Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog

Liturgical Roles In the Eucharistic Celebration

Liturgical Roles In the Eucharistic Celebration | Francis Cardinal Arinze | From Celebrating the Holy Eucharist

The sacred liturgy is the public prayer of the whole Church. The chief person acting in every liturgical celebration is our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ himself, the one perfect Mediator between God and man.

But Christ associates the Church with himself in every liturgical act. Many liturgical acts are hierarchically ordered: with a role for the Bishop and priest, for the deacon, for those lay people who are assigned a liturgical role as defined by the Church, and for all the people of God. The Church in the diocese manifests herself in the most visible way when the Bishop celebrates the Eucharistic Sacrifice in his cathedral church, with the concelebration of his priests, the assistance of the deacons, and the participation of the faithful (cf. SC 41).

Lay Liturgical Roles

For proper celebration of the sacred liturgy and fruitful participation in it by all Christ's faithful, it is important to understand the roles proper to the ministerial or ordained priest and those proper to the lay faithful. Christ is the priest, the High Priest. He gives all baptized people a share in this role of offering God gifts. The common priesthood of all the baptized gives people the capacity to offer Christian worship, to offer Christ to the Eternal Father through the hands of the ordained priest at the Eucharistic celebration, to receive the sacraments, and to live holy lives, and by self-denial and active charity to make of their entire lives a sacrifice.

The ministerial priest, on the other hand, is a man chosen from among the baptized and ordained by the Bishop in the sacrament of Holy Orders. He alone can consecrate bread into the Body of Christ and wine into the Blood of Christ and offer them to the Eternal Father in the name of Christ and the whole Christian people. [1] It is clear that though they differ from one another in essence and not only in degree, the common priesthood of all the baptized and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood are closely related (see LG 10).

Continue reading...

Avoiding Biblical Paralysis: Sacred Scripture and Today's Catholic

Avoiding Biblical Paralysis: Sacred Scripture and Today's Catholic | Curtis A. Martin | Ignatius Insight

Who has never experienced frustration trying to read the Bible? The Book itself is fairly imposing, with more than 1,000 pages and seldom a picture. The characters seem to be right out of the Iliad and the Odyssey: "Mizraim became the father of Ludim and Anamin and Lehabim and Naphtuhim" (Gen. 10:13). Trying to read through the sacred text can lead to more perspiration than inspiration. So what is the layman to do? Many people read modern commentaries or even take classes on the Bible, looking for some helpful hints on how to crack open the sacred page and begin to experience the joy, the wisdom, and the life-transforming effects of which the saints and so many of our evangelical friends speak. This is usually where the problems begin.

A typical "Introduction to the Bible" course practically involves learning a new language and a new alphabet. For example, instead of Moses as the author of the Pentateuch (the first five books), we are told that J, E, P and D are the real authors. Just when one becomes acquainted with the prophet Isaiah, we are told that there are two of them, then three. The novices who thought that Matthew wrote the first gospel, are then told no, it was Mark, actually Q (or Q1, Q2, and Q3 for the more advanced! Just when the letters of St. Paul are beginning to become instructive, someone points out that they are not all really his. What are the Catholic faithful to make of this convoluted mess? Every new piece of information only seems to call attention to how little we can (really) know.

Read the entire essay...

"Its Principal Driving Force": More from Fr. Schall on the encyclical

Caritas in Veritate: "Its Principal Driving Force" | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J. | July 14, 2009 | Ignatius Insight

"Charity in truth, to which Jesus Christ bore witness by his earthly life and especially by his death and resurrection, is the principal driving force behind the authentic development of every person and of all humanity." -- Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate, (#1).

"The Trinity is absolute unity insofar as the three divine Persons are pure relationality. The reciprocal transparency among the divine Persons is total and the bond between each of them complete, since they constitute a unique and absolute unity. God desires to incorporate us into this reality of communion as well: 'that they may be one even as we are one' (Jn. 17:22). The Church is a sign and instrument of this unity. Relationships between human beings throughout history cannot but be enriched by reference to this divine model. In particular, in the light of the revealed mystery of the Trinity, we understand that true openness does not mean loss of individual identity but profound interpenetration." -- Caritas in Veritate, (#54).

I.

