Musings of an Old Curmudgeon
The musings and meandering thoughts of a crotchety old man as he observes life in the world and in a small, rural town in South East Nebraska. My Pledge-Nulla dies sine linea-Not a day with out a line.
02 December 2024
Bp. Athanasius Schneider Debunks Communion in the Hand
St Habcuc ~ A "Bi-Ritual" Saint
The eighth of the Minor Prophets, who probably flourished towards the end of the seventh century B.C.
I. NAME AND PERSONAL LIFE
In the Hebrew text (i,1; iii, 1), the prophet's name presents a doubly intensive form Hàbhàqqûq, which has not been preserved either in the Septuagint: Ambakoum, or in the Vulgate: Habacuc. Its resemblance with the Assyrian hambakûku, which is the name of a plant, is obvious. Its exact meaning cannot be ascertained: it is usually taken to signify "embrace" and is at times explained as "ardent embrace", on account of its intensive form. Of this prophet's birth-place, parentage, and life we have no reliable information. The fact that in his book he is twice called "the prophet" (i, 1; iii, 1) leads indeed one to surmise that Habacuc held a recognized position as prophet, but it manifestly affords no distinct knowledge of his person. Again, some musical particulars connected with the Hebrew text of his Prayer (ch. iii) may possibly suggest that he was a member of the Temple choir, and consequently a Levite: but most scholars regard this twofold inference as questionable. Hardly less questionable is the view sometimes put forth, which identifies Habacuc with the Judean prophet of that name, who is described in the deuterocanonical fragment of Bel and the Dragon (Dan., xiv, 32 sqq.), as miraculously carrying a meal to Daniel in the lion's den.
In this absence of authentic tradition, legend, not only Jewish but also Christian, has been singularly busy about the prophet Habacuc. It has represented him as belonging to the tribe of Levi and as the son of a certain Jesus; as the child of the Sunamite woman, whom Eliseus restored to life (cf. IV Kings, iv, 16 sqq.); as the sentinel set by Isaias (cf. Is. xxi, 6; and Hab., ii, 1) to watch for the fall of Babylon. According to the "Lives" of the prophets, one of which is ascribed to St. Epiphanius, and the other to Dorotheus, Habacuc was of the tribe of Simeon, and a native of Bethsocher, a town apparently in the tribe of Juda. In the same works it is stated that when Nabuchodonosor came to besiege Jerusalem, the prophet fled to Ostrakine (now Straki, on the Egyptian coast), whence he returned only after the Chaldeans had withdrawn; that he then lived as a husbandman in his native place, and died there two years before Cyrus's edict of Restoration (538 B.C.). Different sites are also mentioned as his burial-place. The exact amount of positive information embodied in these conflicting legends cannot be determined at the present day. The Greek and Latin Churches celebrate the feast of the prophet Habacuc on 15 January.
II. CONTENTS OF PROPHECY
Apart from its short title (i, 1) the Book of Habacuc is commonly divided into two parts: the one (i,2-ii, 20) reads like a dramatic dialogue between God and His prophet; the other (chap. iii) is a lyric ode, with the usual characteristics of a psalm. The first part opens with Habacuc's lament to God over the protracted iniquity of the land, and the persistent oppression of the just by the wicked, so that there is neither law nor justice in Juda: How long is the wicked thus destined to prosper? (i, 2-4). Yahweh replies (i, 5-11) that a new and startling display of His justice is about to take place: already the Chaldeans — that swift, rapacious, terrible, race — are being raised up, and they shall put an end to the wrongs of which the prophet has complained. Then Habacuc remonstrates with Yahweh, the eternal and righteous Ruler of the world, over the cruelties in which He allows the Chaldeans to indulge (i, 12-17), and he confidently waits for a response to his pleading (ii, 1). God's answer (ii, 2-4) is in the form of a short oracle (verse 4), which the prophet is bidden to write down on a tablet that all may read it, and which foretells the ultimate doom of the Chaldean invader. Content with this message, Habacuc utters a taunting song, triumphantly made up of five "woes" which he places with dramatic vividness on the lips of the nations whom the Chaldean has conquered and desolated (ii, 5-20). The second part of the book (chap. iii) bears the title: "A prayer of Habacuc, the prophet, to the music of Shigionot." Strictly speaking, only the second verse of this chapter has the form of a prayer. The verses following (3-16) describe a theophany in which Yahweh appears for no other purpose than the salvation of His people and the ruin of His enemies. The ode concludes with the declaration that even though the blessings of nature should fail in the day of dearth, the singer will rejoice in Yahweh (17-19). Appended to chap. iii is the statement: "For the chief musician, on my stringed instruments."
