Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

[late fourth century]

The Fortieth Day after [the Nativity of Our Lord] is observed here with
special magnificence.  On this day they assemble in the Anastasis.  Everyone
gathers, and things are done with the same solemnity as at the feast of
Easter.  All the presbyters preach first, then the bishop, and they interpret
the passage from the Gospel about Joseph and Mary taking the Lord to the
Temple, and about Simeon and the prophetess Anna, daughter of Phanuel,
seeing the Lord, and what they said to him, and about the sacrifice offered
by his parents.  When all the rest has been done in the proper way, they
celebrate the sacrament and have their dismissal.

[638]

In honor of the divine mystery that we celebrate today, let us all hasten to
meet Christ.  Everyone should be eager to join the procession and to carry a
light.

Our lighted candles are a sign of the divine splendor of the one who comes to
expel the dark shadows of evil and to make the whole universe radiant with
the brilliance of his eternal light.  Our candles also show how bright our
souls should be when we go to meet Christ.

The Mother of God, the most pure Virgin, carried the true light in her arms
and brought him to those who lay in darkness.  We too should carry a light
for all to see and reflect the radiance of the true light as we hasten to
meet him.

The light has come and has shone upon a world enveloped in shadows; the
Dayspring from on high has visited us and given light to those who lived
in darkness.  This, then, is our feast, and we join in procession with
lighted candles to reveal the light that has shone upon us and the glory
that is yet to come to us through him.  So let us hasten all together to
meet our God.

The true light has come, "the light that enlightens every person who is
born into this world."  Let all of us, beloved, be enlightened and made
radiant by this light.  Let all of us share in its splendor, and be so
filled with it that no one remains in the darkness.  Let us be shining
ourselves as we go together to meet and to receive with the aged Simeon
the light whose brilliance is eternal.  Rejoicing with Simeon, let us
sing a hymn of thanksgiving to God, the Father of the light, who sent
the true light to dispel the darkness and to give us all a share in his
splendor.

Through Simeon's eyes we too have seen the salvation of God which he
prepared for all the nations and revealed as the glory of the new Israel,
which is ourselves.  As Simeon was released from the bonds of this life
when he had seen Christ, so we too were at once freed from our old state
of sinfulness.

By faith we too embraced Christ, the salvation of God the Father, as
he came to us from Bethlehem.  Gentiles before, we have now become the
people of God.  Our eyes have seen God incarnate, and because we have
seen him present among us and have mentally received him into our arms,
we are called the new Israel.  Never shall we forget this presence;
every year we keep a feast in his honor.

O Lord, holy Father almighty, everlasting God, who hast made all things
out of nothing, and hast appointed that the labors of bees should be
formed into wax by thine ordinance: who didst likewise as on this day
fulfil the prayers of thy righteous servant Simeon: we humbly beseech
thee; that thou wouldest vouchsafe, by the power of thy holy Name, and
at the intercession of blessed Mary Ever-Virgin, whose festival we this
day celebrate, and of all thy Saints, to ble+ss and sanc+tify these
candles for the use of men, and for their protection both in body and
soul in all perils of land or sea: hear, O Lord, we humbly pray thee,
from thy holy heaven and from the throne of thy glory the voice of this
thy people, that seeketh to bear them forth to thy glory and to sing thy
praises: and we humbly beseech thee that thou wouldest have mercy on all
them that call upon thee, whom thou hast redeemed with the precious Blood
of thy dear Son.  Who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the
Holy Ghost, ever one God, world without end.  Amen.

Almighty and everlasting God, who as on this day didst suffer thy only-
begotten Son to be presented in the temple and to be received in the arms
of Saint Simeon: we humbly beseech thy mercy; that like as we thy servants,
taking these candles do seek to light them and bear them to the glory of
thy Name, so thou wouldest vouchsafe to ble+ss and sanc+tify the same: that
we being made worthy of offering them unto thee, our Lord and our God, and
being enkindled with the holy flame of thy most gracious charity, may be
found meet to be presented before thee in the temple of thy glory.  Through
the same thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord.  Amen.

