Jesus of Nazareth II: Electric Boogaloo

Just in on the wires. Jesus of Nazareth part II is completed, or at least the German version is done. Work on translations, thus is about to get underway. Months, they say. I remember being promised this to be done in the spring. In fact the words were "should be ready" and "expected in the spring of 2010". Indeed, it is still spring, but I was led to believe that the translations were being prepared starting last September, not still the original.

That said, the Pope's a busy guy, and I suppose I can give him a break, but I can't wait for part II to come out! I do hope they don't rush the translation; I want it to be good, like part I was.

February Intentions

I'm excited about the Pope's general prayer intentions for the month of February, because he's praying for me:

That by means of sincere search for the truth scholars and intellectuals may arrive at an understanding of the one true God.

I like it!

Eucharistic Compendium

More great news. The Eucharistic Compendium promised in Sacramentum Caritatis is finally finished. It is being reported that it has been published either in Latin or in Italian (depending on who you ask). It also sounds like it is geared toward clergy, rather than the laity, but that won't stop me from getting one once the English version is published.

A Papal Sequel

It would seem that Pope Benedict XVI has finished, for the most part, the Part II of his book Jesus of Nazareth. The Vatican is saying that it will be out in Spring of 2010. [Source]

I am excited, because I really liked the first part. In general, I find I like Pope Benedict's writing style. I am not sure if I like his more German-methodical approach to analysis, or that he is philosophically an Augustinian. I find his writings very readable.

The first book dealt with the earlier parts of Jesus' life, and was especially critical of some of the biblical scholars, and some modern biblical interpretation methods.

The Beauty of Creation

The Pope recently spoke on Bonaventure, when he visited his home. (ZENIT)

BAGNOREGGIO, Italy, SEPT. 7, 2009 (Zenit.org).- St. Bonaventure, like his spiritual father, St. Francis, has a message for today, according to Benedict XVI: Creation should be appreciated in the light of God.

The Pope reflected on this aspect of Bonaventure's teachings when he visited the saint's birthplace on Sunday.

He thus reflected on just a few points of Bonaventure's legacy: his testimony as a seeker of God, his love for creation, and his witness to hope.

Regarding this second point, the Pontiff called Bonaventure a "seraphic singer of creation" who "learned to 'praise God in all and through all creatures.'"

He added: "St. Bonaventure presents a positive vision of the world, gift of God's love to men. [...] How useful it would be if also today we rediscovered the beauty and value of creation in the light of divine goodness and beauty!

"In Christ, observed St. Bonaventure, the universe itself can again be the voice that speaks of God and leads us to explore his presence; exhorts us to honor and glorify him in everything."

This is how I try to see the world. Creation is full of intricacies in order, that we are to discover. This is how I approach my physics education and research; we seek the Truth by observing the natural world, and infer the order which it contains. This order derives from God, the author of all reason.

Corpus Christi Indulgence

I think indulgences are great. They codify the good works and special prayers and remembrances which can act as special reparation for the temporal punishment we all deserve for our sins. And more than that, we can apply this reparation to those who have died, both those we know and those we've never met.

There are many specific grants in the Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, the Handbook of Indulgences, and some of then are attached to specific days. In the dioceses of the United States, the solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ (Corpus Christi) is transferred to this Sunday. The grant in the Handbook attached to this feast is the recitation of the Tantum Ergo.

A partial indulgence is granted to the Christian faithful who devoutly recite the above verses [the Tantum Ergo]. The indulgence will be a plenary one ... on the solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ during its liturgical rites. [EI 59]

Keep this in mind come Sunday (or if you happen to be reading in a country where the feast is not transferred, Thursday). Remember, the standard requirements for obtaining a plenary indulgence: sacramental confession, eucharistic communion, a prayer for the pope's intentions, and the exclusion of all attachment to sin.

Incidentally the Pope's intentions for the month of June are

Pope Benedict's general prayer intention for June is: "That international attention towards the poorer countries may give rise to more concrete help, in particular to relieve them of the crushing burden of foreign debt"

His mission intention is: "That the particular Churches operating in regions marked by violence may be sustained by the love and concrete closeness of all the Catholics in the world".

