PATRISTIBLOG: Augustine’s Sermons on 1 John – PART 1

You may remember my intention to work through St. Augustine’s sermons, or tractates, on 1 John.

I think it is time to get at them.

I am motivated in part because in these sermons, Augustine tackles, among other things, “enemy love”.  Since I, imperfect in my charity, am striving right now to view people who clearly hate me and the Church’s good bishops with as much Christian love as I can, Augustine’s sermons are personally relevant.

Aside from my personal failings in charity and thoughts about myself – which I freely admit  – who among us does not struggle not to feel hatred for people who do us wrong?  Even when those wrongs are only imagined?

Hatred for others kills the life of grace in the soul.  It is a fundamental rejection of Christ, a contradiction of terms for one who styles herself as Christian.  I really try not to hate enemies of the Church, and I think I avoid it most of the time.  But it is hard to love them.  This is what Augustine tackles.  Enemy love.  And why we have to do it.

We will, therefore, seek some help from the great Doctor of Grace, St. Augustine of Hippo (+430).

And so we begin.

We will use the free, online version available at New Advent, by H. Browne, in the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 7.  The translation has the advantage is sticking closely to the Latin.  However, it is a bit archaic.  You will find words such as “haply”, which means “perhaps” and has nothing to do with your mood.  You will find “mark!” and “lo!”.   Reading it aloud is a very good idea, but you will find it challenging.  You can find the Latin text for free online here.

Homily 1 begins with a reading of 1 John 1:1-2:11 and then follows Augustine’s analysis.

Remember, I expect you to read Augustine’s sermon. I provide these notes as a pry-bar to get you into a text, an original, primary, patristic text.

To help, this time, I recorded it quickly.  It might be a little rough in places.  I had a lot of stops and starts from interruptions.

CONTEXT:  It is just after Easter.   Augustine the bishop is sitting on his bishop’s chair after the reading was sung.  He has the scroll of Scripture on his lap and is working line by line.   He will speak about “infants”, or in Latin “infantes”, which is a nickname for the newly baptized.  Augustine is instructing new Christians in particular, but not ignoring the already baptized. Augustine is also carrying on a polemic against Donatists, who have torn the Church apart in schism.  Donatists split into a Church of the “pure”, as it were, after some bishops and priests had fallen in time of persecution and had handed over sacred books to imperial officials.  That disqualified them, for Donatists, from ever giving valid sacrament, since, for Donatists, sacraments depended on the holiness of the one giving them, as they the man himself imparted holiness.  Augustine will along the course of this make a reference to “Africans”.  They are in North Africa, that lively, sometimes ferocious, Church which experienced the century before terrible persecutions and which has its share of theological and political controversies.  Africans here are Catholics, not just any denizen of that continent and not those who went into schism.

Keep in mind, Augustine is speaking off the cuff.  Stenographer secretaries are writing everything down just as he speaks it in the church.  Augustine gets repetitive in some sections, circling around and around as he thinks and pounds home his verses so people will remember.  These are not edited later.  We have them as they were spoken. Augustine doesn’t preach in the manner of, say, an article in Aquinas’s Summa, very linear. He peals the onion.  He unwinds the skein of yarn.  He circles around with an eye on the edge and end and an eye on the center and core and he twirls you around with him.  There is real logic and you can trace linear arguments, but they are sometimes buried in the mass of repetition of texts and phrases of Scripture which we weaves and winds and unwinds.

Augustine starts be setting up contrasts of light and darkness, that which is eternal and that which is worldly and mortal, divine and human, life and death, unity and fellowship versus separateness.

The first bit Augustine quotes is itself a summary of the whole letter.  We start with God’s nature, and the Trinity and we move to fellowship and forgiveness.  The elements Augustine is going to bring out are contained already in the first verses.  There is no mention of the Spirit… but He is there, unmentioned, because fellowship can be with the Fa and son is through the Holy Spirit, who is the fellowship between the Father and the Son.  The principle themes are already present in the first verses.

Let’s leave martyrs aside and touching Christ aside for a little while.

“In that charity… in that unity”, these are codes words for the Holy Spirit.  John hasn’t explicitly brought in the Spirit yet, but all three Persons of the Trinity are there.  There are code words for the Holy Spirit in both John and, therefore, Augustine.

There are two groups: infants and who were baptized in the past, but they have succumbed to sin.  Donatists believed that the sins of the lay faithful could only be absolved through the bishop with a clean conscience because he did not hand over scriptures ….  you will hear “cup against cup” … this is like “altar against altar”, which is a reference to the schism of the Donatist Church.

Augustine affirms that every man sins, even in small ways, even venial sins.  Light sins, which we mustn’t make light of.  “Many drops make a river.”

Augustine stresses the need for humility.  We must admit we sin.  Therefore humility helps lead to confession which leads to charity and forgiveness.

Augustine revs up in paragraph 6.  There is really good stuff here.  For Augustine, humility is the root of charity.  Humility is the necessary condition for charity.  Humility, for Augustine, is self-knowledge.  Self-knowledge concerns concrete ways in which I am a sinner.  This rubs against the Donatists, who think that they are a Church of the sinless.  Forgiveness, therefore, must be ongoing because the true Church, the Catholic Church, is made up of sinners, but saved sinners, because they can be forgiven sins even after baptism.

Think about it this way: Augustine is saying, and he is right, that holiness is dependent on acknowledgment that we are sinners.  I think we have to be very wary of anyone who plays down the fact that we are sinners or who thinks that talking about sin is too negative.

