Blog Posts

The Sacraments of Initiation

12/26/2017

Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen says that our Lord has a “divine sense of humor” because he revealed the universe was sacramental, in that it possesses both a visible and an invisible aspect. The visible can be seen, tasted or touched but the invisible can only be perceived with eyes of faith (2 Cor 5: 7). The universe is full of signs that point to God, full of what might be termed “poetry,” and it is a sin to turn it into prose, refusing to recognize the deity in his words and works. Just as Christ used his human nature as the instrument of divinity and used material things as signs and symbols of the reconciliation he offered, so he now employs other human natures and material things for the communication of the same divine life through the sacraments.[1]

Christ gave us three beautiful sacraments of initiation into himself, namely, Baptism, Confirmation and Eucharist. The early Church Fathers were well aware of the relationship between Baptism and Eucharist, seeing in the latter a more complete incorporation into the death and resurrection of Christ. As Pope John Paul II has written, “The Eucharist is indelibly marked by the event of the Lord's passion and death, of which it is not only a reminder but the sacramental re-presentation.”[2] The pierced side of Christ was a reminder of these two sacraments of initiation, with the water being a symbol of Baptism and the blood, a sign of our redemption in Christ. Baptism raises us “to the dignity of the royal priesthood,” Confirmation configures us more closely to Christ, and the Eucharist gives us the great privilege of participating in the “Lord’s own sacrifice.”[3]

I. The Eucharist: Source and Summit of Ecclesial Life
The Savior instituted the Eucharistic sacrifice of his Body and Blood at the Last Supper:
in order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the Cross throughout the centuries until He should come again, and so to entrust to His beloved spouse, the Church, a memorial of His death and resurrection: a sacrament of love, a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a paschal banquet in which Christ is eaten, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us.”[4]

The Eucharist is the Body, Blood, soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ and an anticipation of eternal glory.[5] The sacrifice of the cross is eternal and applies to all men until the Second Coming of the Lord.

The Eucharist is a pure offering, a sacrifice of thanksgiving and praise. It is a gift from the Father for he handed his Son over to sinners in order to reconcile us with himself and it is the free love offering of his life by the Son through the Holy Spirit in reparation for our disobedience.[1] The bread became Christ’s Body, when at the Last Supper he said, “This is my body which is given up for you. Do this in memory of me” (Lk 22: 19). By consuming the Eucharist in the divine liturgy, the once for all sacrifice of Christ, symbolized by the broken bread, we enter into communion and form one body in him. “Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread” (1 Cor 10: 17). The Holy Eucharist is as St. Augustine wrote, sacramentum unitatis ecclesiae and when we receive his Body, we are nourished and strengthened “by a divine, ineffable bond are united with each other and with the Divine Head of the whole Body.”[2] St. John Chrysostom explains:

For what is the bread? It is the body of Christ. And what do those who receive it become? The Body of Christ – not many bodies but one body. For as bread is completely one, though made of up many grains of wheat, and these, albeit unseen, remain nonetheless present, in such a way that their difference is not apparent since they have been made a perfect whole, so too are we mutually joined to one another and together united with Christ.[3]

When the words of Christ are spoken by the priest during the Holy Mass along with the epiclesis, the bread and wine become the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. The whole Christ is truly, really and substantially contained therein. “This presence is called ‘real’ not to exclude the idea that the others (e.g., Christ’s presence in the bishops) are ‘real’ too, but rather to indicate presence par excellence, because it is substantial and through it Christ becomes present whole and entire, God and man.”[4] The mode of Christ’s presence is unique. It raises the Eucharist above all the sacraments as “the perfection of the spiritual life and the end to which all the sacraments tend.”[5] The Holy Eucharist is the “Sacrament of sacraments’ to which all the others are ordered “as to their end.”[6]

[1] CCC, 2643 and 614.

[2] Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi, 19. St. Cyprian also referred to the Eucharist as “the sacrament of unity” in his great work ecclesiae catholicae unitate, 6-7 according to Enrico Mazza, The Celebration of the Eucharist: The Origin of the Rite and the Development of its Interpretation (Collegeville: Liturgical press, 1999), p. 131.

[3] In Epistolam I ad Corinthios Homiliae, 24, 2: PG 61, 200 quoted in EE, 23.

[4] Pope Paul VI, Mysterium Fidei, 39. Hereafter cited as MF.

[5] CCC, 1374.

[6] CCC, 1211.

[1] Fulton J. Sheen, These are the Sacraments, New York: Hawthorn Books, 1962, online version at http://www.ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/SACRAMEN.TXT.

[2] Pope John Paul II, Ecclesia Eucharista, 11. Hereafter cited as EE.

