This is our Faith

This is the Faith of the Church.
We are proud to profess it through Christ, our Lord.

"To the glory of God most holy and of our Lord Jesus Christ, trusting in the aid of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of the holy apostles Peter and Paul, for the profit and edification of the Church, in the name of all the pastors and all the faithful, we now pronounce this profession of faith, in full spiritual communion with you all, beloved brothers and sons.

We believe in one only God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, creator of things visible such as this world in which our transient life passes, of things invisible such as the pure spirits which are also called angels,³ and creator in each man of his spiritual and immortal soul.

We believe that this only God is absolutely one in His infinitely holy essence as also in all His perfections, in His omnipotence, His infinite knowledge, His providence, His will and His love. He is He who is, as He revealed to Moses,⁴ and He is love, as the apostle John teaches us:⁵ so that these two names, being and love, express ineffably the same divine reality of Him who has wished to make Himself known to us, and who, "dwelling in light inaccessible"⁶ is in Himself above every name, above every thing and above every created intellect. God alone can give us right and full knowledge of this reality by revealing Himself as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in whose eternal life we are by grace called to share, here below in the obscurity of faith and after death in eternal light. The mutual bonds which eternally constitute the Three Persons, who are each one and the same divine being, are the blessed inmost life of God thrice holy, infinitely beyond all that we can conceive in human measure.⁷ We give thanks, however, to the divine goodness that very many believers can testify with us before men to the unity of God, even though they know not the mystery of the most holy Trinity.

We believe then in the Father who eternally begets the Son, in the Son, the Word of God, who is eternally begotten; in the Holy Spirit, the uncreated Person who proceeds from the Father and the Son as their eternal love. Thus in the Three Divine Persons, coaeternae sibi et coaequales,⁸ the life and beatitude of God perfectly one super-abound and are consummated in the supreme excellence and glory proper to uncreated being, and always "there should be venerated unity in the Trinity and Trinity in the unity."⁹

We believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God. He is the Eternal Word, born of the Father before time began, and one in substance with the Father, homoousios to Patri,¹⁰ and through Him all things were made. He was incarnate of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit, and was made man: equal therefore to the Father according to His divinity, and inferior to the Father according to His humanity;¹¹ and Himself one, not by some impossible confusion of His natures, but by the unity of His person.¹²
He dwelt among us, full of grace and truth. He proclaimed and established the Kingdom of God and made us know in Himself the Father. He gave us His new commandment to love one another as He loved us. He taught us the way of the beatitudes of the Gospel: poverty in spirit, meekness, suffering borne with patience, thirst after justice, mercy, purity of heart, will for peace, persecution suffered for justice sake. Under Pontius Pilate He suffered—the Lamb of God bearing on Himself the sins of the world, and He died for us on the cross, saving us by His redeeming blood. He was buried, and, of His own power, rose on the third day, raising us by His resurrection to that sharing in the divine life which is the life of grace. He ascended to heaven, and He will come again, this time in glory, to judge the living and the dead: each according to his merits—those who have responded to the love and piety of God going to eternal life, those who have refused them to the end going to the fire that is not extinguished.

And His Kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, who is Lord, and Giver of life, who is adored and glorified together with the Father and the Son. He spoke to us by the prophets; He was sent by Christ after His resurrection and His ascension to the Father; He illuminates, vivifies, protects and guides the Church; He purifies the Church's members if they do not shun His grace. His action, which penetrates to the inmost of the soul, enables man to respond to the call of Jesus: Be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect (Mt. 5:48).

We believe that Mary is the Mother, who remained ever a Virgin, of the Incarnate Word, our God and Savior Jesus Christ,¹³ and that by reason of this singular election, she was, in consideration of the merits of her Son, redeemed in a more eminent manner,¹⁴ preserved from all stain of original sin¹⁵ and filled with the gift of grace more than all other creatures.¹⁶
Joined by a close and indissoluble bond to the Mysteries of the Incarnation and Redemption,¹⁷ the Blessed Virgin, the Immaculate, was at the end of her earthly life raised body and soul to heavenly glory¹⁸ and likened to her risen Son in anticipation of the future lot of all the just; and we believe that the Blessed Mother of God, the New Eve, Mother of the Church,¹⁹ continues in heaven her maternal role with regard to Christ's members, cooperating with the birth and growth of divine life in the souls of the redeemed.²⁰

