Art imitates life? (Thanks, Rebecca!)

"That Future is Now!" The New Thrust of Inter-religious Dialogue according to Cardinal Tauran

Worth reading is Cardinal Tauran's description of the interfaith activity of the Catholic Church which he gave while in Kenya recently. Tauran is the current president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue at the Vatican, so he knows what he is talking about.

Here is the interesting bit:

4. The new thrust of inter-religious dialogue

My dear friends, as you may know, inter-religious dialogue takes different forms:... dialogue of life, dialogue of cooperation, dialogue of theological discourse and dialogues of spiritualities. The penultimate (dialogue of theological discourse) is often postponed to the future. In the Pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI, that future is now.

Up till recently, discussions and praxis of inter-religious dialogue have focused on the common spiritual bonds which Christians share with other believers. By emphasising these bonds, Popes Paul VI and John Paul II, have constructed bridges of understanding between Christianity and other religions. The perceptible direction of Pope Benedict XVI is that, building on what his predecessors have put in place, he is now leading the Church to cross that bridge. Whereas other highlighted the common elements we share, he wants to emphasize, by use of reason, the distinctiveness of the Christian faith.

Together with other believers we walk in search of the truth. We should be prepared to ask difficult questions. Partners in dialogue must be open to talk about those issues not often put on the table: religious liberty, freedom of conscience, reciprocity, conversion, religious extremism, etc.

That kind of puts things (such as the Regensburg speech and the Good Friday prayer) in a certain perspective, doesn't it?

It is also entirely of a piece with Papa Benny's own words to the gathering of Interreligious leaders in the US, when he said:

There is a further point I wish to touch upon here. I have noticed a growing interest among governments to sponsor programs intended to promote interreligious and intercultural dialogue. These are praiseworthy initiatives. At the same time, religious freedom, interreligious dialogue and faith-based education aim at something more than a consensus regarding ways to implement practical strategies for advancing peace. The broader purpose of dialogue is to discover the truth. What is the origin and destiny of mankind? What are good and evil? What awaits us at the end of our earthly existence? Only by addressing these deeper questions can we build a solid basis for the peace and security of the human family, for "wherever and whenever men and women are enlightened by the splendor of truth, they naturally set out on the path of peace" (Message for the 2006 World Day of Peace, 3).

Two Jews, Three Opinions: Different reactions from Jewish Communities to the Holy Father

The Tablet is carrying the news that the Austrian Grand Rabbi has announced suspension of dialogue with the Church because of the Good Friday prayer.

Which is just one more indication of the truth of the old joke that the Jews themselves tell of "Two Jews, Three Opinions".

In the meantime, in New York, we get scenes like this:

Do they look unhappy? Do they look like they are about to "suspend dialogue". I don't think so. On the other hand, it might just be a case of the difference between Europe and the US on matters of faith.

When there is a disagreement, on any issue, the only way it will be solved is if both parties remain open to dialogue.

A Lutheran Theologian suggests "Muslim Friendly" Christian worship?

I am very glad to be working as a Catholic in interfaith relations. We at least have a reasonably clear theology that guides us in these matters. Lutherans don't, I guess in part because interfaith dialogue was light years away from the thoughts of the authors of the Book of Concord. So they end up borrowing either from evangelical theologies (you have to have Jesus as your personal saviour or you're going to hell) or liberal protestant theologies (Christianity is just one road to up the mountain that has "God" at the top).

This is an example of the latter. Herb Hoefer holds the "Missions Chair" at Concordia University Portland, an LCMS institution. He caused a stir in Lutheran circles in the States by posting an essay called "Muslim-Friendly Christian Worship" in September last year. (The URL given on all the blogs is http://faculty.cu-portland.edu/herbhoefer/MuslimFriendly.html, but that doesn't work any more. From what I can see, CU has pulled the item from their website. I am accessing the text here at Fr Hollywood's page).

This is a really terribly misguided effort. It says volumes about the attitude one regularly encounters among LCMS types (not Pastor Weedon and his friends, I hasten to add) which has an utilitarian attitude toward the liturgy of the Church, regarding it simply as an instrument for evangelisation. Still, not even the worst of the Church Growthers went this far!

In order to make Christian worship more palatable to Muslims, Herb wonders if we should rethink the appropriateness of "worshipping Jesus". He suggests revision of the creeds to make it clear (assuming they don't) that we worship one God only, that the term "Church" should be removed from the creeds, that St Paul's letters should not be read, that the term "Son of God" should be retired, that grape juice rather than alcohol should be used in the Lord's Supper, and that images and music should be scaled down.

In short, he is suggesting that to witness to Muslims we should stop being Christians.

Don't get me wrong. On absolutely every point, Herb has heard his Muslim friend's objections loud and clear. It is true that they think that we are polytheists and that we worship a human being instead of God. It is true that they reject the title "Son of God" since "God neither begets nor is begotton" as one Muslim said to me recently. It is true that they have real problems with the way we worship (using images, music and alcohol).

But we don't change our way of worship to suit someone else's misunderstanding of or rejection of our beliefs (remember "lex orandi, lex credendi"). For instance, we Catholics are not about to through out the rosary, the Hail Mary, and the statues of Mary just because you protestants either fail to understand Mariology or reject it outright!

Dialogue is the place to talk these issues through. Frank dialogue is the arena in which misunderstandings (and I would suggest that much--but not all--of the Muslim rejection of our Trinitarian and Christological Theology is based on misunderstanding what we are saying) can be corrected, and objections can be clarified.

And in the dialogue of spiritual experience--where I encounter your way of worship and you encounter mine--the onus is on the visitor to try to understand what the host believes he is doing, not the the host to modify his way of worshipping to suit the visitor.

Joseph and Chico

I have just finished reading to my children "Joseph and Chico".

It is quite good--and certainly the children enjoyed the story. But, although I hate to be a spoil sport, my professional opinion as a librarian did kick in a little. I was disappointed that, although beautifully illustrated, the Holy Father himself is never depicted except as a child. That picture of the back of his head on the cover is as close as you get (shades of Ex 33:23!). The other thing is that the conceit of the cat telling the story is just a little stretched. After all, as the text makes clear, Chico has spent very little time with the Holy Father. And the fact of the matter is that Papa Benny's life is really not that exciting for a child. Not, at least, compared to JPII's. (My youngest daughter was enthralled by the Jon Voigt movie of the previous pontiff--"A man got SHOT, Mummy!") It is hard to explain the 1968 student rebellions to a 7-year old! Or the joys of the study of theology and philosophy! Still, over all it was a good preparation for their encounter in Sydney in July.

By the way, if you want a quick video news roundup of the Pope's tour to the US, have a look here at Rome Reports.