In any event, as you read sermon, watch how closely Augustine roots his though in scriptural texts.  He goes around and around with his quotes to drive home that post-baptismal sins can be forgiven.  We know this from scripture.  But forgiveness requires confession, to both God and to man.  We must tell men what we are!  We must tell God who we are!  It isn’t enough to do just one.  We have to do both.

In par. 7 we get into the problem of presumption.  Saying “Lord! Lord!” is not sufficient.  There must be an intention to change our ways.   Considering 6 and 7 together you get the impression that Augustine is talking about the sacrament of penance, though we celebrate it differently in modern times.  The point is, we cannot take forgiveness for granted or as automatic.  We need an interior disposition to receive forgiveness and we must then express it outwardly to men as well as God.

Furthermore. we have an “advocate”, a “propitiator”.  Jesus Christ.  We sometimes today call the Holy Spirit Advocate, Paraclitus.  Augustine is quoting 1 John, which says Jesus is the Advocate.  REmember that whatever the Son does, the Spirit does too, and the Father also does.  They act together.

Moving to par 8, Augustine says John drank in the secrets of the Lord’s mysteries.  Whew.   I may have to come back to that at another time.  However, John included himself in the ranks of sinners, which is pure anti-Donatist rhetoric.  Donatists excluded themselves form the ranks of sinners and formed a Church of the pure.  Augustine is moving now into his treatment of schism.  Augustine had a real horror of schism.

Augustine also gets into intercession for the people by bishops, but he stresses that people have to pray for the bishops.  They pray together as a Body, but Christ is the Head of the Body.  You can hear in this section that Augustine is gesturing, point around.  Read this aloud.

Also, for Augustine, the whole world is the res catholica, not just in Africa.

This whole paragraph is against the Donatist idea that the bishop is the sole mediator.

We are also here getting into knowledge of God.  For Augustine, knowing God means loving God, and therefore, as we shall see, neighbor.  In order to know God, we have to love our enemy.  This is a key point, and one of the most important things to take away from this sermon.

Knowledge and love are interchangeable for Augustine.  We know someone to the extent that we love them and love them to the extent that we know them.  Knowing God is perfected (lots of perfection language here) in the love of enemies.

The first step of love of enemies is back in paragraph 6: admission that one is a sinner, which is the way into truth, which is charity.  But charity is the Holy Spirit. That means, necessarily, love of enemy.  He knows God who loves his enemy.  That’s the logic.

Augustine runs together all sorts of verses.  It can get confusing, like a maze. But they are all moving the argument toward the conclusion that we know God and love God to the extent that we love our enemy.  The intertexting of the verses is designed by Augustine to bring people to that point.  You could map out the logic.  The repetition is strange to our ears, but this is Augustine technique.  Eventually, however, he clearly says the conclusion.

In par. 9 Augustine talks more about being perfected in love.  What is perfection of love? To love even enemies, and love them for this end, that they may be brethren.

For Augustine there are three types of people to love and three types of love.  There is brother love, neighbor love and enemy love.  We must love frater (people in the Church with us), proximus (neighbor), and inimicus (enemy).  A really useful article for this is the voice for inimicus in the Augustinius Lexicon.  You won’t find it on Amazon, alas.

We are commanded to love proximus.  Higher yet, is love of enemy.

Get to love of enemy and you get to real love of God.  Enemy love is love of God perfected.

When Augustine in this section talks of “carnal” love, and isn’t talking about sex.  It is loving in the sense of selfishness, what you get for yourself.  We should love a man’s spiritual good, not any temporal good.

However, temporal goods are really goods.  Temporal goods are not automatically evil.  Pizza and money are real goods, air  conditioning is a good.  They are real goods.  But are spiritual goods which are greater goods.  From the point of view of ethics, for Augustine it is lawful to desire a temporal good unless and until it conflicts to the spiritual good.  If it does, a sin is committed.

So, in par. 9, we learn from Augustine that we love enemies so as to wish them to become brethren; Love your enemies, so that they may be called into fellowship with us.

For Augustine, the concrete way if loving enemies is to pray for them.  That’s what Jesus did.  On the Cross we prayed to the Father to forgive His enemies.

In par 10, Augustine gets into the commandment that we love one another.  The old man and new man language here refers to the pre- and post baptismal state of the infantes and the already baptized.  But there is more to it  “But why an ‘old’ commandment? Not as pertaining to the old man.”  Augustine is saying here that the command to love one’s enemy existed in the old law, but we didn’t really see it because of darkness.  Therefore, it is both new and it is old, something we had from the beginning but better understood now that there is greater light.  The commandment is clear now that Christ has taught it and demonstrated it.

In par 11, we have again the three steps on the ladder of love.  Augustine, by the way, calls the Holy Spirit mother this section!  Charity is the Holy Spirit and charity is our mother.  Let’s not press this too far, of course.  Augustine doesn’t think the Holy Spirit is female.  That would be a silly claim.  He is playing with the images.

Par 12 gets into scandal, offenses.  He is really into the problem in this section of the sermon of splitting from the Church.  Particularly, splitting from the Church because of hatred of some teaching.  Tell that to some of the groups we see around us today.  Augustine says:

“For he that forsakes the Church, how is he in Christ who is not in the members of Christ?”

Where the Church is, there Christ is. Split from the Church, split from her teachings, you split from Christ.  It’s simple.