O Lord Jesu Christ, who art the true light that lightenest every man that
cometh into the world: we beseech thee to pour out thy bless+ing upon
these candles, and sanc+tify them with the light of thy grace; and mercifully
grant, that even as they with their outward flame do scatter the darkness of
night; so our hearts being inflamed with the inward brightness of thy Holy
Spirit may be delivered from all blindness of iniquity: that the eyes of our
souls being enlightened may discern such things as are pleasing unto thee
and profitable unto us for our salvation; that finally after the darkness
and dangers of this world we may attain in the end to light everlasting.
Through thee, O blessed Jesu, Redeemer of the world, who in the unity of
the blessed Trinity livest and reignest God, world without end.  Amen.

Almighty and everlasting God, who by the mouth of Moses thy servant didst
command the shildren of Israel to bring pure olive oil for the lamps to
burn always before thy face: we beseech thee to pour the bless+ing of thy
grace on these candles; that like as they shed forth on us their outward
beams, so of thy bounteous goodness the light of thy Holy Spirit may never
fail to enlighten us inwardly in our souls.  Through thy Son Jesus Christ
our Lord in the unity of the same Holy Spirit.  Amen.

O Lord Jesu Christ, who as on this day appearing among men in the substance
of our flesh wast presented by thy parents in the temple: whom Simeon in
his old age, being enlightened by the light of thy Spirit, knew and blessed,
taking thee in his arms: mercifully grant; that we, being enlightened and
instructed by the grace of the same spirit, may know thee truly in our minds
and love thee faithfully with all our hearts.  Who livest and reignest with
the Father in the unity of the same.

V. Let us go forth in peace.
R. In the Name of Christ.  Amen.

And the Thurifer shall go first with smoking censer: and after him the Subdeacon
vested and bearing the Cross in the midst between two Acolytes with lighted
torches: then shall follow the Clergy after their order; and last the Celebrant
with the Deacon on his left, all bearing lighted candles in their hands: singing

		O Sion, adorn thy bridechamber, and receive
		Christ thy King: greet Mary who is the gate
		of heaven: for she beareth the King of the
		glory of the new light: she remaineth a Virgin,
		yet beareth in her arms a Son begotten before
		the morning star: whom Simeon took in his arms
		declaring to all nations that he is Lord of life
		and death, and Saviour of the world.

		It was revealed unto Simeon by the Holy Ghost
		that he should not see death before he had seen
		the Lord's Christ: and when they brought the
		child into the temple, then took he him up in
		his arms and blessed God and said: Lord, now
		lettest thou thy servant depart in peace.

		When his parents brought in the Child Jesus to
		do for him according to the custom of the law,
		then took he him up in his arms.

		They offered for him unto the Lord a pair of
		turtledoves or two young pigeons: As it is written
		in the law of the Lord.

		When the days of Mary's purification according to
		the Law of Moses were accomplished, they brought
		Jesus to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord.
		As it is written in the law of the Lord.

		Glory be to the Father and to the Son, and to the
		Holy Ghost.  As it is written in the law of the Lord.

		Almighty and everliving God, we humbly beseech thy
		Majesty: that, as thy only-begotten Son was this
		day presented in the temple in substance of our
		flesh; so we may be presented unto thee with pure
		and clean hearts, by the same thy Son Jesus Christ
		our Lord.  Who livest and reignest with thee and the
		Holy Ghost, one God, world without end.  Amen.

Alleluia.  Alleluia.  The old man bare the young Child in his arms: yet was
the young child the old man's King.  Alleluia!

    The channel 4 TV weatherman (WBZ, Boston), said that This day ,
    groundhog day or candlemas (SP?), was traditionally used to start the
    planning for Spring. In Europe, a different animal was used for
    "weather planning" than our groundhog. We used the groundhog since
    it is native to us.
    
    Is this day rooted in long ago traditions regarding the seasons?
    
    Marc H.

re .12 see .2

/john

    RE: .13
    see .12, .2 wasn't clear.
    
    Marc H.

I don't see anything in .2 that has anything to do with seasons.

I don't see any connection between Candlemas and Groundhog Day.

/john

    I thought candlemas was a Pagan holiday.
    
    It is connected with Groundhog day.
    
    It is a time in mid winter to celebrate the yearning for spring.
    
    
    Patricia

    Re: .16
    
    Thats basicly what the weatherman said......except the "pagan" word
    wasn't used.
    
