News Letter 5845-051
15th day of the Tenth month 5845 years after creation
The Tenth Month in the Sabbatical Year
The Second Sabbatical Year of the 119th Jubilee Cycle
January 2, 2010
Shabbat Shalom Brethren,
I received an email this week from Avi ben Mordechai, whose web site is http://www.m7000.com/. He has sent me the itinerary of his Passover tour this spring. Yahweh willing, I am going to tour with him.
On this tour will be world? renowned international author, lecturer, and Egyptologist David Rohl, who will be teaching us about the Kings of Egypt during the Exodus and the Armana letters, which prove that King David and Saul and Solomon were real figures in history.
Also on this tour of the most amazing group of teachers will be Dr. Lennart Moller, who wrote the book ‘The Exodus Case’. We will be with him at Nuweiba, where Israel crossed the Red Sea. Dr. Moller has documented the many artifacts at the bottom of the Red Sea which prove the destruction of the Egyptian army at this place.
We will also have Jim & Penny Caldwell, who will share with us their travels to the Mountain of Moses in Saudi Arabia. This is the actual Mountain that Yahweh rested upon while talking with Israel. We will not be able to go to Saudi at this time.
We will then go to Petra in Jordan, cross the Jordan at Jericho, and afterward we will keep Passover. If Passover is one month later, then we will make do. Please watch the video and get ready to join us on this most amazing trip. This is the trip of a lifetime. However, time is of the essence and reservations must be made by January 15, 2010.
I look forward to being able to sit and talk to you one on one during this awesome tour, as we travel along the same route as Israel did when they left the land of Egypt 3386 years ago. The time frame is very tight to lock in these speakers, so we need you to commit ASAP if you are interested.
The whole world is celebrating the New Year right now as of January 1. For our new Brethren, let me briefly explain what Yahweh says about the New Year. Then for all of you who have Scottish blood, you will want to read what we have this week for you about your, our ancestry.
First, when is the New Year? We are told in Exodus when it is to begin.
Exodus 12:2 This month shall be your beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you.
Now let’s read that verse in context to see exactly which month Yahweh is talking about.
Exodus 12: 1 Now Yahweh spoke to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying, 2 “This month shall be your beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you. 3 Speak to all the congregation of Israel, saying: ‘On the tenth day of this month every man shall take for himself a lamb, according to the house of his father, a lamb for a household. 4 And if the household is too small for the lamb, let him and his neighbour next to his house take it according to the number of the persons; according to each man’s need you shall make your count for the lamb. 5 Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year. You may take it from the sheep or from the goats. 6 Now you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month. Then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it at twilight. 7 And they shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and on the lintel of the houses where they eat it. 8 Then they shall eat the flesh on that night; roasted in fire, with unleavened bread and with bitter herbs they shall eat it. 9 Do not eat it raw, nor boiled at all with water, but roasted in fire–its head with its legs and its entrails. 10 You shall let none of it remain until morning, and what remains of it until morning you shall burn with fire. 11 And thus you shall eat it: with a belt on your waist, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand. So you shall eat it in haste. It is Yahweh’s Passover. 12 For I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the Yahweh.
There is no mistaking when this is. It is the month of the Passover. The month of the Passover is the first month of the year. Some of our brethren have concluded that Passover must be eaten on January 14th, but is this correct?
Let’s go to Karaite Korner and read what my friend Nehemiah Gordon has to say on this. This comes from:
The Biblical year begins with the first New Moon after the barley in Israel reaches the stage in its ripeness called Abib. The period between one year and the next is either 12 or 13 lunar months. Because of this, it is important to check the state of the Barley crops at the end of the 12th month. If the barley is Abib at this time, then the following New Moon is Hodesh Ha-Aviv (“New Moon of the Abib”). If the barley is still immature, we must wait another month and then check the barley again at the end of the 13th month.
By convention, a 12-month year is referred to as a Regular Year while a 13th month year is referred to as a Leap Year. This should not be confused with Leap Years in the Gregorian (Christian) Calendar, which involve the “intercalation” (addition) of a single day (Feb. 29). In contrast, the Biblical Leap Year involves the intercalation of an entire lunar month (“Thirteenth Month”, also called “Adar Bet”). In general, it can only be determined whether a year is a Leap Year a few days before the end of the 12th Month.
