus V, Apostolic Constitution Effraenatam (Against Abortionists), 29 October 1588}
The Holy Father teaches that abortionists cause aborted children to lose both their bodies and their souls. Abortion mills are not baptismal fonts. They are not places of sacramental grace. Abortionists are not priests. They don't have the sacred power to send children to Heaven.

But surely you're not saying that aborted babies go to the fires Hell, are you? No, of course not. I am not saying that aborted babies go to the fires of Hell. To affirm that infants are tormented in Hell would be heresy and contrary to the teaching of Saints Gregory Nazianzus, Thomas Aquinas & Bonaventure, and contrary to the infallible decree of the Second Council of Lyons in A.D. 1274 and the infallible decree of the Council of Florence in A.D. 1439. Both councils teach that those that die with original sin alone receive a different punishment than those who die with original sin and actual sins that they have committed.

So where do they go?

Pope Saint Pius X tell us in the Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X, first published in 1910 AD:

Question 100 - Where do infants go who die without Baptism?
Answer - Infants who die without Baptism go to Limbo where they do not enjoy the sight of God, but also do no suffer. This is because having original sin, and it alone, they do not merit heaven, but neither do they merit purgatory or hell.
Here come the groans. "Oh Dr. Marshall, surely you don't believe in limbo, do you? Don't you know that the New York Times declared that the Pope admitted that this was bad theology and his been replaced by the Balthasarian message of hope for universal salvation and the Rahnerian doctrine of personal transcendence? Get with the program." 

Yes, I know that the New York Times declared that Limbo is no longer true. I also know that the International Theological Commission published a paper upon which all the newspapers pounced. I've read it: International Theological Commission Report “The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptized” (2007). The “International Theological Commission” (ITC) consists of thirty theologians who act as an advisory panel to the Vatican, in particular to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The reports and documents of the ITC are not considered expressions of authoritative Church teaching, but they sometimes set the stage for official Vatican pronouncements. Consequently, a document released by an advisory board is not binding or authoritative on the Catholic Church. While this document calls the limbo of children into question, it by no means closes the door on the traditional teaching of limbo.

The most offensive element of the ITC document is that it essentially ignores what two infallible Ecumenical Councils  (Lyons II, and Florence) taught on the subject. For example:

“The souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway in infernum to be punished, but with unequal pains.” 
-Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Laetentur Caeli, July 6, 1439

That's difficult teaching in the Council of Florence, but we cannot ignore it. By not weighing this passage (and others) carefully, the ITC is not representing what the magisterium has taught. Two Councils infallibly teach that unbaptized babies with original sin alone do not received the Beatific Vision of God because such a state requires sanctifying grace. It's in black and white letters for everyone to see. These Councils are just as binding as Trent or Vatican II.

It is very difficult for me to grant this. My own thinking has changed over time. Those who have read this blog for a few years have seen me wrestling through this topic. I also am aware of the pain of women who have had abortions and have repented. Many priests have told them, "Don't worry, your baby is in Heaven." These words of comfort are often based on a forged (false) version of Pope John Paul II's Evangelium Vitae, no. 99. which does not read "now live with the Lord" (EV, no. 99 is quite a controversy right there, but that's another blog post for another time.) However, I don't think that we can say this to mother's who have had abortions. The truth will set you free, even when the truth is hard to bear. Look, I wish that everyone were going to Heaven and that we did not live a valley of tears. But wishful thinking is not Catholic dogma. We have to listen to Sacred Scripture as interpreted by the Councils and the Popes speaking ex cathedra. 

Perhaps what really needs to be done is a theology of natural beatitude as it relates to what has been called "limbo." What does it mean for a child "not to enjoy the sight of God, but also do no suffer"? How does human nature relate to a natural end without the supernatural? Saint Thomas Aquinas suggests that the infants in limbo receive illumination through the ministry of angels, but do not receive the beatific vision of God. This is the kind of theology that needs to be worked out. We cannot theologize with our emotions. We must be careful with what has been revealed and declared by Holy Mother Church.

I'm sure this will spark some comments. Please be calm and civil.

Holy Innocents, pray for us.



Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Tuesday, December 25, 2012

The Apparition of Mary to Caesar Augustus at Christmas



The Roman reign of Caesar Augustus was an era of peace, prosperity, and felicity. Augustus took an imperial census during this era of peace, at which time he closed the temple of Janus for the third time, in the fortieth year of his reign. The Prince of Peace would be born into this historical parenthesis of peace. According to Saint Bede the Venerable, “A lover of peace, He would be born in a time of the most profound quiet. And there could be no plainer indication of peace than that a census should be taken of the whole world, whose master Augustus was, having reigned at the time of Christ’s nativity for some twelve years in the greatest peace, war being lulled to sleep throughout all the world.”[i]

Tradition holds that Caesar Augustus learned from the oracle of the Tiburtine Sybil that a Hebrew child would silence all the oracles of the Roman gods. Tradition also records that the Blessed Virgin Mary, holding the Christ Child in her arms, appeared to Caesar Augustus on the Capital Hill. Augustus recognized that this vision corresponded to the oracle concerning the Hebrew child. In response to this apparition of Mary and Jesus, Augustus built an altar in the Capitol in honor of this child with the title Ara Primogeniti Dei, meaning “Altar of the Firstborn of God.” Over three hundred years later, the Christian emperor Constantine the Great built a church at this location of the apparition and altar, which is called Basilica Sanctae Mariae de Ara Coeli, meaning “Basilica of Saint Mary of the Altar of Heaven.”[ii] 

If one visits the church today, he will observe murals of Caesar Augustus and of the Tiburtine Sibyl painted on either side of the arch above the high altar. These images recall the oracle, which prophesied the advent of the Hebrew “Firstborn of God.” In the fifteenth century, this church became famous for a statue of the Christ Child carved from olive wood taken from the Garden of Gethsemane outside Jerusalem. The church’s connection to the birth of Christ made it a fitting place for devotion to the infancy of the Savior.

Meanwhile in the Jewish district of Rome, on the day of Christ’s nativity, a fountain of oil flowed out from the earth in the tavern of a certain man in what is today called Trastevere—the region south of the Vatican and to the west of the Tiber River. This fountain of oil revealed to the Jews of Rome that the Messiah had at last been born, since Messiah or Christ means “anointed with oil.” To this very day, the Church of Saint Maria in Trastevere marks the location. The Emperor Septimius Severus, who reigned from A.D. 193 to 211, granted the location to the Christians. In A.D. 220, Pope Saint Callixtus I established the site as a church, and his relics still remain under the church’s high altar. The church has been rebuilt several times and can still be visited to this very day.

There are just a couple of interesting connections between Christ and Rome.

This post is derived from Dr. Taylor Marshall's brand new book: The Eternal City: Rome & the Origins of Catholic Christianity. Please continue reading here.

Available in paperback and Kindle:






[i] Quoted by Cornelius a Lapide in his Commentary on Luke at Luke 2:1.
[ii] This tradition is confirmed by Baronius, citing Suidas, Nicephorus, and others, in the materials of his Annals.

Monday, December 24, 2012

Yes, Christ Was Really Born on December 25: Here's a Defense of the Traditional Date for Christmas



The following is adapted from Taylor Marshall's new book: The Eternal City: Rome & and Origins of Catholic Christianity.


The Catholic Church, from at least the second century, has claimed that Christ was born on December 25. However, it is commonly alleged that our Lord Jesus Christ was not born on December 25. For the sake of simplicity, let us set out the usual objections to the date of December 25 and counter each of them.


Objection 1: December 25 was chosen in order to replace the pagan Roman festival of Saturnalia. Saturnalia was a popular winter festival and so the Catholic Church prudently substituted Christmas in its place.

Reply to Objection 1: Saturnalia commemorated the winter solstice. Yet the winter solstice falls on December 22. It is true that Saturnalia celebrations began as early as December 17 and extended till December 23. Still, the dates don’t match up.

Objection 2: December 25 was chosen to replace the pagan Roman holiday Natalis Solis Invicti which means “Birthday of the Unconquered Sun.”