[3] Catechism of the Catholic Church (Rome: Vatican, 2nd Edition, 1997), 1322. Hereafter cited as CCC.

[4] Sacrosanctum Concilium, 47. Hereafter cited as SC.

[5] CCC, 1402.

St. Augustine on the Bible

5/16/2017

The Mighty Augustine and the Bible:
from Pope Leo XII in Providentissimus Deus

“. . . the rule so wisely laid down by St. Augustine-not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires;(40) a rule to which it is the more necessary to adhere strictly in these times, when the thirst for novelty and unrestrained freedom of thought make the danger of error most real and proximate. Neither should those passages be neglected which the Fathers have understood in an allegorical or figurative sense, more especially when such interpretation is justified by the literal, and when it rests on the authority of many. For this method of interpretation has been received by the Church from the Apostles, and has been approved by her own practice, as the holy Liturgy attests; (PD 15)

"On my part I confess to your charity that it is only to those Books of Scripture which are now called canonical that I have learned to pay such honor and reverence as to believe most firmly that none of their writers has fallen into any error. And if in these Books I meet anything which seems contrary to truth, I shall not hesitate to conclude either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand."( Ep. lxxxii., i. et crebrius alibi.)

Wherefore, as no one should be so presumptuous as to think that he understands the whole of the Scripture, in which St. Augustine himself confessed that there was more that he did not know, than that he knew,( ad lanuar. ep. lv., 21) so, if he should come upon anything that seems incapable of solution, he must take to heart the cautious rule of the same holy Doctor: "It is better even to be oppressed by unknown but useful signs, than to interpret them uselessly and thus to throw off the yoke only to be caught in the trap of error. "( De door. chr. iii., 9, 18.)

….as St. Augustine warns us, "not to make rash assertions, or to assert what is not known as known."(51) If dissension should arise between them, here is the rule also laid down by St. Augustine, for the theologian: "Whatever they can really demonstrate to be true of physical nature, we must show to be capable of reconciliation with our Scriptures; and whatever they assert in their treatises which is contrary to these Scriptures of ours, that is to Catholic faith, we must either prove it as well as we can to be entirely false, or at all events we must, without the smallest hesitation, believe it to be so."(52) To understand how just is the rule here formulated we must remember, first, that the sacred writers, or to speak more accurately, the Holy Ghost "Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the visible universe), things in no way profitable unto salvation."(53) Hence they did not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather described and dealt with things in more or less figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordinary speech primarily and properly describes what comes under the senses; and somewhat in the same way the sacred writers-as the Angelic Doctor also reminds us - `went by what sensibly appeared,"(54) or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the way men could understand and were accustomed to.

"Those," he says, "who are zealous in the work of preaching must never cease the study of the written word of God."(20) St. Augustine, however, warns us that "vainly does the preacher utter the Word of God exteriorly unless he listens to it interiorly;"

the "examination of older tongues,"(30) to quote St. Augustine, will be useful and advantageous. But in this matter we need hardly say that the greatest prudence is required, for the "office of a commentator," as St. Jerome says, "is to set forth not what he himself would prefer, but what his author says."

This is inculcated by St. Jerome, and still more frequently by St. Augustine, who thus justly complains: "If there is no branch of teaching, however humble and easy to learn, which does not require a master, what can be a greater sign of rashness and pride than to refuse to study the Books of the divine mysteries by the help of those who have interpreted them?"

But he must not on that account consider that it is forbidden, when just cause exists, to push inquiry and exposition beyond what the Fathers have done; provided he carefully observes the rule so wisely laid down by St. Augustine-not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires;(40) a rule to which it is the more necessary to adhere strictly in these times, when the thirst for novelty and unrestrained freedom of thought make the danger of error most real and proximate

St. Clement of Alexandria

2/13/2017

St. Clement of Alexandria (150-216 A.D.)

Titus Flavius Clemens, St. Clement of Alexandria was probably born a pagan in Athens about 150 A.D. He was one of the first great leaders in Christian Africa. After his conversion, he traveled to Italy, Syria and Palestine seeking Christian teachers. He met a most impressive one by the name of Pantaenus in Alexandria, became his pupil, associate and succeeded him as the head of a school for catechumens (converts) by 200 A.D.

He speaks of the apostolic tradition he received his teachers. He had no doubt, known some who recalled Ignatius and Polycarp or perhaps, even some who as children had heard St. John speak of our Lord's commands. He could claim to be in the next succession after the apostles.
Principal works comprise a trilogy focused upon Christ and this threefold relationship with the believer. He converts the heart/mind, disciplines and then imparts wisdom. His focus is upon Christ the Incarnate Word, whom he sees at work in the depths of our souls, leading us toward the moment of encounter in His divinizing presence.

