The Popeular History Podcast

Birthday Interview with Catherine: Epiphany, The Little Drummer Boy, Confession, & Communion

I chat with my daughter Catherine, who's 8 today. Happy birthday! This conversation was recorded on January 7th, the Feast of the Epiphany (observed).(No transcripts currently available for interviews as they are not pre-scripted. One day I hope to have interview transcripts for accessibility as well, if you would like to help make that happen let me know.)

✝🇻🇦O13 N Deacon Philip and Simon Magus

Acts Timeline
https://www.2belikechrist.com/articles/timeline-of-the-book-of-acts 
Acts 8:9-25
Good evening everyone,
Just a quick update, the next couple episodes will be the next few promised installments in the big timeline project, episodes of which are now marked with a latin cross at the beginning of the episode name to make them easily identifiable, now including all such episodes released so far.
For those episodes, remember they were originally put together for the daily format, so words like “yesterday” and “tomorrow” should be taken with a grain of salt, as the last such episode was in early October, and the next after these will be in 2025 at the earliest.
Next month, which I guess is technically this month, I'm officially recording in March now, uh anyways later in March we’ve got some birthday interviews, and I’m going to let those carry the show until April, when the next worldbuilding Episode on the Gospel of Mark should be ready, followed by Luke in May and John in June. If I fall behind on that plan, don't be alarmed, that's life and there's a lot of life right now. No matter what, I'll have another update for you on June 29th, everyone's favorite feast day, and don't worry, I haven't forgotten about Cardinal Numbers.
Anyways, for today, here's past me, going into a little more detail about the adventures of Saint Philip, the Evangelist!
Welcome to Popeular History! My name is Gregg, and yeah, there are show notes these days. They have transcripts, and links! Lovely stuff. Anyways…
Last episode we concluded our discussion of who can claim the status of the First Gentile Convert. If the Samaritans Philip had converted shortly after Stephen's stoning count- and to be clear as I previously argued I don't think they actually should, since Samaritans aren't normally considered gentiles, but if they do manage to count, then Simon Magus has a decent claim to be the first Gentile convert, as he was among those first recorded Samaritan baptisms.
 
Let's dive in, quote
 
"for some time a man named Simon had practiced sorcery in the city and amazed all the people of Samaria. He boasted that he was someone great, and all the people, both high and low, gave him their attention and exclaimed, “This man is rightly called the Great Power of God.” They followed him because he had amazed them for a long time with his sorcery. But when they believed Philip as he proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women Simon himself believed and was baptized. And he followed Philip everywhere, astonished by the great signs and miracles he saw." End quote
 
Now that's basically the part we covered last episode, but with the addition of Simon as a sorcerer. But wait, there's more! Quote:
 
When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit."
 
End quote
 
This is one of the key texts for the practice of the Sacrament of Confirmation, as it shows a separate reception of the Holy Spirit after baptism. It's also interesting to observe how the baptism was carried out by Deacon Philip, but the confirmation part seems to have required the presence of the apostles, the predecessors of the bishops. This matches current practice, where deacons- or really anyone in a pinch- can baptize, but confirmation is generally reserved to the bishop. In modern practice it might also be delegated to the priests, so maybe some of those priests who joined the Jerusalem Jesus club after Peter's Pentecost homily could have done in a pinch.
 
I also want to note that I saw some commentary suggesting Philip the Deacon was the same as Philip the Apostle, sort of an embedded agent among the deacons, but I think the way that all played out just now is an effective counterargument to that theory. There's a million Johns, why not multiple Philips?
 
Anyways, the next section is what Simon is most famous for and is where the practice of Simony- the selling of Church offices, blessings, and or pardons gets its name.
 
Quote
 
"When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money and said, “Give me also this ability so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.”
 
Peter answered: “May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin.”
 
Then Simon answered, “Pray to the Lord for me so that nothing you have said may happen to me.”
 
End quote
 
Alright, so Peter condemns, and Simon Magus repents, and therefore the practice of Simony is ended for all time. Just kidding. Simony is one of the most popular pieces of corruption in the Church, and while being pretty consistently condemned it just keeps popping up. We'll even get to the point where the Papacy is effectively sold, and yeah, that's considered a low point, not to mention the way the apparent selling of forgiveness in the form of indulgences helped spark the Protestant Reformation. There was some fancy mental and theological footwork being done to argue that the whole indulgences thing wasn't *really* Simony, but the whole situation reeked of corruption and Europe exploded. Now look, it wasn't the only cause and I'm being needlessly dramatic here, but let me have this one because that was fun to say.
 
Speaking of things we can have fun with but should probably feel academically guilty about, I want to turn to some less generally reliable sources tomorrow. You know, the 3s, 4s, and 5s on our credibility scale. They've got more info on Deacon Philip, more info on Simeon Bachos- remember that's the Ethiopian Eunuch, a lot more info on Simon Magus, and heck, more info on Peter too, while we're at it. Of course I think the word "info" might be a stretch. Words. These sources have more words on those folks.
 
I'm sure tomorrow will be a banger as we dive onto the New Testament Apocrypha- and as we make our way to Rome!

✝O14 Apocrypha and Beyond

Acts Timeline
https://www.2belikechrist.com/articles/timeline-of-the-book-of-acts 
Philip's unmarried daughters
Acts 21:8-9
Philip the Deacon reflection w/Same As Apostle Arguments
http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bio/264.html 
Hermione, Eutychis, Irais, and Chariline
https://www.markcarlson-ghost.com/index.php/2016/09/17/philips-daughters-prophets-names/ 
Hermione
https://www.oca.org/saints/lives/2022/09/04/102492-martyr-hermione-daughter-of-saint-philip-the-deacon
Welcome to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights. As promised, this episode is going to be a bit of a roundup of extra stories and tidbits we have on some of our recent characters from outside the Bible.
Let's start with our main man of late, a guy I really didn't think I'd be talking about this much but we are deacon oriented so I'm rolling with it, Philip the Deacon. The best extrabiblical tie-in point for Philip is actually in the canonical bible, where in an aside, Paul says the following, quote:
"We reached Caesarea and stayed at the house of Philip the evangelist, one of the Seven. He had four unmarried daughters who prophesied." (Acts 21:9)
End quote. And that's it. Here we have four women with holy powers and no additional info apart from they're the unmarried daughters of one of the first deacons. You aren't going to find many prompts more ripe for fan fiction than that, and the early Christian community ran with it, naming the daughters Hermione, Eutychis, Irais, and Chariline, or some other set of names, it’s inconsistent, but definitely they got names outside the bible and went off on adventures. They may have went on to be a source for a source for Eusebius, who can be described as the dominant early Church historian so we'll definitely be revisiting him in time.
Philip himself is cited as the Protodeacon among the seven original deacons, the proto- part meaning first, kind of like how his colleague Stephen is referred to as the Protomartyr, though I suppose that application is more in terms of chronology than dignity. The title of Protodeacon does have a specific application in the College of Cardinals today, namely it's the Cardinal who has held the title of Cardinal-Deacon the longest. The protodeacon is normally the one who gives the announcement- Habemus Papam- "we have a Pope" when a new Pontiff is elected.
I didn't come across any death tradition for Philip the Deacon, but I did find a site making an unexpectedly compelling case for identifying him with Philip the Apostle. Sure, the Apostles set up the deacons to allow themselves to get on with their apostling, but what if he was, like, an embedded supervisor? It would be fairly recognizable organizational move today and would match with the extra emphasis he receives, not to mention his extrabiblical protodeacon status. The lack of any apparent tradition regarding the deacon's death is to me the most compelling argument, usually there's *something* floating around about that. The biggest wrinkle is what we talked about yesterday, with the apostles kind of being needed to sign off on the baptisms of the Samaritans, you know, that discussion of confirmation.
Anyways, when a saint dies–and pretty much everyone who believes in saints accepts Philip the Deacon as a saint–well, when a saint dies it's typical for the day of their death to go down as their feast day. I'm going to be talking a LOT about all sorts of things over the course of this podcast, but I won't be going into feast days much. They're easy to look up and can be tricky to explain accurately considering they can vary across traditions, or even within traditions as practices vary over time, and they can get bumped in certain years by other more significant dates, and I'd want to call out of they're based on something other than their date of death, all of which would be interesting if you were interested in feast days but extremely dry if you weren't. Really, there's plenty of material in feast days for their own podcast, and if anyone wants to take that on or has one to recommend I'll be happy to edit this to include a plug for that show, but in the meantime, no, I will not be focusing on feast days. Too easily findable elsewhere, and too derailing for our already very fragilly railed narrative. I'll simply be doing darn near everything else.
Now, we've talked a lot about two out of the seven deacons; can extrabiblical tradition tell us more about the others? Yes, of course! But I'm not going to go into every detail various traditions have about everyone. Believe it or not, I didn't even do that for Philip. The high level takeaways are that four out of five of the remaining deacons were martyred, and the fifth, Nicolas, well he was actually suspected of being a heretic by two early big names in the Church, Saints Iranaeus and Hippolytus, both of whom we'll get to in time. You see, in Revelations 2, God, or uh, well, probably god? Revelations is a trip. Anyways, in Revelations 2 God makes it clear he really doesn't like the "Nicolateans", whoever that is. It does seem that they were a heretical Christian sect early enough to make it into the actual Bible, but that and the apparent name of their founder is basically all we have on them from the Bible. Outside the Bible, like I mentioned, Nicholas the Deacon is very much a suspect, and it probably doesn't help his case that his name not only matches the perp, but he was named last among the Seven, the same place of dubious honor Judas Iscariot once held among the Twelve.
That's all for today. We're going to talk more about two characters we've discussed recently multiple times in due course, and we’ll save them for those times. After all, Simeon Bachos the Eunuch traditionally founded a national church whose impact on Christian history is as extensive as it is unique, and Saint Paul is, well, Saint Paul. Similarly, I'll find other appropriate occasions to discuss the later lives and deaths of the Apostles we haven't already covered, in addition to letting Pontifacts take the lead on that, they have a series coming up, it will be exiting in a few months. And Cornelius, for his part, actually has surprisingly little to review, he traditionally wound up as a bishop, and that's about it. Which I make sound like nothing,  but it would have been a sign of his new life in Christ, just as it was for everyone else who wound up in leadership in the new Christian church. It certainly isn’t nothing.
Anyways, I believe that basically leaves us with Simon Magus, which is perfect. In our next narrative episode, we'll follow him to Rome, and as you might have guessed Rome is going to be our home base for the next two thousand or so years of narrative. Thank you for listening, God bless you all!

