Sunday, May 10, 2020
Ss. Cyril and Methodius 20th Annual Lecture with Fr. John Behr
Edit.
Original video has been set to private. Here is a copy:
Saturday, May 09, 2020
St. George
Related:
Churches of St. George Around the World
OrthoChristian.com presents a collection of photographs of churches dedicated to St. George that have been built around the world.
Ignatius Press for the English Translation?
Nope: Bloomsbury.
CWR Dispatch: In new biography, Benedict XVI laments modern ‘anti-Christian creed’
The biography, written by Peter Seewald and issued by Munich-based publisher Droemer Knaur, is available only in German. An English translation, “Benedict XVI, The Biography: Volume One,” will be published in the U.S. in November.
CWR Dispatch: In new biography, Benedict XVI laments modern ‘anti-Christian creed’
The biography, written by Peter Seewald and issued by Munich-based publisher Droemer Knaur, is available only in German. An English translation, “Benedict XVI, The Biography: Volume One,” will be published in the U.S. in November.
BXVI on Modern anti-Christian creed https://t.co/Dcuf54c7OQ @cnalive
— The Catholic Thing (@catholicthing) May 6, 2020
Friday, May 08, 2020
Fr. David Anderson: The Sunday Experience of the Resurrection
One of Fr. David's wishes is to write a book on write book on Paschaltime. May God bring it to fruition!
How is our Lord breathing upon the apostles (John 20:22-24) different from what happened at Pentecost? Was this gift of the Holy Spirit a kind of ordination, to give them the power to do the acts necessary to minister to Christians before Pentecost, a prefiguration of the gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church Universal?
As for Fr. David's memories of Sunday Mass: in the Latin ecclesial tradition (justified by texts in the Roman rite?) is the exclusive or almost-exclusive identification of the Eucharist with the "sacrifice of our Lord on the Cross a possible reason why Sunday doesn't feel like a ceelbration of the Resurrection? Maybe Mass wouldfeel more like a mini-Good Friday if anything. In contrast, the Byzantine rite is more holistic in how it understands the sarifice of our Lord, looking at the entirety of His life, both here on earth and after His ascension.
Russell Hittinger on the Compendium of Catholic Social Doctrine
From Pecknold's essay:
Httinger is correct, and it should be noted that the Compendium was released with Rome's authority.
Hittinger’s critical analysis comes to a head when he discusses the Compendium’s treatment of the common good. He notes that the older metaphysical definition of the common good—that which belonged to the common philosophical infrastructure of Leo XIII and Pius XI—had given way in the Catechism to a weaker definition lifted from Vatican II’s Gaudium et Spes, which suggested that the common good was concerned with “the sum total of social conditions.” But the compilers of the Compendium are aware that this “sum total” account differs from the older and more precise definition of the metaphysical primacy of the common good. So what do they do? As Hittinger observes, they don’t try to reconcile them, they just “juxtapose” them, like this:
a. The common good indicates “the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfilment more fully and more easily.”Hittinger thinks that the authors of the Compendium juxtapose these two passages without reconciling them because they don’t know how to do so. They are actually perpetuating the problem that John Paul II was trying to solve. The juxtaposition is not only lazy, but dangerous—in such juxtapositions, usually the weaker, less binding of the formulas wins out. This loss of philosophical coherence leads to a loss of moral authority, ecclesial unity, and evangelical witness.
b. The common good does not consist in the simple sum of the particular goods of each subject of a social entity. Belonging to everyone and to each person, it is and remains “common”, because it is indivisible.
Hittinger observes that “at best these are equivocations about what the common good means.” What was needed was not a mere juxtaposition, but a synthesis that strengthens rather than weakens principles. Hittinger even suggests an elegant way the Compendium authors could have done so. Rather than let a thousand principles bloom, they could have clarified that the first “broadly accepted sense” of the common good is not an aggregate definition at all but simply concerns “social conditions,” whereas the second is a definition of the common good in the strict and stronger sense. If they had done the work that John Paul II had asked for, Hittinger reckons, they would have secured the tradition instead of exchanging it “for a mess of pottage.”
Httinger is correct, and it should be noted that the Compendium was released with Rome's authority.
C.C. Pecknold on R. Hittinger and RCST
First Things: Defend Us From Ideology by C. C. Pecknold
Should a bishop be preaching moral theology to non-believers or Christ instead?
Does Rome have the authority to promulgate principles of moral theology, other than precepts of the Divine Law, as definitive? By what competence? Rome can only affirm that such principles (and conclusions of moral theology) are free from heresy but Rome cannot guarantee that their formulation is true or sound as they stand, at least not with the authority of the pope as defined so far. Not only that, but the Compendium does not include an exhaustive list of the precepts of Divine Law regarding political communities and political life.
Preaching the "common good" never transformed a tyranny to a just regime. While we need to critically examine the principles of RCST, I do not think that Latins will have the courage to take such an examination that far, as it may run contrary to accepted beliefs about the state and other beliefs taken from liberalism, egalitarianism, and other political ideologies.
“To guard ourselves against ideology...we need to strengthen principles through coherent philosophical definition and reflection. Hittinger concludes, ‘it is not only rigid thinking...but also weak thinking is vulnerable to ideology.’— C.C. Pecknold (@ccpecknold) May 8, 2020
My latest. https://t.co/fZ3x6aVQNw
"Some might take this as a counsel of despair, but I take Hittinger to be issuing an invigorating challenge... we need to strengthen principles through coherent philosophical definition & reflection."https://t.co/EjweJOEHKh— Josh Hochschild (@JoshHochschild) May 8, 2020
Yet Hittinger sees “warning signs” beginning with Pope Pius XII. Pius was well-schooled in the same philosophical infrastructure, yet issued no social encyclicals from 1940 until his death in 1958. Pope John XXIII began writing social encyclicals again, but no longer “to all bishops,” as was the Leonine custom. Rather, he addressed them “to all men of good will.” This shift of address drastically changed the scope and coherence of social doctrine, since it no longer assumed the shared philosophical infrastructure and distinctions that had been essential to the tradition.
Should a bishop be preaching moral theology to non-believers or Christ instead?
Does Rome have the authority to promulgate principles of moral theology, other than precepts of the Divine Law, as definitive? By what competence? Rome can only affirm that such principles (and conclusions of moral theology) are free from heresy but Rome cannot guarantee that their formulation is true or sound as they stand, at least not with the authority of the pope as defined so far. Not only that, but the Compendium does not include an exhaustive list of the precepts of Divine Law regarding political communities and political life.
Some might take this as a counsel of despair, but I take Hittinger to be issuing an invigorating challenge. If we want to guard ourselves against ideology and corruptions of our traditions, we need to strengthen principles through coherent philosophical definition and reflection. Hittinger concludes, “it is not only rigid thinking that’s vulnerable to ideology, but also weak thinking is vulnerable to ideology.”
This is true for the political common good as well as the ecclesial common good. Skepticism that eschews a strong, coherent public philosophy will not help us. Only a philosophically coherent account of the American common good will save us from our descent into ideological incoherence.
Preaching the "common good" never transformed a tyranny to a just regime. While we need to critically examine the principles of RCST, I do not think that Latins will have the courage to take such an examination that far, as it may run contrary to accepted beliefs about the state and other beliefs taken from liberalism, egalitarianism, and other political ideologies.
Fr. Stephen Brock Has a New Book
Wondering if any of my Twitter friends have seen Fr. Stephen Brock's new book, The Light that Binds. I look forward to reading it, expect it to be excellent.https://t.co/2vyh1UsfOr
— Josh Hochschild (@JoshHochschild) May 8, 2020
Thursday, May 07, 2020
Who Is the Future of Existential Thomism?