To be or not to be a Religion? Scientology and the Moonies

Over the last few years, I have been visited a number of times by representatives from both the Scientologists and the Moonies (although the latter go under a whole range of names). They're nice people, and earnestly desiring to be accepted as bona fide religions.

Well, I know that the Church doesn't usually regard them as such. But who knows? The Mormons, after all, got included on the guest list for the Ecumenical (ie. Christian) meeting with the Pope in the US.

There have been two very interesting programs on ABC Radio National lately on the subject, one by Rachel Kohn on the Spirit of Things on the Moonies and one by Stephen Crittenden on the Religion Report on Scientology.

I would like the time to do some study into the theoretical difference between a "world religion" (ie. respectable and possible dialogue partner) and a "cult" (ie. not respectable and to be treated with disdain) in inter-religious dialoge.

Pipe Smoking and Doc Martin

My wife is watching an old episode of Doc Martin.

I overheard this conversation:

Old lady: Is it bad?

Doc Martin: It could be lung cancer. Why do smokers always think that they will be one of the lucky ones, who can smoke and still live to be 70?

Old Lady: I’m 75.

Doc Martin: Well, eighty then.

Old Lady: My mother smoked a pipe till she was ninety three.

Doc Martin: And then she died.

Old Lady: No. She lost her pipe.

First Female Bishop for MELBOURNE!

You might have heard it somewhere else first, but I heard it just tonight from Bishop Peter Elliot after the Cross and Icon mass. The Melbourne Anglicans, in an uncharacteristic display of unity and solidarity with their brethren and sistern in Perth, have rushed to announce their own female candidate for the Anglican episcopate.

I do admit to having a bit of a chuckle about the new bishop-elect's name, Darling. The biography on the Melbourne Anglican website doesn't mention whether she is married or not, but if she is, I wonder if Bishop Darling would be known by her better half as "darling Bishop"?

At least one Catholic bishop had a bit of a chuckle at that one.


Reminds one of another classic character by the same name...

Cross and Icon arrive in the Glorious See of Melbourne!

And the Schütz-Beatons were on hand to welcome it as it was received at St Patrick's at a special mass this evening presided over by our great Archbishop +Denis (a man who really knows how to preside!).

But more surprising by far (and bringing even greater joy to the liturgically sensitive among the crowd) was the appearance of AN ALTAR CROSS! There it was, bold as brass (solid brass in fact), centre altar facing the presiding celebrant. So the liturgy was celebrated "versus Dominum" as well as "versus populum".


If you are interested in how the liturgy is usually celebrated in St Patrick's, take a look at Joshua's excellent account of the episcopal Sunday mass here.

See? I told you.

Well, it was inevitable that eventually someone would say something, and now our own Australian equivalent of Cardinal Kasper has said it:

Ordination for women is a doctrinal issue, not just a practical issue for us. And the ordination of women bishops enhances that obstacle because bishops are the leaders of the Church, and even within the Anglican Communion that leadership will be received ambiguously. (Bishop Michael Putney)

Once again, if I may say so, this is a clear example of the way in which the Church should seek both Unity and Doctrinal Orthodoxy.

And once again it is the Anglicans who are demonstrating the "devil-may-care" attitude to unity. The Perth bunch are dead set on the "gospel-imperative" that women be ordained to all levels of Holy Orders as a demonstration of the equal dignity of women and men before God. This is for them an issue of "doctrinal purity" and they are willing to forego the quest of unity to uphold it. So they are acting in exactly the same way as the Sydney Diocese. The only difference is the doctrinal issue at stake. Both are deliberately acting in a way that they KNOW will cause a further breakdown of relations with their brothers and sisters. BUT they don't care.

The Catholic Church, on the other hand, while just as clearly committed to its doctrinal convictions and fully acknowledging that both issues (the approval of homosexuality and the ordination of women) create major impediments to unity, NEVERTHELESS does not, for these reasons, sever relations with the dissenting community nor turn back from dialogue and seeking the path to doctrinal agreement and full communion at some point in the future (even if it recedes so far as to become only an eschatological hope!). We are doing all that we can to open the doors for full communion with the Catholic Church by explaining Catholic doctrine and showing its godliness and rationality. Moreover, while insisting on faithfulness to the Christian traditions, we do not put new stumbling blocks in the path of God's little ones.

It is a difference in attitude. It is the Catholic "both/and" in comparison to the Protestant "either/or".

Nor do I.

No-one who knows Kay Goldsworthy would question her spiritual, intellectual, pastoral or administrative capacity for episcopal ministry.

So writes Rev. Dr Charles Sherlock, an Anglican theologian for whom I have the greatest respect, in Eureka Street. I do not know the revered personage in question, but I have no doubt that Dr Sherlock is correct in this statement.

But the fact is that being a bishop is not just about fulfilling a function.

It is about being a successor to the Apostles.

Who were all men.

Sad Source for Glad News of Newman...

"Is that true, or did you just read it in the Times?"

I have said it before, and will say it again, if you read something about "The Vatican" in The Times, it is probably only rumours and myths and will be proved false before long.

Which is sad, because I really do want to believe that this time they could be right. See: Victorian Cleric Put on Path To Sainthood

Yet more on Unity and "Pure" Doctrine

In case I haven't made it clear enough in posts below, "purity" of doctrine vs unity of the Church is not a Catholic option. It is a "both/and", as is so often the case in the Catholic Church, rather than an "either/or" as is so often the case with our Protestant brethren and sistern.

Why do protestants have a difficulty with this? Because they do not have the assurance that what their Church teaches IS and always WILL BE pure doctrine. Therefore, they must always maintain the freedom and the right to "opt out" of any relationship of communion which (in their judgement) might entail them being associated with "impure" doctrine.

Whereas Catholics have the assurance of the infallibility of the Church and hence maintaining unity is a matter of receiving with gladness the pure doctrine of the Church and maintaining pure doctrine is a matter of remaining within the unity of the Church's universal communion.

Here again, and at length, from the same talk by the Holy Father in the US to leaders of the other Christain communties:

For Christians to accept this faulty line of reasoning would lead to the notion that there is little need to emphasize objective truth in the presentation of the Christian faith, for one need but follow his or her own conscience and choose a community that best suits his or her individual tastes. The result is seen in the continual proliferation of communities which often eschew institutional structures and minimize the importance of doctrinal content for Christian living.

Note the way the Holy Father speaks about unity in fellowship and in doctrine IN THE SAME BREATH!!!

Even within the ecumenical movement, Christians may be reluctant to assert the role of doctrine for fear that it would only exacerbate rather than heal the wounds of division. Yet a clear, convincing testimony to the salvation wrought for us in Christ Jesus has to be based upon the notion of normative apostolic teaching: a teaching which indeed underlies the inspired word of God and sustains the sacramental life of Christians today. Only by “holding fast” to sound teaching (2 Thess 2:15; cf. Rev 2:12-29) will we be able to respond to the challenges that confront us in an evolving world. Only in this way will we give unambiguous testimony to the truth of the Gospel and its moral teaching.

