The first review of the Eusebius Gospel Problems and Solutions book by David Miller, Adam McCollum, Carol Downer and friends, edited by me, has appeared here at Bryn Mawr. It’s very kind and rather encouraging!
Greek Papyri in Cairo now online
Via AWOL, I learn that a Photographic Archive of Papyri in the Cairo Museum is now online. It is mainly documentary material, but one literary codex seems to be involved:
-
Gospel of Peter: Photos of all the pages of the Gospel of Peter ms. from Akhmim (P.Cair. 10759)
-
1 Enoch, chapters 1-27 (same)
A list of contents of all the papyri would be a useful addition to the site.
Trying to find a 1922 publication in Google books – for my US readers
I’m trying to locate a copy of E. A. Lowe and E. K. Rand, A sixth century Fragment of the Letters of Pliny the Younger, 1922, in Google Books. The date means that in the US it is out of copyright. There are pages from it in Hathi, which bear the mark of Google Books and the University of Michigan. (A correspondent has sent me a PDF he made himself from them) So the PDF must exist in Google Books. But I can’t find a downloadable copy.
Would any of my readers in the USA care to have a look, and post a URL in the comments, if they can find it?
What I want to know, of course, is whether it’s just me, living outside the US, or whether it is genuinely inaccessible.
Indexes in manuscripts of Pliny the Younger’s letters
Six folios survive of a 5th century manuscript of the Letters of Pliny the Younger. They are in New York, in the Pierpont Morgan collection, where they have the shelfmark M.462.[1] They contain letters from Book 2, Letter XX, line 13, to Book 3, Letter V, line 10. But I learn that they also contain “one of the indices (to Book 3) which are a special feature of the Ten-Book tradition” of the letters of Pliny.[2]
The Letters of Pliny reached us by a complicated process. Originally possessing ten books, copies of this kind began to be cut down during the middle ages into a collection of 100 letters. Another family also existed, which contained only nine books, and circulated in various more or less complete forms.
The ancient manuscript of the ten-book family was still complete in the 15th century, when it belonged to the library of Saint-Victor in Paris. It is mentioned in the 1514 catalogue of that library, which was made by Claude de Grandrue,[3] and published in 1983.[4] At what date thereafter it was dismembered, we cannot now say.
This detail, about the “indices” is mentioned only in passing. But to those of us interested in chapter titles and tables of contents in ancient books, this is most interesting.
So where may these “indices” be found? Clearly in the Morgan manuscript there is one. I have emailed Robert Parks, Director of Library and Museum Services there, and asked if the ms. could be digitised and placed online. It will be interesting to see what he says. They have some images from books of hours and similar online, but those are more pretty than useful.
There’s a 1903 edition online at Google Books here (and is it me, or is Google Books making it harder and harder to find the PDF that we all want to download, in order to promote its crappy commercial ebook reader?) This doesn’t give the indices, no siree. Hey, they’re only present in a 5th century copy! This casual negligence towards the manuscript data is infuriating!
Where can they be?
- [1]The catalogue is here, which tells us these are “6 leaves (1 column, 27 lines), bound : vellum ; 287 x 180 mm”; “The original manuscript was in France at least by ca. 1380 (dated with reference to the inscription on folio 51); owned by the Abbey of Saint Victor Library in Paris up to 1505 (foliated by the librarian Claude de Grandrue and listed as missing/stolen in the 1514 catalogue); discovered around 1500 at the Saint Victor Library by the Dominican Fra Giovanni Giocondo of Verona, who initially transcribed some of the letters and sent them to Aldus Manutius in Venice, and later borrowed or simply removed the manuscript from the abbey in 1505 and perhaps sold it to Aloise Mocenigo, the Venetian ambassador in Paris, who took it to Venice and lent it to Aldus Manutius; by the 18th century the manuscript had been fragmented and the surviving 6 leaves were purchased by Marchese Francesco Taccone of Naples (1763-1818); sold by his heirs to Tammaro de Marinis in 1910; purchased by J. Pierpont Morgan (1837-1913) from De Marinis through Alexandre Imbert but shipped by Quaritch, in 1910.” Publication: A sixth-century fragment of the letters of Pliny the Younger / E.A. Lowe and E.K. Rand. Washington : Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1922.↩
- [2]L. D. Reynolds (ed.), Texts and Transmissions, 1983, p.317.↩
- [3]Reynolds, p.317, n.5: “Where it was foliated and described by the librarian Claude de Grandrue.”↩
- [4]Les manuscrits de l’Abbaye de Saint-Victor : catalogue établi sur la base du répertoire de Claude de Grandrue (1514) / Gilbert Ouy. Turnhout, Belgium : Brepols, 1999, v. I p. 30-31, v. Ii p. 630, and Le catalogue de la bibliothèque de l’abbaye de Saint-Victor de Paris de Claude de Grandrue, 1514 ; introduction par Gilbert OUY ; texte et index établis par Veronika GERZ-VON BUREN, en collaboration avec Raymonde HUBSCHMID et Catherine REGNIER… ; Paris : Editions du C.N.R.S., 1983 ; in-8°, Lxii-734 pages.↩
“Tertullian Tracts” … what can these be?