First Communion interview with Catherine!

Catherine had her First Communion earlier this month, and has had many communions since. Here are her thoughts on this important matter.

Pride and the Sacred Heart

+This episode is dedicated to the memory of Robin Beasley. Lux aeternum.
TRANSCRIPTThis month is always interesting, because while roughly half of my friends are celebrating Pride, another rough half is pointing out that June is dedicated to the Sacred Heart. Two different audiences. I usually keep both in mind, but for this special chat I'm splitting things up into two rooms so I can speak more clearly to folks at their level. You're welcome in either room, or both. I won't be checking credentials, so even if a talk isn't oriented to you, you're still welcome, just keep the focus of the talk you're in in mind.
The first room will have a talk by your humble host geared towards tradition-oriented Christians. The topic will be effective outreach to LGBT+ advocates and allies.
After that, you are welcome go on your merry way or stick around a few seconds to move across the audio hall to the other room for a second talk by your humble host, this one geared towards LGBT+ advocates and allies. The topic will be effective outreach to tradition-oriented Christians. That second address starts around 5 minutes 38 seconds into this recording if you want to jump right to it.
Obviously I'm not a particular authority in either world–one of them doesn’t even have any particular authorities–but in the end I hope that by the grace of God I'm able to speak effectively to each group as a member of both, because this sort of conferencing is overdue.
Oh, and I apologize, there is no snack budget for this audio-only conference. You'll have to make do with what you already have. If that's a dealbreaker for you I understand, you're always welcome to circle back later. I do recommend you do your best to listen in when you're not hungry and cranky, as there has historically been plenty of crankiness and I'm hoping we can peek over the barricades past that today.
The first talk will begin after the traditional show intro:
INTRO
THE SACRED HEART TALK
Welcome, tradition-oriented Christians. Winning souls for Christ, that’s our calling, right?
Let's get to the point: how do we win over LGBT+ advocates and allies? How do we bring these souls to Christ? Perhaps there's no point in trying?
With the God who replaces stony hearts, all things are possible, and you know God looks for the lost sheep. If it's not going to happen, that’s between them and God. But you have a moral responsibility to try.
What's the reward? More souls for Christ.
How do you have the best impact? Look for the willing, especially those closest to you. That’s where you'll have the most impact. Reach out using what you have in common. There are Christians among LGBT+ advocates, why not start there if you’re at a loss? Find your allies, and be willing to listen to and work with them for good. You've got common ground. Right now, someone is listening to the other talk, hoping to find and work with someone like you. They’re out there! Reach out to me if I can help, even if only via moral support and encouragement.
Speaking of encouragement, don't be discouraged by minimal progress. Maybe you can win everyone over–wouldn't that be wonderful! But remember, even if you only win over one or two people in a lifetime of work, that echoes across generations. Plus when your efforts are sincere and your intentions good, people see that. They also see when folks take the easy route, tearing down rather than building up. That drives folks away, and our impact on this–for good or for ill–echoes down the generations, because those we influence will go on to influence others, and fruit–good or bad–grows from there. All of this matters, all of this is worth doing, and all of this is worth doing well.
Doing this well doesn’t mean giving up on your principles. Going against your conscience is never the right call. Anchor yourself with the truth and do what you can. It'll be more than you might think.
Thank you for listening, I'm going to get ready for the next talk.
To keep things separated out nicely, let's go ahead and hear the Popeular History intro again while I get my notes ready.
INTRO
PRIDE TALK
Welcome LGBT+ advocates and allies. Protecting LGBT+ rights and lives, isn’t that what we're here for?
Let's get to the point: how do we win over traditionalist Christians? How do we make them see the big picture, and the small picture, the individual lives and pains too? Perhaps there's no point in trying?
There's always a point in doing what's right. You're saving lives and keeping kids from harm by engaging productively with Christians. If it's not going to happen, that’s between them and God. But you have a moral responsibility to try.
How do you have the best impact? Look for the willing, especially those closest to you. That’s where you'll have the most impact. Reach out using what you have in common. There are LGBT+ advocates among Christians, why not start there if you’re at a loss? Find your allies, and be willing to listen to and work with them for good. You've got common ground. Right now, someone is listening to the other talk, hoping to find and work with someone like you. They’re out there! Reach out to me if I can help, even if only via moral support and encouragement.
Speaking of encouragement, don't be discouraged by minimal progress. Maybe you can win everyone over–wouldn't that be wonderful! But remember, even if you only win over one or two people in a lifetime of work, that echoes across generations. Plus when your efforts are sincere and your intentions good, people see that. They also see when folks take the easy route, tearing down rather than building up. That drives folks away, and our impact on this–for good or for ill–echoes down the generations, because those we influence will go on to influence others, and fruit–good or bad–grows from there. All of this matters, all of this is worth doing, and all of this is worth doing well.
Doing this well doesn’t mean giving up on your principles. Going against your conscience is never the right call. Anchor yourself with the truth and do what you can. It’ll be more than you might think.
Thank you for listening, God bless you all. Happy Pride, and may the Sacred Heart of Jesus have mercy on us and on the whole world.

Emergency Fundraiser! Critical Need! Other Buzzwords!

FUNDRAISING LINK: www.Patreon.com/popeular TRANSCRIPTHello everyone, Welcome to Popeular History, or to Cardinal Numbers, whichever feed you happen to be listening to! The good news, as you can infer from that first sentence, is the separate feed for Cardinal Numbers is back live well ahead of schedule! The bad news is it's because I forgot I had it set to auto-renew and it was absolutely not worked into Popeular History's *extremely* modest budget. Which means it's time for an emergency fundraiser! That little whoopsie set me back $108, aka $9/mo for a year, so until that shortfall is covered, anyone who goes to Patreon.com/popeular and helps out by signing up as a monthly donor during this state of emergency will get an extra bonus in the form of a special thank you in every episode I release as long as you continue to make a monthly donation. If you continue for years, my thanks will continue for years. Normally that's a top-tier bonus, but I'm making it available to all who sign up as monthly donors today because of the miniature financial crisis I've created for myself. So yes, this is a great offer but it is also a limited time one, once I've got the immediate need covered thanks to a few helpful folks I will officially end the fundraiser by removing this episode from my podcast feeds and even more officially will post an update to Popeularhistory.com. So go to patreon.com/popeular and sign up if you've got a few extra bucks a month you can throw my way. No extra steps are required to participate in the emergency fundraiser, the extra thank-yous will go to everyone who signs up to monthly support during this admittedly self-inflicted critical fundraising period and will continue as long as they support the show monthly at any level. Of course you can also have the shoutout assigned to someone else if you like. Thank you!

4th Anniversary Special (and return from hiatus!)

TRANSCRIPTGood evening, Happy Feast of Saints Peter and Paul, and welcome back to Popeular History! That’s right, we’re officially off hiatus, starting next week you can expect a short Cardinal Numbers episode every Saturday and a longer Popeular History worldbuilding episode every month. As I continue to get a feel for the rhythms of family life that seems like a doable schedule, especially since most of the work for the remainder of the year is already done. Alleluia!I also have some special stuff for you today. First off, I want to wish a very happy birthday to Cardinal Seán O’Malley of Boston. This birthday is bittersweet, because the next conclave is officially losing a real one as Cardinal O’Malley is 80 today and is therefore automatically no longer a Cardinal Elector.This brings the total number of current Cardinal Electors to 125, and for what it’s worth I am fully expecting another consistory for the creation of new Cardinals to be announced later in the year once that’s in danger of dropping below 120.When I call Cardinal O’Malley “a real one”, naturally that’s partially a reference to the fact that he’s a Buckeye, partially a reference to the fact that he’s one of the few bearded churchmen in the Latin Rite, partially because of the amazing nature of being able to see him mowing the lawn in his habit, and partially because he was the fixer brought in to bring Boston out of the mess it was in scandal wise after the troubled tenure of Cardinal Law. One day I will get to covering Cardinal O’Malley and the other older Cardinals in Cardinal Numbers, but for now my focus for that show is on covering the younger cardinals who will participate in the next conclave when the time comes. By the way, Cardinal Numbers now somewhat accidentally has its own feed again. I wasn’t financially prepared to have two podcast feeds active, but I forgot to cancel the subscription, so might as well roll with it! All my content will be posted right here on the Popeular History Feed of course, but Cardinal Numbers specific content will also be posted on the Cardinal Numbers feed so that can also develop as a standalone rexypod, which was the original intent.There is also officially a bit of Paton-exclusive content now! But don’t worry, I’m not paywalling knowledge, that goes against my principles as a librarian. We’ll see some early access situations, sure, but there is never going to be something for you to learn that’s only going to be on my Patreon feed. Instead, it’s going to be more pure fun extension stuff like the episode I just posted where Fry from Pontifacts kindly agreed to be subjected to my look at Cardinal Burke and give her live reactions! She also managed to get me talking a little more loosely than I normally would. It was a great time and I’m looking forward to making more content for my Patreon Patrons, if I ever get any of those to make more content for! Hint hint. Patreon.com/popular, go check it out!
 
