The ‘Har Ghar Tiranga’ event is being marked by Buddhist organisations and institutions across the Himalayan belt, including Ladakh with enthusiasm and high spirits. Some of the monasteries in Ladakh have been planning and working on the modalities to have large Tirangas placed at vantage locations.
The Spituk monastery, which is located around 8 km from Leh is a remarkable structure which forms part of the tourist circuit in the city. Built in the 11th century, and founded as a Red Hat institution, the monastery was taken over by the Yellow Hat sect in the 15th century.
It has more than 100 monks and a giant statue of Kali which is highly revered by the locals. The monastery celebrated the ‘Har Ghar Tiranga’ event by hoisting the national flag on August 6 at the monastery. The junior monks also formed part of the larger celebration during the day.
The Stakna monastery, which is another beautiful landmark 25 kms from Leh belongs to the Drugpa sect. The monastery is located along the banks of the Indus river. It was founded in the late 16th century by a Bhutanese scholar and saint, Chosje Modzin. The monastery is built on a hill shaped like a tiger’s nose.
Stakna has a residence for approximately 30 monks who celebrated the occasion hoisting the national flag on August 5 at a vantage location with the monastery in the backdrop. The gathered monks proudly sang the national anthem while waving the flag. A group of monks walked across the ramparts of the monastery as if to mark the presence of the Tiranga in all parts of the monastery.
The famous Hemis Monastery which belongs to the Drupka Lineage, and situated 45 km from Leh, also marked the occasion with flags being hoisted by young monks living in the monastery. The celebrations were marked by chanting by the monks while many of them held the flag firmly in the high windy condition. The monastery is famously known for the annual Hemis festival honouring Padmasambhava which is held in the month of June each year.
The Hemis festival takes place in the rectangular courtyard in front of the main door of the monastery. Large number of tourists who visited the monastery during the event also participated in the ‘Har Ghar Jhanda’ activity.
Another famous monastery — the Thiksey monastery also witnessed large scale celebrations of the ‘Har Ghar Tiranga’ utsav on August 6 when a group of young monks living in this beautiful monastery emerged from the ramparts of the monastery waving large national flags.
The monastery, delicately perched on a mountain and spread over different levels, wore a mood of excitement and celebration with the junior monks having a field day portraying the relevance of the Tiranga.
The tourists and visitors were impressed by the solemn event and formed part of the activity.
The Thiksey monastery belongs to the Gelug sect and is located around 19 kms from Leh. It is known to resemble the Potala Palace in Lhasa, Tibet, and is the largest Gompa in central Ladakh.
The monastery is a twelve storey structure and hosts the Maitreya temple installed to commemorate the visit of His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama to the monastery in 1970.
The event was marked by a number of other smaller monasteries in the region while some monasteries intend to host the event between August 13 and 15.
With the prominent monasteries in Ladakh celebrating the occasion, a strong message has gone across among the community of monks about the deep essence and significance of the Tiranga.
Soon after the events were held in the above mentioned monasteries the city of Leh also witnessed a spread of the Tiranga among the smaller Buddhist institutions and organisations besides the local market.
There are plans for the event to be held in some of the gompas located far from Leh where small groups of monks plan to travel through remote villages carrying the Tiranga and encouraging the locals to be part of the activity.
The International Buddhist Confederation has been supporting these activities and a representative of the IBC was present at the events held in all the above monasteries.
The situation at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant has deteriorated rapidly to the point of becoming “very alarming,” Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Rafael Mariano Grossi warned the Security Council on Thursday afternoon.
“These military actions near such a large nuclear facility could lead to very serious consequences,” Mr. Grossi said at the meeting requested by Russia, which was marked by resounding calls to allow the Agency’s technical experts to visit the area amid mounting safety concerns.
IAEA has been in frequent contact with both Ukraine and Russia to ensure that it has the clearest picture possible of the evolving circumstances.
Providing an overview, the IAEA chief said that on 5 August, the Zaporizhzhia plant – Europe’s largest – was subjected to shelling, which caused several explosions near the electrical switchboard and a power shutdown.
One reactor unit was disconnected from the electrical grid, triggering its emergency protection system and setting generators into operation to ensure power supply.
The senior UN official said that there was also shelling at a nitrogen oxygen station. While firefighters had extinguished the blaze, repairs must still be examined and evaluated.
No immediate threat
He said that the preliminary assessment of IAEA experts indicate that there is no immediate threat to nuclear safety as a result of the shelling or other military actions.
However, “this could change at any moment,” Mr. Grossi cautioned.
Overarching goal
He recalled his recent address to the ongoing Tenth Review Conference of the Parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, where he outlined seven indispensable pillars that are critical for nuclear safety and security.
These included aspects dealing with the physical integrity of the plant, off-site power supply, cooling systems, and emergency preparedness measures.
“All these pillars have been compromised if not entirely violated at one point or another during this crisis,” flagged the IAEA chief.
“Any nuclear catastrophe would be unacceptable and thus preventing it should be our overarching goal”.
He asked both sides to cooperate with the UN atomic agency.
“This is a serious hour, a grave hour, and the IAEA must be allowed to conduct its mission in Zaporizhzhia as soon as possible”.
Trading Blame
Presenting his case, the Russian delegate said Ukrainian forces used heavy artillery against Zaporizhzhia on 5 August, shelling the plant during a shift change to intimidate staff – their own citizens.
He upheld that on 6 August, those forces attacked with cluster munitions, and on 7 August, a power surge occurred, blaming.
The Russian Ambassador blamed Kyiv for refusing to sign a trilateral document issued by IAEA, stressing that Moscow strictly complies with the IAEA Director General’s seven principles.
In turn, Ukraine’s representative said that the withdrawal of Russian troops and return of the station to the legitimate control of Ukraine is the only way to remove the nuclear threat at Zaporizhzhia.
The Ukrainian Ambassador insisted on the need to send a mission to the site and has negotiated modalities with the Agency.
“Despite their public declarations, the occupiers have resorted to manipulations and unjustified conditions for the site visit,” he said.
Given the militarization of the site by Russian armed forces, such a mission must include qualified experts in military aspects.
To increase the EU’s security of energy supply, the Council today adopted a regulation on a voluntary reduction of gas demand by 15% this winter. The regulation foresees the possibility for the Council to trigger a ‘Union alert’ on security of supply, in which case the gas demand reduction would become mandatory.
The purpose of the gas demand reduction is to make savings for this winter, in order to prepare for possible disruptions of gas supplies from Russia, which is continuously using energy supplies as a weapon.
Member states agreed to reduce their gas demand by 15% compared to their average consumption in the past five years, between 1 August 2022 and 31 March 2023, with measures of their own choice.
Whereas all member states will deploy their best efforts to meet the reductions, the Council specified some exemptions and possibilities to apply a partial or in some cases a full derogation from the mandatory reduction target, in order to reflect the particular situations of member states and to ensure that the gas reductions are effective in increasing security of supply in the EU.
The Council agreed that member states that are not interconnected to other member states’ gas networks are exempted of mandatory gas reductions as they would not be able to free up significant volumes of gas to the benefit of other member states. Member states whose electricity grids are not synchronised with the European electricity system and are more reliant on gas for electricity production will also be exempted in case they are desynchronised from a third country’s grid, in order to avoid the risk of an electricity supply crisis.
Member states can limit their reduction target to adapt their demand reduction obligations if they have limited interconnections to other member states and they can show that their export capacities and their domestic LNG infrastructure are used to re-direct gas to other member states to the fullest.
Member states can also limit their reduction target if they have overshot their gas storage filling targets, if they are heavily dependent on gas as a feedstock for critical industries or they can use different calculation method if their gas consumption has increased by at least 8% in the past year compared to the average of the past five years.
Member states agreed to strengthen the role of the Council in triggering the ‘Union alert’. The alert would be activated by a Council implementing decision, acting on a proposal from the Commission. The Commission shall present a proposal to trigger a ‘Union alert’ in case of a substantial risk of a severe gas shortage or an exceptionally high gas demand, or if five or more member states that have declared an alert at national level request the Commission to do so.
When choosing demand reduction measures, member states agreed that they shall consider prioritising measures that do not affect protected customers such as households and essential services for the functioning of society like critical entities, healthcare and defence. Possible measures include reducing gas consumed in the electricity sector, measures to encourage fuel switch in industry, national awareness raising campaigns, targeted obligations to reduce heating and cooling and market-based measures such as auctioning between companies.
Member states will update their national emergency plans that set out the demand reduction measures they are planning, and will regularly report to the Commission on the advancement of their plans.
The regulation was formally adopted through a written procedure. The adoption follows a political agreement reached by ministers at the Extraordinary Energy Council on 26 July. The regulation will now be published in the Official Journal and enter into force on the next day.
The regulation is an exceptional and extraordinary measure, foreseen for a limited time. It will apply for one year and the Commission will carry out a review to consider its extension in light of the general EU gas supply situation, by May 2023.
Background
The EU is facing a potential security of supply crisis with significantly reduced gas deliveries from Russia and a serious risk of a complete halt, for which member states need to prepare immediately in a coordinated fashion and a spirit of solidarity. Although not all member states are currently facing a significant risk of security of supply, severe disruptions on certain member states are bound to affect the EU’s economy as a whole.
It complements existing EU initiatives and legislation, which ensure that citizens can benefit from secure gas supplies and that customers are protected against major supply disruptions, notably Regulation (EU) 2017/1938 on the security of gas supply.
This regulation follows other initiatives already in progress to improve the EU’s resilience and security of gas supply including a gas storage regulation, the creation of an EU Energy Platform for joint purchases and initiatives listed in the REPowerEU plan.