    Maybe he was beening PC?
    
    Marc H.

Well, since pagans don't celebrate "mass" Candle-mas (Lichtme� in German)
cannot be a pagan celebration.

The Feast has two official names, "The Presentation of the Lord", and
"The Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary".

.1 and .2 describe the celebration as it existed in Jerusalem in the 4th
and 7th century.

It appears to be perfectly based on the Gospels.  The use of candles appears
to be perfectly in line with the Song of Simeon (see .0).

Just because pagans celebrate something on the same day doesn't mean that
the pagan ritual has something to do with a Christian celebration.

/john

    RE: .18
    I think that you have made a wrong assumption. That assumption being
    that this "groundhog day" or spring close time is pagan today.
    I don't see anything wrong in observing the natural changes in the
    seasons....in fact, the normal change is a natural beauty that is
    deeply spiritual. 
    
    Now, I'm not celebrating by burning images at a pagan altar or using
    crystals to focus my energy...but...really John, the beauty of nature
    is truely a gift from God. There is nothing wrong in celebrating it.
    
    Marc H.

re .19

.18 is in response to .16 which says "I thought Candlemas was a pagan holiday."

It is not.  It is the Feast of the Presentation of our Lord, also known as the
Feast of the Purification of the B.V.M., also known as Candlemas, the Mass of
Candles or Mass of Light.  It has nothing to do with Groundhog Day.

It celebrates the event in Luke 2:22-40, in which Jesus is held by the aged
Simeon, who calls Him "A Light to Lighten the Gentiles".

It occurs forty days after Christmas (the Mass of Christ) because Leviticus
orders parents to present their first-born son in the temple forty days after
birth, and for a mother to offer two turtledoves or pigeons forty days after
the birth of a male child.

/john

    RE: .20
    What we have here, is a failure to communicate.
    
    Marc H.

    40 days after Christmas.
    
    That's about midway between the Winter Solstice and the Spring
    Celebration of the Equinox and the return of light.
    
    Patricia 

Forty is the number of days the Mosaic Law specifies for the purification of
a woman who gives birth to a male child.

/john

    It is two bad that giving birth creates such impurity in a woman.

It is a fact of nature that a woman is very susceptible to infection during
the period immediately after birth.

/john

    
    For *forty* days?  I don't think so.
    
    Cindy

re Note 839.24 by AKOCOA::FLANAGAN:

>     It is two bad that giving birth creates such impurity in a woman.

        Apparently, according to .23, it's the birth of a MALE child
        that causes impurity.

        Bob

    I don't know about the birth of a male child causing impurtity, but
    I've read that a woman who bears a male child is considred Blessed...
    doesn't have to be the Christ-child.... that is I read this in the
    Bible. :-)
    
    Nancy

    Nancy,
    
    Are you suggesting that a woman who gives birth to a male child is more
    blessed than a woman who gives birth to a female child?
    
                                          Patricia

re Note 839.29 by AKOCOA::FLANAGAN:

>     Are you suggesting that a woman who gives birth to a male child is more
>     blessed than a woman who gives birth to a female child?
  
        Well it's certainly true in certain parts of the world that a
        woman who gives birth to a female child is considered cursed.

        Bob

    .29
    
    There was an alarming report on "Primetime" a few weeks ago citing
    the practice of infanticide of female babies in India.  It made
    me heartsick.
    
    Richard

    Well, yeah that is what I was saying. 
    
    However, I'd need to do a more indepth search on this...  in quick
    search I found this scripture pertaining to males that I thought was
    interesting:
    
    Luke 2:23  (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that
    openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;)

    
    Richard,
    
    You can read a little more in note 1085 in VAXWRK::INDIA to get
    another perspective on the topic.
    
    Personally I agree most with the last noter in the string...
    
    Cindy

You people seem willing to go to any extreme to deny the salvation of our God.

You spit out venomous condemnations of His glory because you are unwilling to
understand.  Observance of the Jewish ritual purity laws was a sign of love
between God and his chosen people, not a punishment.

