THE HEART OF DIXIE

THE ASHERAH PROBLEM

THE ASHERAH PROBLEM:

A COMMON SENSE APPROACH

            This paper will introduce the reader to the “Asherah problem”. It will then proceed to summarize what the scholars are saying about it. After that I shall attempt to offer what I call the “common sense” approach to the issue. I do not intend here to over intellectualize the problem nor pretend to out scholar the scholars. The reader of this paper need not  have a PhD in biblical studies nor have mastered the Hebrew language in order to digest the following work. My aim here to is offer a paper that can be used as a reference guide to the issue by anyone interested in biblical studies and continue the  “common sense” theme of my own writings. With this said, let us begin.

The Asherah Problem

            Our problem is quite simple. It revolves around the use of the term Asherah in the Hebrew Bible. Here are a few examples.

2 Kings 23:4

The King commanded the high priest Hilkiah , the priests of the second order, and the guardians of the threshold, to bring out of the temple of the Lord all the vessels made for Baal, for Asherah, [capital A] and for all the host of heaven; he burned them outside Jerusalem in the fields of the Kidron, and carried their ashes to Bethel.[1]

           

As you can see from this verse, Asherah (Capital A) appears to be a deity, generally assumed to be a Goddess.

2 Kings 23:15

Moreover, the altar at Bethel, the high place erected by Jeroboam son of Nebat, who caused Israel to sin—he pulled down that altar along with the high place. He burned the high place, crushing it to dust; he also burned the asherah.[2] [small a]

           

From this passage asherah (small a) appears to be some sort of object related to worship or cultic activities.

Jeremiah 17:2

While their children remember their altars and their asherim [small a] beside every green tree, and on the high hills.

            Once again, “asherim” appears to be some sort of object but in the plural.

Deuteronomy 16:21

You shall not plant any tree as an asherah [small a] beside the altar that you make for the Lord your God.

            In this passage it is rather clear that the asherah is a tree of some sort. Now let us look at one final verse that adds further to the confusion.

2 Chronicles 19:3

Nevertheless, some good is found in you, for you destroyed the asheroth [small a] out of the land, and have set your heart to seek God.

            From this verse the definition of “asheroth” is presupposed by the writer. Not only does it appear to be a plural form of asherah, it is different from the plural form used in Jeremiah. All we can tell from this verse is that the asheroth were removed, we have no idea what it or they are.

            Now that’s  our problem in a nutshell. But it is still more complex than this. Without doubt the common reader by cross referencing bible verses could come to some sort of conclusion to our problem, but wait. The term “asherah” occurs forty times in nine of the O.T. books. Nine times without a definite article or pronominal suffix. Four times in singular form, three times in the masculine plural, once in the feminine plural, and once with a proposition (l) attached. All of the remaining verses have the pronominal suffix or definite article which necessitates definiteness.[3]

            What all this means is that of all the verses containing the term “asherah” in the O.T. the meaning is still not entirely clear. Therefore at this point, let us look at the history of the problem.[4]

            The 2^nd century B.C.E. Greek version of the bible, also known as the LXX or Septuagint, rendered the term “asherah” as “grove”. Later on the King James Version (KJV) of 1611 C.E. would follow suit. The only exceptions are Isaiah 17:8; 27:9 and Chronicles 15:16; 24:18 where the LXX has “trees”. St. Jerome’s 5^th century C.E. version of the bible called the “Vulgate” also translated “asherah” as “grove in all cases except Judges 6:25, 26, 30, where it has “wood”. The Targums or Aramaic versions of the bible done in the early centuries C.E. in Babylon and Palestine, do no more than transliterate the word “asherah”. Finally the Peshitta which is a Christian version in Syriac (a dialect of Aramaic), from the 4^th century C.E. uses a variety of terms such as “object of reverence”, “Fearful thing” (19 times), “trees” (twice), “molten images” (twice), “images” (twice), “idols” (twice), “high places” (3 times), “statue” (once) and three times the meaning is uncertain. In Judges 3:7 it uses, “astarte”. [5]

            According to the Mishna, ( Hebrew word meaning “instruction”, a part of the Talmud), the asherim were living trees that were worshiped. Medieval Jewish commentators such as Kimhi write, “Every tree which is worshiped and is planted in honor of a deity that they worship idolatrously is called Asherah.”  In 1685 Cambridge Scholar John Spencer attempted to understand the Hebrew Bible from the standpoint of comparative religion. Although his resources were limited he detected several meanings. Often he admitted that “asherah” meant “grove” but it could also denote an image of a grove, individual tree, a temple, or the goddess Astarte. Upon entering the 19^th century and early part of the 20^th when critical approaches to the bible were being accepted we can detect three main views coming to the fore. 1. Asherah was equated with the goddess Astarte or her symbol, 2. Asherah was a cult object (wooden pole, image, tree or phallic symbol) but not the name of a deity[6] and 3. Asherah denotes both a goddess and a cult object symbolizing her, but not equated with Astarte. This last view is the one most widely accepted today.[7] But hang on to your hats, there’s more to come.

            In 1929 excavations began at the ancient city of Ras Shamra on the Northern coast of Syria. What was found has “revolutionized the study of Canaanite mythology and its bearing upon biblical scholarship”.[8] Texts, written in the local West Semitic script language, known as Ugaritic, as well as in several other scripts and languages such as Akkadian, Egyptian, Hittite and Hurrian were found dating from the end of the late bronze age (1400-1190 B.C.E.).The myths and legends of the texts are in poetic form (as is much of the Hebrew bible), while the letters, administrative documents and ritual instructions are in prose. These myths and legends provide us the principle points of comparison with the Hebrew Bible in both form and content. The poetry is similar to the biblical Hebrew for both are characterized by multilevel parallelism and share rhetorical and stylistic devices as well as expressions. As far as content goes, the texts provide many details of Canaanite religion, to or about which the Hebrew Bible contains reactions or reflections.[9]

            The texts follow three main cycles: 1. The deeds and conflicts and final ascendancy of the god Baal who lives at Mt. Zafon, over his enemies. Other mythic figures with biblical associations are the sun god El (sometimes represented by a bull) and his consort Ashtoreth [Athirat] or Asherah, their son Hadad, Anath, Yam-Nahar, Moth and others, 2. The story of a King Keret of Hubut and 3. The tale of Haquhat, son of a righteous King Daniel.[10] 

            Until the discovery of the Ugaritic texts and ever afterwards it was common for scholars to deny the very existence of the goddess Asherah, whether in or outside the bible, and many of those who did accept her existence wrongly equated her with Astarte, but now no one can deny that there was a Canaanite goddess Asherah, independent of Astarte. It is even generally accepted that this same goddess appears a number of times in the OT.[11]

            According to P.Matthiae, the earliest references to the goddess Asherah appear in the Elba Texts (ca. 2350 B.C.E.) where she is a “lesser but well-attested” deity. In the 2^nd millennium B.C.E. we also find the goddess (called Asratum) in cuneiform texts from the period of the first dynasty of Babylon ( 1830-1531 B.C.E.) where she is the consort of Amurru. Although these texts are in Akkadian instead of Semitic language they are of interest, for “it is likely that her cult was brought to Mesopotamia by the Amorites.” She is called “the lady of the steppe”, the “bride of the king of heaven” the “mistress of sexual vigor and rejoicing” and her name appears in several old god lists.[12]

            Two more texts in Akkadian cuneiform are worth mentioning. One is from Taanach, near Megiddo in northern Palestine which dates from the 15^th century B.C.E. and reads “Further, and if there is a wizard of Asherah, let him tell our fortunes and let me hear quickly and the sign and interpretation send to me”.  A second item is from the el-Amarna letters that date from the first half of the 14^th century B.C.E. and calls the king Amurru a “servant of Asherah”.  Both of these texts were discovered before the Ugaritic texts but many scholars at that time refused to accept that they testified to the existence of the goddess Asherah.[13]

            Now besides all this, there is more extrabiblical  evidence for our problem. Asherah has been found at several other sites, namely Khirbet el-Qom, Kuntillet Arjud, Lachish, Pella, Ekron , Arslan Tash and Taanach which was mentioned above. Also an artifact called the “Jerusalem pomegranate” has factored in to our issue.[14]

            Now since I can not cover every one of these sites in this paper, I am now going to mention and explain the two most controversial of the above. At Khirbet el- Qom a group of tombs were found by William B. Denver. One of the inscriptions there reads:

Blessed be Uriyahu by Yahweh and by his [A]asherah; from his enemies he saved him.” [15]

            The issue at hand is whether “Asherah” (Capital A or small a), refers to the Goddess or to an object. If it refers to the Goddess, then Yahweh (God of the Hebrews), would have had a wife or a female consort of some type in the mind of the writer.

            Now the scholars bounce this issue around and around among themselves. Andre Lamaire a famous epigraphist (someone who studies ancient inscriptions)[16], has supplied the translation that has set off all the argument.[17]

            Now before going more into the arguments, lets look at the last find we shall discuss. Kuntillet Ajrud. In 1975-76, Z. Meshel excavated this 9^th-8^th century B.C.E. site in the eastern Sinai.[18] This site does not have a biblical name “because nobody knows how to connect it with the bible.” The name is Arabic. The site is on the boarder between the southern Negeb and the Sinai peninsula. It is a “one –period site” (meaning that it’s not contaminated with different strata or layers from other times). Many inscriptions were found there with the majority being in Hebrew. The settlement lies near the road between Gaza and Eilat, and served as both a fortress and rest stop for caravans. Given the desolate area and rough terrain, it is understandable that many of the inscriptions are “heart felt prayers of thanksgiving”.[19]

            Now lets take a look at the inscriptions.

• Inscription 1 on Pithos[20] A reads: Thus says …: Say to Yehalle, Yo’asa and …I bless you to/before Yahweh of Samaria and his [A]asherah.
• Inscription 2 on Pithos B reads: Thus says Amaryau: Say to my Lord: Is it well with you? I bless you to/before Yahweh of Teman and his [A}asherah. May He bless and keep you and be with my lord.
• Inscription 3 on Pithos B reads: By/Before Yahweh of Teman and his [A]asherah…Whatever he shall request of anyone, may he grant it…and may Yahweh give him according to his intention.[21]

The inscription [Pithos A] expresses a religious sentiment or blessing. It says “ I bless you by” and we have the tetragrammaton [YHVH], the sacred personal name of the God of Israel. Followed by the name of a city, Shomeron [Samaria] the capital of the northern Kingdom, Israel. Following this word is the term at the center of the controversy.[22]

      Ok, with most of the problem of our discussion put forth, let us take a look at what a few scholars have to say about our issue. Then we can carry on with some more information and then proceed on to the “common sense approach.”

According to Mark Smith of Yale University, while it is unclear whether asherah in these inscriptions (Khirbet el- Qom, Kuntillet  ajrud) refer to the goddess Asherah or to her cult symbol, the asherah, the inscriptions unambiguously place Yahweh in a positive context with what the biblical data present as foreign.[23] The biblical view seems to be supported by the Ugaritic texts, which describe Asherah as a goddess, mother of the Gods and spouse of El, the older judge, patriarch and father of the pantheon. Asherah as a nurturing mother goddess was represented by the religious symbol, the asherah which was in Israel a wooden pole, or perhaps a tree representing the “tree of life”. The “tree of life” motif in the ancient Near East goes back to the 3^rd millennium. In Israel it had become the goddess’ symbol by the 13^th century (B.C.E.).[24]

      These Hebrew inscriptions  (Khirbet el- Qom, Kuntillet  ajrud), suggest the possibility that Asherah, or at least her symbol, the asherah was acceptable in at least some quarters of pre-exilic[25] Israel. In reading the Deuteronomistic History (Deuteronomy, Judges, Joshua, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings) an indication that asherah was observed as early as the period of the Judges ( 1200-1000 B.C.E.) and as late as a few decades before the fall of the southern kingdom of Judah (587/586 B.C.E.) is displayed. It was acceptable in both kingdoms (Northern and Southern), and inside and outside the royal cults of Samaria and Jerusalem. An association between the Canaanite deities Asherah and Baal was perceived by the Deuteronomistic school[26] as having existed in the period of the Judges and therefore eventually by the time of the monarchy an association must have been made between Asherah and Yahweh. “It would appear from the inscriptions and the biblical evidence that the asherah was not simply a Canaanite import; it appears to have been perfectly at home in ancient Israel in the pre-exilic period.”[27]

For John Day of  Oxford University: three views have been suggested as possibilities, a cella or chapel, the Goddess herself, or a cultic object. The first meaning though attested in other Semitic languages, in not found elsewhere in Hebrew and should therefore be rejected. The second view, that it is simply the goddess Asherah, should also be rejected, for in biblical Hebrew (unlike some other Semitic languages) personal names are unknown with a pronominal suffix. Therefore the most probable view is the third, namely that Asherah denotes the name of a cultic object. This meaning is well attested in the O.T. (Exod 34:13; Deut 7:5; 12:3 16:21; Judg 6:26, 28, 30; 1 Kgs 14:15, 23 etc.). Although there is some dispute about precisely what kind of cult object the asherah was the evidence is strong that it was a wooden pole symbolizing the goddess Asherah. “We can understand how the Asherah can be invoked as a source of blessing in the Kuntillet Ajrud inscriptions along side Yahweh, since it symbolized the goddess”. It therefore seems that these texts reflect a religious syncretism[28] in which Asherah was closely related to Yahweh, presumably as his consort. That this should be so, ought not to surprise us when we recall allusions such as Deut 16:21-22.[29] The presence of the symbol of the goddess Asherah next to Yahweh’s alter most naturally suggests that she was regarded in syncretistic circles as his consort. The Kuntillet Ajrud inscriptions date from about 800 B.C.E. and thus give us a direct insight into the nature of the popular religion condemned by Israel’s pre-exilic prophets.[30]

      Now at this point, let us summarize what we have discussed before looking at our last bit of information that pertains to the Asherah Problem. I have shown you the issue in simple form (bible verses), and displayed the grammatical tensions in the texts. Translation history and Jewish commentaries as well as scholarly history has been displayed. We have covered the major archaeological finds that bear on our problem and you have heard two famous scholars opinions. With this in mind, let us see one final part of the puzzle that may bear heavily on your opinion.

