Sandro Magister recently began a series of contributions by several Italian (and/or Roman) theologians discussing the Second Vatican Council. Last week saw a very interesting addition to the discussion by University of Bologna Professor Enrico Morini. Professor Morini outlines a thesis that the Council did indeed elicit a rupture, but one that sought to re-establish continuity with the Tradition (ecclesial) of the first millennium. I found particularly interesting the professor's views related to collegiality and the question of the filioque.
I leave it you whether you agree with the professor's passing comment about Father John Romanides.
Give it a read here.
Showing posts with label Ecclesiology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ecclesiology. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Western Pope's thoughts on Eastern Liturgy
11. In the liturgical experience, Christ the Lord is the light which illumines the way and reveals the transparency of the cosmos, precisely as in Scripture. The events of the past find in Christ their meaning and fullness, and creation is revealed for what it is: a complex whole which finds its perfection, its purpose in the liturgy alone. This is why the liturgy is heaven on earth, and in it the Word who became flesh imbues matter with a saving potential which is fully manifest in the sacraments: there, creation communicates to each individual the power conferred on it by Christ. Thus the Lord, immersed in the Jordan, transmits to the waters a power which enables them to become the bath of baptismal rebirth.
Within this framework, liturgical prayer in the East shows a great aptitude for involving the human person in his or her totality: the mystery is sung in the loftiness of its content, but also in the warmth of the sentiments it awakens in the heart of redeemed humanity. In the sacred act, even bodiliness is summoned to praise, and beauty, which in the East is one of the best loved names expressing the divine harmony and the model of humanity transfigured, appears everywhere: in the shape of the church, in the sounds, in the colors, in the lights, in the scents. The lengthy duration of the celebrations, the repeated invocations, everything expresses gradual identification with the mystery celebrated with one's whole person. Thus the prayer of the Church already becomes participation in the heavenly liturgy, an anticipation of the final beatitude.
Apostolic Letter ORIENTALE LUMEN, John Paul the Great
Friday, October 09, 2009
Eastern Ecclesiology
The Ochlophobist references the translation of an article by Metropolitan Georges Khodr of Mount Lebanon from a recent issue of the Lebanese newspaper an-Nahar. The translation is from the very erudite and informative blog Notes on Arab Orthodoxy and entitled Antiochian Ecclesiology. It's worth reading as the basic concepts apply to all Byzantine Christians, Orthodox or Catholic. This become very apparent in the differences in the way laity and priests interact with their bishops in an Eastern Church versus a Western Church.
A snippet to whet your whistle:
A snippet to whet your whistle:
... the bishop is not only connected to the whole of the flock with which he is entrusted. He his connected as a member to the other metropolitans who govern the church that we call ‘local’ or ‘regional’ just as he is united to the right-believing bishops of all the world. However, current, day-to-day events determine the actions of the local church...Insightful and worthy of your consideration, read it here.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Grist to the Mill
Over at Ierinikon, a nineteenth century tract from an Anglican source discusses the division of the Eastern and Western Church. While the author was an early proponent of the "branch" theory of ecclesiology, long refuted, it makes for interesting reading.
The comments, to date, are also worth consideration. I hope to see the conversation there continue.
The piece is entitled, "A Tractarian perspective"; the original title being:
On the Present Apparent Conflict Between “Orthodoxy” and “Catholicism"
From Dissertations on Subjects Relating to the “Orthodox” or “Eastern-Catholic” Communion (1853), by William Palmer, M.A., Fellow of St. Mary Magdalene College, Oxford, and Deacon.
Like all nineteenth century academic writing from the British Isles it's heady reading, but worth expanding one's twentyfirst century short attention span.
The comments, to date, are also worth consideration. I hope to see the conversation there continue.
The piece is entitled, "A Tractarian perspective"; the original title being:
On the Present Apparent Conflict Between “Orthodoxy” and “Catholicism"
From Dissertations on Subjects Relating to the “Orthodox” or “Eastern-Catholic” Communion (1853), by William Palmer, M.A., Fellow of St. Mary Magdalene College, Oxford, and Deacon.