Thus, on the contrary, orthodox doctrine is aimed at HEALING the wounds of division, NOT exacerbating them.

...I am confident that – to borrow the words of Father Paul Wattson – we will achieve the “oneness of hope, oneness of faith, and oneness of love” that alone will convince the world that Jesus Christ is the one sent by the Father for the salvation of all.

Oneness of faith and Oneness of love, Truth and Love together, make for the true life of the Church.

A choice between Monarchy, Republic or a different Republic? It's not even that simple!

The Vision 2020 Summit meeting (which, if nothing else, proved how lucky we are not to live under a system of "direct democracy") apparently came up with the idea that

First, there will be a vote to ask the electorate whether it wants a republic. If a majority say yes, there will then be a few years of discussion about what sort of republic we should have. Once a model has been chosen, there will be a second referendum to amend the constitution.

We are Sentire Cum Ecclesia are NOT HAPPY with such a suggestion, and for precisely the reasons suggested in this article in today's edition of The Age: "It's not just yes or no to a republic" by John Roskam.

Roskam notes that we should be more than just a little wary of the suggestion that came from the Summit, if for no other reason than that "98 of the 100 people in the governance stream at the summit supported a republic." That is far in excess of the support that the republican movement has in Australia generally (about 55% to 60%), but it is a result, as Roskam notes, which is "not surprising, given the composition of the summit".

As Roskam points out, there are not one, but two main sorts of republican in the Australian republican movement:

Any government that offered voters only a yes or no vote on the republic would not be offering Australians a genuine choice. It is disingenuous for anyone to claim that the debate about an Australian republic is about only two choices. The debate is actually about three choices: no change, "minimal" change (a republic with a president, probably chosen by the parliament), and "maximum" change (a republic with a directly elected president).

So lets ask the question: What would a plebiscite asking the question "Should Australia become a republic?" actually mean? Because in fact there are two issues driving the republican movement in Australia--two quite different issues which are confusing the debate. They are:

1) Should we have an Australian as our head of state? Behind this is a sense of national pride and independance and perhaps a touch of anti-English sentiment in some quarters.

2) Should we be able to elect our own head of state? Behind this is a rather more left-wing radical kind of democratic yearning that believes in the "sovereignty of the people" sort of goverment.

Those who are driven mainly by the first idea are likely to be content with a minimalist republican model. Those who are driven by the second are more likely to be driven by a maximalist model. But let it be quite clear: They are supporting the idea of a republic for two very different reasons, which may well make it impossible to find agreement across the board on an acceptable model for a future non-Monarchical Australian constitution.

Of course it works in reverse too. I am a constitutional monarchist, not because my loyalties are particularly tied to the English monarch (although I am her obedient subject and very fond of her and her family generally), but because I believe constitutional monarchy is a stable system of government which maintains a workable separation between the office of the head of state and the democratic political system. I would actually be very happy with an Australian Monarch as I have outlined in the Schütz Model (see side bar).

Roskam is right: The Australian people will not be able to sort out whether they SHOULD be a republic until they sort out WHAT SORT of republic they should be. And they won't be able to sort that out until they sort out exaclty WHY they really want to be a republic in the first place.

Failure to "Think with the Church": a familiar problem here in Australia too...

Pope to Bishops in the US:

This is aggravated by an individualistic and eclectic approach to faith and religion: far from a Catholic approach to "thinking with the Church", each person believes he or she has a right to pick and choose, maintaining external social bonds but without an integral, interior conversion to the law of Christ. Consequently, rather than being transformed and renewed in mind, Christians are easily tempted to conform themselves to the spirit of this age (cf. Rom 12:3).

Sound like anyone we know?

"The Institution is God"? Unity and Catholicity in the Church

In the combox to the blog below, I insisted that unity is as important as orthodoxy in the Church.

Past-Elder responded by saying:

"That's what makes Catholicism Catholicism -- anything is allowed except leaving the family, like a spiritual Mafia. The institution is god."

Well, I guess that since "the Church IS Christ", and the "institution" we are talking about is the Church, and Christ is God, then perhaps we could extend our syllogism to read "the Institution is God" as Terry suggests...

But lets get a couple of things clear about the Sydney Anglicans--great guys and gung-ho for the gospel as they surely are: they are not just "pure" evangelical Church-of-England types. Eg. They have been practicing (and pushing for in the wider Church) lay-presidency of the Eucharist, something with which no other Anglican Church in the world agrees. And Archbishop Peter Jenson is boycotting (and encouraging other bishops to boycott) the Lambeth Conference and trying to run his own Episcopal Conference in Jerusalem (even though the local Anglican bishop in Jerusalem, who is also an evangelical, is imploring them not to come and to go to Lambeth instead to make their voices heard among the brethren).

I don't know whether "pure doctrine" is possible by any standard. I rather think that "orthodoxy" allows of a number of different possible formulations of Christian doctrine. My way of saying something may not be your way of saying something but that doesn't mean that you are necessarily teaching heresy (see this example). Hence, within acceptable orthodoxy, communion is maintained.

But what appears to be going on in Sydney Anglicanism is certainly "pure schismaticism", pressing the "local option" button (to use Pope Benedict's words) at the first sign of disagreement among the brethren and sistern.

My point is that in the Christian Church the maintenance of unity and the maintenance of orthodoxy must never and can never be played off against one another. Both are equally important. The Church is both ONE and CATHOLIC. Neither Unity nor Catholicity is more important than the other.

And, by the way, since I have cited the Creed, clearly the Creed isn't trying to say "These are the qualities the Church should be aiming for", but rather "These are the qualities that the Church HAS". So if you want to find the true Church, find the Church that is firm in CATHOLIC doctrine and UNITED in communion throughout the world while being totally COMMITTED to seeking full communion with all Christians universally.

I have.

Thanks To Catholic Culture for List of Papal Statements in US

Thanks to Jeff Mirus of Trinity Communications, the guy behind the Catholic Culture website for this list of links to all the statements that Pope made during his US visit. Very handy for those of us still catching up.

