A quick note

I recently took some older stuff off for not being relevant anymore (it pertained to things taken offline and no longer available), so if you're here looking for a post and it's not here, that's why.

The First Three Sermons of Fulgentius of Ruspe: An English Translation

Fulgentius of Ruspe, a 5th/6th century Christian writer and Catholic/Orthodox Saint (not to be confused with the separate St. Fulgentius of Cartagena), had various writings, including for our purposes several sermons. However, as far as I am aware, these are not available in an English translation. The "Fathers of the Church" series did translate some of his works ("Fulgentius: Selected Works" and "Fulgentius of Ruspe: Correspondence on Christology and Grace") but neither appear to have the sermons! There are some excerpts of the sermons online in English, but not full sermons. So if someone wants to look one up, perhaps due to a citation, they are largely out of luck unless they know Latin.

The good news is that, to try to rectify this problem, on a message board someone by the name of "Bithynian" did translate the first three of the sermons and posted them. However, that message board is no longer available. In order so that their work will not disappear for those who may wish to look at the sermons in English, I am putting them up here. Bithynian said in their post they granted permission to distribute it so long as they were credited. The translations have not been edited by myself save for adding in "Sermo III/Sermon 3" at the start of the third in order to keep the titling consistent (the footnote in the third was in the posted translation).

Unfortunately, the poster only provided translations for the first three, leaving the others untranslated, and I have no way to contact them. So these are the only ones I will be able to post. Still, hopefully they will be of use to someone who for any reason needs to check to see what they say.

Latin texts of the sermons, for the record, can be found starting on page 719-720 of volume 65 of Migne's Patrologia Latina, found here. They can also be found, with better scanning quality, in the Corpus Christianorum Series Latina volume 91a, which can be found here, though it requires you to check it out to read. (the sermons are often cited to this, though unfortunately rather ambiguously with things like "CCL 91A") Note that the first link lists 10 sermons; it appears the last two sermons were considered more dubious and thus they are separated out in the second source, but not the first.

Disclaimer: These are provided for reference purposes. I make no statement about the accuracy of the translation or the accuracy of the theology in the sermons.

Without further ado, here we go:

Sermon 1
Sermon 2
Sermon 3

Sermo I - De Dispensatoribus Domini
Sermon 1 - On the Stewards of the Lord

(1) We should all listen to the Lord’s sermons not only eagerly, but also sensibly, and we should obey them humbly and agreeably while also having an appropriate amount of moderation at all times. In doing so, the pasture may feed the sheep, and the provisions nourish the shepherd, as some sermons specifically instruct us who are shepherds, but others overall teach both us and you, the flock. For indeed, we have been charged with the sacred office of preaching, for we are servants whom the Father established as his household staff in his manor house, so that we may minister the Word of his grace to his people. But overall obedience to his commandments is proclaimed for salvation both to us and you. Again, spiritual abundance overflows in his commandments, as though it were a most opulent feast, so that in the Word of God there abounds food that both adults can eat and even little children can suckle. There in the Word of God is a drink of milk by which tender babies may be nourished in their faith, and also solid food so that younger children can accept the firm food of the morally perfect as spiritual profit in holy virtue. Indeed, in it is counsel for salvation to all whom the Lord has deemed worthy to save. In there is something for every season. It is applicable to every calling. In it we hear the precepts which we ought perform. There we discern the reward for which we hope. In it is the promise which leads us through his grace and guides us to glory.

(2) We heard a little while ago from the Gospel what the Lord said when he wanted to describe the special duty of his servants, whom he appointed for his people, ‘Who do you think is the faithful and wise steward, whom the lord established over his household, so that in time the lord may give a measure of wheat to his steward? Blessed is the servant who is found doing so when the lord comes’. Who is this lord, brothers? Without a doubt he is Christ, who said to his disciples ‘You call me Teacher and Lord, and you speak rightly, for indeed I am he.’ What is the household of the Lord? Truly it is that which the Lord redeems from the hand of the enemy and is delivered up to his kingdom. Moreover, this household is the Catholic Church, which is poured forth throughout the world with abundant fruitfulness, and she, the Church, gloriously tells of her redemption by the precious blood of her Lord.

(3) The blessed apostle declared that bishops too were stewards, saying ‘For a bishop must be blameless, as he is a steward of God’. He said this so that none of us might suppose that only the apostles were made stewards, as otherwise the duty of spiritual work may be neglected and lazy servants might faithlessly and inconsiderately fall asleep. Therefore we are servants to the household of the Father, we are stewards of the Lord, we have accepted the measure of wheat which we give you. But if we were to ask what this measure of wheat is, the blessed apostle Paul showed us this measure when he said ‘To each and every person just as God apportioned a measure of faith.’ Thus, what Christ calls a measure of wheat, Paul calls a measure of faith, so that we may recognise that there is no other spiritual wheat than the venerable mystery of the Christian faith. We give you a measure of this wheat in the name of the Lord, and as often as we are illuminated by the gift of spiritual grace, we preach according the rule of true faith. You accept this same measure of wheat through the stewards of the Lord when daily you hear the Word of Truth through the servants of God.

(4) We are trees, brothers and sisters, planted in the field of the Lord. Moreover, God is our farmer. He rains upon us, he tends to us, he himself grants abundance, he gives the grace of fruitfulness. The rainfall of God is the sermon of holy preaching, the husbandry of God is the watering of spiritual grace. Therefore God rains upon us with his commandments, he nourishes us with his help. As long as he rains upon us, he takes away from us the drought of ignorance. As long as he nourishes us, he gives the fullness of upright living. As long as he rains, he waters the earth of our hearts. Truly, as long as he tends to us, he roots out from the earth the thorns and thistles of the love of this world. Therefore we ought to be made fruitful by heavenly rains, and we ought to answer the hands of the heavenly tiller by bearing pleasing fruit. And if no tree is able to bear pleasing fruit, for all that no tree must remain in the field of the Lord.

(7) Therefore, my dearly beloved brothers and sisters, if not all are able to fulfil what the Lord said, ‘Sell what you have’, nevertheless it is possible for all, if good will exists, to do what he additionally said ‘Give alms’. It is easily done by all, if a wicked covetousness is not present. It is profitable for all, if their love is aflame. Therefore this is a commandment accessible to all, so that everlasting happiness is granted to everyone. Therefore they who receive so great a virtuousness from God sell what they have and give it to the poor, and in doing so they despise all worldly things by their love for the heavenly kingdom. But if they do not have such a virtuousness, let them give alms, to whatever extent as they are able. Let good will offer so much as anyone is able. Let the morally perfect possess the first place of virtuousness, the morally immature, at least, gets it second. Let the perfect be made gloriously worthy, let the immature be praiseworthily abundant. Let the perfect be the most ardent lovers of holy poverty, let the immature be the most pious comforters of the holy poor. Let the immature have the poor as advocates before God, and let the perfect rejoice that they have the same poor as their virtuous brothers and sisters. Let the perfect be such people who are determined to sit with God, and let the immature be such people who are judged worthy to stand at the right hand of the Father. Let the perfect be such people who have, by perpetual right, eternal homes as their possession, and let the immature be such people whom the perfect welcomes in their homes. For the Lord reminds us when he says ‘Make friends for yourself from the riches of injustice, friends who will receive you in their eternal homes’.

(8) Therefore, brothers, we all must do this: that none be lazy in good deeds, none be unfruitful, none despise the future by their love of the present, none disdain that which is eternal because the wicked ponders only that which is transitory, none prefer the bodily over the spiritual, none value the earthly above the heavenly. Brothers and sisters, we gather our treasure in heaven so that we can have even our hearts in heaven. This is necessary because where the treasure of our love leads, there too the direction of our thoughts will follow. Therefore the Truth said ‘For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also’. So that we may gather up our treasure in heaven, let us love that which is heavenly. Do you wish to know where you should gather up your treasure? Ponder what you love. Do you want to know what you love? Consider what you think. Therefore may you recognise your treasure from your love, and may you understand your love by what your thoughts evidence. Moreover, the Lord showed how we can gather up our treasure in heaven when he said ‘Let your loins be girt and your lamps alight’.

