Tuesday, December 9, 2025

Presidential Message on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception

The White House December 8, 2025 Today, I recognize every American celebrating December 8 as a Holy Day honoring the faith, humility, and love of Mary, mother of Jesus and one of the greatest figures in the Bible. On the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, Catholics celebrate what they believe to be Mary’s freedom from original sin as the mother of God. She first entered recorded history as a young woman when, according to Holy Scripture, the Angel Gabriel greeted her in the village of Nazareth with news of a miracle: “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you,” announcing that “you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus.” In one of the most profound and consequential acts of history, Mary heroically accepted God’s will with trust and humility: “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word.” Mary’s decision forever altered the course of humanity. Nine months later, God became man when Mary gave birth to a son, Jesus, who would go on to offer his life on the Cross for the redemption of sins and the salvation of the world. For nearly 250 years, Mary has played a distinct role in our great American story. In 1792, less than a decade after the end of the Revolutionary War, Bishop John Carroll—the first Catholic bishop in the United States and cousin of signer of the Declaration of Independence Charles Carroll—consecrated our young Nation to the mother of Christ. Less than a quarter-century later, Catholics attributed General Andrew Jackson’s stunning victory over the British in the climactic Battle of New Orleans to Mary. Every year, Catholics celebrate a Mass of Thanksgiving in New Orleans on January 8 in memory of Mary’s assistance in saving the city. Over the ages, American legends like Elizabeth Ann Seton, Frances Xavier Cabrini, and Fulton Sheen, who spent their lives glorifying God in service to others, have held a deep devotion to Mary. The Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, located in the heart of our Nation’s Capital, honors Mary as the largest church in North America. The timeless hymn “Ave Maria” remains beloved by countless citizens. She has inspired the establishment of countless churches, hospitals, and schools. Nearly 50 American colleges and universities bear Mary’s name. …. As we approach 250 years of glorious American Independence, we acknowledge and give thanks, with total gratitude, for Mary’s role in advancing peace, hope, and love in America and beyond our shores. More than a century ago, in the midst of World War I, Pope Benedict XV, the leader of the Roman Catholic Church, commissioned and dedicated a majestic statue of Mary, Queen of Peace, bearing the infant Christ with an olive branch so that the Christian faithful would be encouraged to look to her example of peace by praying for a stop to the horrific slaughter. Just a few months later, World War I ended. Today, we look to Mary once again for inspiration and encouragement as we pray for an end to war and for a new and lasting era of peace, prosperity, and harmony in Europe and throughout the world. In her honor, and on a day so special to our Catholic citizens, we remember the sacred words that have brought aid, comfort, and support to generations of American believers in times of need: Hail, Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

Tuesday, December 2, 2025

Rachel Campos-Duffy: “Reclaim our culture”

Fox News contributor Rachel Campos-Duffy (Image: Screengrab via ABC News / The View / YouTube)© provided by AlterNet “It’s always been about communism,” Campos-Duffy insisted. A Fox News host is urging viewers to defend America’s “western Christian culture” and to think “communism” whenever they hear about feminism or secularism. Rachel Campos-Duffy, a “Fox & Friends Weekend” co-host, told viewers on Monday, “I think it’s really up to us to reclaim our culture.” “We can sit and complain about it, but when we give in to those atheist groups that keep suing, we should come right back — this is our culture,” she said. “I’m not going to let, you know, pro-Palestinian or whatever they’re putting forward — these are all fronts for, you know, whenever you see any of these groups, just think feminism, secularism, just think communism. This is what they’re really about.” “It’s always been about communism,” Campos-Duffy insisted. “Making the state the center, removing the power of religion and family from our culture. It’s up to us to make sure that our culture remains what it is, which is a Western Christian culture with a beautiful history that we have in this country, and that we have to defend these things every single day, especially with our children.” Campos-Duffy has a history of targeting feminism. “Feminists like Hillary Clinton have robbed women of so much over the years, of minimizing the importance of what our purpose as mothers and as wives, and, I think, and really demeaning it and saying that it’s not the most important,” she said in September. “Always remember that feminism has never been about women. It’s always been about ABORTION and COMMUNISM,” she wrote in 2023.

Jesus according to Josephus

“[A] gripping read and triumph of careful philology that will change views of the importance and reliability of this long-debated passage. It certainly changed mine”. —Jack Tannous, Associate Professor of History and Hellenic Studies at Princeton University Home - Josephus & Jesus Josephus & Jesus. New Evidence for the One Called Christ …. This book brings to light an extraordinary connection between Jesus of Nazareth and the Jewish historian Josephus. Writing in 93/94 CE, Josephus composed an account of Jesus known as the Testimonium Flavianum. Despite this being the oldest description of Jesus by a non-Christian, scholars have long doubted its authenticity due to the alleged pro-Christian claims it contains. The present book, however, authenticates Josephus’s authorship of the Testimonium Flavianum and then reveals a startling observation: Josephus was directly familiar with those who put Jesus on trial. Consequently, Josephus would have had access to highly reliable information about the man from Nazareth. The book concludes by describing what Josephus tells us about the Jesus of history, his miracles, and his resurrection. —T. C. Schmidt (PhD, Yale University) Visiting Fellow, Princeton University, James Madison Program (2025-2026) Associate Professor, Fairfield University What Scholars Are Saying ________________________________________ An astonishingly new intervention into what had seemed to be a settled consensus…[an] erudite study — Annette Yoshiko Reed, Professor of Divinity and Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity, Harvard Divinity School An extraordinary scholarly achievement… impressive philological acumen — Tobias Hägerland, Senior Lecturer at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden “[A] gripping read and triumph of careful philology that will change views of the importance and reliability of this long-debated passage. It certainly changed mine. —Jack Tannous, Associate Professor of History and Hellenic Studies at Princeton University Josephus and Jesus: New Evidence for the One Called Christ T C Schmidt Published: 5 May 2025 Abstract This book brings to light an extraordinary connection between Jesus of Nazareth and the Jewish historian Josephus. Writing in 93/4 ce, Josephus composed an account of Jesus known as the Testimonium Flavianum. Despite this being the oldest description of Jesus written by a non-Christian, scholars have long doubted its authenticity due to the alleged pro-Christian claims it contains. The present book, however, authenticates Josephus’ authorship and then reveals a startling discovery. First, the opening chapters demonstrate that ancient Christians read the Testimonium Flavianum quite differently from modern scholars, considering it to be basically mundane or even vaguely negative, and hence far from the pro-Christian rendering that most scholars have interpreted it to be. This suggests that the Testimonium Flavianum was indeed written by a non-Christian. The book then employs stylometric analysis to demonstrate that the Testimonium Flavianum closely matches Josephus’ style. The Testimonium Flavianum appears, therefore, to be genuinely authored by Josephus. The final chapters explore Josephus’ sources of information about Jesus, revealing a remarkable discovery: Josephus was directly familiar with those who attended the trials of Jesus’ apostles and even those who attended the trial of Jesus himself. The book concludes by describing what Josephus tells us about the Jesus of history, particularly regarding how the stories of Jesus’ miracles and his resurrection developed.

Wednesday, November 26, 2025

The power of the Miraculous Medal

‘Is it possible that our enemies should display such activity and gain superior strength, while we remain idle, without getting down to work? Do we not have even stronger weapons, namely the protec¬tion of heaven and of the Immaculate Virgin?’ Saint Maximilian Kolbe We read in the following article: Maximilian Kolbe and the Miraculous Medal | Militia Immaculatae Maximilian Kolbe and the Miraculous Medal (Excerpt of the book “The Immaculate, our ideal”) As an outward sign of membership in the [Militia Immaculatæ), the Knight of the Immaculata wears her Miraculous Medal. We human beings are not only spirit, but also body. Our interior life, our ideal and mentality must be perceptible from outside, must be expressed in our external life. Therefore outward signs are necessary in order to bring the interior disposition to light. The Savior willed to grant His graces to people pre¬cisely through such “sacred signs”, namely the Sacraments. In a similar manner the Knight of the Immaculata must also make an outward pro¬fession. The Miraculous Medal is the outward sign of the interior Total Consecration to the Immaculata. Furthermore, as a weapon in the battle for souls he distributes these medals wherever he can. The Miraculous Medal should be the weapon, the bullet, which the Knight of the Immaculata makes use of. Even if someone is as wicked as can be, if he agrees to wear the Miraculous Medal, give it to him and pray for him, and occasionally try with a kind word to bring him to the point where he begins to love the Mother of God and to fly to her in all his difficulties and temptations. But anyone who sincerely begins to pray to the Immaculata will soon be con¬vinced to go to Confession as well. There is much evil in the world, yet let us consider that the Immaculata is even more powerful: “She will crush the head of the infernal serpent.” Isn’t such a practice somewhat exaggerated? How is it that the founder of the M.I. places so much trust in such an external thing? We should reply, first, that the very origin of the M.I. is closely related to a great miracle that was worked through the Miraculous Medal, namely the conversion of a Jewish man, Alphonse de Ratisbonne. In the year in which the M.I. was founded (1917), the seventy-fifth anniversary of this great miracle was being celebrated in Rome. Young Brother Maximil¬ian had already asked himself the question long before that: Is it possible that our enemies should display such activity and gain superior strength, while we remain idle, without getting down to work? Do we not have even stronger weapons, namely the protec¬tion of heaven and of the Immaculate Virgin? He found out the answer on that memorable twentieth of January, when the superior of the house presented to them the story of the impenitent Jew’s conversion as a theme for meditation. In that medita¬tion, as Father Pal, his friend and co-founder of the M.I. attests, the Saint received the inspiration to found a knighthood in honor of the Immaculata, which chose the Miraculous Medal as its emblem and shield for the future Knights. From that day on, Brother Maximilian often visited the church of Sant’Andrea delle Fratte in order to pray before the altar where Alphonse de Ratisbonne had converted. He also chose that altar as the one upon which he would offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass for the first time after his priestly ordination. Furthermore Fr. Maximilian often used to tell his friars about truly extraordinary incidents that he himself had experienced with the Mirac¬ulous Medal. For example, one time while he was recuperating in Zako¬pane he tried to convert a young Freethinker who proudly called him¬self “the Heretic”. All arguments were in vain. Nevertheless, out of courtesy he accept¬ed the Miraculous Medal. Immediately afterwards I suggested that he make a confession. “I am not prepared. By no means,” was his reply. But … at that very moment he fell on his knees, as though impelled by a higher power. The confession began; the young man wept like a child. The Immaculata had won. …. \Naturally, the cause of this miraculous change in a human heart was not the medal itself as a physical object, but rather the Immaculata, who attaches her special graces to the wearing of the Miraculous Medal. And there were many, many such incidents in the life of St. Maximilian. Therefore: Distribute her Medal, wherever there is an opportunity: to chil¬dren, so that they will always wear it around their necks; to the elderly and the youth, so that they, under her protection, might have enough strength to resist the temptations and falls that par¬ticularly beset them in our times. And also to those who do not go to Church, or who are afraid to go to Confession, who make fun of religious practices, who laugh at the truths of the faith, who are mired in a moral swamp or are living outside the Church in heresy – to all of these people you absolutely must offer the Medal of the Immaculata and ask them to wear it, but then fervently beg the Immaculata also for their conversion. Many people make use of another expedient when someone is reluctant to accept the Miracu¬lous Medal. They just sew it secretly into his or her clothing and pray for that person, and sooner or later the Immaculata will show what she is capable of. The Miraculous Medal is the ammunition of the M.I.

