Since this germ was kindly given to me, way back in early December, luck has been with me. Luck? I mean Bad luck. The strange side effects that bedevilled me for a fortnight, the cough which followed and only now looks like abating (my neighbours downstairs will be glad) and then there are the little things.
The light went out in the fridge freezer. The whole thing appeared to stop. This meant removing stuff and placing it in the landlords fridge, which has not been touched in years and needing wiped when I was exhausted and it was late at night (see neighbours again). It turned out the fridge freezer works OK, so all has to go back, no cleaning attempted this time, and the light is still out as the plastic surround will not come off!
The mouse returned.
The mouse's appearance so frightened the lass next door she has forced her man to leave move her out. I hear a child is on the way and she is neurotic about babies attacked by mice. Hmmm. The landlord had a man in to deal with the mouse, I blocked up all I could and the mouse vanished. Once I had confirmed he had gone he reappeared, apparently orange peel is attractive. No more of that left for him.
Once my back heals, ah yes my back.
At Christmas I aided an old man to stand, my right arm soon ached with the strain! It still does, though much lessened. Then I did my back in, this still aches but not so bad. I am treating it gently however and it is healing. And on top of this things keep falling apart. Things fall on the floor and disappear, my glasses of course required renewing after I stood on them, packets are delivered by a postie who cannot knock loudly on the door and I have yet to get to the sorting office to collect it, and each time I am on the internet something goes wrong, pages vanish, strange messages appear, new spam piles up.
However, after a bad Saturday, full of aches and that dreary lurgii that leaves only a rotten feeling things have begun to improve. The bug is clearing up I believe, my head is almost awake, and as I sat on my bed rejoicing last night I spilled a near full mug of tea across the bed.
Rejoice! Rejoice!
Things are so bad I got a call from Sandringham today offering sympathy!
Talking of which I began to wonder what was hiding behind the hundreds of articles full of ignorant speculation in the media? As fear of war recedes in the Gulf, at least until Trump pushes it again, the media need something to protect Boris. What devious Bill is he offering behind the headlines, what important decision is not being given the space it deserves? These are good days to hide bad news, and all Boris has to offer is news that will be bad for us. We need to read the small stories also.
It never fails to surprise me how interested the secular media are when something happens with a Pope. They disregard Christianity, speak against it, live lives totally opposed to it then offer long reports on radio and fill space in the media concerning the goings on. Why? All these folk do is declare their clear ignorance of the subject, spew forth this ignorance and yet take no time to learn or research the subject.
This time there is an attempt to make out one ex-Pope is attacking the current Pope, although whether that is what he is doing is dubious. The point concerns celibacy and the demand priests must be celibate. Pope Francis has indicated he may allow some priests to be married in those far off areas where it is difficult to acquire priests. Benedict objects possibly not because of the priests being married in this situation but that it may remove celibacy altogether from the church. Such an idea goes way back into the past, a celibate man being dedicated to God more than a married one.
We have to ignore Roman Catholic teaching and seek scripture, no objection to marriage is found for the church leaders. Paul indicates this does make life difficult for a man running a church but I suspect almost all leaders in the first 200 years were married with single men being rare.
By the late 300's AD churches had changed. Constantine had legalised the church, many found this a way to high position and in my mind this is where a separation of Priest and laity arises. There appear to be many who wish to be among the ecclesiastical hierarchy and position themselves as priests and important men. Celibacy is added, not just to offer commitment but possibly for a Greek sense of 'purity' that is not found in scripture.
We need not add surely that you will realise that a priest's job is to take your sacrifice and offer this to God, he gets in between you and God. When Jesus died on the cross the curtain in the temple enclosing the 'Holy of Holies' the residence of God himself, tore apart from top to bottom. This showed the way to God fro each individual was now open, but only through the Great High Priest Jesus Christ. He is both the sacrifice and the high priest, anyone who stands between you and God calling himself priest is a false priest!
Indicating this to Anglicans, who have now dropped the term 'Vicar' and replaced it with 'Priest in charge' brings lots of silent looks. Indicating this to RC's may bring much more.
