Mark Shea put me onto this chap. John Granger has for some years styled himself as “Hogwarts Professor”, and now has branched out into “Meyerology”, discussing the meaning of the Twilight series.
If you are a fan of this series – or even, on the other hand, if you hate it with a passion – you will find “What Twilight Means” very enlightening.
It is interesting, from the point of view of Catholic/Lutheran dialogue, to see that the Holy Father has based his Lenten Message for 2010 around Romans 3:21-25.
Also interesting is that he does so in the context of a discussion of “justice”, and never once uses the word “righteousness”, even in quoting the scripture passage. Lutherans are very accustomed to hearing the phrase “Christ, the Righteousness of God”, but of course, the greek word Paul uses can be just as validly translated as “justice”, which, in the context in which the Holy Father discusses the passage, does give the text a different flavour.
It is also notable that the Holy Father does not simply address the New Testament doctrine of God’s Justice/Righteousness, but also has in mind, and directly discusses, the Hebrew understanding of Sedaqah (perhaps he is still thinking of his recent visit to the Roman Synagogue?).
Still, this message is also proof once again that this Pope understands the Lutheran concerns. I don’t think even Dr Martin could quibble with this statement, as he addresses “the Great Exchange”:
What then is the justice of Christ? Above all, it is the justice that comes from grace, where it is not man who makes amends, heals himself and others. The fact that “expiation” flows from the “blood” of Christ signifies that it is not man’s sacrifices that free him from the weight of his faults, but the loving act of God who opens Himself in the extreme, even to the point of bearing in Himself the “curse” due to man so as to give in return the “blessing” due to God (cf. Gal 3, 13-14). But this raises an immediate objection: what kind of justice is this where the just man dies for the guilty and the guilty receives in return the blessing due to the just one? Would this not mean that each one receives the contrary of his “due”? In reality, here we discover divine justice, which is so profoundly different from its human counterpart. God has paid for us the price of the exchange in His Son, a price that is truly exorbitant. Before the justice of the Cross, man may rebel for this reveals how man is not a self-sufficient being, but in need of Another in order to realize himself fully. Conversion to Christ, believing in the Gospel, ultimately means this: to exit the illusion of self-sufficiency in order to discover and accept one’s own need – the need of others and God, the need of His forgiveness and His friendship. So we understand how faith is altogether different from a natural, good-feeling, obvious fact: humility is required to accept that I need Another to free me from “what is mine,” to give me gratuitously “what is His.” This happens especially in the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist. Thanks to Christ’s action, we may enter into the “greatest” justice, which is that of love (cf. Rm 13, 8-10), the justice that recognises itself in every case more a debtor than a creditor, because it has received more than could ever have been expected.
The connection then to “justice” in his message is in the next paragraph:
Strengthened by this very experience, the Christian is moved to contribute to creating just societies, where all receive what is necessary to live according to the dignity proper to the human person and where justice is enlivened by love.
I commend the Message to you all.
There has been a lot of media attention given to the Holy Father’s address to the Bishops of England and Wales at their recent ad limina meeting with him. Less attention has been given to the address to those next in line, the Scottish Bishops.
Some highlights and observations:
1) Vocation of the Laity. I commented in regard to the English speech the Holy Father’s emphasis on the role of the laity in catechisation. This is, I observed, unusual in that it represents an unsual magisterial encouragement of the vocation of the laity “ad intra”. In this speech, the Holy Father returns to the more accustomed language of Vatican II stressing the “ad extra” mission of the faithful. This is because in this speech he is especially concerned to highlight the difference between the vocation of the priesthood and the vocation of the laity. He especially emphasises the lay vocation in regards to evangelisation. That fits with my emphasis on this blog in relation to what is needed for the revival of the Church: catechisation and evangelisation. Both can be regarded as true apostolates of the Laity. Papa Benny also includes the same themes he addressed in the English speech, namely the rising tide of secularism and the need for faithfulness to the Magisterium:
Hand in hand with a proper appreciation of the priest’s role is a correct understanding of the specific vocation of the laity. Sometimes a tendency to confuse lay apostolate with lay ministry has led to an inward-looking concept of their ecclesial role. Yet the Second Vatican Council’s vision is that wherever the lay faithful live out their baptismal vocation – in the family, at home, at work – they are actively participating in the Church’s mission to sanctify the world. A renewed focus on lay apostolate will help to clarify the roles of clergy and laity and so give a strong impetus to the task of evangelizing society.That task requires a readiness to grapple firmly with the challenges presented by the increasing tide of secularism in your country. Support for euthanasia strikes at the very heart of the Christian understanding of the dignity of human life. Recent developments in medical ethics and some of the practices advocated in the field of embryology give cause for great concern. If the Church’s teaching is compromised, even slightly, in one such area, then it becomes hard to defend the fullness of Catholic doctrine in an integral manner. Pastors of the Church, therefore, must continually call the faithful to complete fidelity to the Church’s Magisterium, while at the same time upholding and defending the Church’s right to live freely in society according to her beliefs.