Can Joseph Barnabas be extended to incorporate Joseph Barsabbas?

by Damien F. Mackey “Now these are either unconnected similarities, or else we are to connect the dots to see that “Joseph called Barsabbas”, who was not chosen to be an apostle, but because he was such an encouragement, Barsabbas is now called Barnabas by the apostles!” Perry Dox The first step was to identify Joseph Barnabas, a Cyprian Levite, with the rich young man of the Gospels: Was Apostle Barnabas the Gospels’ ‘rich young man’? (1) Was Apostle Barnabas the Gospels' 'rich young man'? This I was able to do thanks to an enlightening article by Harry Whittaker: http://www.christadelphianbooks.org/haw/sitg/sitgb52.html The second step was to identify Joseph Barnabas, the rich young man of the Gospels, with Joseph of Arimathea: Joseph of Arimathea a perfect match for Apostle Barnabas as the Gospels’ ‘rich young man’ (1) Joseph of Arimathea a perfect match for Apostle Barnabas as the Gospels' 'rich young man' A main challenge here was geographical. Now, can we take a third step, by identifying Joseph Barnabas, the rich young man, with Joseph Barsabbas. I had wondered about that this morning (27th November, 2025), and then almost immediately found the following article which attempts just such an identification: PerryDox – BeJustAChristian » Was Barnabas, Barsabbas? Was Barnabas, Barsabbas? Was Barnabas, Barsabbas? The Bible doesn’t directly say so, but the Bible doesn’t directly many things. Such is where we learn implications and inferences, patterns of narrative storytelling, and such. So, does the Holy Spirit imply such is true by how each narrative unfolds? If they are the same individual, the Bible introduces them both in ways which I believe suggests we are to infer they are. This isn’t just an intellectual game of “what if”. If they are the same man, there is a great spiritual, dare I say “encouraging”, lesson to be imitated. Let’s notice a few facts from their “introduction” narratives (Acts 1:13-26; Acts 4:36-37) 1. Both are named Joseph. 2. Their nicknames are similar – Barnabas and Barsabbas in spelling. 3. Both nicknames are similar in meaning because they mean, “Son of”: the Sabbath or Rest; and Encouragement. 4. Similar language is used in describing them: “Joseph called Barsabbas”; “Joseph…the one called…Barnabas”. 5. Both narratives involve land being bought or sold: “Now this man acquired a field” (Acts 1:8). That would be Judas and the land was a burial place for the poor. In Acts 4:37, Barnabas sold a field and brought the money and laid it as the feet of the apostles for poor saints. Barnabas is unlike the apostle who needed replacing. 6. A final connection is both scenes involve the apostles. In Acts 1, Barsabbas is chosen along with Matthias to possibly replace Judas. However, he is not chosen to be the replacement. Then notice in Acts 4, Joseph is called Barnabas BY THE APOSTLES. This means, “Barnabas” is a new nickname. If they are the same man, the group he wasn’t chosen to be one of, ends up changing his nickname from Barsabbas to Barnabas! Later on, Barnabas is selected to accompany two men carrying encouraging news to the Gentile churches. One of these two men was named, Justus called Barsabbas (Acts 15:22). Could this other Barsabbas be the brother of Joseph called Barsabbas who is possibly Joseph called Barnabas? Now these are either unconnected similarities, or else we are to connect the dots to see that “Joseph called Barsabbas”, who was not chosen to be an apostle, but because he was such an encouragement, Barsabbas is now called Barnabas by the apostles! Do you see the encouraging lesson? Even when we are not chosen, be there for those who are, and continue to do what you can. Encourage others. Encourage the ones called. Wait your turn. And finally, who does the Holy Spirit lead Luke to write about more – Matthias or Barnabas who I believe was Barsabbas. ….

Joseph of Arimathea a perfect match for Apostle Barnabas as the Gospels’ ‘rich young man’

by Damien F. Mackey It remains to be determined if we can reconcile the geography – the fact that we have Joseph of Arimathea, on the one hand, while, on the other hand, Joseph Barnabas was from Cyprus. Here I take some of the key points that were picked up about the ‘rich young man’ of the Gospels in the article: Was Apostle Barnabas the Gospels’ ‘rich young man’? (2) Was Apostle Barnabas the Gospels' 'rich young man'? and now apply them also to Joseph of Arimathea. 1. His name was Joseph. Acts 4:36: “Joseph … whom the apostles called Barnabas …”. John 19:38: “After this, Joseph of Arimathea, who was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, asked Pilate to let him take away the body of Jesus”. 2. He was rich. Mark 10:22: “When he heard this, he was shocked and went away grieving, for he had many possessions”. Matthew 27:57: “There came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who also was a disciple of Jesus.” 3. He was a good man. Acts 11:24: “[Barnabas] was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and faith …”. Luke 23:50: “Now there was a man named Joseph … a good and upright man …”. 4. He was a seeker after righteousness. Mark 10:17: ‘Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?’ Mark 15:43: “Joseph of Arimathea … who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God …”. 5. He was a Levite, and a ruler in the Sanhedrin. Luke 18:18: “A certain ruler [member of the Sanhedrin] asked him, ‘Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?’” Acts 4:36: “Joseph, a Levite …”. Mark 15:43: “Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Sanhedrin …”. (Possibly, therefore, a Levite). 6. Gave over his property. Acts 4:36-37: “Joseph … sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet”. Mark 15:46: “So Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb”. Readers may perhaps be able to suggest further points of comparison. It remains to be determined if we can reconcile the geography – the fact that we have Joseph of Arimathea, on the one hand, while, on the other hand, Joseph Barnabas was from Cyprus (Acts 4:36: “Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus …”). We well know where Cyprus was, and still is. So, what about Arimathea? Fortunately, for our purposes, “the exact site [of Arimathea] remains uncertain”. Thus, for instance: Bible Map: Arimathea Arimathea is believed to be located in the region of Ramathaim-Zophim in the hill-country of Ephraim, which is associated with the modern village of Beit Rima, about 2 miles north of Timnah. Other theories suggest it may correspond to Rentis, located twenty miles northwest of Jerusalem, or Ramleh, on the road from Jaffa to Jerusalem. The exact site remains uncertain, with various interpretations of its location. Arimathea - Encyclopedia of The Bible - Bible Gateway ARIMATHEA ăr’ ə mə the ə (̓Αριμαθαία; KJV, ASV ARIMATHAEA). The native town of Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Sanhedrin who, after the Crucifixion, obtained the body of Jesus and placed it in his own unused tomb (Matt 27:57-60; Mark 15:43; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38). It is mentioned in the NT only in connection with the story of Joseph of Arimathea. The exact site is uncertain …. Arimathea - Wikipedia Arimathea or Arimathaea (Koine Greek: Ἀριμαθέα) or Harimathaea or Harimathea (Ἁριμαθαία, Harimathaía) was a purported city of Judea. It was the reported home of Joseph of Arimathea, who appears in all four canonical Gospel accounts of the Passion of Jesus for having donated his new tomb outside Jerusalem to receive the body of Jesus (see Matt. 27:57–59; Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:50–53; John 19:38–40). There is no external evidence for the existence of Arimathea …. Given such negative conclusions about the location of Arimathea, can we, in accordance with this article, find it situated, instead in Cyprus, from whence hailed Joseph Barnabas the Levite? I believe that we can, thereby wrapping up Joseph of Arimathea with our rich young man, Joseph Barnabas. It is Amathus (Amathea), To my great surprise, I find this comment by Wikipedia (I, only a minute earlier, having never heard that Amathus had been connected with Joseph of Arimathea): Amathus - Wikipedia “Amathus is an ancient city located on the southern coast of Cyprus, known for its historical significance and archaeological remains. It is believed to be the legendary home of Joseph of Arimathea, who is reported to have donated his tomb to receive the body of Jesus after his crucifixion”. While I think that this is correct, that Amathus was the home of our composite Joseph, has Wikipedia got its wires crossed here?