Where is Abib Mentioned in the Hebrew Bible?
The story of the Exodus relates “This day you are going out in the the month of the Abib.” (Ex 13,4).
To commemorate that we left Egypt in the month of the Abib, we are instructed to bring the Passover sacrifice and celebrate the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Hag HaMatzot) at this time of year. In Dt 16,1 we are commanded:
“Keep the month of the Abib and make the Passover (sacrifice) to YHWH your God at night, because in the month of the Abib YHWH your God took you out of Egypt”. [click here to hear the verse in Hebrew!]
Similarly, we are commanded in Ex 23,15:
“You will keep the Feast of Unleavened Bread; seven days you will eat unleavened bread, as I have commanded you, at the time of the month of the Abib, because in it you went out of Egypt.”
The same is commanded in Ex 34,18:
“You will keep the Feast of Unleavened Bread; seven days you will eat unleavened bread, as have I commanded you, at the time of the month of the Abib, because in the month of the Abib you went out of Egypt.”
What is Abib?
Abib indicates a stage in the development of the barley crops. This is clear from Ex 9,31-32 which describes the devastation caused by the plague of hail:
“And the flax and the barley were smitten, because the barley was Abib and the flax was Giv’ol. And the wheat and the spelt were not smitten because they were dark (Afilot).”
The above passage relates that the barley crops were destroyed by the hail while the wheat and spelt were not damaged. To understand the reason for this we must look at how grain develops. When grains are early in their development they are flexible and have a dark green color. As they become ripe they take on a light yellowish hue and become more brittle.
The reason that the barley was destroyed and the wheat was not is that the barley had reached the stage in its development called Abib and as a result, had become brittle enough to be damaged by the hail. In contrast, the wheat and spelt were still early enough in their development, at a stage when they were flexible and not susceptible to being damaged by hail.
The description of the wheat and spelt as “dark” (Afilot) indicates that they were still in the stage when they were deep green, and had not yet begun to lighten into the light yellowish hue which characterizes ripe grains. In contrast, the barley had reached the stage of Abib at which time it was no longer “dark”, and at this point it probably had begun to develop golden streaks.
We know from several passages that barley which is in the state of Abib has not completely ripened, but has ripened enough so that its seeds can be eaten parched in fire. Parched barley was a commonly eaten food in ancient Israel and is mentioned in numerous passages in the Hebrew Bible as either “Abib parched (Kalui) in fire” (Lev 2,14) or in the abbreviated form “parched (Kalui/ Kali)” (Lev 23,14; Jos 5,11; 1Sam 17,17; 1Sam 25,18; 2Sam 17,28; Ruth 2,14).
While still early in its development, barley has not yet produced large enough and firm enough seeds to produce food through parching. This early in its development, when the “head” has just come out of the shaft, the seeds are not substantial enough to produce any food. At a later stage, the seeds have grown in size and have filled with liquid. At this point the seeds will shrivel up when parched and will only produce empty skins. Over time the liquid is replaced with dry material and when enough dry material has amassed, the seeds will be able to yield “barley parched in fire”.
Abib and the Harvest
The month of the Abib is the month which commences after the barley has reached the stage of Abib. 2-3 weeks after the beginning of the month, the barley has moved beyond the stage of Abib and is ready to be brought as the “wave-sheaf offering” (Hanafat HaOmer). The “wave-sheaf offering” is a sacrifice brought from the first stalks cut in the harvest and is brought on the Sunday which falls during Passover (Hag HaMatzot). This is described in Lev 23,10-11:
“When you come to the land which I give you, and harvest its harvest, you will bring the sheaf of the beginning of your harvest to the priest. And he will wave the sheaf before YHWH so you will be accepted; on the morrow after the Sabbath the priest will wave it.”
From this it is clear that the barley, which was Abib at the beginning of the month, has become harvest-ready 15-21 days later (i.e by the Sunday during Passover). Therefore, the month of the Abib cannot begin unless the barley has reached a stage where it will be harvest-ready 2-3 weeks later.
That the barley must be harvest-ready 2-3 weeks into the month of the Abib is also clear from Dt 16,9 which states:
“From when the sickle commences on the standing grain you will begin to count seven weeks.”