Jesus made no rule but in Matthew 19 he indicates marriage is for life, not just until you get fed up, and some will be single for a variety of reasons. The disciples at the time thought long term marriage a hard thing, most may well have been married. People get married and remains single for many reasons, sometimes love, but there is no, and can be no demand to be celibate. Indeed one scripture indicates those who demand this are a danger, possibly Greek influence. I forget where it is found.
The two Popes would be better off ignoring the celibacy thing and spend time reading scripture, putting aside false church teaching and following Jesus instead of debates about that which is quite clear to most other churches.
While cogitating on my readership I came upon a gentleman called John Duns Scotus of whom you will have knowledge I'm positive. He was named after his birthplace, 'Dunse,' now called 'Duns' and found ion the Scottish borders not far from Berwick on Tweed. It was common then to call people by their place of origin as you know hence the name.
Duns Scotus lived from 1265 - 1308, an interesting time in Scots History with the English barbarian Edward I attempting to steal the land for his imperialist grandeur and failing and one reason for this was that great man Sir William Wallace, patriot and Knight!
John had an uncle who was guardian of the Friars Minor at Dumfries and he joined there, at that time a good place for clever kids to make use of their brains. Mind you entering a monastery before puberty does not appeal to me as a good idea, especially in those far off days. On the other hand clever people did reach powerful positions and Duns Scotus did have a good brain.
Educated by the Franciscans at Oxford by 1291 the political background meant little to him and by 1300 he was disputing and lecturing. His brain took him to Paris where it failed to prevent him taking sides wth the Pope when he and the French King fell out, Duns was out also after this.
He returned a couple of years alter and was suddenly called away by his order to Cologne in 1307 where he died and was buried there a year later. A mere 43 years of life, life was short in those days.
On his tomb it reads 'Scotland brought me forth. England sustained me. France taught me. Cologne holds me,' in Latin as you appreciate.
Along with Thomas Aquinas and William of Ockham, he was one of the leading Scholastic philosopher-theologians of the High Middle Ages. Duns Scotus wrote treatises on theology, grammar, logic and metaphysics which were widely influential throughout Western Europe, earning Duns the papal accolade Doctor Subtilis (Subtle Teacher). Duns remains highly esteemed in the Roman Catholic Church, and was beatified by Pope John Paul II in 1993. However, with the advent of the Renaissance and the New Learning, and then the Protestant Reformation, many of Duns's theories and methods (which were considered hair-splitting) were challenged or rejected by Humanist and Protestant scholars, who used the term "Dunsman" or "Dunce" in a pejorative sense to denote those who foolishly clung on to outmoded doctrine. (The form "Dunce" reflects the medieval pronunciation of "Duns".) Gradually "dunsman" or "dunce" was used more widely for anyone stupid or dull-witted.
Wiki
In short our man was an intellectual philosopher who studied Greek authors and followed Roman teaching more than scripture. Thus it is no wonder his influence faded after the Reformation. Scripture became the centre of the Christians life not philosophical ramblings no matter how intellectual or stimulating.
Quite how the word 'Dunce' ought to have brought my readership to my mind is unclear at this moment...
While in Colchester a while back I obtained, at half the £3 price, an aged version of Bede's 'History of the English Church and People.' £1:50 in my view was a decent price although the original price was six shillings when reprinted in 1960! Six shillings is worth today Thirty Pence! How come old things are worth more as time passes yet you and I appear to be worth less? From today I am going to wear a price tag!
Bede was born in the year 672 or 3 near the modern day town of Sunderland in England's green and pleasant north east. At least it was green and pleasant at the time! It is possible he came from a 'noble' family who wished him to enter the monastery as monks were influential at the time. Several women, of similar backgrounds became Abbess's and highly influential in the politics of the day. His life otherwise would have been as a Saxon noble a very fraught lifestyle.
Bede, who called himself 'Beada' when he wrote, his name being altered to Bede by time and language. He entered the monastery at Monkwearmouth when seven years of age and worked between there and the later monastery at Jarrow for the rest of his life. He did however travel to York and Lindesfarne and it is possible he travelled further. The only means at the time being horse, boat or feet! His life, which he clearly enjoyed, was one of study, teaching, writing, and the monks daily routine. Bede died on Thursday, 26 May 735 (Ascension Day), aged 62.