International Youth Day celebrates “the power of partnerships across generations,” the UN chief said in his message for the day.
Commemorated annually on 12 August, Secretary-General António Guterres noted that this year’s theme – “Intergenerational Solidarity: Creating a World for All Ages” – reminds us of “a basic truth” that “we need people of all ages, young and old alike, to join forces to build a better world for all”.
Happy International #YouthDay to all young people everywhere ?
Today & every day, let’s celebrate young people’s role as powerful advocates for fundamental transformation & as active agents of change ?
Too often, ageism, bias and discrimination prevent this essential collaboration, the top UN official observed.
“When young people are shut out of the decisions being made about their lives, or when older people are denied a chance to be heard, we all lose,” he spelled out.
Mr. Guterres upheld that as the world faces a series of challenges threatening our collective future, “solidarity and collaboration are more essential than ever”.
From COVID-19 to climate change and conflicts to poverty, inequality and discrimination, “we need all hands on deck” to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and build the better, more peaceful future that everyone seeks.
Bolster youth
We need to support young people with massive investments in education and skills-building — “including through next month’s Transforming Education Summit,” said the Secretary-General.
“We also need to support gender equality and expanded opportunities for young people to participate in civic and political life”.
The UN chief maintained that it is not enough to just listen to young people, “we need to integrate them into decision-making mechanisms at the local, national and international levels”.
This is at the heart of the UN’s proposal to establish a new Youth Office at the Organization.
Joining hands
At the same time, he pointed to the importance of ensuring that older generations have access to social protection and opportunities to give back to their communities as well as the ability to share the decades of accumulated experience that they have lived.
“On this important day, let’s join hands across generations to break down barriers, and work as one to achieve a more equitable, just and inclusive world for all people,” concluded the Secretary-General.
‘Youthful drive’ needed
Meanwhile, in his lecture to the students of Nazarbayev University in Kazakhstan, General Assembly President Abdulla Shahid reflected on the importance of intergenerational collaboration, conceding that “it is often young people who hold us accountable when we fall short on any issue, whether it be conservation, peace, or human rights”.
As we face a full-fledged planetary crisis with countries locking themselves into “unreasonable positions” during negotiations, he reminded, “it is the young that are stepping up through their activism”.
“It is young people that kept the 1.5-degree goal alive”, he said. “It is young people who refuse our excuses when we, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, delay and dither on taking action to curb emissions and protect the environment”.
Mr. Shahid confirmed that the world needs “that youthful drive and energy” today.
The factory in Belgium, billed as the world’s largest chocolate factory, said it had resumed operations after being closed for six weeks to deal with a salmonella contamination. Three of the 24 production lines at the plant in the town of Wiese have been restarted and the first delivery has been made, the Swiss company Barry Callebaut, which runs the factory, said.
The plant, which supplies industry giants such as Hershey, Nestle and Unilever but not directly to consumers, was shut down in late June after salmonella bacteria was found in one of the batches. We remind you that at the beginning of April chocolate eggs and Kinder candies were also withdrawn from the Bulgarian market. A warning has been issued about possible salmonella contamination of certain lots.
Zurich-based Barry Callebaut said it halted supplies and informed customers in time to prevent the contaminated chocolate from reaching stores. The source of the contamination was lecithin, which is added to smooth the texture of food, and required weeks of extensive cleanup.
“We remain cautious as this operation is unprecedented and the cleaning and disinfection process takes a long time,” said Barry Callebaut spokesman Cornell Warlop.
He said that while the factory is currently only producing a “fairly small volume”, it plans to reactivate more production lines “in the coming weeks”.
Belgium’s food health agency said it was continuing to monitor production at the plant.
The Barry Callebaut plant employs around 600 people and is a key link in the company’s total output, which in the 2020-2021 financial year was 2.2 million tonnes, produced at more than 60 sites worldwide. The company claims its Vieze factory is “the largest chocolate factory in the world” and claims it’s made in Belgium, which has an international reputation for high-quality chocolate.
Marriage is the union of a man and a woman established by God in Paradise (Gen. 2:18-24; Matt. 19:6). Church marriage is performed and sanctified by the sacrament of Marriage. According to the apostle Paul, marriage is like the union of Christ and the Church: “The husband is the head of the wife, just as Christ is the head of the Church. <…> Therefore a man will leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. This mystery is great; I speak in relation to Christ and to the Church. So let each of you love his wife as himself; but let the wife be afraid of her husband” (Eph. 5:22-33).
The goal of Christian marriage is the joint achievement of an indestructible unity with Christ in His Never-Evening Kingdom. The Christian life of spouses involves cultivating in love the gift of grace received in the sacrament of Marriage, which is manifested, among other things, in childbearing and the joint labor of raising children.
I. Preparation for the wedding and its completion
Marriage implies an open will of a man and a woman, as a result of which rights and obligations arise in relation to each other, as well as to children. “Marriage is the union of a man and a woman, the community of all life, participation in divine and human law,” says the principle of Roman law, which is also included in Slavic church legal sources (Kormchaya, ch. 49). In this regard, church marriage in those countries where it does not have civil legal consequences takes place after the state registration of marriage. This practice has a basis in the life of the ancient Church. In the era of persecution, Christians did not allow compromises with the state pagan religion and preferred martyrdom to participation in pagan rituals. However, even in this historical period, they married in the same way as the rest of the subjects of the Roman state. “They (i.e., Christians) marry like everyone else,” says a 2nd-century Christian writer (Epistle to Diognetus, V). At the same time, Christian marriages, like all other important matters, were performed with the blessing of the bishop: “It is necessary, as you do, to do nothing without the bishop” (St. Ignatius the God-bearer. Epistle to the Trallians, II).
In modern practice, a wedding before the state registration of marriage is possible as an exception with the blessing of the diocesan bishop – for example, in cases of upcoming participation in hostilities, a serious illness or a long separation of future spouses. In situations that require an urgent decision on the wedding prior to state registration, the priest can independently make such a decision, with a subsequent report to the diocesan bishop.
Cohabitation, not consecrated by the Church and at the same time also not registered in the manner prescribed by state law, is not recognized by the Church as a marriage.
It is not recognized as possible to marry marriages registered in accordance with state legislation, but not corresponding to canonical norms (for example, if the number of marriages allowed by church rules is exceeded by one of those wishing to get married or if they are in unacceptable degrees of kinship).
The Church blesses the marriages of those persons who consciously approach this sacrament. In modern church documents, it is prescribed: “Due to the lack of churchness of the majority of those entering into a church marriage, it seems necessary to establish mandatory preparatory conversations before the sacrament of Marriage, during which the clergyman or lay catechist must explain to those entering into marriage the importance and responsibility of the step they are taking, to reveal the Christian understanding of love between man and woman, to explain the meaning and meaning of family life in the light of Holy Scripture and the Orthodox teaching about salvation.
One should strive to ensure that the wedding of Orthodox Christians takes place in the parish to which they belong.
The Sacrament of Marriage, as well as the Sacrament of Baptism, cannot be performed on a person who denies the fundamental truths of the Orthodox faith and Christian morality. Those who wish to receive them for superstitious reasons cannot be admitted to participate in these ordinances. In this case, it is recommended to postpone the wedding until the person realizes the true meaning of the sacrament of Marriage.
The Church also does not allow the following persons to be married:
a) who are in another civil or church marriage that has not ended;
b) on the basis of the 54th canon of the Trullo Council and the church legislation of the Russian Orthodox Church (decree of the Most Holy Governing Synod of January 19, 1810) – those who are related to each other in a direct line in all degrees, and in the side line up to the seventh degree inclusive; marriages in the fifth, sixth and seventh degree of lateral consanguinity may be performed with the blessing of the diocesan bishop;
c) on the basis of the same rule and the synodal decree – being among themselves in property from two genera to the fourth degree inclusive, or property from three genera in the first degree;
d) those who are spiritually related: the recipient and the recipient received in Holy Baptism, the recipient and the recipient; the recipient and mother, as well as the recipient and father of the perceived or perceived;
e) previously married three times; marriages are taken into account, both married and not married, but received state registration, in which the person wishing to enter into a new marriage was after his acceptance of Holy Baptism;
f) those who are in the clergy (starting with those initiated into the subdeacon rank) and monasticism;
g) not belonging to Christianity;
h) who have not reached the minimum age limit in accordance with the current civil legislation;
i) who have reached the maximum age limit according to the rules of St. Basil the Great – 60 years for women (rule 24) and 70 years for men (rule 88); this restriction excludes married couples who have lived together and for one reason or another – for example, in connection with the acquisition of faith – who decided to proceed to the sacrament of the Wedding only in advanced years;
j) recognized as legally incompetent in accordance with the procedure established by law in connection with a mental disorder.
It is unacceptable to perform a wedding without the free consent of both parties.
In cases where the priest finds it difficult to determine the presence or absence of obstacles to the celebration of the Sacrament of Marriage, the priest must either independently turn to the diocesan bishop, or invite those wishing to get married to turn to the diocesan authorities for resolution of the perplexity that has arisen and permission to perform the wedding.
The consecration of marriage, committed – by mistake or maliciously – in the presence of obstacles established by church legislation, is recognized as invalid. The exception is weddings performed in the presence of such obstacles that can be ignored with the blessing of the bishop (see item b of the list above), or if one of the wedding persons does not meet the age limit, if by the time the violation was discovered the legal age had already been reached or if in such a marriage already had a baby. At the same time, if the marriage is recognized as invalid due to violation of the age requirement, the wedding may be performed when the parties reach the legal age.