Sunday, November 23, 2025

Hope after suicide – the Divine Mercy

“We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. … God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives”. Catechism of the Catholic Church We read at: Divine Mercy: A Catholic Response to Suicide — Joy In Truth this consoling article by Victoria Gisondi (2019): Divine Mercy: A Catholic Response to Suicide Photo by Claudia Aracama. …. After my brother’s suicide, I spent Lent crying before the Blessed Sacrament. Everything was thrown into disorder. Was there hope? The Catholic response to these life-shattering events is Divine Mercy. Yes, there’s always hope. …. My brother took his life. It happened in January. His death was an earthquake, uprooting any sense of safety and stability I formerly had. I have not gone through the stages of grief in order. There is no order to disorder. And suicide is so terribly disordered. It creates complicated grief in the casualties it leaves behind. It wasn’t at all like my father’s death by cancer five years before. This death was violent and shocking. It was mysterious and horrible in that it was deliberate and self-imposed. Families are often torn asunder and scattered after death. The secondary wounds can be more painful than the original one. Suicide compounds that. Thoughts and dreams are invaded with manic ruminations and rescue fantasies. Those thoughts spill over into conversation and conversation turns into blame. We were seven siblings. I was between the two boys. Three sisters stopped talking to two sisters. The last living brother kept himself far removed. A narcissistic ex spouse pushed the right buttons from the sidelines, enjoying the show. The fault lines in our fragile foundation cracked irreversibly. Our mother immediately sought refuge in the sacraments. She spent hours in adoration and at daily mass. As for me, I wanted to escape the present moment. The reality that I could not rewind time was too painful. I drank a lot in those days. A priest at confession told me to enter the desert with Jesus. I was a bitter swamp of sorrow, alcohol and rejection. A desert with Jesus sounded like a welcome oasis from a swamp—clean and dry. So, lent was spent crying before the Blessed Sacrament. At mass was where I felt closest to my father and brother. The passion, death and resurrection of Christ no longer separate the body. I was now putting my faith into practice. If we believe these things, then my brother and father were with me together with the whole communion of saints. Do souls in purgatory join us at mass? Do they pray with us and for us? Are they remorseful? I think so. Although I have wept bitterly, I have not despaired for my brother’s salvation. I have offered the words, “Oh my Jesus, forgive us our sins. Save us from the fires of hell, especially those in most need of thy mercy.” Nobody needed God’s mercy more than my brother did right before he pulled the trigger. I offered those words and the words of every chaplet thereafter begging Christ’s mercy and Our Lady’s comfort to my brother in his time of need. He was not a believer. Somewhere along the way he had lost his purpose and his faith. Yet, my mother and I prayed too damned hard for him to be lost. We put our trust in Divine Mercy. My mother reminded me that Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” (He said even as they divided His garments.) My brother did not know what he was doing. He was out of his mind with anxiety and fear. The Catechism of The Catholic Church states: 2282 …Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide. 2283 We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives. Only God knows how culpable my brother was in his desperation. My brother was a self-sacrificing father. He loved deeply and generously. What he lacked in faith he made up for in love. It is therefore fitting that after lent comes Easter. Easter is the celebration of the resurrection. There was no body in the tomb because Christ was occupying it once again—and it wasn’t just his old body patched together, but the glorified version. The Apostles Creed reminds us that we “believe in the resurrection of the body.” We talk about heaven as an abstract thing forgetting that we will be reunited with our own flesh and blood one day. This is so comforting. I will see my brother in the flesh again. And I trust I will because of Christ’s Divine Mercy. In His Divine Mercy, we can pray for people after they die. If every consecration at every mass opens a window to an ever-present moment in salvation history, then my brother’s fatal moment is not limited to a human timeline. It is not out of God’s reach. God is outside of time. My prayer today can retroactively reach my brother yesterday. And because of this, I have hope. Jesus, I trust in you …

Friday, November 21, 2025

Purgatory – a bit like being stuck in a lift

“Being stuck in an elevator is like purgatory, you hope you are going up to heaven but …”. Pope Francis Many of us would know that being stuck in a lift is no fun. Nor would being stuck in Purgatory be any fun. Pope Stuck in Elevator—Now Understands Purgatory | The Spoof Amiko Aventurista 2 September, 2019 At an impromptu news conference, Vatican Spokesperson Alessandro Gisotti explained to an overflow crowd of reporters that Pope Francis was late to celebrate Sunday mass due to an elevator malfunction. Gisotti went to great length to say the Pope was fine. But, after answering several tough questions, it was apparent Gisotti was irritated, and at one point snapped, “Da Papa, he is ok, whats ser mater fo you …”. Apparently, Pope Francis was stuck between floors for 25 minutes, until workers were able to restore power and pry, the praying, pontiff. “Whoa, da was a close one!” were the first words heard from the Pope upon release. Pope Francis, born Jorge Mario Bergoglio, was on his way to mass when the power failed at the Vatican. The Vatican does not have a backup generator, because, according to Gisotti, “…for wha we need da, whats ser mater fo you.” During mass the Pope joked with the faithful that his special pope powers did not work in the elevator. “I had no wifi bars on my God mobile, ha ha.” Francis went on to laugh about it with the congregation. “God did not recognize me; he thought it was another … Jorge from Buenos Aires asking for yet another favor. Being stuck in an elevator is like purgatory, you hope you are going up to heaven but …......” A reminder this month of November, particularly, to pray and make sacrifices for the Holy Souls in Purgatory.

Thursday, November 20, 2025

An Astronomy that has meaning!

