Friday, July 17, 2015

Bicentenary of Don Bosco's Birth

To mark the bicentenary of the birth of St John Bosco, founder of the Salesian family, Pope Francis has sent a letter to...

Posted by Vatican Radio - English Section on Thursday, July 16, 2015

What Would Byzantine Christians Have Added?

Vatican Radio spoke to representatives of the Catholic-Pentecostal dialogue here at the Vatican.

Posted by Vatican Radio - English Section on Friday, July 17, 2015

Beatification Next?

More on the Heroic Virtue of Metropolitan Andrey Sheptysky.

Posted by Vatican Radio - English Section on Friday, July 17, 2015

Pope Francis received approved the decrees recognizing the heroic virtue the Servants of God, including Andrey Roman...

Posted by Vatican Radio - English Section on Friday, July 17, 2015

Vatican publishes decrees of heroic virtues of several Servants of God.

Posted by Vatican Radio - English Section on Friday, July 17, 2015

Thursday, July 16, 2015

What’s Changed? A Comparison of Self- and Divine-Referential Pronoun Usage in Hymns Written Pre- and Post-Vatican II by J.E. Sigler


(via Insight Scoop)

АФОНСКИЕ ОТКРЫТКИ



A Rather Modern Icon?

"I got the most I ever have out of studying this Orthodox Study Bible in front of this icon. I heard that this icon is...

Posted by Orthodox Christian Network on Thursday, July 16, 2015

Wednesday, July 15, 2015

St. Volodomyr

NLM: St Vladimir the Great by Gregory DiPippo

In which he recounts:
The ancient Slavic chronicles record a famous episode that, when investigating which religion he and his people ought to embrace, Vladimir judged Islam altogether undesirable because of the prohibition on drinking alcohol, saying “Drinking is the joy of all Rus’. We cannot exist without that pleasure.” The envoys sent by him to visit the temples of various neighboring peoples reported that the Bulgar Muslim “bows, sits down, looks hither and thither like one possessed, and there is no happiness among them, but instead only sorrow and a dreadful stench. Their religion is not good.” Their report of the Latin Rite among the Germans was that “we beheld no glory there.” But they described the Divine Liturgy celebrated on a great feast in Constantinople in these terms: “(T)he Greeks led us to the edifices where they worship their God, and we knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth. For on earth there is no such splendor or such beauty, and we are at a loss how to describe it. We know only that God dwells there among men, and their service is fairer than the ceremonies of other nations. For we cannot forget that beauty… If the Greek faith were evil, it would not have been adopted by your grandmother Olga, who was wiser than all other men.”

Attention, Latin traditionalists: the Byzantine rite, not the Roman.

Eastern Christian Books: The Greek New Testament

Eastern Christian Books: The Greek New Testament

Fr. Gignac's book (no CUA Press page yet) should be a good resource for those wishing to learn koine Greek.

Meanwhile, at CUA...

Icon of St. Bonaventure

At Mr. Janaro's blog - Saint Bonaventure's Journey.

Another Attempt to Reconcile DH

Vatican II Followed Ottaviani on Church and State by Joseph G. Trabbic

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

What is the "Penitential Way"?

Chiesa: Synod. The Preparatory Document’s Arabian Phoenix
by by Sandro Magister

Everybody says there is one, what it is nobody knows. It is the “penitential way” to communion for the divorced and remarried. The Dominican theologian Thomas Michelet lays bare the contradictions

And how is the notion of "penance" here related to metanoia?

Ninth Annual Summer Patristic Studies


"The Chapel at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology"

Posted by Orthodox Christian Network on Friday, July 10, 2015

As It Should Be

Beautiful photo sent to us with this caption: "From Romania with love!"

Posted by Orthodox Christian Network on Tuesday, July 14, 2015

George writes: Hello! This is the Altar of my church, in Milcoveni, Caras-Severin, Romania. God bless all of us!