      This is the drawing that lies under the inscription on Pithos A at Kuntillet Ajrud.

      As you can see the figures appear to be male and female with some sort of adjoining figure in the rear playing a lyre. Let us now hear what the scholars have to say about this.

According to  M. Gilula, the figures drawn beneath the inscription, despite some superficial resemblance, cannot be interpreted as Bes, an Egyptian dwarf-god well known in the ancient Near east from the Middle Kingdom down to Hellenistic (Greek) times. The principle reason is that these figures are bovine (cow like) and not leonine (lion like) for the Egyptian Bes is invariably leonine. Therefore the two figures standing hand in hand are ( as per Gilula’s reading of the inscription), Yahweh and Asherah (Capital A).[31]

For J.A. Emerton, it is reasonable to argue that it represents Yahweh and Asherah although there is the difficulty that the drawing includes three figures and not two. However if it does not, it might be argued that the drawing includes a male and a female deity, and that they may represent the two. If the writer of the inscription had intended to refer to “Yahweh and  Asherah”, in the sense of Yahweh and his consort Asherah, it would have been possible to do so in a way that corresponds with the Old Testament Hebrew idiom. The writer could have attached the pronominal suffix to a noun denoting the relationship. Therefore it is likely that the drawings come from a different hand than the inscriptions. Also in interpreting inscriptions in a form of Hebrew that appears to be essentially the same language as that of the O.T., one should be guided by grammatical usage of the Hebrew bible. Finally, if the author of the inscription had intended to refer to Yahweh and his consort Asherah the wording in Biblical Hebrew would be clear.[32]

      At this point you have seen a general overview of the “Asherah problem” without all the in-dept scholarly gobbledygook. The argument still rages as new ways of seeing the evidence is put forth and the Hebrew professionals and archaeologists badger back and forth over minute increments of our issue. Once again, this is not to say that scholarly research is not needed nor is it not important to the fields of theology or archaeology. What my intention is, as I told you in the beginning of this paper, is to supply you a “common sense” approach and allow you to draw your own conclusions. So since I am not capable nor are you willing to read a long and drawn out revue of textual studies into ancient Semitic languages and their grammatical structures, let us proceed with what I commonly call in my other works—The Madison Moment.

      Allow me to do for you, what I suggested might be done in the beginning of this paper. Let us cross reference the Hebrew scriptures that contain the term Asherah, Asherim or Asheroth. I have broken this down for you in a simple to read graph that will allow you to continue the research into this subject on your own.

      The lines down the left side of the chart will tell you what action was taken towards the Asherah, Asherim or Asheroth, whether the term is unknown or if it surely refers to something else (Goddess, tree, etc,). Following to the right the verses containing the references are listed. I did not use the entire chapters in my decisions where to list the term. I thought it best to use the particular verse itself instead of adding my own commentary. In other words, the verses will speak for themselves and you can decide based on your own reading of the contexts. It is always best to read the scriptures for yourself first and then use other’s opinions or commentaries.

Use of Term	Action Taken	Number of times	Verses
Tree	Planted	1	Deut. 16:21
Goddess/es	Served	4	Judg. 3:7; 1 Kgs. 18:19; 2 Kgs. 23:4; 2 Chron. 24:18
Unknown	none	3	Isaiah, 27:9, Jeremiah 17:2, Micah 5:14
Object	Made/Carved/Built	9	Isa. 17:8, 1 Kgs. 14:15; 14:23; 15:13; 16:33, 2Kgs. 17:16; 21:7, 2Chron. 15:16; 34:4
Object	Set/Erected	2	2Kgs. 17:10, 2Chron. 33:19
Object	Was Standing	2	2 Kgs. 13:6, 2 Chron. 17:6
Object	Broken/Beat into Powder	2	2 Chron.34:4; 34:7
Object	Women weaving for	1	2 Kgs. 23:7
Object	Cut Down	12	Ex. 34:13,Judg. 6:25; 6:28; 6:30; Deut. 7:5; 12:3, 1Kgs. 15:13; 2Kgs. 18:4l; 23:14, 2 Chron. 14:3; 15:16; 31:1
Object	Removed	2	2 Chron 17:6; 19:3
Object	Burned	4	Deut. 12:3, 1Kgs. 15:13, 2 Kgs. 23:6; 23:15

As you can see from our chart, Asherah (Asherim, Asheroth), is referred to as an object the vast majority of times (34 of 42) in the O.T. Most of the references are to it being “made/carved” and “cut down”, while it is “set/erected”, “removed”, “broken/ground into powder” or “was standing” twice. It was Burned 4 times.

 As Day has told us, the majority opinion is such ; Asherah denotes both a goddess and a cult object (wooden pole, image, tree or phallic symbol) symbolizing her, but not equated with Astarte. This last view is the one most widely accepted today.[33]

With what we know of the Ugaritic Texts, lets look at five verses in Jeremiah that may shed some more light on our problem.

7:18

The children gather wood, the fathers kindle fire, and the women knead dough, to make cakes for the queen of heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods, to provoke me to anger.

44:17

Instead, we will do everything that we have vowed, make offerings to the queen of heaven and pour out libations to her, just as we and our ancestors, our kings and our officials, used to do in the towns of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem. We used to have plenty of food, and prospered, and saw no misfortune.

            44:18

But from the time we stopped making offerings to the queen of heaven and pouring out libations to her, we have lacked everything and have perished by the sword and by famine."

           

            44:19

And the women said, "Indeed we will go on making offerings to the queen of heaven and pouring out libations to her; do you think that we made cakes for her, marked with her image, and poured out libations to her without our husbands' being involved?"

            44:25

Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: You and your wives have accomplished in deeds what you declared in words, saying, "We are determined to perform the vows that we have made, to make offerings to the queen of heaven and to pour out libations to her.' By all means, keep your vows and make your libations!

           

            These verses in the book of Jeremiah the Prophet are the only places in the O.T. where the term “Queen of Heaven” appears. The book covers the period just before the Babylonian exile and the period right after (approx. 620-580 B.C.E.)[34] As we have learned the Ugaritic texts date from 1400-1190 B.C.E. or the end of the late bronze age.[35] If this is so then my question would be, are those of the Southern Kingdom still worshiping the Canaanite Goddess after what appears to be a period of at least 500 years and the loss of the Northern Kingdom? A Goddess that apparently they incorporated into their own traditions after acquiring the holy land. It seems that from what our verses in Jeremiah say they are, but why does the rest of the biblical literature not reflect this? Why, when the term “asherah” is used by a prophet (see chart) it refers to an object or the meaning is unknown. If it was a foreign deity that the prophets were referring to why would they not make the meaning clear? And why in all four verses where a prophet uses the term, he uses it in the plural (asherim). Obviously he is not referring to a deity per say, but to an object that could perhaps represent a deity to someone else but not to him.  Therefore with this in mind lets examine the rest of our evidence.

            If the inscriptions at Kuntillet Ajrud are from the 8^th-9^th century B.C.E.[36] as they have been dated, then according to some scholars,[37] Asherah was certainly worshiped as a Goddess by the Israelites during that time period approx 2 to 3 hundred years before the Babylonian Exile. But once again, if this is the case, why are the inscriptions unclear?

It seems to me that as Emerton says, if the author of the inscription had intended to refer to Yahweh and his consort Asherah the wording in Biblical Hebrew would be clear.[38] What I would contend here is that the evidence of Asherah being worshiped as a deity by the vast majority of Israelites is faulty. I would propose that some sort of symbol, most likely a wooden pole (perhaps adorned) was being used in some or perhaps many cultic circles by either syncretists or pseudo-mystics in order to create more elaborate cultic settings to rival or resemble the temple.[39] I seriously doubt that the Deuteronomistic School would have tried to hide through redactions an idolatry that could have been used to support their own Pro-Gola stance as the elite of the religious in post-exilic Judah. If Asherah were being thought of by the majority of Israelites as a Goddess then the redactors would have played it to the hilt. It is more likely that Jeremiah is upset with the Jerusalem orthodoxy for not clamping down more on these types of popular devotions as Josiah did previously, and not that the majority of the people followed them. In other words, I think the prophets as well as the totality of biblical literature is saying, “Get rid of the sacred poles”.

            Now as for Asherah being a tree. This must be rejected, once again on common sense grounds. The climate of Palestine is subtropical and has not changed much since biblical times. The rainfall decreases from North to South and from West to East. It has only two seasons—the dry season in summer (May through September) when there is usually no rain and the wet season (mid October through March), with most of the rain occurring between November and February. Also a sufficient amount of dew is recorded yearly.[40] With this being the case, I find it hard to believe that the Asherah was a living tree, for one simple reason, living trees can not be burned until they are fully dried out, nor are they “made”, “broken” or “beat into powder” generally. To dry out a living tree for burning takes time and from our scripture verses it appears that time was of the essence in getting rid of the “fearful things”.[41]

            In closing it would appear that I agree with the majority that, Asherah denotes both a goddess and a cultic object (wooden pole) symbolizing her, but wait, I have something else to say. I believe that I have presented my case that the asherah/asherim, according to the biblical writers, is a cultic object and not a deity, but that does not mean that for some she was not a goddess. I am not saying that. Once again it is surely possible that some would have seen her as such in popular devotions, but I doubt that the majority shared this opinion. I think at best she was a minor deity venerated but not worshiped.  Therefore since I hold the majority opinion let it be known that I hold it far more to the “cultic object” side than to the “deity” side. Since the plural of asherah (Asherim) is often used in the scriptures, and especially by the prophets, I think it should be investigated by those with more talent than I, whether my premise that they were used to symbolize the pillars in the temple is viable. This seems to me to be the most “common sense” approach to our issue.

Thank You

James Madison

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Day, John. Asherah In The Hebrew Bible And Northwest Semitic Literature. Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 3 Issue 105, 1986.

              Emerton, J.A. “Yahweh And His Asherah”: The Goddess Or Her Symbol? Vetus Testamentum XLIX, 3, Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden: 1999.

                     Freedman, David Noel. Yahweh Of Samaria And His Asherah. Biblical Archaeologist, December, 1987.

                     Keel, Othmar and Christoph Uehlinger. Gods, Goddesses, And Images Of God In Ancient Israel. Trans. Thomas H.Trapp. Minneapolis Fortress Press: 1998

                     King, Phillip J and Lawrence E. Stager. Life in biblical Israel. Westminster John Knox Press, London: 2001,

                     Margalit, Baruch. The Meaning And Significance Of Asherah. Vestus Testamentum 40.03, ATLA Serials, 2004

                     Newberger, Elana. Asherah: The Israelite Goddess And The Cultic Object. Theta Alpha Kappa. Vol. 29, No. 1 Spring 2005

                     New Revised Standard Version. The Cambridge Annotated Study Bible. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 1993.