A Special Happy Birthday to our Pope

This Romish Papist would like to extend prayerful birthday wishes to our sovereign Holy Roman Pontiff, Benedict XVI.

May the LORD grant him length of years!


Make a special effort to remember him in your prayers today.

Strange Bedfellows

I recently came across a couple news stories that just didn't seem to go together. First, I read that Google to Team Up With Vatican.

VATICAN CITY, JAN. 18, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Google, a symbol of the seemingly endless possibilities of the Internet, will team up with the Vatican Television Center and Vatican Radio in a joint venture to give Benedict XVI his own YouTube channel.

According to the Vatican press office, texts and video footage of the Pope's speeches supplied by Vatican radio and television would be posted directly onto the video-sharing Web site.

Details of the initiative will be announced Friday in conjunction with the publication of Benedict XVI's message for the 43rd World Communications Day. Saturday is the feast of St. Francis de Sales, patron of journalists.

Great, right? Maybe Google has found a heart. In their unrelenting advances toward taking over the world, they have shown themselves to be not uniformly good. Consider their partnership with the government of China. But, perhaps a Google-Vatican partnership would be good for the both of them. Imagine my surprise when this morning I saw this article.

At least sixty amicus curiae briefs have been filed with the California Supreme Court, variously arguing for and against to the constitutionality of Proposition 8. Opponents include internet giant Google, Inc., which argues the Proposition denies employees “basic rights.”

On Thursday Google’s official blog published an entry titled “Supporting Equality.” In that entry, Google said that many people were concerned with the impact the ballot measure could have “on the personal lives of people they work with every day, and on California's ability to attract and retain a diverse mix of employees from around the world.”

Google explained that this is the reason they filed an amicus curiae brief supporting challenges to Proposition 8. “Denying employees basic rights isn't right, and it isn't good for businesses. We are committed to preserving fundamental rights for every one of the people who work hard to make Google a success.”

I'm not sure what "fundamental rights" they are speaking of. Any of the people that Google is speaking of is free, in California, to marry someone of a gender which is opposite theirs. Simple. How does this limit their applicant pool? It's not as if California outlawed homosexuals or gay bars or something. Also, if Google were to desire to grant some sort of same-sex benefits for its employees, I assume California wouldn't stop them.

Back to the main point of this: what doesn't go together here? Google teams up with Vatican, and files support for gay marriage, all in the same week. I don't think this is what Jesus meant when he said "do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing". It may be that Google is simply automating some sort of youtube content of the Pope's comments, but the timing of these announcements just surprised me.

Benedict's Speech to Inter-religious Leaders

Pope Benedict, last week, addressed a group of inter religious leaders. Full text is here, but I came away with a few interesting thoughts.

First of all, the overarching theme of the first part of the talk was the value of interreligious dialog and cooperation, especially in the areas of religious freedom, and morality. But, yet, there is a critique.

There is a further point I wish to touch upon here. I have noticed a growing interest among governments to sponsor programs intended to promote interreligious and intercultural dialogue. These are praiseworthy initiatives. At the same time, religious freedom, interreligious dialogue and faith-based education aim at something more than a consensus regarding ways to implement practical strategies for advancing peace. The broader purpose of dialogue is to discover the truth. What is the origin and destiny of mankind? What are good and evil? What awaits us at the end of our earthly existence? Only by addressing these deeper questions can we build a solid basis for the peace and security of the human family, for "wherever and whenever men and women are enlightened by the splendor of truth, they naturally set out on the path of peace" (Message for the 2006 World Day of Peace, 3).
...
Dear friends, in our attempt to discover points of commonality, perhaps we have shied away from the responsibility to discuss our differences with calmness and clarity. While always uniting our hearts and minds in the call for peace, we must also listen attentively to the voice of truth. In this way, our dialogue will not stop at identifying a common set of values, but go on to probe their ultimate foundation. We have no reason to fear, for the truth unveils for us the essential relationship between the world and God. We are able to perceive that peace is a "heavenly gift" that calls us to conform human history to the divine order. Herein lies the "truth of peace" (cf. Message for the 2006 World Day of Peace).