Leviticus 12:

   The Lord said to Moses, "Say to the people of Israel, If a woman
   conceives, and bears a male child, then she shall be unclean seven
   days; as at the time of her menstruation, she shall be unclean.
   And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
   Then she shall continue for thirty-three days in the blood of her
   purifying; she shall not touch any hallowed thing, nor come into the
   sanctuary, until the days of her purifying are completed.  But if she
   bears a female child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her
   menstruation; and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying
   for sixty-six days.
   
   And when the days of her purifying are completed, whether for a son or
   for a daughter, she shall bring to the priest at the door of the tent
   of meeting a lamb a year old for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon
   or a turtledove for a sin offering, and he shall offer it before the
   Lord, and make atonement for her; then she shall be clean from the
   flow of her blood.  This is the law for her who bears a child, either
   male of female.  And if she cannot afford a lamb, then she shall take
   two turtledoves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering; and
   the other for a sin offering; and the priest shall make atonement for
   her, and she shall be clean.

>    Luke 2:23  (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that
>    openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;)

This, too, is a sign of the glory of the salvation of our God -- A sign of
his deliverance from the land of bondage.  He still delivers those who will
listen today, those who hear his voice.

This is a reference to Exodus 13 -- "Consecrate to me all the first-born;
whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel, both of
man and of beast, is mine." ... "And when in time to come your son asks
you, `What does this mean?' you shall say to him, `By strength of hand the
Lord brought us out of Egypt, from the house of bondage.  For when Pharoah
stubbornly refused to let us go, the Lord slew all the first-born of the
land of Egypt, both the first-born of man and the first-born of cattle.
Therefore I sacrifice to the Lord all the males that first open the womb;
but all the first-born of my sons I redeem.'"

    Nancy,
    
    Can you do some searching of your heart as well as the scriptures.  How
    do you decide whether a  male child is more holy and blessed than a
    female child?  Where do you look for the answer to that question?
    
    Patricia

    I suggest the book "Standing again at Sinai" by Judy Plaskow, a
    Feminist Jew and my favorite feminist theologian.
    
    Plaskow accepts that Judaism is thoroughly patriarchal but also
    embraces her commitment as a Jew and as a feminist to create space for
    Jewish women and to reform Judaism.  Plaskow is pluralistic and in
    dialogue with Christian feminists as well.
    
    The powerful message about the book "Standing again at Sinai" is that
    at the very moment of the covenant between God and Moses as described
    in the Old Testament, the recorded covenant is between God and Jewish
    men.  This is evidenced by God telling Moses that "Israelis"(male
    Israelis) must not have sex with women for three days before the
    covenant because sex with women would render them unclean.  And of
    course the sign of the covenant is the circumsized penis, which again
    obviously excludes women.  
    
    Yes the scriptures identify bearing a male child as making a woman
    blessed.  The scriptures identify a woman as being unclean during her
    menstruation, after childbirth, and making men unclean by having sex
    with women.  The scriptures identify woman as requiring a longer period
    of purification after having a female child than after having a male
    child.
    
    The Holy Spirit that speaks in my heart tells me that none of these
    things were ordained by God.  The holy spirit tells me that these
    "Laws" had a complex cultural evolution.  The Holy Spirit tells me that
    "In Christ, there is no male or female, black or white, Jew or Gentile,
    heterosexual or homosexual, able bodied or physically challenged.
    
    Patricia

    Re.34
    
    Just what the *&^% are you talking about? Just who is "spit out
    venomous condemnations of His glory"?
    
    Have you been reading the replies, or are you just looking for a fight?
    
    Marc H.

re .38

Yes, I've been reading replies.  .24, for example.

/john

    RE: .39
    
    Your mistake is in assuming that a discussion about male/female
    children or gender/feminist issues is the same as the birth of
    Christ. I believe that the customs of the times are important to
    understand...you shouldn't assume that this somehow cheapens what
    actually happened...the birth of Christ.
    
    Marc H.

Where did this "cheapens the birth of Christ" business come from?

I never said anything like that.  The string "cheap" appears for the
first time in your reply.

/john

    RE .24
    
    A vemonous reply?  Wow!

    RE: .41
    
    "Cheapens" was used to express the point you were making.
    
     Looks like a dead end as far as discussion goes with you in this
    reply. Too Bad.
    