(9) If we wish to take what the Lord said quite literally, we would be unable to find any spiritual profit in it. For what does it profit the salvation of the soul if someone is more bodily, or if they gird their loins, or if they light their lamp? Therefore there is another spiritual understanding that must be sought in girt loins and lit lamps. May our understanding undoubtedly be wholly worthy of divine instruction, and may it be found suitable and profitable for our salvation. For in one place the Lord himself did not say in vain ‘The words which I say to you, they are the spirit and life’. Thus carnal lust is shown in the loins, but Christian faith and love is demonstrated in the lamps. Therefore the Lord ordered that our limbs be girt, and he doubtlessly taught that carnal lusts be bridled. Moreover, when he commanded that we have lit lamps, he certainly ordered this so that we may shine with the light of true faith and we be ablaze with the works of holy love. When he ordered that our loins be girt, he enjoined so that we flee wicked desires and deeds. When he ordered that our lamps be lit, he is teaching us to love and do virtuousness.

(10) We have set forth, from the Gospel, these things which we have also considered together with what the Prophets have said. For the one God ordained both testaments, and the one Lord gave them. And if both testaments have various things that are no longer binding, nevertheless they both agree in their understanding of human salvation. Both teach us to not sin and both command us to persevere in good works. Therefore the Lord taught through Blessed David, saying ‘Turn away from evil and do good’. Through Isaiah too, he taught with all these words ‘Remove your evil thoughts from my eyes, cease to do evil, learn to do good’. That which the Lord commanded us through his holy Patriarchs and Prophets, he now teaches through his own self. For what is ‘let your loins be girt’ if not ‘turn away from evil’? What is ‘let your lamps be lit’ if not ‘do good’? What is ‘let your loins be girt’ if not ‘cease to do evil’? What is ‘let your lamps be lit’ if not ‘learn to do good’?

(11) Therefore the loins of the faithful are girt so long as wicked lust is restrained, sinful thinking is hindered, the soul resists lust, the mind refuses licentiousness, luxury is scorned, greed and robbery is despised, personal attacks against neighbours are shunned, pride is vanquished, so long as envy is overcome. Truly the lights of the faithful are lit so long as the rule of correct faith is observed, they persevere in the bosom of Mother church, they disdain worldly things and long for heavenly things, they preserve the peace of those who are afflicted, they love one another purely, they honourably excel one another reciprocally, they profit by the gentleness and humility of the heart, they do works of mercy cheerfully and joyfully, and as long as they strive to please with good works, not men, but God.

(12) Therefore let all Christians have girt loins, so that they may flee lust. Let them have lit lamps, so that they may protect their chastity. Let them have girt loins, so that they may neither rob nor defraud another’s possessions. Let them have lit lamps so that may use their own possessions for works of mercy. Let them have girt loins so that they may not oppress the weak. Let them have lit lamps so that they may protect the oppressed with a veil of nothing less than just defence. Let them have girt loins so that they may not take away food from those who have it. Let them have lit lamps so that they do not steal the clothes from those who are clothed. Let them have lit lamps so that they clothe the naked. Let them have girt loins so that they do not invade the house of another. Let them have lit lamps so that they cheerfully receive those who are strangers to Christ. Let them have girt loins so that so that they flee pride. Let them have lit lamps so that they serve humility. Let them have girt loins so that they banish envy and malice. Let them have lit lamps so that they may present pure hearts to all. Let them have girt loins so that they do not hold forth their arms as instruments of wickedness for sin. Let them have lit lamps so that they show their arms as instruments of righteousness for God.

(13) This, brothers and sisters, is a true and sound teaching of the Catholic faith. This is the measure of wheat that the household of our Lord and Redeemer must eat. As much as the Lord apportions, we give to you from this measure of wheat. We are joined together in beseeching the Lord himself that both we and you, in awe of his grace and by his help, may be deemed worthy to eat. May he take away from us the dominion of wicked desire, and grant to everyone increase and perseverance in love. May he gird our loins, may he light our lamps and keep them lit, so that our love may not grow cold, nor let another wickedness be lord over us. But may our Lord and Redeemer give grace to all, and may he pour out his gift of holy illumination and virtuousness to all. May he grant that we may rightly understand and do as necessary what we hear from him, and that we may preach acceptable and suitable sermons about what you must do. May he grant to you that you understand in your heart and accomplish by deed what you hear from the Lord through his servants. Therefore, the mercy of God works in all of us so that we, whom the Lord willed to be his stewards, are made faithful and wise by him; and you too, he makes obedient and humble, that we may healthfully and profitably have this measure of the Lord’s wheat, which we gave to you, in common with you.

 

Sermo II
In Natale Domini
De Duplici Nativitate Christi Una Aeterna
Ex Patre Altera Temporali Ex Virgine

Sermon 2
At the Birth of the Lord
On the Twofold Nativity of Christ, One Eternal Nativity from the Father, Another Temporal from the Virgin

(1) Although those wanting to talk about today’s solemnity have examined the one Word, which is their topic, they have found no adequate words to say. For this Word is not that which word which ceases after being spoken, but continues after being begotten; it is not transient but eternal; it is not made by the God the Father but begotten; not merely begotten, but indeed the only-begotten. Indeed, God the Father begot, from his own self, the one Word through whom the Father created all things from nothing. For in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him there is nothing made. Because God the Father makes everything through the Word, it is made known that the Father did not make this Word, but begot. Therefore, the Word is God from God, Creator from Creator. For this reason, this Word is, by nature, what the Father is.

(2) Therefore God the Son was born from God the Father, different in person, the same in nature. He is always in the presence of the Father, always with the Father, always from the Father, always in the Father. He is always in the presence of the Father with whom he has innate immeasurability. He is always with the Father with whom he has innate eternity. He is always from the Father from whom he has, by nature, his eternal nativity. He is always in the Father with whom he has, by nature, the one and equal divinity. Indeed, the Father is one, the Son is another, but there are not two Gods because the Father and Son are one God. Seeing that what I have said arises from God the Father and God the Son, we say, as is proper, that one is the Father and another is the Son, and that nevertheless we properly say that the one God is Father and Son. For when say that the Father is one, the Son another, we are indicating the two distinct persons of the Begetter and the Begotten. But when we say that the one God is the Father and the Son, we are pointing out the one nature of an undivided divinity. Therefore there is one person of the Begetter, and another person of the Begotten, but there is one nature belonging to the Begetter and the Begotten.

(3) But is it ever possible to say who is from whom? Man from God, the mortal from the immortal, the visible from the invisible, the mutable from the immutable, the art from the artisan, the created from the creator, the made from the maker, the lesser from the immeasurable, the temporal from the eternal, the humble from the greatest, he who is fashioned from earth by he who created all things from nothing! To the creator belongs an indescribable omnipotence with which, and by his gracious benevolence, he made us. Omnipotence itself is the Creator, and he who does its work graciously also omnipotently fulfills the work of Grace, which is itself the Saviour. As creator he has the power of establishing and ruling his creation, as saviour he has the power of laying down and taking away for the salvation of souls. Indeed we now declare that omnipotence is how the Word, who was in the beginning with God and who is God, made everything that was not; certainly grace, too, is how the Word, who was made flesh, came to seek and save the lost; omnipotence is how makes every day, grace is how he deemed it worthy to be conceived on an appointed day and to be born on an appointed day.

(4) Therefore on a day of the people, he who is co-eternal and equal with God the Father and who abides perpetually throughout the days of the holy angels, he was made made flesh on an appointed day of the people, and so he was made a little less than the angels. Indeed the Prophet speaks about him ‘Bring good news about his salvation, day from day (diem de die)’. What is ‘day from day’ if not the Son from the Father? Therefore the Son is from the Father, and the day is from the day. But nevertheless, the Father and the Son are not two days, but there is one day. The Son is from the Father, and God is from God. Nevertheless the Father and the Son are not two gods, but there is one God. Therefore we understand that the one eternal day is both the Father and the Son, but the Son alone is found in a day within time (dies temporis). For the eternal day, the Father and the Son, made our body and soul, but on a day within time the Son alone received our body and soul. The only-begotten Christ, the eternal day, abides in the form of God, the only-begotten Christ accepts the form of a servant on a day within time. Christ the rich, the eternal day, perserves that he may gather up us, his treasure, Christ the poor, was made on a day within time that he may redeem us. Christ, the eternal day, is God from God the Father, Christ on a day within time is God the man of a virgin mother. Christ the Word, the eternal day, uttered from the heart of the Father, Christ the Word, on a day within time was made flesh in the womb of a virgin mother. Christ, the eternal day, is true God from true God, Christ the bridegroom, on a day within time, goes forth from his chamber. Christ, the day of eternity, creates the angels and Christ, the day within time, saves his people. Christ, the day of eternity, nourishes the holy angels in heaven, and Christ, the day within time, renews the people on the earth. For the creator of angels was made man so that man might eat the bread of angels, and while the creator nourishes both people and angels, he nevertheless continues undiminished. How perfect is this bread who nourishes angels through his splendor so that angels, in their dwelling place, are satisfied in him, and this same bread feeds us through faith so that we may not fail in the Way. This bread gives himself to angels as the joy for their steadfastness, and he has also been given to people as remedy for their health. And he who is the food of angels has been made our medicine.