Posted by Orthodox Christian Network on Monday, July 13, 2015

St. Nicholas of Japan on Buddhism

St. Nicholas of Japan on Buddhism by Deacon Giorgi Maximov (print)

Monday, July 13, 2015

A New Understanding of Anselm

Silverio Rebelo, Le Sacrifice du Christ chez Saint Anselm de Cantorbery, Le noveau visage du Cur Deus Homo, Irenikon, LXXXVII, 2014, 5-46

Summary of Silverio Rebelo:
"The Sacrifice of Christ according to Saint Anselm of Canterbury - A New Look at the Cur Deus Homo." According to the current interpretation of the Cur Deus Homo, Anselm explained the redemptive function of the sacrifice of the Cross in accordance with the basic perspective of the theory of vicarious satisfaction, the classic design of a legal-term replacement of the work of Christ. However, a closer examination reveals a theology of redemption of a very different type, deeply rooted in the patristic tradition, whose basic idea is that the sacrifice of Christ is a life-giving event. According to this interpretation of the mediation of Christ, faith allows believers to share in the perfection of his obedience unto death, which becomes the basis of their life of obedience to God. This leads to a veritable revolution in the understanding of the relationship between God and humanity: the sacrifice of Christ is not a condition of the grace of God for humankind, but a work that renews their way of living, and is an expression [of] God's unconditional will to save."

The article contains a discussion of merit in CDH 2.19 - is this the source of Aquinas's teaching on merit re: Christ's redemptive work in ST III? Or is it mediated by other sources? From a completely unrelated work? Wholly "original"?

The dominant understanding of Anselm's teaching among Latins, transmitted in academic settings, is probably familiar to those who have studied Latin theories of atonement. It is a representation put forth even by Joseph Ratzinger and Louis Bouyer. I assume that both read Anselm's CDH, either in Latin or in translation, so that their representation is confirmed by their reading of the primary source and not based solely on secondary sources. So why did the theological giants of yesteryear fail to get Anselm right (assuming this revised understanding of Cur Deus Homo is the correct one)? Did they lack access to the requisite scholarship for properly understanding how the terms satisfaction and honor were being used by Anselm, definitions that could not be uncovered until they were situated within the historical and theological culture in which they were used? Was it a problem of translation (and the interpretation that precedes translation)?

Sunday, July 12, 2015

Carl Olson on Deification

His response to a perhaps well-meaning but rather ignorant Latin (or a troll):

Not only is it not new, divinization is a key concept in the New Testament, in both implicit and more obvious forms. In addition, it is a huge, huge theme in the entirety of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The most obvious example is par. 460:

The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”: “For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God.” “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.” “The only–begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.”

Another great example is in the section on "grace":

Grace is a participation in the life of God. It introduces us into the intimacy of Trinitarian life: by Baptism the Christian participates in the grace of Christ, the Head of his Body. As an “adopted son” he can henceforth call God “Father,” in union with the only Son. He receives the life of the Spirit who breathes charity into him and who forms the Church.

Taking cues from the CCC, I think it is usually best to describe divinization as partaking in the divine nature (cf. 2 Pet. 1:4), or being made children of God, drawing on the teaching of the Apostle John: "See what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God; and that is what we are..." (1 Jn. 3:1).

But this isn't simply a matter of "mystical theology"; it is Catholicism 101. Which is probably why it is mentioned explicitly in the very first line of the CCC: "God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life. ..." Which continues by stating: "To accomplish this, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son as Redeemer and Savior. In his Son and through him, he invites men to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted children and thus heirs of his blessed life."

In the Eastern Churches (both Catholic and Orthodox) the theme of divinization is very clear and upfront, especially in the Divine Liturgy. And yet Eastern Christians, in my experience, don't fall into pantheism or monism or polytheism, in large part because the reality of divinization is clearly articulated within an Incarnational and Trinitarian framework, in which the distinction between God and man is very confused [sic -- I suspect this is a typo], even while the union of God and man in the Person of Jesus Christ is continually proclaimed and articulated. One problem, it seems to me, is that far too many Catholics view Catholicism as a religion of morality and works rather than appreciating that those things flow first from the reality of Who God is and what he calls us to be.

I say it is a theme that needs to be emphasized far, far more often, which is why I am the co-editor, with Fr. David V. Meconi, SJ (editor of HPR), of a detailed study of divinization that will be published by Ignatius Press early next year, and will include chapters by Dr. Ortiz, Dr. Fagerberg, Fr. Hofer, and several others, with a Foreword by Dr. Scott Hahn.

Edit> The corrected paragraph:

In the Eastern Churches (both Catholic and Orthodox) the theme of divinization is very clear and upfront, especially in the Divine Liturgy. And yet Eastern Christians, in my experience, don't fall into pantheism or monism or polytheism, in large part because the reality of divinization is clearly articulated within an Incarnational and Trinitarian framework, in which the distinction between God and man is not confused, even while the union of God and man in the Person of Jesus Christ is continually proclaimed and articulated. One problem, it seems to me, is that far too many Catholics view Catholicism as a religion of morality and works rather than appreciating that those things flow first from the reality of Who God is and what he calls us to be.