    Marc H.

re: Note 839.34 by "John R. Covert" 

>You people seem willing to go to any extreme to deny the salvation of our God.

>You spit out venomous condemnations of His glory because you are unwilling to
>understand.  Observance of the Jewish ritual purity laws was a sign of love
>between God and his chosen people, not a punishment.

You talkin' ta me?

Jim

You hadn't previous replied in this topic yet.  And especially not with
statements that deny the love in God's covenant with his chosen people.

    Patricia,
    
    I have no issue with submission to the roles God has commanded from His
    people.  Do I like being submissive? NO!  Do I believe that we should
    be submissive?  YES!  But I also believe that submission towards an
    ungodly man is dangerous.  God's roles are not WRONG... but the sinful
    man has corrupted those roles as they have corrupted also the earth.
    
    When God puts into my life a man who is truly submissive to the Lord
    and knows what love expressed really is, I will have no problem being
    submissive towards him.  If this doesn't happen, I will be content to
    be a servant to those around me as a single woman.
    
    The widows had blessed lives in the church of old [imho], as the church
    cared for their physical/spiritual need [when no family was present to
    take up the care], they had the freedom to practice the art of Helps.
    
    I love being a woman and the fact that  males are blessed from the
    womb has no issue with me.  It's not a question of value, it's question
    of setting apart and establishing God's model for the family.
    
    
    In His Love, 
    Nancy

    Nancy,
    
    I have a little bit of difficulty undertanding your answer.
    
    Do you think that it is more blessed to have a boy baby than a girl
    baby?  
    
    Do you think that it would be more blessed to be a boy baby than a girl
    baby?
    
    
    

    
    Re.venomous whatever....
    
    I suggest just ignoring notes like that. 
    
    Cindy

    re .24
    
    Horrible spelling yest
    
    veminus,  Nah
    
    

>    Do you think that it is more blessed to have a boy baby than a girl
>    baby?  
>    
>    Do you think that it would be more blessed to be a boy baby than a girl
>    baby?

What scripture says about this is contained in reply .35.  Scripture says
that parents are to dedicate their first-born male children to God in honor
of God's bringing his chosen people out of Egypt.

Scripture does not say that x is more blessed than y, it says that parents
are to dedicate x to God.

Be careful of misinterpretations that would disagree with other parts of the
bible, especially those which make it clear that both male and female children
are a blessing from God.

/john

    I was just referring to Nancy's quoting of Luke 2:23.
    
    That makes it clear that males that openeth the womb shall be called
    holy to the Lord;
    
    Did I miss the offsetting statement that said that Females are also
    holy to the Lord.  
    
    By the way, my Woman's Bible commentary indicates
    that the Gospel of Luke is the most gender stereotypical. 

Luke 2:23 is a reference to Exodus 13.

Luke 2:23 explains the event Candlemas celebrates.

Luke 2:23 says that every first-born male will be taken to the temple and
designated as holy to the Lord.  This is required because of what happened
to the Egyptian first-born males because of Pharoah's stubbornness.

Luke 2:23 is explained in reply .35

Why would the Woman's Bible not properly explain this?

/john

    Well John,
    
    I don't believe the Exodus story of God killing the first born son's
    either.  I believe that to be a "Myth" also.
    
    Patricia

    
    Flanagan,
    
    > how do you decide wether a male child is more holy
    
    Do you always view things with pc glasses? John starts an interesting
    topic and within a few notes the pc hate traditional christianity
    crowd begins to regurgitate(sp) its usual male patriachy slop....
    
     David

1 Hail to the Lord who comes,		3 There Joseph at her side
   Comes to his temple gate!		   In reverent wonder stands;
  Not with his angel host,		  And, filled with holy joy,
   Not in his kingly state;		   Old Simeon in his hands
  No shouts proclaim him nigh,		  Takes up the promised Child,
   No crowds his coming wait;		   The glory of all lands.

2 But borne upon the throne		4 Hail to the great First-born
   Of Mary's gentle breast,		   Whose ransom-price they pay!
  Watched by her duteous love,		  The Son before all worlds,
   In her fond arms at rest;		   The Child of man today,
  Thus to His father's house		  That He might ransom us
   He comes, the heavenly guest.	   Who still in bondage lay.