And that is the danger. The substance of this dialog cannot be "I'm okay, you're okay, we're all okay!" for that doesn't help advance mankind. Benedict/Ratzinger mentions in Jesus of Nazareth (Chapter 3) how some modern theologies have watered down the "Kingdom of God". In this view, we have gone from a Church-centered to a Christ-centered, to a God-centered, and finally to a Kingdom-centered view. In this way, it is claimed, everybody can be included. The problem, Benedict/Ratzinger points out, is that God has disappeared and man is the only actor on the stage (p. 54).

This address is a challenge to all men of good will, to be open to the Truth. Isn't it such a blessing that we have a Pope, infallible in matters of the Faith, to protect this Truth for us, though the intercession of the Holy Spirit.

Benedict to Bishops, Pastors: Be Men of Prayer

Pope Benedict XVI, in his recent address to the Us Bishops assembled in Washington DC, emphasized the necessity of prayer, especially for those who lead the Church.

Indeed a clearer focus upon the imitation of Christ in holiness of life is exactly what is needed in order for us to move forward. We need to rediscover the joy of living a Christ-centred life, cultivating the virtues, and immersing ourselves in prayer. When the faithful know that their pastor is a man who prays and who dedicates his life to serving them, they respond with warmth and affection which nourishes and sustains the life of the whole community.

Time spent in prayer is never wasted, however urgent the duties that press upon us from every side. Adoration of Christ our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament prolongs and intensifies the union with him that is established through the Eucharistic celebration (cf. Sacramentum Caritatis, 66). Contemplation of the mysteries of the Rosary releases all their saving power and it conforms, unites and consecrates us to Jesus Christ (cf. Rosarium Virginis Mariae, 11, 15). Fidelity to the Liturgy of the Hours ensures that the whole of our day is sanctified and it continually reminds us of the need to remain focused on doing God's work, however many pressures and distractions may arise from the task at hand. Thus our devotion helps us to speak and act in persona Christi, to teach, govern and sanctify the faithful in the name of Jesus, to bring his reconciliation, his healing and his love to all his beloved brothers and sisters. This radical configuration to Christ, the Good Shepherd, lies at the heart of our pastoral ministry, and if we open ourselves through prayer to the power of the Spirit, he will give us the gifts we need to carry out our daunting task, so that we need never "be anxious how to speak or what to say" (Mt 10:19).

The Catholic trifecta: Adoration, Rosary, Liturgy of the Hours. How important is this example of prayer, for those led? How much power a pastor of souls wields. With his example of prayer, prayerful devotion, a love of the Eucharist, he can develop a holiness of life will inspire those entrusted to his care. This is the role of the pastor. A pastor is responsible before God for the souls he has been entrusted.

This calls back to earlier in the speech when the Pope reminded us that we are really nothing without God, and he is the giver of all things. What can we be without prayer?

Benedict speaks out on Sex Abuse Scandal

Though I am surprised it is still such an issue, it really is important. The sex abuse scandal was a terrible chapter in the history of the Catholic Church in America. Benedict spoke on it, and on healing, noting, of course, that "Sometimes it was very badly handled." He goes on to discuss the ultimate problem:

What does it mean to speak of child protection when pornography and violence can be viewed in so many homes through media widely available today? We need to reassess urgently the values underpinning society, so that a sound moral formation can be offered to young people and adults alike. All have a part to play in this task - not only parents, religious leaders, teachers and catechists, but the media and entertainment industries as well. Indeed, every member of society can contribute to this moral renewal and benefit from it. Truly caring about young people and the future of our civilization means recognizing our responsibility to promote and live by the authentic moral values which alone enable the human person to flourish. It falls to you, as pastors modelled upon Christ, the Good Shepherd, to proclaim this message loud and clear, and thus to address the sin of abuse within the wider context of sexual mores.

There it is, the child sexual abuse scandal in context: society is messed up. We can talk all we want about things we can do to handle pedophile priests, but what a disservice we do to our children by bringing them up in this immoral day and age. We need to reign in our sexual immorality. Pornography is available to anyone, basically unimpeded, on the internet, and indecency is of course rampant everywhere. You can hardly turn on the TV or walk down the street in Summer without being exposed to this. This is an immeasurable harm that will be hurting us as a society for years to come.