On the plane: I Go to the United States with Joy
To President Bush: Faith Sheds New Light on All Things
To the Bishops: The People of This Country Are Known for Their Great Vitality and Creativity
Homily at National's Stadium: Americans Have Always Been a People of Hope
To Catholic Educators: Freedom Is Not an Opting Out, it Is an Opting In
To Religious Leaders: A United Society Can Indeed Arise From a Plurality of Peoples
To Members of the Jewish Community: On the Feast of Pesah
To Other Religious Communities: Address at the Ecumenical Prayer Service
To UN Staff: Meeting with Staff of the United Nations
To the UN General Assembly: Human Rights Must Be Respected as an Expression of Justice
To the Disabled: Meeting with Young People Having Disabilities
To Young People and Seminarians: Meeting with Young People and Seminarians
Homily at St. Patrick's Cathedral: Votive Mass for the Universal Church
At Ground Zero: God of Peace, Bring Your Peace to Our Violent World
Homily at Yankee Stadium: Look to the Future with Hope
Farewell Address: Promote Peaceful Co-Existence among Nations

Dear O dear. Another Evangelical attack on World Youth Day

What on earth is the matter with our Evangelical bros. and sists. in Sydney? Don't they get it that World Youth Day will be the biggest evangelistic event since sliced bread was baptised? Or is it that they can't quite get their heads around the Pope=Chief Evangeliser when they have been used to Pope=AntiChrist all their life?

Here's one that a friend sent me today. Ray Galea has written "Nothing in my Hand I bring", and you can read an extract of it at the Sydney Anglican website. Here's what they say on the website:

As the Catholic Church in Sydney plans to accommodate half a million visitors for World Youth Day 2008 in a logistical exercise that will be bigger than the 2000 Olympics, Ray’s book serves as a reminder that Catholicism is not a friendly bigger Christian brother, but rather an international organization that “at almost every distinctive point undermines the person and work of Christ that I have come to love, and want to honor and serve”

Lordy, lordy, lordy. I find it kind of staggering that they can put such stuff on an official Anglican Church website.

Perhaps I should point them to the Holy Father's address to the representatives of Christian communities in the US just the other day.

Too often those who are not Christians, as they observe the splintering of Christian communities, are understandably confused about the Gospel message itself. Fundamental Christian beliefs and practices are sometimes changed within communities by so-called "prophetic actions" that are based on a hermeneutic not always consonant with the datum of Scripture and Tradition. Communities consequently give up the attempt to act as a unified body, choosing instead to function according to the idea of "local options". Somewhere in this process the need for diachronic koinonia - communion with the Church in every age - is lost, just at the time when the world is losing its bearings and needs a persuasive common witness to the saving power of the Gospel (cf. Rom 1:18-23).

You've got to admire a guy who can talk about the need for "diachronic koinonia" as the antidote to "the world losing its bearings". But that's the point, ain't it? While these Sydney-siders are trying to cement attitudes of division in the Church, not only with other Christians such as Catholics but with the other churches of their own communion, the rest of the world is "losing its bearings". And here comes a Christian event proclaiming the name of Christ that is "bigger than the 2000 Olympics" and they write a book to expose the false prophet.

For many reasons, the strength and vivacity of evangelicalism in the Sydney Anglican church may be admired. Lord knows they have been sorely tested by the "prophetic actions" of their sister churches. But they seem sometimes just a little to ready to opt for the "local option" of going it alone. Nor do they reserve their abrasive attitude for members of their own communion with whom they differ. As this new book shows, they are no more ready to receive the "bigger Christian brother" who comes to them in peace and in the name of Christ.

A good blog on bloggin

Thanks to Peter for sending through the link to this post on Godzdogz. The Domincano has it exactly right.

In the midst of all that news, we are in death...

I don't know about you, but I can barely keep up with all the news and reading material coming out of the Papal Visit to the US. No, I will admit it, I haven't kept up at all. It will take days/weeks to process it all. I haven't even had time to watch any of the EWTN coverage, but at least it is all here for when I get five minutes to scratch myself...

In the mean time, I note with just a touch of sadness the death of Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo at the relatively young age (for a curial official) of 72.

I have a strong memory (not necessarily a fond one) of the Cardinal addressing us at the opening of the John Paul II Institute for Marriage and the Family here in Melbourne. It was a hot, crowded room, and his speech went on for hours and hours in an heavily accented English that was impossible to understand. The overall effect was comparable to Chinese Water Torture. From where Cathy and I were sitting it was obvious that even the saintly Director (now Bishop-in-charge of WYD) had some difficulty maintaining an expression of polite interest on his face for the entire address...

And a good time (and a good time and a good time and a good time) was had by all

I arrived home at 11:45pm last night after four great "parties" in a row. Here is the story:

Party One: The (mostly) Melbourne (mostly) Catholic Bloggers Get-together.
Location: My office.
Time: 4pm
Attendees: Joshua of Psallite Sapienter (the excuse for the Get-together as he was visiting from WA), Jeff Tan of One Bread, One Body, Athanasius of the Regensburg Conspiracy, and Fraser Pearce of Epistolae Obscurorum Virorum (the lone non-Catholic -- he is proving very resistant to our attempts to convert him!).
Apologies: Marco Vervoost (aka Bob Catholic) of 3rd Blog from the right and Shannon Donahoo (ex-blogger, now Corpus Christi Seminary student)
Not invited because not Catholic but might as well have come anyway since Fraser was there (we'll ask him next time just to spice up the conversation): LP Cruz of Extra Nos, Past Elder (but he lives to far away anyway)
Served: Good coffee from my office espresso machine and Halal bikkies.

Party Two: Monica O'Shea's farewell party
Location: The courtyard outside my office at the Cardinal Knox Centre
Time: 5pm
Attendees: Monica, of course, of Miss Monification, who is on her way to London to work for the Soho parish, all the above mentioned bloggers, our hosts, Jim O'Farrell and the staff of Catholic Communications, other Archdiocesan staff and loads of interesting people.
Served: BBQ sausages and beer and good wine.

Party Three: Dr Tracey Rowland's Book Launch of "Ratzinger's Faith"
Location: Thomas Carr Centre
Time: 6:30pm
Attendees: Tracey, her husband Stewart who did the honours of MCing the event, His Lordship, Bishop Peter Elliot (who spoke very entertainingly about "Ratzinger's Faith" chief publishing rival "Joseph and Chico"), His Grace, Archbishop Denis Hart, students and friends of the John Paul II Institute, and a host of other very, very interesting people
Served: Excellent finger food and loads of good wine.

Party Four: Impromptu gathering after the St Stephen's Guild mass in the Cathedral
Location: Spaghetti Tree, Bourke Street
Time: 9pm
Attendees: Fr Gregory Pritchard, two visiting Kentucky priests of the Fathers of Mercy mission team, Fraser and self.
Served: Coffee and Brushetta (with too much onion).

A good time really was had by all.

All the pictures from Frank Little's Funeral taken by John and Peter Casamento

You might like to take a look at these photos from John and Peter Casamento, the father and son team who record most of the Archdiocesan events (Page one here and page two here).