                     Petty, Richard J. Asherah: Goddess of Israel. Peter Lang Publishing, N.Y.: 1990

                     Smith, Mark S. God  Male And Female In The Old Testament: Yahweh And His “Asherah”. Theological Studies, Number 48. 1987.

                     The Encyclopedia Of The Jewish Religion. Ed. R.J.Zwi Werblowsky and Geoffrey Wegoder, Holt, Rinehart and Winston: 1966.

                     BIBLIOGRAPHY CONTINUED

            The HarperCollins Dictionary of Religion. Ed. Johnathan Z. Smith. HarperCollins Publishers, San Francisco: 1995.

                    

---

[1] New Revised Standard Version. The Cambridge Annotated Study Bible. All Bible quotations in this paper will come from this version.

[2]  The NRSV has “sacred pole” with a footnote reading that asherah is the actual word used in the Hebrew texts. I have used the actual reading in order to present the argument. The reading “sacred pole” presupposes that this particular argument we are discussing is already solved. It also lists the term Asherah with a capital A.  I shall correct this issue throughout the rest of the paper without mention.

[3] Petty, Richard J. Asherah: Goddess of Israel. Peter Lang Publishing, N.Y.: 1990 Pg.7 : Taken from Elana Newberger’s article, Asherah: The Israelite Goddess And The Cultic Object. Theta Alpha Kappa. Vol. 29, No. 1 Spring 2005 pg. 50

[4] Remember that the Old Testament is written in Hebrew and the problem in question dates from hundreds of years before and up to the Babylonian exile (Approx. 587 B.C).

[5] Day, John. Asherah In The Hebrew Bible And Northwest Semitic Literature. Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 3 Issue 105, 1986. Pg. 397.  Day does not include the dates of the bible versions nor complete information on what language they are done in. I supplied them for the reader. They are available in the “Translations of the Bible” section by Bruce Metzger in the front of the NRSV. The Cambridge Annotated Study Bible. 1993. 

[6] W. Robert Smith was a “noteworthy defender of this view, claiming that Asherah always denoted a wooden pole.” Day. Pg. 398

[7] Day, Pg. 398

[8] The Encyclopedia Of The Jewish Religion. Ed. R.J.Zwi Werblowsky and Geoffrey Wegoder, Holt, Rinehart and Winston: 1966. pg.393

[9] The HarperCollins Dictionary of Religion. Ed. Johnathan Z. Smith. HarperCollins Publishers, San Francisco: 1995. Pg.1105.

[10]  The Encyclopedia Of The Jewish Religion. Ed. R.J.Zwi Werblowsky and Geoffrey Wegoder, Holt, Rinehart and Winston: 1966. pg.393

[11] Day, pg. 385

[12] Day, Pg. 386

[13] Day, Pg. 386

[14]Newberger, Elana. Asherah: The Israelite Goddess And The Cultic Object. Theta Alpha Kappa. Vol. 29, No. 1 Spring 2005 pg. 51

[15] Newberger, Pg.51

[16] Lamaire is considered to be one of the top in this field. He is quoted in all of the research done for this paper.

[17] Newberger, Pg.51

[18] Smith, Mark S. God  Male And Female In The Old Testament: Yahweh And His “Asherah”. Theological Studies, Number 48. 1987. Pg. 333

[19] Freedman, David Noel. Yahweh Of Samaria And His Asherah. Biblical Archaeologist, December, 1987. Pg. 241.

[20] Pithos are pottery.

[21] Keel, Othmar and Christoph Uehlinger. Gods, Goddesses, And Images Of God In Ancient Israel. Trans. Thomas H.Trapp. Minneapolis Fortress Press: 1998. Pgs. 225-26. Taken from Elana Newberger’s article, Asherah: The Israelite Goddess And The Cultic Object. Theta Alpha Kappa. Vol. 29, No. 1 Spring 2005 pg. 52

[22] Freedman Pg. 246.

[23] or “evil in the eyes of the Lord” 1 Kings 16:30,33.  Smith, Pg. 334

[24] Smith, Pg. 334

[25] Before the Babylonian exile, approx. 587 B.C.E.

[26] The Deuteronomistic school is a theory that a particular group of elite that returned from the Babylonian exile formed a school that edited or redacted the Deuteronomistic history to suit their own purposes. See my previous work, The Theological And Political Case For Pro-Gola Redactions in Jeremiah’s Oracles Against the Nations: The Expansionist Story. 2005

[27] Smith, Pg. 335-36

[28] Syncretism means to combine or blend different religious traditions.

[29] Deuteronomy 16:21-22, “You shall not plant any wooden thing as an Asherah beside the altar of the Lord your God which you shall make. And you shall not set up a pillar, which the Lord your god hates.”

[30] Day, Pg. 392

[31] Margalit, Baruch. The Meaning And Significance Of Asherah. Vestus Testamentum 40.03, ATLA Serials, 2004: Pg. 275. Margalit summarizes Gilula’s argument.

[32] Emerton, J.A. “Yahweh And His Asherah”: The Goddess Or Her Symbol? Vetus Testamentum XLIX, 3, Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden: 1999. Pgs. 317,320,334,335.

[33] Day, Pg. 398

[34] Once again, for more information see my previous work: The Theological And Political Case For Pro-Gola Redactions in Jeremiah’s Oracles Against the Nations: The Expansionist Story. 2005

[35] The HarperCollins Dictionary of Religion. Ed. Johnathan Z. Smith. HarperCollins Publishers, San Francisco: 1995. Pg.1105.

[36] Smith, Mark S. God  Male And Female In The Old Testament: Yahweh And His “Asherah”. Theological Studies, Number 48. 1987. Pg. 333

[37] Smith, Pg. 335-36

[38] Emerton, J.A. “Yahweh And His Asherah”: The Goddess Or Her Symbol? Vetus Testamentum XLIX, 3, Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden: 1999. Pgs. 317,320,334,335.

[39] I would further speculate that these wooden poles were used to symbolize or resemble the pillars at the entrance of the Holy of Holies called “Jachin” and “Boaz”. For further information on Solomon’s temple see: King, Phillip J and Lawrence E. Stager. Life in biblical Israel. Westminster John Knox Press, London: 2001, Pgs.330-338.

[40] King, Phillip J and Lawrence E. Stager. Life in biblical Israel. Westminster John Knox Press, London: 2001, Pgs. 86-87.

[41] Listed this way in the Peshitta 19 times according to Day Pg. 397

CHRISTIAN CONFEDERATE RADIO

http://christianconfederateradio.com/

ISLAM IN BRIEF

ISLAM: GOD AS ONE   

            In Islam, the assertion that God is one (Tawid), is the “bedrock of all life and truth.” For Muslims the confession of faith is brief and to the point: “There is no God but God, and Muhammad is the messenger of God.” This is called the “Shahadah” (confession), the basic Muslim confession of faith. Reciting this with faith is what makes one a Muslim.

            When Muslims say the “shahadah” the emphasis is on the exclusion of other divine beings. The word “Allah” means “the God”. God completely fills the divine realm to the total exclusion of any other. God cannot be divided into parts. God has no competitors, no associates, no enemies, no helpers. Although Muslims do believe in the existence of angels and messengers who carry out the will of Allah. All of these creatures belong to the created realm. Only God is God.

            God is transcendent, far beyond the created realm and separate from the created world. Muslims insist on the separation between the two realms of divine and created. To mix God with the created realm would be to compromise God’s oneness. According to the Koran/Quran, associating something else with God is Shirk, the greatest sin.

            This oneness of power therefore means that there is no other source of power. Everything results from the will of God. Although God does allow a certain measure of freedom to creatures, giving them moral responsibility for their actions, the fact that God is almighty means that no other divine power rules or directs an individual’s life.

God has given self-revelation to humans –the Koran. Thus knowledge encompassed in the sciences and humanities, that are not contaminated by human error, lead to the same truth about God found in the Koran. No other divine power is to be discovered with human reason, all knowledge leads to God. “The unity of God thus means the unity of human knowledge.

Since sin is not of the essence of humans, it is possible to live in total submission to God’s law. In other words it is possible for humans to be perfect Muslims. For Islam, the prophets through whom God has sent revelation have all been perfect humans, completely doing God’s will. In the Muslim view failing to follow God’s commands are sin, but there are some sins more serious than others. Major sins include:

1. To believe that there are partners of God

2. To disbelieve in God, God’s prophets, or God’s books, or to deny any of the fundamental principles of Islam

3. To Lie

4. To commit adultery or other illegal sex.

5. To Steal

6. To cheat or deceive anyone

7. To bear false witness

8. To bring false charge against anyone

9. To backbite

10. To do damage to anybody or injure anyone’s feelings.

            How can one start to live a real life? Each of us has the capacity to realize God’s design. The path is active, or being in harmony with God’s “felicity” (falah). This is fundamentally a path of knowledge. Although the central concept is that of submission this is not where the path begins. Knowledge of God will bring about submission. What brings about this knowledge? Simply “iman” or faith. It is not irrational faith such as what Christianity seems to confess at times, but a faith based on rational certainty arrived at through the use of our intelligence. This is the highest form of knowledge. This ‘iman” leads one to “certain knowledge” which then leads one freely to Islam or submission.

            How do we arrive at this knowledge? It is true that God’s whole creation is full of signs that speak to us but because humans are forgetful (sin for Muslims), these signs alone are not enough. Therefore starting with Adam, God has sent reminders through the prophets for guidance on the path toward “certain knowledge and submission.” This is the role of revelations that God has sent to all peoples in all times and places. These revelations have included the Torah brought by Moses, the Gospel brought through Jesus and culminating in the Quran as the final perfect reminder. The Quran is the eternal, uncreated book, authored by God and sent down through the Prophet Mohammed. It contains the complete truth for all peoples of all times. God’s revelation challenges us to arouse our intellects from its dreaming state and to use our reason to ascertain the truth about existence. No one is compelled to accept or follow the Koran, rather they are to hear the revelation, study, examine, test, and inquire of it, until finally their reason leads them to iman (faith). If we truly follow our intellect we will arrive at the “certain knowledge” that the truth presented in the Koran is the ultimate and highest truth. For everything in the universe is of one piece in God’s design. We can be certain that “there is no God but God.”

            Knowledge achieved by intelligence on the basis of God’s guidance, then submission chosen by free will is the path of Islam.

ISLAM: GOD AS ONE   

            In Islam, the assertion that God is one (Tawid), is the “bedrock of all life and truth.” For Muslims the confession of faith is brief and to the point: “There is no God but God, and Muhammad is the messenger of God.” This is called the “Shahadah” (confession), the basic Muslim confession of faith. Reciting this with faith is what makes one a Muslim.

            When Muslims say the “shahadah” the emphasis is on the exclusion of other divine beings. The word “Allah” means “the God”. God completely fills the divine realm to the total exclusion of any other. God cannot be divided into parts. God has no competitors, no associates, no enemies, no helpers. Although Muslims do believe in the existence of angels and messengers who carry out the will of Allah. All of these creatures belong to the created realm. Only God is God.

            God is transcendent, far beyond the created realm and separate from the created world. Muslims insist on the separation between the two realms of divine and created. To mix God with the created realm would be to compromise God’s oneness. According to the Koran/Quran, associating something else with God is Shirk, the greatest sin.

            This oneness of power therefore means that there is no other source of power. Everything results from the will of God. Although God does allow a certain measure of freedom to creatures, giving them moral responsibility for their actions, the fact that God is almighty means that no other divine power rules or directs an individual’s life.

God has given self-revelation to humans –the Koran. Thus knowledge encompassed in the sciences and humanities, that are not contaminated by human error, lead to the same truth about God found in the Koran. No other divine power is to be discovered with human reason, all knowledge leads to God. “The unity of God thus means the unity of human knowledge.

Since sin is not of the essence of humans, it is possible to live in total submission to God’s law. In other words it is possible for humans to be perfect Muslims. For Islam, the prophets through whom God has sent revelation have all been perfect humans, completely doing God’s will. In the Muslim view failing to follow God’s commands are sin, but there are some sins more serious than others. Major sins include:

1. To believe that there are partners of God

2. To disbelieve in God, God’s prophets, or God’s books, or to deny any of the fundamental principles of Islam

3. To Lie

4. To commit adultery or other illegal sex.

5. To Steal

6. To cheat or deceive anyone

7. To bear false witness

8. To bring false charge against anyone

9. To backbite

10. To do damage to anybody or injure anyone’s feelings.

            How can one start to live a real life? Each of us has the capacity to realize God’s design. The path is active, or being in harmony with God’s “felicity” (falah). This is fundamentally a path of knowledge. Although the central concept is that of submission this is not where the path begins. Knowledge of God will bring about submission. What brings about this knowledge? Simply “iman” or faith. It is not irrational faith such as what Christianity seems to confess at times, but a faith based on rational certainty arrived at through the use of our intelligence. This is the highest form of knowledge. This ‘iman” leads one to “certain knowledge” which then leads one freely to Islam or submission.