III. DATE AND AUTHORSHIP
Owing chiefly to the lack of reliable external evidence, there has been in the past, and there is even now, a great diversity of opinions concerning the date to which the prophecy of Habacuc should be ascribed. Ancient rabbis, whose view is embodied in the Jewish chronicle entitled Seder olam Rabbah, and is still accepted by many Catholic scholars (Kaulen, Zschokke, Knabenbauer, Schenz, Cornely, etc.), refer the composition of the book to the last years of Manasses's reign. Clement of Alexandria says that "Habacuc still prophesied in the time of Sedecias" (599-588 B. C.), and St. Jerome ascribes the prophecy to the time of the Babylonian Exile. Some recent scholars (Delitzsch and Keil among Protestants, Danko, Rheinke, Holzammer, and practically also Vigouroux, among Catholics, place it under Josias (641-610 B.C.). Others refer it to the time of Joakim (610-599 B.C.), either before Nabuchodonosor's victory at Carchemish in 605 B.C. (Catholic: Schegg, Haneberg; Protestant: Schrader, S. Davidson, König, Strack, Driver, etc.); while others, mostly out-and-out rationalists, ascribe it to the time after the ruin of the Holy City by the Chaldeans. As might be expected, these various views do not enjoy the same amount of probability, when they are tested by the actual contents of the Book of Habacuc. Of them all, the one adopted by St. Jerome, and which is now that propounded by many rationalists, is decidedly the least probable: to ascribe, as that view does, the book to the Exile, is, on the one hand, to admit for the text of Habacuc an historical background to which there is no real reference in the prophecy, and , on the other,, to ignore the prophet's distinct references to events connected with the period before the Bablyonian Captivity (cf. i, 2-4, 6, etc.). All the other opinions have their respective degrees of probability, so that it is no easy matter to choose among them. It seems, however, that the view which ascribes the book to 605-600 B.C. "is best in harmony with the historical circumstances under which the Chaldeans are presented in the prophecy of Habacuc, viz. as a scourge which is imminent for Juda, and as oppressors whom all know have already entered upon the inheritance of their predecessors" (Van Hoonacker).
During the nineteenth century, objections have oftentimes been made against the genuineness of certain portions of the Book of Habacuc. In the first part of the work, the objections have been especially directed against i, 5-11. But, however formidable they may appear at first sight, the difficulties turn out to be really weak, on a closer inspection; and in point of fact, the great majority of critics look upon them as not decisive. The arguments urged against the genuineness of chapter ii, 9-20, are of less weight still. Only in reference to chapter iii, which forms the second part of the book, can there be a serious controversy as to its authorship by Habacuc. Many critics treat the whole chapter as a late and independent poem, with no allusions to the circumstances of Habacuc's time, and still bearing in its liturgical heading and musical directions (vv. 3, 9, 13, 19) distinct marks of the collection of sacred songs from which it was taken. According to them, it was appended to the Book of Habacuc because it had already been ascribed to him in the title, just as certain psalms are still referred in the Septuagint and in the Vulgate to some prophets. Others, indeed in smaller number, but also with greater probability, regard only the last part of the chapter iii, 17-19 as a later addition to Habacuc's work: in reference to this last part only does it appear true to say that it has no definite allusions to the circumstances of Habacuc's time. All things considered, it seems that the question whether chapter iii be an original portion of the prophecy of Habacuc, or an independent poem appended to it at a later date, cannot be answered with certainty: too little is known in a positive manner concerning the actual circumstances in the midst of which Habacuc composed his work, to enable one to feel confident that this portion of it must or must not be ascribed to the same author as the rest of the book.
IV. LITERARY AND TEXTUAL FEATURES
In the composition of his book, Habacuc displays a literary power which has often been admired. His diction is rich and classical, and his imagery is striking and appropriate. The dialogue between God and him is highly oratorical, and exhibits to a larger extent than is commonly supposed, the parallelism of thought and expression which is the distinctive feature of Hebrew poetry. The Mashal or taunting song of five "woes" which follows the dialogue, is placed with powerful dramatic effect on the lips of the nations whom the Chaldeans have cruelly oppressed. The lyric ode with which the book concludes, compares favourably in respect to imagery and rhythm with the best productions of Hebrew poetry. These literary beauties enable us to realize that Habacuc was a writer of high order. They also cause us to regret that the original text of his prophecy should not have come down to us in all its primitive perfection. As a matter of fact, recent interpreters of the book have noticed and pointed out numerous alterations, especially in the line of additions, which have crept in the Hebrew text of the prophecy of Habacuc, and render it at times very obscure. Only a fair number of those alterations can be corrected by a close study of the context; by a careful comparison of the text with the ancient versions, especially the Septuagint; by an application of the rules of Hebrew parallelism, etc. In the other places, the primitive reading has disappeared and cannot be recovered, except conjecturally, by the means which Biblical criticism affords in the present day.