We believe that in Adam all have sinned, which means that the original offense committed by him caused human nature, common to all men, to fall to a state in which it bears the consequences of that offense, and which is not the state in which it was at first in our first parents—established as they were in holiness and justice, and in which man knew neither evil nor death. It is human nature so fallen stripped of the grace that clothed it, injured in its own natural powers and subjected to the dominion of death, that is transmitted to all men, and it is in this sense that every man is born in sin. We therefore hold, with the Council of Trent, that original sin, is transmitted with human nature, "not by imitation, but by propagation" and that it is thus "proper to everyone."²¹

We believe that Our Lord Jesus Christ, by the sacrifice of the cross redeemed us from original sin and all the personal sins committed by each one of us, so that, in accordance with the word of the apostle, "where sin abounded grace did more abound."²²

We believe in one Baptism instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. Baptism should be administered even to little children who have not yet been able to be guilty of any personal sin, in order that, though born deprived of supernatural grace, they may be reborn "of water and the Holy Spirit" to the divine life in Christ Jesus.²³

We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church built by Jesus Christ on that rock which is Peter. She is the Mystical Body of Christ; at the same time a visible society instituted with hierarchical organs, and a spiritual community; the Church on earth, the pilgrim People of God here below, and the Church filled with heavenly blessings; the germ and the first fruits of the Kingdom of God, through which the work and the sufferings of Redemption are continued throughout human history, and which looks for its perfect accomplishment beyond time in glory.²⁴ In the course of time, the Lord Jesus forms His Church by means of the sacraments emanating from His plenitude.²⁵ By these she makes her members participants in the Mystery of the Death and Resurrection of Christ, in the grace of the Holy Spirit who gives her life and movement.²⁶ She is therefore holy, though she has sinners in her bosom, because she herself has no other life but that of grace: it is by living by her life that her members are sanctified; it is by removing themselves from her life that they fall into sins and disorders that prevent the radiation of her sanctity. This is why she suffers and does penance for these offenses, of which she has the power to heal her children through the blood of Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Heiress of the divine promises and daughter of Abraham according to the Spirit, through that Israel whose scriptures she lovingly guards, and whose patriarchs and prophets she venerates; founded upon the apostles and handing on from century to century their ever-living word and their powers as pastors in the successor of Peter and the bishops in communion with him; perpetually assisted by the Holy Spirit, she has the charge of guarding, teaching, explaining and spreading the Truth which God revealed in a then veiled manner by the prophets, and fully by the Lord Jesus. We believe all that is contained in the word of God written or handed down, and that the Church proposes for belief as divinely revealed, whether by a solemn judgment or by the ordinary and universal magisterium.²⁷ We believe in the infallibility enjoyed by the successor of Peter when he teaches ex cathedra as pastor and teacher of all the faithful,²⁸ and which is assured also to the episcopal body when it exercises with him the supreme magisterium.²⁹

We believe that the Church founded by Jesus Christ and for which He prayed is indefectibly one in faith, worship and the bond of hierarchical communion. In the bosom of this Church, the rich variety of liturgical rites and the legitimate diversity of theological and spiritual heritages and special disciplines, far from injuring her unity, make it more manifest.³⁰

Recognizing also the existence, outside the organism of the Church of Christ of numerous elements of truth and sanctification which belong to her as her own and tend to Catholic unity,³¹ and believing in the action of the Holy Spirit who stirs up in the heart of the disciples of Christ love of this unity,³² we entertain the hope that the Christians who are not yet in the full communion of the one only Church will one day be reunited in one flock with one only shepherd.

We believe that the Church is necessary for salvation, because Christ, who is the sole mediator and way of salvation, renders Himself present for us in His body which is the Church.³³ But the divine design of salvation embraces all men, and those who without fault on their part do not know the Gospel of Christ and His Church, but seek God sincerely, and under the influence of grace endeavor to do His will as recognized through the promptings of their conscience, they, in a number known only to God, can obtain salvation.³⁴
We believe that the Mass, celebrated by the priest representing the person of Christ by virtue of the power received through the Sacrament of Orders, and offered by him in the name of Christ and the members of His Mystical Body, is the sacrifice of Calvary rendered sacramentally present on our altars. We believe that as the bread and wine consecrated by the Lord at the Last Supper were changed into His body and His blood which were to be offered for us on the cross, likewise the bread and wine consecrated by the priest are changed into the body and blood of Christ enthroned gloriously in heaven, and we believe that the mysterious presence of the Lord, under what continues to appear to our senses as before, is a true, real and substantial presence.³⁵
Christ cannot be thus present in this sacrament except by the change into His body of the reality itself of the bread and the change into His blood of the reality itself of the wine, leaving unchanged only the properties of the bread and wine which our senses perceive. This mysterious change is very appropriately called by the Church transubstantiation. Every theological explanation which seeks some understanding of this mystery must, in order to be in accord with Catholic faith, maintain that in the reality itself, independently of our mind, the bread and wine have ceased to exist after the Consecration, so that it is the adorable body and blood of the Lord Jesus that from then on are really before us under the sacramental species of bread and wine,³⁶ as the Lord willed it, in order to give Himself to us as food and to associate us with the unity of His Mystical Body.³⁷