The image of the burning of the sun (Christ) and the moon (the Church) is in this section too, but it isn’t too hard.  You’ll follow it right away.  Those burned by the sun create schisms when the leave the Church.  They break unity.  Augustine refers to brotherly love, here, which is the frater love of those who are in the Church with us.

For Augustine, we must bear all things for the sake of unity in Christ’s Church.  “Africans”, remember, are the Catholics, not the Donatists.  Donatists deserted the whole world the res catholica.   Again, we must bear all things for the sake of unity and we do so because of love, even to the point of enemy love.

“If you loved your brethren, there would be none occasion of stumbling in you.”

Remember that Donatists skipped from the real Church, the res catholica, the “whole world” and started their own thing because they were scandalized by the weakness and sins of some bishops, priests, others, who caved during the persecutions of the 3rd century in North Africa.

Don’t we hear about this today?  Have you ever heard of someone saying that she is leaving the Church – usually very self-righteously as if she isn’t a sinner too – because someone else, a bishop a priest, more than one, are weak sinners who did some terrible (real or imagined) thing?   We have to turn that inside out and say, could you find no one who was holy?  A saved sinner truly striving to love properly?  We can always find good people around.  The fact that there are sinners in the Church shouldn’t shock us.  Of course, if people want to leave the Church and do leave the Church, that means, per force, that they are defective in loving.

For Augustine, schism is a violation of love.  If you don’t like what someone in the Church is saying, a truth of Catholic teaching that is, you must bear the burden.  You cannot leave the Church because of hard truths or the sins of some or even of many.

For Augustine, Donatists actually hate their brethren.  Catholics must not, cannot hate their brethren.  Augustine is saying that Catholics who don’t see Donatists as fratres really should.  Donatists, on the other hand, don’t see Catholics as fratres.  , Catholics must see Donatists as fratres.  Donatists are baptized.

This calls to mind something from years ago.  Wasn’t it Paul VI who referred to Anglicans as our “separated brethren”?  Joseph Ratzinger, however, in the Ratzinger Report has a chapter entitled “Brethren, but separated”.  That comma is important.

For Augustine Donatists are fratres, but so separated that the Holy Spirit does not dwell in them.  Their sacraments are not efficacious.  They become efficacious when they return to the Church.  This is because they don’t possess charity, which is the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit’s gift.  The Holy Spirit wants to dwell in Donatists, in schismatics, but He can’t.   They reject charity because they deny possibility of salvation to Catholics.

In par. 12, Augustine seems to know that he has been going on for a while: “Not that I am going to speak for a long time…”

In par. 13, we get into the image of the stone and mountain.  It is pretty clear.  You’ll see what Augustine is doing here rather easily.  You might notice that the kingdoms of the world are split apart by Christ, but that underscores his point about true love as the source of true unity.

Here is something important to consider when reading about brother love, neighbor love and enemy love, in light of his assertion that we must truly bear all things for the sake of unity.

Augustine talks about brother love and separated brethren, but that does not keep him from pointing out their errors, reproaching them, upbraiding them, castigating them, chiding them for the errors.

Love of separted brethren, caritas fraterna, does not not not cancel out correctio fraterna! Caritas fraterna includes correctio fraterna.  It even includes correptioCorreptio is literally a “seizing” and therefore “reproach”.

Remember the famous Augustinian adage, “Love and do what you will”?  “Ama et quod vis fac!” In the proper context, the adage actually means love the Donatist and punish him.  Punish to correct, but from love.  It is addressed to the military who must compel the Donatists back into the Catholic Church, which was eventually the sad and necessary situation after virtually everything else failed.  We must somethings correct in the hard sense, even through suppression.  But, for Augustine, we must do it in in love, not in anger.  That is the tricky part.  When we love, we truly desire the good of the other and we are willing to do what it takes to help them from love.

Think about this in terms of “dialogue” today, with, say, dissenters.  Dialogue does not mean not pointing out error.  It means exactly pointing out error, because dialogue must be about the truth!

Back to the sermon.  Again, Donatists separated themselves from the real Church, the whole church, because they don’t have charity for Catholics.  And in the very last line, Augustine names Donatus for the first and only time.

The very last lines are a bit of a puzzle, actually. It may be that Augustine is referring to a split among the Donatists themselves. The Maximillianists split from Donatists.  But when Augustine says, “and do tolerate for the sake of Donatus those whom they condemn” he probably not talking about the Maximillianists.  That “and do tolerate for the sake of Donatus those whom they condemn”, perhaps aims at the fact that Donatists don’t recognize that they are not holy, that they are the real sinners.  If they really understood love and Christ, they would condemn themselves!  But, because they look to the ideas of Donatus, not Christ, they don’t condemn themselves.  What appears to be unity among Donatists themselves, is really a toleration on false basis.  At least that is what I suspect he is saying.

So, this keynote sermon in his series on 1 John is about tough love, in the sense of the highest love, enemy love as the hardest to attain, but also its flip side, applying hard things in love to enemies in order to win them back into fellowship and unity for their sake.

Augustine works his themes and verses, winding and unwinding them. He moves around in circles, round and about his points.  While focusing on the center he winds all around the edges of the discourse at the same time.  Sometimes you might ask “Where is he going?”, but trust him and follow him.  You’ll get there.

I suggest that you read your sermon now, Augustine’s 1st Tractate on 1 John.

Just do it.

Posted in Our Catholic Identity, Patristiblogging, The Drill | Tagged , , , , , , ,
4 Comments

Do you use “protection”?

I hope you are not careless.