Bede was committed to his study and he was certainly in the right place, the library at the monastery contained around two hundred books, an enormous amount for the time, and these covered both religious and classic authors. Bede wrote scientific and historical works as well as theological. His books also covered music, something that was very important to the monks, grammar and chronology. New music arrived from Rome and this had to be taught to the monks throughout the land. He knew Greek and wrote is readable Latin
His best known work is of course his 'History.'
There is a slight problem to begin with here, the book is titled 'English Church and People,' but this requires some explanation. Bede was an Anglo Saxon, an incomer after the Romans had left around the four hundreds. To Bede these Saxons, divided into several realms, were the 'English.' When he talks of the 'British' he refers to those living in the west, usually Wales. The 'Scots' are of course Irish and the Scots Christians originate from Iona, an Abbey begun by Columba many years before. Those from Scotland were of course Picts, a people who have disappeared from sight, although their DNA still hangs about many Scots ('Scots' Scots that is). The Scots religion is almost identical with the Roman version brought later by Augustine to Canterbury but Bede spends an inordinate amount of time to ensure they get the 'correct' date for Easter!
Simple really when you think about it.
Bede is keen to record the Kings who became Christian, that is Roman Catholic. Those that do are praised as noble, those that do not are seen as bad pagans. Bede tends to a bias against Mercia possibly a bias caused by the Mercian's unhappy habit of attacking his people. The Kings appear to be happy to war with one another whether 'Christian' or not it appears to me. The job of being King tends to involve a lot of war, and there was a lot of war in Saxon times.
The 'History' was completed in the year 731 and begins with a geographical account and a history dating from Caesar's invasion. Christian Roman Britain, St Alban, and Augustine are covered, the latter bringing Christianity to the Anglo Saxons. Bede covers Penda, Edwin, the Council of Whitby where the Scots (from Ireland) lost out to Rome, and on up to his own day which he leaves tantalisingly as he has no way of knowing what the future will bring for his people.
Bede's Christianity is very Roman Catholic. His admiration for Rome, a place he is unlikely to have visited, is clear. This is surprising as his knowledge was great yet he finds no conflict between being a 'priest' and no such role being found in the New Testament! His obedience to Rome removes such questions from his mind. Throughout when he informed of a miracle, some of which are interesting, others somewhat dubious, he appears to accept them without comment. Possibly he merely adds them as this was what those in his day accepted as fact. These are often accompanied by an explanation that the story originated with someone honest. Some do appear unlikely but for myself I have found such things, moments where God works in the lives of those around us, and why should he not? At times the narration appears to consist of who was Bishop, when they died and who replaced them. This can be wearing after a while. The historian will find this useful but it makes for poor reading. One Bishop looks like any other to me. The same can be said of the Kings. Names arise and fall, first in one area then another, some become famous others are soon forgotten. Those that return to paganism are seen to die soon afterwards, those that stay 'faithful' die glorious deaths or are killed by wicked people.
I confess this was a disappointing book for me. It would be wrong to expect a history similar to those published today however the listing of peoples while useful is somewhat drab. Too much concern for the 'correct' date Easter and almost nothing about the daily lives of the people outside of the monastery walls. To both nobles and monks the people were the lower orders and their absence except when being preached at tells us something of the separation of the important people from the common. This is not what Christianity should offer!
For those interested in the 'dark days' of the Anglo Saxons this is a must read. We know so little, although much is being discovered daily, that Bede shines a light into the world later vanquished by the Norman invasion of 1066. The world of monks, often in freezing conditions, writing their books, often wonderful pieces of art, the fields farmed by those possibly on subsistence levels, the wars, the Vikings, the rich jewels of the royalty, and the land. Land used mostly for farming with the cold North Sea in the background. Even today the north of Northumbria near Lindisfarne is quite empty and to me always an attractive area. I wonder however how empty the land was in the seven hundreds? Small huts would adorn the land, villages and towns would prosper, and many travelled the highways, covering many miles, whatever the weather. Not sufficient tales are told of these people by Bede, most of his tales come from within monastery and Abbey walls. I feel this is a lack indeed.
