Fr. Panayioti, "The Protestant Reformation and the Orthodox Christian East"

A historic lecture given in Wittenburg Germany on the 500-year anniversary of the protestant reformation. Fr. Panayioti weighs in with a lecture called: The Protestant Reformation and the Orthodox Christian Easthttps://t.co/Z2GLtp0rpm pic.twitter.com/mUXY6wDQxk

— Trisagionfilms (@TrisagionFilms) July 30, 2020

Medieval Aristotelian Natural Science

Nice introduction to (Aristotelian) natural science in the medieval periode here.https://t.co/nPbZEZl2Sx https://t.co/2UL58h771E

— Pieter Beullens (@LatinAristotle) July 30, 2020

Mary Ann Glendon

"Encountering and over time growing in familiarity with Mary Ann’s openness and her passion for the world, the law, and the life of the mind quite literally changed the direction of my life." https://t.co/buwlVFl3hc

— Harvard Law School (@Harvard_Law) July 29, 2020

The Litany of Humility

In this episode Fr. Gregory and Fr. Bonaventure (unironically) discuss the virtue of humility and the Litany of Humility--a favorite prayer of the last century. What about the virtue of humility is so foundational? Why is this prayer so challenging? pic.twitter.com/ApyMJQFTV4

— Godsplaining (@godsplaining) July 30, 2020

A New One from Fr. Aidan Nichols, O.P.

Well this should be interesting.... https://t.co/R9KBBsST95

— Fr. Thomas Petri, OP (@PetriOP) July 30, 2020

A Antipope Who Was Venerated as a Saint

NLM

Hmm

My new essay for @PostliberalTho1 will probably make Thomists mad.

But it should make my chief demographic, Catholic homeschooling moms and Lite Lacanians, very happy.

Sub or buy the issue: https://t.co/ysg5o05ReH pic.twitter.com/pB2Q1aodXf

— Marc Barnes (@BadCatholicBlog) July 29, 2020

Because Economics is an "Independent" "Science"

Bad writing by philosophers and theologians about economics is a moral issue. If their views about economics are taken seriously—as they often are in churches and in policy advocacy—they threaten the life-changing effects of free markets for the poor. https://t.co/pmgb7k83oN

— Public Discourse (@PublicDiscourse) July 29, 2020

Public Discourse

John Cavadini on Vatican II

"Viganò’s letter has at least had the virtue of forcing me to emerge from complacency in accepting half-measures in the reception of the Council."

Was Vatican II a Bad Seed?
by @JohnCavadini of @McGrathND https://t.co/W3d5IFlZiG

— Church Life Journal (@ChurchLifeND) July 29, 2020

Public Discourse

Catholics can reject the Church of the crusades, or the Church of popes thundering interdicts and excommunications, or the “Constantinian” Church—but they cannot reject the Church of Peter and of the council of the apostles, Pierre Manent writes. https://t.co/r6jJ9KmC97

— Public Discourse (@PublicDiscourse) July 27, 2020

The beginning of this sentence, as it is written in Greek, follows the form of decrees made by Greek cities: “It has seemed good to the council and to the people. . . .” We can see the extraordinary audacity of this borrowed usage. We can also see which teachings this “council of the apostles,” drawing out the consequences of Pentecost, emphasizes for the manner in which we must understand “the fact of the Church.” This is not the Church copied from the form of the empire, a prideful power among prideful powers; this is the Church scarcely born, under the direction of Peter, an association deprived of everything that gives strength and credit to a human association. It is this Church that declares her power and her right to deliberate and decide as the human city deliberates and decides. In short, the Church has the form and consistency of a city.

Today Catholics can reject the Church of the crusades, or the throne and altar, or the Church of popes thundering interdicts and excommunications, or the “Constantinian” Church—but they cannot reject the Church of Peter and of the council of the apostles. If the Church today is something other than the sum of our nostalgias—or the print left behind by a “big thing” that we don’t know the meaning of, only we know that it does not concern us any more—it is because she is something other than an association of individuals exercising their right to have opinions. She is a kind of city, a “commanding form” in which a specific work is conducted, a work that operates on the whole man and is proposed to all men—this work that the Church in her weighty but clear language calls “sanctification” and whose source and body dwell in the sacrifice of the Mass.

Sacrifice, Again

From my book, "First Comes Love." May God bless you today! pic.twitter.com/8nAxLctsqj

— Scott Hahn (@DrScottHahn) July 28, 2020

Another Defense of Vatican II

An older essay, from 2012.

CWR: The True Spirit of Vatican II by Douglas Bushman
The main desire of the Council was to reinvigorate the Church’s mission of promoting a fully human life in Jesus Christ.