The unique and indivisible existence of the Lord glorious in heaven is not multiplied, but is rendered present by the sacrament in the many places on earth where Mass is celebrated. And this existence remains present, after the sacrifice, in the Blessed Sacrament which is, in the tabernacle, the living heart of each of our churches. And it is our very sweet duty to honor and adore in the blessed Host which our eyes see, the Incarnate Word whom they cannot see, and who, without leaving heaven, is made present before us.
We confess that the Kingdom of God begun here below in the Church of Christ is not of this world whose form is passing, and that its proper growth cannot be confounded with the progress of civilization, of science or of human technology, but that it consists in an ever more profound knowledge of the unfathomable riches of Christ, an ever stronger hope in eternal blessings, an ever more ardent response to the love of God, and an ever more generous bestowal of grace and holiness among men. But it is this same love which induces the Church to concern herself constantly about the true temporal welfare of men. Without ceasing to recall to her children that they have not here a lasting dwelling, she also urges them to contribute, each according to his vocation and his means, to the welfare of their earthly city, to promote justice, peace and brotherhood among men, to give their aid freely to their brothers, especially to the poorest and most unfortunate. The deep solicitude of the Church, the Spouse of Christ, for the needs of men, for their joys and hopes, their griefs and efforts, is therefore nothing other than her great desire to be present to them, in order to illuminate them with the light of Christ and to gather them all in Him, their only Savior. This solicitude can never mean that the Church conform herself to the things of this world, or that she lessen the ardor of her expectation of her Lord and of the eternal Kingdom.

We believe in the life eternal. We believe that the souls of all those who die in the grace of Christ—whether they must still be purified in purgatory, or whether from the moment they leave their bodies Jesus takes them to paradise as He did for the Good Thief—are the People of God in the eternity beyond death, which will be finally conquered on the day of the Resurrection when these souls will be reunited with their bodies.
We believe that the multitude of those gathered around Jesus and Mary in paradise forms the Church of Heaven, where in eternal beatitude they see God as He is,³⁸ and where they also, in different degrees, are associated with the holy angels in the divine rule exercised by Christ in glory, interceding for us and helping our weakness by their brotherly care.³⁹

We believe in the communion of all the faithful of Christ, those who are pilgrims on earth, the dead who are attaining their purification, and the blessed in heaven, all together forming one Church; and we believe that in this communion the merciful love of God and His saints is ever listening to our prayers, as Jesus told us: Ask and you will receive.⁴⁰

Thus it is with faith and in hope that we look forward to the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.

Blessed be God Thrice Holy. Amen."

Pope Paul VI

June 30, 1968

***

 The Creedo of the People of God was proclaimed at the close of the Year of Faith, celebrated for the 19th Centenary of the martyrdom of Sts Peter and Paul.

  ***

³ Cf Dz.-Sch. 3002.
⁴ Cf Ep.3:14.
⁵ Cf 1 Jn. 4:8.
⁶ Cf 1 Tim. 6:16.
⁷ Cf Dz.-Sch. 804.
⁸ Cf Dz.-Sch. 75.
⁹ Cf. ibid.
¹⁰ Cf Dz.-Sch. 150.
¹¹ Cf Dz.-Sch.76.
¹² Cf Ibid.
¹³ Cf Dz.-Sch. 251-252.
¹⁴ Cf Lumen Gentium, 53.
¹⁵ Cf Dz.-Sch. 2803.
¹⁶ Cf Lumen Gentium, 53.
¹⁷ Cf Lumen Gentium, 53, 58, 61.
¹⁸ Cf Dz.-Sch. 3903.
¹⁹ Cf Lumen Gentium, 53, 58, 61, 63; Cf Paul VI, Alloc. for the Closing of the Third Session of the Second Vatican Council: AAS LVI [1964] 1016; Cf. Exhort. Apost. Signum Magnum, Introd.
²⁰ Cf Lumen Gentium, 62; cf Paul VI, Exhort. Apost. Signum Magnum, p 1, n. 1.
²¹ Cf Dz.-Sch. 1513.
²² Cf Rom. 5:20.
²³ Cf Dz.-Sch. 1514.
²⁴ Cf. Lumen Gentium, 8, 5.
²⁵ Cf Lumen Gentium, 7, 11.
²⁶ Cf Sacrosanctum Concilium, 5, 6; cf Lumen Gentium, 7, 12, 50.
²⁷ Cf Dz.-Sch. 3011.
²⁸ Cf Dz.-Sch. 3074.
²⁹ Cf Lumen Gentium, 25.
³⁰ Cf. Lumen Gentium, 23; cf Orientalium Ecclesiarum 2, 3, 5, 6.
³¹ Cf Lumen Gentium, 8.
³² Cf Lumen Gentium, 15.
³³ Cf Lumen Gentium, 14.
³⁴ Cf Lumen Gentium, 16.
³⁵ Cf Dz.-Sch. 1651.
³⁶ Cf Dz.-Sch. 1642,1651-1654; Paul VI, Enc. Mysterium Fidei.
³⁷ Cf S.Th.,111,73,3.
³⁸ Cf 1 Jn. 3:2; Dz.-Sch. 1000.
³⁹ Cf Lumen Gentium, 49.
⁴⁰ Cf Lk. 10:9-10; Jn. 16:24.