Finished writing a review of John F.X. Knasas’s Thomistic Existentialism & Cosmological Reasoning. Knasas has a distinctive—I think difficult—voice and it left me wondering: who in the younger generation might be carrying the torch for “Thomistic Existentialism”?
— Josh Hochschild (@JoshHochschild) May 4, 2020
European Society of Philosophy CFP
webpage
This call for papers for an issue of the journal of the European Society for Moral Philosophy on political philosophy looks very promising: https://t.co/FZ7l25mZey
— Pater Edmund (@sancrucensis) May 7, 2020
Fr. Stamatis Skliris
Orthodox Arts Journal: The Icon Painting of Fr. Stamatis Skliris: A Call for Authenticity By Fr. Silouan Justiniano
His website.
The Icon as a unique and inimitable fact in the Church
His website.
The Icon as a unique and inimitable fact in the Church
The Pontificale Romano-Germanicum
NLM: The Purest Source of the Roman Palm Sunday Rites by Gregory DiPippo
Wednesday, May 06, 2020
Western Culture
CWR Dispatch: Ratzinger’s Western Culture delves deeply into the foundations of European life
This collection offers reflections on many of the fundamental underpinnings of the life of society, applicable to both European and non-European countries.
Ignatius Press
Edit. 5/12
A review: What Will Become of Europe? by Carson Halloway
This collection offers reflections on many of the fundamental underpinnings of the life of society, applicable to both European and non-European countries.
Ignatius Press
Edit. 5/12
A review: What Will Become of Europe? by Carson Halloway
Concilium v. Communio
CWR Dispatch: Joseph Ratzinger, Theological Reformer by George Weigel
(Also published at First Things.)
(Also published at First Things.)
As I wrote in The Irony of Modern Catholic History, a fissure in the ranks of the reformist theologians at Vatican II began to open up during the Council’s third session, held in the fall of 1964. A new theological journal, Concilium, was being planned by some of the Council’s influential theological advisers (many of whom had been heavily censored in the pre-Vatican II years). A towering figure among them, the French Jesuit Henri de Lubac, began to worry that Concilium would take the reformist project in a deconstructive direction: one that would do serious damage to what John XXIII, in his opening address to the Council, called “the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine,” which Pope John urged “be more effectively defended and presented.”Only one group was engaged in true reform, though in a wrong-headed way by employing the council to do it. Would it be accurate to say the progressives were leaning towards heresy or had embraced it? Or were they guilty of an archaeologistic thinking that reflected a historical reality that existed only in their imagination? (Simplicity, the Eucharist as Last Supper, and all that?)
The first several issues of the new journal intensified de Lubac’s concerns. So in May 1965 the most venerable member of its editorial committee quietly withdrew from the Concilium project while continuing his work at the Council itself. As Vatican II drew to a close, others would join him in expressing serious reservations about the tack being taken by their onetime theological allies. And those concerns did not lessen over time.
The result was what I call in my book “The War of the Conciliar Succession”: the war to define what Vatican II was and what Vatican II intended for the Catholic future. This war was not a struggle between “traditionalists” and “progressives.” It was a bitterly fought contest within the camp of Vatican II theological reformers. It continues to this day. And the question that so concerned Henri de Lubac remains entirely pertinent, 56 years later: Would an interpretation of the Council that effectively set the Catholic Church against “the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine” end up betraying the gospel and emptying it of its power?
Joseph Ratzinger joined de Lubac and other dissident conciliar reformers in launching another theological journal, Communio, which he and his colleagues hoped would advance an interpretation of Vatican II that was in continuity with the Church’s settled doctrine even as it developed the Church’s understanding of that doctrine. Communio, now published in 14 language editions, has been a creative force in Catholic intellectual life for decades. Like Ratzinger, Communio is not against Vatican II; it has challenged what its authors contend is a wrongheaded interpretation of Vatican II.
Eastern Christian Books: Bulgakov on the Apocalypse of John
Eastern Christian Books: Bulgakov on the Apocalypse of John
The Apocalypse of John: An Essay in Dogmatic Interpretation by Sergius Bulgakov
The Apocalypse of John: An Essay in Dogmatic Interpretation by Sergius Bulgakov
Tuesday, May 05, 2020
Peter Kwasniewski on the Roman Canon
Rorate Caeli:
“The Roman Canon: Pillar and Ground of the Roman Rite” — Full text of Dr. Kwasniewski’s lecture
Today, in honor of the feast of Pope St. Pius V, I am pleased to
present to readers of Rorate Caeli the full text of my lecture on the
Roman Canon, which in recent years has been delivered in a number of
places in varying forms. The lecture had previously been translated into
and published in Italian (“Pilastro e Fondamento del Rito Romano: il Canone Romano come Norma Dottrinale e Morale”) and German (“Im Herzen des katholischen Gottesdienstes: Zwölf Glaubenswahrheiten im römischen Kanon”).
Monday, May 04, 2020
Law 101
How do we understand the law? According to the mind of the legislator, and in the case of the Constitution, according to the mind of the states who ratified it.
Chronicles: Faux Originalism by Mark Pulliam
Will Vermeule eventually concede this? Or will he stick to his error of judging "originalism" to be a form of "legal positivism"?
Chronicles: Faux Originalism by Mark Pulliam
In response to the activism of the Warren Court (and the marginally better record of the subsequent Burger Court), conservatives in the 1970s, led by Robert Bork, advocated a jurisprudence of “original intent”—hewing to the original meaning of the Constitution, based on its text and history. Following decades of heedless activism, this was a bold position. In a 1982 article in National Review, Bork famously stated that “The truth is that the judge who looks outside the Constitution always looks inside himself and nowhere else.” Like the boy who pointed out that the emperor was naked, Bork’s critique was devastating.
Famed jurist Antonin Scalia and others tweaked “original intent”—which focused on the subjective intentions of individual Framers—into a more general inquiry into the original public meaning of the constitutional provisions when they were enacted and ratified. How were the words understood at the time they were adopted? This is the central doctrinal question of constitutional originalism.
Will Vermeule eventually concede this? Or will he stick to his error of judging "originalism" to be a form of "legal positivism"?
Sunday, May 03, 2020
Waiting for This One to Be Published
Nobody knows more about the history of Catholic social teaching than Russell Hittinger.
— Josh Hochschild (@JoshHochschild) April 29, 2020
This lecture is a preview of Russ’s book forthcoming later this year. https://t.co/sDVXNzu5AA
Can There Be a Reform of the Reform?
1P5: Why the “Reform of the Reform” Is Doomed by Peter Kwasniewski
Only now are some younger men becoming bishops; thus we see examples like Thomas Daly or Alexander Sample, both of whom sponsored liturgical conferences, which I think are aimed at an enrichment of both forms of the Roman rite. There are also probably many bishops like Joseph Strickland, who prefer the OF but allow their priests to study and celebrate the EF, and perhaps introduce some enrichment into the OF. But many dioceses still have the old guard in positions of power, though many have retired in recent years and will continue to retire, while others have the next generation of "progressives" in charge. So, ask the question again in 5 years, and maybe things won't seem so bleak, at least with respect to liturgical praxis.
Let's break down the second claim.
Why are there still liturgically minded people defending the Novus Ordo or promoting its “redemption” through Ratzingerian improvements?