Reply to Objection 2: Let us examine first the cult of the Unconquered Sun. The Emperor Aurelian introduced the cult of the Sol Invictus or Unconquered Sun to Rome in A.D. 274. Aurelian found political traction with this cult, because his own name Aurelian derives from the Latin word aurora denoting “sunrise.” Coins reveal that Emperor Aurelian called himself the Pontifex Solis or Pontiff of the Sun. Thus, Aurelian simply accommodated a generic solar cult and identified his name with it at the end of the third century.

Most importantly, there is no historical record for a celebration Natalis Sol Invictus on December 25 prior to A.D. 354. Within an illuminated manuscript for the year A.D. 354, there is an entry for December 25 reading “N INVICTI CM XXX.”  Here N means “nativity.” INVICTI means “of the Unconquered.” CM signifies “circenses missus” or “games ordered.” The Roman numeral XXX equals thirty. Thus, the inscription means that thirty games were order for the nativity of the Unconquered for December 25th. Note that the word “sun” is not present. Moreover, the very same codex also lists “natus Christus in Betleem Iudeae” for the day of December 25. The phrase is translated as “birth of Christ in Bethlehem of Judea.”[i]

The date of December 25th only became the “Birthday of the Unconquered Sun” under the Emperor Julian the Apostate. Julian the Apostate had been a Christian but who had apostatized and returned to Roman paganism. History reveals that it was the hateful former Christian Emperor that erected a pagan holiday on December 25. Think about that for a moment. What was he trying to replace?

These historical facts reveal that the Unconquered Sun was not likely a popular deity in the Roman Empire. The Roman people did not need to be weaned off of a so-called ancient holiday. Moreover, the tradition of a December 25th celebration does not find a place on the Roman calendar until after the Christianization of Rome. The “Birthday of the Unconquered Sun” holiday was scarcely traditional and hardly popular. Saturnalia (mentioned above) was much more popular, traditional, and fun. It seems, rather, that Julian the Apostate had attempted to introduce a pagan holiday in order to replace the Christian one!

Objection 3: Christ could not have been born in December since Saint Luke describes shepherds herding in the neighboring fields of Bethlehem. Shepherds do not herd during the winter. Thus, Christ was not born in winter.

Reply to Objection 3: Recall that Palestine is not England, Russia, or Alaska. Bethlehem is situated at the latitude of 31.7. My city of Dallas, Texas has the latitude of 32.8, and it’s still rather comfortable outside in December. As the great Cornelius a Lapide remarks during his lifetime, one could still see shepherds and sheep in the fields of Italy during late December, and Italy is at higher latitude than Bethlehem.

Now we move on to establishing the birthday of Christ from Sacred Scripture in two steps. The first step is to use Scripture to determine the birthday of Saint John the Baptist. The next step is using Saint John the Baptist’s birthday as the key for finding Christ’s birthday. We can discover that Christ was born in late December by observing first the time of year in which Saint Luke describes Saint Zacharias in the temple. This provides us with the approximate conception date of Saint John the Baptist. From there we can follow the chronology that Saint Luke gives, and that lands us at the end of December.
Saint Luke reports that Zacharias served in the “course of Abias” (Lk 1:5) which Scripture records as the eighth course among the twenty-four priestly courses (Neh 12:17). Each shift of priests served one week in the temple for two times each year. The course of Abias served during the eighth week and the thirty-second week in the annual cycle.[ii] However, when did the cycle of courses begin?

Josef Heinrich Friedlieb has convincingly established that the first priestly course of Jojarib was on duty during the destruction of Jerusalem on the ninth day of the Jewish month of Av.[iii] Thus the priestly course of Jojarib was on duty during the second week of Av. Consequently, the priestly course of Abias (the course of Saint Zacharias) was undoubtedly serving during the second week of the Jewish month of Tishri—the very week of the Day of Atonement on the tenth day of Tishri. In our calendar, the Day of Atonement would land anywhere from September 22 to October 8.

Zacharias and Elizabeth conceived John the Baptist immediately after Zacharias served his course. This entails that Saint John the Baptist would have been conceived somewhere around the end of September, placing John’s birth at the end of June, confirming the Catholic Church’s celebration of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist on June 24.