Like all nineteenth century academic writing from the British Isles it's heady reading, but worth expanding one's twentyfirst century short attention span.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Clean Monday & St Elias Video on the Church Building as Catechesis
A joyous Clean Monday to all! For Eastern Catholics, today marks the beginning of the Great Fast. For those who wish to follow the readings, hymns and basic commemorations of the Byzantine Tradition, a search through this blog will provide several daily resources from years past. This year, I may not be a very active "blogger" during the Fast as several personal issues impede. I will, God willing, give a personal update on Presbytera shortly for those who have been praying for her.
Hat Tip to the New Liturgical Movement for a nice article on mystagogical catechesis and the below short video from St Elias Ukrainian Catholic Church in Brampton, Ontario.
Hat Tip to the New Liturgical Movement for a nice article on mystagogical catechesis and the below short video from St Elias Ukrainian Catholic Church in Brampton, Ontario.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Neuhaus on Hauerwas and the Church
First Things' On the Square has Fr Neuhaus at his best discussing the nature of the Church. Consider these excerpts:
By the bye, the article is related to Fr Neuhaus's current project, a book to be entitled American Babylon: Notes of a Christian Exile. I have a feeling it will be a must read book!
The whole article is available here.
PS Deep in the mysty recesses of time, I had an ethics class with Professor Hauerwas. On that basis, I encourage you that if you ever have the opportunity to attend a lecture by the Professor, do so. He has that kind of quirky passion usually only found in Old Testament professors (think Father Paul Tarazi) and is quite entertaining as well as thought provoking.
It follows that to speak of Christ and culture is to speak also of the Church and culture. Within this society, or any society, the Church is a distinct society. The word Church is from the Greek ekklesia, which means a gathering of the people who are called out. In theology, the subject of the Church is called ecclesiology. Some Christian traditions—the Orthodox and Catholic, for instance—have a full-orbed ecclesiology, an understanding of the Church through time that encompasses continuity with the apostles, councils, martyrs, saints, and authoritative teachers, all inseparably bound by a sacramental communio that is nothing less than communion with Christ through time....
...
American Babylon is our culture. It is not the culture of our choice, although, given the other cultures on offer, it may be the culture we would choose if we had a choice. It is certainly the culture in which we have been chosen and for which we have a measure of responsibility. The irrepressible human aspiration toward the transcendent, toward that which at the core of our being we know to be our destined home, takes many different forms. That aspiration is our religion, whether or not we call it by the name of a religion. The aspiration may be stifled or misplaced, but it cannot be denied; at least it cannot be denied for long. When, as Augustine teaches, our loves and loyalties are rightly ordered, we recognize that the only satisfactory alternative to Babylon is the City of God. At least this is how Christians see the matter.
By the bye, the article is related to Fr Neuhaus's current project, a book to be entitled American Babylon: Notes of a Christian Exile. I have a feeling it will be a must read book!
The whole article is available here.
PS Deep in the mysty recesses of time, I had an ethics class with Professor Hauerwas. On that basis, I encourage you that if you ever have the opportunity to attend a lecture by the Professor, do so. He has that kind of quirky passion usually only found in Old Testament professors (think Father Paul Tarazi) and is quite entertaining as well as thought provoking.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
St John Chrysostom on Bishops
The soul of a Bishop is for all the world like a vessel in a storm: lashed from every side, by friends, by foes, by one’s own people, by strangers. Does not the Emperor rule the whole world, the Bishop a single city? Yet a Bishop’s anxieties are as much beyond those of the emperor, as the waters of a river simply moved, by the wind are surpassed in agitation by the swelling and raging sea. And why? because in the one case there are many to lend a hand, for all goes on by law and by rule; but in the other there is none of this, nor is there authority to command; but if one be greatly moved, then he is harsh; if the contrary, then he is cold! And in him these opposites must meet, that he may neither be despised, nor be hated. Besides, the very demands of business preoccupy him: how many is he obliged to offend, whether he will or not! How many to be severe with! I speak not otherwise than it is, but as I find it in my own actual experience.