A marriage may be declared invalid upon the application of one of the spouses in the event of the incapacity of the other spouse for marital cohabitation due to natural reasons, if such inability began before the marriage and is not due to advanced age. In accordance with the definition of the All-Russian Church Council of 1917-1918. an appeal on this occasion to the diocesan authorities can be accepted for consideration no earlier than two years from the date of the marriage, and “the indicated period is not obligatory in cases where the inability of the spouse is undoubted and is due to the absence or abnormal anatomical structure of organs” .
With regard to Orthodox Christians, whose marriage, entered into by them in a lawful manner, is not consecrated by the sacrament of Marriage, parish priests should be guided by the decision of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church of December 28, 1998, on the inadmissibility of the practice of depriving Communion of persons living in an unmarried marriage, and identifying such a marriage with fornication. You should have special pastoral care for such people, explaining to them the need for grace-filled help requested in the sacrament of Marriage, and also that for Orthodox Christians the practice of living in a civil marriage without a wedding is unacceptable.
With the blessing of spouses who have lived together for many years and have not been married in the Church, one should use the “Chinese of the wedding of spouses who have been for many years”.
II. Marriage with non-Orthodox and non-Orthodox
The difference in the religion of the bride and groom makes it canonically impossible to consecrate marriages between Orthodox and non-Christians (IV BC 14; Laod. 10, 31; Carth. 30; VI BC 72). The Council of Trulli (canon 72), under the threat of excommunication, forbids Orthodox Christians from marrying not only pagans, but also heretics.
This is connected with the care of the Church for the Christian growth of those who marry: “The common faith of spouses who are members of the body of Christ is the most important condition for a truly Christian and church marriage. Only a family that is united in faith can become a “domestic church” (Rom. 16:5; Philm. 1:2), in which the husband and wife, together with their children, grow in spiritual perfection and the knowledge of God. Lack of unanimity poses a serious threat to the integrity of the marital union. That is why the Church considers it her duty to call on believers to marry “only in the Lord” (1 Cor. 7:39), that is, with those who share their Christian convictions.
At the same time, the Church can show pastoral indulgence towards persons married to non-Christians, making sure that they maintain contact with the Orthodox community and are able to raise their children in Orthodoxy. The priest, considering each individual case, should remember the words of the Apostle Paul: “If any brother has an unbelieving wife, and she agrees to live with him, then he should not leave her; and a wife who has an unbelieving husband, and he agrees to live with her, must not leave him. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the believing husband” (1 Corinthians 7:12-14).
The question of the possibility of blessing the marriages of Orthodox Christians with non-Orthodox Christians must be decided in accordance with the current definitions of the highest church authority. Thus, in the Fundamentals of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church, it is stated: “Based on considerations of pastoral economy, the Russian Orthodox Church, both in the past and today, finds it possible for Orthodox Christians to marry Catholics, members of the Ancient Eastern Churches and Protestants who profess faith in the Triune God, subject to the blessing of marriage in the Orthodox Church and the upbringing of children in the Orthodox faith. The same practice has been followed in most of the Orthodox Churches over the past centuries.
III. Termination of marriage
The marital union must be indestructible according to the word of the Savior: “What God has joined together, let no man separate” (Matt. 19:6).
At the same time, based on the gospel teaching, the Church recognizes the possibility of ending a marriage during the lifetime of both spouses in the event of adultery by one of them (Matthew 5:32; 19:9). Divorce is also possible in cases that affect the marriage union as destructively as adultery. In addition, the Church considered acceptable a number of reasons for divorce, which can be likened to the natural death of one of the spouses, ending the marriage.
At present, the Russian Orthodox Church, on the basis of the sacred canons, the definition of the Holy Council of the Orthodox Russian Church of 1917-1918 “On the reasons for the termination of the marriage union, sanctified by the Church” and the Fundamentals of the social concept of the Russian Orthodox Church, considers the following reasons acceptable for considering the issue of recognizing a marriage as broken :
a) the falling away of one of the spouses from Orthodoxy;
b) adultery of one of the spouses (Matt. 19:9) and unnatural vices;
c) the entry of one of the spouses into a new marriage in accordance with civil law;
d) monastic vows of one of the spouses, performed on the condition of mutual consent and the fulfillment of all moral obligations in relation to family members; tonsure performed without observing these conditions cannot be considered valid, and its consequences must be regulated by the Regulations on Monasteries and Monasticism;
e) the inability of one of the spouses to marital cohabitation, which was the result of intentional self-mutilation;
f) illness of one of the spouses with leprosy, syphilis, AIDS, as well as medically certified chronic alcoholism or drug addiction of the spouse;
g) the unknown absence of one of the spouses, if it lasts for at least three years in the presence of an official certificate of the authorized state body; the specified period is reduced to two years after the end of hostilities for the spouses of persons missing in connection with such, and to two years for the spouses of persons missing in connection with other disasters and emergencies;
h) malicious abandonment of one spouse by another;
i) the wife performing an abortion with the husband’s disagreement or the husband forcing his wife to have an abortion;
j) an encroachment by one of the spouses on the life or health of the other or children, established by a court order;
k) an incurable severe mental illness of one of the spouses that occurred during the marriage, confirmed by a medical certificate.
If one of the spouses has one of the listed grounds, the second may apply to the diocesan authorities with a request to consider the issue of terminating the marriage. At the same time, the presence of a decision of secular authorities on the dissolution of a marriage does not negate the need for an independent judgment and its own decision for the church authorities according to the reason of Holy Scripture, according to church canons and according to the duty of pastoral care.
Before contacting the diocesan bishop, those intending to divorce should meet with their parish priest, who is called upon to study the situation and, if possible, exhort the spouses to reconcile. In the event that such an exhortation fails or it is impossible to carry it out, the priest issues an appropriate conclusion to them for submission to the diocesan administration, or sends such an opinion to the diocesan administration independently.
After examining the issue, the diocesan bishop issues a certificate recognizing this church marriage as broken and about the possibility for the innocent party to marry a second or third marriage. The guilty party may be provided with such an opportunity after repentance and the execution of penance, about which the guilty spouse may also be issued a certificate if he applies.
The actual consideration of cases and the issuance of the said certificates may be carried out, with the blessing of the diocesan bishop, by a commission consisting of presbyters and, if possible, headed by a vicar bishop, if there is one in the diocese. Cases are considered by the commission collegially, and if necessary – with hearing of the parties. The decision on the dissolution of marriage is made in the diocese at the place of actual residence of the spouses. If the spouses live in different dioceses, the marriage can be dissolved in one or another diocese.
APPENDIX
About consanguinity and property
The collateral blood relationship, in degrees in which marriage is prohibited without the possibility of exception, consists of:
• in the second degree – brothers and sisters, including consanguineous and consanguineous (hereinafter);
• in the third degree – uncles and aunts with nephews and nieces;
• in the fourth degree —
cousins among themselves;
great aunts and grandparents with great nieces and nieces (that is, with the grandchildren or granddaughters of their brothers or sisters).
The degrees of blood relationship along the lateral line, in the presence of which a marriage can be performed with the blessing of a bishop, consist (in this and in the following lists all possible family ties of each degree are given, despite the fact that marriages in some cases are impossible even theoretically, given the difference in generations):
• in the fifth degree —
this person with the children of his cousins or sisters;
this person with great-grandchildren and great-grandchildren of his brothers or sisters;
• in the sixth degree —
second cousins among themselves;
this person with grandchildren and granddaughters of his cousins or sisters;
this person with the great-great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren of his brothers or sisters;
• in the seventh degree —
this person with the children of his second cousins or sisters;
this person with great-grandchildren and great-granddaughters of his cousins or sisters;
– this person with the great-great-great-grandchildren and great-great-great-grandchildren of his brothers or sisters.
In property from two genera (two-kind property) in the case of monogamy of both spouses, there are:
• in the first degree – the spouse and parents of the other spouse;
• in the second degree —
spouse and grandparents, brothers and sisters of the other spouse;
husband’s parents and wife’s parents among themselves;
• in the third degree —
spouse and great-grandfathers, great-grandmothers, uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces of the other spouse;
parents of one spouse and grandparents, brothers and sisters of the other spouse;
• in the fourth degree —
spouse and great-great-grandparents, great-great-grandmothers, cousins, cousins, grand-nephews and nieces of the other spouse;
parents of one spouse and great-grandfathers, great-grandmothers, uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces of the other spouse.
In property from two genera (two-kind property) in case of bigamy of one or both spouses, there are:
• in the first degree – stepfather and stepmother with stepsons and stepdaughters;
• in the second degree —
this person with stepsons and stepdaughters of a son or daughter;
– stepbrothers and sisters;
• in the third degree —
this person with stepsons and stepdaughters of grandsons or granddaughters;
this person with the children of his half-brothers and sisters;
• in the fourth degree —
this person with stepchildren and stepdaughters of great-grandchildren or great-granddaughters;
– this person with the grandchildren of his half-brothers and sisters;
children of stepbrothers and sisters among themselves.
In a property from three genera (three-kind property) in the first degree are:
• stepfather and wife of his stepson; stepmother and husband of her stepdaughter;
• the husband and mother-in-law of his wife from her other marriage; wife and father-in-law of her husband from his other marriage.