(5) Nevertheless, my dearly beloved brothers and sisters, consider the greatness of his grace and recognise that God deemed it worthy to reward his people in advance. For Christ is the Son of God, true God from true God and, by nature, the one God with the Father, eternally nourishing his holy angels from his very self. But nevertheless the Son of God did not accept the nature of angels. But in order that God might entrust his own love to us, his Son accepted our nature from us. The only-begotten God, who is the bread of angels, accepted both the soul and flesh of man so that the Son might make himself the bread of men. Each he accepted was true, holy and of this world: he accepted our soul without sin, he accepted our flesh with mortality, he accepted a righteous soul through which he might grant righteousness to our souls. On our account he deemed it worthy to accept mortal flesh, so that according to the flesh he might die and vanquish death, according to the flesh he may also rise again, and through the flesh he may resurrect our bodies.

(6) The great mystery, my dearly beloved brothers and sisters, is the great evidence of his divine love. Man departed from God in his condemnation God, God came to men in his love for man. He loved the unjust so that he might make them just. He loved the weak so that he might make them whole. He loved the wicked so that he might make them righteous. He loved the dead so that he might make them alive. What more could I say? Since indeed the only-begotten God so loved human nature that he not only freed it from the power of the evil angel, but he also set human nature in his very self at the right hand of the Father, over all the good angels. For this nature in the first man had been captured by the evil angel, now in the second man it rules over all the good angels. This nature in the first man polluted the world by sin, and in the second man it cleansed the world from sin. The first man is earthen from earth, the second man is heavenly from heaven. A woman deceived the first man with a corrupted heart, and a virgin with an uncorrupted virginity conceived the second man. In the wife of the first man, the faithlessness of the devil perverted the heart, leading it astray, but through the mother of the second man, the grace of God preserved virtuous both the heart and the flesh. He bore the most steadfast faith in the heart, and he refrained from every desire of the flesh. Accordingly, since man was pitiably damned because of sin, therefore God was miraculously born as man without sin.

(7) Consider, brothers and sisters, that the ways of this medicinal grace have been shown to us by divine benevolence. For at that time the wicked angel came to Eve so that the man, whom God had made, would be separated from God through her; but now the righteous angel came to Mary so that God might unite to human nature in her. The wicked devil came to Eve so that he might take life away from us, and Gabriel came to Mary so that he might announce the redemption of life to man. Through the fault of the first man, the devil began to rule over man, and through the grace of the second man, he began to be overcome by man; he domineered over the first, was held captive under the second. Through the first man the devil held us captive, through the second he lost us who had been freed. The first man, Adam, was for us the author of fault, and the last Adam is for us the author of grace. The man formed from earth brought forth the people of the earth, and the man conceived by the Holy Spirit made them people of heaven. Through the first man we squandered the first grace, through the second we received again even more. Indeed, the first man introduced the stain of sin with which we were born for death, and the second man offers the grace of justification so that we may be reborn for his kingdom. Through the first man we were begotten in the flesh and made sons and daughters of the age, through the second man we were begotten in the spirit and revealed as sons and daughters of God. The first man subjected us to vice, the second man made us blossom with righteousness. The first man drove us out to the place where, among wickedness, the second man died. This second man raised us to a place where, among righteousness, the first man ascended. Indeed, the first man was the first to descend to Sheol, the second man was the first to ascend into heaven.

(8) Nevertheless, brothers and sisters, it is worthwhile for you to solemnly hear of the day of the Resurrection of the Lord even if today is the Nativity of the Lord. For just as the only-begotten God deemed it worthy to be born on account of us, so too did he deem it worthy to die on account of us according to the flesh, even to rise. Indeed, his birth is the day of visitation, his death and resurrection is the day of redemption. For the only-begotten God saves us by his grace, the work of which he began when he was conceived in the womb, and he completed the work of his grace when he rose from the grave. By his conception in the womb, he was made to share in our death, and by his rising from the grave, he made us to share in his life. Now therefore let us all beseech the Lord that, as he has given joy to his people on this day of the Nativity, so too may he lead all with joy and peace to also the day of the Resurrection, and make he keep his people in faith and in love. Amen.

Sermo III
De Sancto Stephano Protomartyre
Et Conversione S. Pauli

Sermon 3
On Saint Stephen, the First Martyr
And the Conversion of Saint Paul

(1) Yesterday we honoured the Nativity of our eternal king; today was praise the triumphant passion of his soldier. For yesterday our King, having put on a stately robe of the flesh, deemed it worthy to depart from the palace of the virgin’s womb and to visit the world; today his soldier left the tabernacle of his body and departed triumphantly to heaven. Our king took on the servant’s girdle of flesh, the majesty of his eternal divinity intact, and entered into the martial camp of this age. His soldier, having put down the corruptible garments of his body, ascended to the palace of heaven where he will rule in perpetuity. Our king was clothed in flesh and descended, his soldier was laurelled with blood and ascended. His soldier ascended with the Jews throwing stones, because his king descended with the angels rejoicing. Yesterday we rejoiced glory to God in the highest and the holy angels sang; today the angels rejoice and receive Stephen into their fellowship. Yesterday the Lord departed from the womb of the virgin; today his soldier departed from the prison of the flesh. Yesterday Christ was swaddled in rags for us, today Stephan was clothed by Christ in the garment of immortality. Yesterday the poverty of a stable bore the infant Christ; today the immeasurableness of heaven received triumphant Stephen. God alone descended so that he might raise many; our king humbled himself so that he might glorify his soldier. For he prepared the womb of the virgin for his body, and he also deemed it worthy to open heaven for his martyr. The Lord Christ did not disdain to be conceived in the poverty of the womb, so that that the heights of heaven might receive the soul of Stephen.

(2) Nevertheless, my brothers and sisters, we must recognise with what armour Stephen was fitted so that he could overcome the fury of the Jews and successfully triumph. For we cannot ignore such courage and triumph. A man that cannot be overcome by a multitude is man who defends himself with worthy armour. For in Stephen shined the sign of unconquered righteousness, which did not succumb. For it neither feared those who threatened him or was overcome by the blows of those who stoned him. For he remained so undaunted among the violent crowd and he was so untroubled by the torments of stones that he fearlessly reproved the disbelief of the Jews and he pleaded with them as a friend. Therefore what kind of great and unconquerable armour did Stephen equip so that he could reprove the violent crowd, that he could overcome those stoning him not by striking back but by enduring, and that, after being slain, he could enter alive and crowned into the palace of the heavenly kingdom? Doubtless it was because he was defended by his king’s protection that he could not be conquered by his enemies. Seeing that our king, although the greatest, came to us as a humble man, but he could not come in vain. Indeed, he distributed a great donative* to his soldiers, with which he not only enriched them abundantly, but he also strengthened them for successful battle. For our king distributed the gift of love, which guides his people to the fellowship of the divinity. Therefore what he distributes he also pays out of his own treasury: he does not diminish himself at all, but he wonderfully enriches the poverty of his faithful, and he remains abundant with unfailing treasures.

*This term was notoriously difficult to translate appropriately, so I left it as is. A donativum was a cash bonus paid to Roman soldiers by the Emperor. Originally, it was a gesture of good will and was voluntarily disbursed by the emperors on important occasions (such as the anniversary of their accession). As a historical tidbit, by the time of Fulgentius, donativa came to be expected (like a pay increase), and there was a significant risk that soldiers would mutiny if they weren’t paid this cash bonus.

(3) Therefore love sets Christ down on earth from heaven, and it also lifts Stephen from the earth to heaven. Love leads under the power of the king, and it follows and shines bright in the king’s soldier. O the ever admirable might of the Saviour! O the unceasingly praiseworthy grace of the Redeemer! His might shows the wonder within his mother of perpetual virginity, his grace demonstrates the proof of unconquered love in his martyr. Indeed, the chaste purity continues in the virgin, the unconquered righteousness of love perseveres in the martyr. As the virginity of the Lord’s mother could not be injured, so the love of Christ in the soul of the martyr could be overcome by so savage a host. Therefore Stephen, so that he might be worthy to receive the crown of his own name, he had love as his armour and through it he was victorious everywhere. Through the love of God, he did not yield to the violent Jews. Through love of his neighbour, he interceded for those who stoned him. Resting on the righteousness of love, he conquered the violent and cruel Saul, whom Stephen had on earth as a persecutor, and now Stephen is worthy to have Saul in heaven as a co-heir. For this holy and unwearied love desired to win by prayer those who were unable to be converted by teaching. We must not think, brothers and sisters, Stephen to have loved his enemies when he was praying for them, and to not have loved them when he was correcting their disbelief by reproof. This is unworthy of the soul of a martyr who is hastening to the palace of heaven. For holy love keeps firm endurance in prayer, which holds in reproach a severity that must be corrected. And therefore gentleness deserves to be heard in prayer, because without love there is no gravity in correction; and through this, blessed Stephen did not keep back love, whether by prayer or by correction, because by both he purposed the salvation of those who sin, and by the proof of his holy prayer Stephen showed that his rebuking was not of hate but of love.