I do not think there are many among Bishops that will be saved, but many more that perish: and the reason is it is an affair that requires a great mind. Many are the exigencies which throw a man out of his natural temper; and he had need have a thousand eyes on all sides. Do you not see what a number of qualifications the Bishop must have? to be apt to teach, patient, holding fast the faithful word in doctrine (see 1 Tim. iii. 2–9; Tit. i. 7–9). What trouble and pains does this require!
And then, others do wrong, and he bears all the blame. To pass over every thing else: if one soul depart unbaptized, does not this subvert all his own prospect of salvation? The loss of one soul carries with it a penalty which no language can represent. For if the salvation of that soul was of such value, that the Son of God became man, and suffered so much, think how sore a punishment must the losing of it bring! And if in this present life he who is cause of another’s destruction is worthy of death, much more in the next world. Do not tell me, that the presbyter is in fault, or the deacon. The guilt of all these comes perforce upon the head of those who ordained them.
Let me mention another instance. It chances, that a bishop has inherited from his predecessor a set of persons of indifferent character. What measures is it proper to take in respect of bygone transgressions (for here are two precipices) so as not to let the offender go unpunished, and not to cause scandal to the rest? Must one’s first step be to cut him off? There is no actual present ground for that. But is it right to let him go unmarked? Yes, say you; for the fault rests with the bishop who ordained him. Well then, must one refuse to ordain him again, and to raise him to a higher degree of the ministry? That would be to publish it to all men that he is a person of indifferent character, and so again one would cause scandal in a different way. But is one to promote him to a higher degree? That is much worse.
If then there were only the responsibility of the office itself for people to run after in the episcopate, none would be so quick to accept it. But as things go, we run after this, just as we do after the dignities of the world. That we may have glory with men, we lose ourselves with God. What profit in such honor? How self-evident its nothingness is! When you covet the episcopal rank, put in the other scale, the account to be rendered after this life. Weigh against it, the happiness of a life free from toil, take into account the different measure of the punishment. I mean that even if you have sinned, but in your own person merely, you will have no such great punishment, nothing like it: but if you have sinned as bishop, you are lost.
I do not think there are many among Bishops that will be saved, but many more that perish: and the reason is it is an affair that requires a great mind. Many are the exigencies which throw a man out of his natural temper; and he had need have a thousand eyes on all sides. Do you not see what a number of qualifications the Bishop must have? to be apt to teach, patient, holding fast the faithful word in doctrine (see 1 Tim. iii. 2–9; Tit. i. 7–9). What trouble and pains does this require!
And then, others do wrong, and he bears all the blame. To pass over every thing else: if one soul depart unbaptized, does not this subvert all his own prospect of salvation? The loss of one soul carries with it a penalty which no language can represent. For if the salvation of that soul was of such value, that the Son of God became man, and suffered so much, think how sore a punishment must the losing of it bring! And if in this present life he who is cause of another’s destruction is worthy of death, much more in the next world. Do not tell me, that the presbyter is in fault, or the deacon. The guilt of all these comes perforce upon the head of those who ordained them.
Let me mention another instance. It chances, that a bishop has inherited from his predecessor a set of persons of indifferent character. What measures is it proper to take in respect of bygone transgressions (for here are two precipices) so as not to let the offender go unpunished, and not to cause scandal to the rest? Must one’s first step be to cut him off? There is no actual present ground for that. But is it right to let him go unmarked? Yes, say you; for the fault rests with the bishop who ordained him. Well then, must one refuse to ordain him again, and to raise him to a higher degree of the ministry? That would be to publish it to all men that he is a person of indifferent character, and so again one would cause scandal in a different way. But is one to promote him to a higher degree? That is much worse.
If then there were only the responsibility of the office itself for people to run after in the episcopate, none would be so quick to accept it. But as things go, we run after this, just as we do after the dignities of the world. That we may have glory with men, we lose ourselves with God. What profit in such honor? How self-evident its nothingness is! When you covet the episcopal rank, put in the other scale, the account to be rendered after this life. Weigh against it, the happiness of a life free from toil, take into account the different measure of the punishment. I mean that even if you have sinned, but in your own person merely, you will have no such great punishment, nothing like it: but if you have sinned as bishop, you are lost.
