Post by Monks of Norcia.
Friday, February 28, 2014
Thursday, February 27, 2014
Rorate Caeli: Pope Francis: "Bishops, Enough with Congresses, Conferences and Travels! The Decrees of Trent must be obeyed: a Bishop must truly reside in his diocese."
The solution is not to abolish national episcopal conferences (though the concept may need to be re-examined and the existence of some is questionable, i.e. that of the United States, since the United States was not formed as a unitary nation but as a federation of polities). Rather, local synods may need to be the ideal (Bavaria, not Germany), guided by a better understanding of a more humane scale of travel and interaction (as well as group identity).
The solution is not to abolish national episcopal conferences (though the concept may need to be re-examined and the existence of some is questionable, i.e. that of the United States, since the United States was not formed as a unitary nation but as a federation of polities). Rather, local synods may need to be the ideal (Bavaria, not Germany), guided by a better understanding of a more humane scale of travel and interaction (as well as group identity).
Peter Kwasniewski Clarifies
NLM: Clarifications on the Reform of the Reform Controversy by Peter Kwasniewski
Does Professor Kwasniewski address Dave Armstrong or Fr. Angelo? (Would he want to?)
See also: Home from the Liturgical Thirty Years War
Does Professor Kwasniewski address Dave Armstrong or Fr. Angelo? (Would he want to?)
See also: Home from the Liturgical Thirty Years War
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Tuesday, February 25, 2014
Where was this photo taken?
According to the link: High Altar at St. Cyprian’s, Majestas - which St. Cyprian's?
Monday, February 24, 2014
A Report on the Riverside Symposium
of the Saints Cyril and Athanasius Orthodox Institute...
Capella Romana was present to sing the Divine Liturgy on Sunday!
Capella Romana was present to sing the Divine Liturgy on Sunday!
Sunday, February 23, 2014
Saturday, February 22, 2014
Friday, February 21, 2014
NLM: The Growing Realization of the Irreparable Failure of the Liturgical Reform
by Peter Kwasniewski
If Fr. Fessio were to come out stating his agreement with the authors cited above, that the reform of the reform is not the path to take (unless it be brought more into conformity with the ancient use?), then the reform of the reform movement in the U.S. is done. (Can it really be called a movement when its adherents are probably fewer by a magnitude or two than traditionalist priests?) Is there any interest in the reform of the reform overseas? Anyway, I don't think Fr. Fessio would ever come out and publicly state this, since it would entail an implicit or explicit criticism of the Pauline reform, and he is a good Jesuit.
by Peter Kwasniewski
If Fr. Fessio were to come out stating his agreement with the authors cited above, that the reform of the reform is not the path to take (unless it be brought more into conformity with the ancient use?), then the reform of the reform movement in the U.S. is done. (Can it really be called a movement when its adherents are probably fewer by a magnitude or two than traditionalist priests?) Is there any interest in the reform of the reform overseas? Anyway, I don't think Fr. Fessio would ever come out and publicly state this, since it would entail an implicit or explicit criticism of the Pauline reform, and he is a good Jesuit.
Thursday, February 20, 2014
Dom Mark Daniel Kirby Revises His Opinion of the Reform
Let nothing be preferred to the Work of God
(Rorate Caeli)
Related: Father Hugh Somerville-Knapman - The Lament of a Liturgical Loner
(Rorate Caeli)
Related: Father Hugh Somerville-Knapman - The Lament of a Liturgical Loner
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Pravmir: From the Ascesis of Virginity to the Ascesis of Agape (Love): Revisiting the thought of St. John Chrysostom on Marriage and Sexuality by Fr. Panayiotis Papageorgiou, Ph.D.
Greek Orthodox Ordination
As far as I know photos of his ordination have not been made available yet... looks like the ordination video is no longer available.
Nvm. Poked around on Youtube. They've uploaded it there:
Nvm. Poked around on Youtube. They've uploaded it there:
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Constantinople and the Byzantine Millennium (330-1453)
February 28-March 1, 2014
Marines' Memorial Theatre, San Francisco
Cornucopia: Constantinople and the Byzantine Millennium (330–1453)
More info: Humanities West
Marines' Memorial Theatre, San Francisco
Cornucopia: Constantinople and the Byzantine Millennium (330–1453)
More info: Humanities West
CUA Press: Breaking the Mind: New Studies in the Syriac Book of Steps
Editors: Kristian S. Heal and Robert A. Kitchen
CUA Press is having its winter sale - 20% of new titles with the code CWS14. (I'm not sure when the sale ends.)