Benedict to Bishops: Speak Out

In his address to the US Bishops yesterday, Pope Benedict exhorted them to be the moral voice of society, to speak out for what is right.

As preachers of the Gospel and leaders of the Catholic community, you are also called to participate in the exchange of ideas in the public square, helping to shape cultural attitudes. In a context where free speech is valued, and where vigorous and honest debate is encouraged, yours is a respected voice that has much to offer to the discussion of the pressing social and moral questions of the day. By ensuring that the Gospel is clearly heard, you not only form the people of your own community, but in view of the global reach of mass communication, you help to spread the message of Christian hope throughout the world.

Clearly, the Church's influence on public debate takes place on many different levels. In the United States, as elsewhere, there is much current and proposed legislation that gives cause for concern from the point of view of morality, and the Catholic community, under your guidance, needs to offer a clear and united witness on such matters. Even more important, though, is the gradual opening of the minds and hearts of the wider community to moral truth. Here much remains to be done. Crucial in this regard is the role of the lay faithful to act as a "leaven" in society. Yet it cannot be assumed that all Catholic citizens think in harmony with the Church's teaching on today's key ethical questions. Once again, it falls to you to ensure that the moral formation provided at every level of ecclesial life reflects the authentic teaching of the Gospel of life.

It bears repeating: "It cannot be assumed that all Catholic citizens think in harmony with the Church's teaching on today's key ethical questions." We can only hope people hear this message and at least reflect on the possibility that they need to amend their ways. The "Catholic" politicians and voters could have such influence if they all would "think in harmony" with the Church. If we could be united in the Faith, then so much more could likely be accomplished.

Benedict on Science

Again, from Benexict XVI's address to the Bishops, we have another gem.

It is easy to be entranced by the almost unlimited possibilities that science and technology place before us; it is easy to make the mistake of thinking we can obtain by our own efforts the fulfillment of our deepest needs. This is an illusion. Without God, who alone bestows upon us what we by ourselves cannot attain (cf. Spe Salvi, 31), our lives are ultimately empty.

And, this is the ultimate problem today. Science and medicine seem like they can, or soon will be able to, do anything. We control our environment to the point where doubting in the existence or necessity of God is almost a foregone conclusion.

Benedict to Bishops on Secularism

Taken from Wednesday's address to the Bishops:

While it is true that this country is marked by a genuinely religious spirit, the subtle influence of secularism can nevertheless color the way people allow their faith to influence their behavior. Is it consistent to profess our beliefs in church on Sunday, and then during the week to promote business practices or medical procedures contrary to those beliefs? Is it consistent for practicing Catholics to ignore or exploit the poor and the marginalized, to promote sexual behavior contrary to Catholic moral teaching, or to adopt positions that contradict the right to life of every human being from conception to natural death? Any tendency to treat religion as a private matter must be resisted. Only when their faith permeates every aspect of their lives do Christians become truly open to the transforming power of the Gospel.

Just go for the throat, that seems to be the best policy here, no? In this election season, there is a lot of discussion about these issues. Many "Catholic" politicians try the "personally opposed" argument, or the "private beliefs" argument to justify their position on abortion or embryonic stem cell research, but this is clearly inconsistent.

Read that last line again. Wonderful. Thanks, Pope!

More to follow...

Papal Address to the US Bishops

As you are well aware, I am sure, the Pope is here in America. Everything he says, I am sure, is going to be useful to read, and as with all that Ratzinger/BXVI says and writes, we will be able to digest it over time.

The Pope addressed the US Bishops at the National Shrine to the Immaculate Conception in Washington D.C. You can read the text here, and also watch the speech on Youtube, with the first segment here.

I will follow up with comments on interesting parts.

Status of the Jesuits

Fr. Adolfo Nicolas, S.J., the new superior general of the Jesuits, insists that there is no conflict between the order and the Pope. I'm not so sure he really sees what is happening. I have a couple articles about his press conference.

Fr. Nicolas’ statement included some brief stories and anecdotes illustrating his long pastoral experience in Asia. "I am in Asia and Asia is in me, and that is good for the Church," he said.

"There has never been and there is not opposition between the Pope and the Society of Jesus, between the Jesuits and the Vatican," Fr. Nicolas said in his statement.