V. PROPHETICAL TEACHING
Most of the religious and moral truths that can be noticed in this short prophecy are not peculiar to it. They form part of the common message which the prophets of old were charged to convey to God's chosen people. Like the other prophets, Habacuc is the champion of ethical monotheism. For him, as for them, Yahweh alone is the living God (ii, 18-20); He is the Eternal and Holy One (i, 12), the Supreme Ruler of the Universe (i, 6, 17; ii, 5 sqq.; iii, 2-16), Whose word cannot fail to obtain its effect (ii, 3), and Whose glory will be acknowledged by all nations (ii, 14). In his eyes, as in those of the other prophets, Israel is God's chosen people whose unrighteousness He is bound to visit with a signal punishment (i, 2-4). The special people, whom it was Habacuc's own mission to announce to his contemporaries as the instruments of Yahweh's judgment, were the Chaldeans, who will overthrow everything, even Juda and Jerusalem, in their victorious march (i, 6 sqq.). This was indeed at the time an incredible prediction (i, 5), for was not Juda God's kingdom and the Chaldean a world-power characterized by overweening pride and tyranny? Was not therefore Juda the "just" to be saved, and the Chaldean really the "wicked" to be destroyed? The answer to this difficulty is found in the distich (ii, 4) which contains the central and distinctive teaching of the book. Its oracular form bespeaks a principle of wider import than the actual circumstances in the midst of which it was revealed to the prophet, a general law, as we would say, of God's providence in the government of the world: the wicked carries in himself the germs of his own destruction; the believer, on the contrary, those of eternal life. It is because of this, that Habacuc applies the oracle not only to the Chaldeans of his time who are threatening the existence of God's kingdom on earth, but also to all the nations opposed to that kingdom who will likewise be reduced to naught (ii, 5-13), and solemnly declares that "the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of Yahweh, as the waters cover the sea" (ii, 15). It is because of this truly Messianic import that the second part of Habacuc's oracle (ii, 4b) is repeatedly treated in the New Testament writings (Rom., i, 17; Gal., iii, 11; Hebr., x, 38) as being verified in the inner condition of the believers of the New Law.
Commentaries: Catholic:—Shegg (2nd Ed., Ratisbon, 1862); Rheinke (Brixen, 1870); Trochon (Paris, 1883); Knabenbauer (Paris, 1886); Non-Catholic:—Delitzsch (Leipzig, 1843); Von Orelli (Eng. Tr. Edinburgh, 1893); Kleinert (Leipzig, 1893); Wellhausen (3
Francis E. Gigot
The Prophet Habacuc foresaw the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple, the Babylonian Captivity and the later return of the captives to their native land. During the war with the Babylonians, the prophet withdrew to Arabia, where the following miracle occurred. When he was bringing dinner to the reapers, he met an angel of the Lord, and instantly by the strength of his spirit he was transported to Babylon, where at the time the Prophet Daniel was languishing in prison. The food intended for the reapers assuaged the hunger of the exhausted Prophet Daniel (Dan. 14:33-37).
After the end of the war with the Babylonians, the Prophet Habacuc returned to his homeland and died at a great old age. His relics were found at the time of Emperor Theodosius the Younger (408-450), together with the relics of the Prophet Micheas (August 14).
The Fourth Ode of the Psalter (“O Lord, I have heard thy report, and was afraid...”) is based on Habacuc 3:2-19.
Troparion — Tone 2
We celebrate the memory / of Your prophet Habacuc, O Lord; / through him, we entreat You, / save our souls.
Kontakion — Tone 8
Divinely eloquent Habacuc, / you announced to the world the coming forth of God from the south, from the Virgin. / Standing on the divine watch, you received a report from the radiant angel: / “You proclaimed the Resurrection of Christ to the world!” / Therefore in gladness we cry out to you: / “Rejoice, splendid adornment of the prophets!”
Manuel Komnenos’ Submission to Alexander III
Eighty years before the "Union Council" of Lyons, the Emperor of the East offered full submission to the Pope and corporate reunion of the Greeks.
From Unum Sanctam Catholicam
Mid-twelfth century Italy was a time of intense political struggle in which the peninsula was torn by five rival powers, including the Normans, Byzantines, the Papal States, Lombard League, and the Holy Roman Empire. The papacy was in a particularly tough spot, as popes Adrian IV (1154-1159) and Alexander III (1159-1181) struggled against the tenacious efforts of the Normans in the south and Hohenstaufens in the north to subjugate all of Italy.
Manuel Komnenos, Emperor of Constantinople (r. 1143-1180) had been eagerly monitoring the situation through his emissaries in the Italian peninsula, ever hoping to exploit the problems of Italy for the benefit of Byzantium. Manuel had much to gain from an alliance with the pope. During the mid-12th century, Byzantium was holding pockets of territory along the southern Italian coast, notably in the regions of Apulia and Calabria. These territories were under intense pressure from the Sicilian Normans, however, who were aggressively expanding their kingdom in southern Italy.
Manuel Floats Reunion to Adrian IV
The 1150s saw the Byzantines and Normans warring openly in southern Italy for hegemony, but the Normans also made themselves a nuisance to the papacy, coveting the Papal States. Manuel suspected that the papacy would rather have Byzantium for a southern neighbor than the unruly Normans and had begun floating the idea of reunion of churches in exchange for papal support for Byzantium’s claims. Feelers for reunion were put out as early as 1155 under the pontificate of Adrian IV. Manuel offered a large sum of money to Adrian for the provisioning of troops, with the request that Adrian grant him emperor lordship of three maritime cities in return for assistance in expelling the Normans and their rowdy King William from Sicily. Manuel sweetened the offer by promising to pay 5,000 pounds of gold to the papacy. [1]Adrian was amendable, and an alliance was formed between Manuel and Pope Adrian, in which union of the Churches was to be established at the price of Byzantine hegemony in southern ItalyUnfortunately for Manuel, his military situation rapidly deteriorated. Manuel’s forces were soundly defeated at the Battle of Brindisi (1156) forcing Manuel to exit the war and cede Apulia and Calabria to William of Sicily. The Byzantine forces evacuated Italy in 1158, never to return. Pope Adrian was compelled to make peace with the Normans by the Treaty of Benevento, which locked the Papal States into an alliance with Norman Sicily, much to the annoyance of the powerful Frederick Barbarossa, Holy Roman Emperor (r. 1155-1190).