Finally, I’ve decided that I’ve been sitting on the Habemus Pointsam recordings Bry and I have already made for too long, in part because I always worry files will just disappear. So the rest of today’s show will be the draft pilot for that mini rexypod. Get ready for some foolishness and categories in 3…, 2…, 1…HABEMUS POINTSAM RECORDING

0.21f Sayings of the Savior VI: Messages from Mark

https://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/ultraviolet-light-reveals-scientists-hidden-bible-passage-1500-years-later (for Luke)
Unique passages:
https://www.julianspriggs.co.uk/pages/UniquePassages 
Bibleref.com commentary on Mark 6:5:
https://www.bibleref.com/Mark/6/Mark-6-5.html 
Thanks Biblehub.com's parallel chapters tool.
 
Words of Jesus ("All the Red Letter Scriptures")
https://www.jesusbelieverjd.com/all-the-red-letter-scriptures-of-jesus-in-the-bible-kjv/ 
 
Parallel Passages in the Gospels
https://www.bible-researcher.com/parallels.html#sect1  
 
The Eye of the Needle (crossword/sudoku feedback):
https://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-25583,00.html#:~:text=The%20%22Eye%20of%20the%20Needle,in%20order%20to%20enter%20heaven
 
Camel needle w/Aquinas citation (of Anselm of Canterbury)-- Anselm of Canterbury as cited in Catena Aurea, Thomas Aquinas, CCEL Edition.
https://classictheology.org/2021/10/12/through-the-eye-of-an-actual-needle-the-fake-gate-theory/ 
 
The Widow's Mite:
https://numismatics.org/pocketchange/the-poor-widows-mite/ 
 
Miracles of Jesus reference list:
https://sunnyhillschurch.com/3301/the-37-miracles-of-jesus-in-chronological-order/ LINK BIBLEREF.COM MENTIONED IN CHAPTER 8 SECTION (“Can’t” do miracles in hometown- keyword absolute for lookup)
 
Welcome to the Popeular History Podcast: History through Pope Colored Glasses. My name is Gregg and this is episode 0.21f: Sayings of the Savior Part VI: Messages from Mark.
 
All of these aught episodes are made to let us build our Pope-colored glasses so we can use the same lenses when we look at history together. If you're lost, start at the beginning!
 
In previous worldbuilding episodes, we looked at quite a few of Jesus' words: the sermon on the mount and the sermon on the plain, plus all the Parables and miracles on our list, and his sayings closely tied to all those.
 
All that made for a good start, but if we're going to look at the sayings of the Savior, we should be comprehensive to avoid cherry-picking. So we spent the last of these worldbuilding episodes going chapter by chapter through the first gospel in order of appearance, the Gospel of Matthew, up until things caught up with where our rosary themed tour of the New Testament will carry on when we get to the next mystery. I am aware that what was once upon a time supposed to be a couple quick background episodes introducing my listeners to, well, all of Catholicism has ballooned wildly into wheels within wheels, but hey, I wouldn't have it any other way.
 
Anyways, next up in the traditional ordering is the Gospel of Mark, so that's our mission today. We’ll go chapter by chapter, glossing over what we've already discussed and focusing on the Sayings of the Savior, since, you know, that's the deal here.
 
MARK 1 opens with a description of Jesus’ cousin John the Baptist, and you'll never guess what John does to Jesus when He shows up. Actually you probably will because I was trying to set you up with a fake out where John refuses to baptize Jesus but it turns out that initial refusal is in Matthew but is absent from Mark's generally sparse account. Anyways, we get Jesus’ first words in Mark only after he's baptized and had an express version of the temptation in the desert. Sometime after John was arrested, we're told Jesus preached a message that sounded a lot like what John had been saying,
 
MARK 1:15
“The time has come,” … “The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!”
 
GREGG
Of course we just got a bit meta, since “Good news” is where the word Gospel comes from. A very “Begun, the Clone Wars have” moment. This urgent call to repentance has been a consistent refrain throughout Christian history, with the good news bring that repentance really can lead to reconciliation with God. Shoutout 0.1 if you need a refresher on why such a reconciliation is needed in the Catholic perspective.
 
Having begun to declare the Good News, Jesus the Christ soon picks out folks to help him, starting, like all good missions, with a pun. Talking to two fishermen, the brothers Simon and Andrew, Jesus says
 
MARK 1:
 
Follow me, and I will make you become fishers of men
 
GREGG
When I covered this section in Matthew- we're deep in parallels here- I stuck with my usual NIV translation. Not because I'm an NIV snob, but because the New International Version is the one that shows up first on biblegateway.com and it's good enough, especially when I'm doing a LOT of scripture quoting like I have been with this series.
 
But because the NIV went for inclusivity, they translated the line as “make you fish for people”, which simply isn’t as smooth a pun. I did check with my toddler-level skills and it looks to me like the pun is present in the Greek, so it's worth calling out. Jesus’ humor is often downplayed, which is a shame.
 
If you're wondering why I'm going on about this, well, honestly, Mark is short and we've already covered most of what's there in Matthew. So we might as well take our time. There's plenty there, to be clear, I don't want angry letters from scholars whose primary focus is Mark saying I'm dismissing it offhand.
 
Alright, enough dilly dallying, what's next? Jesus calls more fishermen–the sons of Zebedee, James and John–but His actual words and possible new pun are not recorded. The next time he speaks he's talking to a demon in one of the healing miracles we discussed in 0.20, followed by another miracle–the healing of Simon’s mother in law–later in the same chapter. Then, after assorted other miracles, Jesus goes out to pray by Himself in what's described as a quote unquote “desolate place”. When His disciples track Him down and tell Him everyone is looking for Him, He says
 
MARK 1:38
Let us go somewhere else--to the nearby villages--so I can preach there also. That is why I have come.
 
GREGG
Though Jesus’ disciples did in fact say no to Him on a downright alarming number of occasions, they went along with His plan this time, and another montage of undescribed healings and exorcisms finishes off with the healing of a grateful leper who ignores Jesus’ command to tell no one. Mark 1 concludes with Jesus getting mobbed with requests for miracles as a result.
 
Chapter 2 opens with the healing of the paralytic who had been let in via the roof–a great bit of drama, but something we already covered under our review of miracles. After that, He called His tax collector disciple, who we got to know as Matthew in the Gospel of, well, Matthew, but who's listed as Levi here and in Luke. Using different names in different contexts was absolutely a thing,  but both Matthew and Levi are Hebrew names so the usual Greek vs Hebrew divide doesn’t seem to be the culprit here, and what's more neither Mark nor Luke explicitly identify Levi with the apostle Matthew, though the inference isn't a terrible reach over all.
 
In the end, our main hook in this particular series is the actual sayings of the Savior, and this calling is carried out with a simple “follow me”, so perhaps we shouldn’t dive into it too much.
 
After taking out a section of parables we covered in 0.21c as part of a SYNOPTIC ROUNDUP, we arrive at Mark 2:23, notably without leaving the SYNOPTIC ROUNDUP room because you can also follow along in Matthew 12 and Luke 6. As a reminder if you're rusty on Jewish customs, the Sabbath rest begins Friday at sundown and continues through the day on Saturday. Picking grain as we're going to see here would be considered working on the day of rest and therefore a violation.
 
MARK (2:23-2:28, NIV))
23 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain.
 
24 The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”
 
25 He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need?
 
26 in the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions."
 
27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.
 
28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
 
GREGG this section is one of the earlier signals of what would become a core piece of Christianity: its distancing from the Law of Moses. There are still aspects of continuity, for example most Christians including Catholics actually do still maintain *a* day of rest, just Sunday rather than Saturday and they'll generally skip the night before business though some of that has carried over in the form of vigil practices, as we'll see when we get there.
 
Anyways, I've always thought those last couple lines were pretty baller, and it turns out they're one of the few bits unique to Mark, so let's go ahead and hear them again:
 
QUOTE
The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.
So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.
END QUOTE
 
This bold claim lies at the heart of what will in time lead to the followers of Christ being seen as a religion separate from Judaism, which is fair enough but also don't sleep on just how much that takes, given there's such a thing as secular Jews and Jewish atheists. There have been other messiah movements in Jewish history; though they fizzled out it's not much of a stretch to imagine a world where Christianity is still seen as part of a wide tent Judaism, indeed there is still a common heritage. But there are absolutely differences as well, principally, of course, centered around Jesus, the Son of Man, Lord of the Sabbath.
 
That other part
 
“The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”
 
is the context for the start of the next chapter, serving as a good reminder that, while convenient for finding your place, chapter and verse divisions are not part of the original texts of the Bible, so it's important to not treat them as fences where you have to stop. You see, in Mark 3 we have the healing of the man with a withered hand in the synagogue on the Sabbath:
 
MARK 3
2 Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath.
3 Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, "Stand up in front of everyone.”
4 Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent.
 
GREGG
I mean, it's a bit of a false dichotomy perhaps, are those really the only two options? But obviously I'm siding with Jesus here, mark me down as pro-healing when one can heal. And yeah, we actually already covered that exchange when we talked about the miracle in our miracles roundup, but the words are important there and Mark is short so forgive me for fitting it in here too.
 
Mark 3 continues with Jesus dealing with crowds now that word is getting around due to His miracles, and simultaneously He's ordering demons not to share the apparent secret that He is quote “the holy one of God”. We don't have his exact words in commanding the demons here so there's more room for interpretation than usual but the general take on these sort of passages is that it's tied to His time not having yet come to be revealed as the Messiah. Of course, unless I missed something, the specific instances where Jesus talks about His time having not yet come are in the Gospel of John, so reading that into Mark is something most modern scholars wouldn't go for- especially since the general consensus is Mark came first by a fair stretch- but that sort of quibble wasn't much of a barrier for most of the history of Christians reflecting on Scripture, so the traditional interpretation is what it is and I don't think it's too much of a reach.
 
After telling assorted demons to hush up, Jesus appoints the Twelve Apostles starting in verse 13, no direct quotes there so no need to tarry though interested folks are always welcome to check out the naming differences between the Gospels.
 