2) The Positive Nature of Catholic Teaching. Pope Benedict has been at pains to stress in his pontifical teaching that the Catholic Faith is not about “thou shalt nots” so much as it is a positive message for human liberation and salvation. He returns to this theme in this address:
The Church offers the world a positive and inspiring vision of human life, the beauty of marriage and the joy of parenthood. It is rooted in God’s infinite, transforming and ennobling love for all of us, which opens our eyes to recognize and love his image in our neighbour (cf. Deus Caritas Est, 10-11 et passim). Be sure to present this teaching in such a way that it is recognized for the message of hope that it is. All too often the Church’s doctrine is perceived as a series of prohibitions and retrograde positions, whereas the reality, as we know, is that it is creative and life-giving, and it is directed towards the fullest possible realization of the great potential for good and for happiness that God has implanted within every one of us.
3) Emphasis on Ecumenism. This was part of the Pope’s message to the English and Welsh bishops also. In both cases he shows no embarrassment about raising the history of the Church in Britain in regards to the Reformation.
The Church in your country, like many in Northern Europe, has suffered the tragedy of division.
It is sobering to recall the great rupture with Scotland’s Catholic past that occurred four hundred and fifty years ago.
I give thanks to God for the progress that has been made in healing the wounds that were the legacy of that period, especially the sectarianism that has continued to rear its head even in recent times. Through your participation in Action of Churches Together in Scotland, see that the work of rebuilding unity among the followers of Christ is carried forward with constancy and commitment. While resisting any pressure to dilute the Christian message, set your sights on the goal of full, visible unity, for nothing less can respond to the will of Christ.
4) Emphasis on teaching the Faith in Catholic Schools. It would not surprise me if the situation in Scottish Catholic Education is much what it is here in Australia. The Pope said:
You can be proud of the contribution made by Scotland’s Catholic schools in overcoming sectarianism and building good relations between communities. Faith schools are a powerful force for social cohesion, and when the occasion arises, you do well to underline this point. As you encourage Catholic teachers in their work, place special emphasis on the quality and depth of religious education, so as to prepare an articulate and well-informed Catholic laity, able and willing to carry out its mission “by engaging in temporal affairs and by ordering them according to the plan of God” (Christifideles Laici, 15). A strong Catholic presence in the media, local and national politics, the judiciary, the professions and the universities can only serve to enrich Scotland’s national life, as people of faith bear witness to the truth, especially when that truth is called into question.
Look what just arrived on my desk from the Book Depositry (A$22.95 – sorry Mary, the competition was too tempting!): The Manual of Indulgences is the only place you can get the 4th (1999) edition of the 1968 manual in English. The 1968 1st edition is widely available on the Web, but the latest edition is only available in Latin on the Vatican website. Most writers and websites on indulgences cite only the first edition. This translation was done by the USCCB and was commissioned and fully approved by the Apostolic Penitentiary. Every Catholic should own one!
It is a handsome volume, made all the more useful by the inclusion of the various prayers to which plenary or partial indulgences are attached – making it an excellent prayer book for Catholics.
The especial difference of the 4th edition to previous editions is the following change in emphasis:
The Apostolic Penitentiary…, rather than stress the repetition of formulas and acts, has been concerned to put greater emphasis on the Christian way of life and to focus attention on cultivating a spirit of prayer and penance and on the excercise of the theological virtues. (Introduction, 4)
Now, I just know this will draw some comment from our regulars, who will see this Manual as a medieval throwback, but consider this: Is our sanctification dependant upon our relationship with God through our Lord Jesus Christ and in the power of the Holy Spirit – or not? Of course it is. Secondly, is our this relationship strengthened by “cultivating a spirit of prayer and penanc and the exercise of the theologial virtues (faith, hope and love) – or not? Of course it is. So, whether you are ready to swallow the full doctrine of penance and purgatory as the Catholic Church teaches it – or not – you cannot say that to encourage the faithful to make these practices a regular part of their daily life is not a good thing in relation to our sanctification. That, in a nutshell, is what this is all about.
They tell me that the whole of the United States watches the Superbowl. So Focus on the Family decided to use it as a forum. I understand this costs megabucks. The message may be a little “unfocused”, but given that everyone knows that FOTF is a pro-life organisation, the point is not lost.
Here is the full story from “Inside the Vatican”: Quarterback for Life. HT to Andrew Rabel for this.
