Tuesday, November 12, 2019
Monday, November 11, 2019
Why the NYT?
AmCon: The Trial Of Conservative Catholicism by Rod Dreher
Dreher links to Douthat's analysis and interview of Cardinal Burke. Why is the NYT publishing this? Why did it hire Douthat in the first place? To demoralize its enemies?
Dreher links to Douthat's analysis and interview of Cardinal Burke. Why is the NYT publishing this? Why did it hire Douthat in the first place? To demoralize its enemies?
Sunday, November 10, 2019
Elder Joseph
OrthoChristian: The Story Behind “My Elder Joseph the Hesychast” by Hieromonk Ephraim, St. Nilus Skete, Alaska
Saturday, November 09, 2019
Friday, November 08, 2019
Thursday, November 07, 2019
Wednesday, November 06, 2019
Tuesday, November 05, 2019
10-Year Anniversary Jubilee
NCReg: Ordinariates Mark 10 Years of Anglican Traditions and Catholic Communion by Peter Jesserer Smith
The Catholic Church is marking the tenth anniversary of Benedict XVI’s historic apostolic constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus.
The Catholic Church is marking the tenth anniversary of Benedict XVI’s historic apostolic constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus.
Reprints of Books by Joseph C. Fenton
Missed this in 2018.
First Things: Fenton Returns by Patrick Carey
Related:
Cardinal Ottaviani and the Council by Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton
1966 Letter Reveals Cardinal Ottaviani’s Post-Conciliar Concerns
First Things: Fenton Returns by Patrick Carey
Fenton told readers of his “The Ecumenical Council and Christian Union” (1959) that the council’s ecumenical work would amount to nothing more than the Church’s previous emphasis on a “return of dissident Christians to the one true fold of Jesus Christ.”He probably included the Orthodox as dissident Christians.
Related:
Cardinal Ottaviani and the Council by Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton
1966 Letter Reveals Cardinal Ottaviani’s Post-Conciliar Concerns
Monday, November 04, 2019
More on the Development of Doctrine
CWR: The Spirit versus the letter: Responding to a false view of doctrinal development by Eduardo Echeverria
Sergio Centofanti’s recent essay for Vatican News claims that the Church teaches, “It is necessary to follow the Spirit, rather than the strict letter.” This opposition could not be further from the truth.
But does Echeverria make enough distinctions between theological opinion (even if it is of the bishop of Rome) and dogma? Let us look at the two examples of reversals: religious liberty and ecumenism. Was religious liberty (or anything pertaining to the political community and the laws that it may or may not issue) part of Divine Revelation? No -- religious liberty, like contemporary Roman Catholic Social Teaching, pertains to moral theology, and so papal theological opinion on this point isn't "reversed" as if it were dogmatic (even if some Latins think it is) but contradicted.
As for ecumenism -- precepts concerning whom to admit to worship, or with whom one can pray is more a human determination that is (ecclesiastical) positive law than a precept of Divine Law, something taking into consideration goods secondary to God Himself. And so in so far as we are dealing with ecclesiastical positive law, that can be changed. As for human judgments as to who is a heretic or schismatic, those judgments can be erroneous and are not protected by an Latin notion of infallibility.
In order for theories of doctrinal development to be taken seriously, we must talk about doctrine, what constitutes doctrines, whether there are levels of doctrine, and if historically what has been understood to be doctrine was mistaken.
Sergio Centofanti’s recent essay for Vatican News claims that the Church teaches, “It is necessary to follow the Spirit, rather than the strict letter.” This opposition could not be further from the truth.
I am not of course suggesting that there is not development. But there is development without change even when there is reversal in Church teaching. Centofanti completely overlooks the distinctions between development, continuity, change, and reversal. He focuses on examples of reversals (unbaptized babies, the exegesis of 1 Timothy 11-12 regarding the place of woman in the Church, and religious liberty) but never refers to the theological notes that qualify certain teachings as infallible such that they possess the highest degree of certainty. This means that he fails to account for development, clarifications, reformulations, while nevertheless maintaining the stable continuity of fundamental meaning and truth of authoritative dogmas/doctrines. I will return to this point below.
But does Echeverria make enough distinctions between theological opinion (even if it is of the bishop of Rome) and dogma? Let us look at the two examples of reversals: religious liberty and ecumenism. Was religious liberty (or anything pertaining to the political community and the laws that it may or may not issue) part of Divine Revelation? No -- religious liberty, like contemporary Roman Catholic Social Teaching, pertains to moral theology, and so papal theological opinion on this point isn't "reversed" as if it were dogmatic (even if some Latins think it is) but contradicted.
As for ecumenism -- precepts concerning whom to admit to worship, or with whom one can pray is more a human determination that is (ecclesiastical) positive law than a precept of Divine Law, something taking into consideration goods secondary to God Himself. And so in so far as we are dealing with ecclesiastical positive law, that can be changed. As for human judgments as to who is a heretic or schismatic, those judgments can be erroneous and are not protected by an Latin notion of infallibility.
In order for theories of doctrinal development to be taken seriously, we must talk about doctrine, what constitutes doctrines, whether there are levels of doctrine, and if historically what has been understood to be doctrine was mistaken.
Sunday, November 03, 2019
Interview with Fr. Edward Henderson
OrthoChristian: On Holy Relics, Primacy in the Church, and the Pastoral Life in the Bay Area - An Interview with Fr. Edward Henderson by Jesse Dominick, Fr. Edward Henderson
See also “The Way We Serve is Our Means of Communicating With God” - On the Old Believer Church of the Nativity of Christ in Erie, PA by Tatiana Veselkina, Archpriest Pimen Simon
See also “The Way We Serve is Our Means of Communicating With God” - On the Old Believer Church of the Nativity of Christ in Erie, PA by Tatiana Veselkina, Archpriest Pimen Simon
Saturday, November 02, 2019
And what does it mean for him?
Augsburg, 31 October 1999: "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" signed by the Catholic Church's Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity and the Lutheran World Federation. I was there pic.twitter.com/348UKBpBIX
— Massimo Faggioli (@MassimoFaggioli) October 31, 2019
A return to a first-millenium proclamation of the kerygma, something more patristic?
Friday, November 01, 2019
Whose Latin Christianity? Which Hermeneutic?
Another essay on... Vatican II.
Reading the Signs of the Times by Douglas Farrow
What happened to the Church being the sign of God's presence and purpose to the world?
Reading the Signs of the Times by Douglas Farrow
The Church,” says Gaudium et spes, “has always had the duty of scrutinizing the signs of the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel.” A few paragraphs later, that duty is parsed in a positive way. The Church, we are told, “labors to decipher authentic signs of God's presence and purpose in the happenings, needs and desires in which this People has a part along with other men of our age” (emphasis added).
What happened to the Church being the sign of God's presence and purpose to the world?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)