Starting in verse 20 we have the house divided parable, covered in our parables series a few episodes back, then in verse 28 we hit “the unpardonable sin” section, and believe it or not it's not being a weeb, it turns out it's, well, let’s let Jesus explain:
 
MARK 3
28 Truly I tell you, people can be forgiven all their sins and every slander they utter,
29 But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin."
 
GREGG
When we covered the parallel text of this in Matthew 12–seriously, over 90% of Mark is parallelled in Matthew–I focused on the idea of the sin against the Spirit as being despair. But Mark’s telling has a bit of context that has lead to another popular interpretation, especially among–Catholics cover your ears– *whispers* Protestants.
 
MARK 3
30He said this because they were saying, "He has an impure spirit.”
 
GREGG
Using that verse, which at a glance is simply explaining why Jesus said what He said, the passage is taken to mean that rejecting Jesus as the Son of God slash Savior slash Messiah is the sin against the Spirit being referred to here. And though I called out Protestants specifically a minute ago, it's not like that interpretation is unheard of within Catholicism, typically it's a both/and sort of thing, accepting the despair angle and the “ya'll need Jesus” angle. Nor are the two interpretations unrelated, as someone wholly given to despair will have a hard time accepting Jesus’ offer of salvation.
 
Of course, when I speak of accepting Jesus’ offer of salvation, now I really AM getting into the fundamental faith vs works discussion. That's faith and works in the context of salvation from sin. We'll be getting into it in more detail in future episodes, but as an overview all major forms of Christianity agree that faith in the saving power of Jesus Christ is fundamentally necessary for salvation. The disagreement comes in whether anything else plays any role- “anything else” being summed up under the umbrella term of “works”, or it might help to rephrase the question as whether our actions have any meaning when it comes to our salvation.
 
For Catholics, the answer is yes, while for most Protestants, the answer is no. Generally speaking when there are fights about it, Protestants will take the position that your works having meaning, as Catholics argue is the case, means that you can save yourself through your works. Some people do think that, of course, but not Catholics, at least not Catholics who know their onions, as the Catholic Church condemned that position as a heresy over thousand years before Protestantism became a thing. However, the Church is far from perfect, and in the time of Martin Luther, whose teachings are typically seen as the spark that ignited the Protestant Reformation, it's clear that some within the Church were comfortable blurring the lines for financial gain.
 
I've got more on faith vs works and Catholicism vs Protestantism planned for future episodes, and I don’t want to bury that conversation where no one will look for it, so let's leave that there for now and get back to Mark, with chapter 3 verse 31 to 35
 
MARK
 
31 Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him.
32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.”
33 "Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked.
34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers!
35 Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother.”
 
GREGG
Thanks to the Marian doctrine of Our Lady's perpetual virginity we discussed back in episode 0.14, the surprising fact that Jesus doesn't immediately attend to his family members isn't the most discussed aspect of this passage when it comes to Catholicism. No, that would be the fact that Jesus’ brothers, the Greek term is Adelphoi, show up. Generally these are understood as Jesus’ half brothers, via his earthly father Saint Joseph from a previous marriage.
 
As for the question of whether Jesus just kind of blew off his family here, half brothers or cousins or full brothers or whoever was there with Mary, while I can see how you might get that impression, it's not like His every action is recorded. It's entirely possible that He checked in with them after making a quick positive observation- one that I don't want to lose in the rest of this analysis so I'll repeat it:
 
MARK 3
“35 Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother.”
 
GREGG
 
Anyways, as is the custom with Mark, we're on to the next scene in a hurry, launching into Mark 4 with the next verse as a classic transition:
 
MARK 4
1 Again Jesus began to teach by the lake.
 
GREGG
I'm not going to go into detail about what He taught by the lake here, because Chapter 4 is made up entirely of miracles and parables we've already covered in 0.20 and earlier in 0.21, respectively. We’ve got the Parable of the Sower, then the Lamp on a Stand, then the Growing Seed and the Mustard Seed, capped off by Mark's account of Jesus calming the storm at sea.
 
Similarly, Mark 5 is a string of by-now familiar miracles- and if any don't seem familiar you know by now Miracles are in one of the 0.20 episodes, right? The Gerasene Demoniac, the Bleeding Woman, Jairus’ Daughter, they're all there, and in Mark 5 too.
 
Mark 6 give us a bit more food for thought on Jesus’ local life and family dynamic. A sign of how things hit differently at home, it's worth a long quote:
 
MARK 6:1-6
6 Jesus left there and went to his hometown, accompanied by his disciples. 2 When the Sabbath came, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were amazed.
 
“Where did this man get these things?” they asked. “What’s this wisdom that has been given him? What are these remarkable miracles he is performing? 3 Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.
 
4 Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town, among his relatives and in his own home.” 5 He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. 6 He was amazed at their lack of faith.
 
GREGG
Many of Jesus’ sayings have become proverbial, and while it's not in the level of turning the other cheek, “a prophet is not without honor except in his own town” has some popularity. It does seem to speak to a common truth of celebrities.
 
I do like the touch that He was unable to do any miracles there except for the miracles which He did do, which evidently still failed to impress. Of course, the idea of Jesus being *unable* to do miracles is theologically interesting, since He's, you know, God. Of course, God does seem to have had some trouble dealing with iron chariots back in Judges 1:19, so maybe there is some precedent.
 
But we've got our Pope-colored glasses on, so not only is Jesus God but God is omnipotent, so it's fair to ask: what gives? It could be that old favorite, the translation issue, but I admit my personal Greek skills are basically at the naming barnyard animals level, so I decided to bring in an expert to verify. An expert by the name of bibleref.com, linked in the show notes. Their commentary on the passage notes that in the parallel passage in Matthew, it simply says Jesus “did not” perform many miracles in his hometown, which isn't as controversial though of course it’s always fair to ask why God doesn't just fix everything for everyone since he's all good and all knowing and all powerful. But that popular question isn't where we're at today because apparently it's not a translation issue, Mark 6:5 does specifically say Jesus *could not* perform the miracles in the Greek according to the commentary. But it goes on to note that there can be multiple senses of inability, like how you can't touch the ball when playing soccer, or football for my non-US listeners, and yeah, I'm not counting goalies. Anyways, obviously you can physically touch the ball, but you cannot in the sense that it's against the established rules of the game. If that's the sense, it makes some sense that Jesus quote unquote “can't” perform miracles in His hometown because His miracles are supposed to draw people to Him and they aren't having that effect at home. At least not much, keep in mind he did do some miracles there according to Mark, so in any event the whole “can't” thing definitely isn't absolute.
 
Of course, I personally find it awful to think that God would play games with our salvation- hence my quasi-universalism. I get respecting our free will, but I also know He's omnipotent and isn't going to give up on us, no matter how much we try to give up on ourselves if there's another chance we can get He's going to give that to us. But we have to accept at some point, so don't think I'm downplaying the urgency there.
 
Anyways, let's get back to Mark 6, now in Verse 8 where He's sending the disciples out in pairs with the following instructions:
 
MARK 6:8-11
 
8 Take nothing for the journey except a staff--no bread, no bag, no money in your belts.
 
9 Wear sandals but not an extra shirt.
 
10 Whenever you enter a house, stay there until you leave that town.
 
11 And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.”
 
GREGG
As you should by now have come to expect, these instructions do have a parallel in Matthew that we covered in the last worldbuilding episode. But it's not as close a parallel as you might think. Often, as we've talked about before, parallels in the synoptic gospels are so close that you'd get dinged for plagiarism, with maybe a word being changed here or there. But here, it basically reads like two different people were told to write down a speech shortly after they finished hearing it. Which, I mean, matches tradition, for what it's worth. The most obvious difference is that Mark’s telling skips Matthew's bit about only going to Jewish households, forbidding visits to Gentiles or Samaritans. Though as we've seen Mark's Jesus was already laying the groundwork for some serious reframing of Mosaic Law by taking on the title of Lord of the Sabbath, I think on the whole it's more likely that in Mark's account that's simply taken as a given and perhaps left off for brevity rather than this being a separate incident or its absence being a sign that the disciples were to ignore those cultural barriers at this stage.
 
The rest of Mark 6 is taken up by his narrative of the death of John the Baptist, where, unusually for the Gospels, Jesus is offstage, and then there’s two banner miracles, the Feeding of the 5000 and Jesus walking on water.
 
Which brings us to Mark 7, which has Jesus… let’s see… excoriating the Jewish authorities… then calling a woman a dog… and let's not forget giving someone a wet willy.
 
Don't believe me? Let's go.
 
MARK 7
 
1The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus
2and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed.
3(The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders.
4When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.)
5So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”
6He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: "'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.
7They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.’
8You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”
9And he continued, "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!
10For Moses said, 'Honor your father and mother,' and, 'Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’
11But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)--
12then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother.
13Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”
 
GREGG
Note that while there’s a close parallel between these passages and Matthew 15, Mark is apparently much more concerned with explaining Jewish custom to his audience, suggesting the intended audience is not Jews themselves.
 
The rest of the chapter we've covered before, from the Parable of the Heart of Man to the two miracles that give the tibits I teased earlier. Jesus calls the syrophoenician woman a dog in the runup to healing her servant, and he totally heals a deaf guy via wet willy at the end of the chapter. But I already covered both of those in 0.20c, so check them out there for more.
 
So that means we're on to Chapter 8, which opens with… another miracle! Turns out Jesus did a lot of those! Who knew?
 
That's the feeding of the four thousand, but you know the drill, we're skipping that and on ahead to verse 12, where Jesus is responding to a group of Pharisees asking for a sign.
 
MARK 8:12
He sighed deeply and said, "Why does this generation ask for a sign? Truly I tell you, no sign will be given to it."
 
GREGG
Ok. Remembering that by a sign here they mean a miracle, we've got the guy known for working miracles getting annoyed at requests for miracles. Why? You'd think He'd be all about that. Is it another sort of hometown situation, where folk's lack of faith is an impediment?
 