by Damien F. Mackey G. Mackinlay, following through Isaac Newton’s principle that the Jewish teachers frequently made figurative allusions to things that were actually present, suggested that “other allusions” unspecified by Newton, “such, for instance, as the comparison of the Baptist to the shining of the Morning Star”, must also indicate that the object of reference was present. Introduction As discussed previously, some laudable attempts have been made by scholars to identify the Nativity Star of the Magi. The complexity of such an enterprise is apparent from Frederick (“Rick”) A. Larson’s question: Could the star have been a meteorite; a comet; a supernova; a planet; or a new star? Whilst lawyer, Larson, will favour, for the Magi Star, the planet Jupiter, the two other scholars considered in my article: Solid attempts to interpret the biblical sky (3) Solid attempts to interpret the biblical sky | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu Bruce Killian and G. Mackinlay, have opted for the planet Venus. Though Venus, again, will even play a rôle in Larson’s view of a bright conjunction with Jupiter. Frederick Larson is nothing if not thorough. He has picked up what he has called “The Nine Points of Christ’s Star” that he believes to be the key pieces in the puzzle of the sacred text, and he says he will not be satisfied with a final scenario that does not accommodate all nine of these. https://youtu.be/HIrwQJpD_OA Such is Larson’s thoroughness that even eight points for him will not suffice. His major difficulty will be with the fact that the Magi Star had stopped. But then it occurred to him that the planets, due to the optical phenomenon known as “retrograde motion”, actually appear to stop. Mars does a loop; Venus does a backflip; Jupiter inscribes a shallow circle. Important Chronological Notes While Larson has his Nine Points, I have interlaced previous articles on this subject with four Chronological Notes, the most relevant one here being this first one, on retrocalculation: * A very important comment on chronology (D. Mackey): Studies on the Star of the Magi and on other archaeoastronomical issues, with their retrocalculations of the night skies back into BC time, assume that our AD time is fixed, and that we actually live, today, a little over 2000 years after the Nativity of Jesus Christ. Not until revisionists like Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky came along were the standard BC calculations and ‘Dark Ages’ seriously questioned, and that has led to scholars today also rigorously testing AD time and its ‘Dark Ages’. See, e.g., Dr. Hans-Ulrich Niemitz: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/volatile/Niemitz-1997.pdf and Jan Beaufort’s summary: http://www.cybis.se/forfun/dendro/hollstein/hollstein0/beaufort/index.htm I, whilst not necessarily agreeing with all of what these writers have to say, think that there is enough in their theses, however, and that of those to whom they refer, to prompt one seriously to question the accuracy of the received AD dates. (I have since done this in various articles). Applying this note to Larson’s thesis, for instance, I have written: One of Larson’s nine points, his first in fact, has to do with this tricky subject of chronology. And this area of research may be his weak link, and may actually vitiate his whole argument. Larson has determined, based on an ancient version of the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, that the Birth of the Messiah had occurred in relation to the reign of Herod in 3-2 BC (***). *** A third chronological note This all becomes quite irrelevant, however, if I am correct in my view of Judas Maccabeus belonging to the approximate time of the Nativity of Jesus Christ …. Next I introduced: Bruce Killian, Venus The Star Of Bethlehem, whilst warmly praising Larson’s effort, has offered his own criticisms of Larson’s “The Star of Bethlehem” (2021): http://www.scripturescholar.com/VenusStarofBethlehem.pdf …. Fredrick Larson is a lawyer and does an excellent job of selling the wrong identification of the Star of Bethlehem. He identifies the Star of Bethlehem as Jupiter. He also notes that Jupiter is the largest of the planets, but that was unknown to the ancients who would see Venus as the most important because it was the brightest. He sees the king of the Jews identified in a month long shallow loop of Jupiter near Regulus the king star in the constellation of Leo. It does not “crown” this star but loops near it as it appears to loop like a Spiro graph drawing continuously in the sky. He then observed a close conjunction of Venus and Jupiter to indicate the conception of Jesus and he claims these two stars coming together was the brightest star anyone had ever seen. The problem is that Venus at its inferior conjunction is brighter than these two stars together. Finally he saw a link between the woman in Revelation 12 giving birth, but he fails to mention this happens each year and that it was not visible because it was during the day. He further presents the star guiding the magi to Bethlehem when they already knew that was where they were to go, but not identifying which of the many boys in Bethlehem was the newborn king. The stopping of Jupiter is when it reverses and goes into retrograde motion, but this point really does not even point to Bethlehem because when do you determine that this has occurred, visually you can’t, and when during the night? A miracle—many believe the star that guided the magi was simply a miracle. A light clearly called a star. Today we live at a time that planes fly over head all the time, God could have done this but why say a star guided them rather than an angel. It is clear from the information presented in this article that God was able from the foundation of the world to use the lights He set in the sky to guide the magi. I believe that most who hold this view do not recognize the special attributes of the planet Venus. These stars could be seen by all, but were faint, one would only see them if they were paying close attention. .... [End of quote] Bruce Killian would agree with Frederick Larson, though, about the Divine use of easy-to-read star tableaux. Regarding Killian’s hard BC dates (days and months), I added, recall my earlier warning about retrocalculations. George Mackinlay’s major contribution By far the most important contribution of the three, though, so I believe, is that of Lieutenant-Colonel G. Mackinlay, The Magi: How they recognized Christ's star (Hodder and Stoughton, 1907). He, too, had determined that the Star of Bethlehem was a planet, namely Venus in his case. He did not, back in his day, have the advantage of modern computer software, as has Larson, but was reliant on astronomical charts to put a date to the circumstances of Venus that he had determined had pertained to the chronology of Jesus Christ. Mackinlay - like Larson and others, relying heavily on the Scriptures - showed just how significant Venus was as “the morning star” and “the evening star”, and he quoted texts from the prophet Micah; including that fateful text without which King Herod (the Godfather of today’s abortionists) would never have condemned to death the children of Bethlehem. George Mackinlay also showed through Micah that the Baptist was symbolised as the morning star, heralding as it does the dawn (Christ). He was able to determine an internal chronology of Jesus Christ, and the Baptist, based on the periods of shining of the morning star, all this in connection with historical data, seasons and Jewish feasts. As said, the inherent weakness in such reconstructions as Larson’s, and even Mackinlay’s, is their presuming that the conventional dates for Herod and Jesus Christ are basically accurate - just as 539 BC is now wrongly presumed to be a certain date for King Cyrus of Persia - and that it is, therefore, simply a matter of finding an astronomical scenario within that conventional period and then being able to refine the dates using sophisticated modern scientific data. Happily, though, neither Larson’s nor Mackinlay’s scenario has that odd situation of the shepherds watching their sheep out in the open, in winter, that critics seem to latch on to every Christmas in order to ridicule St. Matthew’s account. Whilst I do not accept that Larson, Killian, or Mackinlay have managed, despite their valiant attempts, to identify the Magi Star, the contribution of Mackinlay on the chronological importance of the planet Venus I consider to be ground-breaking. Neither Killian’s nor Larson’s efforts - worthwhile though they assuredly are - can, I believe, match the coherent consistency of Lieutenant-Colonel G. Mackinlay’s model, that shows a Divine plan at work in every major phase of the life of Jesus Christ. Mackinlay was able to demonstrate how perfectly the eight year cycles of Venus wrap around the events of the life of Christ (who is also the “Sun of righteousness”), shining throughout the joyful occasions, but hidden during episodes of sadness and darkness. But not only does the Divine artist make use of the planet Venus in this regard. The Moon, too, in its various phases, and also the seasons (reflecting now abundance, now paucity), as Mackinlay has shown, also serve as chronological markers. Mackinlay’s harmonious theory has, to my way of thinking, the same sort of inherent consistency as has Florence and Kenneth Wood’s explanation, in Homer’s Secret ‘Iliad’ (http://www.amazon.com/Homers-Secret-Iliad-Night-Decoded/dp/0719557801), that the battles between the Greeks and Trojans as described in The Iliad mirror the movements of stars and constellations as they appear to fight for ascendancy in the sky. Since George Mackinlay’s thesis is far too detailed to do justice to it here, with all of its diagrams and detailed astronomical explanations always interwoven with the Scriptures, the interested reader is strongly advised to read the entire book. Mackinlay commences with the example of Saint John the Baptist and his association also with the morning star. (This symbolism has an Old Testament precedent, too, in Joseph’s astronomical dream, Genesis 37:9-10, according to which people are represented by heavenly bodies). Let us begin. Simile of St. John the Baptist to the Morning Star The figurative use of the morning star in reference to the Baptist is evident from the prophet Malachi’s description of the Christ’s forerunner: “My messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me” (Malachi 3:1); because, as noted by Mackinlay (p. 39), “the same figure of speech is supported by Malachi 4:2, where the Christ is spoken of as the Sun of righteousness, who shall arise with healing in His wings”. That this definitely is the right association of scriptural ideas is shown by the reference made by Zechariah, the father of St. John the Baptist (Luke 1:76), to these two passages in the Old Testament. Thus, on the occasion of St. John’s circumcision, Zechariah prophesied of him: “You shall go before the face of the lord”, and, two verses later, he likens the coming of the Christ to “the Dayspring [or Sunrising] from on high”, which shall visit us. We note further that this same passage from Malachi, with reference to the Baptist, was quoted also by Mark the Evangelist (1:2); by the angel of the Lord who had appeared to Zechariah before his son’s birth (Luke 1:17); by the Baptist himself (John 3:28); by Jesus during his ministry (Matthew 11:10; Luke 7:27); and by the Apostle Paul at Antioch (Acts 13:24-25). These quotations are all the more remarkable because they were made at considerable intervals of time the one from the other. Jesus used the words more than three decades after they had been spoken to Zechariah by the angel, announcing that Christ’s forerunner would be born. And St. Paul referred to the very same passage in the Book of Malachi some fourteen years after Jesus had spoken them. St. John the Evangelist wrote of the Baptist: “The same came for a witness, that he might bear witness to the Light, that all might believe through him. He was not the Light, but came that he might bear witness to the Light” (John 1:7, 8). George Mackinlay, commenting on this passage (p. 41), says that “The Light par excellence is the Sun, and the Morning Star, which reflects its light, is not the light itself, but is a witness of the coming great luminary”. All four Evangelists record the Baptist as stating that the Christ would come after him: a statement in perfect harmony with the comparison of himself to the morning star (see e.g. Matthew 3:2; Mark 1:7; Luke 3:16 and John 1:15). On three memorable occasions St. John the Baptist preceded and also testified to Jesus: viz. some months before Jesus’s birth (Luke 1:41, 44); shortly before Jesus’s public ministry (Matthew 3:11); and by his violent death at the hands of Herod, about a year before the Crucifixion (Matthew 14:10). Alluding to the Baptist’s martyrdom, Jesus said: “Even so shall the Son of Man also suffer” (Matthew 17:12, 13). The figure of St. John the Baptist as the morning star is therefore a most appropriate one. Object of Reference Always Present George Mackinlay, following through Isaac Newton’s principle that the Jewish teachers frequently made figurative allusions to things that were actually present, suggested (p. 56) that “other allusions” unspecified by Newton, “such, for instance, as the comparison of the Baptist to the shining of the Morning Star”, must also indicate that the object of reference was present. “We may reasonably conclude”, he added, “that the planet was then to be seen in the early morning before sunrise”. Mackinlay realised that if Newton’s principle really worked in this instance, it would enable him to “find an indication of the dates of the ministries of Christ and of John, and consequently of the crucifixion”. Making use of calculations made by expert astronomers at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, Mackinlay, himself a professional observer, drew up a chart recording the periods when Venus appeared as the morning star for the period AD 23-36 – “a period which covers all possible limits for the beginning and ending of Christ’s ministry”. {One will need to refer to Mackinlay’s own chart reproducing the astronomical data that he had received. I have already listed various chronological precautions that I believe must seriously affect dating methods, including Mackinlay’s}. From Mackinlay’s diagram we learn that the morning star shines continuously on the average for about seven and a half lunar months at the end of each night, giving at least an hour’s notice of sunrise; but if we include the period when it is still visible, but gives shorter notice, the time of shining may be lengthened to about nine lunar months. An eight years’ cycle containing five periods of the shining of the morning star - useful for practical purposes - exists between the apparent movements of the sun and Venus, correct to within a little over two days. The morning star is conventionally estimated (see previous comment on chronology) to have begun to shine at the vernal equinox, AD 25, and eight years afterwards, viz. in AD 33, it began again its period of shining at the same season of the year; and so, generally, at all years separated from each other by eight years, the shinings of the morning star were during the same months. From the historical data available, it is conventionally agreed that the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ occurred between the years AD 28 – 33. Of necessity, then, the three and a half years’ ministry (Mackinlay is of the view that Christ’s public ministry lasted “the longer period” of between three and four years, whilst he also discusses “the shorter period” of less than three years) would have begun in one of the years AD 24-29 (conventional dating). We shall proceed now to examine in more detail those passages in the Gospels that refer to St. John the Baptist as the morning star. (a) Beginning of the Baptist’s Ministry At the very beginning of his ministry, the Baptist referred to the prophecy in Malachi 3:1, in which he himself is likened to the morning star, when he said: “He who comes after me is mightier than I” (Matthew 3:2, etc.). Now, according to Isaac Newton’s principle of scriptural interpretation, that figures are taken from things actually present, the morning star would have been shining when the Baptist began his ministry; thus the witness in the sky, and the human messenger, each gave a prolonged heralding of the One who was to come. If we refer to the Gospel of Matthew (3:8, 10 and 12), we find St. John the Baptist using three figures of speech at the beginning of his ministry: 1. “Now is the axe laid to the root of the trees” – presumably to mark the unfruitful trees to be cut down (see also Matthew 7:19). 2. “Every tree that does not bring forth good fruit is cut down …”. 