The publication of a social encyclical is a significant event both in the Church and in the world. Many people will have heard even the Latin titles, which are the names given to the most famous of them, Rerum Novarum, Quadragesimo Anno, Mater et Magistra, Pacem in Terris, Populorum Progressio, and "Centesimus Annus, not to mention "Gaudium et Spes, a decree of the Second Vatican Council.

We read in Scripture that a difference is found between the world and the Church. This difference often becomes clear in the way the world understands and receives a social encyclical. The world often considers its relative autonomy to be absolute so that no guidance or advice from outside its own control will be admitted. In not a few countries in the world, even today, opposition to the Church's presence and freedom is juridical and intense. But even in countries where freedom of the press is guaranteed, an encyclical is often interpreted in an unrecognizable or ideological way.

For its part, a social encyclical tries to say something significant and meaningful to the world about the world in terms of truth and human worth. Within it, we often find words like politics, economics, market, violence, profit, capitalism, socialism, justice, technology, development, corruption, rights, freedom, constitution, duties, and any number of other words we see or hear every day in the media. In general, unless it absolutely has to, the Church does not like to be "polemical." But it does have to be truthful. It seeks to make common ground on some one or more basic points on which agreement of principle or practice is feasible and coherent.

Continue reading...

The love transcending all understanding

Ephesians 3:19: And to know the love of Christ that transcends knowledge, so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.

In the Lord's Incarnation, in his sojourning among us, in his words and deeds, his love for us was expressed in a way we could grasp. Knowing the forms of this love that can be grasped, the Christian also realizes that they are produced by that love which dwells not only in the world but also in God and which therefore remains not only comprehensible but also eternally greater and incomprehensible—the love with which God the Father loved us from eternity in the Son. Whoever speaks of Christ's love must include mention of the triune love among Father, Son, and Spirit. When Paul opened just now the whole range of the four dimensions, he was ultimately talking about God's triune love, which transcends all understanding, as it was revealed and given to be known in the Son. We can know it as the love of Christ, but we see it as such only when we discover behind the love of the Father and the Spirit and, in turn, understand the whole triune love as the origin of the Incarnation of the Son and of his connection with us.

It is the love transcending all understanding. Our understanding remains bound to our powers of comprehension; for this reason it runs up on all sides against limits that are set by our human nature. But because the love o fChrist, despite his Incarnation, remains the divine, triune love, it surpasses every understanding. Whenever we think we are going to finish understanding something, the love of the Lord points beyond it, because this love is divine and is constantly ready to lead on to the Father and to the Spirit. It is contained to such a degree in the triune God that the omnipotence of God and his eternity, which are both limitless, belong to it in the fullest sense.

From The Letter to the Ephesians, by Adrienne von Speyr (Ignatius Press, 1996).

The Dull, Dissenting Americanism of Kathleen Kennedy Townsend

(15) The inspiration of the Spirit can be discerned in a variety of religious, political, and cultural movements which appear to be progressive. Failure to join in these movements is consequently a form of infidelity.

(19) The Church is primarily a political reality, whose value is determined to the degree that it promotes social change and progress.

(20) Action in the world is therefore the principal vocation of the Christian, and contemplation and the spiritual life are at best accessories to this. Salvation, if such is possible, is achieved through politics.

(25) After centuries of obscurity, the true meaning of the Gospel is now being discovered by progressives. ...

— From "Twenty-Six Heretical Notions Characterizing Radical Catholicism," an appendix to The Decline & Fall of Radical Catholicism (Herder and Herder, 1971), by James Hitchcock

People who pretend to be Catholics, who assume offices in the Church, are seeking from within, under the banner of reform and progress, to destroy the Church. Completely different from these people are those who do not want to destroy the Church as such, i.e., who do not seek the disappearance of the Church, but who rather want to transform the Church into something which completely contradicts her meaning and essence. This includes all those who wish to make the Church of Jesus Christ into a purely humanitarian society, to rob her of her supernatural character, to secularize and desacralize her. They share that camouflage of the enemies of the Church which comes from using the shibboleths of "reform," "progress," and "adaptation to modern man." But they do not want to eliminate the Church. The catchwords "reform" and "progress" are not mere tricks which they use; the really believe them. ... Henri de Lubac, S.J., pointed this out with forceful and penetrating words: "One becomes conscious that the Church is confronted with a grave crisis. In the name of a "new" Church, a "post-conciliar" Church, some people are attempting to found another Church than that of Jesus Christ; an anthropocentric society, which is threatened by an 'immanentist apostasy,' and which can be drawn into a movement of general surrender under the cloak of rejuvenation, ecumenism, or adaptation."