From Lev 23,15 we know that the seven weeks between Passover (Hag Hamatzot) and Pentecost (Shavuot) begin on the day when the wave-sheaf offering is brought (i.e. the Sunday which falls out during Passover):
“And you shall count from the morrow after the Sabbath, from the day you bring the sheaf of waving; they will be seven complete Sabbaths.”
Therefore, the “sickle commences on the standing grain” on the Sunday during Passover, i.e. 2-3 weeks after the beginning of the month of the Abib. If the barley is not developed enough so that it will be ready for the sickle 2-3 weeks later, then the month of the Abib can not begin and we must wait till the following month.
It should be noted that not all the barley ripens in the Land of Israel at the same time. The wave-sheaf offering is a national sacrifice brought from the first fields to become harvest-ready. However, the first-fruit offerings brought by individual farmers can vary in ripeness anywhere from “Abib parched in fire” to fully ripe grain which may be brought “crushed” or “coarsely ground”. This is what is meant in Lev 2,14:
“And when you bring a first-fruit offering to YHWH; you shall bring your first-fruit offering as Abib parched in fire or crushed Carmel” (Carmel is grain which has hardened beyond Abib to the point where it can be “crushed” or “coarsely ground”).
All of the above passages have been translated directly from the Hebrew and it is worth noting that the King James translators seem to have poorly understood the various Hebrew agricultural terms. In Lev 2,14 they translated Carmel as “full ears” and “Abib” as “green ears” whereas in Lev 23,14 they translated Carmel as “green ears”!
In summation, barley which is in the state of Abib has 3 characteristics:
1. It is brittle enough to be destroyed by hail and has begun to lighten in color (it is not “dark”).
2. The seeds have produced enough dry material so it can be eaten parched.
3. It has developed enough so that it will be harvest-ready 2-3 weeks later.
Now, there are some Brethren who teach that the 7th month is the first month of the year. Stop and think on this; is the seventh month really the 1st month? No, it is the 7th month. Ask your children if this makes any sense to them. The 7th month is the 7th month.
We know this because the Romans told us which month was which, by the way they named the months.
From http://www.crowl.org/Lawrence/time/months.html which any one can go to and read where it says:
The original Roman year had 10 named months Martius “March”, Aprilis “April”, Maius “May”, Junius “June”, Quintilis “July”, Sextilis “August”, September “September”, October “October”, November “November”, December “December”, and probably two unnamed months in the dead of winter when not much happened in agriculture. The year began with Martius “March”. Numa Pompilius, the second king of Rome circa 700 BC, added the two months Januarius “January” and Februarius “February”. He also moved the beginning of the year from Marius to Januarius and changed the number of days in several months to be odd, a lucky number. After Februarius there was occasionally an additional month of Intercalaris “intercalendar”. This is the origin of the leap-year day being in February. In 46 BC, Julius Caesar reformed the Roman calendar (hence the Julian calendar) changing the number of days in many months and removing Intercalaris.
Take note that prior to 700 B.C., the year began with March, which was the same as the Hebrew Calendar. Also note the names of the month in the fall:
August — Augustus Caesar’s month
Latin Augustus “Augustus”
Latin Augustus mensis “month of Augustus”
Latin sextilis mensis “sixth month”
September — the seventh month
Middle English septembre
Latin septem “seven” + -ber (adj. suffix)
Latin september mensis “seventh month”
October — the eighth month
Middle English octobre
Latin octo “eight” + -ber (adj. suffix)
Latin october mensis “eighth month”
November — the nineth month
Middle English Novembre
Latin Novembris mensis “nineth month”
December — the tenth month
Middle English decembre
Old French decembre
Latin december “tenth month”
Latin decem “ten” + -ber (adj. suffix)
December was always called the tenth month. Why? Because it was ten months away from March, which used to be called the first month. Decem means ten. September was the seventh month, as the name implies. These months are still in the same place they always have been, that is in the seventh and tenth place.
So, is January 1 the New Year? And is January 14 the time for Passover? Is the barley Aviv in January or even December? The correct answer for all of you who are being mentally challenged right now is NO! The New Year begins around March, as explained above. It is never in the dead of winter.
I had a few people write me and call to let me know how to change the name and where to get a search engine for the computer. I do thank you all.