3. “His winnowing fork is in his hand, and He will clear his threshing floor, and gather his wheat into the granary, but the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire”. As Mackinlay has noted (p. 60), these three figures used by St. John all refer to the time of harvest, which would have taken place within the month of the Passover, “as the place where John began his ministry was the deep depression ‘round about Jordan’ (Luke 3:3), where the harvest is far earlier than on the Judaean hills”. Now, according to Mackinlay’s chart, the morning star was shining during the month after the Passover (April or May) only in the years AD 24, 25 and 27, in the period AD 24-29. Hence we conclude that St. John the Baptist began his ministry in one of these three years. (b) Beginning of Jesus’s Ministry The Baptist again bore witness just before the beginning of Jesus Christ’s public ministry, when he proclaimed to the people: “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, for He was before me’” (John 1:15); and he repeated that statement the next day (John 1:30) – again bearing out the simile of the morning star and the rising sun. George Mackinlay, analysing what time of year this was, is certain that it must have been a good deal later than the beginning of St. John’s own ministry; “probably at least four or five months, to allow time for the Baptist to be known and to attract public attention”, he says (p. 61). It could not have been earlier than the latter part of August, he goes on; and “it must also have been long before the following Passover”, for several events in Jesus’s ministry “occurred before that date”. Mackinlay suggests that Jesus Christ most likely began his public ministry, “which we must date from the marriage in Cana of Galilee”, before November, “because there would have been leaves on the fig tree” when Nathanael came from under it (John 1:47, 48) (pp. 61-62). Jesus approvingly called Nathanael “an Israelite indeed” (John 1:47). Unlike the hypocrites who loved to pray so as to be seen by men (Matthew 6:5), Nathanael had carefully hidden himself for quiet prayer under cover of his fig tree, and so he was greatly surprised that Jesus had seen him there. In Scripture, the state of the vegetation of the fig tree is used to indicate the seasons of the year (see Matthew 24:32). We are informed that when the branch of the fig tree “becomes tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near”. From the Song of Songs (2:13), we read of the season when “the fig tree puts forth her green figs”; and the fading of the leaf of the fig tree is mentioned in Isaiah 34:4. From this scriptural detail, relating to seasons, Mackinlay is able to narrow even further the choice of years (from AD 24-29) for the beginning of the two ministries. “We must reject AD 24, for the morning star definitely was not shining between the months August to November of that year”, he writes (p. 63). This leaves us with only two options, viz. AD 25 and 27. At this stage Mackinlay makes a further assumption – previously he had asked the reader to assume for the time being that “the shorter period’ choice for the length of Jesus’s ministry be put aside – in relation to the date AD 27. Whilst admitting that AD 27 would fulfil the necessary conditions given above “if we suppose that Christ began His ministry within a month or six weeks from the time of John’s first appearance”, Mackinlay elected to put aside this date for reasons that would become apparent later on. “He must increase, but I must decrease”. The next reference to St. John the Baptist under the figure that we are considering is: “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30). According to F. Meyer, the Baptist “knew that he was not the Light, but sent to bear witness of it, not the Sun, but the Star that announces the dawn …” (Life and Light of Men, p. 42). St. John’s words may have foreshadowed his imprisonment as well, as Mackinlay thinks, for “they were uttered after the first Passover, which took place, according to the assumption which we have just made, in AD 26, but before the Baptist was cast into prison” (pp. 63-64). Consequently, he adds, we may assume that St. John the Baptist spoke these words about the beginning or the middle of April. Meyer may not have been correct, however, in concluding his otherwise beautiful metaphor above by saying that “the Star”, which represents the Baptist, and which “announces the dawn”, also “wanes in the growing light” of the Sun. The waning of a celestial body appears to be the scriptural symbolism for the destruction of wickedness. The seeming annihilation of the stars caused by the rising of the sun, was an ancient figure of speech used to typify the triumph of good over the powers of darkness and evil. George Mackinlay suggests that this may be the image intended by St. Paul when he spoke of “The lawless one, whom the Lord shall bring to nought by the manifestation (in Greek, “shining forth”) of His coming” (II Thessalonians 2:8); and he adds that the figure of the rising sun extinguishing the light of the stars “is associated with conflict, punishment and judgment, which certainly did not represent the relationship between Christ and His forerunner John” (p. 65). Undoubtedly, rather, the impression that the Evangelist was intending to convey in this instance was one of the morning star decreasing in the sense of its non-appearance in the sky at the end of each night, as the increasing power of the sun’s heat and light became manifest. The planet Venus moves further and further away from its position as morning star, and increases its angular distance on the other side of the sun as the evening star. According to Mackinlay, in the year 26 AD Venus began to appear as the evening star “shortly before midsummer” (p. 64). Interestingly, George Mackinlay’s chart indicates that it is the more probable explanation of the non-appearance of Venus in the sky at the end of the night as being the more appropriate figure to depict the decreasing of St. John the Baptist, which is fulfilled in the circumstance under consideration. Imprisonment of St. John the Baptist It is likely, as W. Sanday has noted (Outlines from the Life of Christ, p. 49), that the imprisonment of the Baptist took place after the Passover, and before the harvest of AD 26 (John 4:35); and soon after St. John had stated that “He must increase, but I must decrease”. Sanday considered that the events surrounding the Passover (of John 2:13-4:45) did not occupy more than three or four weeks, and when Jesus arrived in Galilee (see Matthew 4:12) the impression of his public acts at Jerusalem was still fresh. Sanday thought that his estimation of the date of the Baptist’s imprisonment was “somewhat strengthened by the fact that the Synoptic Gospels record no events after Christ’s Baptism and before John was delivered up, except the Temptation (Matthew 4:12; Mark 1:14 see also Luke 4:14); and because the Apostle Paul said that “as John was fulfilling his course, he said, ‘What do you suppose that I am? I am not He. No, but after me One is coming, the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie’.” (Acts 13:25)”. These words tend to place the end of the Baptist’s career rather early, because the message here referred to was proclaimed by him when he announced the Messiah, in autumn of AD 25 (John 1:26, 27). Following George Mackinlay (p. 64), we therefore estimate that St. John the Baptist was imprisoned about the middle or end of April, AD 26, when, as is apparent from Mackinlay’s chart, the morning star, appropriately, was not shining. “He was a burning and shining lamp” The next reference to St. John the Baptist under this simile is a very striking one. Jesus speaks of him as “a burning and shining lamp; and you were willing to rejoice for a season in his light”. (John 5:35). Mackinlay has suggested that, because the definite article is used twice in the Greek version of this passage, “it therefore seems to indicate some particular light” (p. 67). Though St. John was in prison, Jesus said of him at this time: “You sent to John, and both was and still is a witness to the truth” (John 5:33). Regarding the phrase “to rejoice for a season in his light”, Dr. Harpur tells of a custom in the East for travellers by night to sing songs at the rising of the morning star because it announces that the darkness and dangers of the night are coming to an end (as referred to by Mackinlay, p. 68). In effect, then, Jesus was saying that the disciples of the Baptist were willing to rejoice in the light of the herald of day, which shines only by reflecting the light of the coming sun; but should rejoice now ever more since the sun itself had arisen – since “the Light of the World” had actually come. This interpretation harmonises with Jesus’s statement recorded a few verses on (John 5:39) that “you search the Scriptures … which bear witness of Me”; the inference again being – now that I have come, you ought to receive Me. All through this conversation, Mackinlay notes, “the subject is that of bearing witness” – by his own works; by the Father; by the Baptist; by the Scriptures and by Moses – “the whole pointing to the necessity of receiving the One to whom such abundant witness had been borne”. The time when Jesus made this particular statement about the Scriptures bearing witness to Him was just after the un-named feast of John 5:1, and before the Passover of John 6:4. It is often assumed, George Mackinlay informs us, that this un-named feast was Passover – but some have opted for naming it the feast of Purim, fixed several centuries earlier by the command of Queen Esther (Esther 9:32); or even the feast of Weeks at the beginning of June (p. 69). This does not affect our chronological scheme, however, for we learn from Mackinlay’s chart that the morning star was appropriately shining on each one of these feasts in AD 27. The Crucifixion But when we come to the last Passover, in the year AD 29, the herald of the dawn had just disappeared. George Mackinlay shows (p. 81) that the disappearance of the planet Venus harmonises perfectly with the record of the complete isolation of Jesus Christ at his Crucifixion, given as follows: (1) The disappearance of the witness John by death (Matthew 14:10). The forsaking of Our Lord by all his disciples (Matthew 26:56; Psalm 38:11; 49:20). (3The absence of any record of a ministry of angels, as after the Temptation (Matthew 4:11). The hiding of God’s face, when Christ uttered the cry: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46; Psalm 22:1). (5) In nature, the Sun’ light failed (Luke 23:45). (6) Being daytime, the Paschal Full Moon was, of course, below the horizon. Most relevant to our subject also is the following chapter from George Mackinlay’s book: Chapter Three: “A Star … out of Jacob” Mackinlay commences by establishing “the greater probability” of the following two facts: (a) That the Nativity of Jesus Christ was at least five months after the beginning of a period of shining of the morning star, and (b) That the Nativity was at a Feast of Tabernacles (p. 140). Firstly, we consider Mackinlay’s reason for believing that the Lord’s Nativity was: (a) Five months after a period of shining. To begin with, we must consider what reason there is for supposing that the morning star was shining at all when Jesus Christ was born. In Malachi 3:1, as we have seen already, St. John the Baptist is referred to under the figure of the morning star, as the forerunner of the Christ. But the morning star itself may be called “My messenger who shall prepare the way before Me”. It is not unusual for inanimate objects thus to be spoken of in Scripture, for instance in Psalm 88:38 we have “the faithful witness in the sky”, and in Psalm 148:3 the sun, moon and stars of light are exhorted to praise God. Consequently, as George Mackinlay has explained it (p. 141), “we can reasonably suppose that the Morning Star was shining at the Nativity”. Furthermore, he adds, if the morning star were the herald of the coming One, it is fitting to imagine that a somewhat prolonged notice should be given; for “it would be more dignified and stately for the one to precede the other by a considerable interval, than that both should come almost together”. We shall find Mackinlay’s supposition of a prolonged heralding by the morning star borne out by the following inference. According to the principle of metaphors being taken from things present, we could infer that the morning star was actually shining when Jesus Christ (in Matthew 11:10), quoting Malachi 3:1, spoke of the Baptist as “My messenger … before My face”. Consistently following the same line of thought, we may reasonably infer that the morning star was also shining more than thirty years earlier when Zechariah quoted the same scriptural verse– i.e. Malachi 3:1 – at the circumcision of his son, John (Luke 1:76). Even had this appropriate passage not been quoted at the time, Mackinlay suggests (p. 142), “we might have inferred that the herald in the sky would harmoniously have been shining at the birth of the human herald”. George Mackinlay further suggests from his inference that both Jesus and John were born when the morning star was shining, that “both must have been born during the same period of its shining”. [He shows this in his charts]. The Annunciation to Mary was made by the angel Gabriel in the sixth month after the announcement to Zechariah (Luke 1:13, 24, 26); and so it follows that the Baptist was born five to six months before Jesus. Since Mackinlay’s charts indicate that the periods of shining are separated from each other by intervals of time greater than six months, then both Jesus and his herald must have been born during the same period of shining. Consequently Jesus Christ was born at least five months after the beginning of a period of shining of the morning star. It will be noticed that some years in Mackinlay’s charts are omitted – this is due simply to lack of space – but no events recorded in the Gospels took place in these omitted years, nor were any of them enrolment (see below) or Sabbath years. (b) At a Feast of Tabernacles The Law, we are told by St. Paul, has “a shadow of the good things to come” (Hebrews 10:1). The various ordinances and feasts of the Old Testament, if properly understood, are found, according to George Mackinlay, “to refer to and foreshadow many events and doctrines of the New Testament” (p. 143). Again, A. Gordon had remarked that: “Many speak slightingly of the types, but they are as accurate as mathematics; they fix the sequence of events in redemption as rigidly as the order of sunrise and noontide is fixed in the heavens” (The Ministry of the Spirit, p. 28). The deductions drawn from Gospel harmonies attest the truth of his statement. We have already observed that the Sabbath Year began at the Feast of Tabernacles; the great feasts of Passover and Weeks following in due course. Jesus’s death took place at the Passover (Matthew 27:50), probably, George Mackinlay believes, “at the very hour when the paschal lambs were killed”. “Our Passover … has been sacrificed, even Christ” (1 Corinthians 5:7); the great Victim foretold during so many ages by the yearly shedding of blood at that feast. The first Passover at the Exodus was held on the anniversary of the day when the promise –accompanied by sacrifice – was given to Abraham, that his seed would inherit the land of Canaan (Exodus 12:41; Genesis 15:8-18). Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the day after the Sabbath after the Passover (John 20:1); the day on which the sheaf of first fruits, promise of the future harvest, was waved before God (Leviticus 23:10, 11). Hence we are told by Saint Paul that as “Christ the first-fruits” (1 Corinthians 15:20. 23) rose, so those who believe in him will also rise afterwards. This day was the anniversary of Israel’s crossing through the “Sea of Reeds” (Exodus 12-14), and, as in the case of the Passover, it was also a date memorable in early history, being the day when the Ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat (Genesis 8:4). The month Nisan, which had been the seventh month, became the first at the Exodus (Exodus 12:2). Thus Christ’s Resurrection was heralded by two most beautiful and fitting types, occurring almost – possibly exactly – on the same day of the year; by the renewed earth emerging from the waters of the Flood, and by the redeemed people emerging from the waters of the “Sea of Reeds”. Mackinlay proceeded to search for any harmonies that there may be between the characteristics of this Feast of Tabernacles and the events recorded in connection with the Nativity. As we have noticed previously, he says (p. 146), there were two great characteristics of the Feast of Tabernacles: 1. Great joy and 2. Living in booths (tents). 1. Great joy. The Israelites were told at this feast, “You shall rejoice before the Lord your God” (Leviticus 23:40), and “You shall rejoice in your feast … you shall be altogether joyful” (Deuteronomy 16:14, 15). King Solomon dedicated his Temple on a Feast of Tabernacles, and the people afterwards were sent away “joyful and glad of heart” (1 Kings 8:2, 66; 2 Chronicles 7:10). There was no public rejoicing at the Nativity of Jesus Christ, however; on the contrary, as George Mackinlay notes, “shortly afterwards Herod was troubled and all Jerusalem with him” (Matthew 2:3). But though He was rejected by the majority, we find the characteristic joy of Tabernacles reflected in the expectant and spiritually-minded souls. Before the Nativity both the Virgin Mary and Elizabeth rejoiced in anticipation of it (Luke 1:38, 42, 44, 46, 47). At the Nativity an angel appeared to the shepherds and brought them good tidings of great joy; and then “suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, ‘Glory to God in the highest’.” The shepherds then came to the infant Saviour and returned “glorifying and praising God” (Luke 2:9-20). Forty days after the Nativity, at the Purification, Simeon, who had been waiting a long time for the consolation of Israel, and the venerable Anna who was a constant worshipper, joined in with their notes of praise and gladness (Luke 2:22-38). And lastly the wise men from the East “rejoiced with exceeding great joy” when they saw the star indicating where the Saviour was, and they came into the house, saw the young Child with his Mother, and presented the gifts that they had brought (Matthew 2:9-11). This “Mother”, the Virgin Mary, is the ultimate “Star” pointing to Jesus Christ, her Son. John Paul II’s encyclical, Redemptoris Mater (1987), is full of allusions to the Blessed Virgin Mary as ‘our fixed point’, or star ‘of reference’. To quote just this one example (# 3): …. The fact that she “preceded” the coming of Christ is reflected every year in the liturgy of Advent. Therefore, if to that ancient historical expectation of the Saviour we compare these years which are bringing us closer to the end of the second Millennium after Christ and to the beginning of the third, it becomes fully comprehensible that in this present period we wish to turn in a special way to her, the one who in the “night” of the Advent expectation began to shine like a true “Morning Star” (Stella Matutina). For just as this star, together with the “dawn,” precedes the rising of the sun, so Mary from the time of her Immaculate Conception preceded the coming of the Saviour, the rising of the “Sun of Justice” in the history of the human race. 2. Living in booths. According to George Mackinlay (pp. 147-148), the living in booths finds a parallel in the language of the Apostle John, when he wrote concerning the Birth of Jesus, “The Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us” (John 1:14); and Our Lord himself used a somewhat similar figure when he spoke of his body thus “Destroy this Temple, and in three days I shall raise it up” (John 2:19) – words misunderstood by his enemies and afterwards quoted against him (Matthew 26:61; 27:40). It was at the Feast of Tabernacles that the glory of God filled the Temple that King Solomon had prepared for Him (2 Chronicles 5:3, 13, 14), and it would seem to have been at the beginning or first day of the feast, the fifteenth day of the month. Consequently, in Mackinlay’s opinion (p. 148) “it would appear to be harmonious that the Advent of the Lord Jesus in the body divinely prepared for him (Hebrews 10:5) should also take place at the same feast and most suitably on the first day of its celebration”. It will be noticed that the glory of God did not cover the tent of meeting when the Israelites were in the wilderness, and did not fill the tabernacle, at the Feast of Tabernacles. But it did so on the first day of the first month of the second year after the departure from Egypt (Exodus 40:17, 34, 35). We must remember that there was no Feast of Tabernacles in the wilderness, nor was the Sabbath Year kept at this stage; but both of these ordinances were to be observed when the Israelites entered into the Promised Land (Exodus 34:22). No agricultural operations were carried out during the forty years of wandering in the wilderness. As the Feast of Tabernacles inaugurated the Sabbath Year, Mackinlay judged (p. 149) that the glory of God filled the temple on the first day of the feast, “as that would be in harmony with what happened in the tabernacle in the wilderness when the glory of the Lord filled it on the first day of the only style of year then observed”. A. Edersheim, writing about the Feast of Tabernacles, says (The Temple, note on p. 272): “It is remarkable how many allusions to this feast occur in the writings of the prophets, as if its types were the goal of all their desires”. For further reading, see my articles: The Magi and the Star that Stopped (3) The Magi and the Star that Stopped and: Magi were not necessarily astronomers or astrologers (3) Magi were not necessarily astronomers or astrologers