When I complemented h8m and his son on their work, John said, "It's the Holy Spirit." If you want to purchase any of these in full version, contact Catholic Communications.

When Good Philosophy (and Theology!) comes from Bad Translation

There was an interesting discussion on the Philosophers Zone a month or so back on the perils of translation in philosophy. We theologians are familiar with the problem, and often share much the same complaints. But then there came this interesting comment from the host, Alan Saunders, which got me thinking about the grace-filled possibilities of mis-translation in both philosophy and theology:

Alan Saunders: There is such a thing I suppose, perhaps you might both have opinions on this, there is such a thing, and it's not a very philosophical point, but there is such a thing as fruitful mistranslation. The opening of the Gospel according to St John in the King James translation from the 17th century, it goes 'The light shineth in the darkness and the darkness comprehendeth it not.' Now 'comprehendeth' just means the darkness hasn't put it out and in modern translations they say, 'The darkness has not put it out.' But what you get if you've got a 21st century mind applying yourself to this 17th century translation of an ancient Greek text, what you get is the notion that the darkness can't understand the light, it cannot comprehend the light. And that's a lovely thought, even though it has nothing to do with the original. So we can get that sort of thing from translation as well, can't we?

Rick Benitez: And you sometimes feel robbed when the scholars come along and correct.

Exactly, Dr Benitez. Modern scripture scholars are forever knocking favourite old ideas on the head with their new scholarly exegeses that cut out beloved traditional applications and interpretations of scripture. The most famous case, of course, is that of Matthew 1:23 "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son", which is, as is well known, based on the Greek Septuagint mistranslation of the Hebrew for "young woman" in Isaiah 7:14. But in precisely this case, we see how important the mistranslation has become for orthodox Christian theology.

For the fact remains that sometimes what is dismissed as a "mistranslation" can contain an element of the original text--a possibility for application and fulfillment which happens on many different levels in biblical interpretation--that would be overlooked by a more "literal" or "surface level" translation. Even the translation "comprehendeth" in John 1:5 captures something of the original text, even if not the major intent of katalambanein.

And here is something worth thinking about: There is a good case to be made for the Septuagint as our original Old Testament. The Greek Canon of the Septuagint is in fact much older than the Hebrew Canon, predating even the Dead Sea scrolls. The decision by scholars to adopt the Biblical Hebraica as the basis for Christian Old Testament is precisely that--a scholarly, rather than an ecclesiastical, decision.

Australian Lutherans do Survey on "The Ministry"

Quite an unusual way of going about things, given that there is no way of authenticating the membership of the respondent or his/her status as laity or clergy. Nor, for that matter, is there anything to stop you doing the survey a hundred times.

But anyway, for those dinky-di-true-blue-ozzie-cobber-womby Australian Lutherans out there, here is the survey where you can tell your powers that be what you think the ministry is all about and how well your church (and your local pastor) is at doing it.

It is interesting to see the kinds of assumptions that lie behind the survey. Here are the qualities that are seen as relating to the ministry:

• A strong Christian faith
• Commitment to the teachings of the Lutheran Church
• Commitment to the pastoral vocation
• Confidence in your ability to lead
• Capacity to relate well to others
• Openness to listen and learn
• Mission mindedness
• Personal authenticity in the pastoral role
• A pastoral heart (compassion, empathy, wise counselling, etc)

And here are the list of skills seen as relating to the ministry:

• Conducting worship and performing ritual acts
• Preaching
• Teaching
• Counselling
• Team building
• Organizational skills
• Motivating the laity for mission
• Training the laity for mission
• Implementing strategies for outreach
• Resolving conflict situation within the congregation
• Coping with personal conflicts
• Interpreting scripture in practical situations
• Maintaining a balance between personal and professional life

I would be interested to know what your reaction to this is. Its generally a good list and one would be happy if most Catholic priests had even half of these qualities. Possibly the most glaring ommission is anything about the pastor's personal moral life or beliefs. There is also a incredible weighting on the outreach/mission aspect of the pastor's work. There is also the odd requirement that the pastor may be able to "interpret scripture in practical situations". Is there a distinction being made here between the pastor's right to "interpret scripture" in relation to theology (which, of course, is by implication "impractical"). One wonders what role such an interpretation would have in the life of the church?

Of course, then there is the whole question of doing this sort of thing by survey. What result are they looking for? Is the work and nature of the ordained ministry of the Lutheran Church to be determined by "majority rules"? Well, probably the answer to this is yes. Afterall, while the Lutheran Church affirms that something called "the Public Office of the Ministry" is by "divine right", it is reserved to "human right" to determine how it is ordered and carried out.

It was a great occasion

This photo from The Age captures the spirit of Archbishop Frank Little's funeral yesterday perfectly. It was an historic moment--the casket was lowered into the crypt of the Cathedral (a very small affair, not something that you can actually enter easily)--an event which had not happened since 1983 when Cardinal Knox was similarly interred.

Unfortunately your correspondent missed witnessing the actual moment because, like many others with whom I have spoken who were also there, I was caught up with the vigour and vibrancy of the singing of the Our Father at the very point when the casket was lowered.

Don't let anyone ever tell you that Catholics can't sing. They did yesterday in the Cathedral.

Reasons for Hope Retreat

This looks good. It's another one from the kids at VCSYA. Unfortunately, if you are over 35 you are disqualified from attending!

Reasons for Hope

EDMUND RICE CENTRE, AMBERLEY WAY, LOWER PLENTY
Friday 25th - 27th April
“Preparing for World Youth Day”

Incorporating the Journey of the Cross and Icon! Check Out: www.towards2008.org.aufor more info.

Weekend Highlights!· Inspiring Speakers
· Journey of the Cross and Icon Mass at St. Patrick’s Cathedral
· JCI Concert with Guy Sebastian and Paulini
· Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament
· Daily Mass and Rosary
· Chance to meet other Catholics and make new friends
· Free time to relax!