He sees all the values the Greeks held dear, in mythology, philosophy and their mystery cults, fulfilled in Christ, who is the true mystagogue and the dispenser of wisdom. He see Christ as the ministrel who gives harmony to the universe and makes music to God. He sees the divine Word as the Sun of Righteousness enlightening the whole world. He urges converts to resist the siren call of pleasure and cling instead to the wood of the Cross in order to be freed from corruption. Cardinal Dulles in his book, A History of Apologetics, says, “he is above all a Christian humanist, who moves easily amid the arts and letters of classical civilization combining Christian piety with the highest values of ancient culture” (p. 41).

He has two quotations in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

“Just as God’s will is creation and is called ‘the world,’ so his intention is the salvation of men, and is called ‘the Church.’” (CCC 760)
Speaking of the principle of the Church’s unity: “What an astonishing mystery! There is one Father of the universe, one Logos of the universe, and also one Holy Spirit, everywhere one and the same; there is also one virgin become mother, and I should like to call her ‘Church.” (CCC 813)
The Blood of our Lord, indeed is twofold. There is His corporeal Blood, by which we are redeemed from corruption; and His spiritual Blood, that with which we are anointed. That is to say, to drink the Blood of Jesus is to share in His immortality . The strength of the Word is the Spirit, just as the blood is the strength of the body. Similarly, as wine is blended with water, so the Spirit with man. The one, the Watered Wine, nourishes in faith, while the other, the Spirit, leads us on to immortality. The union of both, however,--of the drink and of the Word,--is called the Eucharist, a praiseworthy and excellent gift. Those who partake of it in faith are sanctified in body and in soul. By the will of the Father, the divine mixture, man, is mystically united to the Spirit and the Word.

A persecution by Roman Emperor Septimius Severus in about 203 forced him to close the school and flee to Egypt. His writings are the first to discuss the relationship between faith and reason. His great treatises constitute a moral and dogmatic theology as well as an apologetic (defense) of the faith. He died in Cappadocia between 211-215 A.D.

The Cocoon: A Commentary on the Gospel of Luke 16: 19-31

10/20/2016

This post is a homily on the Gospel for September 25, 2016, which is the parable concerning the treatment of the beggar St. Lazarus and the rich man, who died and went to his just punishment as a result of failing to show compassion and help Lazarus while he lived (Luke 16: 19-31). The homily is by Fr. Joseph Cisetti.

                                                  THE COCOON

          One of the many wonders of nature is a cocoon. A caterpillar, a worm like creature that crawls upon the ground encloses itself in a type of tomb and then emerges transformed and flies through the air. We rightly see that as a type of death and resurrection.

          An image for the Gospel today is that of a cocoon but it is a different type of a cocoon. Rather than a transformation into beauty, there is a deformation into misery that takes place. The Gospel never says that this rich man committed an atrocity or killed anyone, but it is as if he is closed in on himself. Perhaps without being fully aware of it, he is lulled into a self-absorbing stupor that does not seem to go beyond his clothes, his meals and his own doorstep. His wealth is something that he spends on himself and not something he shares with others, not something that he uses to bless others. He is drawn himself so tightly into his cocoon that he cannot seem to see beyond himself.

          In the end, our possessions are not owned by us, but loaned to us. They are entrusted to us; obviously so that we can meet our basic needs, but also so that we can help and even bless others.

          In Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, early on in story, Ebenezer Scrooge says to the ghost of Jacob Marley, “But you were always a good man of business, Jacob.” And the ghost exclaims, “Business! Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, benevolence, were all my business.”

          This disturbing parable tells us to pay attention, to wake up and to not be absorbed by ourselves. St. Augustine described sin as being caved in on oneself. Sin closes us in on ourselves and charity draws us out of ourselves and that is where we find joy. The word “ecstasy” literally means to stand outside of oneself.

          We are called to live lives of intentional faith that include actions of intentional faith at times perhaps in big ways but also in every little way because mankind is our business. The common welfare is our business; charity, mercy, forbearance, benevolence, are all our business.

          This parable tells to pay attention to Moses and the prophets, that is, to pay attention to God’s word given to us in the Scriptures and to God’s word made flesh in the person of Jesus, who did return from the dead and who calls us to new life with Him. Compared to the rest of the world, most of us, even those of modest means, can seem to be the rich man.

          The five brothers represent us. We are not to expect some sort of special personalized message, but rather we listen to what we have been told and an also act on it loving God and our neighbor.