Fr. Weinandy Replies to Vatican II Critics

Father Thomas Weinandy writing a thoughtful reflection on recent attempts to criticize and blame Vatican II....

https://t.co/q4Pva2k6z8

— Fr. Thomas Petri, OP (@PetriOP) July 27, 2020

ITV

Gerald Russello Reviews Natural Law and Human Rights: Toward a Recovery of Practical Reason by Pierre Manent

City Journal

Natural Law for Modern Times | City Journal https://t.co/nL7cjheOHL

— Allen Mendenhall (@allenmendenhall) July 27, 2020

A Shame

Nothing so eloquently symbolizes the optimism and errors of the Catholic Church in the 1960s than the ruins of the hideous St. Peter's Seminary in Scotland. https://t.co/KLhWVosTKc via @church_militant

— Nick Donnelly (@ProtecttheFaith) July 27, 2020

A Complaint about the Lack of Collegiality

What Church has Cardinal Marx been in all these years? Since when does the Pope or the Church need a quorum to issue a teaching? This is why the papacy exists: to teach, correct and protect doctrine. Endless synods are not practical or necessary. Thoughts? https://t.co/gHdJ4XnPbi

— Raymond Arroyo (@RaymondArroyo) July 27, 2020

Cardinal Kasper aptly defends the Vatican instruction on parish reform against German critics: Reform begins with conversion - and that is something German bishops do not like to hear. Good for Kasper to speak out! https://t.co/0hckgGcoHc #Theology #Vatican #Parish #Catholic

— Ulrich L. Lehner (@ulrichlehner) July 27, 2020

The Just Price

Here's my latest episode:

Understanding Just Price | Ep 57

YouTube: https://t.co/YhfSCsdm3s
Audio: https://t.co/pVRtDvdkUK

— Catholic Economics Podcast (@CatholicEcon) July 27, 2020

Plotinus as Progress

All this suggests that a Trinitarian ontology will naturally tend to revise Aristotle. Perhaps even more than Aquinas did, though he did revise Aristotelian metaphysics both neoplatonically and for doctrinal reasons. (As neo-Thomism ignores.)

— john milbank (@johnmilbank3) July 26, 2020

For Plato and Plotinus there are five genres of being, rest, motion, same and other that are really more like transcendentals. In fully real intelligible reality they fully coincide. In material reality they more tend to exclude each other and come in degrees.

— john milbank (@johnmilbank3) July 26, 2020

Plotinus also questions Aristotle’s distinction of action and making. For him even action as thought moves, goes out from itself, emanates. Augustine and Aquinas’s thought on verbum is jn this lineage. (Lonergan totally wrong here.)

— john milbank (@johnmilbank3) July 26, 2020

Another Interview with Archbishop Viganò

VIGANÒ, EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW. THE POPE AND THE SODOMITES https://t.co/2udM67vv0F

— Marco Tosatti (@MarcoTosatti) July 25, 2020

Two Perspectives on Vatican II

The first is from theologian and bishop Franco Giulio Brambilla, as relayed by Sandro Magister: A Bishop and Theologian Breaks the Silence Over the “Banality” of Viganò and Company

In fact, this is the contribution of the most significant statements of this last decade, before, during, and after Pope Benedict's statement in 2005.
We could outline the theme of the legacy in three moves:
a) Vatican II as style: to resume the original way in which the council fathers (which historical studies have made known to us) posed problems with the method and resources that they put to work in order to propose a response to the challenges of their time in the interaction between subjects, textual “corpus,” and new readers;
b) the principle of pastorality: to bring out the originality of Vatican II, its creative ideas and its basic intuitions in the areas of both method and content;
c) the future of the Council: to rediscover the state of invention that characterized that epochal turning point and that today needs, at the beginning of the third millennium, a creative recovery and a new ecclesial pragmatics.

And the following is from Adam DeVille: Vatican II as “chosen trauma” and “chosen glory”.

If nothing else, the decision to be faced by Catholics today is whether we will allow ourselves to manifest the maturity necessary to stop treating Vatican II as either a trauma or a glory and instead to see it as all councils from our past: an event where some of the crooked lines of human history were used by God to write straight the salvation of the world. If He is content to leave some lines askew on the page, some tares and wheat in the fields of the Church until the end of the age (cf. Matt. 13: 24-30), why can we not grant ourselves the same freedom to stop clinging to pseudo-intellectual genealogies helpful to nobody and instead get to work healing today’s myriad crises in Church and world alike?

Even though DeVille is Ukrainian Catholic, he assumes that Vatican II was an ecumenical council, or at least a council of both Roman Catholics and of Eastern Catholics. As far as I'm concerned, even if various Eastern Catholic bishops signed the documents, that does not make Vatican II an ecumenical council, and even the claim that it was a "general" council of the churches in communion with the bishop of Rome is question, given the lack of equal weight given to Eastern perspectives. I see it in content and function as being a synod of the Latin churches in communion with the bishop of Rome, and it needs to be understood carefully: not as an ecumenical council, but as a Latin council with certain pretensions, to be historically situated in the development of the Roman papacy in the second millenium and with reference to the claims of Rome, which go back to the first millenium. It also must be understood with the proximate and not-so-proximate causes that lead up to the council, which explain why Latin bishops and theologians thought some sort of reform was necessary.