“Hounds of Love” is a song from the eponymous album by Kate Bush, released in 1986. The album was the one of Kate’s consecration album, a “concept album” which showed to the world that Bush was not only the most popular female singer of the UK pop scene, but a crazy lady capable of pushing the boundaries beyond reasonableness. When released, it was accompanied with a video clip that Bush realized herself, a video that smells the 80’s but has also a weird flavor of its own which transpires through the ages:
Randy Bryan is a singer songwriter from Richmond, Virginia, who was diagnosed with late-in-life autism spectrum disorder. But who cares about his diagnosis, as what we want is good music, by good musicians? Of course, he might care about it as he says that it came down right before he started this track, and that he now navigates this new territory of that issue. But as far as we are concerned, let’s have a look at his project, which took 8 months before it be released: re-create “Hounds of Love” into a modern version, cinematic and passing it from the Fairlight CMI (The first popular synthesizer/sampler that had its glory in the early 80s, and was used profusely by Kate Bush) to more modern sounds and arrangement.
The project, the song is a real success. It adds a long dramatic intro, that owes a lot to his co-producer e-flamingo, dealing with bass, beat and drum mixing. And then the song comes, with strong and rich electronic orchestral arrangement. Randy’s voice is great, rich and profound, and brings its own universe to a song that in its original version was made around Kate’s Anglo-Irish soprano voice.
It’s a beautiful track, pretty well produced, which in no way degrades the beauty of the original song, but gives it a second-life. I was a fan of “Hounds of Love” by Kate Bush. So it’s impossible for me to say that this new version is better. But honestly, to my 2022 ears, passed through decades of new sounds and mixing progresses, it is… richer. I hope I won’t attract the wrath of Kate’s fans by saying that, as in no way I believe there is anything to change/add to “Hounds of Love” original song, but I wanted to pay tribute to the Randy’s project, which I believe deserve full attention and recognition.
According to a study that examined the movements of their eyes and bodies during sleep, it is possible that these tiny spiders are not just resting, but dreaming – entering a sleep state remarkably similar to rapid eye movement sleep ( REM), seen in humans and other vertebrates. This could expand our understanding of sleep and sleep states, as well as the role that REM sleep plays in the cognition of the animals in which it occurs. Until now, most sleep research has focused on vertebrates.
Only recently has evidence of REM sleep been observed in invertebrates – namely cephalopods such as cuttlefish and octopus.
This raised some really interesting questions: are these creatures dreaming? What other animals experience REM sleep? Perhaps the answers to these questions will lead us to the answers to even more puzzling conundrums, such as: why did REM sleep evolve? What is its purpose, if any?
Recently, a team of researchers led by behavioral and evolutionary ecologist Daniela Roesler of Harvard University found that a species of jumping spider called Evarcha arcuata appears to sleep. At sunset, the little spiders hang themselves on a single thread and remain motionless in this position throughout the night. Or rather, not quite still. The adult spiders observed by Roessler and her colleagues exhibit periods of heightened activity: their tiny legs, backs and bellies twitch, or their legs curl into what appears to be a defensive posture.
The team notes that the movements resemble twitching during REM sleep in cats and dogs. But, at least with the adult spiders, it was difficult to determine exactly what they were doing. However, young specimens of the species are not subject to the same restrictions. Their bodies, which are still growing and maturing, are not pigmented and therefore transparent. This means that it is possible to observe and record what happens in their bodies during this period of nocturnal inactivity. In particular, the retina of spiders. Jumping spiders’ large, black, transparent eyes are fixed in their small heads and do not move, but their retinas can shift to regulate the spiders’ vision as they go about their important spider business.
Rapid eye movement is a diagnostic indicator of REM sleep. Therefore, direct observation of the retinas of small E. arcuata spiders can show whether what happens to these spiders is actually similar to REM sleep. The researchers filmed 34 E. arcuata spiders at four-hour intervals as they went about their nightly business. They also trained a neural network that allowed them to identify the movement of the spiders’ retinas. Then they carefully studied the resulting videos.
Not only do their videos capture the retinal movement of sleeping spiders, but this retinal movement precisely matches the oscillations and curves of the spine and legs. In fact, every observed instance of leg twitching was associated with retinal motion (although leg twitching was not observed in every instance of retinal motion). Sometimes the spiders were stretched or cleaned. The researchers note that these cases occur soon after REM-like states, but are not related to retinal movement itself. This, according to the researchers, indicates short periods of wakefulness. As in other animals, retinal movements are observed during intervals during which spiders are still, and are of a duration comparable to REM sleep in other organisms.
According to the researchers, this meets all the requirements. “This report provides direct evidence for REM sleep in a terrestrial invertebrate—an arthropod—with clear parallels to REM sleep in terrestrial vertebrates,” they wrote in their paper. “The combination of periodic limb twitches and eye movements during this sleep-like state, as well as an increase in the duration of REM sleep-like bouts, meets the basic behavioral criteria for REM sleep observed in vertebrates, including humans.” What’s interesting about this research is that jumping spiders are highly visual little arthropods, with impressively good vision. At the front of their face are two large eyes for their size, and around their head are six smaller eyes that provide a large field of vision. Research even suggests that their vision may be tetrachromatic.
It has been suggested that in humans, eye movement patterns during REM sleep are directly related to the visual “movie” experience of sleep. So the dream of spiders may also include visual dreams or have a function that is related to vision. Other spiders that rely less on vision and more on vibrations to sense the world may experience REM sleep differently. Further research on other sleeping creatures could reveal much more – and provide some new insights into the purpose of sleep and dreams. “Although sleep is ubiquitous in the animal kingdom, it remains to be proven whether REM-like sleep is equally universal and how these sleep phases may manifest in less visual species,” the researchers wrote. “In contrast, eye movement during REM sleep may be a unique feature of visual minds, and this convergent evolution implies some critical functionality specific to vision.”
Where the scythe cuts and the sock rives, No more fairies and bee-hives.
Laugh like a pixy (i.e., fairy).
Waters locked! waters locked! (A favourite cry of fairies.)
Borram! borram! borram! (The cry of the Irish fairies after mounting their steeds. Equivalent to the Scottish cry, “Horse! horse and hattock!”)
To live in the land of the Fair family. (A Welsh fairy saying.)
God grant that the fairies may put money in your shoes and keep your house clean. (One of the good wishes of the old time.)
Fairies comb goats’ beards every Friday.
He who finds a piece of money will always find another in the same place, so long as he keeps it a secret. (In reference to fairy gifts.)
It’s going on, like Stokepitch’s can.
A pixey or fairy saying, used in Devonshire. The family of Stokespitch or Sukespic resided near Topsham, and a barrel of ale in their cellars had for many years run freely without being exhausted. It was considered a valuable heirloom, and was esteemed accordingly, till an inquisitive maidservant took out the bung to ascertain the cause why it never run dry. On looking into the cask she found it full of cobwebs, but the fairies, it would seem, were offended, for on turning the cock, as usual, the ale had ceased to flow.
It was a common reply at Topsham to the inquiry how any affair went on “It’s going on like Stokepitch’s can,” or proceeding prosperously.
To laugh like Robin Goodfellow.
To laugh like old Bogie; He caps Bogie. (Amplified to “He caps Bogie, and Bogie capped old Nick.”)
To play the Puck. (An Irish saying, equivalent to the English one, “To play the deuce or devil.” KEIGHTLEY’S “Fairy Mythology.”)
He has got into Lob’s pound or pond. (That is, into the fairies’ pinfold. KEIGHTLEY’S “Fairy Mythology.”)
Pinch like a fairy. (“Pinch them, arms, legs, backs, shoulders, sides, and shins.” “Merry Wives of Windsor.”)
To be fairy-struck. (The paralysis is, or rather perhaps was, so called. KEIGHTLEY’S “Fairy Mythology.”)
There has never been a merry world since the Phynoderee lost his ground. [A Manx fairy saying. See Train’s “Isle of Man,” ii. p. 14.8. “Popular Rhymes of the Isle of Man,” pp. 16, 17.]
To be pixey-led.
Led astray by fairies or goblins. “When a man has got a wee drap ower muckle whuskey, misses his way home, and gets miles out of his direct course, he tells a tale of excuse and whiles lays the blame on the innocent pixies” (see KEIGHTLEY’S “Fairy Mythology”). Also recalling Feufollet, or the Will o’ the Wisp, and the traveller who
“thro’ bog and bush Was lantern-led by Friar Rush.”
Gypsies have from their out of doors life much familiarity with these “spirits” whom they call mullo dûdia, or mûllo doods, i.e., dead or ghost lights. For an account of the adventure of a gypsy with them, see “The English Gypsies and their Language,” by C. G. LELAND. London: Trübner & Co. “Pyxie-led is to be in a maze, to be bewildered as if led out of the way by hobgoblins or puck, or one of the fairies. The cure is to turn one of your garments the inside outward; some say that is for a woman to turn her cap inside outward, and for a man to do the same with some of his clothes” (MS. “Devon Glimpses”—Halliwell). “Thee pixie-led in Popish piety” (CLOBERY’S “Divine Glimpses,” 1659).
The fairies’ lanthorn.
That is the glow-worm. In America a popular story represents an Irishman as believing that a fire-fly was a mosquito “sakin‘ his prey wid a lanthorn.”
God speed you, gentlemen!
When an Irish peasant sees a cloud of dust sweeping along the road,
he raises his hat and utters this blessing in behoof of ye company of invisible fairies who, as he believes, caused it.” (“Fairy Mythology”).
The Phooka have dirtied the blackberries.
Said when the fruit of the blackberry is spoiled through age or covered with dust at the end of the season. In the North of England we say “the devil has set his foot on the Bumble-Kites” (“Denham Tract”).
Fairy, fairy, bake me a bannock and roast me a collop, And I’ll give ye a spintle off my god end.