"It is not true that there is a theological distance between the new General of the Jesuits and Pope Ratzinger," he added.

Asia is in him. I hope that doesn't mean new-age eastern theology is in him. Also, can he really say that there has never been opposition between the Pope and the Jesuits? Does he forget the Jesuit Intervention in 1981?

Rome, Jan. 25, 2008 (CWNews.com) - In a January 25 statement to reporters in Rome, the new superior general of the Society of Jesus said that the Jesuits remain loyal to the Pope. "If there are problems" in the relationship, he said, "it is precisely because we are so close."

Father Adolfo Nicolas compared the relationship between the Jesuit order and the Holy See to a marriage, observing there are always tensions between loving couples. But as in a marriage, he added, the Jesuits and the Pope are wholly dedicated to the same goal: the welfare of the Church.

Downplaying suggestions that the Jesuit order is at loggerheads with Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news), Father Nicolas recalled that he had studied the works of then-Father Joseph Ratzinger years earlier and found them inspirational. Theological disagreements between himself and the Holy Father, he insisted, exist only "in the imaginations of those who have written" on that topic. The new Jesuit leader told journalists that his own views on religion have been heavily influenced by his years in Japan. Before serving in Asia, he said, he had firm and unyielding views about what constitutes proper religious faith and practice. In Japan, he reported, such attitudes are seen as intolerant; the Asian approach accepts a wide diversity of views. "In Japan," Father Nicolas said, "I discovered that true religion goes much deeper."

I see that, yes, "proper religious faith and practice" can indeed take on many forms. Even the Pope has said this. This is why we have the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite. This is why there are so many popular devotions. I worry, though, when I see words like "accepting a diversity of views". If our language hadn't been hijacked, this would not be a problem, but the connotations of this tend to be a bit more permissive than they should mean. I hope he realizes that there exists One True religion. This is another place where some Jesuits have had troubles, in the uniqueness and necessity of Christ.

I've heard about Jesuits before, and I don't buy that it is because "they are so close" that the CDF has to send out notifications about members of the Order.

Pope Cancels University Visit

As I reported yesterday, the Pope was planning on speaking at an Italian university amid much protesting from some faculty and students on campus, saying the Pope was anti-science, among other things. The Pope has announced today that he will not be going to the university amid the protests.

Does this mean that they won? I hope not. I think it may better reflect the Pope's prudence in not getting involved with such an unreasonable crowd. "If they don't want me, I'll go somewhere else..." The pope will be publishing the text of the address he was to give.

UPDATE: (01/17/08, 1:47 PM)

Cardinal Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State published a letter he sent to the Dean of the University.

Pope Benedict was scheduled to open the academic year by giving the keynote address at La Sapienza, but according to Cardinal Bertone a “decidedly minority group of professors and students” threatened to protest his visit.

Due to this planned disturbance, the Secretary of State wrote to the rector that “the prerequisites for a dignified and tranquil welcome were not present” and that “it was judged opportune to postpone the scheduled visit in order to remove any pretext for demonstrations which would have been unfortunate for everyone concerned".

Cardinal Bertone also explained why the Pope decided to send his address to the university’s rector. In the letter, the cardinal relates that since the majority of professors and students wished to hear "a culturally meaningful word, whence to draw stimuli for their own journey in search of truth, the Holy Father has instructed that the text he prepared for the occasion be sent to you".

"I don't want any trouble"

Scientests say Pope is Anti-Science

A group of scientists at an Italian University is raising a fuss over an upcoming visit from the Pope. They say that the Pope is anti-reason and anti-science, and should not be honored in an academic setting. (Full Article)

To bolster their position, the 67 protestors cite a 1990 speech in which then-Cardinal Ratzinger defended the Church's disciplinary action against Galileo in 1633. In that talk, the future Pope cited the verdict of the agnostic scholar Paul Feyerabend, who said: "The Church in the age of Galileo clung to reason more than Galileo himself did." He found that the heresy verdict against Galileo was, by the standards of the times, "rational and just."

Although he did not endorse Feyerabend's conclusion-- Pope John Paul II (bio - news) had already acknowledged that the Church erred in condemning Galileo-- Cardinal Ratzinger did stress that the Church was not hostile to science, and in fact Galileo continued his investigations, with support from the hierarchy, even after his trial.

