Thanks JD and Ed for a helpful chat. Yes, it would be great to have the right type of Marian apparition. Er... How do you tell if a Marian apparition is genuine? You offer a very sound guide - Mary should be unifying. You have something like Medjugorje which has been a font of continual dispute and disagreement and the focus of the dissident local Franciscans and....er, I don't see much unity here.
Admittedly I have been to Medj only once and to Lourdes ten times. But Lourdes has been so inclusive to so many for so long. You have the Jewish anarchist who took refuge there in 1940 as the Nazis swept south and went on to write The Song of Bernadette. There was the entirely secular photojournalist I met circa 1982 who was attracted because he was interested in people. There were people of all religious backgrounds who came on my groups with their desperately sick and disabled children. And we could all process with our tacky candles which illuminated the tacky paper windshields with the words of the Lourdes hymn internally illuminated.
I have not been to the site of another fake apparition, Marpingen in the Saarland. I can recommend David Blackbourn's enthralling piece of micro history, which describes the 1876 "visions" site which attracted even more pilgrims than Lourdes for a while. There was so much going on. The aftermath of the Franco-Prussian War, which saw drastic boundary changes to this frontier area, combined with Bismarck's Kulturkampf against the Catholic Church, massive social change as local men went off to the coal mines leaving their wives as heads of families and the unspoken wish to have a German rival to Lourdes.
I loved your reference to Mary and her link with wine and the vine harvest. Having just come back from Bordeaux, where the wine industry is so visible and there is celebration of the vine on all sides, it was another wonderful detail. In Bordeaux, even secular venues like the wonderful City of Wine mention the deep link between wine and Christianity. And the City of Wine, among much, much else, has a compendium of film clips involving wine consumption. One of them inevitably shows those two good-hearted Catholic lads, The Blues Brothers, on their Mission from God, embarrassing the other diners at the fancy restaurant as they knock back the wine.
Hmmm… Your discussion on the Pope’s faux pas made me wonder the next time he comes to the USA, will he extol the virtues of our past leaders like General Robert E. Lee? It depends whether or not he is an avid follower of Catholic Twitter controversies.
Maybe he remembers Catherine for ignoring the bull of the Pope and allowing the Jesuits to continue existing in Russia (Which she could do for some reason, even though non-Catholic. The actual Catholic monarchs of the time were all strongly anti-Jesuit.)
Nice thought from Ed on St. John, but no feasts other than Easter are documented as celebrated in Apostolic times. Not trying to sound Protestant - just the liturgical calendar took a long time to develop.
Ed, Try Red Chillies Indian Restaurant in Takoma Park (Langley Park). It looks like it’s a name changed but continuous ownership from the closed “Udupi Palace” which was very good and affordable. They had lots of people from India eating there and pictures of Indian celebrities who visited while in America.
But have you sampled Ethiopian in Silver Spring (or Shagga on Hyattsville)? It’s taken over for us as our top non-American choice for special occasions.
Which American Cardinal was the one that convinced the USCCB in 2019 to nix the proposed message to Rome by equating concerns over abuse investigations and response to attacking the Pope's leadership?
I had never heard before that the Nativity of Mary would be a meat Friday (when the feast falls on a Friday of course); it’s not actually a solemnity, so what would be the reasoning for that?
In a light defense of Peter the Great, Ukraine was not independent at that time. It was divided between Poland and the Ottoman Empire. Peter actual united it wholly under Russia. Additionally at the time, the Crimea was never part of Ukraine. It was controlled by the Tatars. Due to some ethnic cleansing by Peter, it allowed more settling by Ukrainians and Russians. By standards at the time in Europe, Peter was mild.
Listened to the podcast returning from a football game with some friends. Beyond the Nativity of Mary, students of Marian theology and scholars often ask the question, "when did Marian devotion arise."
The stock response is "in the eastern church" and then depending on who you talk to, in the "fifth or sixth centuries," or "the sixth or seventh centuries."