Only now are some younger men becoming bishops; thus we see examples like Thomas Daly or Alexander Sample, both of whom sponsored liturgical conferences, which I think are aimed at an enrichment of both forms of the Roman rite. There are also probably many bishops like Joseph Strickland, who prefer the OF but allow their priests to study and celebrate the EF, and perhaps introduce some enrichment into the OF. But many dioceses still have the old guard in positions of power, though many have retired in recent years and will continue to retire, while others have the next generation of "progressives" in charge. So, ask the question again in 5 years, and maybe things won't seem so bleak, at least with respect to liturgical praxis.
Let's break down the second claim.
"Faith"
This is the "pisteuo" Πιστεύο pblm.
— Nassim Nicholas Taleb (@nntaleb) May 3, 2020
Credere does not mean epistemic belief, but trust, which I defined as "pisteic", a kind of doxastic committment . From the Nicene credo: "Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα Θεὸν"
In Engligh, "belief" ~beloved.
Note: δόξα = belief, gift, & glorification. https://t.co/qZYuRKfKPz
2/ In Semitic lang., "Amen" means "trust", not epistemic belief, so professions of faith state trust.
— Nassim Nicholas Taleb (@nntaleb) May 3, 2020
The Syriac credo is "mhayminan 7ad aloho" = "WE TRUST only one god". (not "I" since; is no Nicene creed for non Greek-Orthodox/Cath)
Doxa in Christian Aramaic/Syriac is tshba7. pic.twitter.com/VLTM6j7Fbo
3) The pisteuo pbm is the reason first-order atheists a la Dawkins & religious people talk past one another: simply religious beliefs never claimed to be epistemic that is, belief in the scientific sense.
— Nassim Nicholas Taleb (@nntaleb) May 3, 2020
You need to remove verbalism & labels to understand what something means.
The Jesus Prayer
I just wanted to take the long version and show how it embodies most of the aspects of prayer outlined here.
"Lord Jesus Christ": adoration/doxology/praise/benediction
"Son of the Living God": adoration/doxology/praise/benediction
"have mercy on me": petition
"a sinner": contrition
The only aspect that seems to be missing would be thanksgiving, but it may be implicit in the first two, an acknowledgement of what God has done for us that is joined with thanksgiving in the spirit.
I would argue that all 4 aspects can be implicit in the Most Holy Name of our Savior, the simplest form of the Jesus Prayer which is His name itself. A cry to our Lord should be a cry for His Mercy, an expression of our humility and recognition of our sinfulness.
"Lord Jesus Christ": adoration/doxology/praise/benediction
"Son of the Living God": adoration/doxology/praise/benediction
"have mercy on me": petition
"a sinner": contrition
The only aspect that seems to be missing would be thanksgiving, but it may be implicit in the first two, an acknowledgement of what God has done for us that is joined with thanksgiving in the spirit.
I would argue that all 4 aspects can be implicit in the Most Holy Name of our Savior, the simplest form of the Jesus Prayer which is His name itself. A cry to our Lord should be a cry for His Mercy, an expression of our humility and recognition of our sinfulness.
Saturday, May 02, 2020
An Excerpt from Fiedrowicz’s Book
Something not included with Krwasniewski's recommendation over at Rorate Caeli, a link to which I posted here.
NLM: Best One-Volume Scholarly Introduction to the Traditional Mass, Now in English by
Peter Kwasniewski
NLM: Best One-Volume Scholarly Introduction to the Traditional Mass, Now in English by
Peter Kwasniewski
Law and Leviathan
In 2018, @CassSunstein and I published a piece connecting administrative law with Lon Fuller’s account of law’s morality. (For a valuable response: https://t.co/DnDCybyuHE). Two years later, our project is almost finished. Release date is September 15! https://t.co/dl8HbRz5FU
— Adrian Vermeule (@Vermeullarmine) May 1, 2020
Another Opinion Piece Against Watching Televised or Livestreamed Masses
Rorate Caeli: Tired of Streaming Masses? An Alternative Option for How Families may worship in Spirit and in Truth in this time of Crisis. by Father Richard Gennaro Cipolla
Two points:
1. His recommendation is for people to not watched live-streamed Masses but do the following:
I think they should instead start praying the liturgy of the hours, whether in its full form or something adapted from the domestic church, and they can start with Sunday, Vespers on Saturday, Morning Prayer on Sunday, and second Vespers on Sunday. But this may be difficult for many to learn on their own; why haven't parishes been promoting the liturgy of the hours? Well, we know it wasn't a priority for parish life in the so-called "reforms" that happened after Vatican II, though some EF parishes may celebrate them.
2. The author offers a perspective on the Mass that is predominantly Latin in its principles:
It has the advantage of being readily intelligible to the average Latin. But it could be elaborated more in a catechetically useful way, with a discussion of the priesthood of the faithful, though "traditionalist" Latins might be loathe to do that.
Two points:
1. His recommendation is for people to not watched live-streamed Masses but do the following:
I offer here a suggestion as to what a family might be doing on Sunday morning without the Mass being available at this time. Gather the family together. Let a parent begin by reading the Introit of the Day, followed by the Collect of the Mass. Then let one of the children read the Epistle for that day, followed by the Alleluia verse by another child. Then a parent reads the Gospel of the day with all standing. This is followed by a brief silence and then a Family Rosary. And that is Sunday worship for that day, and it is fine and it is good and bestows grace.
I think they should instead start praying the liturgy of the hours, whether in its full form or something adapted from the domestic church, and they can start with Sunday, Vespers on Saturday, Morning Prayer on Sunday, and second Vespers on Sunday. But this may be difficult for many to learn on their own; why haven't parishes been promoting the liturgy of the hours? Well, we know it wasn't a priority for parish life in the so-called "reforms" that happened after Vatican II, though some EF parishes may celebrate them.
2. The author offers a perspective on the Mass that is predominantly Latin in its principles:
The Church has always understood the Mass as a supernatural event in which the priest, and the congregation assisting him, “bring down” the eternal, bring down heaven in some sense, in doing what Jesus asked us to do: in mei memoria. “Therefore with angels and archangels and the whole company of heaven….” The precept of the Church to attend Mass on Sundays and Holy Days is of course based on the Commandment to worship God. And this worship in spirit and truth is the offering of the Holy Sacrifice that is the source of grace for the forgiveness of sins that makes possible eternal life in God.
...
What does this have to do with streaming Masses? The Mass is a supernatural event that takes place in a particular place and time. The priest and people are not mere observers of the event. They take part in this supernatural event that happens on Sunday in a certain time and place. Their real presence “enables” the supernatural event to take place that brings about the Real Presence.
It has the advantage of being readily intelligible to the average Latin. But it could be elaborated more in a catechetically useful way, with a discussion of the priesthood of the faithful, though "traditionalist" Latins might be loathe to do that.
Friday, May 01, 2020
Eastern Christian Books: Orthodoxy and Contemporary Thought
Eastern Christian Books: Orthodoxy and Contemporary Thought
Pickwick/Wipf & Stock: Theology and Philosophy in Eastern Orthodoxy: Essays on Orthodox Christianity and Contemporary Thought edited by Christoph Schneider
Pickwick/Wipf & Stock: Theology and Philosophy in Eastern Orthodoxy: Essays on Orthodox Christianity and Contemporary Thought edited by Christoph Schneider
Adam DeVille Reviews Eros Crucified
Routledge
CWR Dispatch:The Idolatry of Eros and the Corporeality of God by Dr. Adam A. J. DeVille
Matthew Clemente’s Eros Crucified is philosophy of religion done by a young scholar in such a way as to give one great hope for the future not just of the discipline, but of Catholic letters and intellectual culture more generally.
Some thoughts:
DeVille writes:
Is Clemente's book really philosophy of religion, as opposed to Christian theology? For an unbeliever who reasons accordingly, it might be philosophy of religion. But for a Christian who thinks thus? It is theology, even if the author's academic degree is in philosophy.