Manuel did not give up his hopes of a restored Byzantine Empire in souther Italy, however. Two years after Brindisi, a new pope was on the throne—Alexander III—and a schism bad broken out with Barbarossa. Barbarossa opposed the new pro-Norman orientation of the Holy See and supported the anti-pope Victor IV against the claims of Alexander. Backed by the might of Barbarossa, Victor proved a formidable threat, even driving Alexander III from Rome in 1162. Emperor Manuel saw the pope’s difficulty as his opportunity and began sending out feelers to Alexander III about reunion, to which the pope was amenable.
Manuel Offers Union and Submission to Alexander III
A formal offer of reunion of the churches came in the year 1167, when Emperor Manuel sent an embassy of his most distinguished secretaries with a great sum of money to the papal court in exile at Benevento. The emissaries conveyed the following message to Pope Alexander, which has been preserved in Alexander’s vita by his biographer Boso. According to Boso, the message read as follows:
Our lord the emperor [Manuel Komnenos] has long had a very great desire to honor and increase the esteem for his mother, the Roman Church. But when he now sees Frederick, that Church’s champion, whose duty it is to protect it from others and defend it, become [instead] her attacker and persecutor, his desire to serve and succor her is even stronger. And that in these days the phrase of the Gospel, “and there will be one fold and one shepherd” may be fulfilled, he wishes to unite and subject his Greek Church to the Church of Rome, in that status in which we know it to have been of old, if only you are willing to restore his rights to him. For this reason he asks and begs that when the enemy of the Church has been deprived of the crown of the Roman Empire, you restore it to him [i.e., to Manuel], as reason and justice requires. To bring this about, he is ready to bestow and expend immediately whatever you in your good pleasure consider necessary in sums of money, soldiers, and armaments. (2)
This proposal was incredibly ambitious in what it affirmed, what is asked, and what it pledged. First, what it affirmed:
(1) The text affirms that the Greek Churches were historically subject to the See of Rome “in that status in which we know it to have been of old.”
(2) It admits that the imperial title had been transferred from the Greeks to the West by the pope according to the legal doctrine commonly known as translatio imperii. Manuel affirms this doctrine, for, in asking the pope to voluntarily give the imperial title back to Constantinople, he is thereby admitting that the pope both had removed it in the past and had the power to restore it again unto him.
Second, what it asks:
(1) Manuel asks Pope Alexander to declare Emperor Frederick Barbarossa deposed and to bestow the Frederick’s crown upon himself, thus uniting the domains of Barbarossa and Manuel. Manuel must have known that ascending to the lordship of Germany was a practical impossibility; what he likely hoped for was to detach Barbarossa’s Italian domains from the Holy Roman Empire and preside over a restored Byzantine hegemony in Italy with a title legitimized by the pope. As mentioned above, this request implies acknowledgement that the pope has the power to legitimize (or delegitimize) the imperial title.
Finally, what is pledges:
(1) Manuel pledges the submission of the Greek Church to the Church of Rome.
(2) He also pledges to offer material support to the papacy to defeat the forces of Barbarossa and the schismatic anti-pope, in money, soldiers, and arms. In essence, Manuel seeks to fund Alexander’s struggle against Barbarossa. He is willing to sacrifice the autonomy of the Greek Church to this cause if it will net him the acquisition of Italy under a title recognized and legitimized by the pope.
Alexander’s Response
Like his predecessor Adrian IV, Pope Alexander III was eager for reunification of East and West, but could see that Manuel’s proposal had the potential to exacerbate a conflict he was trying hard to defuse. The pope took counsel with his Cardinals, who shared his misgivings. In the end, Alexander rejected Manuel’s offer and sent him the following response, also preseved by Boso:
We give thanks to your lord the emperor as to a most Christian prince and a most devoted son of St. Peter, for his devout and persevering embassies, and for the display of the good will which he bears towards the Holy Roman Church. On these accounts we listen with pleasure to his most affectionate words. In so far as we can, in obedience to God, we wish with fatherly kindness to fulfill his requests. But what he asks goes very deep and is exceedingly complicated, and since the decrees of the holy fathers forbid such requests on account of their inherent difficulties, we neither can nor ought to grant our assent under terms of this sort, since by reason of the office entrusted to us by God it is fitting that we be the authors and guardians of peace. (3)
Pope Alexander rejects the proposal of Manuel on two grounds (1) that is is “exceedingly complicated”, and (2) that “the holy fathers forbid such requests on account of their inherent difficulties.”
It is unfortunate that Alexander did not elaborate his points, which leaves us to speculate. His first point likely referred simply to the infeasibility of the plan: the Greek bishops would have to ratify any union, which would they would be unlikely to support and the details of which would undoubtedly take years to hammer out. Military success against Barbarossa was questionable, even assuming Manuel held up his end of the bargain entirely. And the legal quagmire that would arise from establishing Byzantine hegemony in Europe probably gave Alexander a headache. In short, the plan had too many moving parts to be considered a reasonable course of action. We may further surmise that Alexander was not keen on exchanging subservience to one imperial family for another. It was better, if possible, to prevail over a humbled and weakened Barbarossa than to exalt Manuel.