A correspondent wrote as follows:
Do you know of any writings by Tertullian call the “Tertullian Tracts”?
They supposedly deal with early church mediumship or spiritualism or spirit contact of prior believers who died.
I did not, of course, but a certain amount of cross-examination revealed that we were discussing a line on the following site, giving a list of books and links:
To anyone who writes to me: do give me all the facts, hey? Don’t make me drag out of you just which site you are referring to, and so on?!
Anyway, in the section “Mediumship and Mediums”, there is the curious item:
Tertullian Tracts – very early Christian practice of spirit communion
The link is to a Geocities site “tertulliancyrian”, which must be a typo. I quickly saw that it had to be:
Of course GeoCities no longer exists. But the material we are seeking is preserved in the internet archive here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20090829082536/http://geocities.com/tertulliancyprian/29.htm
This consists of excerpts from one of the treatises of Tertullian, “De ieiunio adversus psychicos”, in which he discusses Montanist claims to revelation. None of this material has anything whatever to do with mediumship (!) or any spirit other than the Holy Spirit.
More on the ban on Norwich church by Norwich council
I wrote yesterday about the banning of a Norwich church by the City Council. Thankfully the widely-read Cranmer blog has picked up on this disgraceful story.
This is the New Inquisition: the demand for theological orthodoxy has given way to prohibition of ‘feeling insulted’. And you might be next. Indeed, as His Grace has previously observed, this blog may well be closed down because someone (just one) complains to the police that religio-political polemic makes them feel uncomfortable and causes them distress; that they feel ‘insulted’, despite His Grace’s best efforts ‘to foster good relations between people of all backgrounds and religions’. This blog is, after all, a public space and His Grace is publishing alarming material. He probably not infrequently falls foul of equality and diversity demands, or transgresses the bounds of acceptability for those of other faiths or ‘disordered’(© Benedict XVI) sexual proclivities. His Grace never means to insult or cause distress, but the intention or motive is irrelevant: if the beholder feels offended, His Grace may be reported to the police under Section 5 of the Public Order Act, and they are obliged to investigate.
And now, if they determine that no crime has been committed, you can rely upon some jobsworth from bureaucratic officialdom to override the law and mete out their own brand of summary justice, with no indictments, no right of appeal, no juries, and no witnesses. This blog does not agree with all of Dr Clifford’s message, but, by God, it stands foursquare with him against the misuse and abuse of power by Norwich City Council.
And so does this blog.
A correspondent has pointed me to what is said to be the leaflet. Since I understand that Norfolk police have advised that, despite everything, it violates none of our new and excitingly vague laws against saying what we think, I give it here. It reads as follows:
WHY NOT ISLAM
The Inauguration of President Barack Obama is an alarming development. Behind his seductive charm and eloquent rhetoric lurks a dark and dangerous agenda. His speech should alert all who dimly perceive the world-wide Islamic threat. Yes, he challenged terrorists, but he also proposed cooperation with the Islamic world. Does he not realise that in one sentence he betrayed the ‘free world’?
1. WHY ISLAM IS NOT PEACEFUL
It is undeniable that Islam’s global jihadists – some quietly, others violently – are plotting the overthrow of all we have known for centuries. They are preparing for ‘USAistan’ and ‘UKistan’ in no uncertain terms! Tragically, our secularist Governments – which Islam aims to subjugate and replace in any case – are playing dangerous games by ignorantly distinguishing between militant and moderate Islam. The only difference between moderates and militants is between those who keep their mouths shut and those who don’t! Western Governments and other secularists are deluded by the deceptive mantra ‘Islam means peace’ (reinforced by the early, pre-abbrogated Sura 2: 256 and the frequently misquoted Sura 5: 32). But it means nothing of the kind! The Arabic word for ‘peace’ is ‘salaam’, the Hebrew equivalent being ‘shalom’. No, ‘Islam’ means ‘submission’, submission to Allah. The only sense in which the Pax Islama could mean ‘peace’ is when tribute-paying non-Muslims are silenced by conquest and reduced to a state of dhimminitude or ‘second class’ citizenship. To properly use Sir Iqbal Sacranie’s deceptive expression (used to shield Islam from its critics after 7/7) ‘the Qur’an is perfectly clear’, it states: ‘Make war on them: … Fight those who believe not in Allah … Nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are of the People of the Book, i.e. Jews and Christians), until they pay the jizyah with submission, and are utterly subdued’ (Sura 9: 14, 29).