          Growing up, parents and teachers may have reminded us that our actions have consequences but today the Gospel reminds us that our inactions also have consequences. There is more to being good than not being bad. We can sin by what we do but we can also sin by what we fail to do.

          Mother [now Saint] Teresa remarked that you can find Calcutta all over the world, if you have eyes to see. So too, we can find Lazarus all over the world if we have eyes to see. Lazarus can be all around us in those physically suffering, but also in those spiritually suffering and to help serve Him we have the corporal and spiritual works of mercy.

          The corporal works of mercy, based largely on Matthew 25, are to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, to visit the sick and imprisoned, to clothe naked and welcome the stranger and to bury the dead. The spiritual works of mercy are to counsel the doubtful and comfort the afflicted, to instruct the ignorant and to admonish sinners, to bear wrongs patiently and forgive offenses willingly and to pray for the living and the death. May we have eyes to see Lazarus, hearts to love him and arms to serve using that with which we have been blessed to bless him.

          Informed by the word, sustained by prayer, encouraged by one another and nourished by the Eucharist, let us ask for the grace to not be imprisoned in the cocoon of self-absorption but rather live generous and joyful lives aware of the consequences of selfishness and inaction.

          Mankind is our business. The common welfare is our business; charity, mercy, forbearance, benevolence, are all our business.

A Deeper Freedom

10/8/2013

One major problem affecting our country, our world, sometimes our families, and even possibly ourselves, is addiction. Addictions can take over and destroy lives. It may be in the form of drugs, alcohol, gambling, or pornography. What seems to be an exercise of freedom: I can do what I want because I’m free; instead, becomes a form of slavery: I cannot, not do this. It is often very cruel slavery.

In the gospel (Luke 14: 1, 7-14) Jesus warns against another type of addiction. It is something we all want and to a certain extent need: attention, recognition, prestige and honor. When we become addicted to these things we put our lives or at least our emotional well being into the hands of others. Why? Why would we make our happiness and our self worth dependent upon what others do or not do?

            Jesus speaks both of being a guest and being a host. What he gives in both instances is not just pointers about good manners, although that can be important. What he shares is a way of life and an insight into the kingdom of God. Jesus speaks of humility and generosity.

            We can see humility as weakness, being a doormat, putting ourselves down, lack of ambition to do good, etc. but this is false humility. Real humility is something different.

            Real humility is rooted in one word–honesty, about ourselves, about others and about God. Real humility is neither exalting ourselves nor putting ourselves down. These two extremes are in fact rather similar. Whether you speak well of yourself or speak poorly, you are still talking about yourself.

            Real humility is how we come to know God as the first reading from the Book Sirach (Sir 3: 17-18, 20, 28-29) tells us. Real humility is the narrow way we that we heard Jesus speak of last week. Real humility includes the ability to listen to really listen to another person

Perfect humility is to realize the depths of God’s love for us.[1]

            Humility is something freeing; pride is a high maintenance item. When we are humble, we don’t care where we are seated at the table. When we are humble we do not get too worked up over who is named employee of the month.   To be proud is to be worried about many things, but to be humble is to be free.

            A couple of months ago I was in a conversation with a group of people. There was an older woman who was recounting a young man she had known in her youth. She said, “I thought he was the handsomest thing.” Then she added, “Of course, he thought the same thing.” In the end, she preferred a man a little less handsome but a little more humble.   In other words, humility is attractive.

            Jesus says the truth will set you free.   If humility is based on truth than humility will also set you free.

            We have models of humility in our own lives: People who live their lives and their faith with quiet dignity and virtue. We see the same in the saints. We have another, more important model in Jesus. Jesus was humble but not weak. Jesus was humble but not a doormat. Jesus was humble and yet he spoke very challenging words both about himself and to others.

            As Catholic Christians we are to share the sometimes challenging truths of our faith not arrogantly but with a confident humility and a humble confidence.

            In his humility, Jesus took the last place, not in the corner of a banquet hall but in front of the world, with the fate of a common criminal, mocked, naked and tortured to death on a cross. Jesus took that last place as a model of strong humility. Because of this, God highly exalted him and he sits at the banquet of kingdom of heaven. On the Cross, Jesus not only saved us, he gave us model of humility that is not weak but very strong.

            Humility leads us to generosity. In truth, in humility, we come to realize that all is gift and as we have been given so should we give. St. Paul understood this. St. Therese understood this. The cornerstone of our church quotes her who said, “Everything is grace.”

            That is why Jesus says to give when you cannot be repaid. Otherwise, generosity and hospitality just become forms of self-seeking. True generosity involves the sincere gift of self, it is glad when it cannot be repaid.