Also wanted to take a moment to tell you that I enjoy your comments and teachings. It is good to see someone who is really trying to accomplish their goal, and finish their course correctly. YHVH bless you increasingly in this
Shalom Joseph F Dumond
I have been reading your News Letter for a while, and it has been a lot of help. I am writing you from Spain, I have been in the ministry more than 25 years, but since 10 years ago I came into messianic teaching and it was altogether different. I keep Shabbat and all YHWH´s Feast and the Name of Yahweh and Yeshua.
Here in Spain we are not many messianics just now, and we need a lot of teaching and materials for going ahead,
Last week I had the wrong link to the video on the disturbing attack on Christians in India. Here again is the link. I hope it works this time. I have also changed it on last week’s News Letter: http://www.masihitube.com/view/826/18-only-18-only-india-killing-christians-viewer-beware/
This week I want to bring to your attention a letter from all the leaders of Scotland to the Pope. I want you to be made aware of how they saw their ancestry and knew where they came from back in the 1300’s, unlike today, where so many do not even know their own great grandparents names. I am doing this so that you can know where the ten Tribes of Israel went after the captivity.
Once you have read the two articles below, please go to the following link at Yair Davidiy’s site Brit-Am: http://www.britam.org/tartan.html
This week, Yair is talking about the Tartan and where it comes from. This work is not yet done but I am excited to see it being developed. Make sure you also look at this page, as it was just added: http://britam.org/tartan3.html
Yair is also using the information of David Rohl, renowned Egyptologist of whom I have read all his books. I have submitted my Sabbatical Cycles to David Rohl for his review. We also have a video of the discovery of the Tomb of Joseph where this Tartan is worn by Joseph. Watch this short video, a BBC documentary from several years ago interviewing David Rohl about Joseph’s tomb in Egypt. It has been uploaded to youtube. You are welcome to link to it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCPGgTE27Xk
It is this same David Rohl who is to be a guest speaker in Egypt for this Passover tour of Egypt, Nuweiba Jordan and Israel. If you have any interest in this tour, watch the video and sign up at http://www.m7000.com/imagenet/toursignup04a.htm
As you read this I would like you to remember what I sent out to you all on December 5, 2009: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100018459/at-midnight-last-night-the-united-kingdom-ceased-to-be-a-sovereign-state/
This was the article which stated: At midnight last night, the United Kingdom ceased to be a sovereign state,
Scotland is currently part of the United Kingdom and with the stroke of a pen on the Lisbon Treaty, the United Kingdom has given up this freedom that so many in the past have died to attain for their posterity.
For as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we be brought under English rule, on any conditions. It is not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom — for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.
From The Declaration of Arbroath 1320.
Declaration of Arbroath
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Arbroath
The Declaration of Arbroath was a declaration of Scottish independence, and set out to confirm Scotland’s status as an independent, sovereign state and its use of military action when unjustly attacked. It is in the form of a letter submitted to Pope John XXII, dated 6 April 1320. Sealed by fifty-one magnates and nobles, the letter is the sole survivor of three created at the time. The others were a letter from the King of Scots, King Robert I, and a letter from four Scottish bishops which all presumably made similar points.
The Declaration was part of a broader diplomatic campaign which sought to assert Scotland’s position as a kingdom, rather than being a feudal land controlled by England, as well as lift the excommunication of Robert the Bruce. The Pope had recognized Edward I of England’s claim to over-lordship of Scotland in 1305 and Bruce was excommunicated by the Pope for murdering John Comyn on the altar in Greyfriars Church in Dumfries in 1306.
The Declaration made a number of much-debated rhetorical points: that Scotland had always been independent, indeed for longer than England; that Edward I of England had unjustly attacked Scotland and perpetrated atrocities; that Robert the Bruce had delivered the Scottish nation from this peril; and, most controversially, that the independence of Scotland was the prerogative of the Scots people, rather than the King of Scots. In fact it stated that the nobility would choose someone else to be king if the current one did anything to threaten Scotland’s independence.