It's Regensburg all over again. At least these scientists won't be blowing up Churches or burning the Pope in effigy. Why is it that they, who insist on "reason" being so important, can't even use a quotation properly? The author of the article gets it right:

The protests against the Pope's visit to La Sapienza have echoed that hostility toward religious faith, claiming that the Church today still suppresses scientific progress. Ironically, to protest that alleged restraint on free inquiry, the group asks university officials to prevent a speech by the Roman Pontiff. Vatican Radio, describing the protests as unworthy of academic life, questioned whether the professors were displaying the "tolerance" that they proclaimed.

This just emphasizes the fact that these scientists, like the militant atheists and the anti-Catholic fundamentalists, don't care to be reasoned, but prefer to just spout their opinions. I compare it to how the Catholic Church can be portrayed as "homophobic" for opposing the disordered lifestyles of that crowd of people, whereas these scientists (or anyone really) are "reasoned" or "enlightened" by opposing the Church, and what it teaches. The university will have an interesting response to the visit.

The dean of the university has said that he will not cancel the Pope's visit. But protests at the school are planned throughout the week, with critics posting anti-clerical slogans around the campus and organizing a "homo-cession"-- a parade of homosexuals and lesbians-- to protest Church teachings.

Of course, the good old "homo-cession". This makes the clearest statement about what this opposition to the visit is really about. It has nothing to do with the Pope's or the Church's supposed opposition to scientific progress. This is about the Church teaching what it has always taught. People still don't like the Church, Jesus promised that it would be that way.

Still, if the Pope told these scientists that they needed to stop doing this or another research, would they? I doubt it. This means he isn't a threat to them. And, there really is no denying that he is perhaps the foremost theologian in Europe right now, which makes him an academic. I'm not sure what the Pope will be talking about there, but it may well touch on the moral obligations of science, which these scientists need to hear.

Church reaffirms what it has always believed, or rolls back Vatican II

On the heels of the Motu Proprio and the ensuing rollback of Vatican II, the job continues with a new document from the Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith (read: Inquisition). This document, a series of questions and answers, reiterates the Church's position with regards to other Christian and non-Christian religions. Apparently there have been enough erroneous theology that they needed to issue a mass clarification.

First Question: Did the Second Vatican Council change the Catholic doctrine on the Church?

Response: The Second Vatican Council neither changed nor intended to change this doctrine, rather it developed, deepened and more fully explained it.

So, the Church doesn't change. Surprised yet?

Second Question: What is the meaning of the affirmation that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church?

Response: Christ "established here on earth" only one Church and instituted it as a "visible and spiritual community"⁵, that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted.⁶ "This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organised in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him"⁷.

In number 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium ‘subsistence’ means this perduring, historical continuity and the permanence of all the elements instituted by Christ in the Catholic Church⁸, in which the Church of Christ is concretely found on this earth.

It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them.⁹ Nevertheless, the word "subsists" can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone precisely because it refers to the mark of unity that we profess in the symbols of the faith (I believe... in the "one" Church); and this "one" Church subsists in the Catholic Church.¹⁰

So, other Christians are okay, but not as cool as us.

Third Question: Why was the expression "subsists in" adopted instead of the simple word "is"?

Response: The use of this expression, which indicates the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, does not change the doctrine on the Church. Rather, it comes from and brings out more clearly the fact that there are "numerous elements of sanctification and of truth" which are found outside her structure, but which "as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity"¹¹.

"It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church"¹².

Defective Church? They don't make them like they used to!

Fifth Question: Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of "Church" with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?

Response: According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery¹⁹ cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called "Churches" in the proper sense²⁰.

We'll see how this one goes over.

-JG

Motu Proprio Reflections

The Holy Father, some days ago issued a much anticipated Motu Proprio entitled Summorum Pontificum. An official English version has not yet been issued, and so I will be referring to the version located in the Catholic Culture Library. I find it interesting that the letter accompanying the Motu Proprio (of which there is an official English version) was just as long as the Motu Proprio itself.

The Pope first lays out the history of the liturgy, from Gregory the Great to Pius V, to the present. Then we get to the legal parts.