— From the Introduction to The Devastated Vineyard (Franciscan Herald Press, 1973), by Dietrich von Hildebrand

How interesting that two of the best responses to Kathleen Kennedy Townsend's recent op-ed in Newsweek, "Without a Doubt: Why Barack Obama represents American Catholics better than the pope does" (July 9, 2009), were published nearly forty years ago. What to make of it? For starters, it indicates the simple truth expressed long ago by the author of Ecclesiastes: "Nothing is new under the sun" (Eccl. 1:9). It also highlights what might seem, at first glance, contradictory facts: the beliefs of Townsend and Co. are both dangerous and dull. Dangerous because they are false and destructive; dull because they are clichéd and intellectually empty.

Dr. Hitchcock's book is both a helpful overview of the turmoil of the late Sixties and a measured, devastating critique of the flawed and, yes, heretical perspectives of progressives who sought and fought to remake the Church according to the latest leftist ideologies and fads. One of the primary themes, as the quotes above indicate, is how progressives, in employing an ecclesiology that is thoroughly secular in nature and horizontal in scope, attack and destroy the heart of Catholicism, which is a life-changing, supernaturally-transforming encounter with Jesus Christ, who is King of Kings and—oh, by the way—the giver of the keys of the Kingdom to a certain St. Peter and his successors.

Dr. von Hildebrand's book, which is a companion of sorts to his earlier (and equally excellent) work, Trojan Horse in the City of God (Franciscan Herald Press, 1967), covers similar ground as Hitchcock's book, but more through philosophical critique and theological reflection. Especially notable, regarding Townsend's essay, are von Hildebrand's chapters on authority and democracy, especially "Democratization of the Holy Church," where he states, "The idea that one can make the Church more accessible to the spirit of the times by this 'democratization,' or that this 'democratization' represents an improvement, has sometimes a pernicious, sometimes a naive character—but it is always an illusion. One can call for the democratization of the holy Church only if one has lost all sense for the true nature of this sacred institution."

So, then, what to make of Townsend's piece, which is getting plenty of attention, deserved or otherwise? Frankly, Townsend's essay is not worth reading because it is worth reading, but because it is the sort of worthless reading that a wide swath of readers do actually read and, apparently, agree with to some degree or another. To put it another way: if Townsend's views actually expressed the formal, legitimate, and authentic teachings of the Catholic Church, there wouldn't be a Catholic Church. But, in fact, Townsend's views are simply a tired, dull, boring, and empty riff on the radical Catholicism exposed by Hitchcock and the collapsed immanentism referred to by de Lubac and von Hildebrand. These beliefs are so banal and naive in nature ("the drivel of heretics," says von Hildebrand) they make the recent address of the Episcopalian "presiding bishop" Katharine Jefferts Schori seem downright dazzling, edgy, and mature in comparison (Schori, after all, has the audacity to refer to "heresy," which is soooo exclusive and judgmental, don't you think?).

Here is the heart of Townsend's argument:

In truth, though, Obama's pragmatic approach to divisive policy (his notion that we should acknowledge the good faith underlying opposing viewpoints) and his social-justice agenda reflect the views of American Catholic laity much more closely than those vocal bishops and pro-life activists. When Obama meets the pope tomorrow, they'll politely disagree about reproductive freedoms and homosexuality, but Catholics back home won't care, because they know Obama's on their side. In fact, Obama's agenda is closer to their views than even the pope's.

(As for President Obama's "pragmatic approach to divisive policy," see my previous post, "The President's hovering, morally superior political rhetoric", July 6, 2009). A key issue, obviously, is authority. American Catholics, Townsend insists, are agreed with Obama on several important matters, over against the pope, "vocal bishops and pro-life activists." The sloppiness of the argument is apparent. If the bishops and so-called activists are Catholic, then not all American Catholics are in agreement with the President. But if she assumes that they aren't really Catholic, on what basis does she make her judgment? Because she doesn't agree with them?