Speakers

Dr. Tracey Rowland is the Permanent Dean of the John Paul II Institute and graduate of Oxford University. She is widely seen as one of the foremost theologians in the world and has just published a book called Ratzinger’s Faith – The Theology of Benedict XVI. She will give a talk titled “An Introduction to Benedict XVI” .
Fr. Gregory Jordan SJ is originally a New Zealander who has spent most of his life acting as a Rector at various Jesuit schools and colleges around Australia. Fr. Jordan is also the National Chaplin to ACSA. He is renowned for his wit and erudition and for always leaving his audience wiser while cracking a few jokes on the way. Fr. Jordan will speak on “How the Church has handled the pagan world: how should we?”.
Fr. Paul Newton is the Priest-in-Charge of Sacred Heart Croydon where he supervises a youth group and over 100 pilgrims planning to go to World Youth Day. He is known as an entertaining and direct evangelist and he loves to challenge young people to live the Gospel. Fr. Paul will speak on “How to be a Catholic in a Secular World”.
Fr. Joe Pich is Assistant Priest at St. Mary’s Star of the Sea, West Melbourne and is a priest of Opus Dei (Work of God). He is originally from Spain where he served in the army for some time before he entered the seminary. On the retreat Fr. Joe will guide a series of meditations on pilgrimage.
The Missionaries of Charity were founded by Mother Teresa in India to bring the love of Christ to the poorest of the poor. In Melbourne the MC Sisters run separate men’s and women’s homeless shelters. They will speak on “Spiritual and Corporal Works of Mercy”.
Br. Vincent Magat OP was born in Slovakia (Eastern Europe) but grew up in Australia where he joined the Dominican order which in Melbourne is based at St. Dominic’s Camberwell. He has spent some time working as a chaplain to secondary and tertiary students. Br. Vincent will be one of the leaders of the forum on “Masculinity and Femininity”.
Angela Conway works for the Australian Family Associaition as National Research Officer. She is interested in the interplay of economic, cultural and political forces that impact on marriage and the family. Angela will be one of the leaders of the forum on “Masculinity and Femininity”.
Tim Davis works for the Melbourne Days in the Diocese Office. He has worked for many years in Youth Ministry mainly with the Marist Brothers. In his spare time he loves to surf and hike. Tim will speak about World Youth Day and some exciting opportunities to volunteer for Days in the Diocese.
ALSO: Br. Dean Mathieson OFM Cap, Br. Ben Johnson OFM Cap and Conor Sweeney, a top student of the JPII institute Conor will be one of the leaders of the forum on “Masculinity and Femininity”.

What is "Reasons for Hope"?
RFH Melbourne is the annual retreat of the Victorian Catholic Students and Young Adults (18-35), a group that provides spiritual and intellectual formation for, you guessed it, students and young adults! This year Reasons for Hope provides a fantastic opportunity to continue your spiritual preparation for life in general and especially if you are going to Sydney World Youth Day, the biggest youth event in the world.
Where is it held?
This year, RFH wll be held at the Edmund Rice Centre Amberley, Amberley Way, Lower Plenty (see website for map)
Contact Infomation
Matt Restall - 0407 883 494 (vcsa@melbourne.catholic.org.au)
Lucy Righetti – 0433 981 789 (lucyrighetti@hotmail.com)

You can register online at
www.towards2008.org.au
FULL WEEKEND
STUDENT $130 NON - STUDENT $140
PARTIAL WEEKEND OPTIONS
$20 day pass for Friday/Sunday ($30 Saturday)

Enquiries to:
Matt Restall - 0407 883 494 (vcsa@melbourne.catholic.org.au) Lucy Righetti – 0433 981 789 (lucyrighetti@hotmail.com)
www.towards2008.org.au

Pope auditions for Flight Attendant's job?

Good Morning! Ladies and Gentlemen.
Welcome onboard this AirItalia flight to the United States.
My name is Pope Benedict and I will be your In-flight Service Director for the journey...

A beautiful essay on the meaning of Conversion to the Catholic Church

And baptism. And relations with Islam. But I relate to it because of what it had to say about conversion to the Catholic Church. I am speaking of Pietro De Marco's beautiful essay that appeared in L'Osservatore Romano and was translated on Sandro Magister's website, Twofold response: to the Catholics, and to Aref Ali Nayed.

De Marco's essay forms a helpful counterpoint to the essay on conversion by Scot McKnight ("From Wheaton to Rome")which I blogged about earlier. I have read all of McKnight's essay now, and actually find it quite gentle and gracious (well worth reading), but he doesn't really understand the heart of the Catholic convert. De Marco does. I found many occasions when reading McKnight when I said, "Yes, he is right, that is what I thought during my conversion process", but when I read De Marco I thought, "This bloke has it spot on--that is what I FELT during the process."

De Marco is writing about the controversial conversion of Magdi Cristiano Allam, and the controversy that followed Allam's own statements and the reactions to it. But he is also writing for Catholics who have become uncomfortable with conversions to Catholicism and don't know how to deal with the exhuberant enthusiasm of the convert.

For instance:

Thus the process of the overturning of the relationship between Revelation and humanity that has marked recent modernity was manifested even in the Catholic Church. Only the human, according to this logic, is universally constituted; while all Revelation can be nothing other than individually given or founded. From this it emerges that the passage, or the return, to a religion can be seen as an undesirable, incomprehensible act, and all the more so when the elites of this religion are trying to emancipate themselves from this individuality.

Fortunately, the current terms of Catholic reflection are no longer the ones just described, but trans-religious spirituality and vague philosophical religions still tempt it. And conversion is still not admired, even today. Magdi Cristiano Allam will have the chance to see this for himself: among the intricacies of the splendor of the City of God, he will experience the bitter side of the Catholic "complexio oppositorum."

Indeed.

Like McKnight, De Marco understands that conversion is about a "search for transcendance". "Conversion is always the crossing of a threshold", he says, and "the threshold implies the human-divine in the search for transcendence."

But he has a better understanding of the role of "journey" in conversion. McKnight speaks of the search for "certainty", but De Marco speaks of the 'call of certainty' that compels one to begin the journey in the first place:

It is an often painful journey through unknown lands, following the splendor of a call, following the appearance of a "certainty of a pure Presence" (Louis Massignon) that judges and burns the heart. It is the exit from a spiritual Egypt, by a voyage whose arrival point transcends the search, and reveals a land that is not that of the departure.

At the start of my own conversion journal after Easter in 2000, I quoted Newman's famous words from his Apologia:

You may think how lonely I am. ‘Obliviscere populum tuum et domum patris tui,’ has been in my ears for the last twelve hours. I realise more that we are leaving Littlemore, and it is like going on the open sea.

Even more striking is the way De Marco describes the peril of the journey--for you do not know how the journey will when you set out. This is great paradox for those who, according to McKnight, have a transcendant need for certainty. They must launch themselves into the unknown relying totally on God's mercy for any hope of reaching their destination. De Marco writes:

The fact that the arrival point is not guaranteed, that it must always be desired as if it were not possessed, as a gift that remains under the sovereignty of the Giver, all of this does not negate, but rather confirms the reality of the threshold. The precariousness of the gift, in fact, is such only for man. But with the crossing of the threshold, we know that He, the divine Lover (as the true mystics know him, beyond his ineffability) "takes us as it were by the hand, and introduces us to lasting life, to the true and correct life." And therefore: "Let us hold on tightly to his hand!". These are the tender, perfect words dedicated to baptism by Benedict XVI at the homily for the Easter vigil, at which Allam was baptized.