(4) Moreover, in doing this, the blessed martyr showed his love to those present, and none among the coming generations ignored his upright example. For he showed the two-fold duty of the Church’s stewards, that correction should not be neglected in one’s speech and that prayer should be humbly poured out to God on behalf of the sinner whose sins must be corrected. So that he who does evil, let him be shamed through reproach of his wicked deeds, and let him be helped through prayer before God. In this way, love may express righteousness in his mouth so that he corrects his sins and keeps humility in his heart so that, for his sin, he may pour out prayer with pure love. For he who does not correct his sin, he is judged by his negligence, and he who does not pray for the former, he will be condemned to ruin. Wherefore, brothers and sisters, whenever one is corrected for the salvation of his soul, let them not accept contemptuously the counsel of love nor let them listen to the existing harsness of their will, but let them consider what useful profit they are to acquire. For on that account, they ought to be reproved so that they may be corrected from their perverse deeds. He would not regard his own love as having grown cold in his heart when he sees reproof ablaze with some sternness of words. Thus let reproof keep watch in one’s speech so that prayer may not fall asleep in the heart. And through this, it may be deliberately provided for to sinners in both ways so that as long as a man is corrected, he is ashamed of sin and is separated from wicked works, and through prayer, by the mercy of God, he is saved. For Sacred Scripture says that the Lord loves him whom he corrects; moreover he scourges every son whom he receives.

 (5) Therefore we are compelled by the love of Christ, and we encourage all good men and women to persevere in good, and we hold to account the wicked that they may depart from wickedness. Since especially both marks of salvation are shown to us in these two saints, that whoever is good ought to imitate the perseverance of love in Stephen, but whoever is wicked ought to follow the example of conversion in Paul. And let the good hold fast to kindness until the end, and let the wicked abandon their wickedness as soon as possible. For the assurance of righteousness does not result in the good being abandoned, nor does the consideration of sin makes the wicked lose hope, but the good will do good more bravely, and the wicked will abandon wickedness more quickly. Let the good fear that they might fall, and let the wicked attempt to rise. Therefore let whoever is wicked be cast down with Paul into ruin so that they may be raised with Paul into righteousness; since they who have fallen as the wicked also rises as the good. The sinful have been cast down, and the righteous have been raised; the most vicious persecutor has fallen and he has risen as a truthful preacher. For in falling the wicked loses the light of the body, but in rising the justified receives the light of the heart. Therefore he has been conformed to Stephen, and has been made a sheep from a wolf. And behold, now Paul is glad with Stephen, now he fully enjoys the glory of Christ with Stephen, now he rejoices with Stephen, now he reigns with Stephen. For where Stephen departed, slain by the stones of Paul, there Paul follows, assisted by the prayers of Stephen.

(6) My brothers and sisters, true life is not to be understood as Paul’s shame for Stephen’s murder, but true life is what Stephen gave thanks for when he received Paul as his co-heir, since love rejoices in both. Indeed, the love in Stephen conquered the viciousness of the Jews, the love in Paul overwhelmed his multitude of sins, the love in both was equally worthy to inherit the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, love is the font and beginning of all good, an excellent armour, the way which leads to heaven. Whoever walks in love, they can neither sin nor fear. Love guides, protects and leads. For which reason, brothers and sisters, since Christ set up the ladder of love, up which every Christian is able to climb to heaven, you ought to bravely keep a pure heart, you ought to show your love for one another, and by your growth in love you should climb the ladder. You ought to persevere in good works, so that you can attain the eternal prize, by the grace of Christ’s help, who is our Lord and Saviour.

A Letter from Jesus?

So there is a supposed letter from Jesus (sometimes called "A True Letter of Jesus Christ") that one can find posted on some web pages which I stumbled upon. I am going to put its full text here for reference; I apologize for the considerable length, but as someone searching for information on it may search for specific text from it, it would be useful to include it in full for that reason.

If you want the quick version that doesn't require any scrolling: There is no evidence it is real, and its claim of being approved or blessed by Pope Leo XIII is false too, as he actually condemned it.

For those curious in the more in-depth explanation, let's begin. But first I want to post the full letter, because if the hope is that someone looking for information will stumble across this blog post, I'd better post the whole thing. Skip past all of the italics if you want to see my commentary. Here's the letter:

A True Letter of Our Savior Jesus Christ
Consecrating the Drops of Blood which Our Lord lost on His way to Calvary.

Copy of a letter of the Oration found in the Holy Sepulchre of Our Lord Jesus Christ in Jerusalem, preserved in a silver box by His Holiness and by the Emperors and Empresses of the Christian Faith.

St. Elizabeth, Queen of Hungary, with St. Matilda and St. Bridget, wishing to know something of the Passion of Jesus Christ, offered fervent and special prayers, upon which there appeared to them Our Lord Jesus Christ who spoke to them in the following manner:

I descended from Heaven to the Earth in order to convert you.

In olden times people were religious and their harvests were abundant; at present, on the contrary, they are scanty.

If you want to reap an abundant harvest you must not work on Sunday, for on Sunday you must go to Church and pray to God to forgive your sins. He gave you six days in which to work and one for rest and devotion and to tender your help to the poor and assist in the Church.

Those people, who brawl against my religion and cast slurs on this Sacred Letter, shall be forsaken by Me.

On the contrary, those people who shall carry a copy of this letter with them shall be free from death by drowning and sudden death. They shall be free from all contagious diseases and lightening; they shall not die without confession, and shall be free from their enemies and from the hand of wrongful authority, and from all their slanderers and false witnesses.

Women in peril at child-birth will, by keeping this Oration about them, immediately overcome the difficulty. In the houses where this Oration is kept, no evil thing will ever happen: and fourty days before the death of a person who has this Oration about him or her, the Blessed Virgin will appear to him or her. So said St. Gregorius.

To all those faithful who shall recite for 3 years, each day 2 Our Fathers, Hail Marys, and Glory Be’s, in honour of the drops of blood I lost, I will concede the following 5 graces:
1.The plenary indulgence and remittance of your sins.
2.You will be free from the pains of Purgatory.
3.If you should die before completing the said 3 years, for you it will be the same as if you had completed them.
4.It will be upon your death the same as if you had shed all your blood for the Holy Faith.
5.I will descend from Heaven to take your soul and that of your relatives, until the fourth generation.

Be it known that the number of armed soldiers were 150; those who trailed me while I was bound were 23. The executioners were 83; the blows received on my head were 150; those on my stomach, 108; kicks on my shoulders, 80. I was led, bound with cords by the hair, 24 times; spits in the face were 180; I was beaten on the body 6666 times; beaten on the head, 110 times. I was roughly pushed, and at 12 o’clock was lifted up by the hair; pricked with thorns and pulled by the beard 23 times; received 20 wounds on the head; thorns of marine junks, 72; pricks of thorns in the head, 110; mortal thorns in the forehead, 3. I was afterwards flogged and dressed as a mocked king; wounds in the body, 1000. The soldiers who led me to the Calvary were 608; those who watched me were 3, and those who mocked me were 1008; the drops of blood which I lost were 28,430.

Benedetta DA S.S., Pope Leo XIII, In Roma 5 Aprile 1890 

Frequently, this is where the account of the letter will end. If you are curious, the last sentence is in Italian which says that it was blessed by Pope Leo XIII in Rome on April 5, 1890. However, some postings will go on further, and add the following even more lengthy portion. Sometimes it will go directly to it but some add a caution of "The following list of miracles and promises or warnings attached are published here, but with the caution that we do not know if the approval of Pope Leo XIII was for this portion as well". In any event, here is the rest of it:

MIRACLES ACCOMPLISHED BY THE SACRED LETTER OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST.

A second and similar copy of this Letter has been found in a place called "Pursit," three leagues from Marseilles, written in golden letters, and believed to be of supernatural origin. It was found by a boy 7 years old of the same town. With it is an appendix and declaration of the 2nd of January, 1750, which says: "All those who work on Sunday, will be cursed by me, for on the Sacred day you must rest, go to Church, attend all Divine Services, so that you and your generation will be blessed.