Bede may not have known this but he was recognised for his scholarship in 1899 when he was declared by Rome as a 'Doctor of the Church,' the only 'Englishman' named thus.
Bede : Durham Tomb : Bede's World
.
.
Watching the Pope greet the English queen and parade along Princes Street today I was struck by how reverential people were towards him and how smarmy the commentary was. The hangers on VIPs and the faithful gathered to meet him in Holyrood House were looking to him as if to a god, and that is the word to use. This irked me, and I am often irked, because at no time would the Apostles ever accept being regarded in such a manner. Peter and Paul and all the early Christians pointed people, all people, to Jesus the redeemer and refused reverence for themselves. Benedict may not look for such treatment but his position brings this to him like it or not.
I followed his car through Edinburgh (on the TV, not in person like) and found myself wishing I was back there. Possibly this has more to do with the lack of gray clouds and driving rain than anything else. To see Edinburgh without such weather is indeed a miracle! Two or three things stood out for me and they are not all good. The commentators, all of them, were at their oleaginous best throughout. (OK, I did use a Thesaurus smart guy!) Enthusing about the 'enthusiasm' and the 'huge excitement,' and 'atmosphere,' all the usual flannel from commentators either truly impressed or sticking to the usual tried and true words for such an occasion, whether they fit or not! Language at such occasions is important as during a state funeral it is important not to say "Now comes the main body of the parade." The fact the Pope had a tartan scarf draped around him drew much acclaim (hooray!) and Scots pride was to the fore. The Saltires waved by the kids naturally drew comment, although Tony Blair would have replaced them with English flags had he been in power. Nonentities in the background spouted platitudes for this man, speaking of how wonderful, important and marvellous the visit was. (Whoopee). He brought one said, a message of 'Hope,' but what hope did she mean? Others spoke, with dripping tongues, of 'peace' and 'interfaith dialogue,' but what do they expect to get from that? People of faith (whatever that Labour spin word means) meet daily living their lives. What end does such 'dialogue' lead to? Flannel abounded this morning, alongside smiles and cheers. Prince Philip noticing all the tartan asked the female leader of the Tory Party (Who she?) "Are you wearing tartan knickers?" Diplomacy was never something ex sailors were asked to perform.
Who is the Pope and what is the Roman Catholic Church?
From a Christian viewpoint the Pope is of no importance whatsoever! The church based in Rome was doing very well until the third or fourth century when things began to go wrong. With other major elders (The word 'Bishop' is best translated 'Elder' or 'Presbyter') around the Mediterranean world, Constantinople, Antioch and Alexandria to mention just three, Rome was no more important than anyone else, indeed much of the time it was of little importance to the rest of the world. There were constant theological disputes of course, some important some not, and eventually one elder at Rome decided to use the Apostle Peters death, believed to be in Rome around 64 a.d. and the line "You are Petras (Rock) and upon this rock I will build my church. I will give you the keys of heaven." (I am afraid I have forgotten the precise verse and which Pope this was 'Leo' I think. Google them!) However he was chancing his arm and this was a claim never made before. In the first century no church took precedence and none should do so today.
The Reformation arose because the Roman church had long forgotten the creator and had become a mere political power base. Christianity was attempted by many but the theology was often confused. Luther, Calvin, Knox and others brought about a split between those who wished to know God and make him known, and the Roman church which sadly refused to change its ways. The fact that this is the 450th anniversary of the Reformation and the Pope comes to Edinburgh, one of the centres of this event through the work of John Knox has been noticed. Deliberate perhaps? During his speech the Pope did mention Margaret of Scotland, but appeared to forget our man John, absent minded maybe? The RC church has deviated far from Apostolic Christianity and sadly appears to be showing no wish to reform itself even now. Therefore from a Christian point of view the Pope is of no consequence. The bible, the revealed word of God, is the only guide.
