Showing posts with label communion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label communion. Show all posts

Thursday, August 05, 2021

Next on the Agenda: False Ecumenism?

Friday, February 22, 2019

What sort of communion?

Opus Dei: Letter from the Prelate (14 February 2019)
Monsignor Fernando Ocáriz stresses the importance of unity with those around us, a unity that, since it is the result of love, "is not uniformity, but communion."

Precisely since it is the result of love, this unity is not uniformity, but rather communion. It is a unity in diversity that is shown in the joy of living alongside those who are quite different from us, where we learn to grow through what the others have to offer and we foster an atmosphere of affection around us. Jesus made clear that this unity is a requirement for being effective in passing on the Gospel: “so that the world may believe” (Jn 7:21).

Is he referring to Christians? It would seem so, though the words themselves are open to being interpreted as referring to a population center in which religious pluralism is the norm, or even religious pluralism and ethnic diversity. So what sort of differences are we talking about, the ones that exist among Christians? Differences in personalities? Hobbies?

Saturday, February 02, 2019

Latins Gonna Latin

From Analysis from Fr. Louis Bouyer’s 1978 essay that may apply today, an excerpt of a lecture given by the then newly-elected superior general of the FSSP:

“There is no possibility to get to Heaven without being united to the Pope,” said Fr. Andrzej Komorowski, the recently-elected Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), a Society of Apostolic Life of Pontifical right that celebrates the Traditional Latin Mass.

I shouldn't be shocked that he would hold this position but I hadn't thought about the FSSP for some time.

Monday, June 04, 2018

CWR: Why talk of Catholic-Lutheran intercommunion damages Catholic-Orthodox relations by Ines Angeli Murzaku

If the Catholic Church can and will think of intercommunion, then intercommunion with the Orthodox Churches is the most reasonable, probable, and feasible.

Monday, October 09, 2017

Only a Latin Traditionalist Who Is a Thomist Could Have Written This?



Would non-traditionalist Thomists or Dominicans agree?

At any rate, the essay deserves a longer response, but I will say that charity has priority and primacy over all else. The problem may lie in St. Thomas's treatment of the virtue of religion, which may need to be reconsidered. (Can we say that religion is concerned with what is directed to the God as end, while the theological virtues are concerned with God as object, if religion is concerned with what we owe to God but charity is also owed to God?)

Tuesday, July 11, 2017

Does any prominent Father in the first millenium

apply the image of Spouse to the individual human person, and not just to the Church as a whole? Or is this more of a medieval Latin development, concomitant with shifts in Latin understandings of spirituality and the Eucharist?

Regarding the Bridegroom and the Bride, God the Son is the analogue of the male/man, and the Church (and perhaps the individual human person) is the analogue of the female. Just as the husband is the "active" principle and leads and imprints himself on his wife, and the wife is conformed to the husband, so Christ is the active principle, and the individual human person is conformed to Christ.

While the literal application of this imagery may be useful to female religious, I question its effectiveness for men. (As opposed to its being used as a theological metaphor to help our understanding of our communion with Christ and the Holy Trinity.)

And the individual human person has a filial relationship with God the Father by being sons in the Son. A logical consequence of the first, perhaps, our being conformed to Christ.

Would we say that the individual soul is the bride of the Holy Trinity as a whole? Or of the Father? I don't think so, even though it may be claimed that Israel is the bride of God the Father in the OT? It would be even more problematic if the human person were called to have a "conjugal" relationship with God the Father and a "filial" relationship as well. I believe the latter is literal, even if by analogy, while the former is only a metaphor or figurative language. So as I start reading through John Paul II's catechesis (and not the popularizations put forth by others) I will be keen to see how he parses this out.

Monday, November 30, 2015