Monday, November 10, 2025

Louisiana Governor enthrones Sacred Heart in Governor’s Mansion

Louisiana Governor Enthrones Governor’s Mansion Home Reflections Louisiana Governor Enthrones Governor's Mansion August 3rd, 2024 “It was with great honor as the 57th governor of Louisiana to be entrusted with the historical event of enthroning the Sacred Heart of Jesus over the governor’s mansion; our home and the home of the people. In doing so may our great state and its people remain blessed and under the protection of God for centuries to come!” -Governor Jeff Landry

Saturday, November 8, 2025

Feast of Christ the King – Enthronement of the Sacred Heart

“When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, but finds none. Then it says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when it comes, it finds the house empty, swept, and put in order. Then it goes and brings with it seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there, and the last state of that person is worse than the first. So also will it be with this evil generation”. Matthew 12:43-45 While there are various plausible interpretations of this parable, one, suggested in a sermon, is that, while the soul has now become clean, it is empty. So there is nothing there to resist the incursion of a band of powerful and determined demons. The perfect antidote to this parlous situation would be to have the Sacred Heart of Jesus enthroned as King in the spiritual epicentre of one’s being. Then, even if Satan himself should come with all of his legion of fallen angels, he would not be able to gain entrance there. The soul would remain perfectly secure. Christ is King! Enthronement to the Sacred Heart Posted by Theology of Home on November 23, 2024 By Emily Malloy It is hard to believe that the liturgical calendar is already coming to an end with the Solemnity of Christ the King. It serves as a dramatic close to the Church's calendar year. On this feast, the Church celebrates the eternal kingship of Jesus Christ over all of creation. We often think of God's omnipotence over all of the universe in times of turmoil and find peace. Less considered is Christ's kingship over our homes. I am referencing the practice of the Sacred Heart Enthronement within the home, a devotion that began in 1908 by a French priest. Jesus revealed to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque that He “will bless every place in which the image of my Sacred Heart shall be exposed and honored.” Making the solemn acknowledgement of Christ's kingship over our homes serves as a beautiful way to rightly order our place (and businesses, too, for that matter, but more on that type of enthronement for another day). It also reminds of our membership within the mystical body of Christ with him at the head and is a beautiful bridge between the Mother Church and our domestic churches. Earlier this year, Governor Jeff Landry of Louisiana enthroned the Governor's Mansion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, to which he said, "it was with great honor as the 57th governor of Louisiana to be entrusted with the historical event of enthroning the Sacred Heart of Jesus over the governor’s mansion; our home and the home of the people. In doing so may our great state and its people remain blessed and under the protection of God for centuries to come!” Meditating upon this devotion within the context of the upcoming feast provides much to ponder. Christ has dominion over the entire cosmos, died for our sins and defied the finality of death, yet he simply knocks on the door of our homes waiting for an invitation to enter. This mysterious and astounding paradox in the power and meekness of our Lord continually beguiles. The ceremony, lead by your pastor in your home (and the consequent graces that follow), acknowledges our need for Christ's presence and leadership within the folds of our lives. It is fairly brief and involves the participation of the members of the household along with the priest. A blessing of the home also takes place. The promises made by those in the home involve practicing devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, involving participation in the First Friday devotions, daily family rosary, celebration of the feast of the Sacred Heart, and a prominent placement of an image of the Sacred Heart within the home. These practices serve as an outward expression seeking to rightly order the home and acknowledge and invite the perfect dominion of Christ. As this liturgical year comes to a close, ponder these twelve promises made by Christ to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque as you consider enthroning Christ within your home: 1. I will give them all the graces necessary in their state of life. 2. I will establish peace in their homes. 3. I will comfort them in all their afflictions. 4. I will be their secure refuge during life, and above all, in death. 5. I will bestow abundant blessings upon all their undertakings. 6. Sinners will find in My Heart the source and infinite ocean of mercy. 7. Lukewarm souls shall become fervent. 8. Fervent souls shall quickly mount to high perfection. 9. I will bless every place in which an image of My Heart is exposed and honored. 10. I will give to priests the gift of touching the most hardened hearts. 11. Those who shall promote this devotion shall have their names written in My Heart. 12. I promise you in the excessive mercy of My Heart that My all powerful love will grant to all those who receive Holy Communion on the First Fridays in nine consecutive months the grace of final perseverance; they shall not die in My disgrace, nor without receiving their sacraments. My divine Heart shall be their safe refuge in this last moment.