The second-century Protoevangelium of Saint James also confirms a late September conception of the Baptist since the work depicts Saint Zacharias as High Priest and as entering the Holy of Holies—not merely the holy place with the altar of incense. This is a factual mistake because Zacharias was not the high priest, but one of the chief priests.[iv] Still, the Protoevangelium regards Zacharias as a high priest and this associates him with the Day of Atonement, which lands on the tenth day of the Hebrew month of Tishri (roughly the end of our September). Immediately after this entry into the temple and message of the Archangel Gabriel, Zacharias and Elizabeth conceive John the Baptist. Allowing for forty weeks of gestation, this places the birth of John the Baptist at the end of June—once again confirming the Catholic date for the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist on June 24.

The rest of the dating is rather simple. We read that just after the Immaculate Virgin Mary conceived Christ, she went to visit her cousin Elizabeth who was six months pregnant with John the Baptist. This means that John the Baptist was six months older that our Lord Jesus Christ (Lk 1:24-27, 36). If you add six months to June 24 you get December 24-25 as the birthday of Christ. Then, if you subtract nine months from December 25 you get that the Annunciation was March 25. All the dates match up perfectly. So then, if John the Baptist was conceived shortly after the Jewish Day of the Atonement, then the traditional Catholic dates are essentially correct. The birth of Christ would be about or on December 25.

Sacred Tradition also confirms December 25 as the birthday of the Son of God. The source of this ancient tradition is the Blessed Virgin Mary herself. Ask any mother about the birth of her children. She will not only give you the date of the birth, but she will be able to rattle off the time, the location, the weather, the weight of the baby, the length of the baby, and a number of other details. I’m the father of six blessed children, and while I sometimes forget these details—mea maxima culpa—my wife never does. You see, mothers never forget the details surrounding the births of their babies.

Now ask yourself: Would the Blessed Virgin Mary ever forget the birth of her Son Jesus Christ who was conceived without human seed, proclaimed by angels, born in a miraculous way, and visited by Magi? She knew from the moment of His incarnation in her stainless womb that He was the Son of God and Messiah. Would she ever forget that day?[v]

Next, ask yourself: Would the Apostles be interested in hearing Mary tell the story? Of course they would. Do you think the holy Apostle who wrote, “And the Word was made flesh,” was not interested in the minute details of His birth? Even when I walk around with our seven-month-old son, people always ask “How old is he?” or “When was he born?” Don’t you think people asked this question of Mary?

So the exact birth date (December 25) and the time (midnight) would have been known in the first century. Moreover, the Apostles would have asked about it and would have, no doubt, commemorated the blessed event that both Saint Matthew and Saint Luke chronicle for us. In summary, it is completely reasonable to state that the early Christians both knew and commemorated the birth of Christ. Their source would have been His Immaculate Mother.

Further testimony reveals that the Church Fathers claimed December 25 as the Birthday of Christ prior to the conversion of Constantine and the Roman Empire. The earliest record of this is that Pope Saint Telesphorus (reigned A.D. 126-137) instituted the tradition of Midnight Mass on Christmas Eve. Although the Liber Pontificalis does not give us the date of Christmas, it assumes that the Pope was already celebrating Christmas and that a Mass at midnight was added. During this time, we also read the following words of Theophilus (A.D. 115-181), Catholic bishop of Caesarea in Palestine: “We ought to celebrate the birthday of Our Lord on what day soever the 25th of December shall happen.”[vi]

Shortly thereafter in the second century, Saint Hippolytus (A.D. 170-240) wrote in passing that the birth of Christ occurred on December 25:

The First Advent of our Lord in the flesh occurred when He was born in Bethlehem, was December 25th, a Wednesday, while Augustus was in his forty-second year, which is five thousand and five hundred years from Adam. He suffered in the thirty-third year, March 25th, Friday, the eighteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, while Rufus and Roubellion were Consuls.[vii]

Also note in the quote above the special significance of March 25, which marks the death of Christ (March 25 was assumed to corresponded to the Hebrew month Nisan 14 - the traditional date of crucifixion).[viii] Christ, as the perfect man, was believed to have been conceived and died on the same day—March 25. In his Chronicon, Saint Hippolytus states that the earth was created on March 25, 5500 B.C.  Thus, March 25 was identified by the Church Fathers as the Creation date of the universe, as the date of the Annunciation and Incarnation of Christ, and also as the date of the Death of Christ our Savior.