One does not have a conversation with the dead who can no longer answer for themselves, but with the living, and this is true even in the scholastic method. So how many committed Freudians are there who need an apologia of Christianity or of Christ?
Then there is the question of whether Freud's reasoning and not just his claims can be captured well in essay form... This does raise a question of what the best way of transmitting reasoning through the written word. Something for theologians and philosophers to consider, even if they reject the manualist approach.
CWR Dispatch:The Idolatry of Eros and the Corporeality of God by Dr. Adam A. J. DeVille
Matthew Clemente’s Eros Crucified is philosophy of religion done by a young scholar in such a way as to give one great hope for the future not just of the discipline, but of Catholic letters and intellectual culture more generally.
Some thoughts:
DeVille writes:
One popular, and often dreaded, buzzword in the academy today is “intersectionality,” which is just a newer version of the idea Newman first demonstrated so winsomely: “all knowledge forms one whole.” Clemente, a young Catholic philosopher of religion at Boston College, lives Newman’s method in this book (without mentioning him). Clemente ranges freely across theology and philosophy, refusing to allow them to be forcibly separated via an act of what Paul Ricoeur famously called “controlled schizophrenia.” But Clemente’s point, and method, is not merely reflective of current academic preoccupations to bring things together. It is, in fact, the only method on offer to human thinkers, who cannot (and must not) be bamboozled into seeing the world as divisible, the end result of which is the creation of some “private” sphere labelled the “secular” from which God has been exiled into some other sealed sphere called “religion.” In philosophizing in this way, Clemente is reflecting some of the best insights of recent philosophers including Charles Taylor and one of Clemente’s mentors, the philosopher (and Greek Orthodox priest) John Panteleimon Manoussakis.
Is Clemente's book really philosophy of religion, as opposed to Christian theology? For an unbeliever who reasons accordingly, it might be philosophy of religion. But for a Christian who thinks thus? It is theology, even if the author's academic degree is in philosophy.
Clemente wants us to think about the corporeality of God and its nakedly erotic self-giving in the Eucharist (“this is my body”) as well as its implications for us as human beings in our quotidian living, desiring, and dying, our lovemaking and birth-giving. (Clemente’s one-and-a-half-page conclusion, a meditation on watching and waiting with his wife give birth to their first son, packs in more biblical theology than a year’s worth of homilies from your average preacher.) Clemente writes with verve and a wide sweep of philosophy and theology, ancient and modern. All this learning, including considerable insights from psychoanalytic thought, is rendered in a way that is at once lively and serious.Might there be some truth in Freud's writings? Perhaps. Would it be better to rely upon sound philosophical psychology which is open to the insights of Christians with rich interior knowledge and wisdom? I would think so. But doesn't it depend on one's audience? What if one is reaching out to those who have been influenced by Freud? How many of those are left?
One does not have a conversation with the dead who can no longer answer for themselves, but with the living, and this is true even in the scholastic method. So how many committed Freudians are there who need an apologia of Christianity or of Christ?
Then there is the question of whether Freud's reasoning and not just his claims can be captured well in essay form... This does raise a question of what the best way of transmitting reasoning through the written word. Something for theologians and philosophers to consider, even if they reject the manualist approach.
Blackfriars 2020 Aquinas Lecture for by Russell Hittinger
"Tradition or Pottage: Reflections on Catholic Social Doctrine"
Soundcloud
Lecture includes discussion of the notions of justice an the common good.https://t.co/lpIEkJ9xvi
— Josh Hochschild (@JoshHochschild) April 29, 2020
Soundcloud
Thursday, April 30, 2020
Eastern Christian Books: Searching for Sacred Images
Eastern Christian Books: Searching for Sacred Images
Gracewing: In Search of the Sacred Image by Aidan Nichols, O.P.
Gracewing: In Search of the Sacred Image by Aidan Nichols, O.P.
Eastern Christian Books: OCA's 50th Anniversary of Autocephaly
Eastern Christian Books: OCA's 50th Anniversary of Autocephaly
SVS Press: The Time Has Come edited by Ionut-Alexandru Tudorie
Related: SVS Press publishes volume commemorating OCA autocephaly
SVS Press: The Time Has Come edited by Ionut-Alexandru Tudorie
Related: SVS Press publishes volume commemorating OCA autocephaly
Eastern Christian Books: Old Believers in the Tsarist Empire
Eastern Christian Books: Old Believers in the Tsarist Empire
Bloomsbury: The Old Believers in Imperial Russia: Oppression, Opportunism and Religious Identity in Tsarist Moscow by Peter T. De Simone - hardback and paperback
Bloomsbury: The Old Believers in Imperial Russia: Oppression, Opportunism and Religious Identity in Tsarist Moscow by Peter T. De Simone - hardback and paperback
That Will Be an Unpopular Post
among Latin traditionalists.
One of the points made by James Chastek in his post on Latin liturgical reform:
I think I would agree with his post for the most part; it's good to know that not all Thomists are committed to the prevailing theologoumena among Latin traditionalists about the Eucharist. (I will have to review Levering's work on these questions.) I am not sure if the more "traditional" Dominicans themselves hold to such views.
One of the points made by James Chastek in his post on Latin liturgical reform:
4.) The main problem of the TLM is that through historical accidents it lost a large part of its ability to symbolize the pascal sacrifice, which is essentially a sacrificial community meal presenting the sacrifice as a culmination of God’s fidelity in salvation history according to the scriptures. I wholeheartedly endorse the most strident traditionalist who insists on “the holy sacrifice”, but the claim that we have to choose whether the Mass is a sacrifice or a supper completely misses its nature. Passover is a sacrificial meal. If this is Protestantism, then the Protestants were right about something. So what?
I think I would agree with his post for the most part; it's good to know that not all Thomists are committed to the prevailing theologoumena among Latin traditionalists about the Eucharist. (I will have to review Levering's work on these questions.) I am not sure if the more "traditional" Dominicans themselves hold to such views.
Pinkoski's Response to James Patterson on Latin Integralism
Law and Liberty: How Not to Challenge the Integralists by Nathan Pinkoski
And one recommendation for the above by Michael Brendan Dougherty: Is Integralism Just Catholic Fascism?
The rest of the essay is worth reading as the author discusses the relation of integralism to political movements in Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is not a thorough history nor does he mention all of the Latin counter-revolutionary/anti-liberal thinkers, but hopefully Patterson will read it.
A response to @McGillPatterson on integralism, its origins and ideas. https://t.co/Rcy2Cx6AuR— Law & Liberty (@LawLiberty) April 30, 2020
And one recommendation for the above by Michael Brendan Dougherty: Is Integralism Just Catholic Fascism?