This is spoken three times by the Clydesdale peasant when ploughing, because he believes that on getting to the end of the fourth furrow those good things will be found spread out on the grass “(CHAMBERS’ “Popular Rhymes, Scotland,” 3rd ed. p. 106).
Turn your clokes (i.e., coats), For fairy folkes Are in old oakes.
“I well remember that on more occasions than one, when a schoolboy, I have turned and worn my coat inside out in passing through a wood in order to avoid the ‘good people.’ On nutting days, those glorious red-letter festivals in the schoolboy’s calendar, the use pretty generally prevailed. The rhymes in the text are the English formula” (“Denham Tract”).
He’s got Pigwiggan
Vulgarly called Peggy Wiggan. A severe fall or Somerset is so termed in the B’prick. The fairy Pigwiggan is celebrated by Drayton in his Nymphidia” (“Denham Tract”). To which may be added a few more from other sources.
Do what you may, say what you can, No washing e’er whitens the black Zingan. (“Firdusi.”)
For every gypsy that comes to toon, A hen will be a-missing soon, And for every gypsy woman old, A maiden’s fortune will be told. p. 205 Gypsy hair and devil’s eyes, Ever stealing, full of lies, Yet always poor and never wise.
He who has never lived like a gypsy does not know how to enjoy life as a gentleman.
I never enjoyed the mere living as regards all that constitutes ordinary respectable life so keenly as I did after some weeks of great hunger, exposure, and misery, in an artillery company in 1863, at the time of the battle of Gettysburg.
Zigeuner Leben Greiner Leben. (Gipsy life a groaning life. KORTE’S “Sprichwörter d. D.”)
Er taugt nicht zum Zigeuner. Spottisch vom Lügner gesagt weil er nicht wahr-sagt. (KORTE, “Sprichwörter.”)
“He would not do for a gypsy.” Said of a liar because he cannot tell the truth. In German to predict or tell fortunes also means to speak truly, i.e., wahr = true, and sprechen = to speak.
Gypsy repentance for stolen hens is not worth much. (Old German Saying.)
The Romany chi And the Romany chal Love luripen And lutchipen And dukkeripen And huknipen And every pen But latchipen And tatchipen.
The gypsy woman And gypsy man Love stealing And lewdness And fortune telling And lying And every pen But shame And truth.
Meaning a bad day, or that matters look badly. In allusion to the Winters, a gypsy clan with a bad name.
As wild as a gypsy.
Puro romaneskoes. (In the old gypsy fashion.)
Sie hat ‘nen Kobold. (“She has a brownie, or house-fairy.”)
“Said of a girl who does everything deftly and readily. In some places the peasants believe that a fairy lives in the house, who does the work, brings water or wood, or curries the horses. Where such a fairy dwells, all succeeds if he or she is kindly treated” (KORTE’S “German Proverbs”).
“Man siehet wohl wess Geisters Kind Sie (Er.) ist.”
“One can well see what spirit was his sire.” In allusion to men of singular or eccentric habits, who are believed to have been begotten by the incubus, or goblins, or fairies. There are ceremonies by which spirits may be attracted to come to people in dreams.
“There was a young man who lived near Monte Lupo, and one day he found in a place among some old ruins a statue of a fate (fairy or goddess) all naked. He set it up in its shrine, and admiring it greatly embraced it with love (ut semen ejus profluit super statuam). And that night and ever after the fate came to him in his dreams and lay with him, and told him where to find treasures, so that he became a rich man. But he lived no more among men, nor did he after that ever enter a church. And I have heard that any one who will do as he did can draw the fate to come to him, for they are greatly desirous to be loved and worshipped by men as they were in the Roman times.”
The following are Hungarian or Transylvanian proverbs:—
False as a Tzigane, ie., gypsy.
Dirty as a gypsy.
They live like gypsies (said of a quarrelsome couple).
He moans like a guilty Tzigane (said of a man given to useless lamenting).
He knows how to plow with the gypsies (said of a liar). Also: “He knows how to ride the gypsies’ horse.”
He knows the gypsy trade (i.e., he is a thief).
Tzigane weather (i.e., a showery day).
It is gypsy honey (i.e., adulterated).
A gypsy duck i.e., a poor sort of wild duck.
“The gypsy said his favourite bird would be the pig if it had only wings” (in allusion to the gypsy fondness for pork).
Mrs. GERARD gives a number of proverbs as current among Hungarian gypsies which appear to be borrowed by them from those of other races. Among them are:—
Who would steal potatoes must not forget the sack.
The best smith cannot make more than one ring at a time.
Nothing is so bad but it is good enough for somebody.
Bacon makes bold.
“He eats his faith as the gypsies ate their church.”
A Wallach proverb founded on another to the effect that the gypsy church was made of pork and the dogs ate it. I shall never forget how an old gypsy in Brighton laughed when I told her this, and how she repeated: “O Romani kangri sos kerdo bâllovas te i juckli hawde lis.”
“No entertainment without gypsies.”
In reference to gypsy musicians who are always on hand at every festivity.
The Hungarian wants only a glass of water and a gypsy fiddler to make him drunk.
In reference to the excitement which Hungarians experience in listening to gypsy music.
With a wet rag you can put to flight a whole village of gypsies (Hungarian).
It would not be advisable to attempt this with any gypsies in Great
[paragraph continues] Britain, where they are almost, without exception, only too ready to fight with anybody.
Every gypsy woman is a witch.
“Every woman is at heart a witch.”
Source: In the “Materials for the Study of the Gypsies,” by M. I. KOUNAVINE, which I have not yet seen, there are, according to A. B. Elysseeff (Gypsy-Lore Journal, July, 1890), three or four score of gypsy proverbial sayings and maxims. These refer to Slavonian or far Eastern Russian Romanis. I may here state in this connection that all who are interested in this subject, or aught relating to it, will find much to interest them in this journal of the Gypsy-Lore Society, printed by T. & A. Constable, Edinburgh. The price of subscription, including membership of the society, is £1 a year—Address: David Mac Ritchie, 4, Archibald Place, Edinburgh.
Illustration source: The Project Gutenberg EBook of Gypsy Sorcery and Fortune Telling, by Charles Godfrey Leland. Release Date: December 13, 2018 [EBook #58465]
None of the modern monarchs have any real power. In Great Britain, Elizabeth II and several other members of the royal family have formally led the state for half a century, but it is no secret that political power belongs to completely different people. In the US, royals are seen more like characters from the pages of a foreign fashion magazine. The last monarch the Americans had dealt with was the demented King George, and hardly anyone would like to have that encounter again. In areas where dynastic traditions are still preserved, technical specialists and advisers are much more effective today. Kingship has become a beautiful but outdated symbol. At the same time, for most of human history, things have been different. Kings were governors, military leaders, prime ministers, architects, judges and legislators.
Here we are talking about a country where the monarchy had completely real power. Herod the Great reigned in Judea (also in Galilee, Samaria and Idumea). He got to this “title” with difficulty, but he confirmed his position through his relations with Rome. Apparently, the title of king of the Jews meant a lot to him, considering that in order to keep it for himself, he had three of his sons killed. After his death, the kingdom fell into parts, which became the property of other of his sons, but the one in whose hands was the supreme political power, Caesar Augustus, deprived them of their right to be called “kings of the Jews.” They became tetrars, secondary rulers. The king then possessed de facto power, and the tetrars received rather limited powers from Rome, and one was soon deprived of both these and his office. The royal power was based on conquests and the power of arms. Such was the reality of the reign of Herod the Great, as well as the reign of many of the figures of world political history.
There is no need to doubt the veracity of the accounts of the events of 1066 and their like – a history of battles, of battles, of conquests. William the Conqueror, the Wars of the Roses, Napoleon and the two world wars played a decisive role in British history, and the course of American history was forever changed by the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the Cold War, the two wars in The Persian Gulf and the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001 The fight for power and land has never stopped. This is how it was in China, in Japan, in the peninsula of Hindustan, in South America, in Africa, in the endless expanses of Eurasia. Mongolians still honor Genghis Khan – the greatest of their compatriots. Kings, generals, lords, chieftains and emperors hold victories and suffer defeats. Herod is simply repeating the experience of all world history. He is a mighty king.
Herod the Great and the Roman Empire
Every year at Christmas we retell the story associated with the names of King Herod and the baby Jesus, but the story of Herod himself needs a fuller exposition. He reigned in Judea from 37 BC to 4 AD. His long reign was marked by conquests, construction, prosperity, internal conflicts and centralization of power. We can say without exaggeration that Herod the Great determined the destiny of his people in spiritual, physical and socio-political terms for many years to come. The correct understanding of his personality will also allow us to better know the world in which Christ lived. What kind of king was he?
The Jews, who had long tried to assert their independence, were gradually forced to give way. At first they came under the rule of Alexander the Great, and then under the Seleucid Empire. Among them is Antiochus Epiphanes – a cruel persecutor of the Jews and their religion. At a certain historical moment, new actors appeared in the political arena – the Maccabee family, dedicated to the liberation of the Jewish people. With a persistent struggle, they managed to gain partial independence. And they founded the royal dynasty of the Hasmoneans, whose representatives simultaneously performed the role of kings and high priests. Their goal was to unite the people under the authority of one God. The main milestones in Israel’s history were the Exodus from Egypt and later the return from the Babylonian captivity, so the theme of how God delivers His people has always occupied a central place in the hopes of the Jews. No one doubts that deliverance can only be obtained on the condition that the people obey God – as the prophets taught. In connection with this, various questions related to law and obedience arise: must, for example, soldiers fight on the Sabbath? The law seems to have prohibited this. But giving up combat once a week gave their enemies a huge advantage. Finally, it was decided that the army could fight on the Sabbath as well, which significantly strengthened their position (1 Mak. 2:29-41). Even this compromise, however, did not help to win full independence, and gradually Israel fell under Roman rule. About 60 BC The Roman Empire actually completely subjugated the Hasmonean ruler Hyrcanus II. At that time, he increasingly relied on the help of his first minister, Antipater, who had two sons, one of whom was Herod. Thus he appears on the political scene.