While this last point is often interpreted as an early expression of ‘popular sovereignty’ – that kings could be chosen by the population rather than by God alone – it can also be argued to have been a means of passing the responsibility for disobeying papal commands from the king to the people. In other words, Robert I was arguing that he was forced to fight an illegal war (as far as the Pope was concerned, since they were meant to be fighting against the Infidel, not each other) or face being deposed. However, the context suggests that this claim was made to bolster Bruce’s position as the legitimate ruler of Scotland. A justification had to be given for the rejection of King John in whose name William Wallace and Andrew de Moray rebelled in 1297. The reason given in the Declaration is that Bruce was able to defend Scotland from English aggression whereas, by implication, King John could not .
To this man, in as much as he saved our people, and for upholding our freedom, we are bound by right as much as by his merits, and choose to follow him in all that he does.
The idea of a contract between King and people was therefore advanced to the Pope in order to excuse Bruce’s coronation whilst John de Balliol still lived in Papal custody.
Whatever the true motive, the fact remains that this 14th century document is one of the earliest expressions of a form of Scottish national consciousness yet found and one of the earliest documents in European history to imply that the king is chosen by the people.
Written in Latin, it is believed to have been drafted by Bernard, abbot of Arbroath Abbey (often wrongly identified with Bernard de Linton), who was the Chancellor of Scotland at the time; and by bishop Alexander Kininmund. While dated to 6 April 1320 at Arbroath Abbey, there was in fact no meeting of nobles there by whom the document was drafted. Instead the document may have been discussed at a council meeting at Newbattle Abbey, Midlothian, in March 1320, though firm evidence for such a debate is lacking. Arbroath was simply the location of the royal chancery, Abbot Bernard’s writing office, and the date provides evidence only for his part in proceedings.
The seals of eight earls and as many as forty-one other Scottish nobles were appended to the document, probably over the space of some weeks and months, with nobles sending in their seals to be used. The Declaration was then taken to the papal court at Avignon by bishop Kininmund, Sir Adam Gordon and Sir Odard de Maubuisson.
The Pope seems to heed to the arguments contained by the Declaration, although its contemporary influence should not be overstated. It was in part due to his intervention that a short-lived peace treaty between Scotland and England, the Treaty of Northampton, renouncing all English claims to Scotland, was finally signed by the English king, Edward III, on the 1 March 1328.
The original copy of the Declaration that was sent to Avignon is lost. A copy of the Declaration survives among Scotland’s state papers, held by the National Archives of Scotland in Edinburgh. The most widely known English language translation was created by Sir James Fergusson, formerly Keeper of the Records of Scotland, from text that he reconstructed using this extant copy and early copies of the original draft. One passage in particular is often quoted from the Fergusson translation:
…for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom – for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.
Here is the Letter itself from http://www.constitution.org/scot/arbroath.htm
The Declaration of Arbroath 1320 —
To the most Holy Father and Lord in Christ, the Lord John, by divine providence Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Roman and Universal Church, his humble and devout sons Duncan, Earl of Fife, Thomas Randolph, Earl of Moray, Lord of Man and of Annandale, Patrick Dunbar, Earl of March, Malise, Earl of Strathearn, Malcolm, Earl of Lennox, William, Earl of Ross, Magnus, Earl of Caithness and Orkney, and William, Earl of Sutherland; Walter, Steward of Scotland, William Soules, Butler of Scotland, James, Lord of Douglas, Roger Mowbray, David, Lord of Brechin, David Graham, Ingram Umfraville, John Menteith, guardian of the earldom of Menteith, Alexander Fraser, Gilbert Hay, Constable of Scotland, Robert Keith, Marischal of Scotland, Henry St Clair, John Graham, David Lindsay, William Oliphant, Patrick Graham, John Fenton, William Abernethy, David Wemyss, William Mushet, Fergus of Ardrossan, Eustace Maxwell, William Ramsay, William Mowat, Alan Murray, Donald Campbell, John Cameron, Reginald Cheyne, Alexander Seton, Andrew Leslie, and Alexander Straiton, and the other barons and freeholders and the whole community of the realm of Scotland send all manner of filial reverence, with devout kisses of his blessed feet.