The author gives a history of the development of Latin integralist thought, starting with the Roman Catholic anti-liberals (not all of whom were strict monarchists, by the way).The swift refutation of James Patterson’s smear tactics is *almost* enough to make me believe in the marketplace of ideas https://t.co/ZhnxS8xsHW— Adrian Vermeule (@Vermeullarmine) April 30, 2020
Although its theological claims go back further, Catholic integralism owes its politics to post-revolutionary Europe. The basic presupposition of integralism is that theology is prior to politics and must order politics. As Émile Perreau-Saussine observed in Catholicism and Democracy, this requires a strong demarcation between the spiritual power of the Church and the temporal power of the state. That demarcation was not visible in the Ancien Régime, as the monarch anointed at Reims mixed temporal and spiritual power. The cruel exposure of that demarcation came as the French Revolution’s newly secular state violently attempted to assert its temporal power over the spiritual power of the Church. Since Catholics could no longer rely on their monarch—a Christian head of a Christian state—to protect the Church’s liberties, early 19th century Catholic political thinkers sought a deeper understanding of the principles of authority. They looked to the Papacy—to spiritual power—as the ultimate guarantor of Catholic liberties. Hence Perreau-Saussine argues that integralism is post-revolutionary. Ultramontanist thinkers, such as Joseph de Maistre, helped develop the demarcation between Church and State. In distinguishing temporal authority from spiritual authority, spurning Bonapartist Concordats to revive the Gallican Church, and granting that the Pope was the ultimate authority, these thinkers sought to free the Church from the grip of the post-Revolutionary secular state and campaigned for regimes that would get the Church-State relationship right.And Latin bishops today act with this sort of mindset, that they have a "spiritual authority" that enables them to lecture the state, even if the state does not recognize their authority. Integralism is a logical consequence to certain Roman claims concerning the authority of the bishop of Rome, and here is its first major weakness. Latin integralists will call their political theory "Catholic" as Latins are apt to label everything part of their ecclesial tradition, but it is particular to them alone, at least so far. Byzantine theory of symphonia may be reconcilable with some looser form of Latin integralism, but it will differ with Latin integralism in all forms in so far as integralism is tied to ultramontanism or a maximalist conception of the papacy. While symphonia developed within the context of empire, on the face of it I cannot see why a version of it cannot be harmonized with republican forms of government.
The rest of the essay is worth reading as the author discusses the relation of integralism to political movements in Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is not a thorough history nor does he mention all of the Latin counter-revolutionary/anti-liberal thinkers, but hopefully Patterson will read it.
Carron on Giussani
Julián Carrón presenta "Il senso religioso" di Luigi Giussani - Comunione e Liberazione
Intervento di Julián Carrón al corso su Il Senso Religioso (versione corretta)
Julián Carrón presenta "All'origine della pretesa cristiana" di Giussani - Comunione e Liberazione
Presentación de «El Sentido Religioso» de Luigi Giussani por el P. Julián Carrón
Julián Carrón e Luciano Violante - Incontro sull'educazione al Teatro Dal Verme
Intervento di Julián Carrón al corso su Il Senso Religioso (versione corretta)
Julián Carrón presenta "All'origine della pretesa cristiana" di Giussani - Comunione e Liberazione
Presentación de «El Sentido Religioso» de Luigi Giussani por el P. Julián Carrón
Julián Carrón e Luciano Violante - Incontro sull'educazione al Teatro Dal Verme
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
Modern Latin Devotion to St. Joseph
in the guise of a Roman document to the Church Universal.
Pope Leo XIII, Quamquam pluries
NLM: The Solemnity of St Joseph 2020 by Gregory DiPippo
Pope Leo XIII, Quamquam pluries
NLM: The Solemnity of St Joseph 2020 by Gregory DiPippo
The special reasons for which St Joseph is held to be Patron of the Church, and for the sake of which the Church has such great confidence in his protection and patronage, are that he was the spouse of Mary, and was reputed the father of Jesus Christ....
Recent Synods of the Patriarch of Rome
The “Historic” Amazonian Synod, Revisited by George Weigl
Also published at CWR.
Weigel's purpose is to protect the true legacy of Vatican II and of the popes of Vatican II, and so he compares the Amazon Synod to previous synods called by the patriarch of Rome. We see the same pattern over and over ago, attempts at top-down reform using existing institutional practices, which are mostly bureaucratic in nature. I'll just comment upon a few of these synods that Weigel considers to be more "historic" than the Amazon Synod.
Second Extraordinary General Assembly - The Twentieth Anniversary of the Conclusion of the Second Vatican Council (24 November-8 December 1985)
Vatican II remains the paradigmatic example of the use of anecumenical council Latin synod to try to reform the patriarchate of Rome with respect to its theological outlook. (Even if one were to assume that the Ressourcement approach to theology and liturgy was the correct one, and this Latin traditionalists will still dispute.) It was the wrong instrument to accomplish this task, and could only fail. A Latin could argue that Vatican II was merely following Trent as a council of reform, but the Tridentine fathers had certain reforms in mind, which could be readily ascertained as to whether they were implemented or not. There was no questioning of the Latin ecclesial tradition at that time, but just a clarification of dogma in response to the Protestants (but really a solidification of scholastic theology as dogma), and how to reform the institutions of the Latin churches so that this dogma could be promoted. With respect to Vatican II, in contrast, a renewal of Latin theology and spirituality (which would necessarily involve an integration of the two), by its paradoxical combination of simplicity and complexity, could not simply be legislated into existence. It requires a true paradosis, and churches not acting as institutions but on a humane scale. Knowing the Gospel or Kerygma, witness, and the Christian life -- all touched upon in the synods after Vatican II, which did nothing permanent to arrest the decline of the Latin churches, as the same institutional practices remain in place.
Also published at CWR.
Weigel's purpose is to protect the true legacy of Vatican II and of the popes of Vatican II, and so he compares the Amazon Synod to previous synods called by the patriarch of Rome. We see the same pattern over and over ago, attempts at top-down reform using existing institutional practices, which are mostly bureaucratic in nature. I'll just comment upon a few of these synods that Weigel considers to be more "historic" than the Amazon Synod.
This is the same pope that failed to give any sort of modicum of leadership at a time when papal authority still carried some weight with bishops. This is also the same pope who created the turbulence with a disastrous liturgical reform. A pope who was wrongly canonized for the sake of institutional reasons. How can there be a "evangelization" by Christian peoples who cannot give credible witness with respect to their private lives, non-existent parish lives, and liturgical worship? The bishops failed to focus on the basics; if they had done so, they wouldn't need a document from Paul VI about evangelization.
The 1974 Synod on evangelization was a donnybrook, reflecting the turbulence in the Church a decade after the Second Vatican Council. The synod fathers couldn’t agree on a final report, so they handed the synod’s materials to Pope Paul VI with the request that he do something. Pope Paul responded with the great apostolic exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (Announcing the Gospel). It was Paul VI’s last pastoral testament to the Church and the first summons to what John Paul II would call the “New Evangelization”: the grand strategy that animates the living parts of the world Church today.
The 1990 Synod debated priestly formation and seminary reform. The propositions adopted by the synod fathers helped shape John Paul II’s 1992 apostolic exhortation, Pastores Dabo Vobis (I Shall Give You Shepherds). Where it was taken seriously (as in the United States), that exhortation helped apply the brakes to the silly season in seminaries and laid the foundation for the reformed seminaries of today.Assuming that seminaries, during a time of contracting local churches and budgets, would remain a viable option for educating future deacons and bishops was a mistake. Weigel's assessment of the current state of American seminaries, like his judgment of many other aspects of the patriarchate of Rome, is excessively positive. How many of these seminaries have implemented a program of scripture study even close to something like Pius X wanted? (What is the typical Latin seminarian's knowledge of Greek and Hebrew like?) How could Latins come to a new appreciation of the fundamental Kerygma without returning to the language of scripture, away from the jargon of neo-scholasticism?
And then there was the special Synod of 1985, which met on the 20th anniversary of Vatican II’s fourth and final session to explore what had gone right, and what had gone not-so-right, in implementing the Council. Its final report’s description of the Church as a communion of disciples in mission provided the thread that wove the 16 documents of Vatican II into a coherent, compelling tapestry of Catholic faith. Like Evangelii Nuntiandi, the special Synod of 1985 was a crucial moment in the journey from Vatican II—the council Pope John XXIII called to give the Church new missionary energy—to the New Evangelization.
