Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The crucified thieves
Topic Started: Monday, 23. August 2010, 21:11 (273 Views)
pete

Rose touched on this on another thread, and rather than go off topic I thought it worthy of a thread of its own.
I wonder how serious the crime was for 2 men to have suffered such an agonising death. Could they have stolen in order to feed their families in order to strive off starvation? Or were they out and out baddies. Considering in the 19 century in this civilized country of ours, a person could be deported for stealing a loaf of bread. For 2 men to steal a sheep they would both be hung and their families flung into the workhouse. Could it be that the 2 men crucified with Our Lord may have committed a lesser act of thievery than stealing a sheep?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PJD

Point well made Pete

PJD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

All we know is that they did something the civil authorities didn't approve of and the civil authorities regarded themselves as having the right to get rid of them for that.

Christ caused something of a revolution by teaching that that thinking was actually wrong.

The early Christians followed this teaching for the first three centuries or so. Then their leaders got a chance to grab some of that civil power for themselves and seem to have decided that casting aside the teaching of Jesus and going with along with the civil authorities was a worthwhile price.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

pete
Monday, 23. August 2010, 21:11
Considering in the 19 century in this civilized country of ours, a person could be deported for stealing a loaf of bread. For 2 men to steal a sheep they would both be hung and their families flung into the workhouse.
Not just a "civilized" country, Pete, a country that actually prided itself on its Christianity.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
In different Catholic versions of the Bible the two are called bandits, thieves, robbers, revolutionaries.

All we know is that in their society their crimes were regarded as serious.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Mairtin
Monday, 23. August 2010, 23:03
The early Christians followed this teaching for the first three centuries or so. Then their leaders got a chance to grab some of that civil power for themselves and seem to have decided that casting aside the teaching of Jesus and going with along with the civil authorities was a worthwhile price.
In England it took nearly two thousand years for attitudes to change.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Theft of a horse used to be a capital offence in USA (in cowboy days) because without his horse a man could be unable to earn his living.

Whatever our views about executing thieves, see what the "good thief" said

Quote:
 
39 One of the criminals hanging there abused him: 'Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us as well.'
40 But the other spoke up and rebuked him. 'Have you no fear of God at all?' he said. 'You got the same sentence as he did,
41 but in our case we deserved it: we are paying for what we did. But this man has done nothing wrong.'
42 Then he said, 'Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.'


The man was of the opinion he himself deserved to be crucified. The Jews said Jesus had blasphemed and must pay the penalty, but this man said Jesus had done nothing wrong. Was he more astute than the people who called for Barabbas to be freed and Jesus crucified?
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pete

To steal a loaf of bread to feed your starving kids, here too that was considered serious. Injustice was blatantly rife, more evil than the crimes themselves in the majority of cases. People were hanged for petty crimes and this is 1,800 years after the crucifixion of the 2 thieves. If the judge didn’t like the colour of your eyes, that could be enough, or to be Irish or a Jew that too might decide your destiny. His Honour the judge was not answerable to anyone.
After saying all that, the scales have now tilted the other way. If the 2 thieves were to go to court today their parents would probably be to blame or the environment they grew up in. They would by law get legal aid, have words put into their mouths by a cleaver lawyer and walk laughing from the court. The moral of the story is the 2 thieves were born in the wrong century. :gavel:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Rose of York
Monday, 23. August 2010, 23:21
All we know is that in their society their crimes were regarded as serious.
All we know is that their crimes were regarded as serious by those who had invaded their country and ruled their society by forcible violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Anyone know what Greek word is actually used - and possible translations?

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

pete
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 00:12
They would by law get legal aid, have words put into their mouths by a cleaver lawyer and walk laughing from the court. The moral of the story is the 2 thieves were born in the wrong century. :gavel:
That seems a lot nearer to what Jesus wanted when He said that if somebody steals our coat, we should give them our tunic as well.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pete

Quote:
 
That seems a lot nearer to what Jesus wanted when He said that if somebody steals our coat, we should give them our tunic as well.


I wonder what Our Lord would have to say about identity theft? If someone clears out your Lloyds bank account, give them your Abbey savings account details as well :wink:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
pete
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 11:31
Quote:
 
That seems a lot nearer to what Jesus wanted when He said that if somebody steals our coat, we should give them our tunic as well.


I wonder what Our Lord would have to say about identity theft? If someone clears out your Lloyds bank account, give them your Abbey savings account details as well :wink:
In those days a man who had a tunic and a coat was rich. It may be that the thief stole the coat because he was so poor he was in dire need. It is wrong to steal, but surely Jesus is saying do not follow the old law "an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth". We must not seek vengeance.

Quote:
 
38* "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39* But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; 40 and if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well; 41 and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to him who begs from you, and do not refuse him who would borrow from you. 43* "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48* You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.


We must seek to be perfect as our heavenly father is perfect. If I catch a person stealing bread from my kitchen, and I have reason to believe that person has no money, and no food, and is desperate with hunger, I should offer more food, sufficient for the day. the least I can do is give more food, to add to the bread, to make a sandwich. I admit that if I offered more food, the thief would have to eat it away from my house, I would not put myself in danger.

Clearing out your Lloyds bank account, is motivated by greed it is not done out of necessity to provide for today. Rather than seek violent vengeance we report that person to police, let them deal with it. We know a thief will not be executed. If the authorities do not deal effectively with crime, that is another matter, they are at fault.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

Gerard
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 08:51
Anyone know what Greek word is actually used - and possible translations?

Gerry
Matthew and Mark both use "lestai" - robbers/plunderers/pirates; Luke says "kakourgoi" - criminals/thieves/robbers; John just says "alloi" - others.

The lexicon used is the magisterial one by Liddell and Scott - sixth edition 1869.
Edited by OsullivanB, Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 12:24.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

peter
 
I wonder how serious the crime was for 2 men to have suffered such an agonising death. Could they have stolen in order to feed their families in order to strive off starvation? Or were they out and out baddies. Considering in the 19 century in this civilized country of ours, a person could be deported for stealing a loaf of bread. For 2 men to steal a sheep they would both be hung and their families flung into the workhouse. Could it be that the 2 men crucified with Our Lord may have committed a lesser act of thievery than stealing a sheep?


Not if the Jewish Encyclopedia is correct. It is the best source I can find and accords with what I remember from reading about the penalty of crucifixion under the Romans.

Quote:
 
Originally only slaves were crucified; hence "death on the cross" and "supplicium servile" were used indiscriminately (Tacitus, "Historia," iv. 3, 11). Later, provincial freedmen of obscure station ("humiles") were added to the class liable to this sentence. Roman citizens were exempt under all circumstances (Cicero, "Verr." i. 7; iii. 2, 24, 26; iv. 10 et seq.). The following crimes entailed this penalty: piracy, highway robbery, assassination, forgery, false testimony, mutiny, high treason, rebellion (see Pauly-Wissowa, "Real-Encyc." s.v. "Crux"; Josephus, "B. J." v. 11, § 1). Soldiers that deserted to the enemy and slaves who denounced their masters ("delatio domini")were also punished by death on the cross.


Read more: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=905&letter=C#ixzz0xWR7kgYo
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic »
Add Reply