This "stock" answer has always left me unimpressed, especially since it opens the door to the criticism that Marian devotion is entirely unbiblical (for instance, the Assumption, the title "Mother of God," the Immaculate Conception) and not based on the witness of scripture or the very early church.
There are indications of a missing link, and JD mentioned a source of some of this tension in the podcast. If I am not mistaken JD mentioned that popular piety arose as a result of the affirmations of Mary as "Theotokos" at the Council of Ephesus (431).
Here's what we rarely hear:
The Council of 431 was moved to Ephesus precisely because it was known as a Marian stronghold. That coup was engineered not by any bishop, nor by the Emperor, but by the Augusta Aelia Eudocia (401-460), not to be confused with another empress of the same name.
The Augusta Aelia moved the Council to disadvantage Nestorius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, who had publicly preached that Mary the mother of Jesus was not the Theotokos. The Augusta took the preaching as a personal insult, since she underwrote Marian devotion in Constantinople.
But here's the thing: Marian devotion was active in Constantinople in the 420s, and Ephesus was a Marian stronghold in the 420s. Mary's popularity was not the work of the emperors, nor the bishops. It grew organically, in much the same way devotion to Our Lady of Guadalupe is a popular devotion that has grown organically.
There is no reason to doubt that Marian devotion in Ephesus dated to the first century, and the tradition that both John the Beloved and Mary retired there. Indeed, the Augusta's husband built the Basilica of St John (which was destroyed by earthquake) in Ephesus.
There is no way the Emperor would have built a Basilica to St. John in Ephesus (in the 400s) unless that devotion, like the Marian devotion, had existed for centuries.
I enjoyed the episode as I always do, and I’m glad the subject of the Russian/Ukrainian (planned) joint participation came up again. It’s something that I find myself thinking about occasionally, probably because I think I’m the only person I know of who thinks it could have been a good idea.
Often I worry about the reduction of the horizon of faith to the temporal order. When I first learned about the controversy, I immediately thought it was a good idea to have both. The message I took from it (or perhaps wanted to take from it) was that Jesus died for each man as if he were the only man (in line with Lewis and Augustine), and that God intervenes into our real, awful suffering, but isn’t constrained by it. God has always held the poor, the suffering, the helpless close to His heart. But Jesus came to call sinners, and I try not to hold mental reservations about that, difficult as it is.
That’s why the crucifixion is so powerful - I can never say, “Jesus did not die for you,” no matter what horrible things someone has done. I sometimes worry that talk about forgiveness easily drifts towards sins that “aren’t that bad,” or sins that we don’t *really* think are sins. And I think that the inclusion of representatives from a country invaded, as well as by representatives from the country invading, could have powerfully countered that tendency that I worry about. Invading a country is evil, not to mention the subsequent atrocities in the current invasion of Ukraine.
Of course I think that a position like that would have needed to be deliberately chosen and clearly articulated and defended. When the decision was made to ditch it, I initially interpreted it as backing down from that and yielding to public opinion, which was quite disheartening. But now I suppose I’ve concluded it was always more of a peace-making gesture than an attempt to emphasize to the faithful that God’s love is, genuinely and truly, unrestricted. (Even though we must respond to that love by repentance, conversion, etc)
Anyway, none of that is meant to take away from the suffering that gesture (and other comments) causes to the Ukrainian people. I’m very aware that my take is easy to have when I’m not in the middle of an invasion of my home.
Ed- just catching up on the Podcast. I grew up in DC. I hate to over-hype restaurants, but Tiffin in Langley Park is the best Indian Restaurant I’ve ever been to. Near University and New Hampshire. Won’t be disappointed.
Coulda pitched there are baseball t-shirts available! Plus that crewneck sweater is perfect for Fr Pastor to showcase his Roman collar.