Second Extraordinary General Assembly - The Twentieth Anniversary of the Conclusion of the Second Vatican Council (24 November-8 December 1985)
Vatican II remains the paradigmatic example of the use of an
Glorifying the Institution
CNA/CWR: Pope Francis creates foundation to promote John Paul I’s teachings
A pope who reigned for only 33 days... according to those who knew him, a gentle man. How many writings are there from his pontificate? Take a look.
Will the foundation also promote what he wrote and said as a bishop or as a theologian with private opinions? (Such writings must be evaluated according to their merits, and not elevated merely because the one who wrote them would later become pope, as if the Holy Spirit somehow guaranteed by his election that all of his previous writings were exemplary and free from error.) Why would it be necessary to promote the writings of an individual pope, except because of a maximalist view of the Roman papacy? All too often the private opinions of the man who was pope are confused with the "papal magisterium" and held to be on the same level.
There is one of his homilies as pope, in which he uses a proof-text from St. Ephrerm in support of Rome's claims about the scope of authority of the bishop of Rome: HOLY MASS FOR THE INAUGURATION OF THE PETRINE MINISTRY OF THE BISHOP OF ROME
Of course, the same sort of criticisms could be made about the establishment of a foundation for Benedict XVI/Joseph Ratzinger, even if Ratzinger's theological legacy is arguably greater than that of Albino Luciani.
Related:
Who was Albino Luciani, the 'smiling Pope'?
John Paul I: The September pope
The Unpublished Albino Luciani – Pope John Paul I, ‘the Smiling Pope’: Part I and Part II
A pope who reigned for only 33 days... according to those who knew him, a gentle man. How many writings are there from his pontificate? Take a look.
According to a note signed by Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the foundation’s purpose “is to promote and disseminate awareness of the thought, works, and example of Pope John Paul I.”
Will the foundation also promote what he wrote and said as a bishop or as a theologian with private opinions? (Such writings must be evaluated according to their merits, and not elevated merely because the one who wrote them would later become pope, as if the Holy Spirit somehow guaranteed by his election that all of his previous writings were exemplary and free from error.) Why would it be necessary to promote the writings of an individual pope, except because of a maximalist view of the Roman papacy? All too often the private opinions of the man who was pope are confused with the "papal magisterium" and held to be on the same level.
There is one of his homilies as pope, in which he uses a proof-text from St. Ephrerm in support of Rome's claims about the scope of authority of the bishop of Rome: HOLY MASS FOR THE INAUGURATION OF THE PETRINE MINISTRY OF THE BISHOP OF ROME
Of course, the same sort of criticisms could be made about the establishment of a foundation for Benedict XVI/Joseph Ratzinger, even if Ratzinger's theological legacy is arguably greater than that of Albino Luciani.
Related:
Who was Albino Luciani, the 'smiling Pope'?
John Paul I: The September pope
The Unpublished Albino Luciani – Pope John Paul I, ‘the Smiling Pope’: Part I and Part II
Tuesday, April 28, 2020
Misunderstanding Secular Europe
That rare moment when De Koninck agrees with the reds. pic.twitter.com/6KUAgZKggo
— Pater Edmund (@sancrucensis) April 26, 2020
The important consideration being that "plures hominum sequuntur passiones"; not that the plures will actually use this right to contradiction, but in that they will, through negligence and indifference for the common good, allow those who do contradict, to seize power. Ex.g.: several European countries today.
An Aristotelian would agree that "absolute democracy" is a bad regime; after all it was Aristotle, following Plato, who distinguished between good and bad regimes. But what of politeia, the "republic"? I cannot see that De Koninck would deny that the possibility of a good form of government by many exists. Aristotle would probably be inclined to there is no "absolute" politeia, whether with respect to the number (rule by all, regardless of qualification) or with respect to what they can legislate.
Monday, April 27, 2020
Rubrics for the Laity in the EF?
NLM: Should the Postures of the Laity at the Traditional Latin Mass Be Regulated, Legislated, or Revised? by Peter Kwasniewski
Kwasniewski takes a laissez-faire position on this question, and that is appropriate, though it may be counter to the mindset of many Latin traditionalists, who will insist upon kneeling as the appropriate posture for certain parts of the Mass, etc.
Kwasniewski takes a laissez-faire position on this question, and that is appropriate, though it may be counter to the mindset of many Latin traditionalists, who will insist upon kneeling as the appropriate posture for certain parts of the Mass, etc.
There is but one further angle to examine: the Problem of Pews. Since nearly every Catholic church in the West is now equipped with pews, usually bolted down for permanence, the topic is far more speculative than what we have discussed heretofore, and deserving of a separate treatment.The two questions are intertwined so I await for the next part of his discussion. There is also the first ecumenical council's prohibition of kneeling on Sundays, but Latin traditionalists think the patriarchate of Rome is above that. And then there are sentiments like this expressed in comboxes and elsewhere:
I like the fact that the TLM has no rubrics for the laity at all -- including posture. It underscores the fact that the congregation (to be blunt) has absolutely nothing to do with the activity of the Mass. The priest offers the Mass. The server (clerical role) makes the responses. The schola (clerical role) sings the chant. None of this, at least in the missal or rubrics, is appointed for the congregation.
Michael Fiedrowicz, The Traditional Mass: History, Form, and Theology of the Classical Roman Rite
Angelico Press
From the publisher's description:
In contrast to conventional explanations of the Mass that offer practical or allegorical explanations of particular moments in the rite, the present work attends to the organic process by which the Roman rite was built up from its foundations into a magnificent structure, marked by the accumulated riches of each age through which it passed, and characterized by order, beauty, and piety in its texts, gestures, rubrics, chants, and calendar—ranging from the major elements to the most minute details. Treated as well are the reality of the sacred and how it is encountered, the irreducible role of ritual action, the eastward direction of prayer, the formation and value of a specialized sacred language, and liturgical participation correctly understood.
via Fr. Z, who includes this excerpt:
Only in the orations of the classical rite are contained and preserved numerous ideas that, although they belong irrevocably to the Catholic Faith, are understated or entirely lost in later modified versions: detachment from the temporal and desire for the eternal; the Kingship of Christ over the world and society; the battle against heresy and schism, the conversion of non-believers, the necessity of the return to the Catholic Church and genuine truth; merits, miracles, and apparitions of the saints; God’s wrath for sin and the possibility of eternal damnation."The necessity of the return to the Catholic Church and genuine truth" -- in reference to whom? Protestants? Non-Latin apostolic Christians?
Is a Latin traditionalist mindset necessarily tied to Latin triumphalism? Or is Latin triumphalism just the consequence of Roman Catholicism of the latter half of the second millenium taking precedence over charity?
Metropolitan Ephymios (Stilios) on Gerondism
OrthoChristian: The Phenomenon of “Gerondism”
Part 1: The components of “gerondism”
Part 2: Theological critique of the phenomenon. The ethics of the spiritual father and his child
Are the problems similar to the cult of personality that surrounds founders of young religious orders and communities in the West?
Part 1: The components of “gerondism”
Part 2: Theological critique of the phenomenon. The ethics of the spiritual father and his child
Are the problems similar to the cult of personality that surrounds founders of young religious orders and communities in the West?
Sunday, April 26, 2020
Metropolitan Kallistos Ware on Prayer
Public Orthodoxy: What Is Prayer? by Kallistos Ware, Metropolitan of Diokleia
Latins who have been well-catechized may know these 4 types of prayer: Adoration, Contrition, Petition, Thanksgiving.
This list is repeated in the following essays:
What are the four types of prayer in Christian tradition? Sr. Maria Veritas Marks, OP
Adoration by Paul Grutsch, Ph.D.
Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving, Supplication by R.C. Sproul (not Catholic, but a Western Christian)
The last part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, written by Fr. Jean Corbon, O.P., lists five purposes of prayer: Blessing and Adoration, Petition, Intercession, Thanksgiving, and Praise. (Scott Richert gives a summary of the CCC.)
So with regards to these different lists, I'd ask some questions.
1. Is adoration an act of the intellect or of the will? If of the will, how is it distinct from agape?
Aquinas holds that adoration is an act of the virtue of religion, and it is twofold: the devotion of the mind (moved by the will) and a devotion shown through bodily gestures. Aquinas notes that the bodily gestures are signs of humility which can prepare us for internal devotion. The link between adoration and the virtue of humility, which is of the will, should seem obvious, and a point with which the author of the part of the CCC on prayer agrees (2628). But whether "infused" humility is really distinct from the virtue of charity or only notionally so, I'll have to consider some other time.
I also note that for Aquinas adoration is a distinct act of religion from prayer. Is it possible under Aquinas' schema for adoration to motivate prayer? Or is it only possible for it to be simultaneous with prayer?
2. Praise and blessing don't really seem to me to be distinct. For that matter, it is not clear to me that thanksgiving is really that distinct from praise and blessing in traditional prayer formulae, whether of the pre-Christian Jews or of the early Christians. How do we know God? Through His wonderous deeds, which we acknowledge both to praise and bless Him but also for which we must render thanks for the good things He has done for us. In mental prayer it might be easy to miss one of these elements; I wouldn't assume that they are implicitly present. But in traditional vocal prayers meant for use by the individual and the community ?
Similarly, can one remember and acknowledge the deeds of God without humility, or being humbled as a result? It may be possible to pray mechanically but if one is striving for authentic prayer?
3. One could ask whether the element of thanksgiving is missing from the Lord's Prayer, or if it is implicit as it is in other blessings. (Is there a bountiful record of pre-Christian Jewish prayer formulae? I can only think of the blessings that Fr. Bouyer examined in his book Eucharist, and iirc, those prayers were not pre-Christian.)
The Jesus Prayer, whether in its simple form or one of the longer forms, doesn't seem to have the element of thanksgiving, but maybe thanksgiving can be an implicit part of the prayer.
4. I am not sure if I would say that these should be 4 types of prayer; rather I might make the claim that they are 4 elements of prayer, especially if the prayer is to be complete, and even if they are not verbally explicit, they should be manifest in how we order ourselves to God in prayer. Do we train ourselves first through spoken words, which shape our minds and souls? Isn't that one of the purposes of reciting the Psalter, so that we can assimilate the mind of Christ?
While it might seem that humility may be more linked to our being servants of God than sons of God, as we are both, I think that it is possible for humility to encompass both aspects of our relationship to God, just as our participation in the Divine Agape has both aspects as well.
Edit. 5 I was reminded later today that another way the 4 types of prayer are differentiated is according to motive, which is another way of saying that they differ according to the purpose or term of the act. So it's not really a different way of differentiating the 4 (or 5 types) of prayer as it is usually done, but a more "technical" way, that is, a more theologically developed way.
On the contrary, before bringing before Christ the suffering and pain of the world, and before looking downward at our own ugliness and failings, we should look upwards at the beauty and glory of God. All too often our prayer can take the form of grumbling before God, of complaining and expressing regret. But that, so Climacus assures us, is not true prayer.
It is significant that in the Divine Liturgy we do not commence with an act of penitence but with a proclamation of the kingly rule of the Holy Trinity: “Blessed is the Kingdom of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” Only after receiving a glimpse of this heavenly Kingdom can we then begin to repent as we should. In prayer we should start not with our own neediness but with the divine plenitude. The same priority is to be found in the daily prayers that we say at home each morning and evening. After the opening invocation “In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,” it is customary to continue: “Glory to You, O God, glory to You.” Thanksgiving, doxology, are where we start. As St John of Kronsdtadt used to say, “Prayer is a state of continual gratitude.”
This pattern of prayer, with thanksgiving and doxology in the first place, is to be found also in the cycle of liturgical prayer throughout the twenty-four hours of the day. According to the ancient Hebrew understanding of time, which is still followed by the Church, the new day commences not at midnight and not at dawn but in the evening. That is why in the Genesis account of creation it is said, “There was evening and there was morning, the first day” (Gen. 1:5): the evening comes before the morning. In this way Vespers is not the concluding but the opening service of the day, not an epilogue but a prologue. How, then, does the daily cycle of liturgical prayer commence?
Throughout the year, except in the week after Pascha, it begins in precisely the same way, with the reading or singing of Psalm 103 [104]. This is a hymn of praise for the variety and wonder of the created order: “Blessed the Lord, O my soul! Blessed are You, O God …. O Lord, how marvellous are Your works! In wisdom have You made them all.” In the words of Fr Alexander Schmemann, Vespers “begins at the beginning, and this means in the ‘rediscovery,’ in adoration and thanksgiving, of the world as God’s creation. The Church takes us, as it were, to that first evening on which man, called to life by God, opened his eyes and saw what God in His love was giving to him, saw all the beauty, all the glory of the temple in which he was standing, and rendered thanks to God. And in this thanksgiving he became himself … And if the Church is in Christ, its initial act is always this act of thanksgiving, of returning the world to God.”
Latins who have been well-catechized may know these 4 types of prayer: Adoration, Contrition, Petition, Thanksgiving.
This list is repeated in the following essays:
What are the four types of prayer in Christian tradition? Sr. Maria Veritas Marks, OP
Adoration by Paul Grutsch, Ph.D.
Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving, Supplication by R.C. Sproul (not Catholic, but a Western Christian)
The last part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, written by Fr. Jean Corbon, O.P., lists five purposes of prayer: Blessing and Adoration, Petition, Intercession, Thanksgiving, and Praise. (Scott Richert gives a summary of the CCC.)
So with regards to these different lists, I'd ask some questions.
1. Is adoration an act of the intellect or of the will? If of the will, how is it distinct from agape?
Aquinas holds that adoration is an act of the virtue of religion, and it is twofold: the devotion of the mind (moved by the will) and a devotion shown through bodily gestures. Aquinas notes that the bodily gestures are signs of humility which can prepare us for internal devotion. The link between adoration and the virtue of humility, which is of the will, should seem obvious, and a point with which the author of the part of the CCC on prayer agrees (2628). But whether "infused" humility is really distinct from the virtue of charity or only notionally so, I'll have to consider some other time.
I also note that for Aquinas adoration is a distinct act of religion from prayer. Is it possible under Aquinas' schema for adoration to motivate prayer? Or is it only possible for it to be simultaneous with prayer?
2. Praise and blessing don't really seem to me to be distinct. For that matter, it is not clear to me that thanksgiving is really that distinct from praise and blessing in traditional prayer formulae, whether of the pre-Christian Jews or of the early Christians. How do we know God? Through His wonderous deeds, which we acknowledge both to praise and bless Him but also for which we must render thanks for the good things He has done for us. In mental prayer it might be easy to miss one of these elements; I wouldn't assume that they are implicitly present. But in traditional vocal prayers meant for use by the individual and the community ?
Similarly, can one remember and acknowledge the deeds of God without humility, or being humbled as a result? It may be possible to pray mechanically but if one is striving for authentic prayer?
3. One could ask whether the element of thanksgiving is missing from the Lord's Prayer, or if it is implicit as it is in other blessings. (Is there a bountiful record of pre-Christian Jewish prayer formulae? I can only think of the blessings that Fr. Bouyer examined in his book Eucharist, and iirc, those prayers were not pre-Christian.)