            Again, we have models of this in those around us and in the saints.   Again, our model of generosity is also found most perfectly in Jesus. On the cross he not only showed humility but generosity, a generosity carried on by his resurrection and a generosity that continues to overflow to us in this and every celebration of the Eucharist. The Eucharist is the new covenant we hear of in the second reading. The covenant made in sincerity and truth. It says that the blood of Christ is more eloquent than that of Abel. The blood of Abel cried out for vengeance. The blood of Christ cried out for forgiveness and mercy.

            The way of Christ is the way of humility and generosity. It is the way of freedom. It frees us from the addiction to honors and recognition. To do this is also an act of faith. It calls us to trust and lead lives of intentional faith which can lead us to intentional humility and intentional generosity.

            As disciples of Jesus we are to be ready to take the last place. Jesus may put us somewhere else but Christians are ready to take the last place. Should Jesus take us by the hand and lead us to the last place with him,[2] may we respond with humility and generosity. The way of Christ is the way of humility and generosity. The way of Christ is the way of freedom.

[1]Cf. The Cloud of Unknowing, (New York: Image Books, 1973), 65.
[2]Cf. Clarence Enzer, Everyone’s Way of the Cross (Notre Dame: Ave Maria Press, 1986).

Author: Reverend Joseph I. Cisetti
September 1, 2013–22nd Sunday of Ordinary Time

Indulgences

2/22/2013

Indulgences: Springboard for Revolution During the Time of Martin Luther

The Catholic Encyclopedia online notes:

Once it is admitted that Christ left the Church the power to forgive sins, the power of granting indulgences is logically inferred. Since the sacramental forgiveness of sin extends both to the guilt and to the eternal punishment, it plainly follows that the Church can also free the penitent from the lesser or temporal penalty. This becomes clearer, however, when we consider the amplitude of the power granted to Peter (Matthew 16:19): ‘I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.’ (Cf. Matthew 18:18, where like power is conferred on all the Apostles.)[1]

Indulgences are a remnant of early penitential practice when penances were publically performed. Mortal sin was punished by exclusion from the Eucharist, sometimes for years of penance, during which fasting and prayer were called for. The early Church withheld “absolution” (but not of guilt) until satisfaction was made.   “Regarding the nature of this absolution given by the bishop, various opinions have been put forward. According to one view, it was the remission, not of guilt but of the temporal punishment; the guilt had already been remitted by the absolution which the penitent received in confession before he entered on the public penance.” Public penances for mortal sin could be severe. Penances were lessened for those who were ill or in danger of death.   Among the forms of commutation of the penance were pilgrimages, especially to places like Jerusalem or Rome. It was the report of the ill treatment given these pilgrims by the Muslims that led to the Crusades. At the Council of Clermont in 1095 where the First Crusade was organized they provided: "Whoever, out of pure devotion and not for the purpose of gaining honor or money, shall go to Jerusalem to liberate the Church of God, let that journey be counted in lieu of all penance."

When individual confession became the rule, absolution was given immediately after confession (assuming the penitent was sorry for their sins and had a firm purpose of amendment) and lighter penances than those shown in the canons were assigned.   Secret confession goes back to the time of the Apostles but even in the days of Pope Leo the Great (440-461) he declares an abuse, “contrary to the Apostolic rule" the reading out in public of a written statement of their sins drawn up by the faithful.   Penance was said or done immediately after Confession. Indulgences were a form of penance. They could not forgive sins nor were they a substitute for true contrition. Rather, it was a remission of some or all of the punishment due from sins already forgiven granted by the Church to those who met all the conditions for the indulgence. It was based on the Church’s “treasury of grace” earned by Christ for living persons through absolution and for the dead, as a petition.   The grace won by Christ is “God’s saving will in the fullness of love to individual human persons, which also includes purification and overcoming of the punishment due to sin.”   This is why the preconditions always include personal, genuine repentance by the sinner and the restoration of the damaged order in so far as this is possible.

The Church showed concern for the misuses and abuses of indulgences. For example, Pope Boniface in 1382 condemned the practice of some religious who were claiming indulgences forgave sin and selling them for money. In 1420 the Archbishop of Canterbury was reprimanded for initiating an indulgence by Pope Martin V. In 1450 Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, then Apostolate Legate to Germany, corrected those claiming that indulgences forgave sins. Pope Sixtus IV reserved judgment to the Holy See in cases previously delegated to the Holy See. By 1500 the papacy reserved for itself the right to grant indulgences because of abuses by bishops or priests. Nonetheless, the uneducated did not always make the distinctions between eternal punishment and temporal punishment and some comforted themselves by thinking they were buying their salvation thanks to abuses which found their way back into Church before the Reformation.