Well, kind of sort of. But not quite.
 
In the parallel passage from Matthew 16, which I admit I kind of glossed over last time because I was excited to get to the Papally significant Matthew 16:18, Jesus calls those asking for a sign “a wicked and adulterous generation”, which can help explain why Jesus is refusing the request–after all even in Mark's shorter version their motives are implicitly questioned, with Jesus asking why they're asking for a sign.
 
The typical interpretation goes that Jesus is refusing the request for a sign because the Pharisees have the wrong *motives* in asking. Unlike those in His hometown, they seem to believe Jesus can work miracles, but they just want to see a show, they aren't interested in Jesus’ message beyond that. And Jesus for His part, is interested in signs *for the sake of* His message, He isn't there to entertain.
 
These various passages that show Jesus specifically not working miracles could be taken to suggest some embarrassment by the authors about Jesus’ miracles not being as renowned as they would like, forcing them to give explanations for why that's the case. I can definitely picture some neckbeard arguing if God wanted to make everyone believe he'd make miracles known to all and be undeniable. Which is a reasonable enough thought except unless God removes free will, there's never going to be such a thing as undeniable anyways.
 
In the next few verses, Jesus warns against the teachings of the Pharisees and Herod. Though technically the “teachings” part isn't spelled out in Mark, so it could be He's actually meaning to go in another direction with things than He does in Matthew's version, though I think their teaching or at least their general influence is His most likely target. Let's hear it and regroup after.
 
MARK 8 14-15
14The disciples had forgotten to bring bread, except for one loaf they had with them in the boat.
 
15"Be careful," Jesus warned them. "Watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod.”
 
GREGG
Certainly He isn't talking about literal bread, as is evidenced from His reaction. Also, it's interesting that Mark warns against Herod's yeast specifically, while Matthew leaves Herod off in favor of tossing in the Sadducees to accompany the Pharisees. If Mark is the rougher, earlier version as most scholars currently argue–and as I'm inclined to believe looking at the two side by side these last few months–then it seems like one can argue Matthew's account has been modified to perhaps be a little more authority-friendly in this case, keeping in mind the Herodians were the client-kings in charge of the area in Jesus’ day. Check out 0.13 on the Hasmoneans for more on that.
 
After a miracle interlude–healing the blind man in a two-step process where the miracle is evidently incomplete at first–a fairly intriguing Mark-only one that is arguably sanitized out of other accounts, but one we already covered so I'm not getting back into it today– anyways after that we hit Mark's account of Peter's testament, you know, with the binding and loosing and the keys and all that. Except actually *without* all that in Mark's version.
 
Here's the whole exchange as Mark tells it:
 
MARK 8:27-30
27Jesus and his disciples went on to the villages around Caesarea Philippi. On the way he asked them, "Who do people say I am?”
28They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets.”
29"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Peter answered, "You are the Messiah.”
30Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him.
 
GREGG
Like I said, not a key in sight. Peter does give the critical answer, but none of what would become the principal text for the Papacy is presented here. And again, if you consider Mark as the older account, as most scholars do, it’s fair to raise an eyebrow at that. Yet in the end, one way or another, we have a Pope, and I do think there's something to be said for the unifying force of the role. After all, if no one is Pope, then everyone is Pope. But I digress.
 
Of course, poor Peter can only wish he were simply downplayed in Mark 8. The reality is he does pop up again later in the chapter, in a familiar but unflattering way:
 
MARK 8:31-
31He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again.
32He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.
33But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. "Get behind me, Satan!" he said. "You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”
 
GREGG
So there you go. If you want to make a case for the Pope not always being right, there's an easy one. Not everyone gets called Satan by, well, God. Of course, there's a surprising amount of room where you can accept Papal Infallibility *and* the idea that the Pope isn't always right, but we'll get to that in time.
 
The chapter finishes with Jesus reflecting on what his stated fate means for his followers, and it's, uh, not the cheeriest image. It bleeds into chapter 9 so don't put your Bible down too quickly If you're following along.
 
MARK 8:34-9:1
 
34Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: "Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.
35For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it.
36What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul?
37Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?
38If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels.
CHAPTER 9
1And he said to them, "Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.
 
GREGG
Goodness, Jesus, it's hard for me to keep my running joke of treating the Crucifixion as a spoiler when you're literally telling your disciples to take up their crosses before it actually happens. Oh well.
 
Mark 9 continues with The Transfiguration, but like I mentioned in our Matthew discussion, that's it's own mystery of the rosary that we haven't gotten to yet, so pardon me and I'll skip that here too.
 
After that, we have a miracle- the boy with an unclean spirit that can only be driven out by prayer and fasting. So on to verse 30, where we have more talk of the upcoming Passion:
 
MARK 9:30-32
“30They left that place and passed through Galilee. Jesus did not want anyone to know where they were,
31because he was teaching his disciples. He said to them, "The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise.”
32But they did not understand what he meant and were afraid to ask him about it.
 
GREGG
Jesus was speaking pretty plainly here, so it's not immediately clear why the disciples didn't understand what Jesus meant, but it's probably related to the way Jesus keeps telling folks either to talk or not to talk about things. There's definitely a focus on pacing the spread of the Good News throughout the Gospels, especially in Mark, and it seems like a supernatural barrier to the Apostles’ understanding here would fit in with that.
 
The fear of asking is more easily explained: if someone you know is really good at making predictions and you're pretty sure they just predicted something awful, you may well be hesitant to confirm that with them.
 
Being hesitant to talk about stuff with Jesus carries us into the next few verses, where Jesus apparently puts His omniscience to good use in a wonderfully passive-aggressive way:
 
MARK 9: 33-35
33They came to Capernaum. When he was in the house, he asked them, "What were you arguing about on the road?"
34But they kept quiet because on the way they had argued about who was the greatest.
35Sitting down, Jesus called the Twelve and said, "Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all.”
 
GREGG
The first will be last is one of Jesus’ recurring themes, and the whole “I'm-pretty-sure-I-heard-you-but-since-you-won't-confirm-I'm-just-going-to-respond-indirectly approach reminds me of dealing with the drama of children, though I suppose a lot of things remind me of interacting with children these days given my current life situation, and that approach is not necessarily one that exclusively applies to children. Either way, Jesus does bring children into the conversation as His next move.
 
MARK 9:36-37
36He took a little child whom he placed among them. Taking the child in his arms, he said to them,
37"Whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me does not welcome me but the one who sent me.”
 
GREGG
That passage is one of the more often-remembered portions of the Gospels, in part because it's in all three synoptics [air horn], but also in part because it's a handy pastoral lesson to push back on folks who might complain about the presence of children in worship services. As they say, if no one in your church is cryin’, it's dyin’.
 
Next up we have some verses you might wish had been left off if you've ever gotten tired of hearing “in Jesus’ name” a lot:
 
MARK 9:38-41
38"Teacher," said John, "we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.”
39"Do not stop him," Jesus said. "For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me,
40for whoever is not against us is for us.
41Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward.
 
GREGG
Personally I'm thankful for that passage, because I'm a big supporter of ecumenism and cooperation, and “whoever is not against us is for us” is an immensely helpful sentiment in that context.
 
For the next section, where Jesus gets pretty intense, there are several verses that simply aren't present in my go-to NIV version, presumably for bible nerd manuscript reasons. Now, the point of the Sayings of the Savior series is to make sure we cover *everything* Jesus said in the canonical scriptures, and those verses are speaking lines for Jesus, so that won't do. Thankfully the King James version has us covered, so I'm going to switch to that for those verses.
 
So you can tell the difference easily, I'll be switching to a guest narrator as well. Lebron James hasn't responded to my calls, so the King James Version of the King James Version will have to wait, but my brother has come in clutch for podcast purposes.
PJHERE
MARK 9:42-48
42"If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in me--to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea.
43If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.
[NIV leaves off verse 44 “44Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”-KJV]
45And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell.
[NIV leaves off verse 46 “46Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”-KJV]
47And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell,
NIV leaves off verse 48 “48Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”-KJV]
 
GREGG
So yeah, by “verses” I kind of meant “one verse used as a refrain”, but it's officially verses 44, 46, and 48, so I am technically correct, which I'm told is the best kind of correct.
 
Thanks to the reference to “leading little ones astray”, the great millstone imagery has had some use in response to the sexual abuse crisis, though the most commonly cited of these evocative instructions is plucking out the eye, thanks in no small part to the frequency of admonitions against pornography in the online era. Cutting off the hand is also referenced, while I think most folks if they're being honest won't even necessarily recall cutting off the foot is among the scenarios mentioned.
 
Anyways, Jesus finishes this section with a few salty verses that initially bear a strong resemblance to Matthew 5:13- the salt of the earth bit from the Sermon on the Mount. I'm thinking I might have actually pointed these verses out when I was going over that due to the similarity, but just in case, here they are:
 
MARK 9:49-50
49Everyone will be salted with fire
50"Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt among yourselves, and be at peace with each other.”
 
GREGG
“Have salt among yourselves” is an unusual turn of phrase, the typical interpretation of this Mark-only phrase is that Christians are supposed to bring out the best in one another, the way salt brings out the best in food.
 
We're now entering Mark 10, which- surprise surprise, has close parallels to Matthew 19 and 20. I'm not going to give the Matthew sections as a side by side, partly because we've already covered them independently, partly because this episode is already going to be one of my longest despite Mark being the shortest Gospel. But it's worth giving it a thorough treatment since scholars tend to think it's the oldest and also because if I'm going to go all-out it might as well be with the shortest of the bunch. You know, for efficiency.
 
Anyways…
 
MARK 10:1-12
1Jesus then left that place and went into the region of Judea and across the Jordan. Again crowds of people came to him, and as was his custom, he taught them.
2Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?”
3"What did Moses command you?" he replied.
4They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.”
5"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied.
6"But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.’
7For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,
8and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one flesh.
9Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
10When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this.
11He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her.
12And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”
 
GREGG
This version of Jesus’ teaching on marriage and divorce notably does not include the exception for adultery we saw in Matthew's account. Additionally where Matthew focused on Eunuchs for the kingdom–and other kinds of Eunuchs–Mark concluded with that extra condemnation of divorce, with remarriage as adultery.
 