I am talking, of course, about using an Uninterrupted or Uninterruptible Power Source, or UPS.

These things are powerful surge protectors and back-up batteries which will keep your equipment running steady on in the case of power loss.  They can give you time to shut things like computers down normally or keep them safe from momentary or short power outages.  They come with software which will shut your computer down automatically if the battery runs low.  Useful if you are away.

This morning I had a power outage and subsequent massive surge which blew away a big UPS which one of you kind readers had years ago sent me from my wishlist.  I have my important electronic stuff plugged into these things.  I am sure that, if I had not had that UPS, I would have lost something I would rather not have had to replace.

If you don’t have a UPS for your computer or some other thing that you would rather not replace, then allow me to say… GET ONENOW!

I have had the best performance and best customer service so far from ACP.  If your UPS does its job and gets blown away in defense of your equipment, and it is under warranty, they send you a new unit.  Sadly, this one that died today, a big 900VA, is a year over warranty. Sniff.  But I have had great service from APC before.  One of my UPSs was fried from a nearby lightning strike.  APC sent me a new one right away.  I would avoid Ultra, btw.  Trust me on that.

Here is a link to a small APC UPS unit, providing 6 outlets and 350VA for $45 on sale.

Here is a link to a larger APC UPS unit, providing 10 outlets 355 joules of surge protection and 1500VA for $189.

There are units in between as well.  Many of them will condition or clean up your electricity, too.  That is very important, I understand, for flat screen TVs.  If I had one, there is no way I would not have a UPS with a conditioner for it from day one.  Do some research on that.

Consider how much time and money it might take to replace your computer, not to mention what you have on your hard disk.  You might want to get a large external hard drive for your disk back up, too.  Here is a link to a 1TB External HD.  Think about what is on your computer.  Do you want to lose everything?

I really do mean to scare you when I say that it is not a matter of IF you are going to have a big power surge or a hard drive failure, it really is a matter of WHEN.  If you don’t prepare for the day, you’re nuts.  Spend a little now or, later on, cry cry cry.

To the kind soul who originally sent me that UPS that died this morning defending the mothership computer, thank you thank you thank you!  I am going to add one to my wishlist again and, if an when it comes, if ever, I will write the person’s name who sent it on the top so that I won’t forget who you are.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Global Killer Asteroid Questions | Tagged , , , , ,
24 Comments

NCR’s Sr. Fielder implies that men faithful to Church teachings are sick in the head

That keen observer of human behavior Samuel Johnson had sobering observations about self-delusion.  For example, he wrote

“However we may labour for our own deception, truth, though unwelcome, will sometimes intrude upon the mind.”  [Idler #80 October 27, 1759].

And so I turn my attention to the perennial deceptions of Sr. Maureen Fiedler who writes for… yes!… the National Catholic Fishwap.

Sr. Fiedler has been nurturing the delusion that the male fraidycats in “The Vatican” are a-scared of the notion of women’s ordination.

I used the word “notion” here, precisely because it sounds like sewing bobble.

My emphases and comments.

The Vatican’s Fear of Women
by Maureen Fiedler on Aug. 11, 2011

I am been amazed, and a bit amused, by the lightening speed [?!?  HA!] with which the Vatican [I always enjoy that.  “The Vatican”!] has been reacting to any slight sound or movement in favor of women’s ordination, especially among the hierarchy or clergy. [Sister… clergy are the hierarchy too… right? I suggest you brush up on your Lumen gentium.]

Recently, the Patriarch of Lisbon [I’ll bet Sister loves that title!] was called in for “conversations” of his publicly stated belief that there is no “fundamental obstacle” to women’s ordination. Bishop William Morris of Australia was removed for suggesting that the ordination of women might be one solution to the growing worldwide shortage of priests. [That wasn’t the only reason, Sister.  But it would have sufficed.] And of course, Maryknoll priest Roy Bourgeois, under fire for years, [“under fire”?  Yes, if five years of shooting himself in his own foot counts for being “under fire”.] and has now received his second canonical warning calling on him to recant his belief that women can be called to priesthood… or be thrown out of his order. [Poor Roy.  Perhaps Sr. Fiedler could find him a spot in the Sisters of Loretto! Or… do they discriminate? ]

In addition to that, in July 2010, a Vatican document [It wasn’t just from “The Vatican”.  It was from the CDF.] listed “women’s ordination” as a “crime” at the same level of gravity as pedophilia! [Hmmm… no.  Not really.  The document did not say that they were at the same level of gravity.  That’s Sister’s conclusion, but it isn’t quite right.  The document classified both crimes of child abuse by a cleric and crimes of attempting to ordain a woman as needing to be treated at the same level of procedure, at the CDF.  Just because they are in the same category of graviora delicta, they are not necessarily the same gravity of sin. The two sinful actions, which are also crimes, are rather like apples and oranges, both fruit bnut really different from each other.  Nevertheless, I’ll say that while the first horrid crime scars young people and communities for life, the latter horrid crime scars the People of God and harms the community as well, not to mention the souls of those who delude themselves into thinking that they are really getting somewhere each time the get on a boat or go into a Protestant church and pretend.]

I never cease to be amazed that this topic engenders serious Vatican action and movement, when the scandal of abusive priests, and the bishops who covered up the scandal, received little notice or reprimand from that same Vatican until the secular press and the civil courts called them account.  [blah blah yawn … Sister needs a new argument.  But I will agree that sometimes I, too, marvel that these women and their camp-followers receive any serious notice.  Then again, we have to pay attention, no?  Their souls are in danger.  That is serious.]