Most Holy Father and Lord, we know and from the chronicles and books of the ancients we find that among other famous nations our own, the Scots, has been graced with widespread renown. They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today. The Britons they first drove out, the Picts they utterly destroyed, and, even though very often assailed by the Norwegians, the Danes and the English, they took possession of that home with many victories and untold efforts; and, as the historians of old time bear witness, they have held it free of all bondage ever since. In their kingdom there have reigned one hundred and thirteen kings of their own royal stock, the line unbroken a single foreigner. The high qualities and deserts of these people, were they not otherwise manifest, gain glory enough from this: that the King of kings and Lord of lords, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His Passion and Resurrection, called them, even though settled in the uttermost parts of the earth, almost the first to His most holy faith. Nor would He have them confirmed in that faith by merely anyone but by the first of His Apostles — by calling, though second or third in rank — the most gentle Saint Andrew, the Blessed Peter’s brother, and desired him to keep them under his protection as their patron forever.
The Most Holy Fathers your predecessors gave careful heed to these things and bestowed many favours and numerous privileges on this same kingdom and people, as being the special charge of the Blessed Peter’s brother. Thus our nation under their protection did indeed live in freedom and peace up to the time when that mighty prince the King of the English, Edward, the father of the one who reigns today, when our kingdom had no head and our people harboured no malice or treachery and were then unused to wars or invasions, came in the guise of a friend and ally to harass them as an enemy. The deeds of cruelty, massacre, violence, pillage, arson, imprisoning prelates, burning down monasteries, robbing and killing monks and nuns, and yet other outrages without number which he committed against our people, sparing neither age nor sex, religion nor rank, no one could describe nor fully imagine unless he had seen them with his own eyes.
But from these countless evils we have been set free, by the help of Him Who though He afflicts yet heals and restores, by our most tireless Prince, King and Lord, the Lord Robert. He, that his people and his heritage might be delivered out of the hands of our enemies, met toil and fatigue, hunger and peril, like another Macabaeus or Joshua and bore them cheerfully. Him, too, divine providence, his right of succession according to or laws and customs which we shall maintain to the death, and the due consent and assent of us all have made our Prince and King. To him, as to the man by whom salvation has been wrought unto our people, we are bound both by law and by his merits that our freedom may be still maintained, and by him, come what may, we mean to stand. Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom — for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.
Therefore it is, Reverend Father and Lord, that we beseech your Holiness with our most earnest prayers and suppliant hearts, inasmuch as you will in your sincerity and goodness consider all this, that, since with Him Whose vice-gerent on earth you are there is neither weighing nor distinction of Jew and Greek, Scotsman or Englishman, you will look with the eyes of a father on the troubles and privation brought by the English upon us and upon the Church of God. May it please you to admonish and exhort the King of the English, who ought to be satisfied with what belongs to him since England used once to be enough for seven kings or more, to leave us Scots in peace, who live in this poor little Scotland, beyond which there is no dwelling-place at all, and covet nothing but our own. We are sincerely willing to do anything for him, having regard to our condition, that we can, to win peace for ourselves. This truly concerns you, Holy Father, since you see the savagery of the heathen raging against the Christians, as the sins of Christians have indeed deserved, and the frontiers of Christendom being pressed inward every day; and how much it will tarnish your Holiness’s memory if (which God forbid) the Church suffers eclipse or scandal in any branch of it during your time, you must perceive. Then rouse the Christian princes who for false reasons pretend that they cannot go to help of the Holy Land because of wars they have on hand with their neighbours. The real reason that prevents them is that in making war on their smaller neighbours they find quicker profit and weaker resistance. But how cheerfully our Lord the King and we too would go there if the King of the English would leave us in peace, He from Whom nothing is hidden well knows; and we profess and declare it to you as the Vicar of Christ and to all Christendom. But if your Holiness puts too much faith in the tales the English tell and will not give sincere belief to all this, nor refrain from favouring them to our prejudice, then the slaughter of bodies, the perdition of souls, and all the other misfortunes that will follow, inflicted by them on us and by us on them, will, we believe, be surely laid by the Most High to your charge.
To conclude, we are and shall ever be, as far as duty calls us, ready to do your will in all things, as obedient sons to you as His Vicar; and to Him as the Supreme King and Judge we commit the maintenance of our cause, casting our cares upon Him and firmly trusting that He will inspire us with courage and bring our enemies to nought. May the Most High preserve you to his Holy Church in holiness and health and grant you length of days.
Given at the monastery of Arbroath in Scotland on the sixth day of the month of April in the year of grace thirteen hundred and twenty and the fifteenth year of the reign of our King aforesaid.