Townsend's argument, as it were, implicitly denies the supernatural character of the Church's authority and reduces everything to the level of politics and personal rights. (She also seems to have purposefully fashioned her approach upon the tact of Sr. Theresa Kane, mentioned in her piece, who said ten years ago that then-President Bill Clinton was doing more for social issues than the American bishops.) It is sometimes said that certain ("right wing") Catholics are "more Catholic than the Pope"; Townsend's approach is more that her Catholicism is morally superior to the Catholicism of the Pope—apostolic succession and Magisterial teaching be damned. Why worry about those things when you have polls?:

Yet polls bear out that American Catholics do not want to be told by the Vatican how to think. Despite the rhetoric of love and truth, the Vatican shows disdain (if not disgust) toward gays. But 54 percent of American Catholics find gay relationships to be morally acceptable, according to a 2009 Gallup poll. Meanwhile, against all scientific evidence and protestations from clergy on the ground, the pope claims that condoms aggravate the spread of AIDS. Seventy-nine percent of American Catholics disagree, according to a 2007 poll by Catholics for Choice.

When Sen. John Kerry, a pro-choice Catholic, ran for president in 2004, several bishops decided to deny him communion. A poll done at the time by Time magazine showed that 73 percent of American Catholics disagreed with that decision, and 83 percent said the bishops' move wouldn't change their vote. In fact, more than two thirds said the church shouldn't try to influence the way Catholics vote at all or tell candidates—even Catholic ones—what stance to take.

Americanism lives! Pope Leo XIII described it this way in his January 1899 letter to James Cardinal Gibbons:

The underlying principle of these new opinions is that, in order to more easily attract those who differ from her, the Church should shape her teachings more in accord with the spirit of the age and relax some of her ancient severity and make some concessions to new opinions. Many think that these concessions should be made not only in regard to ways of living, but even in regard to doctrines which belong to the deposit of the faith. They contend that it would be opportune, in order to gain those who differ from us, to omit certain points of her teaching which are of lesser importance, and to tone down the meaning which the Church has always attached to them.

Yep, shaping the Church's teachings "in accord with the spirit of the age." Sounds about right. As for the various numbers used by Townsend, a closer look reveals this essential fact: Catholics who attend Mass on a weekly basis (that is, according to the Church's directives), are both better informed about issues and far more in accord with Magisterial teaching: "The divide between more-observant and less-observant Catholics over abortion is stark, however," notes an April 30, 2009, Pew Forum poll, "Weekly attending white Catholics overwhelmingly oppose abortion, with 63% saying it should be illegal in all or most cases and only 30% saying it should be legal. Conversely, less-observant white Catholics support legal abortion by a 61% to 29% margin." Which means—shockingly!—that Catholics who are less likely to observe Church teachings in their lives are also less likely to offer public support of the same teaching. Amazing. Who would have thought it so?

(As a quick aside, it's worth noting that in the 1980s Townsend, according to her book's website, "founded the Maryland Student Service Alliance to make Maryland the first, and still only state that requires young people to engage in community service as a condition of graduation." So, she believes students should perform involuntary volunteer work [??] in order to earn the state's approval, but she's against the Church saying Catholics need to adhere to Church teaching in order to be Catholics in good standing. That about says it all.)

Speaking of abortion, Townsend is typical of liberal Catholics who downplay the significance of the issue while claiming to be all about caring about the least among us. In a March 27, 2007, interview about her book, Failing America's Faithful, Townsend stated,

We face great challenges in the United States—a war in which Americans have tortured prisoners and have neglected our own soldiers. Iraq itself has been ripped apart with millions of refugees searching for safe havens. Income inequity has grown so that while the few have gotton richer, many families lack health care, children suffer from a poor education and pensions have been cut. We are harming the earth that we should steward. Yet, the churches have focused their attention not on these large issues but on abortion, same sex marriage and stem cell research. They are shrinking God—and using faith to divide, to justify mean spirited attacks and to hurt and hate rather than love our neighbor.

And then, in the next breath, she added:

Q: You write of the possibility of another Great Awakening in the faith community, “a discussion of what a just society could look like.” What does a just society look like to you and what do you believe the next Great Awakening entail?

A: The short answer is that a just society has a commitment to the dignity of every man, woman and child. We are connected to one another as children of God—who loves and cherishes each of us. It is incumbent on us to work for the common good so that work is rewarded, health encouraged, education honored, public resources treasured and families supported.