I commend the essay to you for consideration along with McKnight's article. If you are on the journey at the moment, may God bless you with the trust that you need to reach your destination. Don't let go of that Hand!

The Pope Arrives in the US

Just want to say that we are with you guys over there in the great US of A, and accompanying the Holy Father's journey in prayer. We are looking forward to his visit here in a few months when we can share the pleasure.

Congratulations to our New Vice-Regal Representative Quentin Bryce

Days after the news that the Australian Anglicans have broken the "stained-glass ceiling" by appointing their first female bishop, comes the news that there is some vice-regal glass being broken too: Our new PM, Kevin Rudd, has appointed a woman for the first time in our 107 year history as a nation to the post of Vice-Regal Representative (we don't, for some reason someone will tell me in the combox, use the term "Vice-Regent" for the Governor General). There have been women who have served as Governors of some of the States before (as has Ms Bryce herself), but this is a first on the national level.

(Nb. for foreign readers, each state, as a former colony of Great Britain, has its own Governor who is also a direct representative of our Monarch over the Sea in a relationship quite independant of the federal Vice-Regent--this could cause a problem for Australia if we chose to become a republic some time in the future).

It seems that just about everyone is happy with this avant-garde decision by our avant-garde Prime Minister. Many commentators are comparing it to the less wise choice of former Archbishop of Brisbane, Peter Hollingworth, by our former PM, John Howard. I liked (and still do like) Archbishop Peter, and it is perhaps wrong to judge Howard's Choice by the unfortunate way that Archbishop Hollingworth's term in office ended, but I do think that that choice was wrong in every way.

I offer my heartiest congratulations to Ms Bryce. I have absolutely no argument with women holding the highest office in the State--how could I? I am a fiercely loyal supporter of Her Majesty the Queen. After explaining to my daughter the other day that a woman cannot be a priest, much less a bishop, in the Catholic Church because priests and bishops are 'images' of the maile Christ (the simplest explanation for a young child next to "Jesus didn't appoint women among the Twelve), she very naturally concluded this morning that all our Governors should be women since the Queen is a woman...

Of course, it would be sad if our first woman Vice-Regal Representative was also the last Vice-Regal Representative ever. God save the Queen!

"Why Do Evangelicals Convert to the Catholic Church?" - Evangelical Theologians solve the Mystery!

Have you ever wondered why people like pizza? "Is mystery", as the great spanish philosopher and manservant Manuel once said. Well, the issue is now solved. Scientists and surveys have consistently proven that people like pizzas because they are yummy.

Have you ever wondered why people become Christians? Yes, I know people like Richard Dawkins would agree with Manuel's conclusion ("Is mystery"), but once again, it seems that the mystery has been solved. 100% of those who convert to Christianity have said that it has something to do with believing in Jesus Christ. Imagine that.

Well, now some evangelical theologians believe they have solved the riddle of "Why Are Evangelicals Converting to Roman Catholicism?" In this article, Michael J. Vlach of Theologicalstudies.org reports on Scot McKnight's September 2002 article in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society "From Wheaton to Rome: Why Evangelicals Become Roman Catholic."

And the answer is? Well, there are four answers:(1) a desire for certainty; (2) a desire for history; (3) a desire for unity; and (4) a desire for authority.

Fancy that, eh? Who'd have thought? One can barely resist the temptation to go "Duhhh." People like pizzas because they're yummy, they become Christians because they believe in Christ, and they become Catholics because they are seeking certainty, history, unity and authority.

But now, here is the really weird thing: is there something WRONG with these desires? I mean, are we supposed to think "Poor souls, led astray by their idolatrous desires"? Are they implying that those evangelicals who do NOT convert to the Catholic Church do NOT desire these things? Is there something "weak" in desiring these things? Are true Christians those who can hold their heads high and stand against the storms of controversy that rage in their traditions BECAUSE they lack of certainty, history, unity, and authority?

What is one to make of such observations?

St Pius X Hymnal PDF available for download from National Library of Australia - FREE!

The full music edition of an old Australian Catholic treasure, the "St Pius X Hymnal" is available for download in PDF from the National Library of Australia at http://nla.gov.au/nla.mus-vn2152603. And you don't have to pay a cent! Aren't librarians nice people?

First Woman Bishop for Australian Anglican Church

I asked an Anglican friend yesterday about current news in the Anglican Communion, to which he replied that there was nothing unusual, just the usual attempt to tear themselves apart. He was obviously unaware of the news that would be on the front page of The Age this morning, namely the appointment of the first woman bishop for the Australian Anglican Churches. I extend my congratulations to Archdeacon Kay Goldsworthy, but I must say that, like Cardinal Kasper before me, I see it as a dark day for Catholic-Anglican hopes of the restoration of full communion any time this side of the eschaton. Despite all my admiration for Bishop Tom Wright, I still cannot share his point of view in this response to Kasper's speech.

Reading Paul (properly)

I start my new Anima Education course "Reading Paul" on Monday night 6pm - 8pm at Mary Glowrey House (132 Nicholson Street, Fitzroy). You are welcome to come and join us if you live in or around Melbourne. The course will run continuously for the rest of the year during term time on Monday nights. You can sign up for the lot or just come on the nights you are free.

In fact, the course will be less a lecture and more a bible study. The aim is to find out as much as we can about St Paul and his message by reading about his journeys in Acts and reading his letters (in roughly chronological rather than biblical order). The Holy Father has announced that the "Year of St Paul" will begin on the Feast of Sts Peter and Paul (June 29) this year and close on the same date in 2009.

To prepare I am reading (among other things) a little Tom Wright book called "What Saint Paul Really Said". It is very short (less than 200 pages) and suitable for the lay reader. It also contains some very interesting discussion of "what St Paul really said" when he was talking about the "Righteousness of God" and "justification".

I can't give the whole thesis here, but I found this fascinating:

But if we come to Paul with these questions in mind--the questions about how human beings come into a living and saving relationship with the living and saving God--it is not justification that springs to his lips or pen. When he describes how persons, finding themselves confronted with the act of God in Christ, come to appropriate that act for themselves, he has a clear train of thought, repeated at various points. The message about Jesus and his cross and resurrection--'the gospel'...--is announced to them; through this means, God works by is Spirit upon their hearts; as a result, they come to believe the message; they join the Christian community through baptism, and begin to share in its common life and its common way of life. That is how people come into relationship with the living God.

The simplicity of that paragraph is quite breathtaking for one who was raised on interminable discussions coloured by Pelagian/Augustinian and Lutheran/Catholic arguments over the doctrine of Justification. Wright's entire argument is that Paul does not use 'justification' as a paradigm for personal salvation. Think about it.