If on the contrary you do not believe this you will be chastised, and to your children I will send pest, famine, war, spasms and heartaches; to show you My anger, you will see signs in the sky, thunders and earthquakes.

Those who do not believe that this letter is written by Divine workmanship and dictated by the Sacred Mouth of Christ, and who will keep it hidden from other persons, will be cursed by God and condemned on the Day of Judgment. To those who will publish it, if they have many sins and are truly repentant for having offended Me, even though they have done some injury to their neighbors, when they ask pardon I will cancel their sins. Those who will copy this, or read it, or who will induce others to read it, will be free from all temptations."

A certain Spanish Captain traveling by land near Barcelona, saw a head severed from the body, which spoke to him as follows, "As you are bound for Barcelona, my good man, for God's sake send hither a Priest so that I may confess myself. It is already three days now that I have been attacked by robbers, and I cannot die without first confessing myself." The Captain brought the Confessor to the place; the living head confessed and then expired. On the body from which the head had been severed, the present Oration was found. On that occasion it was approved by several Tribunals of the Holy Inquisition and by the Queen of Spain. The said Paters, Glorias and Aves can be recited for the benefit of any soul.

At the time of the terrible earthquake in Northern Italy and in France, a girl from Nice named Nathaline was caught under a fallen house and remained 3 days buried alive. When unearthed, a copy of this Letter was found on her! She was illiterate and uneducated. When found she was sleeping, untouched by the devastation of the earthquake!

On March 12, 1821, many emigrants from S. Giovanni Incarico, in the Province of Caserta (Italy) sailed for America to look for work. During the trip they were caught in a most terrible storm, which threw their ship into collision with a warship. This caused it to sink. The event occurred on the 19th, St. Joseph's Day. Out of the 667 people on board, only 9 were saved. Everyone of them had a copy of this Letter of Christ in his possession. The survivors were found almost naked, wearing only their vests, in the pockets of which the Letters were found, dry and not even wrinkled!

Two of the survivors from the same town, named Luigi Ceccaccio and Francesco Nero, furnished ample and substantial proof of the miraculous event.

Another miracle of the Sacred Letter of Jesus Christ was revealed at the Island of Iri, also in Italy. A man was peacefully sleeping in his bed, when a mysterious hand shook him abruptly and a voice thundered: "Get up in haste, and save yourself, in a corner of the house!" Promptly complying with the divine warning, the man rose and reached, pale and trembling, a remote corner, just in time to see the floor whereon he had lain in bed, sink into a deep abyss. This Letter saved him.

Another miracle was accomplished by the "Mater Dolorosa" three miles from the town of Castelpetrosa, in the Province of Campobasso, Italy. A 13 year old shepherdess, named Maria Grazia Estassia Bibiana, was attending to her duties in the vicinity of an old Convent. Suddenly appeared to her, and to her astonished mother who was nearby, the Virgin Mater Dolorosa, who told them: "Come with me to this old Church, wherein My Son is vexed with the people of the world, as there are too many sins committed, vice is rampant everywhere; religion is neglected. Therefore destructive earthquakes, pestilence and famine are putting humanity to severe punishment. Go to Church and receive your Holy Communion at least once a year. Thus, He will pardon your sins." Then the Virgin disappeared.

Another miracle was reported recently. In the last days of June, 1889, there appeared at the railroad station of Ancona a woman in mourning. She said she was to go to Rome but lacked the money to pay for her ticket. The train left the station but after a while it stopped. Though 5 more engines were added, it would not budge. A gentleman on the train, named Chev Morelli, thought of the black dressed lady who could not board the train at the station for the lack of the money to pay her fare to Rome. He went immediately to find her, and he offered to pay for it. He paid, in fact, 47 lires for a first class ticket to Rome. This the lady accepted under the condition that she travel alone. No sooner had the lady boarded the train, than it started up speedily, to the astonishment of all.

Chev Morelli, upon reaching Rome, wished to pay his respects to the lady. He went to the car where she had been seated. However, no one was there, and on the seat he found 2,000 lire in money and a note in golden letters, which read, "I am the Mater Dolorosa Virgin; and I wish to tell the sinners of the world that they must redeem themselves, believe in God and serve Him. Otherwise, a great calamity will soon befall Christianity."

His Holiness the Pope received a letter October 2nd, 1889 wherein it was stated that if in the future the people would not renounce the devil and all his work, mortifying all evils and corrupt dealings, and make solemn vows of proceeding daily in all virtue and godliness of living, they would be overcome by disaster. This Letter was sent by the Saviour, Christ. It mentioned the appearance of the Mater Dolorosa at Ancona. It declared that on the last Good Friday no visitors were seen at the Holy Sepulchre. It sid that people should remember the Day of Judgment, when the faithful shall enjoy the Glory of the Heavens and the ungodly shall be overwhelmed in a storm of snares, fire, brimstones, and bolts.

On July 2nd, 1889, when a terrible flood caused ruin, misery and appalling loss of life, the few survivors found in the many districts stricken by the disaster were in many cases in possession of the Sacred Letter.

One Giovanni Santarello who happened to be in France at the time of the earthquake, which made thousands of victims in the Southern Departments, was found buried alive under the wreck of a house after remaining in a deep anxiety four days and four nights. A copy of this Sacred Letter was found on him.

In commemoration of the apparition of the Mater Dolorosa Virgin in Ancoma, the people of the Township of Castelpetrosa, in the Province of Campobasso were so deeply shaken by the divine event that a great revival of worship was proclaimed and a pilgrimage was organized. At a meeting of the leading citizens, the clergy and authorities, it was resolved to build a great temple in honor of the Holy Virgin. On the day set for the laying of the cornerstone, a great gathering of bishops, priests, high church dignitaries and the laity, assisted by several hundred workmen, were ready to start the ceremony. Suddenly all tools, picks and shovels disappeared. To the spectators' terrified eyes appeared the Mater Dolorosa Virgin, who said: "Why are you digging this ground? Yonder, amid those beautiful woods, you will find the Sanctuary for your worship."

Speechless and confused the people beheld, as she vanished, the Virgin ascending to the heavens. A few days afterwards, three miles from Castelpetrosa, in the vicinity of the old Convent, three magnificent fountains were found beside a shrine decked with flowers and golden stars, seemingly erected by a divine hand.

On the solemn occasion of the last Pope's Jubilee, the Saviour, Christ, made His sudden appearance to the Pope, who was then on his throne, surrounded by cardinals, bishops and high dignitaries of the Church. The Holy Spirit spoke thus: "People of the world, forsake your sins or else the end shall soon be forthcoming!" Our Lord then disappeared. All present threw themselves at the feet of the Pope, beseeching pardon and clemency!

Whatever form it takes, you can find this posted on several websites (sometimes with a few small differences), normally those of the traditional Catholic variety, though I did ironically see a Protestant site talk about it, saying it shows Catholicism is absurd if the pope would sign onto something said website thought was obviously false.

There are a number of issues one can see with it, especially the second portion. The most obvious is that Jesus Christ appearing in front of the pope as well as "cardinals, bishops, and high dignitaries of the Church" would have been one of the biggest news stories ever for Catholics, yet is apparently unknown outside of this account. That is a major red flag that this is not true. Even if we ignore the much more fantastical second portion (which is sometimes omitted in re-postings) and limit ourselves to the first portion of it, one has difficulty verifying any of this.

So where did this come from? Well, postings of the first portion seem to go back to is a prayer book called "The Pieta." The Pieta has a number of claims I must confess I find dubious that it doesn't seem to back up (I note that the Pieta as a whole appears to lack any official sanction from the Catholic Church such an imprimatur), but what matters is this particular one here. However, it does not give any source itself, Furthermore, it does not include the second portion of the quoted text, leaving me wonder where that came from. Most probably, there is an earlier English source that contains the "full text" and the Pieta chose to omit the second and more implausible portion. The sources that include the full text are based on that fuller version. Unfortunately, I do not know what that original text is.

This site seems to have a little about it, but unfortunately doesn't add too much information for our purposes. Though it is interesting to note that the English translation offered there differs from the version that is most frequently spread around and quoted.

Perhaps one of the reasons this gets posted is because of the claim that Pope Leo XIII approved it. But did he? Much like the rest of the claims, the source for this is the "letter" itself. As it turns out, Leo XIII never approved it. In fact, he condemned it. I wish I could say I figured out all of this on my own, but some of the critical information came from another web page (which is now defunct, so I suppose this blog post is where one can find the applicable information).