            How do we arrive at this knowledge? It is true that God’s whole creation is full of signs that speak to us but because humans are forgetful (sin for Muslims), these signs alone are not enough. Therefore starting with Adam, God has sent reminders through the prophets for guidance on the path toward “certain knowledge and submission.” This is the role of revelations that God has sent to all peoples in all times and places. These revelations have included the Torah brought by Moses, the Gospel brought through Jesus and culminating in the Quran as the final perfect reminder. The Quran is the eternal, uncreated book, authored by God and sent down through the Prophet Mohammed. It contains the complete truth for all peoples of all times. God’s revelation challenges us to arouse our intellects from its dreaming state and to use our reason to ascertain the truth about existence. No one is compelled to accept or follow the Koran, rather they are to hear the revelation, study, examine, test, and inquire of it, until finally their reason leads them to iman (faith). If we truly follow our intellect we will arrive at the “certain knowledge” that the truth presented in the Koran is the ultimate and highest truth. For everything in the universe is of one piece in God’s design. We can be certain that “there is no God but God.”

            Knowledge achieved by intelligence on the basis of God’s guidance, then submission chosen by free will is the path of Islam.

DEFEND OUR BORDERS

http://defendourborders.com/

BORDERPUNDIT

http://www.saveandromeda.com/wordpress/

HILLBILLY SAVANTS

http://hillbillysavants.blogspot.com/

FACING SOUTH

http://southernstudies.org/facingsouth/

KNOX NEWS

http://knoxviews.com/

TENNESSEE POLITICS BLOG

http://www.tnpoliticsblog.com/

HILLBILLY POLITICS

http://hillbillypolitics.com/

JUST BUILD THE FENCE

http://justbuildthefence.blogspot.com/

SOUTHERN SASS

http://www.southernsass.com/Index.html

CONFEDERATE CATHOLICS

http://catholicconservatives.wordpress.com/

PATRIOT UNION OF AMERICA

http://www.patriotunion.org/

SELECTIVE HEARING

   THERE IS STILL NOTHING MENTIONABLE COMING OUT OF MIDDLESBORO KENTUCKY  BUT JOHN MCCAIN THE PSEUDO CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN PARTY NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT IS APPARENTLY INTERVIEWING PROSPECTIVE BUYERS OF HIS "TELL THEM WHAT THEY WANT TO HEAR", ALSO KNOWN AS "STRAIGHT TALK"  PLATFORM. AMONG THE REPUBLICRAT SUCK UPS ARE OF COURSE THE EVER NEO-CONISH CHARLIE CRIST THE GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA WHO ALONG WITH THE CUBAN SELL OUT MEL MARTINEZ FLIM FLAMMED THE FLORIDA PRIMARY IN MCCAINS FAVOR, BOBBY JINDAL LOUISIANA'S GOVENOR AND SON OF INDIAN IMMIGRANTS WHO WOULD NO DOUBT SUPPORT MCCAIN'S OPEN BORDER POLICIES AND THE EVER LIBERAL BUT ALWAYS CLAIMING TO BE CONSERVATIVE, MIT ROMNEY, THE MORMON'S PRIDE WHO HAS NICE HAIR AS WELL AS THE ABILITY TO CHANGE POSITIONS ON A DIME (OF COURSE IT WOULD BE YOUR DIME). ONE SHOULD NOTICE THAT MIKE HUCKABEE WHO LITERALLY BEGGED AND PLEADED TO BE MCCAIN'S MAID OF HONOR AND OBEDIENTLY SERVED THE CORPORATE AGENDA BY COMPARING THE IMMIGRATION ISSUE TO SLAVERY, COW TOWED TO THE TRAITORS AT TYSON FOODS SO THEY COULD IMPORT CHEAP LABOR AND PUT AMERICAN'S OUT OF WORK AS WELL AS EVEN OPENING A MEXICAN EMBASSY IN LITTLE ROCK HAS NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO THE MCCAIN PARTY. I MEAN GOSH DANG, DOESN'T HUCKABEE HAVE A THEOLOGY DEGREE? WOULDN'T THAT WORK WELL WITH THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT? OH THATS RIGHT, HUCKABEE LIED ABOUT THAT. WE WOULDN'T WANT ANY LIARS IN THE REPUBLICRAT PARTY NOW WOULD WE.?

     NOW BESIDES THIS, THE REVOLUTION CONTINUES TO PLOT A COURSE TO FREEDOM BY REVOLTING AGAINST THE OPEN BORDERS, FIAT MONEY, POLICE STATE CORPORATE AGENDA REPRESENTED BY THE HILLARYCRATS, OBAMAITES AND MCCAIN WAR FOR LIFE NEO-CONS WHO WANT US TO THINK THAT ALL MUSLIMS HATE AMERICANS BECAUSE THEY ARE FREE (I HEARD THE LT. GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA SAY THIS MYSELF) CROWD. YOU KNOW THEM. THEY GET ALL OF THEIR INFORMATION FROM SOUND BITES ON CNN, FOX AND MSNBC. ANYWAY, IT SHOULD BE VERY INTERESTING TO SEE HOW THE ELECTION WILL PLAY OUT. IT SEEMS THAT HILLARY THE ONCE DARLING OF THE LIBERAL LEFT HAS BEEN FORSAKEN FOR A HANDSOME, SWEET TALKING, AND  SOMEWHAT MUSLIM, BUT VERY COMMUNIST LEANING DARK SKINNED MAN FROM CHICAGO. JUST GOES TO SHOW YOU THAT THE LEFT HAS NO LOYALTY. WHAT ARE THE DIXIECRATS TO DO? I HAVE EVEN HEARD ONE YELLOW DOG DEMOCRAT FAMILY MEMBER SAY THAT SHE WOULD NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA IF GIVEN THE NOD BUT WOULD SIDE WITH MCCAIN, EVEN THOUGH SHE HAD NEVER ONCE VOTED FOR A REPUBLICAN FOR PRESIDENT. THEREFORE, WITH NO REAL CONSERVATIVES ABLE TO VOTE FOR MCCAIN, NONE OF THE DIXIECRAT CROWD ABLE TO VOTE FOR OBAMA, THE FAR LEFT NOT ABLE TO CARRY THE SOUTH AND ANYONE ELSE WITH ANY SENSE--WHO CAN WIN THE ELECTION?

     I SUPPOSE WITH OIL PRICES CONTINUING TO RISE, THE STOCK AND HOUSING MARKETS IN SHAMBLES, THE WAR IN IRAQ STILL GOING ON, OUR BORDERS WIDE OPEN SO THAT THE CORPORATIONS CAN SELL OUT THE MIDDLE CLASS, AND THE CHINESE GETTING STRONGER, WE CAN'T EXPECT MUCH FROM A POLITICAL SITUATION THAT LEAVES US WITH THREE CHOICES FROM HELL. ITS AS IF WE HAVE NERO, HITLER OR STALIN TO PICK FROM.  MAYBE ITS TIME TO START LOOKING FOR THAT CONFEDERATE GOLD AGAIN.

THE MARTYRS OF CHINA: THE SILENCE OF THE AMERICAN CATHOLIC

THE MARTYRS OF CHINA: THE SILENCE OF THE AMERICAN CATHOLIC.

BY JAMES MADISON.

Seized by a frenzy of vengeful blood lusts after weeks of suffering outside the walls, the victorious Crusaders poured through the streets, breaking open houses, shops, and mosques to butcher every man, woman, and child they could find… One of the reports to the pope read, “If you would hear how we treated our enemies at Jerusalem, know that in the portico of Solomon and in the Temple our men rode through the unclean blood of the Saracens, which came up to the knees of their horses.”… Word spread that the local Moslems sometimes swallowed their gold as the surest way to hide it, and disemboweling thereafter became a common practice in the search for plunder… Hoping to avoid the maniacal slaughter, Jews crowded into their principle synagogue to give notice that they were not Moslems. The Crusaders burnt down the synagogue, killing them all.[i]

            One might think that the gory scene described above is from an age long past. From a time when humanity was not as civilized or advanced. Since the time of the Crusaders, we have witnessed the reformation, the enlightenment, the rise of social sciences, Freud, the American and French revolutions, and ultimately the Vatican Council II with its Declaration on Religious Liberty—Dignitatis Humanae. Unfortunately, with all of these progressions in philosophical notions of liberty, human dignity, human rights, freedom of consciousness and law, there are those that are still persecuted for their beliefs, even killed, tortured, maimed and imprisoned.

            As of May 2005, fifty Bishops of the underground Roman Catholic Church in China were either in jail, under house arrest, under strict surveillance or in hiding. Some were even sent to labor re-education camps.[ii] In September five members of an evangelical Christian group were sentenced to death, with others receiving sentences from one year to life.[iii] In November, 16 sisters of the Congregation of Franciscan Missionaries of the Sacred Heart were insulted and beaten as they tried to stop the demolition of a diocesan school which the government illegally sold to a construction company.[iv] 

            The list goes on. In July, a baptismal service in Henan Province was raided by police with the pastor and others being sentenced to “15 days administrative detention”. Others present were fined. Mr. Cai Zhuohua is in prison still awaiting sentence for printing bibles.[v]

100 High School students were arrested in July at a Vocational Bible School, later interrogated and ordered not to gather again. 43 South China Church Pastors and believers were imprisoned in August with all but two being released. Having suffered “torture, humiliation and beatings”, He Baobao, a 17 year old had to be hospitalized. The two remaining in prison are reported to having been “savagely and repeatedly beaten into unconsciousness.” Two American Theology students were part of the arrest and were interrogated for hours and had their bibles seized. On August 7^th another raid on a house church resulted in 30 arrests with ten of the women being “stripped and paraded naked”.[vi] 

Later in August, 35 students were arrested along with church leaders at a Sunday School training class. Six were prosecuted for criminal offenses. Twenty-seven  more house church pastors and five American church leaders were also arrested. It is not known where they are being detained.[vii]

            On November 12^th, Roman Catholic Priest, Father Yang Jianwei and ten seminarians were arrested for not agreeing to submit to state registration and oversight. After three days of detention, six of the seminarians were released with Father Yang and the rest remaining in custody. There whereabouts are unknown.[viii]

China has a long history with Christianity. The Nestorians were the first to bring the faith to China under the Tang Dynasty in 635 C.E. Then the Franciscans evangelized it under the Mongols in the 14^th century. Matteo Ricci and the Jesuits came in 1601 and finally Robert Morrison the first Protestant missionary arrived in 1807. By 1926, China had 8000 Protestant missionaries.[ix] 

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) came to power in 1949. With the country being wracked by war and civil strife for more than a decade, the economy was stagnant with inflation reaching 700 percent. Railroads had ceased to operate and the merchant fleets had fled for Taiwan. Unemployment was rampant, as the cities were crowded with refugees.[x]

As time passed and atheistic socialism was instilled, Christian institutions were taken over by the state. Missionaries, mission boards and ecumenical councils were alienated as conflicts between Christians and the state ensued. Loyalties clashed as many Christians saw themselves as patriotic Chinese. Some, facing tremendous pressure, even renounced the faith.[xi] 

Brown summarizes the CCP position on religion as follows:

(1) Religious freedom is narrowly defined. It is something that is permitted within the four walls of a mosque, temple, or church, or something that takes place within the privacy of one’s home. This freedom does not include the right of religious ceremony or display in public places.

(2) Party and government have an obligation to promote atheism. The state is not neutral. Atheism should be promoted through education, scientific research, and propaganda, but not by force.

(3) A distinction is made between superstition and religion. Superstitious practices are harmful to the people and cannot be tolerated. The state has an obligation to protect innocent and gullible people from exploitation by fortune tellers, shamans, and the sellers of magical potions. Religion is viewed as something quite different. Though misguided, it does have some legitimacy due to its historical and social origins.