Alexander’s second objection is more curious—that “the decrees of the holy fathers forbid such requests on account of their inherent difficulties.” What decrees of the holy fathers is he referring to? The only clue is the following explanatory clause, which says, “since by reason of the office entrusted to us by God it is fitting that we be the authors and guardians of peace.” Given his reference to guarding peace, we may therefore presume that Pope Alexander was concerned that acceptance of Emperor Manuel’s offer would lead to further wars and disorders whose magnitude would not be justified. Alexander is probably thus thinking of the principle, “one may not do evil so that good may come of it” (cf. Rom. 3:8), which was also affirmed in Gratian’s Decretals. (4) Declaring Barbarossa deposed and transfering the empire to Manuel would certainly not be acknowledged in Germany; such a provocation would clearly lead to fierce reprisals against the papacy from Barbarossa and no doubt prolong war in Italy—and, at the end of the day, the prospect of success was far from certain. Alexander likely concluded Manuel’s plan would unleash such disorders across the Christian world that it could not be justified on moral grounds, even for the sake of reuniting East and West.
Conclusion: The Battle of Legnano and Aftermath
Having rejected Manuel’s offer, Pope Alexander returned the amabassadors’ gifts and sent them back to Manuel, hoping to prevail over Barbarossa by other means. We know that Manuel did not give up right away; another offer of union followed in 1169, which was rejected on similar grounds. (5)
Manuel was not ready to abandon his ambitions in Italy, however. Instead of allying with the papacy, he began funding the Lombard League, a federation of northern Italian cities hostile to Barbarossa. His money was instrumental in maintaining their opposition; when Barbarossa destroyed the walls of Milan, for example, they were quickly rebuilt with gold from Manuel’s coffers. In 1176 the Lombard League won a decisive victory over Frederick Barbarossa at the Battle of Legnano. Manuel’s position improved substantially. Though he fell far short of any kind of restored Italian hegemony, several Italian cities on the Ligurian coast pledged fealty to Manuel, including Cremona and Pavia.
If there ever was a real chance of successful reunion of East and West during the Middel Ages, it was likely during reign of Manuel Komnenos, when the emperor eager to exchange the haughty independence of Constantinople for a stake in Italy. With the outrages of the Fourth Crusade still in the future and the schism scarcely more than a century old, the bonds of unity between Greek and Latin were not so far distant as to be beyond repair, and the common enemy of Norman and Hohenstaufen gave the papacy incentive to look outside Italy for material support. Though circumstance ultimately did not favor the plans of Manuel, his proposal of submission remains one of great “what ifs” of Church history.
(1) J. Duggan, The Pope and the Princes: Adrian IV, the English Pope, 1154–1159 (Ashgate Publishing: Farham, U.K., 2003), 122
(2) Boso, Life of Alexander III, trans. G.M. Ellis (Basil Blackwell: Oxford, 1973), 76-77
(3) Ibid., 77
(4) For example, in the chapter “Ne quis” (causa xxii, q.2)
(5) J. W. Birkenmeier, The Development of the Komnenian Army (Brill Academic Publishers: Leiden, 2001), 114
Pictured (top): Frederick Barbarossa, Roman Emperor of the West and promoter of schism against Pope Alexander III
St Bibiana, Virgin & Martyr
St Bibiana, Virgin & Martyr
Of the Saints whose feasts are kept during Advent, five are Virgins. The first, St. Bibiana, whom we honor today, is a daughter of Rome; the second, St. Barbara, is the glory of the Eastern Churches; the third, St. Eulalia of Merida, is one of Spain’s richest treasures; the fourth, St. Lucy, belongs to beautiful Sicily; the fifth, St. Odilia, is claimed by France. These five wise Virgins lighted their lamps and watched, waiting for the coming of the Spouse. Such was their constancy and fidelity, that four of them shed their blood for the love of Him, after whom they longed. Let us take courage by this noble example; and since we have not, as the Apostle expresses it, as yet resisted unto blood, let us not think it hard if we suffer fatigue and trouble in the holy exercises of this penitential season of Advent: He, for whom we do them all, will soon be with us and repay us. Today, it is the chaste and courageous Bibiana, who instructs us by her glorious example.
Bibiana was a Roman Virgin, noble by birth, but more noble by her profession of the Christian faith. For, under the most wicked tyrant Julian the Apostate, Flavian, her father, was deprived of his dignity of prefect, and being branded with the mark of slavery, he was banished to Aquæ Taurinæ, and there died a martyr. Her mother, Dafrosa, was first shut up in her own house with her daughters, that she might die by starvation; but shortly afterwards was banished from Rome and beheaded. The virtuous parents thus put to death, Bibiana was deprived of all her possessions, as also was her sister, Demetria. Apronianus, the City Prætor, thirsting after their wealth, persecutes the two sisters. They are bereaved of every human help. But God, who gives food to them that are in hunger, wonderfully nourishes them; and the Prætor is exceedingly astonished on finding them in better health and strength than before.