But aside from this obvious and scandalous difference, [Here is where the second level of her delusion comes in…] there is a deeper question: why is the Vatican so fearful of women as priests or deacons? [Oooo!  The Pope’s a-scared!] Many analysts have said that the men in Rome simply want to perpetuate the “old boys’ club” of the church where they all feel comfortable. Others have cited sexism, pure and simple. Still others have said they continue to believe their own flawed theology. [Sr. Fiedler corrects the Church?  Let’s all say it together: Magisterium of Nuns.  Then quietly chuckle.]

[This is the best part!] But I wonder if something deeper is wrong… something psychological, some form of corruption… But at this point, the actions of the Vatican on this issue are so bizarre, it’s worth asking new questions.

“New questions”!

This is the same old psychobabble that these old liberals have been on for decades now!

Chimps couldn’t fling this stuff better than a… very mature liberal.

Let’s now think through some of Sr. Fiedler’s musings.

Consider.  Two bishops and a Maryknoll priest have a bizarre notion about women’s ordination.  So?  Think of a Catholic teaching, even a dogma, and you will be able to find a couple bishops and a priest out there who have bizarre ideas about it.

If a couple bishops and a priest in the wide world have strange ideas about, say, transubstantiation, should we then have to rethink transubstantiation?   How about the Church’s teachings about slavery?

Where is the bar?  How high do we set it?  Two bishops and a priest?  Or do we need a few more?  How many more?

As for “lightning speed” … it is to laugh. “The Vatican” moves at “lightning speed”!  That may be the first time anyone seriously believed that, I am admire Sister’s confidence.  However, think it through.  Tthere are profs at Catholic universities spouting looney ideas about all manner of Catholic teaching and yet they still receive paychecks every week.  There are at least three groups in favor of women’s ordination and none of them have been excommunicated or interdicted.

You wanna see lightning speed?  Let me run things for a while.

For the absurdity.

And who was it who injected fear into the discussion?  The basis of “The Vatican’s” objections in the documents is 200o years teaching not fear.

And now we come to the part of her piece which makes any rational reader feel a little unclean.

“I wonder”, she muses, “if something deeper is wrong”….

Ooooooo!  You are supposed to make a connection with her reference to… wait for it… pedophilia.  Fiedler is using code language, but she has put her foot wrong.  Take her argument a little farther and then turn it inside out.

She is saying that if priests don’t want women to be priests, then maybe those male priests are actually psychosexually immature.  They are sick in the head.  But where she really leads you to infer is that men who don’t want women to be priests are really homosexuals, not pedophiles.  Right?  The fact is that the problem of abuse of children – sorry, it has to be said – is mostly a homosexual problem: most of the victims were male and a huge percentage were not little children.  The majority of the cases were not textbook pedophilia.  They were something else.  When Fiedler tries to make you connect resistance to women’s ordination with psychosexual problems, she is really straying into the territory of homosexuality.  People who don’t agree with her are sick in the head.  They have a problem.  They are deviants.

This, friends, is how liberals work.  They smear people with ad hominem attacks.  And they hurt people.  People with homosexual inclinations, just like everyone else, deserve our respect and compassion for the burden they carry.  They don’t need a Sister of Loretto to be judgmental about them.

But that is Sister’s position, right?  If someone, some male priest, wants to be faithful to the Church’s teaching on male-only priesthood, then he must be sick in the head.  Liturgical liberals do the same thing, don’t they?  If a priest prefers the Extraordinary Form, he is… maybe… perhaps… get it?  Huh?  Get it?  Clever, no?

Turn these tired old dissenter arguments inside out like a too-long-worn gym sock and all you find is a wad of nasty foot lint you’d rather not have had to think about.

And I thought the Sisters of Loretto were supposed to be more compassionate, committed to justice and peace.  Instead, Sister labels people as backward and fearful and sick in the head.  Nice.

And here is a different, worse, example in the same catholic outlet!

So, at the end of this nasty gym sock of an argument, let’s return to Dr. Johnson… Samuel Johnson, that is:

“However we may labour for our own deception, truth, though unwelcome, will sometimes intrude upon the mind.”  [Idler #80 October 27, 1759]

I’ll leave the combox open, but please avoid ad mulierem attacks on poor Sister Fiedler.  Go after her false ideas and dissent all you want, but don’t descend to the name calling and judgmentalism she applied to any priest who is faithful to the Church’s teachings.

Posted in Our Catholic Identity, The Drill, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged , , , , ,
56 Comments

Are you going to take your children out to look at meteors?

PerseidsAre you going to take your children out to look at meteors?  Think about it.

You can tell them the true story of St. Lawrence and the myth of Perseus as you watch them.

My favorite memory of watching the Tears of St. Lawrence was when I was in my early 20’s and I was in Italy.  I was staying at ancient Cumae.  I went out and lay down on my back in an enormous tomato patch (San Marzano) near the edge of Cumae’s ancient amphitheater.  Zip! Zang!  Zzzzzip!

From Space Weather:

METEOR SHOWER: The Perseid meteor shower is underway. International observers are now reporting more than 20 meteors per hour as Earth passes through a stream of debris from Comet Swift-Tuttle. Forecasters expect the shower to peak on the night of Aug. 12-13.  The best time to look is during the hours before dawn on Saturday morning, August 13th, when the glaring Moon is relatively low and meteor rates are highest.  Visit http://spaceweather.com for full coverage.