(4) Christianity is a special case. Christianity was viewed with a greater degree of antagonism and suspicion because of its historical links with the Western Powers who oppressed China and with the capitalistic system that exploited the people. Christians could be singled out and deprived of their rights as citizens, not because of their religious faith, but because of their “rightist sympathies” or because of their relationship with foreign missionaries. This was particularly true in the early years of the People’s Republic when China and the United States were at war in Korea.[xii] 

            

            With the advent of the Korean war animosity towards the West and especially the United States, came to the fore. Y.T. Wu (Wu Yaotsung), a Protestant leader who had attended Union Theological Seminary in N.Y. and was influenced by the Christian Socialist movement in the 1930s led a group of Christian leaders to meet with Premier Zhou Enlai in Beijing to discuss future government relations. Zhou ordered no more missionaries from the West inside China and restricted Chinese Christian movement. He urged the church to “rid itself of all imperialistic foreign influences”, implying that this would secure state protection of Christianity. With this in mind, Wu wrote The Christian Manifesto which was approved by the premier and published in 1950. By 1952  forty prominent Christian leaders and over forty thousand Christians had signed it.[xiii] 

            The Manifesto asked Christians to raise their “vigilance against imperialism”, “to hasten the building of a Chinese church whose affairs are managed by the Chinese themselves”, support the “common political platform”, “oppose bureaucratic capitalism” and “purge itself from imperialistic influences.” Any domestic Churches should discontinue personal and financial aid with the West as soon as possible and work towards self-reliance. The United States was singled out for “its plot to use religion in fostering the growth of reactionary forces.”[xiv]

            In October 1950 a meeting of the Chinese National Christian Council adopted the Manifesto and implemented the “Three-Self Reform” (self-government, self-support, self-propagation). This reform under the direction of the government’s Religious Affairs Bureau eventually became the Protestant Three-Self Patriotic Movement in 1954 with Y.T. Wu as its president. With the World Council of Churches approving United Nations intervention in the Korean War, T.C. Chao the Dean of the Yenching University School of Religion and one of the WCC’s six presidents resigned his position. His resignation broke all international and ecumenical relationships with the West.[xv] 

            Initiation training classes for preachers and other Christian leaders began in 1953 under the guidance of the Three-Self Committee and the Religious Affairs Bureau. In order to complete the course one was expected to write an essay about the affects of imperialism and how ones thinking had changed. “A confession of wrong doing and an affirmation of complete support for the New China was required.”[xvi]

            One aspect of this period was the “accusation meeting”. Missionaries and those who had refused to sign the manifesto were singled out for special treatment. Accusations were in a set pattern beginning with a sweeping denunciation of the accused followed by a list of specific charges, including cultural aggression, support of American imperialism, and connection with missionaries. The most famous of all denunciations was that of Rev. Wang Mingdao the pastor of an independent Protestant church in Beijing. After refusing to sign the manifesto and criticizing the Three-Self Movement, he was subject to public denunciation, arrested and sentenced to a year in jail. He was released in broken health and forced to sign a confession. After release he repudiated the confession and was arrested again. He remained in prison for 22 years being released at the age of  seventy nine in December 1979.[xvii] 

            Roman Catholics in China suffered more than Protestants. Two factors made resistance inevitable. First was the Vatican recognition of Taiwan and second the necessity of the papacy to make all appointments of bishops. These factors “accentuated the foreign nature of the church in the eyes of the Chinese.” With only one native Chinese being consecrated by the Church in the 17^th century and none during the next two hundred years, four-fifths of the bishops and two-fifths of all priests were foreigners in 1949.[xviii] 

            The “Riberi Affair” forced a break between the Vatican and the People’s Republic. Archbishop Antonio Riberi  was sent as apostolic nuncio by Pius XII in 1946. When the People’s Republic was established in 1949 the Archbishop remained at his post. With the Vatican recognition of the Nationalists in Taiwan a diplomatic impasse was created. The People’s republic waited two years for Vatican recognition while the Archbishop continued to warn of the dangers of communism, urging missionaries to stay, even in the face of persecutions and martyrdom. With the Archbishop’s organization of the Legion of Mary which translates into Chinese as the “Army of the Holy Mother”, the wrath of the Communist party ensued. In 1951 after a repudiation of the patriotic movement, the Archbishop was placed under house arrest and later escorted to the Hong Kong boarder and “unceremoniously expelled from the country.”[xix]

            Later the People’s republic tried to organize Catholics into an movement called the “Three Autonomies” which was similar to the “Three-Self Movement. Catholic Bishops countered with a statement entitled “The Church in China: Declaration of Principles”, which instructed Catholics to reject any pressure from outside to organize its inner structure, denied imperialistic connections, warned of a schism with Rome, prohibited priests from political activity, claimed the Church was moving toward leadership by native bishops and charged Catholics to love their country. In spite of the pressure, the “three Autonomies” movement was a failure. In 1954, 115 out of 143 dioceses were still resistant to the patriotic movement.[xx] 

            The resistance continued with Father John Tung (Tung Shih-chih) who refused to denounce Riberi and was imprisoned in 1951.[xxi] Father Beda Chang was also arrested in 1951 for opposing student control of Catholic schools and died from repeated beatings in prison three months later. In September of 1955 Bishop Gong Binmei (Kung Pinmei), 22 priests, 2 nuns and 300 laity were arrested, with Bishop Gong being accused of spying. A month later 15 priests and another 700 laity were arrested. With the combination of arrests and denunciation meetings sponsored by the Catholic Patriotic Association, organized resistance was finally broken.[xxii] 

            With many Bishoprics being empty due to old age, expulsion and imprisonment, the Patriotic Association issued a call for the election and consecration of new bishops to meet the shortage. Two names were sent to the Vatican with the Chinese hierarchy insisting that the election was according to canon law. The Holy see declared the elections invalid and warned of excommunications. 30 new bishops were consecrated anyway. The Vatican later announced these consecrations as “valid” but “illicit.”[xxiii] 

            At present, the Vatican estimates that there are 13 million Catholics in China with approx. 8 million worshiping in underground churches.[xxiv] Father Ricardo Ramirez, speaking on behalf of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops stated that:

“the unregistered Catholic church suffers far greater unacceptable restrictions. Its bishops, priests, religious and lay leaders are under constant surveillance, many have been arrested and jailed for simply carrying out their sacramental ministry, and not a few have paid the ultimate price for their uncompromising fidelity to their faith.”[xxv]

            

At times persecutions can take on the appearance of economic and nationalistic protections. Those who would proclaim religious liberty can be no better than a crusader whose horse has blood on its knees, if they remain silent while others suffer for their faith. This is the issue facing the American Catholic. Can we remain silent?

            Dignitatis Humanae, the Declaration on Religious Liberty put forth by Vatican Council II, declares:

            That the human person has a right to religious freedom. Freedom of this kind means that all men should be immune from coercion on the part of individuals, social groups and every human power so that, within due limits, nobody is forced to act against his convictions nor is anyone to be restrained from action in accordance with these convictions in religious matters in private or in public, alone or in associations with others.[xxvi] 

            The document goes on to say that the right to religious freedom is “based on the very dignity of the human person”. One must not be “forced to act contrary to his conscience.” It continues:

            But there are forms of government under which, despite constitutional recognition of the freedom of religious worship, the public authorities themselves strive to deter the citizens from professing their religion and make life particularly difficult and dangerous for religious bodies…This sacred council gladly welcomes the first of these two facts as a happy sign of the times. In sorrow however it denounces the second as something deplorable. The council exhorts Catholics and directs an appeal to all men to consider with great care how necessary religious liberty is, especially in the present condition of the human family.[xxvii] 

            The Catechism of the Catholic Church tells us:

            

No.1816: The disciple of Christ must not only keep the faith and live on it, but also profess it, confidently bear witness to it, and spread it: “All however must be prepared to confess Christ before men and to follow him along the way of the Cross, amidst the persecutions which the Church never lacks.” Service of and witness to the faith are necessary for salvation: “So everyone who acknowledges  me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven; but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.”[xxviii]

Pope Benedict XVI recently stated in an address to the ambassador of Eritrea, “The Catholic Church, accordingly, is deeply concerned that all citizens should be free to practice their faith and that no one should feel under threat or coercion of any kind in this regard.”[xxix]

As Catholics these documents and statements make clear what our opinion of the actions of the Chinese Government should be. As Americans what should we think?

According to the U.S. Census bureau, as of October 2005, China is our third largest trading partner, second only to Canada and Mexico. This ranks China above Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, Korea, Taiwan, France and a host of other countries. The U.S. exports 33.7 billion dollars worth of goods a year to China (4.5 %) and imports 200.6 Billion (14.6 %).[xxx] Obviously trade with China is in our national interest.

Established in 1998, The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom sets forth its mission in the following introduction to its annual report: 

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom was created by the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (IRFA) to monitor violations of the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion or belief abroad as defined in the IRFA and set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and related international instruments, and to give independent policy recommendations to the President, Secretary of State, and Congress… The Commission is the first government commission in the world with the sole mission of reviewing and making policy recommendations on the facts and circumstances of violations of religious freedom globally. By providing reliable information and analysis, and careful and specific policy recommendations, the Commission provides the U.S. Government and the American public with important tools necessary to promote this fundamental freedom throughout the world.[xxxi] 

            In the report, religious freedom is said to be “A national security, as well as human rights imperative.” After September 11^th 2001, promotion of religious freedom has become a “keystone of regional peace and American security.” It is in our “self interest” to pursue foreign policies that assist those persecuted for their religious beliefs and “ensure that international rights to religious freedom be respected for every individual.” Quoting President Bush, the report states that “engaging in this struggle requires a political as well as military approach” and the commissions serves to promote such a political strategy in the following ways [Italics mine]:

(1) by encouraging governments throughout the world to adopt policies that promote the right of each individual to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion or belief, along with policies to prevent abuses and punish perpetrators of abuses, so that religious differences and potential fault lines within societies may be addressed in ways that increase freedom, prosperity, and stability; (2) by encouraging the adoption of new structural and constitutional arrangements that ensure religious freedom and related human rights so that debate and dissent from prevailing orthodoxies within majority traditions, and alternative voices from within those traditions, can be given the breathing room necessary to emerge; (3) by confronting the global propagation of government-funded ideologies that are rooted in religious hated and extremism, especially in the case of Saudi Arabian regime’s propagation of Wahhabism, a highly intolerant form of Islam that directs Muslims actively to hate those who hold different views and to reject democracy as “un-Islamic”; and (4) by denouncing arbitrary and abusive repression of persons, organizations, or activities by governments on account of religion, on the basis that such repression can be counterproductive and can fuel religious extremism, hatred, and violence that spill outside national boarders.[xxxii]

In regards to China, it “continues to engage in systematic and egregious violations of religious freedom.” In 2004, conditions for religious freedom “deteriorated”. Religious leaders continue to be “confined, tortured, imprisoned and subjected to other forms of ill treatment” and since 1999 the Commission has recommended that China be designated as a “country of particular concern” or CPC.[xxxiii]

In November of 2004, the Chinese government announced a new set of regulations on religious affairs but experts say these regulations are not issued to protect the security of religious believers, but “to regularize management practices which give Party leaders more extensive control.” The regulations are heralded by Chinese leaders as “a significant step forward in the protections of religious freedom.” Contained in the regulations are fines and criminal punishments “for groups engaging in religious activities without having registered with the official ‘patriotic’ religious organizations.”[xxxiv] 

Provincial level directives, “prohibit participation of minors in religious activity or education” and the “campaign against evil cults” has targeted long established Protestant and Catholic groups who have refused to register. Pastor Gong Shengliang of the South China Church was sentenced to death for founding an “evil cult” and his family remains in jail facing “serious charges and are allegedly subject to torture and other ill treatment.”[xxxv]

Protestant groups that refuse to register are subject to “intimidation, extortion, harassment, detention and the closing of their churches.” In 2004 the government carried out large-scale raids on several house churches, with over a 100 pastors being detained, and then released. 18 remain in custody. Church historian Zhang Yinan was arrested along with 100 others and was sentenced to two years of “re-education through labor”. Others were sentenced to terms of one to three years for sending materials on Christian persecutions to organizations in the U.S. One woman died in custody while being detained for “distributing bibles.”[xxxvi]

Repressions of the unregistered Roman Catholic Church continue. Twenty priests are under arrest, imprisoned or detained including Bishop Su Zhimin, who has been in detention or under surveillance since the 1970s. In 2004 Bishop Gao Kexian died of unknown causes while in prison. “In September 2004, the Vatican issued a statement condemning the arrest of eight priests and two seminarians during a religious gathering.” A Bishop and two priests were arrested for refusal to register two weeks after the death of Pope John Paul II in April 2005.[xxxvii]

Under threats from the State Department to introduce a resolution at the UN Commission on Human Rights, the Chinese Government made a public announcement that “religious education of minors is consistent with Chinese law and policy” and new regulations were enacted that “exempt small family or home worship activities from governmental registration.” The report says that “similar promises were mentioned the last time the United States decided to forgo a resolution.”[xxxviii] 

In summary, the commission continues to recommend that China be designated as a CPC and that the U.S. government should:

·        Urge the Chinese government to end its crackdown on religious groups. Respect fully the “universality” of the right to freedom of religion, and Ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

·        Provide incentives, including breaks on Export-Import Loans and OPIC insurance rates to U.S. companies who promote international standards of human rights including the promotion of religion.