From the Third Homily on Acts
Friday, November 09, 2007
Thursday, July 12, 2007
A Byzantine Catholic Reflection on the CDF Document on the Doctrine of the Church
As noted previously in this blog, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith document entitled “Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church” addresses questions related to what “Church” means for Catholics, particularly in light of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965). The document states that although other Christian groups may share in some of the "marks" of the Church, the Catholic Church alone is the one True Church of Jesus Christ.
Critics see this as an affront to non-Catholics and reflecting an attitude incompatible with twenty-first century understandings of God, religion and culture. Byzantine Catholics agree that the Church is at odds with modern society but also see a more fundamental disagreement.
It should come as no surprise that Catholics, who affirm belief in “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church” inspired, governed and guided by God, believe that this one Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church. However, the document actually asserts that while the Catholic Church possesses all the graces bestowed by Christ on His Church in their entirety other groups may possess some of them at least partially. Therefore, the word “subsist” indicates an identity that is intrinsic but not exclusive in that some of the qualities may be found in another communion or body.
The True Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church, but those qualities, that when present in their totality constitute this subsistential identity, may also be found, more or less individually, in other churches and communions. Thus Catholics can affirm that the Catholic Church alone is the Church Christ founded and continues to inspire while also affirming that the Orthodox Churches and Protestant communions are not totally devoid of Grace.
This view, which is quite moderate and balanced, should offend no one. And in reality, the offence is not what the Church believes about herself, nor that she proclaims it per se, but what such a belief entails -- namely, that there are absolute truths.
It is the claim to affirm an absolute truth that offends. The assertion that a truth is absolute flies in the face of modern sensibilities. Secular society seeks to 'level the playing field' of ideas. All truths are relative and ultimately there is no place for theological, philosophical or ethical absolutes. Thus, real belief in God, divine revelation and Jesus Christ are sins against that 'marketplace of ideas' where no idea can claim more assent than another. This is an essential axiom and virtue of "political correctness".
Being politically correct, however, is a virtue too often bought at the price of integrity, and the Church is unwilling to pay that price when salvation is at stake. It would be hypocritical to claim belief in Christ and the teachings of the Catholic Church and to equally accept a false equality of all religions or a pseudo-equivalence of all moralities.
The Church confronts the world with eternal Truth in Jesus Christ and the secularist world recoils, steeped as it is in the belief that only relative truths ensure 'progress and enlightenment'. The encounter with eternal Truth compels society to recognize that “this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil”. (John 3.19) The recognition of evil, in turn, requires a reevaluation of goals, methods and means.
The secular relativism of modern society is a path with no destination. Rather than enhancing our existence, it demeans and degrades humanity to the base level of sensate hedonism, which ultimately ends in nihilistic despair and death. Christ comes that we may "have life and have it abundantly". (John 10.10) The so-called 'lust for life' is proved to be a thirst that finds no refreshment until it is quenched by the Living Water of Jesus Christ. (cf. John 7.37-39).
It is no surprise then that many who cling to secularist relativism are scandalized and would much prefer the Church to be more compromising. But the Church must be true to herself, even if it offends. Jesus demands total allegiance (John 14.6) and promises to be with His Church until the end of time. (Matthew 16.18; 28.20) The Church has a duty to maintain that apostolic tradition. (II Thessalonians 2.15) It must proclaim the truth of the Gospel.
The Vatican document reveals that the Church is indeed out of step with modern sensibilities, yet she owes no apology for her beliefs any more than Jews, Muslims, Protestants, or Atheists owe the Church an apology for their own beliefs. The Church challenges humanity to grow in the image and likeness of the One who created us. This challenge, and the Truth it reflects, is truly Good News for the world. It is a cause for thanksgiving.
Byzantine Catholics in particular will joyfully continue to observe and proclaim the Faith that has sustained us for two thousand years, even at the risk of offending modern sensibilities. Our worship will not bow to the fads of secular fashion. We will continue to affirm the Faith of the apostles, the Faith of the fathers, the Faith of the orthodox, and the Faith that has established the universe!