Editors: Kristian S. Heal and Robert A. Kitchen
CUA Press is having its winter sale - 20% of new titles with the code CWS14. (I'm not sure when the sale ends.)
Monday, February 17, 2014
Rorate Caeli: On the 50th Anniversary of the Death of Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
The death of a friend of God
The death of a friend of God
Sunday, February 16, 2014
Scholarship Without an Agenda?
Post by Medievalists.net.
Well, Canadians run medievalists.net so what should one expect in the selections they make?
Never thought I'd hear the following from an Orthodox priest, but I did: Fr. Theodore (Greek) gave a "job description" for a husband and some of the requirements included "being obedient to one's wife"; he also seemingly misapplied St. Paul's dictum that Christians should submit to one another to the relationship between husband and wife. (Questionable whether this could be understood as some sort of egalitarianism or just Christian fraternity, characterizing the friendship or agape between members of the same sex.)
I assume the priest has been married for some time - but is his married life sufficient to give support to these principles being laid down as fundamental to Christian morality? Or did he, as a [Greek Orthodox] priest, luck out in the modern marriage market?
I assume the priest has been married for some time - but is his married life sufficient to give support to these principles being laid down as fundamental to Christian morality? Or did he, as a [Greek Orthodox] priest, luck out in the modern marriage market?
Saturday, February 15, 2014
Friday, February 14, 2014
Vatican Insider: Ratzinger’s resignation seen from the south by Alver Metalli
Hummes: “People’s faith in the Church has been restored”
Hummes: “People’s faith in the Church has been restored”
Thursday, February 13, 2014
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Part 2 of the NLM Interview with Dom Alcuin Reid
The 'Consilium ad Exsequendam' at 50 - An Interview with Dom Alcuin Reid (Part 2)
And a reference to Fr. Bouyer's memoirs:
NLM: Were there any persons who, in your opinion, should or should not have been included on the committee? If so, why?
Dom Alcuin: Eleven pages of an appendix to Archbishop Bugnini’s memoirs, The Reform of the Liturgy (Liturgical Press), lists the personnel. Many of these had been involved in the commission for liturgical reform of Pius XII, the preparatory liturgical commission or the conciliar liturgical commission. Names such as Jungmann, Gy, Botte, Martimort, Righetti, feature rightly enough amongst the consultors. Interestingly Louis Bouyer was only included in 1966. Antonelli was one of the members; Bishop Jenny also. And there were bishop members from around the world who were regarded as having shown interest in the liturgy at the Council.
And a reference to Fr. Bouyer's memoirs:
NLM: During and after the Council, there was a great deal of talk in the Church about “collegiality” between the Pope and the bishops. Sacrosanctum Concilium itself says in no. 25 that “(t)he liturgical books are to be revised as soon as possible; experts are to be employed on the task, and bishops are to be consulted, from various parts of the world.” Were the bishops consulted by the Consilium? If so, to what extent? Were the reforms carried out as an act of collegiality between the Pope and the world-wide episcopate?
Dom Alcuin: Certainly there were bishops from dioceses across the world on the Consilium. And some schemas were sent to Bishops Conferences before the 1967 Synod of Bishops. But it is simply not true to assert that “every suggested adaptation, change, or modification was sent out to every Catholic bishop in the world” and that “when changes were severely questioned or opposed by a large number of bishops, they were revised according to the will of the bishops and then sent back again.” (Robert Taft SJ, Interview, 4 Nov. 2009) Bugnini describes the relationship with the world’s bishops in chapter 14 of his memoirs—and it is a very different account from Father Taft’s. The Consilium had ongoing contact with the Episcopal conferences, certainly, but one only has to read Cardinal Heenan’s letters to see how a residential Archbishop regarded the reform as something imposed by ‘Rome’ regardless of local bishops’ views (cf. A Bitter Trial, Ignatius Press).
Msgr Martimort, the Relator (co-ordinator of the working group) for the reform of the Liturgy of the Hours, explained to me in an interview that after consultation with experts he presented two position papers to the Consilium plenary meeting, which decided on which to follow and on appropriate revisions. After this, Martimort complained vigorously, Bugnini ignored these decisions and himself proposed another course to Paul VI—which was the one adopted. This ‘Paul VI approves what Bugnini-wants’ is a significant factor in the postconciliar reform, a fact underlined also by details recounted in the memoirs of Louis Bouyer, still sadly unpublished.
