Wednesday, May 20, 2020
Lit Verlag: Monastic Life in the Armenian Church: Glorious Past - Ecumenical Reconsideration edited by Jasmine Dum-Tragut and Dietmar W. Winkler (Lit Verlag, 2020), 224pp.
Stanford University Press: Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire: Armenians and the Politics of Reform in the Ottoman Empire by Richard E. Antaramian
Cornell University Press: Russia's Entangled Embrace: The Tsarist Empire and the Armenians, 1801-1914 by Stephen Badalyan Riegg
It’s a sign of the times when @kvallier argues that “Christian political theologians now must either work within an integralist framework or explain why not.” (Not to say I agree with all of the analysis here, by any means). https://t.co/MIy4TRM9PU— Adrian Vermeule (@Vermeullarmine) May 20, 2020
Religious coercion has some limits, but it can be used to punish heresy and apostasy, and to ensure that Catholicism is the religion of the state.
Nowhere in the Kerygma or Tradition is political authority vested with the authority to punish heresy and apostasy. So why should we accept the claim that the political authority
It is not up to critics of integralism to show this claim is wrong when it is not a principle but a conclusion that must be given a demonstration/proof/derivation by its defenders. Repeating Aquinas or Augustine on this point could be one response, but Latin integralists must acknowledge the possibility that their arguments are flawed.
Act-consequentialism and integralism are plainly quite different normative theories. They are elegant approaches to ethics and political theory respectively because they make the good the sole normative master conception in a straightforward way. So much so, that one might even think that they’re the default normative theories.
I think that work on act-consequentialism has shown why it is axiologically mistaken. But I don’t think we yet have an account of why integralist axiology is mistaken if we take the truth of Christianity, and Catholicism in particular, for granted.
Latin integralism can hardly be said to be the "default" even for Roman Catholics when it doesn't have a place on the hierarchy of truths. I don't know how Vallier is able to make this claim, as if it were somehow self-evident.
Tomorrow is the Feast of Sts. Constantine and Helen in the Orthodox Church. I have a few thoughts on the complex issues surrounding Constantine’s legacy in the Orthodox Church (which is dominated by the influence of his biographer, Eusebius).— George Demacopoulos (@GDemacopoulos) May 20, 2020
See the thread.
Pius XII listening to Father George Lamaître explaining to him his "Big Bang" theory. pic.twitter.com/upWfpaII6k— elizabeta ugarska (@enchanteeq) May 19, 2020
Taking into consideration the spiritual and mental healing that comes through the Sacrament of Confession, the Holy Synod blesses, for all priests and communities in the Orthodox Church in America, that for this period:
The Sacrament of Confession may not be held in person during this period, except for those who are among the limited “crew” of servers and singers in a parish or mission that is holding Divine Services. If thus done in person, six (6) feet of social distance must be maintained, as well as must be all other civil and public health measures applicable in the locality.
The Sacrament of Confession may be held over the telephone or by live video communication.
If Confession is heard over the telephone or by live video, the priest must read the Prayer of Absolution before ending the phone call or video communication, in the hearing of the penitent.
If anyone of the faithful is uncomfortable with Confession over the phone, then he or she is not bound to confess, but may wait until a time when in-person Confessions will be possible again.
Ven. Fulton Sheen was Biritual meaning he had permission from Rome to celebrate in the Eastern Catholic Rites which are in full communion with the Holy See. Here are a few images of him in this fashion: pic.twitter.com/svl8jEAS58— 🇻🇦Boniface🏴☠️ (@RealBoniface8) May 19, 2020