...
The Holy See has issued a very thorough commentary on the document here.
This is an expanded version of a submission to the local newspaper. If the newsprint version appears, I'll include a link here.
Critics see this as an affront to non-Catholics and reflecting an attitude incompatible with twenty-first century understandings of God, religion and culture. Byzantine Catholics agree that the Church is at odds with modern society but also see a more fundamental disagreement.
It should come as no surprise that Catholics, who affirm belief in “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church” inspired, governed and guided by God, believe that this one Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church. However, the document actually asserts that while the Catholic Church possesses all the graces bestowed by Christ on His Church in their entirety other groups may possess some of them at least partially. Therefore, the word “subsist” indicates an identity that is intrinsic but not exclusive in that some of the qualities may be found in another communion or body.
The True Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church, but those qualities, that when present in their totality constitute this subsistential identity, may also be found, more or less individually, in other churches and communions. Thus Catholics can affirm that the Catholic Church alone is the Church Christ founded and continues to inspire while also affirming that the Orthodox Churches and Protestant communions are not totally devoid of Grace.
This view, which is quite moderate and balanced, should offend no one. And in reality, the offence is not what the Church believes about herself, nor that she proclaims it per se, but what such a belief entails -- namely, that there are absolute truths.
It is the claim to affirm an absolute truth that offends. The assertion that a truth is absolute flies in the face of modern sensibilities. Secular society seeks to 'level the playing field' of ideas. All truths are relative and ultimately there is no place for theological, philosophical or ethical absolutes. Thus, real belief in God, divine revelation and Jesus Christ are sins against that 'marketplace of ideas' where no idea can claim more assent than another. This is an essential axiom and virtue of "political correctness".
Being politically correct, however, is a virtue too often bought at the price of integrity, and the Church is unwilling to pay that price when salvation is at stake. It would be hypocritical to claim belief in Christ and the teachings of the Catholic Church and to equally accept a false equality of all religions or a pseudo-equivalence of all moralities.
The Church confronts the world with eternal Truth in Jesus Christ and the secularist world recoils, steeped as it is in the belief that only relative truths ensure 'progress and enlightenment'. The encounter with eternal Truth compels society to recognize that “this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil”. (John 3.19) The recognition of evil, in turn, requires a reevaluation of goals, methods and means.
The secular relativism of modern society is a path with no destination. Rather than enhancing our existence, it demeans and degrades humanity to the base level of sensate hedonism, which ultimately ends in nihilistic despair and death. Christ comes that we may "have life and have it abundantly". (John 10.10) The so-called 'lust for life' is proved to be a thirst that finds no refreshment until it is quenched by the Living Water of Jesus Christ. (cf. John 7.37-39).
It is no surprise then that many who cling to secularist relativism are scandalized and would much prefer the Church to be more compromising. But the Church must be true to herself, even if it offends. Jesus demands total allegiance (John 14.6) and promises to be with His Church until the end of time. (Matthew 16.18; 28.20) The Church has a duty to maintain that apostolic tradition. (II Thessalonians 2.15) It must proclaim the truth of the Gospel.
The Vatican document reveals that the Church is indeed out of step with modern sensibilities, yet she owes no apology for her beliefs any more than Jews, Muslims, Protestants, or Atheists owe the Church an apology for their own beliefs. The Church challenges humanity to grow in the image and likeness of the One who created us. This challenge, and the Truth it reflects, is truly Good News for the world. It is a cause for thanksgiving.
Byzantine Catholics in particular will joyfully continue to observe and proclaim the Faith that has sustained us for two thousand years, even at the risk of offending modern sensibilities. Our worship will not bow to the fads of secular fashion. We will continue to affirm the Faith of the apostles, the Faith of the fathers, the Faith of the orthodox, and the Faith that has established the universe!
...
The Holy See has issued a very thorough commentary on the document here.
This is an expanded version of a submission to the local newspaper. If the newsprint version appears, I'll include a link here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