			5 O Light of all the earth,
			   Thy children wait for thee!
			  Come to thy temples here,
			   That we, from sin set free,
			  Before thy Father's face
			   May all presented be!

						John Ellerton (1826-1893)

    David,
    
    I don't hate traditional Christianity.
    
    I just find it terribly offensive that some people feel that a boy baby
    is more blessed than a girl baby.
    
    I find it terribly sad that throughout history many girl babies were
    murder simply because they were not boys.
    
    I find it terribly sad that girl babies continue to be murdered in some
    parts of the world.
    
    I find it sad the the Bible offers justification for treating Boy
    babies and more blessed than girl babies.
    
    This has nothing to do with being PC.
    It has to do with a feeling of terrible injustice that is being done,
    has been done.

>    I just find it terribly offensive that some people feel that a boy baby
>    is more blessed than a girl baby.

Christianity does not teach this.
    
>    I find it terribly sad that throughout history many girl babies were
>    murder simply because they were not boys.

Christianity and Judaism condemn this.
    
>    I find it terribly sad that girl babies continue to be murdered in some
>    parts of the world.

Christianity and Judaism condemn the killing of babies.
    
>    I find it sad the the Bible offers justification for treating Boy
>    babies and more blessed than girl babies.

The bible offers no such justification.  The bible does not say that boys
are more blessed than girls.  The bible says that firstborn Jewish sons are
to be dedicated to the Lord in thanksgiving for God passing over the homes
of the Jews and sparing their firstborn sons when he smote the firstborn of
the Egyptians due to Pharoah's stubborness.

That is what the Bible says about Jewish boys, the subject of this topic.

Christianity calls all people, male or female, to be dedicated to the Lord.
    
/john

Note 839.58

>Christianity and Judaism condemn the killing of babies.
 
It hasn't always been this way.  See Psalm 137.

When killing babies occurs in war, it is dismissed as a tragic inevitability.

How many babies were killed during the Persian Gulf War?

Peace,
Richard

>How many babies were killed during the Persian Gulf War?

If I remember correctly, both the Pope and the Presiding Bishop of the
Episcopal Church in the USA condemned the Gulf War for using methods not
necessary to accomplish the objective.  (They aren't generals, though,
and what force was really necessary to repel the murdering invader in
Kuwait is another topic, probably for another conference.)

In fact, it even appears that the Presiding Bishop denied George Bush
access to the sacraments during the war.  This is just a hunch, since
it's unlikely that such a temporary excommunication would have been
made public, but I did notice that Bush seemed to be staying away from
the Episcopal Church during the war.

Psalm 137 is an expression of the kind of vengeful anger that Jesus forbids,
and the Psalm is certainly not approval of killing one's own children, which
is explicitly forbidden in the Law.

/john

re: .58

John,

>to be dedicated to the Lord in thanksgiving for God passing over the homes
>of the Jews and sparing their firstborn sons when he smote the firstborn of
>the Egyptians due to Pharoah's stubborness.

Why didn't he just smite the pharoah? (Or did he)? It hardly seems fair to kill
people that were probably unaware of what was going on.

However, I'm no biblical scholar so if I missed the point here please forgive me.

Steve

re .61

If you read Exodus, you will see that it was not just Pharoah alone who would
not let the Israelites go, it was Pharoah, his officials, and the Egyptian
people.

/john

Note 839.60

>>How many babies were killed during the Persian Gulf War?

>If I remember correctly, both the Pope and the Presiding Bishop of the
>Episcopal Church in the USA condemned the Gulf War for using methods not
>necessary to accomplish the objective.

These chaps and I share something in common then.  How about that!

>(They aren't generals, though,
>and what force was really necessary to repel the murdering invader in
>Kuwait is another topic, probably for another conference.)

I'm not so much in a hurry to separate the issue out to another conference.
The war was debated at length here, Topic 28 primarily.

>In fact, it even appears that the Presiding Bishop denied George Bush
>access to the sacraments during the war.  This is just a hunch, since
>it's unlikely that such a temporary excommunication would have been
>made public, but I did notice that Bush seemed to be staying away from
>the Episcopal Church during the war.