This letter is in fact mentioned in an official Vatican document called the Acta Sanctae Sedis; specifically, the Acta Sanctae Sedis 31 (1898-99). The specific section in question can be found at this link, page 727. The aforementioned web page provided the following Latin translation for it:

"Several leaflets [foliolá in Latin] have been passed on to this eminent Sacred Congregation of Indulgences and Holy Relics. These leaflets contain prayers with improper indulgences attributed to them and hence serious doubts have arisen regarding their authenticity. Thus, lest Christ's faithful be drawn into error for an extended time and in order that all pretext for the enemies of the Church for ridiculing the inestimable treasure of Indulgences be removed, especially in these times, the Sacred Congregation, which is run in a way that is pious, holy, and incorrupt, took it to be its duty to put these leaflets under examination, and, since it was found that there were false, improper, and apocryphal Indulgences promulgated in them, saw fit that the aforementioned leaflets be prohibited without delay, and the Indulgences claimed by them be declared apocryphal and false.

Whence the most eminent Fathers gathered together in a general meeting at the Vatican on May 5, 1898, having weighed everything well, have unanimously decided the following: the aforementioned leaflets brought before this Sacred Congregation are to be altogether prohibited, and the Indulgences attached to them are to be considered false and apocryphal.

Which things having been passed on to His Holiness our Lord Pope Leo XIII in the audience held with the aforementioned Cardinal Prefect on May 26, 1898, His Holiness approved and confirmed the sentence of the eminent Fathers, and commanded that a general Decree be sent out by which the aforementioned leaflets or those differing but little according to various editions, be prohibited and that the Indulgences claimed by them be altogether condemned as false and apocryphal."

Emphasis added. Fortunately for our purposes, for reference they went on to list the text of these leaflets, called "Foliolums," which were mostly in Italian. The applicable one is on page 740, though I will put it here for easy reference:

LETTERA DI GESÙ CRISTO.
DELLE GOCCIE DI SANGUE CHE SPARSE N. S. G. C MENTRE ANDAVA AL CALVARIO.

Copia di una lettera di Orazione ritrovata nel Santo Sepolcro di N. S. G. C. in Gerusalemme, conservata in una cassa d'argento da S. Santità, e dagli Imperatori ed Imperatrici cristiani. Desiderando S. Elisabetta Regina d' Ungheria, Santa Matilde e Santa Brigida sapere alcune cose della Passione di Gesù Cristo, facendo fervorose e particolari Orazioni, mercè le quali gli apparve

Gesù Cristo favellando con esse e cosi dicendo:

Sappiate che i soldati armati furono 150, quelli che mi condussero legato furono 23, gli esecutori di giustizia 83, i pugni che ricevei alla testa furono 150 e nel petto 108, i calci nelle spalle 80, e fui trascinato con corde e per i capelli 23 volte, natte e sputi nella faccia furono 180, battiture nel corpo 6666, battiture nel capo 110, mi diedero un urtone, notate nel cuore, fui alzato in aria per i capelli ad ore 21, ad un tempo mandai 120 sospiri, fui trascinato e tirato per la barba 23 volte, piaghe nella testa 20, spini di giunchi marini 72, punture di spine nella testa 100, spine mortali nella fronte 3, dopo flagellato e vestito da re di burla, piaghe nel corpo 1000. I soldati che mi condussero al Calvario furono 908, quelli che mi guardavano 3, goccie di sangue che sparsi furono 28430 e chi ogni giorno recita 7 Pater, Ave e Gloria per lo spazio di 15 anni per compiere il numero delle goccie di sangue che ho sparso, gli concedo 5 grazie :

I . L'indulgenza plenaria e remissione di tutti i peccati ;
2°. Sarà liberato dalle pene del purgatorio ;
3°. Se morrà prima di compire detti 15 anni, per esso sarà come li avesse compiti ;
4°. Sarà come fosse morto ed avesse sparso il sangue per la Santa Fede ;
5°. Scenderò io dal cielo a prendere l'anima sua e quella dei suoi parenti fino al quarto grado.

Quegli che porterà questa Orazione non morirà annegato, nè di mala morte, nè di morte improvvisa, sarà liberato dal contagio e dalla peste, dalle saette, e non morirà senza confessione, sarà liberato dai suoi nemici, e dal potere della Giustizia, e da tutti i suoi malevoli e da falsi testimoni.

Le donne che non possono partorire, tenendola addosso, partoriranno subito e usciranno di pericolo.

Nella casa ove sarà questa Orazione non vi saranno tradimenti nè di cose cattive, e 40 giorni prima della sua morte quello che l'avrà sopra di sè vedrà la Beata Vergine Maria, come dice S. Gregorio papa.

Un certo Capitano spagnolo viaggiando per terra vide vicino Barcellona una testa recisa dal busto che gli parlò cosi: Giacché vi portate a Barcellona, o passeggiero, conducetemi un confessore acciò possa confessarmi essendo già da tre giorni che sono stata recisa dai ladri, e non posso morire se non mi confesso. Condotto al luogo il Confessore dal Capitano suddetto, la testa vivente si confessò ed indi spirò, trovando addosso al busto da cui era stata recisa, la seguente orazione la quale in quella occasione fu appro- vata da vari Tribunali della S. Inquisizione di Spagna. I suddetti 7 Pater, Ave e Gloria si potranno recitare e applicare anche per qualsivoglia anima.

Altra simile copia della suddetta lettera è stata miracolosamente ritrovata nel luogo chiamato Porsit, tre leghe lontano da Marsiglia, scritta a lettere d'oro e per opera divina portata da un fanciullo di 7 anni del medesimo luogo di Porsit.

Con un' aggiunta e dichiarazione il 2 Gennaio 1750 che dice : Tutti coloro che trayaglieranno nei giorni di Domenica saranno maledetti da me, perchè nelle Domeniche dovete andare alla Chiesa pregando Iddio che vi perdoni i vostri peccati, e per questo vi ho dato sei giorni da travagliare ed il settimo per riposare, e far opere di divozione, e delle vostre sostanze fate bene ai poveri, e le vostre genti saranno ricolme di benedizioni e di grazie : per con- trario se non credete alla presente, verranno maggiori gastighi a voi ed ai vostri figli e vi manderò peste, fame, guerre, dolori e spasimi di cuore, per segno del mio sdegno vedrete segni nel Cielo, tuoni e terremoti.

Quelli che giudicheranno che questa lettera non sia scritta per opera divina e dettata dalla Sacratissima bocca di Dio, e queUi che la terranno maliziosamente nascosta senza pubblicarla ad altre persone, saranno maledetti da Dio e confusi nel giorno del Giudizio, e chi invece la pubblicherà, se avesse tanti peccati purché vera- mente pentito di avermi offeso, e ancora avendo fatto qualche ingiuria al suo prossimo, chiedendomi scusa, io gli cancellerò i suoi peccati, quelli che copieranno questa divozione e la leggeranno, oppure la faranno leggere, giammai periranno e saranno liberi da tutte le tentazioni.

Even if one speaks no Italian, this is immediately recognizable as being the letter in question; in fact, the English version is really just a translation of it (though some parts are reordered). Interestingly, this includes the beginning of the second section that gave the miracle accounts (e.g. the paragraph beginning with "Un certo Capitano spagnolo" corresponds to the paragraph beginning with "A certain Spanish captain") but does not go through all of it. There are several possibilities for why. Perhaps those sections were added later, or it was so long that the people who published the condemnation of it felt they could cut it off at that point and get the point across, or perhaps the specific edition they were using didn't go that far, but others did.

So contrary to the claim that it was blessed by Leo XIII, it was in fact condemned by him. The claim it was blessed appears to be made up and just added to it in order to convince people it had his approval. And it seems it worked. Based on nothing more than that, one can easily find people posting this account and saying that it was approved by Leo XIII even though the opposite is true.

Obviously, whether Leo XIII approved it or not would probably only really matter to a Catholic, as anyone else would simply dismiss the letter to begin with. Still, Catholics should know that Leo XIII condemned this.

This is just another sign of why you should be cautious whenever you find these sorts of claims on the Internet (or anywhere else, really). It's very easy for someone to claim that something was approved or verified by someone important, but it could be false. The above is just one example. When you see things like this in the future, you should want to see an official document in which it was approved.

Incorrect Claims About the Reason for the Electoral College

The electoral college is a controversial system for electing the United States President. Whether it's good or not is not this article's reason for existing; instead, I wish to correct what seems to be a major error as to claims about why it was created in the first place.