2. WHY MUSLIMS ARE NOT ISLAMIC
Yes, you have read it correctly. Muslims are not really Muslims. They are properly called ‘Muhammadans’ – followers of their prophet Muhammad. The god they claim to submit to (the true meaning of ‘Islam’) is in reality the ancient pagan moon god of Arabia. For all their protestations against ‘idolatry’, their crescent moon symbol of Allah may be seen on every mosque. This imagined god is not to be confused with the living God who has uniquely revealed Himself in Jesus Christ. Since Muslims reject the true God, only acknowledged by true Christians, Christians alone are truly ‘islamic’ since they alone submit to God! Invoking an absurd piece of Islamic rhetoric, the Lord Jesus Christ was only a ‘muslim’ in the sense that He, as the Son of God, submitted Himself to the will of His heavenly Father. While Jesus may be regarded as a ‘muslim’ in this sense, Muslims are arguably not Muslims because they fail to submit to the living God! Their hostility to God in Christ makes them strictly ‘anti-muslim’!
3. WHY THE WEST MUST SHUN ISLAM
So, Muslims need rescuing from Islam! At the same time, the West needs rescuing from Islam! To implement this twin rescue mission, two directives must be pursued:
1. Reliable information must be made available to community, educational, church and political leaders about authentic Islam. The loveless concept of Allah; the incoherence of the Qur’an; Islam’s appeal to the baser instincts of human nature; the degradation of women involving female circumcision and forced marriages; honour killings; the killing of apostates, its bloody jihadism and a fallaciously-promised erotic paradise for suicide bombers (murderers not martyrs); all these features must not be hidden. In responding to the growing threat, Western Governments are failing to face reality. The distinction between moderate and militant Islam misses the point that the religion itself is the source of the problem. Indeed, no other religion on earth can claim to match the violence of the Islamic agenda. Seemingly-benign Muslim communities will always be breeding grounds from which their more militant members can recruit jihadists.
2. With sensitive yet courageous compassion, Christians must use all proper means to evangelise Muslims. In the process, there must be no concessions to liberal as well as Muslim denials of the deity and grace of Jesus Christ, the Son of God and only Saviour of the world. In short, the case for the pure, life-transforming faith of biblical Christianity must be courageously made. On the religious education level, the RE component of National Curricula must ‘put the record straight’. Teachers must stop pretending that Jesus and Muhammad are on a par and that the Holy Bible and the Holy Qur’an teach similarly-positive values. Without denying that too often Christians have failed to demonstrate the compassionate virtues of its Founder, the true character of Muhammad’s programme and its devastating dictates must not be hidden from our children. Yes, the Christian Gospel forbids and condemns hatred and violence. The same cannot be said of the message of Muhammad. The children of Western schools must learn the difference between the mercy of the Sermon on the Mount and the hatred of the Hadith. The children of Muslim citizens must also be exposed to the purity of Christ and not the poison of Muhammad.
4. WHY JESUS CHRIST
With a continuing and growing assault on our Christian heritage, never was there a greater need to get to grips with the truth of the Bible text: ‘No man ever spoke like this man’ (John 7: 46). This was the response of amazed men who heard Christ. What truths explain their astonishment?
1. NO MAN EVER SPOKE LIKE JESUS CHRIST
And why? He was no ordinary man. He was perfect and sinless. He is the ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1: 23); ‘God manifest in the flesh’ (1 Timothy 3: 16); the Eternal ‘Word made flesh’ (John 1: 14).
Thus, He spoke words of truth, purity, love, kindness and compassion. He spoke with divine unction, grace and authority. No one else, before or since, ever spoke like Him. He is Creator, King, and Lord of the Universe.
On the other hand, Muhammad was an ordinary man. He was imperfect and sinful. He spoke words of error, impurity, hate and cruelty.
2. NO MAN EVER LIVED LIKE JESUS CHRIST
His life backed up His words. In lip and life, He was perfectly consistent. He brought blessing, healing, comfort and joy to people. His many miracles confirmed His deity.
His tender touch declared the compassion of God. He liberated women from the abusive treatment of selfish men. He rejected violence as a method of spreading His message. No life has ever been lived to match the life of Jesus Christ.
On the other hand, Muhammad’s life contradicted many of his more noble sayings. His life is not a good example for ‘private character’. His claims cannot compare with Christ’s. Spreading his message by the sword, he brought violence and bloodshed to those who refused to submit to his ‘Allah’. He humiliated women. His tenderness was reserved chiefly for his own sexual indulgence and his stomach (according to wife – one of fourteen – A’isha).