So too in 1969, the by-then Archbishop Jenny wrote to Paul VI because he believed he had “a duty in conscience” to utter “a cry of alarm” about “the liturgy in general and the divine office in particular” because of influences outside of the Consilium and outside of its normal working methods. Co-operation within the Consilium itself was questionable!
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
Monday, February 10, 2014
Fr. Kocik on the Pauline Reform
Reforming the Irreformable? by Fr. Thomas Kocik
And maybe a step back:
Is It Fitting for the Priest to Recite All the Texts of the Mass? by Peter Kwasniewski
No: the ‘reform of the reform’ is not realizable because the material discontinuity between the two forms of the Roman rite presently in use is much broader and much deeper than I had first imagined. In the decade that has elapsed since the publication of my book, The Reform of the Reform? A Liturgical Debate (Ignatius Press, 2003), which concerns almost exclusively the rite of Mass, a number of important scholarly studies, most notably those of László Dobszay (†2011)6 and Lauren Pristas,7 have opened my eyes to the hack-job inflicted by Pope Paul VI’s Consilium on the whole liturgical edifice of the Latin Church: the Mass; the Divine Office; the rites of the sacraments, sacramentals, blessings and other services of the Roman Ritual; and so forth.8 Whatever else might be said of the reformed liturgy—its pastoral benefits, its legitimacy, its rootedness in theological ressourcement, its hegemonic status, etc.—the fact remains: it does not represent an organic development of the liturgy which Vatican II (and, four centuries earlier, the Council of Trent) inherited.
And maybe a step back:
Is It Fitting for the Priest to Recite All the Texts of the Mass? by Peter Kwasniewski
Sunday, February 09, 2014
Saturday, February 08, 2014
Friday, February 07, 2014
2014 Huffington Ecumenical Symposium
From the Rising of the Sun to Its Setting: Chant and Contemporary Liturgical Music, East and West: February 21 - 22 at Loyola Marymount University
I had planned on attending a day of recollection that Saturday; otherwise I'd drive down to SoCal for this. Even now it is tempting.
Cappella Romana to perform at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, CA
Related:
New Arctic Light Track on SoundCloud — Paschal Exaposteilarion No. 2
I had planned on attending a day of recollection that Saturday; otherwise I'd drive down to SoCal for this. Even now it is tempting.
Cappella Romana to perform at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, CA
Related:
New Arctic Light Track on SoundCloud — Paschal Exaposteilarion No. 2
Boston Byzantine Music Festival
If I were still living in Boston I'd attempt to attend.
Mary Jaharis Center Presents Boston Byzantine Music Festival
Orthodox Arts Journal
Thursday, February 06, 2014
Wednesday, February 05, 2014
Two on the Common Good
Historical Papers 2006: Canadian Society of Church History: "Charles De Koninck at the Crossroads of Catholic Moral Thought: The “Common Good” Controversy and its Echoes in the Americas" by Christian Roy
Analyse & Kritik 3
"MacIntyre, Thomism and the Contemporary Common Good" by Thomas Osborne
Analyse & Kritik 3
"MacIntyre, Thomism and the Contemporary Common Good" by Thomas Osborne
Tuesday, February 04, 2014
Monday, February 03, 2014
James Chastek: Beginner-level notes on double effect
A quick response:
What defines the act as opposed to what knowingly belongs to it - this is important consideration. But it is also important to note that two acts may be similar in their physical description (~the matter of the moral act), and yet what is being aimed at by the agent is different. (~the form of the moral act). The object of the moral act would include both the form and the matter, and not one to the exclusion of the other.
What opens the possibility of the doctrine of double effect is the distinction between the 'form' and 'matter' of the moral act (and foreseeen consequences and willed consequences and the like). Does Brock offer the best treatment of these points? I'll have to review my notes.).
A quick response:
And so we distinguish things that knowingly belong to an act from those that define it. Since acts are defined by their goals or the things we intended, it makes sense to distinguish what is knowingly done from what is intentionally done.
What defines the act as opposed to what knowingly belongs to it - this is important consideration. But it is also important to note that two acts may be similar in their physical description (~the matter of the moral act), and yet what is being aimed at by the agent is different. (~the form of the moral act). The object of the moral act would include both the form and the matter, and not one to the exclusion of the other.
Notice these things, in a concrete case, are notionally distinct as opposed to being really distinct. A man might do surgery on the battlefield while thinking to himself “Gosh, I just love that sound they make when they scream and beg me to stop”. If this is so, he is not just a surgeon but a sadist too.I don't agree that they are notionally distinct rather than really distinct - the intention of an act is really different from the object of the act. The intention of the will is the end to which the act is ordered.