Initiated by Pope Julius II and revived by Pope Leo X, a plenary indulgence was offered to all those who confessed their sins, received the Eucharist, and contributed according to their means to construction costs of the new St. Peter’s (which is still in use today).   Some papal indulgences were administered by local bishops. For example, the young and ambitious Archbishop Albert of Mainz and Magdeburg was one who decided to foster the sale of indulgences in his territories in an effort, in large part, to pay Rome for a dispensation permitting him to rule two dioceses. He enlisted the Dominicans to proclaim the indulgence, but some like Johan Tetzle did this, Luther alleged, in such a crude way it seemed like grace was for sale. Was the problem was the way they were administered by Tetzle and others? Yes, but perhaps Tetzle was not the villain Luther made him out to be. Recently historians say he received unmerited odium. For example, Luther in his 95 theses accuses him of using the jingle, “As soon as a coin in the coffer rings, the soul out of purgatory springs.” This goes back at least to 1482 and Teztle denies it. In fact, he wrote in his defense, A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences. He went on to get his doctorate in theology but retired to a monastery in 1518, broken in spirit by what was probably unjust criticism. Luther himself wrote him “that the agitation was not that of his creation, but that the child had an entirely different father.” But Luther, nonetheless, falsely charged that Tetzle had preached impiously against the Virgin Mary.

Whether or not Tetzle was guilty is not as significant as the fact that the Church was not sufficiently guarding against abuses in indulgences to preclude Luther using this issue as a springboard for his revolution against the Catholic Church. Certainly the Church addressed this problem and many other needed reforms in the Council of Trent, when they ended all selling of indulgences. But a great irony is pointed out by Msgr. Patrick O’Hare in his book, Luther: The Facts About, when he notes:

What hypocrisy to roll up the white’s of one’s eyes in pretence of holy horror at the Catholic doctrine of indulgences, which is severity itself compared with their sweeping act of faith which alone suffices to wash all man’s sins away, and put him at once, without penance or purgatory, into the company of angels in Heaven.”

[1] “Indulgences,” Catholic Encyclopedia online.

St. Ephrem: Lyre of the Holy Spirit

10/29/2012

.

St. Ephrem (or Ephraim):

"Lyre of the Holy Spirit"

Born into a Christian family the fourth century in Nisibis, in Syria, St. Ephrem (306-373) was baptized as an adult and became a teacher. Known for saintly qualities he was ordained to the diaconate before the year 338 A.D., serving four bishops of Nisibis.Some believe he later became a priest.

We know little about his life except for his beautiful hynms, written to combat the many heresies prevalent at the time. He used these songs to communicate the truths of the faith. The originality, imagery, and beauty of his hymns captured the hearts of the Christians so much so, that Ephrem is credited with awakening the Church to the value of music and poetry in spreading and fortifying the faith. Here is one of his beautiful hymns about Mary that compares her with Eve:

Mary and Eve in their symbols resemble a body, one of whose eyes is darkened and blind,
while the other is bright and clear, providing light for the whole.
(Hymns on the Church, XXXVII.4).

In her virginity Eve put on leaves of shame, but Your mother has put on
in her virginity a garment of glory that encompasses all, while to Him who covers all
she gives a body as a tiny garment.
(Hymns on the Nativity, XVII.4).

A Chariot of flesh did Mary become, enabling her to escort the Fiery One in her bosom.
The angel stood amazed at the Daughter of Man as she carried the Lord of all humanity.
(Hymns on Mary, XVI.1; Bride of Light, p.99).

He was a prolific writer, using a variety of poetic forms and writing in Syrian, winning the title "lyre of the Holy Spirit." He was said to have received his diaconate from St. Basil in Cappadocia and to have been an influence on him despite his short visit there. He battled against Manichean, Marcionite and Aryan heresies.

Sometime in 364 he settled on Mount Edessa living as an ascetic, writing at Edessa (what is now Urfa) 100 miles east of his home. "The soul is your bride, the body is your bridal chamber..."

