comScore
Uncategorized Wednesday, November 21st 2012 at 7:45 pm

Pope Kicks Ox, Donkey, And Singing Angels Out of Nativity Scene

By ( ) Comments

In what can be loosely termed breaking Bible history news, the Pope has stated that the long held nativity traditions of Jesus sharing his birth barn with donkeys and oxen are inaccurate, and also that the angels on hand to attend the birth of Christ did not sing. Which seems like kind of a bummer thing to say, really.  Then again, we assume that the Pope knows his stuff when it comes to the Bible. He is, after all, the Pope, and you don’t get that silly hat by not knowing what was happening when the son of God came onto the scene.

Benedict’s take on the newly lonely but significantly more hygienic birth of Christ is taken from his latest book on the life of Christ, but is not being issued as an official papal edict.  Presumably, that’s because not even the Pope is under the impression that he can get donkey statues out of nativity scenes worldwide, and that the tradition, however inaccurate, is likely to stick around.

Perhaps a more pressing issue than the maneuvering of donkey and ox statues in front yards everywhere, we now have no idea what the angels will be doing in the much loved Christmas carol “Hark The Herald Angels Sing” from now on. We think you’ll agree that our first blush recommendation (“Lo, the herald angels are just kind of hanging around/they are starting to creep us out a little”) doesn’t exactly have the same ring to it. If there are any songwriters in the audience, this is your cue to jump on in — Christmas needs you.

(via Sydney Morning Herald)

Relevant to your interests

Filed Under | • • • • •
  • Jack Bond

    No offense to Catholics, but Catholicism is the weakest interpretation of Christianity out there. I don’t know why it claims to be Christianity at all because it doesn’t resemble anything in the Bible. There is nothing in the Bible that says there should be a Pope. The Pope has no religious authority. So there you go.

  • Idlethoughts

    “No offense to Catholic but I find you to be the worst sect of your entire religion, in fact I question wether you are even part of said religion because apparently you have policy not present in you holy book which is for some reason than virtually every other religion, also what your leader says doesn’t matter to you even though it clearly does.”

    What does the phrase “No offense” mean to you again? Because there seem to be a discrepancy in how we use it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=630050104 Jeremy Hodder

    i won’t say no offense, b/c offense is intended from me. any catholic that still follows the catholic church is nothing more then a pedophile enabler and keeping powerful corrupt men in power. you should be ashamed and stay home to practice your religion, i certainly would be if i was catholic. it’s not the religion that is the problem it’s the church and the followers of the church that are.

  • http://twitter.com/nachtritter Duke Fleed

    It’s not like there can be a more official and less official whatever of something that is based on wind and wishful thinking. Since religion has no basis in reality, no one church is closer to the truth than any other. The Catholic Church is apparently built on the foundation laid by Saint Peter. Did Martin Luther even work with Jesus? Nope! So there, the Catholic Church wins.

    Look, it’s religion. It makes no sense whichever way you choose to look at it. Nobody is right because none of it can be verified anyway.

  • http://twitter.com/nachtritter Duke Fleed

    But you can’t separate the church AND the religion when the church and its systems are part of the religion.

    You can’t have catholicism and NOT have the church, that’s not how it works. So yes, the religion IS the problem just as much as the rest.

  • aromancatholic

    It’s a shame that you assume the worst about Catholics without fully understanding the religion. While there are many issues in the Church (yes, including scandals), I don’t believe it is fair to judge all Catholics on these premises, or on depictions set forth by the media. I’m a young, practicing, open-minded Roman Catholic and I am not ashamed of my faith. In fact, my faith keeps me joyful and helps me realize how blessed I am. I see life as a wonderful adventure – an opportunity to cherish this world and the people in it.

    Just because I am Catholic doesn’t mean that I don’t question my religion or the individuals in power. It doesn’t mean that I agree with every rule mandated by the Vatican. Organized religion is flawed because man is flawed.

    I believe in trying to love people as much as I can for who they are. I believe in trying to understand and learn about others. I only wish you had a similar mindset before making such degrading and ignorant comments.

  • jack7772

    Yes there is. Read Matthew 16:18. It’s quite obvious. What doesn’t exist in the Bible is any statement that scripture is the sole authority.

  • Jack Bond

    What do you care? You look down on Catholics and Christians alike. If anything, you’re worse.

  • Jack Bond

    True… But at least real Christians more closely follow their own holy book.

  • Jack Bond

    Lol. It’s not obvious at all. For all we know Jesus could be talking about a literal rock. It’s pretty unlikely that he was saying “I will give weak men religious authority, and also Christianity will now be entirely ritualistic. You will be able to buy salvation, so don’t feel pressured to be a good person. My death will be meaningless.”

  • Idlethoughts

    I don’t agree with their theologic beliefs so I choose not to follow them, I don’t however judge them based on that, I judge them based on their actions. For instance I think that it is rude and pointless to take snipes at the theologic beliefs of others. What they believe in no way affects you, so stop being a jerk and while your at it stop putting words in other peoples mouths.

  • Idlethoughts

    I’m glad you know jesus better than your fellow Christians, you should totally become a priest or maybe even a cardinal, heck with your clear religious authority I bet you could even become the next Pope.

  • Jack Bond

    So you won’t treat someone nicely unless they treat you nicely first? I’m just saying the Catholic religion is pretty lazy. I didn’t say anything about the people. None of us have the authority to judge people based even on their actions, and even if they’re jerks, you’re supposed to be gracious.

  • Jack Bond

    I have to admit, that was a pretty nice burn. You got me.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1287695071 Richard de Lorimier

    The pope did not say that there were no ox and donkey, only that the Gospel says nothing of animals. He then goes on to explain how the ox and the ass were adopted early on in Christian iconography as representing humanity itself at the scene of the Nativity, concluding the discussion by stating: “No representation of the crib is complete without the ox and the ass” (Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives, p. 69). Regarding the angels, the pope affirms their presence and their song when he writes: “So, from that moment, the angels’ song of praise has not gone silent. It continues down the centuries in constantly new forms, and it resounds ever anew at the celebration of Jesus’ birth” (p. 73).

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1287695071 Richard de Lorimier

    To interpret Jesus as talking about a literal rock is incongruous with the passage. He says 1) Blessed are you Simon son of John, 2) You are Peter (Cephas, cf. John 1:42) and on this rock (Cephas) I will build my church, 3) I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven, and 4) whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, etc. To extract the “rock” statement as Jesus telling Peter that he is only a weak man so it is upon the rock of his faith or some other rock upon which he will build his church does not fit in the midst of all the other blessings directed at Peter at that point.

  • Anonymous

    Listening to Christians (or really any religious folk) argue about different interpretations of supernatural events as written down in the Nth different translation of a translation of a translation of a collection of works collected over time and periodically curated by whatever authority was in power at the time (I’m looking at you Nicene Council) is just so inherently ridiculous. You may as well be arguing about whether Superman could beat up Batman. (The answer to that one is Yes.) Personally, I find religious texts succeed as poetry but fail as textbooks. But hey if you want to live your life based on some arbitrary understanding of a supernatural being, feel free. Same as living your life based on being a Jedi, or your understanding of Narnia.There are good parables in those works as well.