Endorsed: Letter directed to our Lord the Supreme Pontiff by the community of Scotland.
Our next article is to show you Brethren the very special peculiarities of our Scottish Brethren. I have read the following in a number of other documents in the past and never recorded any of them. It was when I was trying to prove which day was the Sabbath. I found the following information very strange and wondered why no one ever told us of this stuff. Our History of our people.
This week as I share with you about the Scots. I also have this article which I first learned about 20 years ago. It is still amazing to me that this sort of information is never shared in our history from our ancestry.
Celtic Sabbath-Keeping Study No. 264
Proof of Celtic Sabbath-keeping is easy to find. The curious thing is why Church of God missionaries do not return to Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, and thunder the Gospel message of repentance, calling on todays Celtic peoples to return to the faith of their fathers.
Henry Charles Lea, the foremost authority on the Papal Inquisitions, records in the period of the commencement of persecution involving judicial capital punishment for heresy, that at the time of the execution of Priscillian with six of his followers in 385 AD., that others were banished to a barbarous island beyond Britain, A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, vol. 1, New York: Harper & Brothers 1887, p. 213.
What was this barbarous island? Most likely, it would appear to be Ireland. Britain and Ireland were favorite places for banishment and the marketing of slaves in those days. If indeed, many faithful heretics were banished to Ireland for centuries, it could not but have had a profound effect on that island, which became a great center of light under Patrick (5th century), Columba (521-597), and Columbanus (c. 540-615) as the darkness of papal tyranny descended over the continent. Missionaries went forth from Ireland to Switzerland, Bohemia, and Kiev. Ireland was one of the most difficult areas for Rome to subjugate, and this explains why such unending efforts have been made for over 1200 years to completely subjugate this island.
The Celtic Church which occupied Ireland, Scotland, and Britain, had the Syriac (Byzantine) scriptures instead of the Latin vulgate of Rome. The Celtic Church, with the Waldenses and the Eastern empire, kept the seventh-day Sabbath.
When Queen Margaret fled to Scotland with her father Edward Atheling, a pretender to the English throne, she wrote to her English cousins expressing astonishment at the religious practices of the Scots. Among the peculiarities of the Scots was that they work on Sunday, but keep Saturday in a sabbatical manner. To another correspondent she complained, They are accustomed also to neglect reverence for the Lords days (Sundays); and thus to continue upon them as upon other days all the labours of earthly work.
David Marshall tells us, The observance of the Saturday Sabbath by most Scots went hand in hand with their refusal to recognize the overlordship of the Pope in matters spiritual. Despite the best efforts of King Nectan centuries earlier, Scottish Christianity was still of the Columban or Celtic, not the Roman, variety.
The most popular narrative history of Scotland Scotland: A Concise History by P. Hume Brown (Langsyne) confirms that at Margarets accession, the people worked on Sundays and observed Saturday as the Sabbath day. Peter Berresford Ellis in Celtic Inheritance (Constable, 1992) page 45 writes: When Rome began to take a particular interest in the Celtic Church towards the end of the sixth century A.D., there were several differences between them . . . . The Celtic Sabbath was celebrated on a Saturday. Elliss comment covers the Celtic Church in Wales, Ireland, Cornwall and Gaul, as well as Scotland. Romanism was, apparently, coming into Scotland but had no strength north of the Forth.
This gave Queen Margaret her crusade (and her route to canonization): Margaret did all she could to make the Scottish clergy do and believe exactly what the Church of Rome commanded. This involved the enforcement of Sunday-keeping, a policy continued by her son, King David I. Nevertheless, on the eve of the Reformation, there were still many communities in the Scottish Highland loyal to the seventh-day Sabbath, as opposed to the Papal Sunday.
Two books published in 1963 to commemorate Columbas landing at lona in 563 concerned themselves with the Celtic distinctives and counted among them the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath. Dr. W.D. Simpson published The Historical St. Columba in Edinburgh. He confirms that Columba and his companions kept the day of the Sabbath and in case there should be any doubt adds in a footnote Saturday, of course . . . . F.W. Fawcett was commissioned to write his Columba Pilgrim for Christ by the Lord Bishop of Derry and Raphoe. His book was published in Londonderry and printed by the Derry Standard in connection with the Irish commemoration of Columbas mission. Fawcett outlines eight Celtic distinctives. Among these that the Celts had a married priesthood and that they observed the seventh day as the Sabbath. David Marshall, The Celtic Connection. England: Stanborough Press, 1994, pp. 29, 30.