The Paul VI (1970) mass is the normal Rite and order of mass to be used. The use of the 1962 edition of the Missal is, however, allowed as an "extraordinary form of the liturgy of the Church".

Masses without people can be celebrated using either Missal. Community celebrations within religious communities (orders or whatnot) can habitually celebrate the 1962 liturgy if their superiors allow it. The exception here, which I don't really understand is that such permissions don't extend to the Triduum for masses without the people. I find that odd.

"Art. 5. § 1 In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, and ensure that the welfare of these faithful harmonises with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the guidance of the bishop in accordance with canon 392, avoiding discord and favouring the unity of the whole Church.

§ 2 Celebration in accordance with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII may take place on working days; while on Sundays and feast days one such celebration may also be held.

§ 3 For faithful and priests who request it, the pastor should also allow celebrations in this extraordinary form for special circumstances such as marriages, funerals or occasional celebrations, e.g. pilgrimages.

That article is the one that does the real action. In other words, if there is a group who really wants daily mass (or a Sunday mass) in a parish using the 1962 missal, and a priest who is qualified to say such a mass, they can have it. The bishop is given power here to make sure people follow the rules and don't go off the deep end, or create a rift. I find section 2 interesting; that there can be one such celebration on Sundays is interesting. I don't think this will affect parishes who already celebrate more than one old mass, because they will have special permission from their bishop.

And so, Motu Proprio.

The news coverage is interesting. I'm not sure why liberals are outraged (as the media reports) because they will probably never see a Tridentine mass, and won't have to if they don't want to. Jews, apparently are outraged, and the Anti-Defamation League has even issued a statement. There is one prayer for the Jews on Good Friday, in which the conversion of the Jews is prayed for. The Church prays for everyone's conversion, even (or especially) Catholics. Jews are God's chosen people (still) and play a special role in salvation history. We love the Jews, and want only the best for them, I don't see how this is offensive, nevermind that it is only once a year.

The letter from the Pope has a lot of good insight in it as well.

News reports and judgments made without sufficient information have created no little confusion. There have been very divergent reactions ranging from joyful acceptance to harsh opposition, about a plan whose contents were in reality unknown.

I am even a little guilty of this, though I did discuss what aspects of a plan I would not like, not that I'm opposed to the Motu Proprio.

This fear is unfounded. In this regard, it must first be said that the Missal published by Paul VI and then republished in two subsequent editions by John Paul II, obviously is and continues to be the normal Form – the Forma ordinaria – of the Eucharistic Liturgy. The last version of the Missale Romanum prior to the Council, which was published with the authority of Pope John XXIII in 1962 and used during the Council, will now be able to be used as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgical celebration. It is not appropriate to speak of these two versions of the Roman Missal as if they were “two Rites”. Rather, it is a matter of a twofold use of one and the same rite.

Then, after discussing the love many had for the liturgy, the truth comes out about this:

Many people who clearly accepted the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and were faithful to the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them. This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.

Greater truth hasn't been told in a while. Not following liturgical norms really harms people and really causes them ill feelings. My own grandmother left our home parish (her parish of probably 60 years running) because of this reason (the priest refusing to ring the bells at the consecration was the straw that broke the camel's back).

In the second place, the fear was expressed in discussions about the awaited Motu Proprio, that the possibility of a wider use of the 1962 Missal would lead to disarray or even divisions within parish communities. This fear also strikes me as quite unfounded. The use of the old Missal presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and some knowledge of the Latin language; neither of these is found very often. Already from these concrete presuppositions, it is clearly seen that the new Missal will certainly remain the ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, not only on account of the juridical norms, but also because of the actual situation of the communities of the faithful.

Ha! This apparently is the complaint of the so-called liberals I saw on the news. They neither know Latin nor are well formed liturgically, and therefore will not even have a claim to request a 1962 mass.

There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture. What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place. Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books. The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness.

I wonder if the Dominican Rite, or the other particular missals of the Latin rite will be brought back some time. I think I would like to experience them as well.

I think that the traditionalists will be happy, and I think now the Bishops will have the job of making sure the faithful can get these masses if they want them, and likewise making sure that people stay faithful and don't become traditionalists. The liberals won't notice any difference, neither will the Jews.

-JG