You've probably seen this claim over and over, which is that the reason the president is elected by the electoral college rather than the popular vote was to prevent the more populated states from running things, or in order to try to give better representation to the less popular rural areas. Basically, the claim is that those who made the Constitution came up with the electoral college to try to give less populated areas of the country more equal power to the populated areas, or something similar to that.

One thing you may notice is that no one ever gives any citation for such a thing, or at least I have never seen anyone give any citation. Surely, if this was their reasoning, there must be a quote or writing of one of them. But no one ever provides such a thing.

So let's look at actual statements made on the issue. First, consider this statement by James Madison, considered to perhaps be the most influential person when it came to writing the Constitution. This quote was given in his notes about the Constitutional Convention and is found here. He stated:

If it be a fundamental principle of free Govt. that the Legislative, Executive & Judiciary powers should be separately exercised, it is equally so that they be independently exercised. There is the same & perhaps greater reason why the Executive shd. be independent of the Legislature, than why the Judiciary should: A coalition of the two former powers would be more immediately & certainly dangerous to public liberty. It is essential then that the appointment of the Executive should either be drawn from some source, or held by some tenure, that will give him a free agency with regard to the Legislature. This could not be if he was to be appointable from time to time by the Legislature. It was not clear that an appointment in the 1st. instance even with an eligibility afterwards would not establish an improper connection between the two departments. Certain it was that the appointment would be attended with intrigues and contentions that ought not to be unnecessarily admitted. He was disposed for these reasons to refer the appointment to some other source. The people at large was in his opinion the fittest in itself. It would be as likely as any that could be devised to produce an Executive Magistrate of distinguished Character. The people generally could only know & vote for some Citizen whose merits had rendered him an object of general attention & esteem. There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections. 

Now, this and the other quotes he includes are from James Madison's notes so they can be more properly considered a transcription of general thoughts rather than a literal word-for-word rendering of what was stated. However, James Madison could be trusted, I think, to get his own ideas right. Here we see nothing of population, but rather that states with a lot of slaves would object to a popular vote because their slaves can't vote and thus they would not have as much power in a national election. While this one does at least relate to the issue of population, it does so in a very different manner than those who claim it's a matter of high populations vs low populations suggest. It should be noted, of course, that with the abolishment of slavery, this consideration is negated.

There is another quote that can be found, from The Federalist Papers. The Federalist Papers were pseudonymously written by James Madison, John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton under the name of "Publius." Their purpose was to try to explain why everything in the Constitution was the way it was in an effort to convince people it was a great idea. Given that these men played a major role in drafting the Constitution to begin with, their testimony is particularly valuable. While a little caution must be exercised because these documents were propagandistic in nature, nevertheless they are one of the best guides we have as to why. The discussion on the electoral college is found in Federalist #68. 

Most of it is not concerned with the question of why you use electors rather than a popular vote, and is rather an argument as to why electors are preferable to other non-popular-vote options such as having the House of Representatives do it. I will analyze it. Note that while there are strong speculations based on the writing style of each part of the Federalist as to who wrote what, we do not know for sure. #68 is believed to have been written by Alexander Hamilton who is the one I will credit, but it is possible that it was Jay or Madison.

THE mode of appointment of the Chief Magistrate of the United States is almost the only part of the system, of any consequence, which has escaped without severe censure, or which has received the slightest mark of approbation from its opponents. The most plausible of these, who has appeared in print, has even deigned to admit that the election of the President is pretty well guarded. I venture somewhat further, and hesitate not to affirm, that if the manner of it be not perfect, it is at least excellent. It unites in an eminent degree all the advantages, the union of which was to be wished for.

It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided. This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjuncture.

It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.

Although little time is actually devoted to explaining why this is preferable to a popular vote, we do see the idea that the decision "should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation." Thus, "A small number of persons, elected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations." Not a word is stated about issues of population.

I should also note, of course, that the electoral college has been an utter failure in accomplishing this goal. No one is selected as an elector with the purpose of it being someone who will analyze who should become president; people are chosen specifically because they will not perform any such analysis and will rather vote for a particular predetermined candidate. The electors for Trump were chosen because they were people guaranteed to vote for Trump, and the electors for Biden were chosen because they were people guaranteed to vote for Biden. While there have been a few faithless electors in the past, these were done more as a protest than any actual goal of changing the election result (to my knowledge, no faithless elector in US history has ever voted for the other primary candidate; rather, they vote for someone else entirely). This is how it has been for a very, very long time. The idea of people analyzing who would be the best president after being chosen for electors is a pipe dream.

The next several paragraphs of the Federalist Paper are unimportant for our purposes so I'll skip them, as it is an explanation for the specifics of the electoral college, such as why they meet in their own states rather than all in one location, or why elected officials like Senators or Representatives are not allowed to be electors. But the final paragraph on the election of the President should nevertheless be noted:

The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States. It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue. And this will be thought no inconsiderable recommendation of the Constitution, by those who are able to estimate the share which the executive in every government must necessarily have in its good or ill administration. Though we cannot acquiesce in the political heresy of the poet who says: "For forms of government let fools contest That which is best administered is best," yet we may safely pronounce, that the true test of a good government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration.

If anyone can look at the people who have been elected Presidents of the United States, and say the office of President has never fallen "to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications" then I would have to say they have an extremely low standard for requisite qualifications.

But the bottom line here is that in the most detailed explanation of the reason for the electoral college, the constantly spouted claim of it being related to better representing less populated areas is not found or even hinted at. If someone wants to claim that's a valid reason for the existence of the electoral college now, fine, but it wasn't at all what was in mind for the people who actually set it up.

It may be noted that Madison's statement from the Constitutional Convention regarding slaves is not mentioned here; most likely, this was omitted because New York (where these pamphlets were distributed) had a very small slave population. I suppose someone could try to say that they would omit any mention of giving more representation to smaller states because New York was one of the more populated states (behind Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts at the time), but the point remains that still no explanation was given for it being an issue of state population.

So here we have two sources as to the why of the electoral college, but neither says anything about the much-touted claim that the reason for the electoral college was to prevent the high population states from controlling the presidential election. Rather, they give totally different reasons. 

Another notable quote from the Constitutional Convention (same page as the Madison quote I gave earlier) is from Elbridge Gerry. Gerry was a vice president of the United States and was an important figure in the framing of the Constitution, but unfortunately for him, the main thing he is remembered for is being the person that the word "gerrymandering" is named after. At any rate, he had the following to say, at least according to Madison's notes linked above:

If the Executive is to be elected by the Legislature he certainly ought not to be re-eligible. This would make him absolutely dependent. He was agst. a popular election. The people are uninformed, and would be misled by a few designing men. He urged the expediency of an appointment of the Executive by Electors to be chosen by the State Executives. The people of the States will then choose the 1st. branch: The legislatures of the States the 2d. branch of the National Legislature, and the Executives of the States, the National Executive. This he thought would form a strong attachnt. in the States to the National System. The popular mode of electing the chief Magistrate would certainly be the worst of all. If he should be so elected & should do his duty, he will be turned out for it like Govr. Bowdoin in Massts. & President Sullivan in N. Hamshire.

So this one is that the general public is not well informed and would be easily led astray (a quite arguable point), with the electors being a guard against this. Nothing about state size. Also, much like the issue with the Federalist Papers, the electors are so bound to the popular wishes of the people nowadays that this can be considered largely negated.

Until such time as someone is able to provide any proof that the electoral college was made to prevent large states from controlling the popular vote, I see no reason to accept this often made claim.

If someone wants to claim that the electoral college accomplishes the goal of giving smaller states better representation... well, I'm not so sure about that, but they can at least try the argument. But don't claim that was the reasoning of the people who made the electoral college without providing any proof for it, particularly when the proof one can find demonstrates no apparent consideration of trying to give small states more power.

Kwadjo Peter (or Kojo Peter, or Kwadwo Peter)

Back in 2015, there was a report about a man in Ghana named "Kwadjo Peter" (I have also seen his name rendered as "Kojo Peter", undoubtedly the differences come from alternate romanizations of the language) who supposedly came back to life after being dead for a month. According to his account, he died, spent some time as a spirit, including a trip to hell, before resurrecting. An example report of it can be found here. Elements of the story were corroborated by family members, who said he was indeed Kwadjo Peter. He even ended up getting on an episode of a religious TV talk show.


If all this is true, it's very notable, especially because he gave an account of what he experienced while dead, such as visiting hell. As is noted in that article:

"In the next world, Kwadjo claims he started flying and got infuriated by the fact that he could still see his family and friends but none responded to him whenever he called out their names. He claims he even tried holding his one-year-old son but it was to no avail. He then met a bearded man who directed him to follow him on a narrow path. He obliged and was shown the Biblical hell fire with Michael Jackson and Pope John Paul trapped in it."