The Jesus Prayer, whether in its simple form or one of the longer forms, doesn't seem to have the element of thanksgiving, but maybe thanksgiving can be an implicit part of the prayer.
4. I am not sure if I would say that these should be 4 types of prayer; rather I might make the claim that they are 4 elements of prayer, especially if the prayer is to be complete, and even if they are not verbally explicit, they should be manifest in how we order ourselves to God in prayer. Do we train ourselves first through spoken words, which shape our minds and souls? Isn't that one of the purposes of reciting the Psalter, so that we can assimilate the mind of Christ?
While it might seem that humility may be more linked to our being servants of God than sons of God, as we are both, I think that it is possible for humility to encompass both aspects of our relationship to God, just as our participation in the Divine Agape has both aspects as well.
Edit. 5 I was reminded later today that another way the 4 types of prayer are differentiated is according to motive, which is another way of saying that they differ according to the purpose or term of the act. So it's not really a different way of differentiating the 4 (or 5 types) of prayer as it is usually done, but a more "technical" way, that is, a more theologically developed way.
Saturday, April 25, 2020
Trolling Liberals
Some thoughts on abuse of power, addressed to my fellow classical liberals https://t.co/dGbtsxRiN2— Adrian Vermeule (@Vermeullarmine) April 25, 2020
Having written about one challenge that integralists face, I find today that Adrian Vermeule posted the following over at MOJ: Abuses of Power. He gives a list of abuses of concern, and ends with "Worst of all, the very grave abuse of state power identified by a defender of true liberty," citing Pope Leo XIII's Libertas:
Those who are in authority owe it to the commonwealth not only to provide for its external well-being and the conveniences of life, but still more to consult the welfare of mens’ souls in the wisdom of their legislation. But, for the increase of such benefits, nothing more suitable can be conceived than the laws which have God for their author; and, therefore, they who in their government of the State take no account of these laws abuse political power by causing it to deviate from its proper end and from what nature itself prescribes.
Of course those who are secular or anti-Christian would not accept that this is an abuse, nor is it the case that the imposition of a Catholic integralist state by force alone will solve this last abuse or any of the others. Changing the law through raw power is not sufficient. Is Vermeule trolling classical liberals, or is this just an inside joke, if Vermeule knows that serious classical liberals aren't paying attention to what he writes at MOJ?
It is one thing to use rhetoric or even dialectic to discredit intellectuals who are threats to a good political or social order. But I doubt a post like Vermeule's is going to convince someone to convert to Christianity or make Latin integralism more appealing to non-Christians.
There is also the theological issue of using an individual text of a pope of Rome as sufficiently authoritative in itself, but I will write more about that in a different post.
As for this abuse:
* The abuse of power by state and local governments, especially when abusively resisting attempts by the federal government to prevent or remedy abuses;
Liberals who are nationalists with respect to the powers of the Federal Government may agree that this is an abuse. Are there any liberals, other than libertarians and paleolibertarians, who still believe in states rights? Given what I have read of Vermeule's writings on the Constitution, I don't think he accepts the Constitution as it was ratified.
Related:
Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae
Against the New Integralists by Raphael Fernandes
NOR: Dungeons and Dragons and Jurisprudence By Kevin D. Williamson
Fr. Alexander Men on Pascha
Pravmir: The Essential Meaning of the Paschal Feast by Archpriest Alexander Men
LSN on That Survey
Here LifeSite's report on the leaked letter (by @RorateCaeli) of the CDF concerning the Traditional Latin Mass, with responses from several good sources (among them Dr. Kwasniewski, Mr Nardi), some of whom are concerned, and some of whom are not concerned:https://t.co/GynMCIwL4Z— Maike Hickson (@HicksonMaike) April 24, 2020
LSN
Coercive Authority
In which @thomaspink1 discusses the profound differences between the Catholic view of coercive authority (as represented for example by Suárez), and modern theories such as that of Hobbes. https://t.co/upw3Pmp0VV
— Pater Edmund (@sancrucensis) April 25, 2020
More on the Common Good
Me: “Authority is held in trust for and exercised on behalf of the community ... not for the benefit of individuals taken one by one.”
— Adrian Vermeule (@Vermeullarmine) April 25, 2020
Patheos blogger, just making stuff up: Vermeule argues for aggregative utilitarianism! https://t.co/GYBvijIsMd
“A society constituted by persons who love their private good above the common good, or who identify the common good with the private good, is a society not of free men, but of tyrants.” — @ccpecknold
— Sohrab Ahmari (@SohrabAhmari) April 25, 2020
Exactly. A host of mini-tyrants is still a tyranny. https://t.co/Vq3Zwe2hs6
Friday, April 24, 2020
L’Islam mis à nu par les siens: Anthologie d’auteurs arabophones post 2001, edited by Maurice Saliba
Riposte Laïque
CWR: Islam Up Close by William Kilpatrick
A new book containing essays by 46 former Muslims joins the ranks of recent works revealing Islam from the inside.
Maurice Saliba
Maurice Saliba : « Qu’ont fait les responsables musulmans pour voir émerger un jour un « islam des lumières ? » [Interview]
Critique de « l’islam mis à nu par les siens » dans « Nous sommes partout »
CWR: Islam Up Close by William Kilpatrick
A new book containing essays by 46 former Muslims joins the ranks of recent works revealing Islam from the inside.
Maurice Saliba
Maurice Saliba : « Qu’ont fait les responsables musulmans pour voir émerger un jour un « islam des lumières ? » [Interview]
Critique de « l’islam mis à nu par les siens » dans « Nous sommes partout »
Thursday, April 23, 2020
The 1955 Reform of Palm Sunday
NLM
First Mr. DiPippo begins with a claim about the 1955 Holy Week reform:
As the Church teaches, or the patriarchate of Rome?
This divorce communicates the Protestant idea that the Last Supper, and the rite which Christ instituted thereby, were merely a commemoration of the Sacrifice of the Cross, rather than the anticipation of the Sacrifice and its perpetuation in time, as the Church believes and teaches. I then explained how the post-Conciliar reform undid this change in some respects.
The rest is useful information, especially the comparison of the Roman rite with other rites with respect to Palm Sunday, and it is probably the case that the texts of the 1955 reform are deficient in comparison with what preceded them.
Renewed Attention to the CDK-Maritain Debate
First Things: False Notions of the Common Good by C. C. Pecknold
But what does an explicit ordination to God require? Not necessarily a version of the Catholic state as the integralists would advocate. Not necessarily the state at all.
Thus De Koninck’s most powerful claim is that human dignity can only be truly defended by embracing the primacy of the common good “expressly ordered to God.” Without an “explicit and public ordination” to God, our debates about the common will devolve into mere debates between tyrants, and “society degenerates into a state which is frozen and closed in upon itself.”
But what does an explicit ordination to God require? Not necessarily a version of the Catholic state as the integralists would advocate. Not necessarily the state at all.
What Checks Against Absolutism?
The integralist understanding of authority is anti-liberal, but it is also against modern state-absolutism and totalitarianism. This is true not only of contemporary integralists, but has been true throughout integralist history.
— Pater Edmund (@sancrucensis) April 22, 2020
The integralist understanding of authority is anti-liberal, but it is also against modern state-absolutism and totalitarianism. This is true not only of contemporary integralists, but has been true throughout integralist history.
Integralists can say that they are opposed to modern state-absolutism and totalitarianism, but what safeguards would they advocate? What forms of resistance by the Church and citizens (or subjects) are possible, and how are they to be reconciled with integralist claims regarding authority? Where is their development of "just resistance theory"? And to which Latin theory of the origin of authority do they subscribe?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)