In the next passage, the conversation changes direction:
 
MARK 10:13-16
13People were bringing little children to Jesus for him to place his hands on them, but the disciples rebuked them.
14When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.
15Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.”
16And he took the children in his arms, placed his hands on them and blessed them.
 
GREGG
We'll meet the Church Father who was allegedly one of the children in this scene as we go about our big timeline, once we get through this worldbuilding and go into that. But for now, it's time for one of the most inconvenient passages in the Gospels, at least if you're rich. 
 
MARK 10:17-31
17As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
18"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone.
19You know the commandments: 'You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, you shall not defraud, honor your father and mother.'”
20"Teacher," he declared, "all these I have kept since I was a boy.”
21Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
22At this the man's face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.
23Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!”
24The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!
25It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
26The disciples were even more amazed, and said to each other, "Who then can be saved?”
27Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.”
28Then Peter spoke up, "We have left everything to follow you!”
29"Truly I tell you," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel
30will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age: homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields--along with persecutions--and in the age to come eternal life.
31But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”
 
GREGG
There is a surprisingly thorough and ranging discussion of the whole “eye of the needle” bit in the digital edition of the British newspaper The Guardian, in the Nooks and Crannies section of their Notes and Queries page. Which I think makes it the most random thing I've cited here, but hey, it's got it all so let's get a sampling going:
 
First, the original query:
The Guardian.com
“I recently read that one of the gates into Jerusalem was named "The Eye of the Needle," and was quite tricky to negotiate, since it was quite small. Does this mean that when Jesus said "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven," He meant that, far from being impossible, it was merely tricky?”
Dara O'Reilly, London, UK
 
GREGG
The first reply is a fairly representative take on the gate theory:
 
GUARDIAN
The interpretation that seems to make sense is this. The "Eye of the Needle" was indeed a narrow gateway into Jerusalem. Since camels were heavily loaded with goods and riders, they would need to be un-loaded in order to pass through. Therefore, the analogy is that a rich man would have to similarly unload his material possessions in order to enter heaven.
Rick, Brighton Uk
 
GREGG
But then the plot thickens, as William Elsom of the UK is having none of it:
 
GUARDIAN
No. The failure is in the translation. The original word that should have been translated was "camella" which means rope. (presumably Greek, but I am open to this being corrected.) "It is easier for a rope to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven" makes more sense as a comparison.William Elsom, UK
 
GREGG
There’s something of a scholarly telephone game going on in the background, as basically every “mistranslation” take offers a variation on the root word and apparent correct meaning. Which is fairly normal for translations especially when there are different alphabets involved, but still, I chuckled.
 
GUARDIAN
I am currently studying the Aramaic language and indeed the word "gamla" (transliterated) does mean both "camel" and "thick rope." Assuming the original manuscript with that teaching of Jesus was recorded in Aramaic and later translated to Greek, the translator may have been familiar with only the "camel" definition of the word. I have not been able to find any reliable information on a city gate called "The Eye of the Needle."
-Xakk, FL USA
 
GREGG
As much as I hate agreeing with someone who spells Zach Xakk–though presumably that's a choice his parents made– anyways as much as I hate to admit it, this overall take seems the most likely to this non-Aramaic specialist. The general meaning is still the same, it's not something you're going to get done.
 
It's also worth noting that at least as of the return from the Exile, if the Book of Nehemiah is to be believed, there was no “Eye of the Needle” gate in Jerusalem. And I can state that with confidence because as longtime listeners will recall, I had a whole special episode devoted to the topic from July 2020 entitled “Literally A Detailed Description of the Gates of Jerusalem and Who Fixed Them in the Time of Nehemiah”, which, despite being exactly what it says it is, has been a pretty popular episode. In any event, it *could* be that an Eye of the Needle gate was established at a later point, though really the whole gate thing feels like wishful thinking on the part of the rich or the would-be rich to me.
 
Of course, as you might expect, there are also literalists who agree it's wishful thinking and would rather cut to the chase. Plus people like my man David:
 
GUARDIAN
The translation is irrelevant. We all know in our hearts we cannot love money above God.
 
David Porter, Orangevale, US
 
GREGG
Let's conclude with my favorite take:
 
GUARDIAN
“Blessed are the cheesemakers?”
Mike Conn, San Francisco, 
 
GREGG
After the second Gate-Gate scandal we've come across in this show (shoutout Samson if you've forgotten), we arrive at Jesus’ third prediction of His own death in Mark
 
MARK 10:32-34
32They were on their way up to Jerusalem, with Jesus leading the way, and the disciples were astonished, while those who followed were afraid. Again he took the Twelve aside and told them what was going to happen to him.
33"We are going up to Jerusalem," he said, "and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death and will hand him over to the Gentiles,
34who will mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him. Three days later he will rise.”
 
GREGG
Mark gives no record of the Apostles’ reaction to this third prediction, unless the next verse is the actual reaction, which is a hilarious thought because it would be shockingly tone deaf. But yeah, it's the very next verse without any transition except the word “then”, so you can certainly read it that way:
 
MARK 10:35-45
35Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. "Teacher," they said, "we want you to do for us whatever we ask.”
36"What do you want me to do for you?" he asked.
37They replied, "Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory.”
38"You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?”
39"We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with,
40but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared.”
41When the ten heard about this, they became indignant with James and John.
42Jesus called them together and said, "You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them.
43Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant,
44and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all.
45For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
 
GREGG
It turns out James and John, the Sons of Zebedee, have massive… cojones. But in the end their reward is understood to be martyrdom–perhaps not what they had in mind, they certainly seem to have had more of an earthly kingdom in mind.
 
In any event, here we have more of the “first will be last” motif popping up, and Scriptural background for why the Pope is considered, at least in theory, the “Servant of the Servants of God”.
 
Mark 10 finishes up with the healing of the blind Bartimaeus, so it's on to Mark 11, with Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem:
 
MARK 11:1-11
1As they approached Jerusalem and came to Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two of his disciples,
2saying to them, “Go to the village ahead of you, and just as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here.
3If anyone asks you, 'Why are you doing this?' say, 'The Lord needs it and will send it back here shortly.'”
4They went and found a colt outside in the street, tied at a doorway. As they untied it,
5some people standing there asked, "What are you doing, untying that colt?”
6They answered as Jesus had told them to, and the people let them go.
7When they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their cloaks over it, he sat on it.
8Many people spread their cloaks on the road, while others spread branches they had cut in the fields.
9Those who went ahead and those who followed shouted, "Hosanna!" "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!”
10"Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David!" "Hosanna in the highest heaven!”
11Jesus entered Jerusalem and went into the temple courts. He looked around at everything, but since it was already late, he went out to Bethany with the Twelve.
 
GREGG
We'll talk more about Palm Sunday in the future, for now just know that this scene is the basis for that. It's also a sign that Jesus is approaching the end of His earthly ministry, though we've still got another couple chapters for today after we finish this one.
 
We'll skip verses 12-14 as that's the cursing of the fig tree we covered under miracles--and that's right, it's a non-healing miracle. At least His target is a tree and not a human as happens in some of the apocrypha.
 
Which brings us to Mark's version of the scene with the moneychangers in the Temple:
 
MARK 11:15-18
15On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple courts and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves,
16and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts.
17And as he taught them, he said, "Is it not written: 'My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations'? But you have made it 'a den of robbers.'”
18The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching.
19When evening came, Jesus and his disciples went out of the city.
 
GREGG
Mark's somewhat abbreviated account leaves off Him making a whip, which is a loss, but hey, the core is there. As a reminder, and yes, I'll say this every time, just remember when someone asks “what would Jesus do” that flipping tables is absolutely a valid option.
 
Then, we're back to the fig tree, seeing the result of the curse on the way out, and this is extra special because this is actually an extended Mark only reflection. Including another King James specific verse that the NIV leaves off. Let's hear it!
 
MARK 11:20-26
20In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots.
21Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!”
22"Have faith in God," Jesus answered.
23"Truly I tell you, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in their heart but believes that what they say will happen, it will be done for them.
24Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.
25And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins."
[NIV omits but KJV has] 26But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.]
 
GREGG
Of course, when I said “Mark exclusive”, that may have been a bit of an oversell, because while the now-proverbial “faith to move mountains” doesn't appear in Matthew's fig tree discourse, it does line up closely to another section, Matthew 17:20, several chapters before Matthew's fig tree. As for the rest, the sentiment is overall familiar, but worth repeating so I'll say it again:
 
MARK 11:25-26
if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins."
[NIV omits but KJV has] 26But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.]
 
GREGG
Next up we've got an attempted trap that Jesus turns around, Bugs Bunny style.
 
MARK 11:27-33
27They arrived again in Jerusalem, and while Jesus was walking in the temple courts, the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders came to him.
28"By what authority are you doing these things?" they asked. "And who gave you authority to do this?”
29Jesus replied, "I will ask you one question. Answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I am doing these things.
30John's baptism--was it from heaven, or of human origin? Tell me!”
31They discussed it among themselves and said, "If we say, 'From heaven,' he will ask, 'Then why didn't you believe him?’
32But if we say, 'Of human origin' . . . " (They feared the people, for everyone held that John really was a prophet.)
33So they answered Jesus, "We don't know." Jesus said, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things."
 
GREGG
Mark 12 opens with the Parable of the Tenant Farmers, which I personally prefer to call the Parable of the Bad Tenants since I think just calling them farmers ignores the amount of murdering they do in the parable. But anyways, we're not covering it here, ‘cause parable. So on to Verse 13:
 
MARK 12:13-17
13Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words.
14They came to him and said, "Teacher, we know that you are a man of integrity. You aren't swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?
15Should we pay or shouldn't we?" But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. "Why are you trying to trap me?" he asked. "Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.”
16They brought the coin, and he asked them, "Whose image is this? And whose inscription?" "Caesar's," they replied.
17Then Jesus said to them, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." And they were amazed at him.
 