Thanks JD and Ed for a helpful chat. Yes, it would be great to have the right type of Marian apparition. Er... How do you tell if a Marian apparition is genuine? You offer a very sound guide - Mary should be unifying. You have something like Medjugorje which has been a font of continual dispute and disagreement and the focus of the dissident local Franciscans and....er, I don't see much unity here.
Admittedly I have been to Medj only once and to Lourdes ten times. But Lourdes has been so inclusive to so many for so long. You have the Jewish anarchist who took refuge there in 1940 as the Nazis swept south and went on to write The Song of Bernadette. There was the entirely secular photojournalist I met circa 1982 who was attracted because he was interested in people. There were people of all religious backgrounds who came on my groups with their desperately sick and disabled children. And we could all process with our tacky candles which illuminated the tacky paper windshields with the words of the Lourdes hymn internally illuminated.
I have not been to the site of another fake apparition, Marpingen in the Saarland. I can recommend David Blackbourn's enthralling piece of micro history, which describes the 1876 "visions" site which attracted even more pilgrims than Lourdes for a while. There was so much going on. The aftermath of the Franco-Prussian War, which saw drastic boundary changes to this frontier area, combined with Bismarck's Kulturkampf against the Catholic Church, massive social change as local men went off to the coal mines leaving their wives as heads of families and the unspoken wish to have a German rival to Lourdes.
https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Marpingen.html?id=ytfYAAAAMAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y
I loved your reference to Mary and her link with wine and the vine harvest. Having just come back from Bordeaux, where the wine industry is so visible and there is celebration of the vine on all sides, it was another wonderful detail. In Bordeaux, even secular venues like the wonderful City of Wine mention the deep link between wine and Christianity. And the City of Wine, among much, much else, has a compendium of film clips involving wine consumption. One of them inevitably shows those two good-hearted Catholic lads, The Blues Brothers, on their Mission from God, embarrassing the other diners at the fancy restaurant as they knock back the wine.
https://youtu.be/WJY2VnTcfK8?si=5ypb8HBJ4jj3hTXT
Hmmm… Your discussion on the Pope’s faux pas made me wonder the next time he comes to the USA, will he extol the virtues of our past leaders like General Robert E. Lee? It depends whether or not he is an avid follower of Catholic Twitter controversies.
Maybe he remembers Catherine for ignoring the bull of the Pope and allowing the Jesuits to continue existing in Russia (Which she could do for some reason, even though non-Catholic. The actual Catholic monarchs of the time were all strongly anti-Jesuit.)
As long as we are being hip & with it, someone ought to familiarize Cardinal Parolin with the facepalm.
Nice thought from Ed on St. John, but no feasts other than Easter are documented as celebrated in Apostolic times. Not trying to sound Protestant - just the liturgical calendar took a long time to develop.
Ed, Try Red Chillies Indian Restaurant in Takoma Park (Langley Park). It looks like it’s a name changed but continuous ownership from the closed “Udupi Palace” which was very good and affordable. They had lots of people from India eating there and pictures of Indian celebrities who visited while in America.
But have you sampled Ethiopian in Silver Spring (or Shagga on Hyattsville)? It’s taken over for us as our top non-American choice for special occasions.
Which American Cardinal was the one that convinced the USCCB in 2019 to nix the proposed message to Rome by equating concerns over abuse investigations and response to attacking the Pope's leadership?
I had never heard before that the Nativity of Mary would be a meat Friday (when the feast falls on a Friday of course); it’s not actually a solemnity, so what would be the reasoning for that?
In a light defense of Peter the Great, Ukraine was not independent at that time. It was divided between Poland and the Ottoman Empire. Peter actual united it wholly under Russia. Additionally at the time, the Crimea was never part of Ukraine. It was controlled by the Tatars. Due to some ethnic cleansing by Peter, it allowed more settling by Ukrainians and Russians. By standards at the time in Europe, Peter was mild.