3. NO MAN EVER DIED LIKE JESUS CHRIST
While His life and preaching angered the religious establishment of His day, nothing could justify the hatred directed at Him. He was guilty of no sin. Expressing God’s mercy to us hell-deserving sinners, Jesus, Saviour of the world, died for our sins.
He died, ‘the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God’ (1 Peter 3: 18). In His agonizing crucifixion, He breathed nothing but love and kindness to His enemies. Such dying! Such love!
On the other hand, Muhammad died, burdened by his own guilt. Sadly and tragically, his death did not terminate his cruel conquests. Others perpetuated his vicious legacy.
4. NO MAN EVER BLESSED
THE HUMAN RACE
LIKE JESUS CHRIST
His impact on history is not just the effect of a perpetuation of His memory. Jesus rose from
the dead! He lives! The Gospel is the greatest blessing the world has ever known! It has
brought forgiveness, love, joy and peace. Christ has mended broken hearts and lives.
He has given hope to those in despair. Through Him, the light of heaven has dispelled the
darkness of death.
He has liberated individuals and nations. The Gospel has delivered people from
ignorance, slavery, poverty and degradation. All that is truly good, noble, pure and
beautiful comes from Him (even if apostate believers – crusading Roman Catholics and
deity-denying Protestant Liberals – have corrupted His truth). Christ’s resurrection
influence continues still where He is accepted, trusted and served.
On the other hand, Muhammad died, to rise no more, except to be judged by Christ when He
returns. His tomb is not empty. His legacy is ignorance, cruelty, fear and oppression. The
continued influence of his teachings is a threat to all that Christ represents.
In conclusion, the case for Christ and against Muhammad is compelling in every respect.
Assessed by every test that may be devised, there is simply no competition. So let us all
respond as did the men in our text! May we all acknowledge, believe, trust, love and
surrender to the incomparable Christ. May we all rejoice in Him, and seek to make Him
known throughout the world.
I am well aware that many in the secular West desire Christ no more than they desire
Muhammad. Therefore, I must warn them. Even if they never suffer from some jihadic
atrocity, they will stand before the judgement seat of Christ, when He returns to judge the
world in righteousness (see 2 Corinthians 5: 10).
While opportunity remains, come to Christ! If you are a Muslim, renounce Muhammad,
and come to Christ! Then, everything I have tried to express will become wonderfully and
experientially true. I invite you all to trust and serve Him with me. Amen!
Dr Alan C. Clifford
Norwich Reformed Church
www.nrchurch.co.nr
Norwich Reform Church banned from meeting and from their own market stall by Norwich Council for “hate”
A BBC East report from yesterday (16/4/12):
Norwich Reformed Church banned for Islam ‘hate’ leaflet
A church has been banned from holding a weekly bookstall in Norwich following a complaint it was producing “hate-motivated” literature against Islam.
The Norwich Reformed Church held the stall on the city’s Hay Hill, which is owned by Norwich City Council.
The council has stopped the church using the site for equality reasons.
Pastor Alan Clifford said the church would appeal in the hope “the council will see sense and see how they are violating our freedom of speech”.
Mr Clifford wrote the leaflet, Why Not Islam, about 10 years ago. The church has been distributing the literature from Hay Hill since 2008.
‘High and mighty’
He said: “Our first response was one of surprise.
“We felt this a violation of freedom of speech and I was accused of hate motivation in producing this leaflet.
“It’s an intolerance from the city council acting in a high and mighty manner as we’ve had it confirmed by Norfolk Police – who’ve inspected the document – there is no crime involved.”
Masoud Gadir, Muslim chaplain at University of East Anglia and president of Norwich and Norfolk Muslim Association, said: “When you look at the leaflet it brings in hatred and scaremongers as to what Islam is.
“God has given us the mind and brain to think – not to follow any religion blindly.”
The Norwich Reformed Church, associated with the Farthing Trust, received notice from the council on 5 April that it would no longer be able to do outreach work on Hay Hill.
The authority has also advised the council-owned Eaton Park Community Centre not to take any further bookings from the church, which has used the centre as a place of worship since 1994.
A council spokesman said: “We received a complaint from a member of the public about material published by the Norwich Reformed Church which uses council facilities.
“This was considered to be hate motivated.”
The spokesman added that the police advised that no criminal offence had been committed, but the council had a “duty to foster good relations between people of all backgrounds and religions”.
The Farthing Trust is appealing against what it describes as the city council’s “dramatic action”.
The Norwich Evening News also have the story.