The reason why Pope Gregory I had perceived the Celtic Church as such a major threat and why he and his successors expended such efforts in destroying the distinctive Irish customs became massively evident.
A.O. and M.O. Anderson, in the Introduction to their Adomnans Life of Columba (Thomas Nelson 1961), shed light, not only on Columbas seventh day Sabbath-keeping practice, but on the gradual adjustment of manuscripts by generations of Roman copyists, in an attempt to provide an impression that the Celtic saints held Sunday sacred.
Adomnans use of sabbatum for Saturday, the seventh day of the week, is clear indication from Columbas mouth that Sabbath was not Sunday. Sunday, the first day of the week is Lords day. Adomnans attitude to Sunday is important, because he wrote at a time when there was controversy over the question whether the ritual of the Biblical Sabbath was to be transferred to the Christians Lords-day. A.O. and M.O. Anderson (editors) Adomnans Life of Columba, Thomas Nelsons Medieval Texts, 1961, pages 25-26.
The Old Testament required seventh-day Sabbath observance and, reason Adomnans editors, since the New Testament nowhere repealed the fourth commandment, the seventh-day was observed by all early Christians. The evidence they adduce suggests that no actual confusion between Sunday and the Sabbath occurred until the early sixth century, and then in the writings of the rather obscure Caesarius of Arles. (Ibid., page 26.)
In England, the question of Sunday may have been among the other ecclesiastical matters discussed by the Synod of Whitby in 664, reason the Andersons, in addition to the date of Easter which could not have caused such a rift. A weekly, not just a yearly observance separated the Celts from the Romans. But the Romans had the task of writing the history of the Church and of copying the writings of Church fathers. While those who copied the Scriptures appear to have been constrained by the Scriptural injunction not to add or take away from the words of the Book and, in the main, to have done a conscientious job, the same scruples did not apply when they copied out the writings of the Church fathers. As the centuries progressed the writings of the Celtic saints, including Patrick were amended to convey the impression that the saints held Sunday sacred, whereas, in the earliest versions of their manuscripts, it is clear that they observed the seventh-day Sabbath. (Ibid., pages 26-28).
The Roman movement to supersede the Celtic Sabbath with Sunday culminated in the production of an (apocryphal) Letter of Jesus, or Letter of Lords day, alleged to have been found on the altar of Peter in Rome; and is said in the annals to have been brought to Ireland by a pilgrim (c. 886). Upon this basis laws were promulgated, imposing heavy penalties for those that violated on Sunday certain regulations derived from Jewish prohibitions for Sabbath. . . . There is in fact no historical evidence that Ninian, or Patrick, or Columba, or any of their contemporaries in Ireland, kept Sunday as a Sabbath. (Ibid., page 28.)
The seventh-day Sabbath, enjoined by the fourth of the Ten Commandments, had been observed by Jesus and nowhere in Scripture had its sacredness been diminished or transferred to another day . . .
An early version of The Rule of Columba is reproduced in Columba Pilgrim for Christ by F.W. Fawcett, MA. Fawcett is a Church of Ireland clergyman. He was commissioned by the Lord Bishop of Derry and Raphoe to produce this book as part of the celebrations in 1963 of the departure of Columba for lona in AD 563. Marshall, The Celtic Connection, 46.
The fifth rule of the Celtic Church listed in The Rule of Columba is The Seventh Day was observed as the Sabbath.
from Cherith Chronicle, April-June 1998, pp. 46-47. ?
We recommend: The Celtic Church in Britain, by Leslie Hardinge, 265 pages, $9.00 plus postage from Giving & Sharing, PO Box 100, Neck City, MO 64849.
“If you love Me, keep My commandments.” Bottom Line. May Yahweh bless you and show you His truths as you begin to keep His commandments. All of them, not just the ones you think are important. All of them are important.
Joseph F Dumond
If you would like to help support the efforts of this web site in these difficult times, donations are accepted at the address below. Please make any cheques to Joseph F Dumond only. To those who have helped in the past, thank you. As we go forward your help is critical. Thank you again.
Joseph F Dumond