Listened to the podcast returning from a football game with some friends. Beyond the Nativity of Mary, students of Marian theology and scholars often ask the question, "when did Marian devotion arise."
The stock response is "in the eastern church" and then depending on who you talk to, in the "fifth or sixth centuries," or "the sixth or seventh centuries."
This "stock" answer has always left me unimpressed, especially since it opens the door to the criticism that Marian devotion is entirely unbiblical (for instance, the Assumption, the title "Mother of God," the Immaculate Conception) and not based on the witness of scripture or the very early church.
There are indications of a missing link, and JD mentioned a source of some of this tension in the podcast. If I am not mistaken JD mentioned that popular piety arose as a result of the affirmations of Mary as "Theotokos" at the Council of Ephesus (431).
Here's what we rarely hear:
The Council of 431 was moved to Ephesus precisely because it was known as a Marian stronghold. That coup was engineered not by any bishop, nor by the Emperor, but by the Augusta Aelia Eudocia (401-460), not to be confused with another empress of the same name.
The Augusta Aelia moved the Council to disadvantage Nestorius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, who had publicly preached that Mary the mother of Jesus was not the Theotokos. The Augusta took the preaching as a personal insult, since she underwrote Marian devotion in Constantinople.
But here's the thing: Marian devotion was active in Constantinople in the 420s, and Ephesus was a Marian stronghold in the 420s. Mary's popularity was not the work of the emperors, nor the bishops. It grew organically, in much the same way devotion to Our Lady of Guadalupe is a popular devotion that has grown organically.
There is no reason to doubt that Marian devotion in Ephesus dated to the first century, and the tradition that both John the Beloved and Mary retired there. Indeed, the Augusta's husband built the Basilica of St John (which was destroyed by earthquake) in Ephesus.
There is no way the Emperor would have built a Basilica to St. John in Ephesus (in the 400s) unless that devotion, like the Marian devotion, had existed for centuries.
I enjoyed the episode as I always do, and I’m glad the subject of the Russian/Ukrainian (planned) joint participation came up again. It’s something that I find myself thinking about occasionally, probably because I think I’m the only person I know of who thinks it could have been a good idea.
Often I worry about the reduction of the horizon of faith to the temporal order. When I first learned about the controversy, I immediately thought it was a good idea to have both. The message I took from it (or perhaps wanted to take from it) was that Jesus died for each man as if he were the only man (in line with Lewis and Augustine), and that God intervenes into our real, awful suffering, but isn’t constrained by it. God has always held the poor, the suffering, the helpless close to His heart. But Jesus came to call sinners, and I try not to hold mental reservations about that, difficult as it is.
That’s why the crucifixion is so powerful - I can never say, “Jesus did not die for you,” no matter what horrible things someone has done. I sometimes worry that talk about forgiveness easily drifts towards sins that “aren’t that bad,” or sins that we don’t *really* think are sins. And I think that the inclusion of representatives from a country invaded, as well as by representatives from the country invading, could have powerfully countered that tendency that I worry about. Invading a country is evil, not to mention the subsequent atrocities in the current invasion of Ukraine.
Of course I think that a position like that would have needed to be deliberately chosen and clearly articulated and defended. When the decision was made to ditch it, I initially interpreted it as backing down from that and yielding to public opinion, which was quite disheartening. But now I suppose I’ve concluded it was always more of a peace-making gesture than an attempt to emphasize to the faithful that God’s love is, genuinely and truly, unrestricted. (Even though we must respond to that love by repentance, conversion, etc)
Anyway, none of that is meant to take away from the suffering that gesture (and other comments) causes to the Ukrainian people. I’m very aware that my take is easy to have when I’m not in the middle of an invasion of my home.
Ed- just catching up on the Podcast. I grew up in DC. I hate to over-hype restaurants, but Tiffin in Langley Park is the best Indian Restaurant I’ve ever been to. Near University and New Hampshire. Won’t be disappointed.