Hyrcanus’ brother – Aristobulus – who also sought power, managed to overthrow Hyrcanus and ascend as Aristobulus II. This seemed to end Herod’s career, but in 63 BC. Aristobulus refuses military aid to Pompey and incurs his wrath. Pompey attacks him, takes him prisoner and besieges Jerusalem, where the riot against Rome is going on. The city fell after a 3-month siege in which the Romans used the latest military techniques. A terrible bloodshed follows – priests are killed in the altar, and the Jews give approx. 12,000 casualties. Pompey dares even to enter the Holy of Holies. As a result, Aristobulus and his family lost power, but this did not benefit Hyrcanus either. He was stripped of his royal title, and political power passed directly into Roman hands. In 54 BC the new Roman governor, Crassus, confiscated from the Jerusalem temple all the gold and precious stones, with a total weight of 8,000 talents, corresponding to the value of fifty million sheep. This act of his only intensified the Jews’ hatred of Rome and finally showed them what it means to be a vassal state. However, Roman power under Julius Caesar was invulnerable.
Hyrcanus and Antipater did not put away their weapons: they diligently sought the location first of Pompey, and then of Julius Caesar, whom they had helped to defeat in Egypt. Two years later, new dramatic events occur. Antigonus, son of Aristobulus, regardless of his father’s delicate situation, turns directly to Julius Caesar with assurances of loyalty and intent to discredit Hyrcanus and Antipater. Herod’s father cannot let the outrageous act go unpunished. He stands before Caesar, throws off his robes, and shows his wounds received in fighting on the side of Rome, and then proves that Antigonus and his father are enemies of Rome, and that they are inciting tumult in the hope of seizing power. This makes a great impression on Caesar, and he prefers to bet on Hyrcanus and Antipater. Hyrcanus was appointed ethnarch and high priest, and Antipater – the official representative of Rome in Judea. Antipater gained the trust of the great Caesar and strengthened his influence as a new Jewish governor, choosing for himself the role of strategist, determining the future development of Israel. In fact, he concentrated in his hands the control of all the territory subject to Rome, appointing his sons as governors in Jerusalem and Galilee.
An event which vividly testifies to the character and political methods of the twenty-year-old Herod helps us to understand his subsequent history. In Galilee, he fought against the people whom Josephus called “robbers”.[10] These were probably not just robbers, but militant nationalists dreaming of rejecting dependence on Rome. Herod crushed the rebels and executed many of them, along with their leader Hezekiah. With which he deserves the gratitude of Sextus Caesar – a relative of Julius Caesar and governor of Syria. The members of the Sanhedrin were enraged and ordered Herod to stand trial: a grim foreshadowing of what Christ was to experience seventy-seven years later. At that time the Pharisees dominated the Sanhedrin. Herod comes in purple royal robes, accompanied by soldiers. He stands before the judges without fear, because he knows that he can count on the support of Rome. Hyrcanus, still holding the office of high priest, does not allow a sentence to be pronounced against Herod, which would also sound like a challenge to Rome. Thus Herod emerges victorious. He left the Sanhedrin with dignity to soon return to Jerusalem at the head of an entire army, threatening to take revenge on his accusers – a threat he did not carry out. The incident is over, but Herod has learned a lesson: never to trust the Pharisees. During his reign, they never once succeeded in gaining power. Instead, the high priesthood was held by the representatives of a group known collectively as the Sadducees. Such is the distribution of the political balance for the next few decades.
As long as Julius Caesar was in power, the situation in Israel remained stable, but after his assassination, representatives of many Jewish groups saw the disorder in Rome as an ideal opportunity for a successful uprising. Then the political strategy of Herod finally becomes clear, who decides to follow in his father’s footsteps.[11]
Recognizing the power of Rome, he remained loyal even in troubled times, and after Caesar’s death he took the side of Mark Antony. The country is plunged into chaos. A revolt breaks out in Jerusalem and his father – Antipater – is poisoned. Herod deals with his murderers cruelly. From the east, Israel was flooded by the wave of the Parthian invasion. This is when Antigonus, son of the defeated Aristobulus II, appears in Jerusalem hoping to retake power. And in a short time he succeeds. Herod’s brother is forced to commit suicide to avoid death at the hands of Antigonus, who forces Herod and his family to flee south. Antigonus became king, relying on the support of the Parthians who had previously sacked Jerusalem. The fact that he bites off Hyrcanus’ ear with his teeth, so that he can never be high priest again, testifies to Antigonus’ character. It is known that one of the requirements for one is not to have a physical disability.
Herod’s reaction is unexpected – he leaves his family and his army in the impregnable fortress of Masada, and he himself goes to Arabia in search of allies. Finding none there, he crosses the desert, heads for Egypt, meets Cleopatra, and from there, after a long voyage through Rhodes, goes to Rome. There he wins the favor of Antony and Octavian, each of whom is currently trying to take Caesar’s place. The Roman Senate proclaimed Herod king of Judea. At first it was only a title, but with the support of Rome, the Samaritans and the Galileans, King Herod was able to return to his country after a persistent and brilliant military campaign in 39-37 BC. At this time, the features of his cruelty, which became his distinguishing mark throughout his reign, were already showing. We have seen that earlier Antogonus captured Herod’s brother, who to avoid torture committed suicide. However, before that, when he realized that Herod had saved himself, he uttered his last words: “I die with a calm soul, because the man who will avenge me is alive”.[12] In battle, Herod does slaughter thousands, but he never does so indiscriminately. Once, in one of the battles for Galilee, he discovered rebels hiding in the caves near Arbel. Standing by, Herod tries to convince them to surrender, but he witnesses a terrible event that must have seriously affected him:
The mother of seven children, together with her sons, begged her husband to let them go out, because Herod had promised to give them their lives. Her husband’s response was terrifying. The old man ordered his sons to leave the cave one by one, killing each one who appeared at the entrance. Herod watched with horror what was happening and was struck in his very heart, stretched out his hand and begged the old man to spare his children. But the old man only laughed at him with contempt and accused him of cowardice. Having dealt with the last of his sons, he killed his wife, threw their corpses into the abyss, and then followed them himself.[13]
Such a scene would shake anyone’s psyche. Herod had hoped to regain Jerusalem by peaceful means, but in a few months of bloody battles, thousands died. Antigonus was captured and sent to Antony in Rome, where he was beheaded, and Herod managed to stop the destruction of the temple by the Romans and stabilized the situation in the country. He came to power at the cost of a lot of blood – including that of his compatriots, and became a governor hated by them. Having received a royal title in 40 BC, three years later he was already the full-fledged ruler of Judea. His long reign (until 4 AD) allowed him to exert a decisive influence on the development of his country.
As king of Judea, Herod maintained relationships with representatives of some countries. One of them is Egypt, where Cleopatra reigned. By this time, Rome had already subdued Egypt, but Antony was dazzled by Cleopatra’s beauty and much of the country came under her influence. As we have seen, Herod had already visited Cleopatra on his flight from Antigonus. Rumor has it (probably out of habit) that she tried to seduce him, but he rejected her. Not used to such treatment, Cleopatra was deeply offended and harbored a deep hatred for Herod. Later, desiring Herod’s death, she asked Antony for the territory of Judea as a thank you for his devotion. However, this time Antony, in love, is prudent enough and refuses. But in 34 BC, much to Herod’s displeasure, he handed Cleopatra the rich plantations around Jericho, as well as part of the southern lands of Judea. Soon after, she visits Jerusalem, to meet Herod and, of course, to gloat over what has happened. The official occasion is for Cleopatra to inspect her new possessions and receive from Herod the lease for them. Because Herod kept them for himself in the form of a lease, for which he paid a large sum. The meeting is quite depressing. Josephus suggests that Herod seriously considered killing Cleopatra, but his advisers dissuaded him. Herod thought that this way he would be able to help Antony, but he was told that the murder could be interpreted in another way.
A new threat to Herod’s power arose in 31 BC when Octavian defeated Antony at the Battle of Actium. After this battle, Octavian was emperor and went down in history as the great Caesar and Augustus. Herod’s position is threatened. As a supporter of Antony, he found himself on the side of the vanquished – with all the ensuing consequences.
Herod presented himself before Octavian Augustus and removed the royal diadem from his head, but Octavian put it back on him, having appreciated his loyalty to Rome and to himself for the future. Herod and Octavian Augustus remained staunch allies for a quarter of a century. Octavian returns the lands and plantations of Jericho back to Herod. After these events, the Judean king Herod now sits firmly and confidently on the throne, securing the full and unconditional support of Rome.
Herod’s relationship with Rome also determined the structure of Jewish society, which was already firmly connected to the Roman Empire. Throughout the territory of the country, Herod erected fortresses to fight against possible rebels or conquerors; thus keeping the population of Judea in fear and subjection. His army is constantly on the move across the country, ready to nip any rebellion in the bud. The Romans demanded the payment of taxes used to support the army, some of which were sent to Rome. Herod duly paid everything, not forgetting to introduce new taxes to cover his own needs. A strengthened economy and political stability and peace are not bad compensations for the high taxes that make up about a quarter of everyone’s income. Thanks to this strategy, his reign was marked by relative economic stability and a general rise in living standards.