Wednesday, November 5, 2025

Pope Leo warns against a false Marian devotion

Pope Leo XIV and doctrinal office affirm Mary’s unique role, rejects ‘co-Redemptrix’ and ‘co-Mediatrix’ titles By CNS 5 November 2025 WHILE praising devotion to the Blessed Mother, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith firmly rejected moves to formally proclaim Mary as “co-redemptrix” or “co-mediatrix”. In a lengthy doctrinal note titled Mater Populi Fidelis (Mother of the Faithful People of God), the dicastery said the title co-redemptrix or co-redeemer “carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ” in salvation. “And, regarding the title co-mediatrix or co-mediator, it said that Mary, “the first redeemed, could not have been the mediatrix of the grace that she herself received.” However, it said, the title may be used when it does not cast doubt on “the unique mediation of Jesus Christ, true God and true man”.” Pope Leo XIV approved the text on October 7 and ordered its publication, said the note, which was released on November 4. Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, prefect of the doctrinal dicastery, presented the document during a conference at the Jesuit headquarters in Rome and said its teaching becomes part of the church’s “ordinary magisterium” and must be considered authoritative. For more than 30 years, some Catholics, including some bishops, have asked for formal dogmatic declarations of Mary as co-redemptrix and co-mediatrix, the document’s introduction said. But Monsignor Armando Matteo, secretary of the dicastery’s doctrinal section, told the conference that the first study of the doctrinal implications of the titles went all the way back to 1926. … Cardinal Fernández said that one time, when St Peter’s Basilica was closed, he spent a long time in front of Michelangelo’s Pietà. The sorrow on Mary’s face because of the death of her son and, at the same time, her obvious strength, he said, “was so beautiful it was understandable why people would want to say everything and more about Mary”. The new document said titles used for the Blessed Mother should speak of her motherly care for all people and her place as the first and perfect disciple of Jesus, but must not create any doubt that Catholics believe Jesus was the redeemer of the world and the bestower of grace. “Any gaze directed at her that distracts us from Christ or that places her on the same level as the Son of God would fall outside the dynamic proper to an authentically Marian faith,” it said, because Mary always points to her son. The titles co-redemptrix and co-mediatrix have been used in reference to Mary by theologians and even popes in the past millennium, the doctrinal dicastery said, but without elaborating on the precise meaning and the extent to which those titles could describe Mary’s role in salvation history. St John Paul II “referred to Mary as ‘Co-redemptrix’ on at least seven occasions,” the note said, but after consultation with the then-Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and its prefect, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in 1996, he did not issue a dogmatic declaration and stopped using the title. Citing Scripture and tradition, the future Pope Benedict XVI said, “The precise meaning of these titles (co-redemptrix and co-mediatrix) is not clear, and the doctrine contained in them is not mature.” “Everything comes from Him – Christ – as the Letter to the Ephesians and the Letter to the Colossians, in particular, tell us; Mary, too, is everything that she is through Him. The word ‘Co-redemptrix’ would obscure this origin,” Pope Benedict said. Pope Francis, at a general audience in 2021, said that Jesus entrusted Mary to humanity as a mother, “not as a goddess, not as co-redemptrix,” adding that love motivated some people to call her co-redemptrix, but love often leads people to “exaggerate”. “Given the necessity of explaining Mary’s subordinate role to Christ in the work of Redemption, it would not be appropriate to use the title ‘Co-redemptrix’ to define Mary’s co-operation,” the doctrinal note said. The title, it said, “risks obscuring Christ’s unique salvific mediation and can therefore create confusion and an imbalance in the harmony of the truths of the Christian faith, for ‘there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.'” “When an expression requires many repeated explanations to prevent it from straying from a correct meaning, it does not serve the faith of the People of God and becomes unhelpful,” the dicastery concluded. The use of the title “co-mediatrix” is more complicated, the doctrinal note said, because the word “mediation” often is “understood simply as cooperation, assistance or intercession” and easily could apply to Mary without calling into question “the unique mediation of Jesus Christ, true God and true man.” Mary’s role in salvation history is unique, the document said. She willingly accepted to become the mother of Jesus the saviour, she raised him, travelled with him and stood at the foot of his cross. While Christ, fully human and fully divine, was the one mediator between God and humanity, it said, “he enables various forms of participation in his salvific plan because, in communion with him, we can all become, in some way, cooperators with God and ‘mediators’ for one another”. “If this holds true for every believer – whose cooperation with Christ becomes increasingly fruitful to the extent that one allows oneself to be transformed by grace – how much more must it be affirmed of Mary in a unique and supreme way,” the doctrinal note said. The church believes that those in heaven can pray and intercede for people still on earth and, “among those chosen and glorified with Christ, first and foremost is his Mother,” the note said. “Therefore, we can affirm that Mary has a unique collaboration in the saving work that Christ carries out in his Church. With this intercession, Mary can become for us a motherly sign of the Lord’s mercy.”

Friday, October 31, 2025

Where exactly in Bethlehem was the Christ Child born?