There are many problems within the RC church. People forced into the role of nun or priest by family pressure fail to live according to their duty, and who can blame them. I have known some such and their troubles are many. Celibacy has destroyed many lives and requires to be dropped for humanity's sake if nothing else, it has no biblical foundation. The huge size of the organisation has allowed homosexuals and paedophiles to find places to hide themselves. Clearly the desperation to avoid scandal has led to cover ups a plenty, and of course many guilty men have wormed their way into top positions. Will they, I wonder, will they ever be revealed? A return to biblical truth, the end of the priesthood, (Jesus is the Great High Priest, and no man should stand between you and God bar Jesus the sacrificial offering and priest himself!) An honest clear out of criminal men is urgently required before the RC church can put this shady past behind them. Difficult though it may be and I suspect the next Pope will be the one who will have to finish this work.
There are many good people amongst the Catholics. Many who work very hard for others throughout the world, often with little praise. These will always be ignored while the majority live a nominal faith and others hide behind the church and abuse the vulnerable. Such sin is of course found in other denominations, in large and small businesses, and possibly in the street where you live. Businesses and others also cover up their wrongdoers but when a church denomination does this it is a dreadful failure. The desperation of some to meet the Pope, for a 'blessing' or just to meet the famous was indeed sickening however. The reverence for the man, the brown nosing by some, the lack of knowledge of biblical truth made me despair. Will this visit recharge the RC church? maybe. Will it be forgotten next week? Definitely!
An 'off the ball' slant on the visit....
The Pope comes to Glasgow and asks "Anyone with 'special needs' who wants to be prayed over, please come forward to the front by the altar."
With that, wee Brendan got in line, and when it was his turn, the Pope asked, "My son, what do you want me to pray about for you?"
Wee Brendan replied, "Your Holiness, I need you to pray for help with my hearing."
The Pope put one finger of one hand in Brendan’s ear, placed his other hand on top of his head, and then prayed and prayed and prayed. He prayed a great prayer for Brendon, and the whole congregation joined in with great enthusiasm.
After a few minutes, the Pope removed his hands, stood back and asked, "Brendon, how is your hearing now?"
Wee Brendan answered, "Ah don't know. It's no' 'til next week....."
.
As you know there is a position arising for 'President of the EU.' Tony Blair has made it clear he wishes to accept this post, although it may not yet be offered to him, and today there is a report on one of his moves in this direction. The Independent newspaper covers a story in which Tony is stating the Pope has it wrong about homosexuals. Now I find this fascination for a couple of reasons.The first is of course his political nous in realising that by making it clear his attitude is 'Politically Correct' he immediately gains much support from the powers behind the throne. Looking to the fashion of the day and jumping on any bandwagon going is Tony's way! He realises that by opposing the Roman Catholic Church, and the Pope in particular, he has swung a large number of the right people in his direction. The left leaning members will see this as a brave and timely action, and note how he has allowed homosexuality to be regarded as normal in the UK, alongside the encouraging of abortion also. Definitely PC in many minds, and brave enough to oppose the Pope also. Tony is half way there to be President, and we know how much he likes the presidential style. His wife, known as 'Cherie Booth' at 'work,' but 'Mrs Cherie Blair' when making money on the back of his name and position, will obviously be pleased with the money this brings in. There is nothing so admirable as a 'socialist' on the make!There is another small point that comes to mind here. The bible, the book Christians must base their opinions upon, tells us clearly that homosexuality is wrong, the RC church call it a clear 'sin!' To decide that 'times have changed' means we can alter biblical truths appears somewhat arrogant or not thought out properly, especially from one who has only recently had the courage to stand up and be admitted to the church he now wishes to instruct. How many have joined the church, any church, and decided to amend those bits they did not like? Far too many in truth, and we have all been there I can assure you. However the bible is not just a rule book. This is Gods Revelation to man and as such contains eternal truths not passing fashions. Covering several thousand years, and informing us, as Thucydides knew two thousand five hundred years ago, that human nature does not change,and if you claim to belong to a religion you must obey what it says, especially when ignorant it seems of its main teachings. Now I realise the Roman church has many faults and that this pope speaks for no Christians in reality, however, he has at least studied the biblical approach. Maybe Tony should do the same?I wonder if the pope will reply to his man? If so he could ask tony why he went into Iraq? he could point out the dead children, thousands who died from the effect of bomb and shell strewn over the land. He could explain why hundreds of British troops die both there and in Afghanistan because he and George W Bush wanted the oil and invented tales of WMD. There are lots of questions the pope could ask Tony, I hope he asks them!