More details are accessible, courtesy of Max Farquar. The leaflet was HERE in PDF form, but has sadly vanished. The story is also mentioned here at the Happy Propagandist blog, who comments:
Unfortunately, [the law in question] is extremely vague and the criteria for breaking the law are entirely subjective. We all know some people who are taken aback by even the most minor of grievances. This law also allows individuals or groups with ulterior agendas to target freedom of speech, at will. Consequently, the law needs to get a grip on the difference between ‘inciting religious hatred’ and simply voicing innocuous opinions, which we are all entitled to do (just about). It also needs to define what ‘grossly offensive’ means. I was of the opinion that one of the great things about a liberal society is that one does not have the right to ‘not be offended’.
It seems that the church have contacted the Christian Institute, and are taking legal advice.
Now I know that bookstall personally, because I pass it every time I visit Norwich. It’s a tiny little table, with a little hut built around it, about 6 foot long in its largest dimension. It’s unobtrusive, and innocuous in every way, as is the literature on it. Yet, apparently, the council — paid for by the taxes of church members — can ban the stall, expel the church from a building paid for by taxpayers, even though no crime has been committed.
It is useless to complain that the council officials — nameless, of course — have acted in this manner. Rather, a legal climate has been created in which those officials are afraid NOT to censor in this way. I only learned of this case by accident. Yet up and down the country, liberty is being interfered with, routinely, deliberately, without malice. This is what comes of evil laws and bad government.
I would suggest that younger church members organise a sit-in at the next council meeting, notifying the local TV just before they do, and appear on TV being dragged out by the police or security. Protest visibly, chaps. It’s the only way.
A Mithraeum in Iran? — The “Verjuy Mithra Temple”
A post by a headbanger on a crank site drew my attention to this page on the web:
Verjuy Mithra Temple, the Oldest Surviving Mithraist Temple in Iran
By: Afshin Tavakoli
Iran, Daily Newspaper
No. 2802, May. 16th, 2004, Page 12Abstract:Maragheh is one of Iran’s most ancient cities having its roots in legends. In the past, its suburbs were used to build temples belonging to the religion of Mithraism. One of the temples is located 4 kilometers south of Maragheh in Verjuy village. There were no signs indicating the location of the temple in the village or even at the entrance of the cemetery. Among other main Mithraism temples in Maragheh, we can refer to hand made caves of the observatory hill.
… Followers of Mithraism built this temple during the Arsacid dynasty (248 BCE-224 CE) …
All around the main hall, there is Quranic inscriptions written in Naskhi script which circles around the walls and entrances like a belt. Parts of the inscription on walls, dating back to the Islamic period when this Mithraism temple was used as a monastery of Sufis or as a mosque, have been destroyed by the course of time.
In the brochure published recently by the Cultural Heritage Organization of Maragheh, the municipality and the governor’s office, these sentences are written about Mehr (Mithra) temple:
“The historical site of Mehr temple and the shrine of Molla Masoum are located in the south of the historical cemetery of Verjuy village. Before the arrival of Islam, it was a place for worshiping the sun and a place for performing ceremonies by the followers of Mithraism. The building was probably built during the reign of Arsacid or possibly early Sassanid dynasties. After the arrival of Islam, it was used as a mosque and the shrine of Molla Masoum, a well-known intellectual in the 13th century.”
The photograph next to these sentences shows a clean temple unlike the reality. Mehr in Avesta and Old-Persian was called Mithra and in Pahlavi language it was called Mithr. In Avesta, Mehr was considered to be one of the creators of Ahura Mazda and was the Yazats (Izad) of contract and promise and hence the god of light and brightness because nothing was kept secret from him. Mithraism reached Babylon and Asia Minor from Iran and it then reached Europe by Roman soldiers. Once in Europe, it was worshiped as a great god. After the appearance of Zoroastrianism, Ahura Mazda became known as the only God and other Aryan gods were considered Yazats or angels which actually resembled characters and the power of God. Mehr was among such Yazats.
All very odd, and none of it seemingly that reliable. There are almost no references, for instance. The article is from an Iranian daily newspaper, which uses a municipal leaflet as a source.
The site calls itself CAIS, the “Circle of Ancient Iranian Studies”, and the URL is www.cais-soas.com, as if the School for Oriental and Asiatic Studies were associated with it, although it no longer has any such association.
I thought that I would investigate further. Nothing about this place looks like a Mithraeum. No Mithraea are known from Iran. So … why the Mithras reference?
The monument is described by Dr Arezou Azad. She is discussing three cave complexes of the region, which seem to be medieval Buddhist.[1] Here is the start of the description, from p.219:
2. Mihri Temple / Imamzada Ma’sum (Near Maragha)
Previous studies. The first archaeologist to describe this site was Parviz Varjavand in the early 1970’s. Warwick Ball provided a more accurate overview by factoring in the inscriptions and decorated stonework in the complex, as well as the adjacent cemetary, and a more detailed floor plan.(37) …
Observations. In the outskirts of Maragha lies the site of the Mihri Temple, also known as the Imamzada Ma’sum. This site is far less known than the last, although it is just as mysterious, and therefore deserves more attention. The site has three accessible areas: a main space surrounded by four domed chambers (nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7); a four-domed hall with a full-size pillar at its centre (no. 3); and a set of three long chambers some 100 metres away.