Why do I have a hard time believing George Bush would ever repent from
having done what was done in the Persian Gulf War, Panama, and other
strongarm measures he knew about?

>Psalm 137 is an expression of the kind of vengeful anger that Jesus forbids,
>and the Psalm is certainly not approval of killing one's own children, which
>is explicitly forbidden in the Law.

This Psalm is discussed in topic 730.  While in this instance I agree with you,
you'll find there are those who don't.

If Jesus was asked, "Who are my children?"  How do you suppose he would answer?
Just your biological children?  I doubt it.  He didn't say that kind of thing
about other relationships.

Richard

re: .62

I'll read Exodus first, but this still makes no sense to me. If you're going to
smite someone, smite the people in your way, not their firstborn sons!

Steve

Couldn't the message of the plagues and finally the death of the firstborn be
that wrong actions by society will affect all of society and that if continued
will eventually affect its most innocent and weakest members?

/john

    -1
    
    Yes John, I can agree with that interpretation If it means that God did
    not actually kill the Egyptian Children.  I applaud your move away from
    literalism.
    
    Patricia

Now wait a minute, Patricia.

I wrote:

>Couldn't the message of the plagues and finally the death of the firstborn be
>that wrong actions by society will affect all of society and that if continued
>will eventually affect its most innocent and weakest members?

And then you wrote:

>Yes John, I can agree with that interpretation If it means that God did
>not actually kill the Egyptian Children.

Are you really saying that you can agree with my interpretation that wrong
actions have an effect -- but only if the wrong actions didn't really have
an effect after all?

/john

Re:  .67

:-)

    It sounded from your interpretation that you were saying that the
    killing of the innocent children was allegorical meaning the most
    innocent persons in the society were being hurt by humankind actions.
    
    I agree with that.  When adults are addictive or abusive the most
    innocent victims are harmed.
    
    
    Patricia

    We celebrated Candlemas at the UU church.  Here is the description.
    
    
    "This is the celbration of Candlemas, the feast of returning light and
    the festival of purification.  We nuture the flames born at the winter
    solstice as the days turn upward in spring.  Winter and death shall be
    swept away and banished, until the Wheel turns once again to their
    time of rest and rebose.  Now is the quickening of the year and new
    life stirs in the womb of the Great Mother.  This is the feast of poets,
    and is sacred to the Goddess in her triple aspect."
    
    Imbolg, St Brigid's day, and Groundhog day are similar names.

That doesn't sound very Christian to me.

Since this is the Christian Perspective conference, I started this topic to
discuss the Christian Candlemas observation, which obviously has nothing to
do with the Goddess, since noone celebrates Mass for the Goddess.

The UU celebration you describe sounds like a neo-pagan coopting of a
Christian festival.

The Bible is clear about the Feast of the Purification and Presentation.
It is a clearly biblical event, taking place forty days after Christmas
in keeping with the law.

/john

    
    Re.70
    
    Sounds good to me...
    
    Cindy

    RE: .71
    
    Just *How* is that an insult? Sure, I don't feel comfortable with
    all of the reply, but, there is a good message in it too. The idea
    of seasons, rebirth, etc. can hardly be called an insult to Christ.
    
    Sounds like your *own* agenda is coming out.../john.
    
    Marc H.

    There is a school of Christianity called the History of Religion school
    that considers it absolutely essential to compare Christianity with the
    other religious of the time in order to comprehend what is truly new,
    unique, and different about Christianity.  dying and rising Gods,
    Virgin births, Festivals of Light, preexistent sparks of divinity etc
    are all part of Paganism, Gnosticism, and the Mystery religions. 
    Christianity does have elements that are truly new, and truly unique. 
    The purpose of this method of exegisis is to determine that which is
    truly new and unique.  I learned about this from reading Rudolph
    Bultmen, a Neo Orthodox German theologian writing from around
    1930-1965.  I don't know a whole lot about it but it is intriguing.  I
    too want to know what is truly unique and essential regarding
    Christianity.
    
    Patricia

The reason it is an insult is that it appropriates the Christian Feast of the
Mass (The Holy Eucharist) of Candles for pagan purposes.

Pagans can have their festival, but they should find their own name for it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wouldn't use "Bultman" and "orthodox" in the same sentence.

Of course, you didn't.