Except, of course, when it comes to the killing of unborn children and the resulting destruction of families and family life. Not surprisingly, Townsend was endorsed by NARAL and Emily's list in her unsuccessful 2002 bid to become governor of Maryland. But you may have already guessed such was the case since she comes from one of the most famous pro-abortion families in American, the Kennedy clan. Coming full circle, at least for my purposes, a recent piece about Townsend's uncle, Sen. Edward Kennedy, who sent a private letter to Pope Benedict via the hand of President Obama, contained these interesting quotes:

“I find it quite moving,’’ said the Rev. Robert P. Imbelli, a Catholic theologian at Boston College. “Clearly, when one Catholic asks another to pray for him, this is a sign both of vulnerability and of trust. To have the opportunity to ask that of the pope is, in addition, a sign of devotion and respect for the one Catholics hold to be the successor of St. Peter with a special role in maintaining the unity and apostolic tradition of the church.’’

Catholicism runs deep in the Kennedy clan, “as a cultural and ethnic identity,’’ said R. Scott Appleby, a historian at the University of Notre Dame, said, “Among individual members, the depth of commitment to the church itself varies, as with many Catholic families. It seems clear, and it is poignant and instructive, that Senator Kennedy seeks peace and reconciliation with ‘Holy Mother Church’ as he nears the end of his earthly life.’’ [emphasis added]

Pardon my dry eyes, but I find it hard to see anything done by a Kennedy in recent years as being "poignant and instructive." Yes, I do pray that Ted Kennedy, like all wayward Catholics, will seek peace and reconciliation with the Church—preferably long before they spend thirty or more years ardently supporting abortion and other anti-life actions. But, really, isn't it about time that the mythologies and nonsense about the Kennedy clan go away forever? They aren't glamorous, they aren't obviously intellectual, they seem to struggle dramatically with basic moral teachings, and they aren't altogether Catholic, at least not based on their public actions and statements. Townsend, for her part, displays the sort of vague and confused rhetoric that is perfectly fitting for a mediocre politician, but is not terribly appealing coming from an alleged Catholic:

Notre Dame awarded the president an honorary degree because it saw the need to highlight the best of Catholic teaching as applied to politics: the ability to open the eyes of those who would prefer to keep them closed, and to open the hearts of those who would prefer not to know the pain that their actions cause. The pope has a lot to learn about Catholic politics in America. Barack Obama can teach him.

No, he can't. But there's no doubt in my mind that Townsend has been learning from her private pontiff, President Obama. That's unfortunate, because there is a lot that Townsend could learn about Catholicism from the real Pope.

UPDATE: A couple of interesting, if not revelatory, remarks left by Townsend on her book's blog in March 2007:

Some have asked why I remain a Catholic since I disagree with some of the pronouncement by the hierarchy.  The Church has endured for two millennia because of its theology, its hierarchy and its laity.  There are always disagreements.  But that is what makes it so rich—-and it allows the Church to grow and endure.  In the fifties, John Courtney Murray was silenced for its advocacy of democracy and freedom of religion.  Less than a decade late, he was recruited by the Vatican to write the Second Vatican Council’s statement on the value of Freedom of Religion.  So, just because one disagrees today, does not mean that the Church will not embrace the very same position tomorrow.  I see my duty to help a male hierarchy know and understand women.

And:

Still, I am disappointed that he has agreed to meet with George Bush…Let’s see if he allows himself to be photographed with him. Pope John Paul II had allowed himself to be photographed with President Bush two months before the last presidential election.  While some claimed that this gave the Pope the opportunity to criticize Bush for the War in Iraq, most political observers said that the picture of the two men meeting was a big political plus for the President. The picture being worth a thousand words.  It sent the signal that abortion trumps war. My hope is progressive Catholics will write the Pope to register our protest.  To be with President Bush will be used by Karl Rove as an endorsement of him, his politics and his power to prolong this incompetent war.

Hmmm, what a slogan this could make: "Kathleen Kennedy Townsend: Against Incompetent Wars! For Incontestable Abortion!" Or: "When It Comes to Killing Your Young, Count on a Kennedy!"