(37) Parviz Varjavand, ‘The Imamzadeh Ma’sum Varjovi near Maragheh’, East and West 25/3-4 (1975), p.435-8 …; Warwick Ball, ‘The Imamzadeh Ma’sum at Vardjovi. A rock-cut Ilkhanid Complex near Maragheh’, Archaologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 12 (1979), p. 329-40.
And on the article goes, with nothing Mithraic that I could see (although the preview was cut-off before the end).
A little earlier, on p.217-8, there is discussion of another cave complex in the area, the Rasadkhana caves at Maragha.
Function and dating. The rectangular stone blocks in chambers a and b were identified as altars, and hence the chambers as sanctuaries. To Ball they looked like the Buddhist circumambulatory pillar-caves of Afghanistan and Central Asia, and to Bowman and Thompson like the Jacobite style of dual sanctuaries. I would also note a resemblance to the Sasanian fire altars of Balkh. Ker Porter wrote: ‘These secluded places [i.e. the caves] we are told, were not merely the habitations of Zoroaster himself and his Magi, but were used as temples.'(27) In the cave temples of the Mithraists (or Mithraea), altars of such dimensions can also be found.(28) An ancient Mithraic use is likely given the similarities with Roman Mithraic temples, but it is the Ilkhanid period that is of greater interest to us.
(27) Porter, Travels in Georgia, Persia, Armenia, vol. 2, p.496.
(28) See Varjavand, Kawish-i Rasadkhana-yi Maragha, p.279-83. On the history and belief system of Mithraism which developed with the conquest of Persia by Alexander the Great in 331 BCE, see Franz Cumont, Les mysteres de Mithra, Brussels (1913) and Taufiq Wahby, The remnants of Mithraism in Hatra and Iraqi Kurdistan and its traces in Yazidism, London (1962).
The list of diverse possible parallels at the front of the quote makes it abundantly clear that we are in speculation land.
I have mentioned before how unreliable statements about Mithras can be in academic books, and it seems that we have another example here.
The 19th century traveller Porter “is told” that Zoroaster himself lived there. This can only be local folklore. But aside from that, we then have the repetition (for the author is not a Mithras scholar) of material from Iranian sources of the Royalist period, every one of whom believed in the Cumontian idea that Persian Mithra was the same as Roman Mithras. The latter view is contradicted by the archaeology, and can no longer simply be presumed. And without that identification, what becomes of all this? It falls to the ground.
I should add, in fairness to the author of the article, that while I was unable to view p.215, I found there the following snippet:
The Iranian archaeologist Parviz Varjavand described them in the late 1980’s, and emphasized their ancient Mithraic elements, bringing us back to where Porter started in the early nineteenth century: relying on folklore and projecting…
which suggests that the author is in fact well aware of how shaky all this material is.
It would seem, then, that there is, in fact, no evidence associating Mithras (or, I think, even Mithra) with either site.
“Christians vilified” in Britain — yes or no?
The headline story in the Daily Telegraph today is about a submission by George Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, to a court case before the European Court of Human Rights.
Britain’s Christians are being vilified, warns Lord Carey
Christians are being “persecuted” by courts and “driven underground” in the same way that homosexuals once were, a former Archbishop of Canterbury has warned.
Lord Carey says worshippers are being “vilified” by the state, treated as “bigots” and sacked simply for expressing their beliefs.
The attack is part of a direct appeal to the European Court of Human Rights before a landmark case on religious freedom.
In a written submission seen by The Daily Telegraph, the former leader of more than 70 million Anglicans warns that the outward expression of traditional conservative Christian values has effectively been “banned” in Britain under a new “secular conformity of belief and conduct”.
His comments represent one of the strongest attacks on the impartiality of Britain’s judiciary from a religious leader.
He says Christians will face a “religious bar” to employment if rulings against wearing crosses and expressing their beliefs are not reversed.
Lord Carey argues that in “case after case” British courts have failed to protect Christian values. He urges European judges to correct the balance.
The hearing, due to start in Strasbourg on Sept 4, will deal with the case of two workers forced out of their jobs over the wearing of crosses as a visible manifestation of their faith. It will also take in the cases of Gary McFarlane, a counsellor sacked for saying that he may not be comfortable in giving sex therapy to homosexual couples, and a Christian registrar, who wishes not to conduct civil partnership ceremonies.