Apronianus, notwithstanding, endeavors to induce them to venerate the gods of the Gentiles. If they consent, he promises them the recovery of all their wealth, the Emperor’s favor, and marriage to the noblest in the empire: but should they refuse, he threatens them with prison, and scourgings, and the sword. But neither promises nor threats can make them abandon the true faith; they would rather die, than be defiled by the idolatrous practices of paganism; and they resolutely resist the impious Prætor. Whereupon, Demetria was struck down in the presence of Bibiana, and slept in the Lord. Bibiana was delivered over to a woman by name Rufina, who was most skilled in the art of seduction. But the virgin, taught from her infancy to observe the Christian law, and to preserve with the utmost jealousy the flower of her virginity, rose above nature, defeated all the artifices of the wretched Rufina, and foiled the craft of the Prætor.
Finding, therefore, that Rufina could in no wise shake the virgin’s holy resolution, and that both her wicked words and frequent blows were of no avail; and seeing his hopes disappointed and his labor thrown away; the Prætor became violently enraged, and ordered Bibiana to be stripped by the lictors, to be fastened to a pillar with her hands bound, and to be beaten to death with leaded whips. Her sacred body was left for two days in the Bull-Forum, as food for dogs; but received no injury, being divinely preserved. A priest called John then buried it during the night, close to the grave of her sister and mother, where there stands at this day a Church consecrated to God under the title of St. Bibiana. Urban VIII restored this Church, having there discovered the bodies of Saints Bibiana, Demetria, and Dafrosa, which he placed under the high altar.
Holy Bibiana, most wise Virgin! thou hast gone through the long unbroken watch of this life; and when, suddenly, the Spouse came, thy lamp was bright and richly fed with oil. Now thou art dwelling in the abode of the eternal marriage-feast, where the Beloved feeds among the lilies. Remember us who are still living in the expectation of that same divine Spouse, whose eternal embrace is secured to thee forever. We are awaiting the Birth of the Savior of the world, which is to be the end of sin and the beginning of justice; we are awaiting the coming of this Savior into our souls that he may give them life and union with himself by love; we are awaiting our Judge, the Judge of the living and the dead. Most wise Virgin! intercede for us, by thy fervent prayers, with this our Savior, our Spouse, and our Judge; pray that each of these three visits may work and perfect in us that divine union, for which we have all been created. Pray also, O faithful Virgin, for the Church on earth, which gave thee to the Church in heaven, and which so devoutly watches over thy precious remains. Obtain for her that strict fidelity, which will ever render her worthy of Him, who is her Spouse as he is thine. Though he has enriched her with the most magnificent gifts, and given her confidence by his promises which cannot fail, yet does he wish her to ask, and us to ask for her, the graces which will lead her to the glorious destiny which awaits her.
We will today consider the state of nature at this season of the year. The earth is stripped of her wonted verdure, the flowers are gone, the fruits are fallen, the leaves are torn from the trees and scattered by the wind, and every living thing stiffens with the cold. It seems as though the hand of death had touched creation. We see the sun rise after the long night of his absence; and scarce have we felt his warmth at noon, than he sets again, and leaves us in the chilly darkness. Each day he shortens his visit. Is the world to become sunless, and men to live out the rest of life in gloom? The old pagans, who witnessed this struggle between light and darkness, and feared the sun was going to leave them, dedicated the twenty-fifth day of December, which was the winter solstice, to the worship of the sun. After this day, their hopes revived, in seeing the glorious luminary again mounting up in the sky, and gradually regaining his triumphant position.
We Christians can have no such feelings as these; our light is the true faith, which tells us that there is a Sun to be sought for which never sets, and is never eclipsed. Having Him, we care little for the absence of any other brightness; nay, all other light, without Him, can only lead us astray. O Jesus! thou true light, that enlightenest every man coming into this world! thou didst choose, for thy birth among us, a time of the year which forces us to reflect upon the miserable state of the world when thou didst come to save it. “The evening was coming on, and the day was far spent,” says St. Bernard: “the Sun of Justice had all but set, so that exceeding scanty was his light or warmth on earth: for the light of divine knowledge was very faint, and, sin abounding, the heat of charity had grown cold. There was neither Angel to visit men, nor Prophet to speak to them; both seemed in despair, for the hardness and obstinacy of man had made every effort useless: then I said, they are the words of our Redeemer, then I said, lo! I come!” (First Sermon of Advent) O Jesus! O Sun of Justice! give us a clear knowledge of what the world is without thee; what our understanding is without thy light; and what our heart, without thy divine heat. Open thou the eyes of our faith; that while seeing with the eyes of the body the gradual decrease of the material light, we may think of that other darkness, which is in the soul that has not thee. Then, indeed, will the cry, which comes from the depths of our misery, make its way to thee, and thou wilt come on the day thou hast fixed, dispelling every shadow of darkness by thy irresistible brightness.
PRAYER FOR THE TIME OF ADVENT
(The Mozarabic Breviary, Wednesday of the Second Week of Advent, Capitula)
O Lord, Jesus Christ, who having assumed human nature, and becoming the Savior of the human race, wast given as a light to the nations; open the eyes of the hearts of them that believe in thee, and mercifully set free from their prison them that are bound in the fetters of unbelief; and whom thou seest captives in prison in the darkness of ignorance, enlighten them, we beseech thee, by the splendor of the knowledge of thee.
Monday of the First Week of Advent
Come, let us adore the King our Lord, who is to come.
From the Prophet Isaias 1:16-18
Wash yourselves, be clean, take away the evil of your devices from my eyes: cease to do perversely, Learn to do well: seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge for the fatherless, defend the widow. And then come, and accuse me, saith the Lord: if your sins be as scarlet, they shall be made as white as snow: and if they be red as crimson, they shall be white as wool.