“One would think that the New Testament would tell us precisely where the Messiah would be born “in Bethlehem.” It does not. Surprisingly, the Old Testament gives us the answer. An earlier verse in the book of Micah tells us exactly where to expect His birth”. Joseph Lenard Jesus’ Birth – The Case for Migdal Edar | Truth in Scripture Taken from the book by Joseph Lenard entitled Mysteries of Jesus’ Life Revealed—His Birth, Death, Resurrection, and Ascensions. For an overview and complete chapter listing of this fascinating study, click here. Jesus’ Birth – The Case for Migdal Edar Where Was Jesus Born? John the Baptist exclaimed, “Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29, KJV). I believe he was making a statement which, among other things, pointed to a particular place in Bethlehem as the birthplace of Christ. How so? As we have seen many times, bits and pieces from Scripture, taken together, often provide a road map. In this case, I believe the road map supports my position that Jesus was actually born at a place called Migdal Edar (Heb. “Tower of the Flock”) in Bethlehem. In addition to the statement by John the Baptist referring to Jesus as “the Lamb of God,” these bits and pieces of Scripture come from diverse sources, from both the Old and New Testaments in the Bible. I believe all of the following will ultimately be shown to point to Migdal Edar as the birthplace of Jesus: The shepherds who – while “watching their flocks by night” – became aware of exactly where to find the newborn Messiah “in Bethlehem”. The special lambs born and raised in the fields of Bethlehem, to be used specifically as Temple sacrifices. The account of the death of Jacob’s wife Rachel, on the outskirts of Bethlehem Why is it that most of us have never heard of Migdal Edar, let alone in reference to the birth of Jesus? Once again, we have Emperor Constantine and his mother, Helena, to thank for the erroneous selection of the site of Jesus’ birth. The church was led astray in the 4th Century AD and has since steadfastly supported the traditional site of the cave under the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem as the birthplace of Jesus. Let’s see where key statements in the Old and New Testaments lead us in our search to confirm the actual birthplace of Jesus. I give credit to Cooper P. Abrams, III and his article Where Was the Birth Place of the Lord Jesus? for bringing together many of the details in support of the case for Migdal Edar. Old Testament Account – Micah’s Prophecy When the Magi from Persia came to Jerusalem in search of the Jewish Messiah, they called upon King Herod as a courtesy and inquired of him where the Messiah was to be born. Damien F. Mackey’s comment: Following a geographical revolution in recent years, the land of Persia had had to be significantly re-located. It is no longer “in the East”, hence the Magi could not have been from Persia. See e.g. these articles: More geographical ‘tsunamis’: lands of Elam and Chaldea (4) More geographical ‘tsunamis’: lands of Elam and Chaldea The Magi and the Star that Stopped (4) The Magi and the Star that Stopped Joseph Lenard continues: The Jewish religious authorities gave their answer from an Old Testament passage from Micah: But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he [Messiah; Jesus] come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting” (Micah 5:2, KJV). In the Bible we find several other names for Bethlehem, including Ephratah (Micah 5:2) and Ephrath (Genesis 35:16, 19; 48:7). It should be noted that Ephrath (or Ephratah) was the ancient name for the area which later was called Bethlehem. Ephrath means “ash heap” and “place of fruitfulness,” and seems to refer to Isaiah 61:3, which mentions “beauty from ashes . . .” It is also widely known that the word “Bethlehem” means “house of bread.” This too may be a reference to Jesus, as He stated during the Seder (Last Supper) with His Disciples that He is the bread which is broken for each of us (Luke 22:19); and He had previously said that He is the true bread which came down from heaven (John 6:32–33) and that He is the bread of life (John 6:35). We know from Micah 5:2 that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. But where in Bethlehem? One would think that the New Testament would tell us precisely where the Messiah would be born “in Bethlehem.” It does not. Surprisingly, the Old Testament gives us the answer. An earlier verse in the book of Micah tells us exactly where to expect His birth: And thou, O tower of the flock, the strong hold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion; the kingdom [the Messiah shall bring the Kingdom] shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem [Mary the mother of Jesus].” (Micah 4:8, KJV) This “tower of the flock” mentioned in Micah 4:8 is in Hebrew “Migdal Edar” and literally means “watch tower of the flock.” Consequently, the Old Testament tells us that the Messiah, Jesus, would be born at Migdal Edar, in Bethlehem. What about the “watch tower of the flock?” Undoubtedly, this was a military tower used to watch over the valley at the edge of Bethlehem and to provide protection to the city. These types of towers were common and are mentioned in various Old Testament books (Judges 8:17; 9:46, 51; 2 Kings 9:17, 18:8; Nehemiah 3:1). Cooper P. Abrams III states in his article regarding Migdal Edar in Jerusalem: “This watch tower from ancient times was used by the shepherds for protection from their enemies and wild beasts. It was also the place ewes were safely brought to give birth to the lambs. In this sheltered building/cave the priests would bring in the ewes which were about to lamb for protection. These special lambs came from a unique flock that was designated for sacrifice at the temple in Jerusalem.” Abrams then states the following: Typically, “Migdal Edar”, (the tower of the flock) at Bethlehem is the perfect place for Christ to be born. He was born in the very birthplace of tens of thousands of lambs, which had been sacrificed to prefigure Him. God promised it, pictured it, and performed it at “Migdal Edar”. It all fits together, for that’s the place where sacrificial lambs were born! Jesus was not born behind an inn, in a smelly stable where the donkeys and other animals of travelers were kept. He was born in Bethlehem, at the birthing place of the sacrificial lambs that were offered in the Temple in Jerusalem which Micah 4:8 calls the “tower of the flock.” The Sheep and Shepherds of the Fields at Migdal Edar In his classic book, The Life and Times of Jesus The Messiah (1883; Latest Edition, 1993), Alfred Edersheim (1825 – 1889), a Messianic Jew, had great insights regarding the birth of Jesus from a Hebrew-Christian perspective. In his work, Edersheim referenced the Jewish Mishnah (The Mishnah was the first recording of the oral law and Rabbinic Judaism. The word in Hebrew means “repetition,” which means that it was memorized material. It is the major source of the rabbinic teachings of Judaism. After the Scriptures, the Mishnah is regarded as the basic textbook of Jewish life and thought and is traditionally considered to be an integral part of the Torah, as revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai.) Edersheim also referenced the Targum (The Targum is an Aramaic translation of the Hebrew Bible (Tanak), which was written during Israel’s seventy-year captivity in Babylon. Aramaic is one of the Semitic languages, an important group of languages known almost from the beginning of human history and including Arabic, Hebrew, Ethiopic, and Akkadian [ancient Babylonian and Assyrian]). Edersheim’s book was the result of a seven year effort. In it he states: “That the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem was a settled conviction. Equally so was the belief, that He was to be revealed from Migdal Eder, ‘the tower of the flock’. This Migdal Edar was not the watchtower for the ordinary flocks which pastured on the barren sheep ground beyond Bethlehem, but lay close to the town, on the road to Jerusalem. A passage in the Mishnah (Shekelim 7.4) leads to the conclusion that the flocks, which pastured there, were destined for Temple-sacrifices, and, accordingly, that the shepherds, who watched over them, were not ordinary shepherds.” In summary, we can state with some certainty that the flocks which were pastured around Migdal Edar were sheep destined for Temple sacrifices, and the shepherds who tended them were special shepherds, trained to take care of these sheep from birth until the time they were delivered to the Temple. I believe that Jesus was born in this same “Tower of the Flock,” and these shepherds went to see Jesus and His mother and father in that structure. New Testament Account of the Birthplace of Jesus Luke has the most complete account of the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, as recorded in Chapter 2: And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and linage of David) To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn. And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men. And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us. And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger. And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child. And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told by the shepherds. But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them. (Luke 2:4–20 KJV) We see from the New Testament Scripture that Jesus was, indeed, born in Bethlehem. But the New Testament does not state the exact place in Bethlehem where Jesus was born. Nativity scenes displayed at Christmas depict the birth of Jesus in a stable surrounded by donkeys, sheep, and cows. This is due to the tradition that there was no room for Joseph and Mary in the inn, so Jesus was born in the stable behind the inn, where the animals were kept. However, all that is stated in Scripture is that Mary gave birth to Jesus, that she laid Him in a manger, and that she wrapped Him in swaddling clothes. We know that these things occurred somewhere in the city of Bethlehem. But from Micah 4:8 we now know that He was actually born at “the Tower of the Flock” (Migdal Edar). The Terms “Manger” and “Swaddling Clothes” The account of the birth of Jesus in Luke includes the terms “manger” and “swaddling clothes.” What specifically are these referring to? And why are these items a “sign”, given to the shepherds by the angel as they tended their flocks in the field? The Greek word which is translated “manger” in our English Bibles is Yatnh phat-ne. It is defined as a “stall” where animals are kept, and in Luke 13:15 it is translated that way. In Proverbs 14:4, in the Septuagint [Greek translation of the Old Testament], the word means a “stall” or a “crib.” What, then, was the “stall” or “manger” referred to in the New Testament; and what kind of animals were fed or housed there? Is there a “logical” place where God would choose to have His Son born, one which would be described by the angel to the shepherds in the country as being “. . . a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger?” To be a “sign,” it would have to be distinctive, understandable, and unique. From the description of the “swaddling clothes” and the “manger,” the shepherds knew right where to go to find the babe. Where was that? My position is that they went to where the newborn lambs were typically wrapped in swaddling clothes in the manger – in the “Tower of the Flock” (Migdal Edar), not far from where they were tending the sheep which birthed the lambs used for sacrifice in the Temple. The “Lamb of God,” as John the Baptist called Jesus, was born in the unique place where the other lambs used for sacrifice were born. Indeed, that was a unique “sign” to these shepherds – that this baby was, indeed, the “Savior, Christ the Lord,” the promised Messiah, as told to them by the angel which appeared to them, and as foretold by the Prophets of Israel. Note what is said of the shepherds: “And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.” They did not have to go around Bethlehem searching each and every stable for this newly born baby. The impression given is that they were able to go “with haste” because they knew from the description of the “wrapped in swaddling clothes” and “lying in a manger” exactly where to go – to the “Tower of the Flock,” Migdal Edar. It was not just any stable in Bethlehem. There was no need for the angel to give the shepherds directions to the place of Jesus’ birth – they already knew exactly where to find him! Key Statement by John the Baptist The father of John the Baptist was Zacharias, a priest who served in the Temple in Jerusalem. John the Baptist was the only son of Zacharias, and he was also of the priestly line. In a sense, John the Baptist was the first of several things: First Christian, first Christian witness, first Christian preacher, first Christian prophet, and first Christian martyr. He was also the first to baptize converts, and he might have even started the first “church” as the disciples of Jesus were initially following John before they were instructed to follow Jesus (John 1:35–37; Acts 1:15–26). Before we look at the famous statement by John the Baptist upon seeing Jesus, it is helpful to first review the problem of sin, which relates to the statement of John and gives us a better understanding of the context. The Bible teaches us that mankind has a sin problem. Sin is violation of God’s Word, a rebellion against God. This is a big problem with God and, consequently, with man. God is holy and He cannot have sin in His presence. Sin came into the world through Adam in the Garden of Eden, as presented in the early chapters of Genesis. Fortunately, God had His plan of redemption through Jesus, which He had established from the very foundations of the world (Romans 5:12–21; 1 Peter 1:18–20; Revelation 13:8; John 1:29). The need for a substitutionary sacrifice and shedding of innocent blood to atone for sin is well established in Scripture, beginning in Genesis 3:21, where God made use of animal skins to cover the nakedness and shame of Adam and Eve following their disobedience. A blood sacrifice is required by God, as presented in Leviticus: “For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul” (Leviticus 17:11). God’s ultimate plan of redemption is further seen in the account of Abraham’s willingness to offer his son, Isaac, on an altar at God’s command (Genesis 22). Abraham’s hand was stayed, and God provided a substitute sacrifice, just as He would provide in His Son, Jesus. Lastly, God’s ultimate plan of redemption is reflected in the Feasts of the Lord, which God established as yearly rehearsals by the people of Israel, beginning with the Feast of Passover and the shedding of the blood of an innocent lamb (Leviticus 23). My first book, The Last Shofar! – What the Fall Feasts of the Lord are Telling the Church (which I co-authored with Donald Zoller and which is also presented on this website) provides an excellent description of God’s plan of redemption in Jesus, as foreshadowed in the Feasts of the Lord. This background of the problem of sin and God’s remedy through the sacrifice of His one and only son, Jesus, offers us a better understanding of John the Baptist’s statement upon seeing Jesus approaching, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). Jesus is the perfect lamb sacrifice, which God provided to pay for the sin debt of mankind. He is, indeed, “the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world.” The lambs sacrificed daily in the Temple ceremonies – as well as the lamb sacrificed annually for the nation’s sins at Passover in the Temple – were but a foreshadowing of the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus, the perfect sacrifice of God. This sacrifice was meant to be sufficient to atone for the sin-debt of all mankind. John the Baptist likened Jesus to those lambs carefully chosen for sacrifice in the Temple. Rachel and Migdal Edar What does Rachel, the wife of Jacob, have to do with the birthplace of Jesus? It involves a veiled prophecy in Genesis, and it has to do with the first mention in Scripture of the term Migdal Edar, at the time of Rachel’s death. Let’s look at two passages in Genesis (Genesis 35:5–21 and Genesis 48:7): “And they journeyed: and the terror of the God was upon the cities that were round about them, and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob. So Jacob came to Luz, which is in the land of Canaan, that is, Bethel [Heb. literally “House of God”], he and all the people that were with him. And he built there an altar, and called the place El-beth-el: because there God appeared unto him, when he fled from the face of his brother [Esau]. “But Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died, and she was buried beneath Bethel under an oak: and the name of it was called Allon-bachuth. And God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came out of Padan-aram, and blessed him. And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel. And God said unto him, I am God Almighty, be fruitful and multiply: a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins; And the land which I gave Abraham and Isaac, to thee will I give the land. And God went up from him in the place where he talked with him. And Jacob set up a pillar of stone: and he poured a drink offering thereon, and he poured oil thereon. “And they journeyed from Bethel; and there was a little way to come to Ephrath: and Rachel travailed, and she had hard labour. And it came to pass, when she was in hard labour, that the midwife said unto her, Fear not; thou shalt have this son also. And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing, (for she died) that she called his name Ben-oni: but his father called him Benjamin. And Rachel died, and was buried in the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem. And Jacob set a pillar upon her grave: that is the pillar of Rachel’s grave unto this day. 21 And Israel journeyed, and spread his tent beyond the tower of Edar” [Heb. Migdal Edal: “Tower of the Flock”]. (Genesis 35:5–21) And the second passage: “And as for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died by me in the land of Canaan in the way, when yet there was but a little way to come unto Ephrath: and I buried her there in the way of Ephrath; the same is Bethlehem.” (Genesis 48:7, KJV) Reflecting on these passages in Genesis regarding to the death of Rachel, it is easy to imagine Jacob’s anguish. After Jacob buried Rachel, he traveled on “. . . and spread his tent beyond the tower of Edar”. Jacob loved Rachel more than all his other wives, from the time he first laid eyes on her (Genesis 29:17–18, 30). When she died, he was heartbroken. But why would Moses record that Jacob pitched his tent at Migdal Edar at Bethlehem? What is significant about that place? We know that every word of Scripture has meaning (Deuteronomy 32:47), so there must be a reason. Although it is not known for certain, I can offer some thoughts which I believe have merit. We know now that the Tower of the Flock would be the birthplace of the Messiah, who would take away all death, heartache, and tears. Rachel and Jacob would one day weep no more, as both would share eternal life in the presence of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. I believe that God intended that from the place of Jacob’s greatest sorrow, where his beloved Rachel died, would later come the Messiah, who would bring eternal life and joy for all those who trust in Him. Did Jacob fully understand all of these things? Probably not. But he did understand that God was all-powerful and that He was good, holy, and righteous. I believe that Jacob trusted in God for redemption and that he knew God would eventually make all things right, including the removal of death and heartache. I concede that the evidence related to Rachel is not definitive in supporting the case for Migdal Edar. However, the other evidence provided here is strong; and I believe the case for confirming Migdal Edar as the birthplace of Jesus is compelling.