plea for reverence

As some of them are still aware, I still check out what the Tumblr Catholics are up to every now and then.
So, a shout out to all of you; you're all, always, in my prayers.

Scrolling down Jess' tumblog, I cam across this post from a convert who is in the RCIA program; her name is Olivia. I've just copy-pasted the Original Post here. Since all my block quotes are italicised, I have changed what Olivia had in italics to this font instead.

Please, please, please heed what she's saying. Please. For the love of God. No, really, for the Love of God Incarnate, under the form of Bread.

I’ve been sitting here for a good 5 minutes trying to think of a good way to lead into what I want to talk about….I’ve come to the conclusion that there is no easy way to say this.
We, as a people, as a Catholic people, are irreverent towards the blessed Sacrament. We are irreverent towards JESUS. I know what you’re thinking. Olivia, you’re not even Catholic yet, what could you possibly know about the Eucharist. 
Well I will tell you what I know. I know that Jesus IS the Eucharist. I know that when I wake up on Sunday morning (or any morning I get to go to Mass) I’m going to a celebration. I’m going to experience the meeting of Heaven and Earth. I’m going to witness the most intimate of all encounters with Christ. I’m going to be in the presence of Jesus Christ, my friend, my savior, my love, my Father, my everything.
What is it that people don’t understand? It is physically painful for me at Mass to watch SO MANY people casually walk through the communion line, casually receive the Eucharist, casually consume it, and casually walk back to their seats. RECEIVING THE EUCHARIST IS NOT SOMETHING TO BE DONE CASUALLY. Do you realize that when you walk in that procession you are walking towards the living God? The creator of you, of the universe? You are walking towards He who suffered for you. He who weeped for your soul. He who gave his life so you could live more abundantly?!
Please, my dear friends, I am begging you, think about that next time you go to Mass. It is not your priest saying to you “body of Christ” it is Jesus offering his body to you just as he offered it to the disciples at the Last Supper.
I fear for the day we answer for our irreverence  Again I beg you, spend time contemplating the Real Presence. I pray that it is your prayer for the Eucharist to become as real to you as your priest standing before you. Realize my brothers and sisters that when you go into a Church you are in the literal presence of Jesus Christ.
Heavenly Father, who is an endless font of Mercy, look upon your people with compassion and love. Help all of us to become aware of the reality of the Eucharist and of your REAL PRESENCE. Help each one of us to grow in reverance towards your most Holy body and blood.

[original post, here]

Other Tumblr Catholics you should check out:

• Callum @ Catholic Splash
• Niko @ Niko's Nature
• Q @ Intellect & Romance
• Phillip @ Grace & Caffeine
• Catholic Soul @ Totus Tuus
• All About Mary
• Jean @ Signum Crucis

Quotes of the Now

We are all called to be faithful mystical spouses of our Lord Jesus Christ. Every sin therefore is an adulteration against our Beloved who is always faithful and always loving; even when abandoned and cheated upon time and time again. O my Beloved, forgive me, embrace me!

Callum Martin

And it is surely unreasonable to attack the doctrine of the Trinity as a piece of bewildering mysticism, and then to ask men to worship a being who is ninety million persons in one God, neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.

-GK Chesterton, Heretics
via Niko's Nature

 

The Church of the Meek

Hat Tip: The Catholic Breadbox

It will be hard-going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek … The process will be long and wearisome as was the road from the false progressivism on the eve of the French Revolution – when a bishop might be thought smart if he made fun of dogmas and even insinuated that the existence of God was by no means certain … But when the trial of this sifting is past, a great power will flow from a more spiritualized and simplified Church. Men in a totally planned world will find themselves unspeakably lonely. If they have completely lost sight of God, they will feel the whole horror of their poverty. Then they will discover the little flock of believers as something wholly new. They will discover it as a hope that is meant for them, an answer for which they have always been searching in secret.