Writing on the profundity of Holy Scripture he says: "Lord who can grasp all of the wealth of just one of your words? What we understand is much less than we leave behind, like thirsty people who drink from a fountain. For your word Lord has many shades of meaning, just as those who study have many different points of view. The Lord has colored his word with many views so that each person who studies it can see in it what he loves. He has hidden many treasures in His word so that each of us is enriched as we meditate on it. The word of God is a tree of life that from all its parts offers you fruit that is blessed. It is like that rock opened in the desert that from all its parts gave forth a spiritual drink." He who comes into contact with some share of its treasure should not think that the only thing contained in the word is what he himself has found. He should realize that he has only been able to find that one thing from among many others. Nor because only that one part has become his should he say that the word is void and empty and look down upon it. But because he could not exhaust it, he should give thanks for it riches and be glad that you were overcome and do not be sad that it overcame you. The thirsty man rejoices when he drinks and is not downcast because he cannot empty the fountain. Rather let the fountain quench your thirst then have your thirst quench the fountain because if your thirst is quenched when the fountain is not exhausted, you can drink from it again whenever your thirsty. But if when your thirst is quenched the fountain also is dried up, your victory will bode evil for you. So be grateful for what you have received and don't grumble about the abundance left behind. What you have received and what you have reached is your share and what remains is your heritage. What at one time you were unable to receive because of your weakness, you will be able to receive at other times if you persevere. Do not have the presumption to try to take in one draft what can not be taken in one draft and do not abandon out of laziness what you may only consume little by little."

Prayer: St. Ephrem, lyre of the Holy Spirit, who put music and poetry in the service of God, pray for us and intercede for us that we might receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit to enrich our ministry and deepen our faith.

Post Title.

3/10/2012

Church History and Guilt

An Excerpt from Cardinal Ratzinger’s Book:

Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith (pp. 279-283)

          "When we look at this constant story of “mea culpa” in the Church, we may ask ourselves---and I, too, have asked myself this –what exactly is surprising about it, what is new about this Holy Year? My impression—and I should like to offer this for discussion here—is that something changed at the beginning of the modern era, when Protestantism created a new kind of church history, with the aim of showing that the Catholic Church was not merely stained with sin, as she has always known and said, but that she was, allegedly, completely corrupted and ruined and no longer the Church of Christ; rather, she has, on the contrary, become an instrument of the Antichrist. Consequently—since she was corrupt through and through—she was said to be no longer the Church but an anti-church. At this point, something had obviously changed. A Catholic historiography now necessarily grew up in opposition to this picture, with the aim of showing that the Catholic Church—despite those sins that could not be denied and were more than obvious—was nonetheless the Church of Christ and remained the Church of the holy saints, the holy Church. At that time when two kinds of historiography were opposed to each other and when the Catholic historians felt obliged to write apologetics to demonstrate that in spite of everything the quality of holiness still remained in the Church, then necessarily the voice in which sins are confessed in the Church becomes more quiet."

          "The position became still worse in the course of the Enlightenment; let us recall Voltaire’s “Écrasez I’Infâme!” Ultimately, the accusations were growing in scope right up to those of Nietzsche, in which the Church appears, no longer as merely failing to do the will of Christ, but as the great evil of all evils afflicting mankind, as effecting the alienation of man from himself, something from which he must finally be liberated in order to become once more himself. We see the same theme, differently worked out, in Marxism. For Marxism, too, the Church, Christianity as such, alienates man from himself, gives its sanction to oppression, and stands in the way of progress. Since the Enlightenment, many deplorable historical realities have been exaggerated into real myths—the Crusades, the Inquisition, the burning of witches—and these have grown far beyond the historical facts into mythical bugbears that not merely justify but positively demand the rejection of the Church. Any attempt to see history as being a little less black and white, to distinguish a little more clearly the various ways in which different people were responsible, to see the complexity of these phenomena and to see what the various people responsible were trying to do, is condemned beforehand as a concession to inhumanity. When certain distressing facts grow into a kind of negative confession of faith and are no longer able to be seen in the context of forces and effects that can be distinguished from one another, then it becomes more difficult for the faithful to join in the confession of being at fault: it would now seem necessary to make clear that the Church, in spite of it all, has been and still remains an instrument of salvation, a force for good and not for the destruction of man."

          "Today we find ourselves in a new situation, in which the Church can, with greater freedom, invite us to return to the confession of sins and can thus also invite other people to confession and to a more profound reconciliation. We have seen the enormous destruction wrought by various kinds of atheism, which brought forth a new level of anti-humanism, of the destruction and ruin of man. The atrocities that the atheistic systems of the twentieth century have invented and practiced cast all previous horrors into the shadows; we cannot take them in without shuddering. The rejection of the Church, the rejection of God and of Christ, does not save anyone; on the contrary—we can see what appalling capacities it unchains within man. The question is once more posed for everyone: Where are we? What can save us? Thus, we can admit to guilt with a new openness and, at the same time, recognize with a new gratitude the gift of the Lord, which he grants to us through the Church and which all the sins in her have never been able and never will be able to ruin or spoil."

          "To end with, I should like very briefly to formulate three criteria for dealing correctly with the church’s guilt and for the right way to purify our memory."