Lord Carey, who was archbishop from 1991 to 2002, warns of a “drive to remove Judaeo-Christian values from the public square”. Courts in Britain have “consistently applied equality law to discriminate against Christians”.
They show a “crude” misunderstanding of the faith by treating some believers as “bigots”. He writes: “In a country where Christians can be sacked for manifesting their faith, are vilified by State bodies, are in fear of reprisal or even arrest for expressing their views on sexual ethics, something is very wrong.
“It affects the moral and ethical compass of the United Kingdom. Christians are excluded from many sectors of employment simply because of their beliefs; beliefs which are not contrary to the public good.”
He outlines a string of cases in which he argues that British judges have used a strict reading of equality law to strip the legally established right to freedom of religion of “any substantive effect”.
“It is now Christians who are persecuted; often sought out and framed by homosexual activists,” he says. “Christians are driven underground. There appears to be a clear animus to the Christian faith and to Judaeo-Christian values. Clearly the courts of the United Kingdom require guidance.”
He says the human rights campaign has gone too far and become a political agenda.
The article is not a particularly sympathetic one, and gives us little idea of the context from which Dr Carey’s words have been excerpted. I think it is reasonable to ask who sent the submission to the Telegraph, and with what motives.
The article in the Belfast Telegraph is headed, ‘Vilified’ Christians ‘fear arrest’, but is based on the Telegraph article.
What are we to make of this?
The background is that there has been a concerted effort in Britain in recent years to create case law which has the effect that a Christian must conform to newly created laws which seem designed to attack Christian beliefs.
In particular an individual named Ben Summerskill — son of a prominent Labour politican — and his gay campaigning group Stonewall seem to be behind much of the mischief. It is said that he presented a list of demands for laws, in favour of gays and criminalising opposition to them, to Tony Blair, a decade ago, who agreed to enact them all. It is certainly the case that he sent agents provocateurs to the home of an elderly Christian couple who offered “bed and breakfast” to visitors to demand that these two gays should be given a double room to practice their vice in, with the expectation of being refused and reporting the couple to the police under the laws which he himself had drawn up. The object of this hateful exercise was to drag his victims through the courts, and in the process create case law which would prevent Christians running hotels unless he permitted it. A list of his misdeeds would doubtless make interesting reading, but there seems no special need to dwell on them here.
Times of bigotry and intolerance inevitably produce men like Summerskill, men adept at manipulating people in power in order to achieve their own evil ends, and subsequent ages look with revulsion on such people, and wonder why men allowed them to flourish.
But God allows such things, in order that the difference between good and evil shall become clear. It is easy enough to see the difference between those who claim the name of Christian, but whose “god” is merely a servant to Summerskill and his ilk; and those who follow God himself, at whatever cost. The suffering of the confessors — we have yet to have martyrs — is the seed of the church.
But … “vilified”? Is that right? Are Christians, is Christianity vilified in Britain?
Years ago, I went to see progressive rock group Yes at the old Wembley Arena. This was their “90125” tour, which featured a song about vice in the city called “City of Love”. As singer Jon Anderson introduced the song, he referred to a “city of love … a city of sin …”. When he said the word “sin”, the whole arena, probably 100,000 people, shivered, including me. Everyone was nervous that a sermon was about to follow. Yet Anderson is not a Christian, and the line was just a throwaway. That involuntary reaction shows us that there has been some powerful negative conditioning in our land towards religious themes.
Surely we all know that it is embarassing to evangelise, to share the gospel? That it is embarassing to be known as a Christian at work? That to do so is to invite an unfriendly scrutiny, and a jeer when, in vexation, we allow some expletive to pass our lips? We’re accustomed to this, we’ve never known anything different.
But … why is it embarassing? Is it not that we are all — Christian and non-Christian — in possession of attitudes that make it nearly impossible for us to feel otherwise?
And what shapes our attitudes? What was it that created the attitudes that made 100,000 people shiver at Wembley, that evening? It was, of course, the “climate of the times”, as we might call it. The “media agenda of this country” might be another term.
If we look at how Christianity and Christians are portrayed in our mass media, in every way that anyone ever learns about anything, do we not see hostility? Do we not see contempt? Do we ever find that the Christian character in a drama is ever portrayed as anything but a weirdo, a creep, a bigot, a hypocrite and, in our police dramas, not infrequently as a murderer?
We’re used to it. Like a fish, we hardly see it. It’s normal.
But … it is NOT normal. We see how individuals like Summerskill manipulate the political climate to normalise a hideous vice. Why do we doubt that other individuals, no less cynical, manipulate the same environment to make a world in which fornication is normal, abortion routine, and any interference with the same is shouted down or grounds for sacking? The selfish generation had only one creed: “if it feels good, do it”. We know that this was all about sex; and we have discovered that the same creed has rotted the quality of care in our hospitals, and the integrity of our major companies. Why do we suppose that this same rotten attitude does not determine what is “normal” in our society, when it controls all the levers for shaping public opinion?