And so it seems certain to me that the Church is facing very hard times. The real crisis has scarcely begun. We will have to count on terrific upheavals. But I am equally certain about what will remain at the end: not the Church of the political cult, but the Church of faith. She may well no longer be the dominant social power to the extent that she was until recently; but she will enjoy a fresh blossoming and be seen as man’s home, where he will find life and hope beyond death.

--Pope Benedict XVI, predicting our current situation back in 1969 

How to become a Saint. (Desire it!)

Lord, please, please, give me the desire to become a Saint.
Please let me want to desire to be a Saint.
Jesus, who commands me to be holy,
Set me apart for you.
Make me desire to give you all that I have
all that I am
all that I think
and feel
and love.
Be my only love, oh Sweet Jesus!

You, who are my merciful Saviour, it is You that I beg:
Allow me to dwell forever in Your Most Amiable Heart.
Keep me there, close to you, for all eternity.
Sanctify me; live in me so that I can live in You;
Wash me and fill me with your love.
Protect me from Your enemy and mine.

Jesus, hear my prayer! Listen to me, Lord!
Now, oh my Jesus, and forever, my Beloved.
You are my Beloved and I am yours:
be my vision, my stronghold, my strength, my physician.
I love you. Make me love you more.
I want to be a Saint: make me desire You more.
Lord I believe: help my unbelief.

And I pray the prayer of the Dying Thief.

Wish List

You know how some girls have a list of everything they'd like in their ideal husband?
Well, the guy Whom I want to have a spousal relationship with is perfect.

This is my list of things that I think would ideally express my relationship to Him, lived within a Community.

• Habits
• Adoration
• All the Hours of the Church
• Silence
• Study
• Daily Adoration
• Daily Mass
• Daily Rosary
• Strict following of the Rule
• Saints in that Order
• Penance
• Use of Latin
• Some Active Apostolate
• 
  

Caritas in Veritate

(Or, "My Need For an Editor: not the encyclical.")

So, to lay the ground work here, I really admire Niko's zeal for defending the Faith. I think that his love for Christ, and his willingness to speak about Him ought to be commended. I also want to encourage Niko in his formaiton.

There was something he posted recently which said a few things which were not quite in line with Church teaching, it reminded me of how much I need to go through and read what I've written before I post it.

The first thing was this:

It quotes the Catholic Encyclopedia written in 1913 well before Vatican II.  Thus, it describes the old Catholic faith, not the current one.

I don't think that Niko meant this to sound as though there was a "pre-Vatican II" Faith and a "post-CVatican II" one.
But just incase people thought that's what was being said, let me make this very, very clear:
If there were an 'old Faith, an old Belief (which I'm distinguishing from 'belief,' for now), and old Church, nbte new one would be illigitamate, and, frankly, wrong.

But there was no break in the Church, in Her Belief, in the Faith about the middle of the 20th Century. In fact, there has not been one ever.

What I believe Niko meant to express was the development in theological thought that has happened since 1913.

The other thing which Niko said in the same post, which I don't think he meant to say, was

Also, Abraham if he existed would date back to around 1,800 BC...

Abraham, father of Issac and grandfather of Jacob (who became Israel) was alive on earth. To deny that would be to deny the promises of Our Lord God to him and, thus, to the people Israel and, eventually, to us.

The point of this post: I tend to write things (like this post, for example) and not edit them before I send them out to the interwebs (again, like this post.)

A Pro-Life Defense of Truth, by sword-meets-rose

Pro-life advocates argue that elective abortion unjustly takes the life of a defenseless human being. In support of this conclusion, pro-lifers cite both scientific and philosophic evidence. Nonetheless, some people ignore the evidence pro-life advocates present and argue for abortion based on self-interest. That is the lazy way out. If we care about truth, we will courageously follow the facts wherever they lead. But there are pitfalls. Here are five common mistakes people make arguing for abortion

Mistake #1: Confuse objective claims with subjective ones (or confuse claims about ice cream with claims about truth).

When pro-life advocates say that abortion is morally wrong because it takes the life of a defenseless child, they are making a particular type of claim. Specifically, they are making a moral claim about the rightness or wrongness of abortion.

Many people, however, misconstrue the kind of claim the pro-lifer is making in order to respond to one they like better. Consider the following responses to the statement, Abortion is morally wrong.

• “That’s just your view.”