·        Endeavor to establish an official U.S. government presence in Lhasa Tibet to monitor religious freedom.

·        Expand public diplomacy efforts in china by, supporting exchanges between Chinese government officials and U.S. academic experts and religious communities.[xxxix]

On November 9^th 2005 just days before the visit of President Bush to China the United States Commission on Religious Freedom held a China Human Rights Forum on Capitol Hill entitled Talking with China about Human Rights: Assessing the Future of Bilateral Human Rights Dialogues. USCIRF Chair Preeta D. Bansal testified at the hearing on the current situation with respect to Chinese repression of religion. She stated:

Advancing the freedom of religion and belief cannot be considered a marginal issue, but is foundational to a whole range of U.S. interests. Respect for the freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief is a critical indicator of stable trading partners, stable allies and stable regions. The government of China does not treat religion as a side issue, but views religious adherents, religious communities and religious leaders through the lens of security. The United States should not ignore this fact and should fashion policies and actions that integrate the right of thought, conscience, religion, and belief with security and economic interests.[xl]

The Commission issued new recommendations that included, strengthening bilateral human rights dialogues with China, advancing a multilateral resolution at the UN Commission on Human Rights, organize meetings of involved nations to coordinate technical cooperation and capacity building programs in China, Provide incentives for U.S. businesses to promote human rights in china and review all U.S. foreign aid funding and public diplomacy programs for China to include the promotion and protection of religious freedom, as required by the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA).[xli]

President Bush visited China on November 19^th 2005. After attending a state sanctioned church service he made it clear that he had found the worship genuine. “The spirit of the Lord is very strong inside your church” he told Du Fengying, who gave the sermon. The President added that his “hope is that the government of China will not fear Christians who gather to worship openly.” Later that week in Japan, Bush urged China to allow its people, “to worship without state control and to print bibles and other sacred texts without fear of punishment.”[xlii] According to BosNewsLife News Center, Zhang Mingxuan an influential house church leader and his son who were kidnapped by Chinese security forces, was released on Monday, November 21 just hours after President Bush left China although it is unclear whether pressure from the President played a part in the decision to release the detained Christians.[xliii] 

After Pope Benedict XVI indicated in November 2005 that he wished to restore diplomatic relations which were severed in 1951, China responded by saying the Vatican must not interfere in China's internal affairs and must sever ties with Taiwan.[xliv] Even with this said indications of a “thaw” in relations between the Vatican and the Chinese government are appearing. An issue of La Civilta Cattolica, a Jesuit Journal, contained an article entitled China Is Opening Up by Jesuit Hans Waldenfels. He wrote there were, “signs of a future understanding” due to a tacit deal on the nomination of bishops. According to Waldenfels, Bishops consecrated by the official community in China usually seek to obtain nomination by the Holy See. This assessment matched a report by the Archbishop of Hong Kong in a speech given to bishops gathered in Vatican City . According to the Archbishop, Bishops who had not been certified by the pope were being refused by clergy and congregations in China. He also said that the Vatican was moving to recognize Bishops appointed by the government.[xlv]

Where does all this place the Catholic American? With more Christians killed in the 20^th century than in the previous nineteen centuries combined,[xlvi] what does one do to stop this oppression? Although my reading of the Annual Report of the U.S. Commission On International Religious Freedom alludes to the fact that the U.S. can and will use its military might to intervene in states that cannot or will not work to provide its citizens the rights of freedom of conscious, armed conflict with China is out of the question. In November Pope Benedict XVI, in an address to Nepal’s new ambassador to the Holy See stated, “The use of violence as a tool for political change must always be avoided, while the building of mutual understanding and the constructive exchange of ideas is at all times to be upheld.”[xlvii] With this in mind we must continue to pressure China on religious freedom issues. Although the Commissions recommendations are valid they are not enough. Members of Catholic organizations such as Pax Christi, Catholic Charities, The Knights of Columbus, The Legion of Mary, Opus Dei, Catholic Relief Services, and The National Association of Catholic Families, should be alerted to this oppression and asked to stage a boycott of American companies that do business with China unless those companies press the Chinese government for reforms. Pamphlets about the issue should be distributed to parishes around the nation, while letters could be written to Fortune 500 companies demanding action. The only way to force the Chinese government into compliance with the “universality” of the right to freedom of religion, is through attacking the capitalistic structures that feed it.

             It is my further recommendation that those concerned with this issue, write his or her local Bishop requesting prayer services and mass for those martyred in China. These services and masses should alert the American Catholic to the persecutions of their fellow Christians. Once the issue is well known, surely the Holy Spirit will begin to move the American Church.

             Lastly, a letter, call, fax or email to Foreign Ministry Spokesman Qin Gang, regarding the Christian Persecutions would continue the pressure that the Commission on International Religious Freedom, the UN, The Vatican, and those in the underground Churches in China are applying.

Embassy of the People’s Republic of China

2300 Connecticut Ave NW

Washington DC 20008

Tel: (202) 328-2500 Fax: (202) 588-0032

Director of Religious Affairs: (202) 328-2512

Email: Chinaembassy_US@fmprc.gov.cn

          

  In conclusion, I ask you to remember the words of St. Justin Martyr:

            To all our persecutors we say: “you are our brethren; apprehend, rather, the truth of God.” But when neither they nor you will listen to us, but you do all in your power to force us to deny Christ, we resist you and prefer to endure death, confident that God will give us all the blessing which He promised us through Christ.[xlviii]             

---

[i] Robinson, John J. Born In Blood: The Lost Secrets Of Freemasonry. N.Y.: M. Evans and Company, 1989. Pgs. 64-65.

[ii] “Religious Repression Accompanies China’s Desire To Establish Ties With Vatican: Substantial Change Needed Before Religious Freedom For Catholics Is Reality”; Available at www.freedomhouse.org/religion/news/bn2005/bn-2005-05-19.htm. Accessed December 05, 2005.

[iii] “Furor Over Death Sentences of 5 in Chinese Church Group”;  Available at China Aid Online, http://www.chinaaid.org/english_site/stories_detail.php?id+24. Accessed December 18, 2005

[iv] “Religious Freedom a Key to Peace, Says Holy See”; Available from Zenit News Agency, http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid+81218. Accessed December 12 2005.

[v] Kendal, Elizabeth. China: Defiantly Intensifying Persecution. Christian International News, Available at  http://www.christiannewstoday.com/CWN_810.html. Accessed December 18, 2005.

[vi] Kendal. http://www.christiannewstoday.com/CWN_810.html

[vii]Kendal. http://www.christiannewstoday.com/CWN_810.html 

[viii] “In china, President Bush Should Press For Religious Prisoner Releases: Underground Roman Catholic Priest and 10 Seminarians Arrested on Eve of President’s Visit”. Available at http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/news/bn2005/bn-2005-11-18.htm. Accessed December 5 2005.

[ix] Brown, Thompson G. Christianity in the People’s Republic of China. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1986. Pg. 10.

[x] Brown, pg. 62

[xi] Brown, pg. 75

[xii] Brown, pg. 77-78

[xiii]Brown, pg. 80-83. It should be noted that the Anglican delegation refused to sign the Manifesto. 

[xiv] Brown, pg. 83-84

[xv] Brown, pg.. 84

[xvi] Brown, pg. 85

[xvii] Brown, pg. 86.

[xviii] Brown, pg. 86-87

[xix] Brown, pg. 87

[xx] Brown, pg. 88

[xxi] Brown states that “reports in 1965 indicated he [Father Tung] was working in a labor camp in a remote area and in good spirits.” Pg. 89 I could find no further information on Father Tungs whereabouts beyond Brown’s work.

[xxii] Brown, pg. 89

[xxiii] Brown, pg. 90

[xxiv] www.freedomhouse.org/religion/news/bn2005/bn-2005-05-19.htm.

[xxv]  http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/news/bn2005/bn-2005-11-18.htm

[xxvi] Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents. Ed. Austin Flannery, O.P. Vol. 1, N.Y.: Costello Publishing, 2004. pg. 800, chapter 1:2

[xxvii] Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents. Pg. 800,801,811-812, chapter 1:2,3; chapter 2:15.

[xxviii] Catechism of the Catholic Church. N.Y.: Doubleday, 1997. The two quotes inside the passage are from LG 42; cf. DH 14 and Mt. 10:32-33.

[xxix] “Papal Address to Eritrea’s New Ambassador: Concerned That All Citizens Should Be Free To Practice Their Faith.” ; Available at www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=81094. Accessed on December 18 2005.

[xxx] Top Trading Partners-Total Trade, Exports, Imports. http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/top/top0510.html. Accessed on December 18, 2005.

[xxxi] Annual Report Of The U.S. Commission On International Religious Freedom. May 2005. Available at www.uscirf.gov.  Pg. 1

[xxxii] Annual Report Of The U.S. Commission On International Religious Freedom. May 2005. pgs. 2-3.

[xxxiii] Annual Report Of The U.S. Commission On International Religious Freedom. May 2005. pg. 55

[xxxiv] Annual Report Of The U.S. Commission On International Religious Freedom. May 2005. pgs. 55-56.

[xxxv] Annual Report Of The U.S. Commission On International Religious Freedom. May 2005. pg. 57

[xxxvi] Annual Report Of The U.S. Commission On International Religious Freedom. May 2005. Pg. 58

[xxxvii] Annual Report Of The U.S. Commission On International Religious Freedom. May 2005. pg. 58

[xxxviii] Annual Report Of The U.S. Commission On International Religious Freedom. May 2005. pgs. 58-59

[xxxix] Annual Report Of The U.S. Commission On International Religious Freedom. May 2005. Pgs. 59-60. There are more recommendations but they do not apply to this paper.

[xl] Focus, “China Forum and Testimony on Capital Hill”; available at http://www.uscirf.gov/hearings/18/Nov04/testimony.php3; accessed December 05, 2005.

[xli] http://www.uscirf.gov/hearings/18/Nov04/testimony.php3 [Italics mine]

[xlii] Goodenough, Patrick. Bush’s Visit to Beijing Church Emphasizes Religious Freedom.;  Available at http://www.crosswalk.com/news/religiontoday/1364523.html. Accessed December 18 2005.

[xliii]  BosNewsLife News Center. China Releases Kidnapped House Church After Bush Visit.; Available at http://www.worthynews.com/christian-persecution/china-relieases-kidnapped.html. Accessed December 18, 2005.

[xliv] “U.S. Backs Vatican Improved China Relations.”; Available at  http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=17753. Accessed December 18, 2005.

[xlv] Williams, Daniel. Thaw Seen In Vatican-China Relations. The Washington Post.;  Available at  http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=5523. Accessed December 18, 2005.

[xlvi] U.S. House Resolution. Scripps-Howard News Service, September 28, 1996. Available at http://www.worship.com/help/. Accessed December 5 2005.

[xlvii] “Papal Discourse to New Nepalese Ambassador: Violence as a Tool for Political Change Must Always Be Avoided.” ; Available at http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=81165. Accessed December 18, 2005.

[xlviii] The Book Of Catholic Quotations. N.Y.: Farrar, Straus and Cudahy, 1956. pg. 583.