WATCH OUT FOR THE SPACE STATION, TOO:  Consider it a cosmic coincidence.   During the peak of the Perseid meteor shower, the International Space Station will fly over many US towns and cities.  The behemoth spacecraft is easy to see if you know when to look.  Check SpaceWeather.com’s Simple Satellite Tracker for flyby times: http://spaceweather.com/flybys/

Posted in Look! Up in the sky! | Tagged ,
4 Comments

Tinker with prayers and you tinker with our Faith.

The excellent Fr. Kirby found some interesting which he posted on his excellent blog Vultus Christi.   Because what he was looking at is in my bailiwick, I represent it here:

The Modification of a Collect

A few days ago, on the feast of Saint Jean-Marie Vianney, the holy Curé of Ars, I preached on the splendid Collect of the day as given in the 1962 Missale Romanum:

Omnipotens et misericors Deus,
qui sanctum Joannem Mariam
pastorali studio
et iugi orationis ac paenitentiae ardore
mirabilem efficisti;
da, quaesumus,
ut eius exemplo et intercessione,
animas fratrum lucrari Christo,
et cum eis aeternae gloriam consequi valeamus.

In English, this becomes:

Almighty and merciful God,
who didst make Saint John Mary wonderful
in his pastoral zeal
and constant prayer and penance,
grant, we beseech Thee,
that by his example and intercession,
we may be able to win the souls of our brethren for Christ,
and together with them attain to glory everlasting.

Later in the day, I had occasion to look at the Collect as it appears in the reformed Missale Romanum, Editio Typica Tertia (2008). Here is the text as given there:

Omnipotens et misericors Deus,
qui sanctum Joannem Mariam
pastorali studio
mirabilem efficisti;
da, quaesumus,
ut eius exemplo et intercessione,
fratres in caritate Christo lucremur,
et cum eis aeternae gloriam consequi valeamus.

In the New English Translation, this same Collect will, as far as I know, appear as:

Almighty and merciful God,
who made the Priest Saint John Vianney
wonderful in his pastoral zeal,
grant, we pray,
that through his intercession and example
we may in charity win brothers and sisters for Christ
and attain with them eternal glory.

Constant Prayer and Penance Deleted

The revised prayer of the 1970 Missal retains only one of the three priestly attributes mentioned in the older prayer, that of pastoral zeal. Constant prayer and penance, the two attributes that sustained Saint John Mary Vianney’s pastoral zeal, are deleted from the 1970 version of the prayer. On the other hand, the phrase in caritate was added to the penultimate phrase of the text.  [I am surprised they didn’t add something about St. John liking puppies and sunsets.]

Pastoral Zeal

If one ascribes to the axiom, “Lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi” it is clear that this manipulation of the Collect has far reaching consequences for one’s understanding of how the priesthood is to be lived out. [That’s right.  And the effect he is talking about is cumulative.  The identity of the priesthood won’t be undermined by this Collect.  The effect is cumulative.] If what matters is “pastoral zeal” above all else, one risks becoming, and rather quickly, “as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.” Constant prayer obtains an inpouring of divine charity; penance makes room for it in the heart. Constant prayer and penance are the context of a pastoral zeal that is supernaturally motivated and not a exercise in clerical narcissism.

Burnout

The post-Conciliar model of the priesthood placed the emphasis on pastoral zeal, while downplaying the importance of constant prayer and penance. [If people don’t sin, why do penance?  Oh, yes.  For structural sin, right?  But then again that would be “protest” not “penance”.] These latter attributes were often dismissed as monastic and, as everyone knows, following the much-quoted worm-eaten old chestnut, “parish priests are not monks!” The difficulty is that pastoral zeal without constant prayer and penance leads to clerical burnout. This is something that I have seen all too often.

The Chicken or the Egg?

I’m left with a question. Did the model of diocesan priesthood change following the liturgical reforms because of the deletions and amendments made to liturgical texts such as the one looked at here? Or were the deletions and amendments to liturgical texts designed to reflect an activistic pastoral vision that had made inroads in the post-war period well before the Second Vatican Council?  [As in the theory of dictionaries… is this Collect descriptive or prescriptive.  The answer is, of course, “Yes.”]

A Revision of the Revised Texts?

I have already suggested elsewhere on Vultus Christi that the New English Translation of the Roman Missal, while a small step in the right direction, is far from being the solution to deeper underlying issues. One must be prudent, lest the popular canonization of the euchological texts in the New English Translation of the Roman Missal, appear to suggest that the said translation, and the Editio Typica from which it was made, are, in some way, flawless vehicles of the continuity of Tradition. Perhaps the Editio Typica Tertia itself needs to be revised and brought into a more generous textual conformity with the 1962 Missale Romanum.

WDTPRS kudos to Fr. Kirby.

Posted in Fr. Z KUDOS, Mail from priests, WDTPRS | Tagged
5 Comments

15 August: Solemn TLM at St. Peter the Apostle Church (Shrine of St. John Neumann) in Philadelphia!

I post this on behalf of my good friend the great Fr. Robert Pasley, who reigns gloriously at Mater Ecclesiae in Berlin, NJ.   Each year they have a great celebration for the Feast of the Assumption.

Here is this year’s information for those of you anywhere within range.  It is always worth the effort.  I am tempted to fly in for the occaston!