[...]

• “Don’t force your morality on me.”

[...]

1) Relativism is self-refuting—it commits intellectual suicide. [...]

2) It is impossible for a moral relativist to say that anything is wrong, including intolerance. [...]

3) It is impossible to live as a moral relativist.
[...]

• “I’m personally opposed to abortion, but I still think it should be legal.”

[...]

Mistake #2: Attack the person rather than refute the argument. (Ad hominem fallacy)
[...]

Mistake #3 : Assume what you are trying to prove.

[...]

Mistake #4: Confuse functioning as a person with being a person.


[...]

Mistake #5: Disguise your true position by appealing to the hard cases.

[...]

VI. Summary and Conclusion:

[...]

The whole thing is availiable here.
(source and author)

Duty of a Christian

Deo Gratias! Brave Bishop in Malta.

Praised be to God for Bsp Grech of the diocese of Gozo in Malta.

Here is copypasta from CatholicCulture.org:

Malta: bishop says dissenting Catholics should not receive Communion

  May 20, 2011

Preaching less than two weeks before a nationwide referendum on the legalization of divorce, the head of one of Malta’s two dioceses said that dissenting Catholics should not receive Holy Communion.
“Beware of the wolf in sheep’s clothing. And the wolf is now saying he is Catholic,” said Bishop Mario Grech of Gozo in what Maltese journalists describe as a reference to a pro-divorce Catholic organization. “This is a falsity, this is deceit. I am ready to dialogue with everyone but do not be false, do not lie … If you are not in communion with Christ’s teachings, you are not in communion with the Church and you cannot receive Communion.”
“To be politically correct and not tell things as they are will lead us to be sorry,” he added. “There are the brigands among us who are utilizing every means possible to lead the flock astray. They are going after marriage, and then other things will follow.”
During his April 2010 apostolic journey to Malta, Pope Benedict urged the nation’s citizens to defend the indissolubility of marriage.
“Your nation should continue to stand up for the indissolubility of marriage as a natural institution as well as a sacramental one, and for the true nature of the family, just as it does for the sacredness of human life from conception to natural death and for the proper respect owed to religious freedom in ways that bring authentic integral development to individuals and society,” he said upon arriving in the nation.

For the Record

Peter is being ripped to sheds over the Morris affair.

Both Peters: the Editor and the Sheopherd.

The following is an aCatholica comentary on the editorial published in this week's Record [in black] (the Catholic newspaper for the Archdiocese of Perth) with my own [comments] and emphases.

The removal by Pope Benedict of Bishop William Morris from the diocese that had been placed into his care for the Catholic faith in 1993 has been major news throughout the Catholic world over the last fortnight.

An irony here is that nobody -- either from supporters or detractors -- is sucked in by any suggestion that this was a voluntary process or, as officially stated, an 'early retirement'. This was an offer he couldn't refuse. [Three things. 1) That's not what irony is. 2) I think you'll find that "The Holy Father removed Bishop William M. Morris from the pastoral care of the diocese of Toowoomba, Australia." (VIS news, May 2nd).  3) You're making it sound as though he didn't have any choice in the matter at all; he had lots.]

While the removal was almost unprecedented in Australia, it not-so-surprisingly illuminated fault lines within the Church which all reasonably well-informed observers have known about for decades. To use somewhat technical language, the fault-line is sometimes described as the one which runs between the hermeneutic of continuity on the one hand and a mentality which can be described, on the other, as a hermeneutic of discontinuity. [Guess who holds which.]

Good to set these things out from the get-go just in case the reader might be inclined to think that any concerns about the 'removal' [removal not 'removal'] are reasonable. [What? I'm not sure how this comment and paragraph go together...]

At the end of the day, however, the issue under debate was the simple fact that in the Catholic Church every Bishop, a successor to the apostles, is obliged by sacred oath to teach what the Catholic Church teaches - period. [As Fr Z is prone to saying, 'Do I hear an 'Amen!'?']

The hermeneutic of continuity is an outlook which sees the history of the Church from Christ up until now as an organic and constantly developing unity which takes into account the person and teachings of Christ, Scripture, two millennia of Catholic faith and practice and the defined body of teaching called the magisterium. It accepts as a matter of faith that some things can’t change, no matter what the popular view such as, for example, the belief in Christ’s divinity.

Again, setting out the territory. What's to come is to be seen as important as the belief in Christ's divinity. [Not quite what Peter said. It seems more to be a reference to earlier, more famous herisies.]