Jewish society at the time of Herod experienced the influence of Roman, Greek and Jewish cultures. Herod built theaters and stadiums, yet the Jews stubbornly refused to succumb to Greco-Roman influence. That is why elements of these cultures are practically not mentioned in the Gospel. Neither ultra-religious nor moderate Jews attend sporting events. In the eyes of the entire Roman Empire, Herod acquired the reputation of a benefactor. He spent enormous funds on the construction of temples of Apollo and other Roman deities, on theaters, stadiums, markets, aqueducts, porticos, colonnades. In Rome, he was considered an influential, reliable and wealthy vassal. At the age of five, he allocated funds for the Olympic Games and was the first to propose that awards be given to the athletes who finished in second and third place. Olympic silver and bronze medalists owe their awards to Herod’s initiative. However, all this does not fit into the environment of the Jewish culture, which rejects everything foreign, and the history of Herod’s relations with the Jews are quite complicated, and at times even tragic.
Herod the Great and the Jews
On the one hand, he is chosen by the Romans, which in itself causes the hatred of the freedom-loving Jews. The fact that he came to power as a conqueror further complicates the situation. The relationship and relations between king and people are very strained. Herod did not follow the example of his father, who made an alliance with the Pharisees at the time. He preferred to work with the much more compliant Sadducees, who were not so attached to religious dogma and were willing to adjust to life under Herod and the Romans. The king also favors essays that leave the political arena and pose no threat. Moreover, once an Essene named Menachem had predicted to him that he would become king.[14] During his reign, the Pharisees were in opposition, attracting wide sections of the population, and this to a large extent determined not only the moral foundations of Pharisaism, but also the image with which it is presented to us in the years of Christ.
On the other hand, Herod, who was crowned king of the Jews, had to have his dynasty recognized. Since his father was born in Idumea – south of Judea – Herod was only half Jewish. Is it any wonder, then, that he had to go to such great lengths to meet the demands of his subjects who were adamant on the question of descent. His first wife, Dorida, who gave birth to his son Antipater, was not Jewish. After that, Herod married Mariamne, a Jewish woman from the royal family of the Hasmoneans, whom he, as well as the entire people of Judea, loved very much. She bore him two sons, Alexander and Aristobulus, who also deserve the love of the Jews. They were educated in Rome, where they were also trained in the art of government. For a time things calm down in Judea. Finally, a dynasty was established on the throne, Jewish by blood and at the same time pleasing to Rome. But all this turns out to be illusory. Mariamne learns that Herod, on his way to meet Antony in Laodicea (to exonerate the accusations leveled at him by Cleopatra), has given orders that in the event of his death, she also be killed. This decision was probably dictated both by jealousy and a desire to spare her the torments of his enemies in the event of his death, but Mariamne was certainly not satisfied with it, especially as she enjoyed among the people much more greater popularity than Herod himself. There was a serious blow to the trust between the two. But the worst was yet to come.
Herod’s sister – Salome – strongly hates Mariamna. Herod’s first wife and her son Antipater spread a rumor of betrayal of Mariamne and her two sons. It was these sons of Herod who were educated in Rome that the Jews saw as their future rightful rulers. However, they are accused of trying to poison Herod. The trial was held in Rome, under the watchful eye of Octavian Augustus, and dismissed all charges against Herod’s wife and sons. The suspicious Herod, however, in a moment of insanity ordered his sons, as well as his beloved wife, to be executed. He later became convinced of their innocence and the guilt of what had happened haunted him until the end of his days, sometimes falling into temporary madness. This terrible tragedy is reminiscent of the plot of “Othello”, but it is much crueler because it took the lives of real people. Together with Mariamna and her sons, all the hopes of the Jews for the continuation of the Hasmonean dynasty, capable of reviving their faith in the royal family, perished, and Herod was no longer destined to rest in peace. Subsequently, he married three more times: to another Mariamne, then to Maltake, and finally to Cleopatra of Jerusalem. In the last days of his life, Herod nevertheless issued an order to kill his first-born son Antipater, who, together with his first wife Dorida, entangled the entire royal court in intrigues and it is quite possible that he himself planned to poison Herod. It is scarcely possible to describe in words the grievous calamity which befell this family, because of the constant fear which haunted Herod, that he might be dethroned by some of his sons. The royal throne is entangled in the web of evil woven by Herod and his entourage. Fear and intrigue never leave the royal court – silent witnesses of which are the crime-free fortresses of Masada, Irodium and those in other cities. In the light of everything described, the appearance in Jerusalem of the Magi (wise men) who wanted to worship the new Jewish king is a dangerous event. They might as well put their heads in a lion’s mouth.
After the murder of Mariamna, Herod tries to restore the confidence of the Jews in himself and finds a magnificent idea. He decided to restore the Jerusalem temple, which was to become a great national shrine, in no way inferior to the Greek or Roman ones, but built strictly according to the Jewish canon. Like the Athenian and Delphian temples, its treasury must have received considerable cash to ensure a steady source of income for the high priest and his entourage. The high priests – above all the Sadducees – found the kingly idea attractive and concluded, although not very advantageous for them, an agreement with Herod. He reserves for himself the right to appoint a high priest, and thus his choice cannot be considered free. So the temple was built – a majestic, tall, white building decorated with gold. Thousands of priests had to learn the craft of stonemasonry so that the ritual purity of the temple, where only priests were allowed, could be preserved during construction. The territory of the temple was expanded and it again became the center of the religious life of the Jews. The main works on the construction of the temple were between 19 and 10 BC, but the construction continued even after the birth of Christ, until 64. Herod managed to successfully implement the plan, regardless of the fact that the construction was carried out at the expense of the high taxes. But even this grandiose construction evokes in the people rather restrained gratitude.
The rebuilt temple and its surrounding buildings became the main center of the national and religious life of the Jews in Jerusalem and even beyond the borders of Judea. We, who are used to the simpler architecture of the temples, can hardly appreciate the importance of the Jerusalem Temple – not only a Jewish and governmental center, but also an important tourist attraction. According to the degree of development of the system of sacrifices and taxes supporting the existence of the entire religious order, Herod’s relationship with the new Jewish elite is visibly complicated. The construction of the temple is his merit, but the priests also gain power, because everything related to the temple is under the rule of the God of Israel, not the Roman governor. A vivid example of these relationships becomes an event at the end of Christ’s life – probably even after the arrival of the wise men (Matt. 2 ch.). Herod, wishing to show his respect and obedience to Rome, ordered a golden Roman eagle to be placed on the roof of the temple. His action greatly annoyed the Jews, and two rabbis persuaded their disciples to go up and take down the eagle. When Herod learned of this, he became furious, which he demonstrated to the people. He ordered the rabbis, along with the disciples and several other people to be burned alive.[15] Thus, the construction of the temple did not make the situation in the country more stable, but only exacerbated the contradictions in the politics of the Jews and Herod himself.
The secret opposition to Herod had several different strands. First of all we must mention Pharisaism, which gradually became a popular movement, in many respects independent of the temple religion. Scores of scribe-Pharisees traveled throughout Judea and Galilee, using a growing number of synagogues or assemblies for the preaching of the Mosaic Torah, underlying the national self-consciousness and Jewish understanding of virtue. The ruling Sadducees did not outwardly show hostility to the Pharisees and could not help but recognize the strengthening of their positions, so rivalry inevitably arose between the two groups. In addition to the Pharisees, we can count the traveling zealots as the opposition – fierce nationalists who consider the tax paid to Rome to be treason against God. Some of them assembled in various places, ready at the slightest sign of weakness to attack Herod’s soldiers. Mainly, however, these are ordinary people – peasants, poor, overwhelmed by taxes, waiting for change and a new governor. In the great Jewish “cauldron” the hatred of Rome and Herod, the national faith, the preaching of the Torah, the growing interest in the temple and the burden of taxes are mixed. With the death of Herod, this mixture promised to become truly explosive.
Christ and Herod
To the aging Herod, suffering from stomach cancer, the news of Christ’s birth probably had the same effect as the bull’s cloak. Having uncovered a number of conspiracies, he suspects his eldest son of wanting to poison him. And suddenly, from the eastern lands that belong to the Parthians, three noblemen – astrologers – come to him. The Parthians were not only potential opponents of Rome and of itself. Indirectly, his father and brother died because of them. The arriving wise men ask an unexpected question: “Where is the born King of the Jews?” (Matt. 2:2). Herod must have been beside himself with rage. The words of St. Ap. Matthew is too restrained in this matter: “When King Herod heard it, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him” (Matt. 2:3). Herod is enraged by this challenge. He had just executed or was about to execute another of his own sons for his pursuit of the Judean throne and suddenly another self-styled pretender. The inhabitants of Jerusalem are rather worried about the reaction of Herod himself, who in his fits of madness has done terrible things. However, it becomes clear that naive foreigners know nothing about the situation in the country. Far from being partisans, these were Magi from the distant eastern countries, lying beyond Herod’s political interests. With no animosity towards them, Herod decided to focus his efforts on the infant, who threatened to take his throne. As Jerusalem excitedly debates the possible rival of the hated Herod, the same makes plans for his destruction. The king, ignorant of the matters of the Jewish Scriptures, was forced to seek the advice of the scribes. St. app. Matthew says that the events he describes happened before the eyes of all the people. Calling “all the high priests and scribes of the people” (Matt. 2:4), Herod nevertheless did not turn the meeting into an official meeting of the Sanhedrin. [16] The prophecy of the prophet Micah (5:2) about Bethlehem is well known and the priests reported him to Herod.[17] Herod sends the wise men to Bethlehem, which is five miles from Jerusalem, with strict instructions to return to him with a detailed account of what happened. They go, worship Christ, and leave Judea, avoiding meeting Herod again. The “another road” mentioned by Matthew (2:12) most likely went through the Idumaean desert – south to the Dead Sea and from there to the East. Herod’s army entered Bethlehem and slaughtered all the infants of the Messiah’s age (Matt. 2:16). Such a solution of the problem was entirely in the spirit of Herod, at this stage of his life. Josephus writes that soon after the events in Bethlehem, the king, who was on his deathbed, ordered hundreds of high-ranking Jews to be imprisoned in the Jericho hippodrome, who were to die with him, and thus his death would be marked with sorrow, not with jubilation.[18] Herod died in 4 BC. and fortunately his death was not accompanied by mass murder. Five days before his death, he ordered his bodyguards to kill his son, the schemer Antipater. The great Judean king until the very end of his life fought with pretenders to the throne.