The Savior, who is so soon to be with us and to save us, warns us not only to prepare ourselves to appear before him, but also to purify our souls. “It is most just,” says St. Bernard, “that the soul, which was the first to fall, should be the first to rise. Let us therefore defer caring for the body, until the day when Jesus Christ will come and reform it by the Resurrection; for, in the first Coming, the Precursor says to us: Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sins of the world. Observe, he says not the maladies of the body, nor the miseries of the flesh; he says sins, which are the malady of the soul and the corruption of the spirit. Take heed then, thou my Body, and wait for thy turn and time. Thou canst hinder the salvation of the soul, and thine own safety is not within thy reach. Let the soul labor for herself, and strive thou too to help her, for if thou sharest in her sufferings, thou wilt share in her glory. Retard her perfection, and thou retardest thine own. Thou wilt not be regenerated until God sees his own Image restored in the soul.” (Sixth Sermon of Advent) Let us, then, purify our souls. Let us do the works of the spirit, not the deeds of the flesh. Our Savior’s promise is most clear; he will turn the deep dye of our iniquities into the purest whiteness. He asks but one thing of us: that we sin no more. He says to us: “Cease to do perversely, and then come and accuse me, come and complain against me if I do not cleanse you.” O Jesus! we will not defer a single day of this holy season—we accept, from this moment, the conditions thou offerest us. We sincerely desire to make our peace with thee; to bring the flesh into subjection to our spirit, to make good all the injustices we have committed against our neighbor, and to hush, by the sighs of our heart-felt compunction, that voice of our sins which has so long cried to thee for vengeance.
PROSE FOR THE TIME OF ADVENT
(Composed in the eleventh century, and taken from the ancient Roman-French missals)
Thou our eternal salvation, the never-failing light of the world.
Light everlasting and our true redemption.
Moved with compassion to see the human race perish by its idolatry offered to its very tempter.
Thou didst descend to these depths of our misery, yet not leaving thine own high throne above.
Then, by thy own gratuitous love, assuming our human nature,
Thou didst save all on earth that was lost.
Giving joy to this world.
Come, O Christ, purify our souls and bodies.
And make them thy own pure abode.
Justify us by thy first coming.
And in thy second, deliver us;
That so, when thou judgest all things, on the day of the great light,
We may be adorned with a spotless robe, and may follow thy footsteps wheresoever they are seen. Amen.
PRAYER FROM THE AMBROSIAN BREVIARY
(Second Sunday of Advent)
O Almighty God! grant, we beseech thee, unto all this thy family, the desire of meeting, by good works, thy Son, Christ our Lord, who is coming to us; that being placed on his right hand, we may deserve the possession of the heavenly Kingdom. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.
St Bibiana & the Prophet Habacuc: Courage to Endure Suffering
1st Monday of Advent: Grandeur of the Mystery of Incarnation
St Bibiana, Virgin & Martyr
A bridged from her Acts, which are disfigured by interpolations. See Anast. in Simplicio, et Baron. Annot. in Martyr. Rom. Bosius et Aringhi, Roma Subterr. t. 3, c. 37.
A. D. 363.
WE are informed by Ammianus Marcellinus, a pagan historian of that age, and an officer in the court of Julian the Apostate, that this emperor made Apronianus governor of Rome in the year 363, who, while he was on the way to that city, had the misfortune to lose an eye. This accident he superstitiously imputed to the power of magic, through the malice of some who excelled in that art; and, in this foolish persuasion, to gratify his spleen and superstition, he resolved to punish and exterminate the magicians; in which accusation, Christians were involved above all others, on account of many wonderful miracles which were wrought in the primitive ages. Under this magistrate, St. Bibiana received the crown of martyrdom. This holy virgin was a native of Rome, and daughter to Flavian, a Roman knight, and his wife Dafrosa, who were both zealous Christians. Flavian was apprehended, deprived of a considerable post which he held in the city, burned in the face with a ho iron, and banished to Acquapendente, then called Aqu Taurin, where he died of his wounds a few days after. Dafrosa, by an order of Apronianus, who had thus treated her husband for his constancy in his faith, was, on the same account, confined to her house for some time; and, at length, carried out of the gates of the city, and beheaded. Bibiana and her sister Demetria, after the death of their holy parents, were stripped of all they had in the world, and suffered much from poverty for five months, but spent that time in their own house in fasting and prayer. Apronianus had flattered himself that hunger and want would bring them to a compliance; but seeing himself mistaken, summoned them to appear before him. Demetria, having made a generous confession of her faith, fell down and expired at the foot of the tribunal, in the presence of the judge. Apronianus gave orders that Bibiana should be put into the hands of a wicked woman named Rufina, who was extremely artful, and undertook to bring her to another way of thinking. That agent of hell employed all the allurements she could invent; which were afterwards succeeded by blows: but Bibiana, making prayer her shield, remained invincible. Apronianus, enraged at the courage and perseverance of a tender virgin, at length passed sentence of death upon her, and ordered her to be tied to a pillar, and whipped with scourges loaded with leaden plummets till she expired. The saint underwent this punishment cheerfully, and died in the hands of the executioners. Her body was left in the open air, that it might be a prey to beasts; but, having lain exposed two days, was buried in the night, near the palace of Licinius, by a holy priest called John. Peace being soon after restored to the church, a chapel was erected over her tomb; and a hundred years after, in 465, pope Simplicity built there a fair church, as Anastasius mentions in his life. This church was called Olympina, from a pious lady of that name, who defrayed the expenses. It was repaired by Honorius III., but being fallen to decay was afterwards united to St. Mary Major, till it was sumptuously rebuilt by Urban VIII. in 1628, who placed in a the relics of SS. Bibiana, Demetria, and Dafrosa, which were discovered in that place which has been sometimes called St. Bibiana’s cemetery.