THE THREE MEN I ADMIRE THE MOST THE FATHER SON AND HOLY GHOST: THE MIND, BODY AND SOUL OF MYSTICAL CHRISTIANITY

THE THREE MEN I ADMIRE THE MOST THE FATHER, SON AND HOLY GHOST: THE MIND, BODY AND SOUL OF MYSTICAL CHRISTIANITY BY JAMES MADISON

INTRODUCTION

     As one might notice, I have used the lines of a famous folk tune from the 1970s as an opening to this paper. One could guess that many would recognize the ending words to Don McLean’s “American Pie” but more than that one would assume that Christians would recognize the Trinity doctrine in the title. This doctrine of three persons in one God has a rich history in the early church culminating in the finalization of terms at the Council of Calchedon in 451 C.E. This paper will not give you this rich history nor discuss the debates and views of heretics and Church fathers on the subject but will offer the reader something much more, that few if any care to hear about much less wish to delve into. This is the tradition of Christian mysticism and how it has brought something more to the table in light of the Trinitarian God. This tradition of which little is commonly known spans the centuries from the beginning of Christianity to contemporary times. It is little discussed and usually feared. Mystics, although generally not taken seriously keep the doctrine of the trinity alive for Christianity. Not alive in the sense of long boring theological treatises written by theologians with too much time on their hands, but alive in the Mind, Body and Soul of the religion-alive in experience. As Kallistos Ware says:

St. John Climacus, like St. Symeon the New Theologian and St. Gregory Palamas at a later date, lays heavy emphasis upon the need for personal experience. Christianity, as he sees it, is much more than the exterior acceptance of doctrines and rules. No one can be a true Christian at second hand; there must be a personal encounter, in which each knows, sees, tastes and touches for himself.

     Here we will examine the visions and experiences of a few Christian mystics throughout the ages. We shall begin with two men, St. John Climacus and St. Gregory Palamas, proceed to the ecstatic experiences of the Beguines and of the middle ages and finish with the contemporary charismatic movements of the mystical tradition. My hope here is to establish a pattern or circle, of what the tradition of mysticism means to Christianity and how it truly drives the religion beyond static theological boundaries and keeps it genuinely mystical and genuinely Trinitarian.

THE MIND

St. John Climacus:

     Concerning “visions and revelations” Saint Paul says: I know a person in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven, whether in the body or out of the body I do not know; God knows. And I know that such a person whether in the body or out of the body I do not know; God knows, was caught up into paradise and heard things that are not to be told that no mortal is permitted to repeat.

     This experience St. Paul tells us of, although certainly not the beginning of Christian esoterica, displays the propensity and acceptance of early Christianity to the mystical side.

     John Climacus (“ladder” in Greek) known for his work The Ladder of Divine Descent was apparently well educated for he is also referred to as John Scholasticus. It is commonly accepted that he was born near 579 C.E. and died around 649 C.E. The Ladder is written for ascetic monks at the monastery of Raithu who asked St. John to, “tell us of our ignorance” while he was the Abbot at the monastery of Mt. Sinai.

     St. John begins The ladder of Divine Descent as such: "When writing to the servants of God, one should begin with our God and King Himself, the good, the supremely good, the all-good. One may notice immediately St. John’s emphasis on the neo-platonic notion of God as “the good, the supremely good, the all-good.” For St. John, man is “rational” and “endowed” with free will. In other words the mind and the mind’s concept of God is his point of departure. God is transcendent and beyond. God is the “outpouring of light” the “life of all free beings”, the glimpse of the sun, or the changes in weather” an “everlasting creator” who dispenses a “divine law”. After he establishes what God is and before turning to the life of a monk he supplies one line to mention this: “A Christian is an imitator of Christ in thought, word and deed, as far as this is humanly possible, and he believes rightly and blamelessly in the Holy Trinity.”

     As one can see, Christ and the Holy Trinity are but a passing note. By my count, St. John mentions Christ only 32 times, Jesus only 6, the spirit 6, the Holy Spirit 4, the Spirit of the Lord once, the Paraclete once, the Word once, and the Trinity only 6 times. The focus is entirely on God in the abstract, demons and virtues. For a 218 page, tract on the life of obtaining virtue to please God and gain salvation for ascetic monks, I find the lack of focus on Christianity’s most mystical doctrine to be interesting.

     When St. John uses the term Trinity he uses it doctrinally in every passage except one: “Purity makes of a disciple someone who can speak of God, and he can move on to a knowledge of the Trinity”. This line comes on the page before last of the ladder. It is preceded by these lines:

The growth of fear is the starting point of love and total purity is the foundation for theology. When a man is perfectly united to God, then what God has said is somehow mysteriously clarified. But where there is no union of this kind, then it is extremely difficult to speak about God. “The consubstantial Word brings purity to completion, and His presence destroys death, and when death is done away with, the disciple of sacred knowledge is illuminated. The Word of the Lord, being from the Lord, remains eternally pure.

According to the translator Norman Russell, when St. John uses the term “theology” he means, “The knowledge of God from experience rather than from study”. The last two pages are spent exhorting love as the ultimate virtue and plainly stating that, “for indeed, God is love”. This returns us to experience of God as the starting place of being Christian. It is further interesting to note that of St. John’s five mentions of theologians, three of them are referring to Gregory of Nazianzus one of the Cappadocian fathers.

     Let us recall that St. John is speaking to ascetic monks. These monks are known as Hesychasts (hermits). These mystics or “warriors and athletes of Christ” are seeking a direct experience of God and St. John is instructing them on how to attain such. “Those with a mind accustomed to true prayer talk directly to the Lord…Now if you have learned the technique of prayer systematically, then you will certainly grasp what I am saying”. According to Evagrius Ponticus, one of the first Christian monastics of the 4th century who inspired Hesychasts for centuries to come, prayer is “the highest activity of the mind” an “accent of the mind to God”, this “prayer of the mind” is the ultimate goal of a Hesychast. It is “natural” to the mind and establishes the natural relationship with God.

     The prayer St. John refers to is known as The Jesus Prayer: “Lord Jesus Christ Son of God, have mercy on me”. As we shall see in our next section this particular prayer becomes established in Christian mystical circles.

St. Gregory Palamas:

     The views of Evagrius on prayer, which so influenced the Hesychast movement, were based in neo-Platonism that conceived the mind as existing without matter and naturally divine. Mainstream Eastern Spiritual tradition of which Gregory Palamas belongs to understood and practiced Evagrius’ “mental prayers” in a Christocentric light whereas the mind was not opposed to matter. This “mental prayer” became the Jesus Prayer. A prayer which brought about a “personal experience of God”, without which according to St. Symeon, there is no true Christianity.

     St. Gregory Palamas (1296-1359), in his work the Triads, defends the Hesychast monks against a certain Barlaam the Calabrian who felt that secular education was the path to wisdom and therefore the only path to God, whereas the Hesychasts profess to have attained through the Jesus Prayer a spiritual knowledge of the Deity. While both parties agree to the transcendence of God, St. Gregory’s theology provides a means to experience, participate in and know God through his divine energies. These energies are not identical with the divine hypostasis but are possessed and exercised in a commonality of the Three Divine Persons of the Trinity. Participation in these energies allow one to “share the life of God and be deified” letting God reveal himself “positively” to the spiritual senses without loosing transcendence.

     For Barlaam, using an Aristotelian approach, human knowledge can only be based on the senses. He admits the possibility of an illumination of the mind that transcends the senses but this illumination must remain within the mind’s nature. Knowledge of God can only be symbolic or relative. For St. Gregory this is a confrontation of the nature of Christian experience itself. Although both combatants agree on the via negative or apophatic theology in regards to experience of God, St. Gregory sees it as only signifying the inability to know God without a transfiguration of the spirit. One can transcend his nature and experience directly the energies of God. In other words since one is created in the divine image, he possesses an “organ of vision” that is neither the senses or the intellect. Therefore the Hesychasts, through the use of the Jesus Prayer do actually and directly experience the energies, but not the essence of God.

     St. Gregory’s theology brings the experience of God and the concept of God out of and away from the mental constructs of static theologies like Barlaam’s. As St. John Climacus begins The Ladder with a mental concept of God and finishes with a mystical experience of Love which is God himself, St. Gregory moves us further into an immanent Trinity that can be directly experienced through its energies and not only with the mind or by naturalistic means.

     These two mystical theologians that we have seen so far have attempted to retain or even placate the theologies that hold God as some sort of Greek philosophical construct while not denying a direct experience of the divine. Although St. John seems to hold that this experience can only be gained through virtue and then prayer, St. Gregory leans more towards the mystical experience being delivered through the Jesus Prayer itself first and virtue second, which shows more of a Christological focus. The point here of course is that neither of these men, although supporting the current conceptual and static theologies, will deny a mystical and direct experience of God. Therefore they push theology, the Church and Christianity beyond any static position.

THE BODY

     According to Rowan Williams, early Christian spirituality was shaped by two convictions, 1. “that Christian identity was a matter of coming to share by God’s gift the relation that eternally subsists between the Logos and the divine source” (Climacus) and 2. “what we encounter in prayer is never capable of being reduced to a finished conceptual scheme” (Palamas). These convictions are concerns about the relationship between God and being in general or between God and mind.

     In this section we will attempt to display the experiences of the Beguines as a concentration on the mystical experience as manifested in and of the body. These experiences go once again beyond the mental concepts of orthodox theologies and surpass the previously mentioned convictions of early Christianity. In other words these experiences are immanent in the body of these mystics and not just in the mind.

In those days God made manifest his power through the frail sex, in these handmaidens he filled with the prophetic spirit.

The Beguines:

     According to Emilie Zum Brunn and Georgette Epiney-Burgard, the Beguines are marked by the distinctions between the philosophical, theological and mystical perspectives that are common today. They are “specialists” in the mystical tradition and have an ultimate aim to transcend themselves and be “melted into God”. The virtues become an “imperfect” and “preliminary stage” with no need to recourse to the ecclesiastical hierarchy. A freed soul can take leave of these without formality, even surpassing the need for God (duality) to become God himself.      

     Mechthild the author of The Flowing Light of the Godhead, tells us "I neither wish nor am able to write anything, unless I see it with the eyes of my soul and hear it with the ears of my eternal spirit, feeling in all the parts of my body the strength of the Holy Spirit" She is serious when she mentions “all the parts of my body” for she actually makes love to God.

When the poor soul comes to court, she is wise and courtly, and so she looks upon her God with joy. Ah, with what great love she is received there. She is silent, intensely longing that He should praise her. Then with great desire He shows her His divine heart: it is like reddish gold, burning in a large charcoal fire. Then He places her in His ardent heart so that the Noble Prince and the little servant girl embrace and are united, as water and wine. Then she is brought to nought and abandons herself, as if she had no strength left, while He is sick with love for her, as He has always been, for (in this desire) there can be neither growth nor lessening. Thus she speaks: "Lord, You are my consolation, my desire, my flowing fountain, my sun, and I am your mirror." Such is the journey to court of the loving soul, who cannot be without God… Then the Most Beloved goes toward the Most Beautiful in the hidden chambers of the invisible Deity. There she finds the couch and the pleasure of Love, and God awaiting her in a superhuman fashion. This is what Our Lord says:- Stay, Lady Soul.--What is your wish, Lord?--That you should be naked.--Lord, how can this happen to me?--Lady Soul, you are so "co-natured" in Me that nothing can be interposed between you and Me. Never for one single hour was any angel given the honor that is bestowed on you for all Eternity.

     I know of no other way to display this bodily experience of the divine that the mystic Mechthild experiences except through her own words. She refers to herself as God’s fiancée and speaks to each member of the trinity. As she grows old God finally “withdraws” from her and, as Brunn and Epiney-Burgard have it, Mechthild corrects the traditional Platonic formula of the purgative, illuminative, and unitive ways, when she says: 'It is the nature of Love to flow first in sweetness, then She becomes rich in knowledge, and thirdly She demands and desires to be rejected'.

     Beatrice of Nazareth (1200-1268) the author of The Seven Manners Of Love, slept on thorns, scourged herself and fasted due to the belief that one is incapable by one’s own efforts of attaining union with the supremely Good—God. Feeling the attraction of God gives the mystic a desire to follow Christ resulting in an almost “unbearable tension of will.” This desire leads to these violent exterior manifestations. The ecstatic Beatrice’s aim is to “reform her nature that has been wounded by sin and return to the purity of the state in which she was created”.

     At Christmas mass Beatrice has a vision of God as the source of a river. The river is Christ and all who drink from it are graced. After she retains her senses, she realizes through prayer that she should devote her life to charity, the service of others. At some time later she has another vision of being above the world where she sees that she remains “inseparably united to the Divine Essence by the embraces of charity.” After this experience “she became aware that she loved herself perfectly for Christ's sake.”

     At this point Beatrice begins in the Seventh Manner of Holy Love to write about her relationship to God as if it were a relationship to a husband or lover.