From a reader:

Mater Ecclesiae Roman Catholic Church will be celebrating its Tenth Annual Assumption Mass of Thanksgiving on Monday, August 15 at 7:00 pm. Breaking with past tradition, the Mass will not be celebrated in southern New Jersey but at St. Peter the Apostle Church (National Shrine of St. John Neumann) at 1019 N. 5th St. (5th St. & Girard Ave.), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Msgr. George Tomichek will preach the sermon.

Please note that Mass will be celebrated in the upper church (entrance on 5th St.).

(There are three parking lots — two on Lawrence St. and one on 5th St. — which together have space for approximately 250 cars. The church is also accessible to public transportation.)

Mater Ecclesiae will also be celebrating a Solemn Mass at 11:00 am on Sunday, August 14. This will be followed by a potluck dinner and Solemn First Vespers of the Assumption at 2:00 pm.

Posted in The Campus Telephone Pole | Tagged ,
10 Comments

Happy Birthday to Bishop….

Happy Birthday to Bp. Edward Slattery of Tulsa, OK!  His Excellency turned 71.

We have featured His Excellency on this blog several times.  None, however, was more memorable than his stunning sermon at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington D.C. in 2010 sponsored by the Paulus Institute in honor of Pope Benedict’s election as our Sovereign Pontiff..

Bp. Slattery has been trying to revitalize the liturgical worship of the diocese in his care by good writing and ad orientem worship in his cathedral, and fine conferences on liturgical matters.  The FSSP are now there.  The Benedictines at Clear Creek are thriving.  Fr. Mark Kirby of Vultus Christi has something going.  This is what all diocesan bishops can do and he is actually doing it!

WDTPRS kudos to Bp. Slattery and, more importantly, “ad multos annos“!

If you feel like doing something nice for a fine American bishop, how about dropping him a line!  We know he appreciated your thanks after the big Mass in Washington DC.  I’ll bet he’d appreciate a cordial greeting now.  Click here.

Posted in Fr. Z KUDOS, Lighter fare | Tagged , , , ,
8 Comments

Isn’t Croatia famous for Crystal?

I was struck by a couple of stories on CNA, about the ownership of churches.

First, there is a fight over a monastery in Croatia.

Vatican City, Aug 11, 2011 / 11:54 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The Vatican says it is astonished that Croatia’s government has blocked Pope Benedict’s decision to hand back ownership of a Croatian monastery to the Italian Benedictines.

[…]

The disagreement centers on the monastery of Dajla, in northwest Croatia. It is situated in an area that was confiscated from Italy by communist Yugoslavia following the Second World War. The monastery is currently in the control of the local Croatian diocese of Porec and Pula.

Earlier this month the Vatican ruled that the monastery should be given back to the Italian Benedictines, along with a reported 6 million Euros (approximately $8.5 million dollars) in compensation.

But the proposed transfer was blocked by the Croatian Ministry for Justice, which also annulled the entire agreement.

[…]

Strange, so soon after Pope Benedict’s visit to Croatia.

Then there is this.

Garden Grove, Calif., Aug 11, 2011 / 05:59 am (CNA).- The Diocese of Orange upped its previous bid and signaled openness to new negotiations for the Crystal Cathedral after board members recently announced that the building is no longer for sale.

The diocese announced on Aug. 10 that it submitted “a revised non-contingent offer” to purchase the  Crystal Cathedral for $53.6 million cash – instead of $50 million – and gave the current church ministry the option of a 50,000 square foot alternative worship space for up to 15 years.

Bishop Tod D. Brown said in his statement that the diocese wants to accommodate its needs for a new cathedral, while respecting the Crystal Cathedral Ministry and its legacy.

[…]

Perhaps the Diocese of Orange could work something out with the Diocese of Porec and Pula.

Hey… isn’t Croatia famous for crystal?

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged , , ,
15 Comments

Thanks to NCFishwrap for something! (Just for today, okay?)

This may shock you, but I don’t like the National Catholic Reporter… aka Fishwrap.  Better… I don’t like what they do, what they write, what they print.  I like my friend the nearly ubiquitous John Allen, but… for the rest of them….  I might like them too were I to meet them.  But I think they are doing great harm to the Church.  I would like to see their publication entirely reformed or entirely fallen.  They should submit themselves to their spiritual father in Kansas City, MO, where they are located, Bp. Finn, and follow his guidance about their future.  There, I said it.

That said, today I enjoyed enormously a blurb posted by Gerelyn Hollingsworth, who has a little daily blip with some note about a saint of the day, etc.

Here is a portion from her daily portion.  Prepare to be amazed, O ye lovers of all things truly Catholic!

On this day we celebrate the feast of St. Clare.

For some beautiful Latin, click here. It’s the Bull of Canonization of St. Clare of Assisi by Pope Alexander IV, “Given at Anagni, the sixth day before the Calends of October, in the first year of our pontificate.” (1255.)

“CLARA CLARIS PRAECLARA meritis, magnae in caelo claritate gloriae, ac in terra splendore miraculorum sublimium clare claret.”

[…]

Holy cow! That’s lovely Latin.  Latin doing its best imitation of a Hot Fudge Sunday.

I would love to see the rest of the Bull.

No… wait!  It’s right here!

A little more of that Bull… I can’t help it.