• Also see: "Kennedy-Townsend in Newsweek: Obama 'More Catholic' Than Pope", by Matthew Balan of Newsbusters.org.
• "Jesuit: Obama is 'the most effective spokesperson' for 'the spirit of Vatican II'" (Insight Scoop, June 3, 2009)

Related IgnatiusInsight.com Articles:

• Authority and Dissent in the Catholic Church | Dr. William E. May
• Curran's Attack on John Paul II Rebutted | Dr. William E. May
• Is Heresy Heretical? | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J.
• Conservative Bishops, Liberal Results | Dr. James Hitchcock
• A Religion the New York Times Can Love | Donna Steichen

Exposing the Language of the Culture of Death

Exposing the Language of the Culture of Death | An Interview with William Brennan, author of John Paul II: Confronting the Language Empowering the Culture of Death | Ignatius Insight | July 10, 2009

William Brennan, Ph.D., is a Professor of Social Work in the Saint Louis University School of Social Work. He has written and spoken extensively on how euphemisms and dehumanizing language facilitate massive oppression. Hisbook, Dehumanizing the Vulnerable: When Word Games Take Lives (Loyola University Press, 1995), was a Loyola bestseller. Professor Brennan is currently working on a book-length manuscript tentatively titled, Killing in the Name of Healing: Technology, Rhetoric, and the Medicalization of Destruction. Carl E. Olson, editor of Ignatius Insight, recently spoke with Dr. Brennan about his most recent book, John Paul II: Confronting the Language Empowering the Culture of Death (Sapientia Press, 2008), and current events relating to that book's focus and arguments.

Ignatius Insight: How did Pope John Paul II define the culture of death?

Dr. Brennan: He defined the culture of death as a lethal mentality possessing an unlimited  capacity for engulfing a wide range of victims and employed an inclusive perspective for highlighting "whatever is opposed to life itself," such as genocide, abortion, euthanasia, suicide, experimental exploitation of human beings, slavery, torture, mutilation rituals, and a host of other infamies. An ominous feature of this increasingly monolithic mindset, the pope revealed, is "a war of the powerful against the weak: a life which requires greater acceptance, love and care is considered useless, or held to be an intolerable burden, and is therefore rejected in one way or another." He called this phenomenon "a truly alarming spectacle, if we consider not only how extensively attacks are spreading but also their unheard-of numerical proportion, and the fact that they receive widespread legal approval and the involvement of certain sectors of health-care personnel."

Besides the numerous forms of devastation brought about by the death culture, John Paul singled out another casualty—the demise of conscience itself. Through the manipulation of language, the forces of death have proven extraordinarily successful in numbing the moral sensitivities of many to the horrors actually taking place. This process leads to an "extremely dangerous crisis of the moral sense" in which conscience is rendered increasingly indifferent, blind, and impotent in the face of the evils being perpetrated.

Ignatius Insight: What are some of the most influential and significant ways that language is misused, manipulated, and abused in the field of medicine on behalf of the culture of death?

Dr. Brennan: Doing away with unborn humans is routinely portrayed as simply the removal of nondescript "tissue" or "material" from the womb. According to sociologist Amitai Etzioni, "the dominant scientific and public view is to view the fetus" during the first four and one-half months as "subhuman and relatively close to a piece of tissue." Aborted remains at the Oregon Health Sciences University are called "suctioned or curetted material" and "cellular material." Abortionist Dr. Warren Hern characterizes the post-abortion task of re-assembling dismembered body parts as "the tissue examination."

Read the entire interview...

Catholic World Report round table on "Caritas in Veritate"

Catholic World Report Round-Table: Caritas in Veritate | Web Exclusive

When Pope Benedict XVI's third encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, was released on July 7, it sparked world-wide discussion and commentary. Catholic World Report asked a group of leading Catholic intellectuals to reflect on the encyclical, its place in the larger body of Catholic social teaching, and Pope Benedict's vision of a well-ordered and just society.

J. Brian Benestad, Francis J. Beckwith, Father Joseph Fessio, S.J., Richard Garnett, Thomas S. Hibbs, Paul Kengor, George Neumayr, Tracey Rowland, Father James V. Schall, and Rev. Robert A. Sirico share their thoughts on Caritas in Veritate, below.

Continue reading...

Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J., on "Charity in Truth"

From ZENIT:

Pope Places Charity and Truth at Heart of Debate

By Father Joseph Fessio, SJ

NAPLES, Florida, JULY 7, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI has something for everyone in "Caritas in Veritate" -- from praising profit (21) to defending the environment (48). But in these cases, as in all the others, he calls for a discernment and a purification by faith and reason (56) that should temper immoderate and one-sided enthusiasms.