GREGG
This tax exchange, which we saw in Matthew and we'll see again in Luke (SYNOPTIC ROUNDUP AIRHORN?) is intended to be a sort of sting operation, with the expected result being Jesus objecting to the tax and therefore being guilty of rebellion against the Roman government. But I don't think Jesus even needed to tap into His omniscience here, they were acting pretty suspicious with the leading flattery and line of questioning. Plus, what does God ultimately need money for?
 
In the end, of course, everything we have ultimately comes from God, so while I mentioned it with Matthew it's worth mentioning again now- when we give Caesar what is Caesar's and God what is God's, God gets everything.
 
Next up we've got Jesus fielding yet another insincere question from religious authorities, this time from the Sadducees:
 
MARK 12:18-27
18Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question.
19"Teacher," they said, "Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother.
20Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children.
21The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third.
22In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too.
23At the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”
24Jesus replied, "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God?
25When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.
26Now about the dead rising--have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the account of the burning bush, how God said to him, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'?
27He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!”
 
GREGG
That last bit– “You are badly mistaken!” is a Marcan flourish that helps emphasize Mark's generally less Pharisee-slash-Sadducee–friendly stance, underlining the intensity of Jesus’ disagreement with them.
 
The next section is the part about The Greatest Commandment which we used to open the Sayings of the Savior, so check out 0.21a for that. Then we have a theological question apparently designed to further undermine the Credibility of the Teachers of the Law. This time around, it's Jesus who picks the fight,
 
MARK 12:35-40
35While Jesus was teaching in the temple courts, he asked, "Why do the teachers of the law say that the Messiah is the son of David?
36David himself, speaking by the Holy Spirit, declared: "'The Lord said to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet."’
37David himself calls him 'Lord.' How then can he be his son?" The large crowd listened to him with delight.
38As he taught, Jesus said, "Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted with respect in the marketplaces,
39and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets.
40They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. These men will be punished most severely.”
 
GREGG
“The large crowd listened to him with delight”, we're told, as Jesus excoriated the religious establishment of His day. Sounds like a political rally almost. No wonder He was condemned as a revolutionary.
 
The last scene in Mark 12 is one we haven't seen before- it's one of the few passages in Mark not paralleled in Matthew- and it's one of my favorites:
 
MARK12:41-44
41Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts.
42But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.
43Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others.
44They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything--all she had to live on.”
 
GREGG
This scene is generally called the Widow's Mite, not because “mite” was the term for small copper coins in ancient Judea–though they would retroactively be called mites–and not because the mite was the term for small copper coins in 17th century England where the King James Bible was produced, though they would pick up that name, but rather because the King James translation used a Dutch term for some small denomination coins that had originally been picked up for Biblical use by William Tyndale.
 
For once, I'll spare you a deeper rabbit hole, and move on from the names of coins to the lesson of the coins.
 
I mentioned before this passage is one of my favorites. While I appreciate the challenge behind Jesus’ admonition to be perfect that we saw in Matthew, here we see that if all you have isn't much, God still sees the effort and meaningful sacrifice. There's something comforting in that for extremely inadequate folks like myself.
 
On the other hand, there's the lesson that giving out of your abundance may be mathematically and physically helpful but it's not spiritually significant. It's the right thing to do, of course, but an even better thing than giving your excess is to give beyond just your excess.
 
“But I need the rest”, you might argue. And it's certainly true, you may well have just reasons for keeping some aside. It would be irresponsible of me to sell all my worldly possessions and go live in a cave, as even if my wife signed onto it we've got kids too young to voluntarily renounce the world, it's our responsibility to care for them.
 
So, where’s the line? When do we go from taking care of our responsibilities at home to hoarding?
 
Well, if you have any money, you should be giving. It doesn't have to be all you have, especially if you've got responsibilities to those in your household, but it should absolutely be more than nothing, and everything is best.
 
Ultimately Christians are not to see money as theirs to use how they see fit, as something they've earned. That simply isn't a Christian mentality. Money is a means by which you can help others–those you have primary responsibility for first, like your children, and those in need should be prioritized urgently as well. The Church speaks of the “preferential option for the poor”.
 
I'm not saying you need to become a shell of a human, doing nothing for yourself and allowing your own mental and physical health to collapse- though certainly some saints lives point in that direction. But putting yourself first is something that needs to be balanced against your ability to be a blessing to those around you.
 
This isn't the last time I'll bring up this sort of thing by any means, and it looks like I avoided one tangent only to go into another, so let's get back to Mark, now in Chapter 13, which opens with a prophesy of the destruction of the Temple, then flows into a description of the End Times– keep in mind from the Christian perspective time has not only a beginning but an end–that parallels Matthew.
 
It's understandable to want to read this as being written after the actual historical destruction of the Temple in 70AD, but as I argued in my chat with Garry Stevens last June, it's not like it was hard to see such a calamity coming during Jesus’ life, Rome was already in control of a rebellious Judea with the Temple as a potential center of nationalist resistance. And that's of course if you discount the possibility of actual prophecy, which, remember, we're making our Pope-colored glasses, so Jesus actually prophesying Is the most straightforward explanation. Either way, a post 70AD dating for Mark is really pushing the outward edge of scholarly dating for the work, keeping in mind scholars tend to argue it's the oldest of the Gospels.
 
Without further ado, here's a long quote, going from Mark 13:1 to 27.
 
MARK 13
1As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, "Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!”
2"Do you see all these great buildings?" replied Jesus. "Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”
3As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately,
4"Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?”
5Jesus said to them: "Watch out that no one deceives you.
6Many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am he,' and will deceive many.
7When you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come.
8Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be earthquakes in various places, and famines. These are the beginning of birth pains.
9"You must be on your guard. You will be handed over to the local councils and flogged in the synagogues. On account of me you will stand before governors and kings as witnesses to them.
10And the gospel must first be preached to all nations.
11Whenever you are arrested and brought to trial, do not worry beforehand about what to say. Just say whatever is given you at the time, for it is not you speaking, but the Holy Spirit.
12"Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death.
13Everyone will hate you because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.
14"When you see 'the abomination that causes desolation' standing where it does not belong--let the reader understand--then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.
15Let no one on the housetop go down or enter the house to take anything out.
16Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak.
17How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers!
18Pray that this will not take place in winter,
19because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now--and never to be equaled again.
20"If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them.
21At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Messiah!' or, 'Look, there he is!' do not believe it.
22For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.
23So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time.
24"But in those days, following that distress, "'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light;
25the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’
26"At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory.
27And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.
 
GREGG
The remaining portions of Mark 13 are dedicated to a couple parables we've already discussed, the Budding Fig Tree and the Faithful vs Wicked Servant, respectively. After that, Mark 14 launches into the Passion narrative, which I'll be getting into in future worldbuilding episodes. So that means you’ve officially heard every blessed Saying of the Savior contained in Mark, minus the ones you haven't heard yet. You can file them next to all the Matthew stuff from last time, but leave space for Luke and John too. Slowly but surely we're getting there. All it took was an episode longer than the Gospel of Mark itself. I can assure you our next episode on Luke will *not* be longer than Luke, I just wanted to get absolutely granular on a Gospel and Mark, being the shortest and of high scholarly interest, was the best candidate for that.
 
I'd like to thank all of you lovely listeners and all those who support the show in various ways. Thanks especially to Shaun and PJ for the new audio contributions. I look forward to seeing you all next time when it's time for another batch of modern cardinals, followed by the next worldbuilding episode on the Gospel of Luke.

֎Jean-Marc Cardinal AVELINE (elevated 2022)

LINKS
Vatican bio of Cardinal Aveline
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_aveline_jm.html  
Jean-Marc Noël Aveline on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda):
https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2022.htm#Aveline  
Cardinal Aveline on Gcatholic.org:
http://www.gcatholic.org/p/55034 
Cardinal Aveline on Catholic-Hierarchy.org:
https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/baveline.html  
Archdioces of Marseille on Gcatholic.org:
http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/mars0.htm?focus=55034&tab=info  
Archdioces of Marseille on Catholic-Hierarchy.org:
https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dmarf.html  
2019 France3 interview with Archbishop Aveline:
https://france3-regions.francetvinfo.fr/provence-alpes-cote-d-azur/bouches-du-rhone/marseille/entretien-defis-du-nouvel-archeveque-marseille-mgr-jean-marc-aveline-1708884.html
2023 CruxNow coverage of an interview with Cardinal Aveline:
https://cruxnow.com/pope-in-marseille-live-coverage/2023/09/ahead-of-papal-visit-marseille-cardinal-stresses-balance-on-immigration 
2023 La Croix International write-up on Cardinal Aveline: 
https://international.la-croix.com/news/religion/jean-marc-aveline-the-french-cardinal-who-has-the-popes-ear/18350 
Vatican.va description of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue (PCID):
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_pro_20051996_en.html 
 
Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed.
As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com 
If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!
 
TRANSCRIPT
Welcome to Popeular History, history through Pope-colored glasses.
 
Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.
 
Today we're discussing a current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.
 
Jean-Marc Noël Aveline was born on December 26th, 1958 in Sidi Bel Abbès, a community in the province of the same name found in northern Algeria, about 75 kilometers from the Mediterranean. At the time, Algeria was officially part of France– not a French colony, mind you, but at least in theory a full-on constituent part of France that just happened to be in North Africa rather than Europe. That was a very active topic, as Algeria was in the midst of a brutal civil war that was a major catalyst for the change from the Fourth French Republic to the present Fifth Republic, a change that took place that same year of 1958.
 