If this was made up, then we can completely ignore it as well as any information he claimed to have obtained through the experience. But if it was real then we would want to sit up and pay attention to his claims.


It was years after the fact that I first happened to hear about it, and I tried to see if I could find information about it. Did they dig up the body to check to see if it had disappeared, which would verify the story? Did they perform a DNA test to see if this was the same guy? I just couldn't find any information about it beyond the initial reports. The most I found was this article which briefly mentioned it ("To cut a long story short it was a publicity stunt – no iota of truth"), but unfortunately without going into detail on it.

However, I did eventually find it, almost by accident. I missed it because the article in question giving the aftermath rendered his name as Kwadwo Peter, and I was looking for Kojo or Kwadjo because that is how the initial articles were writing his name. It seems like the spelling can vary. But the point is, it was found. But what was the final verdict? It was a fake.

The full scoop can be found here and I am incredibly grateful for that website as it gave me the critical information. His actual name was Emmanuel Osanyongmor, a guy who looked incredibly like the original Kwadjo Peter. After the original had died, various people told Emmanuel how much he looked like him. Inspired by this, he did research on Kwadjo Peter in order to pass on him and deceive Kwadjo Peter's family so they could be used as support for his claim. The hope was that the news about being a resurrected man would gain him fame and fortune. It initially worked, but people forgot about the story pretty quickly, dashing such hopes. Later on he felt so guilty about it he tried to kill himself, leaving himself in critical condition. All of that is mentioned in the above link, but several days after that post he ended up dying for real as a result of the suicide attempt; information about that can be seen here.

So that's the truth of it all. His claims about his resurrection, including visiting the afterlife, were made up. He was able to get away with it due to having a very strong resemblance to the actual person and conducting some independent research on the deceased so he could pretend to have knowledge of their life. This could have been of course also proven wrong by digging up the body, but perhaps because the story went away so quickly there wasn't enough incentive to do so.

Given the difficulty I had in finding this out, I thought it would be good to make a blog post on the subject. That way, should anyone try searching out "Kwadjo Peter" (rather than "Kwadwo Peter") they may stumble upon this article and get information about it.

More Thoughts on Third Parties

A while ago I posted this in which I discussed third parties (in particular the American Solidarity Party) and ranked choice voting. This is a bit of an update, I suppose.

In that post I advocated for supporting the American Solidarity Party on the grounds that its platform was uniquely suited to presenting an alternate option to the Democrats and Republicans, and also said that Ranked Choice Voting (of the specific "Instant Runoff" variety) would be useful for aiding in them or other third parties becoming viable.

Since then, there have been some developments. The party did fall a bit short of what I hoped in the US presidential election, but it should be noted that it was a notable improvement over 2016. In 2016, the candidate (Michael Maturen) received 6,777 votes (putting him in 14th place) whereas the 2020 candidate (Brian Carroll) received 40,230 votes, almost 6 times as much, and bringing him to 10th place. I expect it would've done even better if not for COVID coming along and making it very hard for a newer party to gather up the necessary signatures to get onto the ballot in some states.

The amount of donations was up quite a bit, too. Now, one has to be careful when comparing donation amounts. You can't compare a presidential year to a non-presidential year, for example, and the time periods have to be the same. The FEC does list the amount they received in the back half of 2016 (when they first started reporting it), but to make a proper comparison I had to wait until the back half of 2020. I am not sure if you can get that information off the FEC's websie now given that it lists 2019-2020, but I did see how much was given between 2019 and mid-2020, so I could subtract the amount given totally in 2019 and 2020 to find out how much was given in the back half of 2020, which was more than four times as much as was made in back in 2016.

The total numbers are still not that impressive, even compared to the Libertarian and Green Parties (the total amount in 2019-2020 was nearly that of the Constitution Party, though). But it still shows growth. This is good for it. Not as good as a supporter may hope, but still good.

The other point to bring up is Ranked Choice Voting. This was on the ballot as a referendum in two states: Massachusetts and Alaska. It failed in Massachusetts but succeeded in Alaska, which is a bit surprising to me; I would've actually predicted the opposite. The Alaska one was more broad, though. It abolishes party primaries entirely and allows for a primary where as many people from any party can run as they want. People vote in that primary, and the top 4 people advance to the general election, which is decided by RCV. I am not sure what I think of this, but I can say it's an improvement over the current system, and unlike California which has open primaries and has the top two advance to the main election, isn't likely to result in what California does which is to have two Republicans or two Democrats go up against each other in the election.

We've also seen an increase in Approval Voting, with St. Louis adopting it (though not the state). In Approval Voting, you vote for as many people as you want, and the one with the most votes wins. This is better than our current plurality voting system (everyone votes for one person and whoever gets the most votes wins), though I have my doubts that it's superior to RCV. But any improvement is nevertheless an improvement.

So what is the conclusion of all this? Well, it seems things are moving in a good direction, although very slowly. Another state has picked up RCV. Approval Voting is gaining ground. And the American Solidarity Party is gaining popularity. All of these are going slowly, but they are going. Hopefully we'll see these pick up steam and increase exponentially.

What can you do to help? Well, as I've noted, if you want to help a third party succeed, you should do more than just vote for it come election time. Donate money, even a small amount. If you have problems with the American Solidarity Party, try another one. Do the same for the issue of Ranked Choice Voting, Approval Voting, or whatever alternative voting system to our very flawed one is; see if there's a movement in your state to try to get it approved. Donations are an easy enough way to help and actually do help.

The Number of the Beast Is Not Three 6's

The Number of the Beast from the Book of Revelation (specifically, Revelation 13:15) is famously 666. The meaning of this number has engendered much speculation, and while I have my musings, that isn't the point of this post. I want to set the record straight on what the number actually is. It means six hundred sixty-six. It does not mean three 6's.

Why is this distinction critical? Because in the Book of Revelation, it's written out as the numerical value. Now, in the numerals we use, if I want to write two hundred forty-three, I just write a 2 (in the hundred's place), 4 (in the ten's place) followed by a 3 (in the one's place). So when I write 243, I am functionally saying (2*100)+(4*10)+(3*1), which equals two hundred forty-three.

Greek back then was different. It has its own numerals for 1 through 9. But then there's a completely separate numeral for 10, then a new one for 20, a new one for 30, and so on through 90. And then there is again a new numeral for 100, a new one for 200, and so on. There's more past that, but that's enough for our purposes. Thus to write 243, you don't simply write 2 then 4 then 3. Instead, you would write the numeral for 200, then the numeral for 40, and then the numeral for 3.

In Revelation, what is written is χξϛ. Now, χ is the symbol for 600, ξ is the symbol for 60, and ϛ is the symbol for 6 (modern versions of those symbols are a little different but the general idea remains the same). Thus, χξϛ says 600+60+6 which equals six hundred sixty-six. If the number was supposed to be three 6's, then we would have simply seen ϛ repeated three times, but that's not the case. It is clearly referring to the numerical value of 666.

Far too often, people just spot three 6's and conclude "it's 666!" Sometimes contortions are required to even get to the three 6's, but this problem occurs even when we can see three 6's "naturally." For example, I've seen people try to cite examples of 6.66, 66.6, 6666, 6660, or 60606 in conjunction with something or other as evidence of the Number of the Beast. But as noted, the Number of the Beast is the numerical value of six hundred and sixty-six. Thus no other number, even if it has three 6's somewhere in it, is equivalent. This similarly applies to dates such as June 6, 2006 (6/6/6) because it is not a number, but rather three 6's in close succession.

I also someone claim the OK Sign (this is when you make an O with your thumb and second finger while holding the other three fingers up) was satanic because it looks like a 6 and the three raised fingers signify three 6's. Now while it is true a few people might try to use it like that to be edgy, the fact is it doesn't create the actual Number of the Beast. As noted, it would only create three 6's, not the numerical value of six hundred sixty-six. If there is any numeral value from the OK Sign, it's 18, as 6+6+6=18. For that matter, the symbol we nowadays use for 6 didn't even exist at the time of Revelation.

So don't freak out just because you see something that might be interpreted as several 6's. It's the numerical value of 666 (six hundred and sixty six) that was being discussed. This was obvious in the way the Greeks wrote it, but is less obvious when rendered as 666. It's probably better to write out six hundred sixty-six rather than 666 to help avoid these misunderstandings. There is enough speculation already concerning what the number means without dragging in things that aren't actually six hundred and sixty-six into it.