The only affair which a Christian has in this world, and in which consists all his happiness and joy, is to seek God, to attain to the perfect possession of his grace and love, and in all things most perfectly to do his will. By this disposition of heart he is raised above all created things, and united to the eternal and unchangeable object of his felicity. He receives the good things of this world with gratitude to the Giver, but always with indifference; leaves them with joy, if God requires that sacrifice at his hands; and, in his abundance, fears not so much the flight of what he possesses as the infection of his own heart, or lest his affections be entangled by them. Such attachments are secretly and imperceptibly contracted, yet are ties by which the soul is held captive, and enslaved to the world. Only assiduous prayer and meditation on heavenly things, habitual self-denial, humble distrust and watchfulness, and abundant almsdeeds proportioned to a person’s circumstances, can preserve a soul from this dangerous snare amidst worldly affluence. To these means is that powerful grace annexed. This disengagement of the heart, how sincere soever, usually acquires a great increase and perfection by the actual sacrifice of earthly goods, made with heroic sentiments of faith and divine love, when God calls for it. Such an offering is richly compensated by the most abundant spiritual graces and comforts at present, and an immense weight of eternal glory in the next life.
Collect of St Habacuc, Prophet & Confessor ~ Indulgenced on the Saint's Feast (See Note)
According to the Apostolic Penitentiary, a partial indulgence is granted to those who on the feast of any Saint recite in his honour the oration of the Missal or any other approved by legitimate authority.
Let us pray.
O God, who dost gladden us with the annual feast of Habacuc, Thy Prophet & Confessor, mercifully grant that, whilst honouring the anniversary of his death, we may also imitate his deeds.
Collect of St Bibiana, Virgin & Martyr ~ Indulgenced on the Saint's Feast
According to the Apostolic Penitentiary, a partial indulgence is granted to those who on the feast of any Saint recite in his honour the oration of the Missal or any other approved by legitimate Authority.
Let us pray.
O God, the Giver of all good gifts, Who unto the lily of pure maidenhood in the hand of thy servant Bibiana, didst join the palm of a glorious martyrdom, grant us, we beseech thee, at her pleading, that our hearts and minds being joined to thee by thy love, we may escape all dangers which do presently beset us, and finally attain unto thine everlasting joy.
01 December 2024
Catholic Church Finally Agrees on Something
Eccles brings his satirical style to the Black Friday on which the British House of Commons took another step toward legalising murder.
From Eccles is Saved
Following the Black Friday on which the British House of Commons voted to legalise Assisted Suicide (giving doctors a Licence to Kill, à la Shipman), there is one faint ray of sunshine.
For the first time since the 1960s the Catholics have agreed on something!
"Are you sure we're not on a slippery slope, Kim?"
No matter whether they are SSPX or Happy-clappy, whether they refuse to talk to anyone except in Latin, or whether they refuse to use even Latin terms like "et cetera", whether they are "Trads" or readers of "Where Peter Is", all British Catholics are united in condemning this legislation. Why, even Tina Beattie is against it!
Not all the bishops spoke out against it (or not loudly enough for me to hear), but Nichols, Wilson, O'Toole, Egan, Davies, Swarbrick, McKinney and Stock, at least, deserve gold stars on this occasion.
Praising Vin and Tina together! Can this blog cope with such things?
Well, I thought, there must be some exceptions! How about Austen Ivereigh, the fan of Pachamama and Rupnik? Surely, he at least won't let me down when I'm looking for targets? But no, the gnome is on my side too!
Confusing it with Brexit and getting the date wrong, but otherwise 8/10 for Austen.
OK, so there we are, all Catholics are united, as far as I know. Life is hard for the satirical blogger.
Now we can unite to fight against the world, the flesh, the Devil, Kim Jong Headbanger Leadbeater, Enid Rancid Esther Rantzen, ...
Oh, but I forgot one thing. Our views are influenced by our religion. And, according to Lord Falconer, that means WE SHOULD SHUT UP! Only atheists, agnostics and devil-worshippers are allowed to express opinions.
I'm not bigoted about religions - I hate them all!"
Let's finish with something I wrote in response to a suggestion from Fr Dwight Longenecker. The Anglicans (who are a bit less hardline than Catholics when it comes to being pro-life) will need a liturgy for blessing services of Assisted Suicide.
We come to say farewell to our brother Eccles.
Who looketh a bit fed up, so it is time he went.
Who beareth the means of exit?
𝐈 bear the pillow of suffocation.
Blessed be St Esther of Rantzen, who hath ordained this.
Amen.
Thy life is ending. Go in peace.
Yippee! (Or he may say "Thanks be to Kim".)