In the Syrian Church, March 25 or the Feast of the Annunciation was seen as one of the most important feasts of the entire year. It denoted the day that God took up his abode in the womb of the Virgin. In fact, if the Annunciation and Good Friday came into conflict on the calendar, the Annunciation trumped it, so important was the day in Syrian tradition. It goes without saying that the Syrian Church preserved some of the most ancient Christian traditions and had a sweet and profound devotion for Mary and the Incarnation of Christ.

Now then, March 25 was enshrined in the early Christian tradition, and from this date it is easy to discern the date of Christ’s birth. March 25 (Christ conceived by the Holy Ghost) plus nine months brings us to December 25 (the birth of Christ at Bethlehem).

Saint Augustine confirms this tradition of March 25 as the Messianic conception and December 25 as His birth:

For Christ is believed to have been conceived on the 25th of March, upon which day also he suffered; so the womb of the Virgin, in which he was conceived, where no one of mortals was begotten, corresponds to the new grave in which he was buried, wherein was never man laid, neither before him nor since. But he was born, according to tradition, upon December the 25th.[ix]

In about A.D. 400, Saint Augustine also noted how the schismatic Donatists celebrated December 25 as the birth of Christ, but that the schismatics refused to celebrate Epiphany on January 6, since they regarded Epiphany as a new feast without a basis in Apostolic Tradition. The Donatist schism originated in A.D. 311 which may indicate that the Latin Church was celebrating a December 25 Christmas (but not a January 6 Epiphany) before A.D. 311. Whichever is the case, the liturgical celebration of Christ’s birth was commemorated in Rome on December 25 long before Christianity became legalized and long before our earliest record of a pagan feast for the birthday of the Unconquered Sun. For these reasons, it is reasonable and right to hold that Christ was born on December 25 in 1 B.C. and that he died and rose again in March of A.D. 33.

Taylor's new book The Eternal City also makes an argument in defense of the traditional BC/AD dating as being 100% accurate.




[i] The Chronography of AD 354. Part 12: Commemorations of the Martyrs.  MGH Chronica Minora I (1892), pp. 71-2.
[ii] I realize that there are two courses of Abias. This theory only works if Zacharias and Elizabeth conceived John the Baptist after Zacharias' second course - the course in September. If Saint Luke refers to the first course, this then would place the birth of John the Baptist in late Fall and the birth of Christ in late Spring. However, I think tradition and the Protoevangelium substantiate that the Baptist was conceived in late September.
[iii] Josef Heinrich Friedlieb’s Leben J. Christi des Erlösers. Münster, 1887, p. 312.
[iv] The Greek tradition especially celebrates Saint Zacharias as "high priest." Nevertheless, Acts 5:24 reveals that there were several “chief priests” (ρχιερες), and thus the claim that Zacharias was a “high priest” may not indicate a contradiction. The Greek tradition identifies Zacharias as an archpriest and martyr based on the narrative of the Protoevangelium of James and Matthew 23:35: “That upon you may come all the just blood that hath been shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the just, even unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar.” (Matthew 23:35)
[v] A special thanks to the Reverend Father Phil Wolfe, FSSP for bringing the “memory of Mary” argument to my attention.
[vi] Magdeburgenses, Cent. 2. c. 6. Hospinian, De origine Festorum Chirstianorum.
[vii] Saint Hippolytus of RomeCommentary on Daniel.
[viii] There is some discrepancy in the Fathers as to whether Nisan 14/March 25 marked the death of Christ or his resurrection.
[ix] Saint Augustine, De trinitate, 4, 5.


Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Saturday, December 22, 2012

The Old Testament Foretold that Mary Would Give Birth Without Pain

Painting: Michaelangelo's Prophet Isaiah

Dear friends,

We are all familiar with Isaiah's well known prophecy of Christmas:

“Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a Virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son and his name shall be called Emmanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14)

However, Isaiah made another (lesser known) prophecy of Christmas:

"Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a Manchild" (Isa 66:7)

This verse is the basis for the Catholic teaching that Mary experienced no pain when she delivered Christ at Bethlehem. The Roman Catechism teaches that Christ passed through her "as sunlight passes through glass."