After the war, Algeria became independent and Jean-Marc's family, including his two sisters, relocated back to the European side of things, moving to Marseille in 1966 in a move that one source described as painful, a pain that can be weighed in the context of a quarter million dead Algerians from the war according to the minimum French estimates, with estimates exceeding a million deaths also being common.
 
Anyways, Jean-Marc was one of our primary vocation cases, entering seminary while still a teen and being ordained in 1984 at the age of 25 as a priest for the Archdiocese of Marseille. He was soon embedded in parish life at Saint Peter and Paul Parish as well as the vocations efforts for the Archdiocese, looking to attract and bring up the next generation of priests. Of course he served in various roles at different institutes along the way, from teaching to directing, you know the drill. He picked up a Licentiate in Philosophy and In 2000 he earned a Doctorate in Theology as well.
 
His breakout year came in 2007 when he became Vicar General for the Archdiocese, being called up from parish life to that next level of service. Concurrently from 2008 to 2012 he served as a consultor to the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, which was his first Curial post but would not be his last. For reference, the PCID has about 50 consultors who serve in an advisory capacity.
 
In late 2013 Father Aveline was elected as an Auxiliary bishop of Marseille, becoming Titular Bishop of Simidicca because that's what happens with Auxiliary bishops. Auxiliary Bishop Aveline served alongside the Archbishop until the latter's retirement in 2019, at which point Bishop Aveline became Archbishop Aveline.
 
Marseille has always been a port city, ever since its days as a Greek colony, and recall Archbishop Aveline himself was something of a migrant, having been born across the Mediterranean in modern Algeria. So it's not too surprising that the plight of migrants, one of Pope Francis' biggest priorities, is also a central issue for Archbishop Aveline, though he's not as emphatic on the matter as Pope Francis is. Of course, it would be hard to be *more* emphatic on that particular matter than Pope Francis.
 
In July 2022, Pope Francis appointed Archbishop Aveline to the Dicastery for Bishops. Given that fact and the fact that it's not unusual for the second largest city in France to have a Cardinal, I don't think his inclusion in that year's August consistory would have been too surprising, but you never know. He could have wound up like the Patriarch of Venice, walking around looking like a Cardinal presumably because those were the only clothes in the Patriarchate's wardrobe after a long tradition of promotion only to be without an official red hat over a decade into things.
 
Jean-Marc Noël Aveline is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2038.
 
There's plenty more we can discuss about today's Cardinal, including the drama with one of his suffragan dioceses that's currently forbidden from ordaining new priests. We may indeed come back to Cardinal Aveline in the future, as today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, a Popeular project covering all the Cardinals of Church history to determine who's the most eminent Eminence of all. There will be more Cardinal Numbers in the coming weeks, culminating with the First Judgment where I sit down with some company and decide who among the Cardinals we've discussed in this batch should make it to the next round for a deeper dive.
 
Always remember, the best thing you can do to help Popeular History grow is tell your friends!
 
Thank you for listening, God bless you all!

֎Chibly LANGLOIS (elevated 2014)

LINKS
Vatican bio of Cardinal Langlois
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/documentation/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_langlois_c.html   
Chibly Langolis on FIU's Cardinals Database (by Salvadore Miranda):
https://cardinals.fiu.edu/bios2014.htm#Langlois  
Cardinal Langlois on Gcatholic.org:
http://www.gcatholic.org/p/2868  
Cardinal Langlois on Catholic-Hierarchy.org:
https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/blangc.html   
Diocese of Les Cayes on Gcatholic.org:
http://www.gcatholic.org/dioceses/diocese/lesc0.htm?tab=info   
Diocese of Les Cayes on Catholic-Hierarchy.org:
https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dlesc.html   
2014 Salt and Light Media write up of Cardinal-Elect Langlois
https://slmedia.org/blog/meet-the-cardinals-chibly-langlois-les-cayes-haiti 
2014 NCR article on Cardinal-Elect Langlois:
https://www.ncronline.org/news/people/haitis-new-cardinal-known-tireless-worker-advocate-people 
1983 Spokesman Review article on JPII's visit to Haiti:
https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=6tkvAAAAIBAJ&pg=7222,4661909 
CNA reporting on 2021 earthquake:
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/248690/cardinal-injured-priest-dead-after-earthquake-in-haiti 
Churchinneed.org reporting on 2021 Haitian bishops' statement:
https://www.churchinneed.org/haiti-bishops-issue-urgent-appeal-for-unity/ 
Jamiaca Observer reporting on 2022 Haitian bishops' statement:
https://www.jamaicaobserver.com/latest-news/haitian-bishops-call-for-peace-condemn-violence-and-gang-warfare/
September 2023 Haitian bishop's statement on genocide by criminal gangs:
https://international.la-croix.com/news/world/haitian-bishops-call-on-world-to-stop-genocide-by-criminal-gangs/18362
Donate to Haitian relief:
https://www.unicef.org/appeals/haiti 
 
Thank you for listening, and thank my family and friends for putting up with the time investment and for helping me out as needed.
As always, feel free to email the show at Popeularhistory@gmail.com 
If you would like to financially support Popeular history, go to www.patreon.com/Popeular. If you don't have any money to spare but still want to give back, pray and tell others– prayers and listeners are worth more than gold!
 
TRANSCRIPT
Welcome to Cardinal Numbers, a rexypod ranking all the Cardinals of the Catholic Church we can get our hands on, from the Catacombs to Kingdom Come.
 
Check out the show notes for sources, further reading, and a transcript.
 
Today we're discussing another current Cardinal of the Catholic Church, one of the 120 or so people who will choose the next Pope when the time comes.
 
Chibly LANGLOIS was born on November 29, 1958, in La Vallée, a community in the diocese of Jacmel, Haïti, located on the Tiburon Peninsula that forms much of the island nations' southern territory. Barring future appointments, Chibly Langlois is the only Haitian cardinal, so let's briefly look at the island nation's history while we're here.
 
Haiti was the result of the only successful slave rebellion in history, making it a 19th century pariah with no diplomatic recognition or formal trade relations until the populace literally paid for themselves to compensate for the lost air quotes "property", something which they could only afford using the international equivalent of payday loans to predatory lenders. The end result of this is that Haiti is, to this day, one of the poorest countries on earth. It has also had a range of issues establishing an effective and stable government, considering it started from basically nothing, coupled with general hostility from the international community at large, having about two centuries of rule by fiat mixed with coups, a situation which has only begun to change in the last few decades.
 
When Chibly was born, the dictator of the day was François "Papa Doc" Duvalier, who would be succeeded by his son, Jean-Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier. The Duvalier regime became more repressive after a coup attempt a few months before Chibly's birth, so the family got to deal with that in addition to being no exception to the general poverty.
 
The oldest of four, Chibly entered seminary in 1985, shortly before a 1986 uprising put Baby Doc Duvalier into exile. Incidentally, one of the factors that may have contributed to that uprising was a 1983 visit by none other than Pope John Paul II, where the Supreme Pontiff publicly told the leader of the majority-Catholic country that quote "things must change in Haiti" end quote.
 
Chibly Langlois was ordained in 1991 at the age of 32, becoming a priest for his home diocese of Jacmel. He held a few diocesan roles right off the bat, including serving as vicar for the cathedral, then in 1994 he went off to Rome for further study, obtaining a Licentiate in theology from the Pontifical Lateran University. 
 
Like many Cardinals, Fr Langlois also served as a seminary professor, teaching pastoral theology from 2000 to 2004. In 2004, he was elected bishop of Fort-Liberté, where he served until 2011, when he was transferred to head the Diocese of Les Cayes. Later that year, he became head of Haiti's bishops conference, a role he'd fill till 2017.
 
In 2014, Pope Francis announced that he would be elevating Bishop Langlois to the Cardinalate, in the first of what would become Francis' many surprising red-hattings. Cardinal Langlois is Haiti's first Cardinal, and Pope Francis passed over both of the countries' archbishops in the process. The announcement was made on the fourth anniversary of a devastating 2010 earthquake that had killed more than 2% of Haiti's population, including one of the archbishops, and left another 15% of the population homeless. Cardinal Langlois had carried on his general focus on social justice and the poor in his efforts to aid in the aftermath, and the timing of the announcement on the anniversary was seen as no coincidence given his name appearing on the list.
 
Nor was that Cardinal Langlois' last earthquake, he himself was injured in a separate 2021 earthquake that killed three in the priestly residence where he was staying. He also suffered a broken arm in a 2022 car accident. And though I don't want this episode to just be a laundry list of bad things that happened to Cardinal Langlois and his country, I should also note that the Cardinal has been co-signing statements from Haiti's bishops' conference decrying a quote "descent into hell" end quote as they said  in 2021, then quote "murderous madness of hatred, of contempt for life” end quote in 2022, and just two months ago their statement included a reference to "genocide" of defenseless civilians by criminal gangs. So, to put it mildly, Cardinal Langlois and his brother bishops want you to know that things are once again not great in Haiti.
 
In fact, since the time I made my original notes here, Haiti's government fell again after the acting President who had not taken promised steps to install a successor was refused access back into the country. Whatever the transition will be is still playing out, with violence among armed gangs being even more common than usual.
 
What can you do? Well, there's a UNICEF fundraising link for relief to Haitian children in the comments. You can also pray, I'm not one to mock thoughts and prayers. If you're going to hop on a plane with relief stuff like a new Roberto Clemente–there's a story, dude should be canonized–let me know and I'll encourage listeners to support your mission. You can spread awareness more generally in some small way, hoping increased attention will eventually bring the aid you can't bring personally. I don't pretend any of those options will have much effect, and I know they're all subject to ridicule from cynics. C'est la vie. I'll let you figure out the best response for you, with a note that anything is better than nothing, though keep in mind you can't do everything.
 
Chibly Langlois is eligible to participate in future conclaves until he turns 80 in 2038.
 
Today's episode is part of Cardinal Numbers, and there will be more Cardinal Numbers next week. Thank you for listening; God bless you all!