A thing can be done knowingly without being done intentionally (at least in the sense of “intentional” set out here), and this is opens the possibility of what became the doctrine of double effect.
What opens the possibility of the doctrine of double effect is the distinction between the 'form' and 'matter' of the moral act (and foreseeen consequences and willed consequences and the like). Does Brock offer the best treatment of these points? I'll have to review my notes.).
Sunday, February 02, 2014
Saturday, February 01, 2014
Will Constantinople Ever Repent of Its Ecclesial Pretensions?
Posted by a member at Catholic & Orthodox: Steps Towards a Reunited Church:
So far on the poll at least 93 people identify themselves as Catholic (Latin & Eastern) and Eastern Orthodox. By default all of these and the majority of the ones yet to vote (as this is mainly a Catholic-EO reunion group) accept Chalcedon and recognize the line of the Chalcedonian Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch as the legitimate successors of those Sees. I've posted an Oriental Narrative on Chalcedon before in response to related topics but we've never had a thread about it. Chalcedon still prevents 'the two arms of Orthodoxy' from reuniting even though they both agree that they believe the same thing but say it in different ways. In my opinion, the political, historical, and ecclesiastical implications of Chalcedon are more preventative of reunion than the formulation of the doctrine that was affirmed. I just wanted to get your thoughts on this and how we can realistically approach ecumenism with the Orientals also. Is reunion possible without the Orientals accepting Chalcedon? By the way I will post the symbolism in the Syriac Liturgy of St. James soon because in my opinion it's very beautiful and I think you guys will like it. Anyway, without further ado here is a summary of an Oriental narrative on Chalcedon:
In 324 AD, Byzantium, renamed Constantinople in 330, became the capital of the Roman Empire. The city's ecclesiastical community naturally began to rise in prominence and authority. The church in Constantinople had previously been under the jurisdiction and authority of the Metropolitan Bishop of Ephesus before becoming the church of the capital city of the Roman Empire. This rise in authority was happening at the expense of Alexandria and Antioch which were the Sees of the East, with Alexandria having primacy, being second only to Rome in all of Christendom; these three, Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, are the Petrine Sees in order of primacy. A rivalry had begun to brew between Alexandria and Constantinople in the East.
Driven by power and political gain, the Synod of the Oak was called for in 403 by the Pope of Alexandria Theophilus and the Empress Eudoxia that deposed St. John Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople.
The defeat of Constantinople by Alexandria again at the Council of Ephesus in 431 where Pope Cyril of Alexandria anathematized Nestorius, Bishop of Constantinople for heresy was another blow to Constantinople by Alexandria.
Constantinople, aiming to officially and finally consolidate its position in Christendom as the capital of the Roman Empire to have primacy in the East, achieved its goal at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. This was retribution against Alexandria by the rising See of Constantinople. The result of Chalcedon was widely expected as some think that the only reason this council was called together was to officially rank Constantinople second only to Rome in all of Christendom and to de facto remove Alexandria as a heretical See due to its Miaphysite position. The council is called 'the conspiracy of Chalcedon' by some. Rome even initially rejected the 28th Canon of Chalcedon, seeking to protect Alexandria and Antioch's positions and authority.
The jurisdiction of the See of Antioch, also a predominantly Miaphysite See at the time, was reduced by the establishment of Jerusalem as a Patriarchate at Chalcedon. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, was known in history to have been an opportunist. He sided with the Chalcedonians with the intention of promoting his own See at the expense of Antioch. Also, Juvenal put in his vote of condemnation against the Pope of Alexandria Dioscorus at the Council of Chalcedon although the two had previously been close friends.
In other words the Council of Chalcedon got Alexandria out of the way and officially ranked Constantinople above all the Eastern Sees and reduced Antioch's power by making Jerusalem an independent See all by the authority of an 'Ecumenical' Council. The Council of Chalcedon's main purpose in the Oriental perspective was to promote the See of Constantinople above Alexandria and Antioch by anathematizing them and reducing their authority.
This was followed by almost constant persecution of the Miaphysites of Egypt, Syria, and Armenia by the Chalcedonian Roman Empire causing many to seek refuge in neighboring rural areas such as the Egyptian Desert and Transjordan.
In the 6th Century, the Ghassanid Kingdom, an Arab Christian vassal state of the Roman Empire, is credited to have revived the Syriac Church, the Ghassanids themselves being staunch Miaphysites. The Muslim invasions which began in the 7th century brought even worse periods of persecution against the Oriental Communion that have not ceased to this day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)