Dr Carey is right. In modern Britain Christians are indeed vilified.
This is not, necessarily, a new thing. It has always been rather risky to be a Christian. I read this morning, in the Collected Essays and Addresses of the excellent Augustine Birrell, how the commands of religion no longer commanded the assent of most people. That essay was dated 1904.[1]
But the efforts of Summerskill, and those like him or sympathetic to him, are creating a new thing. They are creating a climate of systematic, structural, legal discrimination against Christians. “Your faith or your job” is the cry. Christians may not run adoption agencies, thanks to Summerskill; he is determined that they may not run hotels, may not decide who does or does not stay in their own homes if they offer B&B; may not wear crosses in workplaces where turbans may be worn; and so on, seemingly endlessly. It matters nothing whether Jews — or Christians, or any other respectable group — are prevented from working by a law that says it explicitly, or by a law which has the same effect by deliberately requiring them to violate their beliefs.
The case before the Euro-court is well-judged. It is a political body; but it is unlikely to rule against the interests of French and Italian Catholics.
In the meantime let us pray for England, where such evil is intended and being put into effect. We have not had to deal with a season of deliberate, malevolent harassment for nearly two centuries.
We might also pray for Ben Summerskill. For, as Tertullian remarks in Ad Scapulam, those who seek to do evil to God’s people tend to live short and unhappy lives; and it is our duty, not to threaten, but to pray.
- [1]UPDATE: But my memory deceived me when I wrote this. I was thinking of an essay in volume 2 of that work, entitled Marie Bashkirtseff, wherein he writes on p.263, “The eclipse of faith has not proved fatal by any means to the instinct of confession.” By the mysterious alchemy of memory this became the statement above.↩
Digitising the manuscripts of Lorsch
After my last post, I started looking for evidence of the work of Heidelberg university in digitising Vatican manuscripts. To my astonishment, I found a website for the now vanished library of the abbey of Lorsch! It seems that a team from Heidelberg have been attempting to recreate this Dark Ages library, full of very interesting manuscripts, and destroyed and scattered during the Thirty Years War. Here they discuss their work.
133 manuscripts, which once formed part of the Carolingian monastic library Lorsch, are integrated nowadays into the valuable and large collection of the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. In 1622/23 the manuscripts were brought to Rome as part of Heidelberg’s Bibliotheca Palatina. For its digitization project “Bibliotheca Laureshamensis – digital” Heidelberg University Library was permitted to digitize the Lorsch manuscripts on the premises of the Vatican Library in Rome. Thus, in November 2010 a digitization centre was set up in Rome in cooperation with the Vatican Library for the digitization of the manuscripts. The digitization of the entire Lorsch manuscripts in Rome was completed within eight months by a team of six.
The list of all the manuscripts once part of Lorsch is here.
The Vatican library manuscripts online are listed here. Many are biblical manuscripts, most are 9th century. There are gems for us, tho: Arnobius the Younger, Hilary of Poitiers, Ps.Hegesippus, Ambrosiaster, Jerome, Augustine, Marius Mercator, Paulinus of Nola, Orosius, Cassiodorus, Bede, Isidore, Jordanes … the list goes on. Just look for yourself at the list!
I can’t resist noting Pal. lat. 822, a copy of Rufinus’ translation of Eusebius’ Church History. Or the presence of Macrobius and the Historia Augusta in Pal. lat. 886, foll. 125-189. Or two works by Sallust, the conspiracy of Cataline, and the Jugurthine War, in Pal. lat. 887 and Pal. lat. 889. Cicero, Seneca, Fulgentius Mythographicus, Vergil … yes, and a Servius’ Commentary on Vergil… And whoa! There’s a 10th century manuscript of Juvenal, Pal. lat. 1701!
Then there are three medieval catalogues of the library at Lorsch, as it was, in Pal. lat. 1877. These have been published, and are found in G. Becker’s Catalogi Bibliothecarum Antiqui, in doubtless not very reliable form. But here are the originals!
Finally, fancy a look at Cyprian? Try Reg. lat. 118.
OK, there’s not a lot there that causes me, this instant, to click on it. But then only a manuscript of Pliny the Elder would do that, just at the moment!
Why have I never heard of this?
UPDATE: But … oh good grief, what is this??!?! I tried clicking on one of the mss, and got the following:
No wonder I have never heard of all this. Who, one wonders, was so STUPID as to do this? To do all that work, and then, greedily, HIDE the images!!!
Sometimes I despair, I really do.