Such things are, in effect, the constellations in the night sky by which the ordinary Catholic man or woman can safely navigate because they do not change position. [Safely because the Church holds "the totality or fullness of the means of salvation," (Ad Gentes 6) "she proclaims the fullness of the faith" (CCC 868)]
The hermeneutic of discontinuity, conversely, is more a mentality that tends to regard much of the Church prior to the Second Vatican Council as somehow deficient and which seeks to obscure, change or reverse some or much Church teaching, not excluding the dogmatically defined magisterium, usually in matters to do with the sanctity of human life and gender, but also extending to issues such as ecclesiology, liturgy, and in specific instances such as the ordination of women. [A good definition, imo.] It usually seeks to do so in accord with moral relativism and the values predominantly to be found in popular culture. It often confuses the individual sinfulness or failings of members of the Church throughout history with the actual faith of the Church.

Ah! Moral Relativism! Will we see how this much used rhetorical weapon applies here? [Oh noes! That phrase that they always use!! People might start thinking they use it for a reason; quick let's use a rhetorical question with the word rhetorical in it! (This is irony.)]

One mentality is informed by two millennia of constant belief and practice, often heroically witnessed to by martyrdom, the other by the mass media and the fashionable theories that abound in our culture.

Such a withering critique! Does it have anything to do with this issue? [Yes. Everything.]

On the side of the essential unity of Church belief and teaching from Christ up until the present is Pope Benedict; on the side of changing Church teaching and practice to suit some values of majority opinion, sadly, was Bishop Morris.

Note, just in case you missed it, 'majority opinion' is used in a perjorative sense. Did you pick that up? [What's that? Peter the Editor thinks that being Catholic involves sideing with the Pope? How terrible!!]

The arguments surrounding the dismissal of Bishop Morris are therefore also about ecclesiology, which is to say they are about the Church: among these being questions such as what is the Church, who constitutes it, who has authority to define what are the essential beliefs which distinguish Christianity, especially Catholicism, from other beliefs and philosophies and who, if anyone, has the power to change Church teaching? This is why the arguments surrounding the dismissal of Bishop Morris are fundamental in nature; they are neither irrelevant nor obscure. They also have direct consequences for Catholic youth, for Catholic marriages, and for Catholic family life.

Stretch that bow, editor! Why not include climate change for good measure! [Because what Bsp Morris wrote had very little to do with climate change and a lot to do with "Catholic youth ... Catholic marriages, and ...Catholic family life."]

Although he is undoubtedly a good man and shares much in common with fellow members of the Church, Bishop Morris’ first problem was that he didn’t understand that. [Evidence that this is a charitable piece on Peter's part.]
The problem for Bishop Morris, in the end, was that given the two positions he had to make a choice - his way or the Catholic Church way.

Popularly depicted as 'my way or the highway'. [Yup. But better said as "How about you reconsider your position on these topics; your current position is quite contrary to what Christ has taught us and therefore not inline with your role. If you continue in this manner, you may be liable for false advertising."]

The problem for the Church was how to handle a Bishop well down the road in effectively promoting what might now reasonably be called heresy in his diocese.

Just as 'moral relativism', thrown in without justification, it's an odds-on certainty in this sort of writing that you can always count on 'heresy'.[I want to comment about how this sentence doesn't even make sense, but I won't. Instead, I'll assume that you mean that the use of the terms 'moral relativism' and 'heresy' are both and equally unjustified. 'Moral relativism' fits so unbelievably well that ... you don't believe it. 'Heresy' fits IFF (if and only if) Bsp Morris said or taught against anything difinitavely defined by the Church. He did, at least implicitly, on at least one occasion. (See link to the Pastoral Letter below.)]  No one, who has has any recognisable authority in the church, has suggested +Morris preached heresy, but why let that stop you? You're on a roll, there are certain things you have to say, certain nuts that need sledgehammers. [This is irony.]

As The Australian’s columnist Christopher Pearson (also a convert to Catholicism) wrote shortly after the story broke, Bishop Morris had already sown consternation in his diocese with his 2006 pastoral letter. [Again, see below for this.] Seeking comment on how to respond to a shortage of priestly vocations in the diocese of Toowoomba, the Bishop canvassed possibilities including the ordination of women priests and recognising the validity of Anglican, Lutheran and Uniting Church Orders. [It's funny how there were almost no vocations to the priesthood while he had the 'pastoral care' of the the diocese.] He did this although he should have known that the Church had already definitively ruled these out.

'Canvassed possibilities'!? [Yup. vexilla regis has the full original Pastoral Letter from 2006 here.]

In 1994, Pope John Paul II declared authoritatively as the Vicar of Christ in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis that the Church had no power to ordain women priests. A year later, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, under the future Pope Benedict XVI, clarified John Paul II’s teaching as 'to be held definitively as belonging to the deposit of faith.'