Once again, Pope Benedict shows himself to be a theologian of synthesis and fundamental principles. In the titles of his three encyclicals he has used only five nouns: God, Love, Hope, Salvation, and Truth -- the most fundamental of realities. And in the opening greeting of this encyclical he succinctly describes the contents: "on integral human development in charity and truth."
Note that from this very greeting Pope Benedict has changed the whole framework of the debate on "the social question." This was expected to be -- and is -- his encyclical on "social justice." And indeed "justice" and "rights" find their proper place in a larger synthesis. But the priority is established from the outset, the foundation is laid, with "charity" and "truth." "Charity is at the heart of the Church's social doctrine" (2). "Without truth, without trust and love for what is true, there is no social conscience and responsibility, and social action ends up serving private interests and the logic of power" (5).

Another fundamental principle, and a central theme of this pontificate, is the continuity of the Church and her teaching. Surprisingly, the central ecclesiastical text from the past is Pope Paul VI's "Populorum Progressio," and Pope Benedict makes it clear that we do not have "two typologies of social doctrine, one pre-conciliar and one post-conciliar, differing from one another: On the contrary, there is a single teaching, consistent and at the same time ever new" (12). This principle of continuity was expressed centrally in Benedict's first address as Pope on April 20, 2005, and again to the Roman curial cardinals on Dec. 22 of that year.

Read the entire piece.

Catholic World Report will soon be posting links to commentary from various sources about the encyclical.

Praying With the Bible

Praying With the Bible | Fr. Kenneth Baker, S.J. | Editorial for Homiletic & Pastoral Review | July 2009

At the Roman Synod on the Bible in October 2008, which I covered for HPR, the most common topic mentioned was the need to recommend “Lectio Divina” as a pious practice among the faithful. You have probably seen the phrase mentioned in recent articles about the synod.

“Lectio Divina” (LD) literally translated means “divine reading.” What it really means is praying with the Bible by selecting a passage and meditating on it. It can be done alone by an individual and it can also be done in a small prayer group. LD has a long history of being practiced in monasteries by monks, especially the Benedictines. The bishops of the world, represented by those in Rome, are now recommending this practice to the faithful.

One problem with this is that many Catholics do not have a Bible. One of the proposals at the synod was that bishops should try to get a Bible into the hands of every Catholic. Almost everyone has a rosary—why not also a Bible, which contains the Word of God which is a love letter addressed to each one?

Read the entire editorial...

Ephesians 5: Bridegroom and Bride

Ephesians 5: Bridegroom and Bride | Deacon Rex H. Pilger | Homiletic & Pastoral Review | July 2009

By submitting herself to her husband, the wife is allowing her man to sacrifice himself for her.

It is Mass on the Twenty-first Sunday of Ordinary Time, in late summer only a few years ago. Fortunately the air conditioning seems to be holding up, for this year at least. The celebrant offers the Opening Prayer, asking the Father for help, to seek the values that will bring lasting joy in a changing world. Seated beside the celebrant, the deacon at this Mass, I join the assembly in preparing to listen to the Word of God. The Scripture readings are from Year B, and we hear the stirring invitation of Joshua: “Decide today whom you will serve…As for me any my household, we will see the Lord” (Josh. 24:15).  The cantor leads us to respond: “Taste and see the goodness of the Lord.”

But next comes the one passage that no one really seems to listen to; out of all of Scripture proclaimed over the complete three-year cycle, this is one passage that is consistently ignored, rejected or misinterpreted—I call it the “nudging” Scripture. After twenty years of ordained ministry, sitting in the sanctuary behind the ambo, every third year I can watch for the elbows. The reader begins: “A reading from the Letter of St. Paul to the Ephesians. Brothers and sisters, be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ.”

Show humility and defer to others, as we often hear in other readings, but are we ready for the next sentence? “Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord.”

Suddenly, the many male faces are alert; the wives of the quickest feel an elbow against their arms. And the faces of some women fall, eyes cast down; it is as if their minds can read: “Oh, no. Not again. Not this Sunday.”

“For the husband is head of his wife…” More nudges and smirks creep across male faces. However, in the self-satisfaction of men and the embarrassment of the women, the remaining phrases of the current sentence are missed: “…just as Christ is head of the Church, he himself the savior of the body.”

A seemingly three-fold admonition is fulfilled with the next sentence: “As the Church is subordinate to Christ, so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything.”

The “triumph” of the husband on this hot summer day contrasts with the flushed cheeks, perhaps even anger, of too many wives. And, the remainder of the passage remains unheard and unheralded:

Read the entire HPR article...