The contrast between Herod and Christ is incredibly great – with the death of Herod the Great, his long stay on the Jewish throne ends. Christ – as some understood him – was the born King of the Jews. Whatever this title meant, it must have been akin to that worn by Herod, rather than a symbolic model of the United Kingdom or other modern monarchies. The genealogy of the Gospel according to Ap. Matthew and App. Luke points to Christ as the Son of David, heir to the royal line. The Magi call him “King of the Jews” referring to Micah’s prophecy. The Evangelists do not in the least doubt the royal appointment of Christ. Getting all this right is the main theme of this book. The royal title is not only a spiritual concept, it clearly also contains some political meaning.
According to the story of the evangelists, the news about the birth of the King did not become known to many people, it could not have been otherwise. God gave a completely definite revelation to the Holy Virgin: “He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David; and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will have no end” (Luke 1:32-33). After the death and resurrection of Christ, the Holy Mother of God delivered these words to Ap. Luke and yet both believe in the fulfillment of this prophecy. The elderly family of Zacharias and Elizabeth – excited by the impending birth of their son John, called the Baptist – learned of his special relationship with the royal infant. “Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, for he visited and delivered his people and raised up for us in the house of his servant David a horn of salvation” (Luke 1:68-69). The cry of the future forerunner of the great King is heard in their home. To ordinary shepherds, heavenly angels announce the birth of the Lord – Messiah in the city of David (Luke 2:11-12). The king comes to His subjects, but visits only the humblest, the poorest of them – those who can barely cope with bureaucracy and taxes. The most amazing thing about the app. Luke is that the King is born not in a palace, but in a manger. The thought that God is not interested in the display of external greatness does not give rest to the ap. Luke: just as he haunts us today. If you rule the whole world, the palace is so worthy of you… Here we first encounter the uniqueness of Christ. Can a king differ from the usual image? During the writing of his gospel ap. Mark is confident of an affirmative answer. At the very beginning, he quotes the prophecy of Isaiah, who calls St. John the Baptist – the Forerunner of Christ. But a few verses later, in 40:10-11, it says:
Behold, the Lord God comes with power, and His arms with power. Behold, His reward is with Him, and His recompense is before His face. As a shepherd he will feed his flock; He will take the lambs in His arms and carry them on His chest, and He will lead the milkmaids.
What strange words! So is this how God deals with His people? The masters demand taxes, slaves, wars, and he rewards! Power is based on fear and violence, and before us is the image of a ruler who is gentle with children and pregnant women. A cruel man cannot carry a tender lamb in his arms. The king relies on the power of his army, and this one carries the subjects “on His chest”. Is it possible that in God’s kingdom there will be no wars of conquest, no robbery or violence? In the context of world history this seems impossible, but in the context of prophecy it is undeniable. It turns out that the king could be something very different from anything known to history.
Thus, the birth of Christ embodies a fundamental political opposition: the powerful and vengeful governor plotting murder, and Christ hidden in Egypt by St. Joseph and the St. Virgin. The Holy Family sets out on its difficult and dangerous journey at night (Matt. 2:14). Bethlehem never became their home, although they probably intended to stay there for a long time. They gather their belongings, but instead of a hundred kilometers on the way back to Nazareth, they will have to go much further and become refugees in Egypt. No one notices their disappearance, except, perhaps, the relatives of St. Joseph. The family of St. Virgin, who remained in the north, will hardly know where they are headed. The road is difficult, but beyond the cruel Herod’s domain the infant is safe. A huge Jewish diaspora lives in Egypt – the largest in the Roman Empire. Large Jewish settlements also existed in Alexandria, Heliopolis and other towns and villages. Egyptian Jews did not have to live in ghettos, on the contrary, they played an important role in the life of this Roman colony. The Romans granted them complete religious freedom, they allowed them to build synagogues without hindrance. That is why St. Joseph’s family probably settled in the new place without difficulty, and Joseph found work without drawing undue attention to himself. Itinerant Jewish merchants, traveling regularly, could deliver letters to their relatives and friends. After some time, news of Herod’s death reached Egypt (Matt. 2:19-20). Now the holy family can safely return home, because the events associated with the appearance of the magi are gradually becoming history. But where is home now? Among the Jews, as a rule, women go to the man’s family. Although St. Joseph lived and worked in Galilee, the fact that he was registered as a tax payer in Judea speaks of his intention to return there (Matt. 2:22). It is possible that he planned to return with his family to Bethlehem. But the killing of the infants by Herod is too fresh in the memory, and in his dream Joseph is instructed to go in a very different direction. After Herod’s death, those of his sons who were fortunate enough to remain alive fought for his throne. Power in Jerusalem was effectively in the hands of Archelaus, so St. Joseph’s concerns were well founded. Philip and Antipas, however, do not want to lay down their arms. At first Archelaus presented himself to his subjects as a magnanimous monarch, addressing the great crowd gathered in the capital for the Passover celebration. But his popularity soon becomes an obstacle for him. The Jews approached him with a request to lower the taxes and punishments for those who took part in the removal of the Roman eagle from the roof of the temple, i.e. the nationalists pressured him to take the side of the Jews in the struggle with Rome. Archelaus delays making a decision; the Jews saw in this a weakness and raised a revolt. Immediately the country seems to return to the time of Herod. The army enters Jerusalem and destroys everything. Battles are even fought on the Temple Mount. Thousands die, and Archelaus’ hands, like his father’s, are stained with blood.[19] In addition, the Roman procurator Sabinus also waged war against the Jews in an effort to strengthen his position and, of course, to benefit from the riches of Jerusalem. It does not stop even before another robbery of the temple. News of all this spread like wildfire and very soon reached St. Joseph and St. Theotokos in Egypt. It turns out that Archelaus is no better than his father. Even after Herod’s death, Bethlehem, located only ten kilometers from Jerusalem, continued to be too dangerous a place for the holy family.
Herod’s three surviving sons—Archelaus, Antipas, and Philip—head to Rome to find out which of them Octavian Augustus will wish to make Herod’s successor. In their absence, an uprising breaks out in the country. In Galilee, Judas – the son of the rebel Hezekiah killed by Herod, and later governor of Galilee – captured the royal arsenal at Sepphorus, not far from Nazareth, and armed his associates, burning with a desire to avenge the murder of his father. In Perea, but east of the Jordan River, one of Herod’s slaves named Simon also revolted and set fire to the royal palace at Jericho. For a while success smiled on the insurgents, but hopes soon evaporated. The Roman general Varus threw against the Jews all the power of the army and inflicted a final defeat on Judea. He burned Sepphorus and, to teach the local population a lesson, sold it into slavery, leaving behind only a lifeless wasteland. He applied what had become classic Roman measures of appeasement, and Judea was once again fully under Roman rule. Two thousand rebels are crucified on both sides of the Sepphoric roads, as a warning to anyone who decides to defy Roman power. Disturbing news is certainly reaching the holy family.
The three sons of Herod receive from Rome authority over a certain territory, but none of them is awarded a royal title. Archelaus was given power over Judea as ethnarch, and the other two brothers became tetrarchs. Now for the parents of Christ the road to Judea is cut off. Returning to the homeland of the Holy Mother of God is also not at all simple, but it was there, in Nazareth (Galilee), that they decided to return. As a good carpenter, St. Joseph probably found work somewhere in the rebuilding of Sepphorus. The Jews learn not to provoke new Roman atrocities, and the old ones eventually fade into memory. Herod Agrippa felt confident enough in his role as the governor of Galilee, and therefore, upon taking office, he did not undertake mass executions. The nationalists temporarily fell silent – weakened after the showdown with Judah, the son of Hezekiah, and his followers. And in Nazareth a child grows up, whose name is Jesus…
* Storkey, A. Jesus and Politics: confronting the powers, Michigan 2005, p. 7-21.
[10] The Jewish War, 1, 10; Jewish Antiquities, 14, 8.
[11] Schurer, E. A history of the Jewish people in the Age of Jesus (175 B.C. – A.D. 135), vol. I, Edinburgh 1973-1987, p. 267-273.
[12] The Jewish War, 1, 13, 10; Jewish Antiquities, 14, 13, 10.
[13] The Jewish War, 1, 16, 4.
[14] Jewish Antiquities, 15:10.5.
[15] The Jewish War, 1, 33, 1-4; Jewish Antiquities, 17, 6, 2-4.
[16] France, R. T. The Gospel according to Matthew & An Introduction and Commentary, Leicester 1985, p. 83.
[17] The place of the Messiah’s birth is not entirely precisely established. According to the general opinion, this is the city of Bethlehem (John 7:42), but it is also said that the birthplace of Christ is not known to anyone (7:27).