Like 'Christ's divinity' you mean? [What are you saying about Our Lord's divinity? Why 'Christ's divinity' and not Christ's divinity? Because, yeah, pretty much "likeChrist's divinity" in that it's not going to be changed.]  So now we not only have 'creeping infallibility' but 'anticipatory infallibility'? [Kate at Australia Incognita has a good exposition of the notion of 'creeping infalibility' here. As for 'anticipatory infallibility,' I'm not even sure what that's supposed to mean, given the broad meaning of the former phrase.]

Official Church teachings and various statements on the validity or otherwise of the Orders of other Christian denominations are numerous, date back centuries and were, in some instances, reaffirmed by the CDF (under the future Pope Benedict XVI) as recently as 1998 as definitive. To suppose that such teachings could be dropped or changed by the Church was never anything more than mere fantasy. [As the Chaplain at NDFreo said today "Ah, come one! You think you can change the Great Holy Mother Church? You must be dreaming!] And whether critics were in a majority or a minority in the diocese of Toowoomba is immaterial. The truth of the Gospel never depends on numbers.

Which is why a phrase like 'sown consternation in his diocese' needs no evidence let alone counter-evidence. [Even if it was only sworn in the mind and heart of one of his sheep, it is too much. (Cf. Mt 18:6, Mk 9:42, Lk 17:2)]

Bishop Morris has been portrayed (not surprisingly) by organisations such as the National Council of Priests of Australia as the innocent and unjustly treated victim of a dogmatic, pharisaical mindset under Pope Benedict and Rome (the usual conspiracy theory in the NCPA world of billabong theology where no fresh water appears to have flowed in since 1968).

Never underestimate the power of parenthesis! [They are really handy for adding information to your sentence that is not needed (but can be helpful by means of clarification.)] [Again, this is irony.]

But as reported in this edition of The Record he was actually treated with the utmost delicacy, discretion and respect by two Popes and three Vatican dicasteries. He was given more than ten years to resolve the issues and, remaining immovable, still stubbornly resisted repeated requests for his resignation.

How do you know that? Where's the record? How can you verify such speculation about how he was treated and how he responded? You can't. You (like the rest of us) just 'assume' and 'speculate' in a way that satisfies what you thought all along.[Have you even done any reading about the issue? There's plenty of information about it out there. *See UPDATE at the bottom of this post.] In the best of Western democratic tradtiions that is far from good enough. [It's a good thing that the Church is not a democarcy, isn't it?]

One other problem seems to have eluded Bishop Morris. Catholic spouses and families everywhere face an unprecedented onslaught against their faith, their values and their children from a modern anti-culture predicated on the idea that there are really no more moral rules and no real consequences: one should do whatever one wants.

AKA the dreaded 'moral relativism' in another name. [Yup.]

As the simple people of faith ...

Do you believe this? [Don't you?]

... do their best to lead the at-times difficult Christian life of fidelity to Jesus and everything He taught, they do not need bishops who will obscure the way or who become obstacles to the heroic vocation of Christian marriage and family. In fact, they are, sadly, better off without them. One might say that they need a Bishop who can be a rock. One of the two Bishops at the heart of this controversy is undoubtedly that.

Who was the other guy? I guess that's a secret too. [Hardly, 'the other guy' is the successor to Peter, the Rock.]

UPDATE (kinda): The Record has stories here and here which outline some of the sources of info that they have. Also, seriously, just read around a bit.

Weird Backwards Cult.

Link here to a comment that I fully agree with on Fr Z's What Does the Prayer Really Say?
I went to and EF Mass today.
thatisall.

Passiontide and the Fast

This previous post of mine is a place to start Passiontide reflections, if you want.

thatisall

Catholicism: You're doing it wrong.

Statue of Gandhi at Boston College's School of Theology and Ministry

There is a link attached to this post of The Vortex episode for the 8th of April. It's on how not to be Catholic.
Only watch it if you have a strong stomach. It is actually sickening.

Much, much more sickening than the video that you can find here.<-- that video, btw, is Cazza's favourtive clip ever. Everytime she goes on a YouTube binge, this clip comes up. I think that 9 or the 10 million views are hers. That's all.

Because Silence Is Not Golden. It's Yellow.*

 

A clip from Real Catholic TV's

The Vortex with Michael Voris

on being a faithful Catholic

RealCathoicTV is a YouTube Channel that I wholesale recommend.
Seriously, go watch all of the clips there.

*The title of this post is the tag-line of one of my favourite blogs The Last Papist Standing, another place you should check out.