I thought it was just the Australian (principally Sydney) media who revelled in the constant rumours of a Vatican appointment for our beloved (or hated) George Cardinal Pell. But it seems from this John Allen piece in the US National Catholic Reporter (Australia’s Pell tops the chart as a rumor magnet), that rumours about George are not only ubiquitous and perennial, but also universal. The rumour about his being a candidate for the top job in the Congregation for Bishops in fact was started (according to Allen) by the Italian press, not the Sydney Morning Herald.
Read the article and have a smile.
Someone recently said to me (or did I read it somewhere?) that they can understand the cause of John XXIII and John Paul II and Mother Teresa being pushed along at the rate of knots because of popular veneration and cult (the historical way in which canonisation was driven), but they could not understand why Pius XII was being pushed for canonisation. They said that when they visited the tombs of the popes in St Peter’s, there were always flowers and crowds at the tombs of John XXIII and John Paul II, but non and no-one at that of Pius XII. There is, they said, no cult of Pius XII that would indicated a popular desire for his canonisation.
But consider these two statements:
“The position of the successor of the Prince of the Apostles held, and for many Catholic Christians still holds, a place of great veneration. During the final years of the reign of John Paul II, that veneration came alarmingly clos to a personality cult.”
“Western politicians saw John Paul II as the greatest anti-communist crusader of the day.”
I expect you would not find these two opinions overstated?
In fact, both statements come from Paul O’Shea’s book “A Cross Too Heavy”, and I did the “naughty” thing of exchanging the name of John Paul II for Pius XII, about whom O’Shea actually wrote these things. If we consider the veneration in which John Paul II is now held, and his impact on the politics of Western Europe, as a parallel to the situation in the late 50′ and early 1960’s with Pius XII, we can perhap understand why the cause for Pius’ canonisation was already begun within a few years of his death. BEFORE any of the damning accusations began to be voiced in 1963.
It is worth remembering that there WAS a cult of Pius XII (still is, in some circles) which started the process off. The fact that later accusations, and a change of tenor in the Chuch after the Second Vatican Council, changed the situation somewhat, does not change the fact that the cause had already begun, and was continued throughout the last fifty years. It was inevitable that, once begun, the process of investigation had to continue through to its conclusion as it now has. Where it goes from here is, as I have said before, in God’s hands.
As I was driving him into Melbourne from the airport, Mark Shea asked me, in order to confirm a theory of his that the Marian dogmas and devotions are the greatest hurdle for Protestant converts to the Church, whether this was the case with me. In fact, it wasn’t. The problem of the Christocentricity of the Gospel vs the supposed Universalism of Roman Catholicism was by far the greatest concern (following after my acceptance of the Catholic teaching on Justification). Dominus Iesus set all that right for me in mid-2000. Devotion to Mary and the Saints was no problem – in fact, it was a joy. I had a little more trouble thogh with the officially recognised Marian Apparitions, such as Lourdes and Fatima. I have come to understand that there is no need for me put much store on these – although quietly, St Bernadette has achieve a place in my devotions, and that of my daughters, as it is the name of our parish and school, and St Bernadette is someone who, I think, young girls can readily identify with. In fact, there is a statue of our Lady of Lourdes outside my office in the courtyard, with St Bernadette kneeling before her. When there are flowers blooming in the courtyard (there aren’t at the moment) I delight in placing a couple of buds in St Bernadette’s concrete hands.
But Medjugorje. Well. If I had difficulty accepting even well attested and officially approved apparitions, I am not really going to go ga-ga over this one, am I?
My friend, Andrew Rabel, a journalist whom I esteem very highly, sent out this circular email today. I found the interview to which he links most helpful in both understanding the nature of the officially recognised Marian apparitions, and, on the other hand, Medjugorje itself.
Dear friends,
Since the visit of Cardinal Schönborn to Medjugorje, and all the commentary that has appeared in cyberspace, I have been reluctant to engage in the subject until now.
I have always liked Fr Hauke’s (dogmatic theologian) writings, and I own his book Women In the Priesthood, published by Ignatius Press. He has expressed the concerns of many of us on the subject, better than we could do. In this article he references the recent interview on this subject given to Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins CMF, the recently retired Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints and a great devotee of Our Lady of Fatima, where he said quite openly, “Medjugorje may be a trick of the devil.” I have interviewed His Eminence on two occasions, through an interpreter.
Regardless, I look forward to a definitive judgment on the matter by the Holy See
in the hearts of Jesus & Mary
Andrewhttp://catholiclight.stblogs.org/archives/2010/02/hauke-on-medj.html
I think Fr Hauke does an excellent job in this article of “discerning the spirits”.
.JPG)