You used "neo-orthodox".  That, of course, means the opposite of "orthodox."

/john

    RE: .75
    
    If you are looking to be insulted, I'm sure you will find it.
    
    I see nothing wrong in having the two celebrations on the same day.
    
    Marc H.

re: Note 839.75 by John 

>You used "neo-orthodox".  That, of course, means the opposite of "orthodox."

neo:  1. a new or recent form, development or type
      2. a recent formation, modification, or abnormal change
      3. the most recent subdivision of a series of periods
      from the Greek neos, meaning new

American Heritage Dictionary.

doesn't sound like �opposite� to me.

Cheers,

Jim

I see nothing wrong with pagans having a celebration any time they want to.

I do see something wrong with calling it "Candlemas."  "Candlemas" is a
specifically Christian term referring to the Holy Eucharist celebrated in
honor of Our Lord's Presentation in the temple and Our Lady's Purification
after childbirth.

Would you not expect Jews to be insulted if a group of pagans celebrated
a feast of salted smoked herring on the same day as Yom Kippur and called
it by that name?

/john

    Re: .78
    
    Leaving kippers aside ( on crackers...excellent), I understand your
    point.
    
    Marc H.

    Most Pagan celebrations significantly predate the similar Christian
    observations.
    
    Patricia

Fine.

What is the pagan name for your celebration?

Please use that name, not ours.

Thank you very much.

/john

    
    Mary is an aspect and an incarnation of the Goddess.
    
    I see no conflict whatsoever.
    
    It was very common for Christianity, in their effort to get
    rid of the older ceremonies, to use the same day/time and
    create a new ceremony to suit their purposes, similar to the
    one that already existed.  Perhaps in the same spirit, pagans 
    should demand that the Church change their Candlemas to 
    another date if it was celebrated before Christ was born.  It 
    is also possible that the name may indeed have been the same 
    or similar.  I do not know.
    
    Since you've made it quite clear that this is *your* topic, I 
    won't enter any further notes into it.  If/when Patricia comes
    back, creating a Candlemas II topic to distinguish it from this
    one is easy enough to do.
    
    Cindy

>Mary is an aspect and an incarnation of the Goddess.

That is insulting.  To call a pious Jewish woman an incarnation of
a pagan goddess is about as gross an insult as possible.

>It is also possible that the name may indeed have been the same 
>or similar.  I do not know.

It is not possible for it to have been the same.

Candlemas is a Feast of Our Lord; the candles carried by the faithful
people in processions in Jerusalem (far from pagan influence) respond to
Simeon's words, "to be a light to lighten the Gentiles;" the -mas means
the Holy Eucharist, the principal form of worship of the Church ever
since Our Lord instituted it the night before he was handed over.

/john

John,
	Surely you realize the Church has subsumed and suborned holidays from
other beliefs from the Church's very inception?  It was used as a means to
legitimize the Christian Faith and lure away "pagans" and "heathens" from their
own beliefs.  Basically, this change of celebrations was to prove that
Christianity was superior to other beliefs and ensure that folks had a
celebration to take the place of their previous celebration - simply to make the
converts feel that they weren't missing out on anything.
	You can also take the stance that this "corruption" of previous
celebrations was to prove that Christianity was not incompatible with previous
belief systems.

	Now, as to Mary being a reflection of Brigit...  It is true that many of
the powers associated with goddesses has been given to, or attributed to Mary. 
Often for the same reasons that the holiday celebrations were changed - it made
Mary more acceptable to the new converts.  Heck, the Grail belief is just a
change in the Cauldron of ancient belief, the Spear that pierced Christ's side
taking the place of the Spear of Lugh.  Christianity took as many elements as it
could and incorporated it into it's own system - you can even see reflections of
pagan practices in the Celebration of Mass.

	None of this invalidates Christian belief - but it may add to your
understanding of how Christian belief was formed and how it changed through time.


George

re .84

Surely you realize that it is the use of the word "Candlemas" for
a pagan festival that I object to.

Also, the claim that "Mary is an incarnation of the goddess" is
not the same as a claim that Christian missionaries encouraged
converts from paganism to ask for the prayers of saints to replace
their devotions to various pagan deities.

It is the former claim I object to.

/john