The Betrothed knows still one more manner of sublime Love which submits her to a hard inward toil: attracted by a Love which is above her humanity, above human reason and intelligence, above all the heart's operations, drawn exclusively by Eternal Love in the eternity of love, in the incomprehensibility, in the inaccessible breadth and height, in the profound abyss of the Divinity Who is "all in all things" and Who remains unknowable above all things, unchangeable, the plenitude of Being Who embraces all in His power, intelligence and sovereign work. The blessed soul is so tenderly engulfed in love, so strongly drawn by desire, that her tormented heart is gnawed with impatience and her infatuated mind is overwhelmed by the strength of these desires.

She goes on to call God “spouse” and to speak of being away from him as “exile” of which “she cannot be, nor wishes to be, consoled”.

     Our last Beguine, Marguerite Porete was burned at the stake on June 1, 1310 for refusing to answer to the inquisition about her work, The Mirror of Simple Shattered Souls. Her work was referred to as “a source of dangerous illusions to those who do not possess an adequate spiritual preparation.” The aim of the mirror is to teach a “super-rational” truth that will render the soul simple. Therefore “annihilating oneself in God through love” she melts into him. Transformed through contemplation we resemble or mirror what we contemplate. Presented in the form of a play with the allegorical character of Soul being transformed and led to Lady Love, who represents God in his essence, The Mirror describes a spiritual combat that leads to the abandonment of reason, will and virtue, resulting in peace. Having abandoned her own being, her own identity, the mystic becomes or is transformed into the being of God. Ontologically she does not exist. Only God exists.

     The Mirror creates a Trinitarian mysticism of Lover, Beloved and Love, which results in Marguerite’s view that “If nobody had sinned except myself alone, You would nevertheless have redeemed my soul, turned from Your love, by being nailed naked to the Cross for me and by using Your well-ordained power to destroy sin. Thus, Lord, all You have suffered in Your sweet humanity You have suffered for me, as if nobody else had sinned, but myself alone.”

     We see that these women experience God directly in his essence. Heresy to the early and middle Church Fathers, virtue, will, reason, the Church and even God and the Trinity are surpassed in these experiences of total negation of the ontological self to literally melt into God. The orthodox theologies of the mind and the abstract deity are abandoned by the Beguines. Although there is some sense of seeking to placate the ecclesial powers, these women experience the Trinitarian God literally in the Body through courtly love. Although St. John Climacus and St. Gregory Palamas also hold to an experience of God albeit through love in the mind, the Beguines take the further step of making the totally transcendent God the participating Trinity. To be blunt, the Beguines have what I would call a human experience of God that beats back static theology.

THE SOUL

Jeanne-Marie Bouvier de la Mothe-Guyon:

     As we have moved from the ascetic monks (Climacus) to the monastic and orthodox monks (Palamas) to the mystical Beguines, we require one further link that displays the movement of the soul or Spirit of Christianity before entering our contemporary world. This link is Jeanne-Marie Bouvier de la Mothe-Guyon ( 1648-1717). Making no claim to learning, but being divinely inspired, Guyon held that she too held an apostolic mission in the vein of Marguerite Porete. She refused to answer to ecclesial authorities and denied the “pre-existing model of a female Sainthood.”

Indeed, because she lived at the end of the seventeenth century, Guyon, in many ways, is different from mystics of the tradition, whether they be thought orthodox or heretical. In previous centuries, women whose apostolic missions and charismatic dispositions could not be muted were nevertheless forced into convents, put under strict clerical supervision, or simply eliminated. In any case, they had to considerably tone down any claim to apostleship. By contrast, Guyon, who claimed to be divinely called to apostolic work outside the convent and even the hierarchy of the church, managed to outsmart the clerics who pressed her to enter a convent or some other religious congregation by invoking the very principles of the Council of Trent.

     Guyon preached the spiritual practice of the simple presence of God, losing the self in God without the use of images. This form of detachment or pure love was the ultimate union with God and could be achieved now. Her teachings led to condemnation by the Church and as Bruneau has it “Catholicism evacuated its own mystical tradition.” Nevertheless, the “negative mysticism” of Guyon “found a viable philosophy for this time of transition”, that created new claims for the individual. These ideas that centered on the conscience of the individual and personal experience of the modernist period used Guyon’s work as support (Schopenhauer and Kierkegaard ). “The difference between Guyon and earlier advocates of religious freedom is that, unlike many schismatics who demanded the respect of their individual conscience but did not extend the same respect to others, Guyon did both. She is known to have professed that she ‘would rather die than to distance herself in the least from the Spirit of the Church.”

     As we move on into the contemporary period, Guyon’s attachment to the “Spirit of the Church” becomes our starting point for displaying the next generation of mystics. These women also will abandon traditional roles and assume their apostolic mission to the world and the Church. Let us proceed.

Rebecca Cox Jackson:

     “There was no mortal that I told go to and gain instruction, so it pleased God in His love and mercy to teach me in dreams and visions and revelation and gifts.”

     Becoming a “new creature” at the age of 35 in 1830 Rebecca Cox Jackson (1795-1871), began a 40 year career as a preacher and founder of the Black Shaker community in Philadelphia. As a “chosen instrument of the will of God” she recorded her manifestations “of a sacred force that came to her from outside.” Looking beyond sanctification she searched for a holiness, “embodied in communal relationships and institutions”.

     Sitting still enabled her to listen and discern the inner voice that paralyzed her and gave her seizures. Practicing self-mortification and celibacy forced her to leave her husband for, "My dreams became a burden to my family." She received gifts of “foresight” and “power” from which she even was able to stop a thunderstorm. In a series of visions in 1843 she experienced God appearing as a woman, Holy Mother Wisdom who had a face, "like a full moon, with the glory of the sun reflecting from Her head," protecting the congregation. In 1862, she would see this:

Thursday morning, November 20, 1862, I received this gift. A knowledge of the Holy Spirit, as proceeding from the Four-in-One Union, with all the work of God, both in time and in eternity. Here I saw how it was that nothing was made without the Son. I also saw that Holy Mother Wisdom was one with the Father, and Her Daughter was one with Her. Thus I saw that the Bridegroom and the Bride was before the world was. I then began to understand the number four, as often spoken of--the one river that divided into four, the four-horned altar, the four foundations, the four winds to blow from the four corners of the heavens. I also saw the four quarters of the earth, which represents the spirit world. I then understood the sin against the Holy Ghost, for that is to sin against the gift of God, which is faith, to sin against the gift of Wisdom, which is charity, without which we are nothing, and to sin against the gift of the Son, which is mercy, without which no soul can be saved; and to sin against the gift of the Bride, which is peace--and without peace, no soul can find a heavenly rest. Here is the gift of the Four Spirits in One Union, to save that which was lost.

     We can notice that Rebecca Jackson, an uneducated Black woman of the 19th century follows the usual pattern of the mystical tradition of Christianity. She finishes her career by writing a theology of the Holy Spirit while founding a religious community. Although this theology is far from orthodox it suffices to display the trend towards the Spirit in contemporary mysticism and how this movement challenges static theologies. One could say that her Trinity was immanent in the sense of the ontological dynamics of Gift, Giver and Gifting, since in a Gift economy the Gifted is obligated. Rebecca Jackson never dropped her obligation.

Kathryn Kuhlman:

     The red-haired lady evangelist Kathryn Kuhlman (1907-1975), often experienced terrible fright before her miracle services. Her fear of not having the Holy Spirit upon her when literally thousands came to be healed racked her with anxiety. Referred to as a “handmaiden of God” and “America’s greatest lady preacher” she led the “most prominent healing ministries of the entire twentieth century.”

     Born-again at the age of fourteen in Concordia Missouri, Kathryn became an evangelist at sixteen, preaching at seventeen and began her own ministry at twenty- eight. Married once, but feeling the “weight of God's call upon her”, she divorced and returned to ministry. While she preached on the power of the Holy Spirit, the first miracle occurred in April of 1947. The following year she began her miracle services. Before her death her ministry was carried on 50 radio stations and 60 television stations.

     Her ability to heal she professed was not her own but came directly from the Holy Spirit. Her ministry attracted followers from all walks of life and had an ecumenical spirit that “bridged the gap between Protestants and Catholics.” Uneducated and from humble upbringings, she once reasoned with God that “if you can take nothing and use it then here is nothing.” With, “the most unorthodox ministry in the world” she healed literally thousands of people of which she herself was one of the most surprised. With a constant emphasis on the “baptism of the Holy Spirit”, her ministry prompted Jamie Buckingham to say, "On a planet ravaged by disease and spiritual darkness she represented that one ingredient without which mankind is doomed--hope".

     Here we can see, in this section the liberationist and ecumenical force of The Spirit, the soul of Christianity and how this movement inspires, rather divinely inspires the church (small c) to surpass any urge to halt or hinder these realized eschatologies, that I believe these mystics we have observed here put forth. The Kingdom is upon them through the Holy Spirit, and no static theology can stop it.

CONCLUSION

     In this work we have examined Christian mysticism from the viewpoint of the Trinity doctrine. The static theology of Climacus and Palamas’ time felt that God was so transcendent that he (the Father) could not be reached, whereas in our second section the Beguines displayed a centering on melting into God or literally making love to God, which connotes a human or Christocentric view of the Deity. In our final section the emphasis is entirely upon the Holy Spirit or the soul of Christianity. Each of our mystics drove the current theologies to move, to change, to shake if you will out of a view of God that rested or centered on one point of the Trinity, usually the philosophical God or the transcendent Father. We can now see that mysticism is inclusive, it takes in the whole Trinity, The Father, Son and Holy Ghost, The Mind, Body and Soul of Christianity.

Let it never be said:

I went down to the sacred store where I'd heard the music years before but the man there said the music wouldn't play and in the streets the children screamed, the lovers cried, and the poets dreamed but not a word was spoken, the church bells all were broken and the three men I admire most, the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost, they caught the last train for the coast, the day, the music, died

WORKS CITED

Bruneau, Marie-Florine. Women Mystics Confront the Modern World: Marie de L'Incarnation (1599-1672) and Madame Guyon (1648-1717). Albany, NY: State University of New York, 1998. Book on-line. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=107213471. Internet. Accessed 24 April 2006.

Brunn, Emilie Zum, and Georgette Epiney-Burgard. Women Mystics in Medieval Europe. Translated by Hughes, Sheila. 1st ed. St. Paul, MN: Paragon House, 1989. Book on-line. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=27957024. Internet. Accessed 24 April 2006.

Burgess, Stanley M. The Holy Spirit: Eastern Christian Traditions. Peabody Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1989. Climacus, John. The Ladder of Divine Ascent /. Translated by Luibheid, Colm and Norman Russell. New York: Paulist Press, 1982. Book on-line. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=102547426. Internet. Accessed 24 April 2006.

Cox, Harvey. Fire from Heaven: The Rise of Pentecostal Spirituality and the Reshaping of Religion in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1995. Book on-line. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=100789377. Internet. Accessed 24 April 2006.

Jackson, Rebecca. Gifts of Power: The Writings of Rebecca Jackson, Black Visionary, Shaker Eldress. Edited by Jean McMahon Humez. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 1981. Book on-line. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=59241305. Internet. Accessed 24 April 2006.

King, Ursula. Christian Mystics: Their Lives and Legacies throughout the Ages. London: Routledge, 2004. Book on-line. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=109134007. Internet. Accessed 24 April 2006.

Martin, Dennis D. "Trinitarian and Mystical Receptivity: Modern Theory and a Medieval Case Study." Theological Studies 56, no. 4 (1995): 696+. Database on-line. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5000374053. Internet. Accessed 24 April 2006.

McLean, Don. American Pie. http://www.don-mclean.com/albums/index.asp and http://www.don-mclean.com/albums/alist.asp?albumID=1002&year=1971 Accessed 24 April 2006.

Meyendorff, John, ed. The Triads /. New York: Paulist Press, 1983. Book on-line. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=102549693. Internet. Accessed 24 April 2006.

Pullum, Stephen J. Foul Demons, Come Out! The Rhetoric of Twentieth-Century American Faith Healing. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1999. Book on-line. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=23610188. Internet. Accessed 24 April 2006.

The New Oxford Annotated Bible: New Revised Standard Version. Ed. Bruce M. Metzger and Roland E. Murphy, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 1991.

Williams, Rowan. "6 The Deflections of Desire: Negative Theology in Trinitarian Disclosure," In Silence and the Word: Negative Theology and Incarnation. Edited by Davies, Oliver and Denys Turner, 115-135. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Book on-line. Available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=105439670. Internet. Accessed 24 April 2006.

Southern Knight

http://www.southernknight.blogspot.com/

The Southern Nationalist

http://www.floridacrackercsa.blogspot.com/

SOUTHRON THOUGHTS AND NEWS

http://www.slmnews.com/id58.html