          "The first criterion: The present-day Church cannot set herself up as a tribunal to deliver judgments on previous generations—even though sins of the past are necessarily implicated in the “mea culpa”; for without the sins of the past, we are unable to understand the situation of today. It is neither possible nor permissible for the Church to dwell arrogantly in the present day, to feel herself exempt from sins and to make out that it is the sins of others, of the past, that are the source of evil. The confession of the sins of other people does not set us free from acknowledging the sins of the present day. Rather, it helps to awaken our own consciences and to open up the way toward conversion for us all."

          "A second criterion: Confessing, according to Augustine, means: “Doing the truth”² That is why it demands, above all, the discipline and the humility belonging to truth, not to deny all the evil that has been carried out in the Church, yet also to avoid marking up against ourselves, in false modesty, sins that were never committed or concerning which where is no historical certainty."

          "Third criterion: Again in accordance with Augustine, we have to say that a Christian confessio peccati always has to go hand in hand with a confessio laudis. In any honest examination of conscience we can see that for our part in every generation we have done much that is evil. Yet we can also see that, in spite of our sins, God has always purified and renewed the Church and has always entrusted great things to fragile vessels. And who could fail to recognize how much good has been done, for example, in the past two centuries by new religious congregations and by lay movements in the sphere of education, in the social sector, in efforts on behalf of the weak, the sick, the poor, and the suffering, even while those centuries were at the same time ravaged by the atrocities of the atheistic systems? It would be failing in honesty to see only our evil and not the good that God has effected through the faithful—in spite of their sins. The Church Fathers saw this paradox of guilt and grace as being summed up in the words of the Bride in the Song of Songs: “Nigra sum sed formosa” (Song I:4). “I am stained with sins, yet beautiful”—beautiful through your grace and through what you have done. The Church is able to confess the sins of the past and of the present in all openness and confidence, in the knowledge that evil will never completely ruin her; in the knowledge that the Lord is stronger than our sins and renews his Church again and again, that she may continue to be the instrument of God’s good works in our world."

No Title

12/24/2011

Spiritual Sense of Scripture



"The spiritual sense may be defined as the meaning derived from the biblical text when 'read under the influence of the Holy Spirit,' in the context of the Paschal Mystery of Christ and of the new life which flows from it" according to the Pontifical Biblical Commission document,
"Interpreting the Bible in the Church" (1994). It is the passion, death and resurrection of Christ which provides a fresh context in which the ancient biblical texts can be seen as fulfillment and consummation in Christ. As Pius XII observed:

      For God alone could have known this spiritual meaning
     and have revealed it to us. Now our Divine Savior points out to us and teaches
      us this same sense in the Holy Gospel; the Apostles also, following the example
      of the Master, profess it in their spoken and written words; the unchanging
      tradition of the Church approves it; and finally the most ancient usage of the
      liturgy proclaims it . . .

One example given by the Pontifical Biblical Commission (PBC) was the covenant oath which established David's throne forever, which the New Testament revealed is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The PBC speaks of the new context as "life in the Spirit."

Old Testament texts that relate directly to the pashcal mystery of Christ may have a spiritual sense as their literal sense. This is frequently the case in the New Testament. Hence there isn't always a distinction between the two senses.

On the other hand, John 19: 33-36 records that the two soldiers did not break the legs of our Lord on the Cross because he was already dead and says that this was so that the Scriptures would be fulfilled, referring to Exodus 12: 46. However, this latter passage refers to the Passover of the lamb that God required the Israelites to celebrate annually. It is only when we reflect on the Exodus passage in light of the paschal mystery that we see the spiritual sense emerge according to Fr. Bernard Orchard.

What is important here is that the principle of coming to know and see the spiritual sense of Scripture, which was rejected by the "reformers" during the Reformation, was annunciated by Vatican II as a "revival of the great patristic tradition" (Dei Verbum 12c). Perhaps we should
remember the injunction of St. Jerome, "Whoever interprets the gospel in a spirit and mentality other than those in which it was written disturbs believers and perverts the gospel of Christ . . ." (quoted by Pope Leo XII in Providentissimus Deus 5).

This is your new blog post. Click here and start typing, or drag in elements from the top bar.

Lectio Divina

11/9/2011

Lectio Divina: A Popular Revival Underway

Our Holy Father has recently urged Catholics to renew an ancient practice in the Church, namely to initiate the regular devotional practice of lectio divina.

In lectio divina the Scriptures are opened up to their interior or hidden meaning by the action of the Holy Spirit, as our spirit is lifted up from earth to heaven to "touch heavenly secrets." This occurs through a four stage process that includes reading, meditation, prayer and contemplation. As Guigo II, ninth abbot of the Grand Chartreuse, writing in the twelfth century described it concisely:

<<Previous

Forward>>

Archives