The reason for this is that Mary is the New Eve who gives birth to the promised Savior (see Gen 3:15). As New Eve, the Blessed Virgin Mary escapes the curse of Eve - labor pains.

This might be something interesting to discuss this Christmas with family or below in the comments. Keep in mind that all the Church Fathers before AD 600 believed that Mary's delivery was painless.

Merry Christ-Mass,
Taylor

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Friday, December 21, 2012

Why You Should Eat Indian Food Today - Saint Thomas' Feastday


Every December 21 (traditional feast of St Thomas) I try to create enthusiasm for feasting on Indian food. As you know, St Thomas is the patron of India. Our family always enjoys this "Indian day" as a fun "pre-Christmas" tradition. (Similarly, December 12 (Our Lady of Guadalupe) is a Mexican food night!) Fortunately, December 21 is still the feast of Saint Thomas in Latin Mass parishes.*

Saint Thomas, one of the twelve apostles, traveled to India and evangelized that nation. To this day, Indian Christians claim Saint Thomas as their founder and patron.

So tonight we're again eating Indian food for dinner: Tiki Masala, Vindaloo, Veggie Korma, Naan, Rice, etc. Since it's Friday, we're rolling Vegetarian - which works well with Indian. Don't you just love being Catholic?!


Happy feast day of Saint Thomas the Apostle.

Godspeed,
Taylor

* December 21 is the feast of Saint Thomas the Apostle in the pre-Vatican 2 calendar and in the calendar Episcopal Church (from my pre-Catholic days). It became somewhat complicated when we became Catholic, because in the current Catholic Novus Ordo calendar (post-V2) has Saint Thomas' feast day on July 3. Our little "pre-Christmas" tradition didn't quite work so well liturgically. Now that we're at a Latin Mass parish, it was great to see the red vestments and hear a solid homily on Saint Thomas...and have some Indian food!

Saint Thomas, Apostle of India, pray for us!

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Taylor's new book. Click on it for more details:

Thursday, December 20, 2012

The New Book *The Eternal City* about the Rome and Catholicism is Available at amazon.com


My new book The Eternal City: Rome & the Origins of Catholicism is now available. Regrettably, it was delayed by about a month. It became available on amazon.com yesterday. I'm very excited about it and I hope that you'll read it.

The Eternal City seeks to answer the following questions:
  1. If Christ was crucified and rose again in Jerusalem, why is the Kingdom of God manifested as the ROMAN Catholic Church?
  2. How do Daniel and the prophets prophecy about the ROMAN Catholic Church?
  3. Was Christ truly born on December 25? (Yes, He was. I defend it thoroughly)
  4. What is the significance of Christ being crucified on a Roman cross?
  5. Is the Latin language significant and redemptive? (Yes it is)
  6. Was Saint Peter the First Pope?
  7. Has Saint Peter's body been found underneath the Vatican? (Yes, the book gives the history of the excavation and findings)
  8. How does the Book of Revelation relate to Rome and the Antichrist?
These and other questions are answered in The Eternal City: Rome & the Origins of Catholicism.



My first book The Crucified Rabbi sought to demonstrate that Christ and His Catholic Church are the perfect fulfillment of over three hundred Old Testament Jewish prophecies. The Crucified Rabbi was a book about how Catholicism rose out of Judaism. This third book The Eternal City is a book about how Catholicism rose from within pagan Rome. The first book was one about Jews. This last book was about Gentiles. Conclusion

The middle book The Catholic Perspective on Paul was a book of mediation standing between the Jews on one hand and the Gentiles on the other. How is it that the redemption of Christ apples to both Jews and Gentiles? What is the nature of the universal Church and her sacraments? These important questions are answered by Saint Paul.

Of the three books, I believe that The Eternal City is the most important. We live in an age of misguided ecumenism in which every well-intended idea and religion must be not only tolerated but celebrated. To the extent, then, that the Catholic Church ignores her Roman identity, she forgets her ancient nobility. Our claim that the Church is Roman affirms her connection to the historic Christ who was born under Augustus Caesar and crucified under Pontius Pilate. To affirm that the Church is Roman is to magnify the mercy of Christ who did not leave us as orphans but sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Popes reigning from the city of Rome. The Roman identity of the Catholic Church reveals that she is unique, not only among all the religions of earth, but especially among the various Christian denominations with their contradictory doctrines.