Clara claris praeclara meritis, magnae in caelo claritate gloriae, ac in terra splendore miraculorum sublimium clare claret. Clarae huius arcta et alta Religio hic coruscat, huius sursum aeterni praemii radiat magnitudo, huius virtus signis magnificis, mortalibus illucescit. Huic Clarae intitulatum hic fuit summae Privilegium paupertatis; huic in excelso rependitur inaestimabilis copia thesaurorum; huic a catholicis plena devotio et honoris cumulus exhibetur. Hanc Claram sua fulgida hic insignierunt opera, hanc Claram in alto divinae lucis clarificat plenitudo, hanc christianis populis prodigiorum eius stupenda declarant.

I must let you hear this…  listen to the clausulae, the beautiful parallels of structure and the word play.

No one in the Holy See is allowed to write like that anymore.

Sincere thanks to Gerelyn for that excerpt!

And now I switch back to my default position on the Fishwrap until circumstances indicate otherwise.

Posted in Just Too Cool, Lighter fare | Tagged , , ,
20 Comments

Silence… silence… please, God, more silence! Fr. Z rants.

I just sent in a column for The Wanderer.  Here is the first part of what I offered this week.

In his General Audience of 10 August, Pope Benedict spoke about monastic silence, beauty and prayer.  He said,

Silence is the environmental condition that most favors contemplation, listening to God and meditation. The very fact of experiencing silence and allowing ourselves to be “filled,” so to speak, with silence, disposes us to prayer. The great prophet, Elijah, on Mount Horeb – that is, Sinai – experienced strong winds, then an earthquake, and finally flashes of fire, but he did not recognize the voice of God in them; instead, he recognized it in a light breeze (cfr. 1 Rev 19:11-13). God speaks in silence, but we need to know how to listen.

Great for monks and cloistered sisters, right?  If silence is good for them, if silence and beauty is are necessary for their prayer, isolated as they are from the busy, noisy, often ugly outside world, how much more necessary is it that our local parish churches, especially in urban settings, be places of beauty and of silence, helpful for refreshing the souls of those who live an active life of many cares?

Some people can go on retreats in a remote place, such as a monastery, from time to time.  But every time we go to a parish church, to be refreshed and fed, wreathed in mystery of the Presence of God, God truly present in the Eucharist reserved in our tabernacles, we should find the beauty that reflects truth and silence which stills the mind and heart and permits active listening.

In his Post-Synodal Exhortation Sacramentum caritatis 40, Pope Benedict wrote about the “art of celebrating” Holy Mass, ars celebrandi.  He spoke of the furnishings of a church and the need for silence during our liturgical worship.

Equally important for a correct ars celebrandi is an attentiveness to the various kinds of language that the liturgy employs: words and music, gestures and silence, movement, the liturgical colours of the vestments. By its very nature the liturgy operates on different levels of communication which enable it to engage the whole human person. The simplicity of its gestures and the sobriety of its orderly sequence of signs communicate and inspire more than any contrived and inappropriate additions.

Our liturgical English for Holy Mass will be dramatically improving quite soon (at the time of this writing, 3 months and 13 days).  Other issues remain to be addressed.

Too often we see our churches filled with things unworthy of the place, or overly busy with potted plants and various tchotchkes which have accrued to clutter the eyescape and therefore mindscape.  Our spaces are filled with aural litter, in the form of oblivious yakking and ditties amplified to ear-bleed levels.  One of the things people might rightly complain about is the constant relentless unceasing sustained continuous unshakable obdurate nonstop noise during Mass.

In C.S. Lewis’s The Screwtape Letters in Letter 22 the senior-management devil writes in disgust to his apprentice Wormwood about the effects of a holy, calm, and happy Christian household:

The whole house and garden is one vast obscenity. It bears a sickening resemblance to the description one human writer made of Heaven; “the regions where there is only life and therefore all that is not music is silence”.  Music and silence — how I detest them both! How thankful we should be that ever since our Father entered Hell — though longer ago than humans, reckoning in light years, could express — no square inch of infernal space and no moment of infernal time has been surrendered to either of those abominable forces, but all has been occupied by Noise — Noise, the grand dynamism, the audible expression of all that is exultant, ruthless, and virile — Noise which alone defends us from silly qualms, despairing scruples, and impossible desires. We will make the whole universe a noise in the end. We have already made great strides in this direction as regards the Earth. The melodies and silences of Heaven will be shouted down in the end. But I admit we are not yet loud enough, or anything like it. Research is in progress. Meanwhile you, disgusting little  ——  [Here the MS. breaks off and is resumed in a different hand.]  In the heat of composition I find that I have inadvertently allowed myself to assume the form of a large centipede.  I am accordingly dictating the rest to my secretary. …

Screwtape explains that, to distract us humans from what is truly important, they our enemies should create so much noise in our lives that we cannot hear the voice of God.

The Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite is particularly susceptible to this, it seems. Even during simple Masses it seems there is someone constantly talking.

In recent years we have heard and read in liturgical circles more and more pleas for liturgical silence.

The older, traditional, Extraordinary Form can help us review how we celebrate the Ordinary Form in this regard.

Most younger priests and bishops are keenly aware of what our Holy Father Pope Benedict has been writing about and teaching by example.  If we as Catholics can keep our heads above the coming waves over the next decade or so, we will see a tidal change in our liturgical worship and active participation, even if we have become what the Pope has called a “creative minority”, even if our numbers and locations are reduced in number.  “Creative minorities” exert disproportionate influence.  If we Catholics are clear about who we are, what we believe, and who our true King is, we can have a great and beneficial impact in the public square in the future.

The key to our future, is the revitalization of our liturgical worship.

[…]

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill, The future and our choices, Wherein Fr. Z Rants | Tagged , , , , ,
23 Comments