I hope that you'll read the new book and share your feedback. My email address is in the back of the book and I'd love to hear from you personally. It's important that we understand how God planned for His Church to be Roman and how this effects our understanding of the New Testament and Church History.

Please read the book and let me know what you think.

ad Jesum per Mariam,
Taylor Marshall, PhD

PS: I'd really appreciate it if you would rate the book at amazon.com after you read it. It is a big boost.


Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Monday, December 17, 2012

10 Things You Should Know About Advent



I was recently wondering about the origins of Advent and its history. So I did a little research and came up with the Top Ten Things You Need to Know about Advent:
  1. The first recorded "preparation for Christmas" is found in the acts of the Synod of Saragossa, Spain in A.D. 380. This synod declared that all baptized Christians should be present in Church from December 17 till December 25. If you do the math, that comes out to the eight days before Christmas--not quite a full Advent season, but it's a start.
  2. Saint Caesarius of Arles (502-542) is recorded to have delivered the first document homilies on Advent.
  3. The Synod of Macon in Gaul (modern day France) in A.D. 581 is our first firm witness of what we might call the season of Advent. It states that the liturgical norms for Lent be kept from November 11 to December 24 (about 40 days). The connection made here between Advent and Lent reflects the reason why the penitential color of purple is common to both Advent and Lent.
  4. We also have a copy of a sermon given by Pope Saint Gregory the Great (590-604) for the second Sunday of Advent.
  5. In the seventh century, Advent was celebrated in Spain with five Sundays! The Gelasian Sacramentary also gives liturgical propers for the "five Sundays of Advent."
  6. The Eastern Churches began celebrating Advent in the eighth century as a time of strict fasting and abstinence--a practice still common Eastern Orthodoxy. This practice also reflects the season's similarity to Lent. Incidentally, red is the most common liturgical color for Advent in the Eastern churches.
  7. Pope St. Gregory VII (1073-85) apparently reduced the number of Sundays in Advent from five to four--the current practice.
  8. The third Sunday of Advent is technically called Gaudete Sunday and it is marked by rose vestments (don't ask your priest why he's wearing "pink"!) and rose hangings. Gaudete means rejoice because the third Sunday marks the over-half-way-point of Advent. This usage corresponds to the rose vestments used on Laetare Sunday, the fourth Sunday of Lent (also the over-half-way-point of Lent).
  9. The Advent wreath, found in many Catholic homes, is a rather modern invention. It derives to a 19th century German custom, apparently Lutheran in origin. The practice was soon adopted by Bavarian Catholics and spread all over the world.
  10. The liturgical season of Advent anticipates Second Advent (Coming) of Christ while also remembering the First Advent (Coming) of Christ at Christmas. Thus, the season generally celebrates the activity of God in history in and through our Lord Jesus Christ. Advent is the parenthesis in which falls all of Christian history.
I hope you found this helpful. Please send it along to friends and family and have Happy Advent.

Have a Happy and Holy Advent,
Taylor Marshall

PS: Tune in again at Christmas for a special piece on the "Top Ten Things to Know about the Twelve Days of Christmas."


Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.

Friday, December 14, 2012

The Chain from Catholicism to Atheism


Pope Pius XII describes how men go from being Catholics to atheists:

"Christ, yes! Church, no! Afterwards: God, yes! Christ, no! Finally, the impious shout, God is dead; even, God never existed."

Pope Pius XII, Allocution to the Union of Men of Catholic Action, 1953.

Do you enjoy reading Canterbury Tales by Taylor Marshall? Make it easier to receive daily posts. It's free. Please click here to sign up by Feed or here to sign up by Email. Please also explore Taylor's books about Catholicism at amazon.com.
Subscribe to feed
Related Posts with Thumbnails

This blog, Canterbury Tales, is solemnly consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

“Et tuam ipsius animam pertransibit gladius
ut revelentur ex multis cordibus cogitationes.”
(Luke 2:35, Vulgate)
Our Lady, Seat of Wisdom, pray for us.
#navbar-iframe { height:0px; visibility:hidden; display:none; }