If you are not convinced, he even quotes Alister McGrath (another great contemporary protestant theologian whom I have had the pleasure to hear speak in person) from his major work "Iustitia Dei", where he writes that 'the doctrine of justification'

has come to develop a meaning quite independent of its biblical origins... The church has chosen to subsume its dicussion of the reconcilation of man to God under the aegis of justification, thereby giving the concept an emphasis quite absent from the New Testament... quite independant of its Pauline origins...

The upshot of this, according to Wright, is that while the way in which the Church has chosen to use the term 'justification' is "neither here nor there", it is not legitimate to "ransack" Paul's letters for statements

dare we say even for proof-texts, on a subject which he may not himself have conceived in those terms. If it is true that Paul meant by 'justification' something which is significantly different from what subsequent debate has meant, then this appeal to him is consistently flawed, maybe even invalidated altogether."

Now THAT, I suggest, should cause a real problem for those who insist that the doctrine of justification should be based on "scripture alone".

(In case your appetite has been whetted by this short comment, there is a feast of material on the matter here at "The Paul Page")

Bishop Prowse argues for Faith into the Public Square in the Herald Sun

A marvellous column by our Auxiliary Bishop Christopher Prowse in the Herald Sun today (highlighted by Cathnews--it isn't a rag that I normally subscribe to) arguing for the Church's right to a voice in the abortion debate in this state. He states the issue clearly and precisely, so that even readers of the Herald Sun should be able understand it. Well done, my Lord!

The Age Obituary for + Frank Little

For those of you wanting more detail on our recently departed Archbishop Emeritus, The Age obituary has it about right. See here: "Gentle Leader of the Flock in a Changing Era".

A tribute to a couple of brave parents... [nb. I have fixed the broken link]

Please keep Mark and Teresa Streckfuss in your prayers. Their sixth (do I have that right?) child is about to be born any day now. Mark and Teresa were in my "Walk through the Scriptures" class for Anima Education in Ballarat recently. So was the unborn one.

The new child will be their sixth, but two of their children are already with the Lord. You can read the story of Benedict and Charlotte and of their parents' courage on this webpage.

I especially noted the quotation Teresa and Mark have on their website from Cardinal Newman:

God has created me to do him some definite service. He has committed some work to me which He has not committed to another. I have my mission - I may never know it in this life, but I shall be told it in the next.

I am a link in a chain, a bond of connection between persons. He has not created me for naught. I shall do good. I shall do His work. I shall be an angel of peace, a preacher of truth in my own place while not intending it - if I do but keep His commandments.

Therefore I will trust in Him. Whatever, wherever I am. I can never be thrown away. If I am in sickness, my sickness may serve Him; in perplexity, my perplexity may serve Him; if I am in sorrow, my sorrow may serve Him.

He does nothing in vain. He knows what He is about. He may take away my friends. He may throw me among strangers. He may make me feel desolate, make my spirits sink, hide my future from me - still He knows what he is about.

Church Music Composers and Publishers: Paying them only encourages them...

Have you ever wondered how the composers and publishers of music used in liturgy (hymns, Mass settings, etc) are paid for the time and effort involved in writing, producing and distributing their work?

So asks Elizabeth Harrington in her latest column. The answer in my case is "no", because I have spent many hours filling out copyright licence records etc. But what I do wish is that we could only return to those "Once upon a time" days that Elizabeth describes when "parishes purchased sets of hymnbooks for the assembly to use". Nowadays its something new every week, and unless it was composed and published since the 1960's it doesn't even get a look in for the parish.

Church music publishers and composers who make their living from flogging their wares onto the Christian community have a lot to answer for with regard to the destruction of a shared communal memory of sacred song.

Perhaps if we stopped paying them, they would stop doing it and go away?

A New Holmes!

In the midst of death we are in life: Benjamin Edward Holmes was born yesterday to Peter and Susie, bringing the total to SIX! Every congratulation and blessing to Susie and Peter on this wonderful occasion.

A blessing for Bejamin Edward:

May he be a Son of Joy for you
rather than a Son of Sorrow,
and a Son of Your Right Hand
as Benjamin was to his Father!
And may he grow in Faith
that he may be a fearless Confessor of Christ!

...like his father...

P.S.: Will number seven be Sherlock?

"The Ministry of Oversight" or the "Oversight of Ministry"?

I have just finished reading "The Ministry of Oversight", the final statement of the 2000-2007 round of dialogue between the Australian Catholic Churches and the Lutheran Church of Australia. You can read the media statement released from the Adelaide Archdiocesan office here.

The document as a whole is not available on line, and until it is, there is little point in me doing a commentary on it line by line on this blog. But it is my intention to do a complete critique at some time in the near future.

I think I may safely say that I am one of only two or three persons anywhere in the world who can really claim to have had an in depth working experience of both the LCA and Catholic systems of "episcopal" governance. Others may indeed by more knowlegable than me on either the Catholic or the Lutheran theology and practice of episkope, but as far as knowing the other (ie. Lutherans knowing the Catholic practice and doctrine and vice versa), I don't think there is anyone else as well placed as I am to offer comment.

The place of "ministry of episkope" in the Church is an essential matter for the dialogue between Lutherans and Catholics that must be squarely, honestly, and accurately addressed if there is any hope that Lutherans and Catholics will move further in the direction of full communion.

However, I don't think this document helps to advance this dialogue in any way. It is a deeply flawed document, which obfuscates rather than clarifies the issues between us, largely by basing the discussion on false equivalents (eg. Bishop=President, instead of Bishop=Pastor, or District=Local Church=Diocese instead of Congregation=Local Church=Diocese).

It mentions the problems raised by "Dominus Iesus" at the beginning regarding the true nature of the Church, but does not engage properly with its assertions. Of course the document came too late to deal with the amplification of the statement in "Dominus Iesus" in the CDF statement "Responses on the Nature of the Church", but fundamental disagreements between this statement from the CDF and "The Ministry of Oversight" almost render the latter statement useless.

"The Ministry of Oversight" shows a great deal of willingness and desire to reach agreement, but what agreement has been reached has been muddied by misunderstandings throughout. I can read it with both a Lutheran and Catholic mind, and I assure you, Catholics are hearing Lutherans say different things than what the Lutherans are actually saying in this document and vice versa.

I am deeply disappointed.

From a 2002 article in AD2000 on Seminary Statistics for Melbourne

An obvious feature of the graph below is the steep decline that has occurred from the high point in 1972 of 148 Corpus Christi seminarians (100 for Melbourne Archdiocese and 48 for rural Victoria and Tasmania) to a low point in 1996 of 21 students (including 12 for Melbourne). No doubt there are many explanations for this, not least smaller families and the inroads of secularism and materialism. Nor have divisions and controversies within the Church helped.

Yet despite these and other factors, the present graph also indicates an encouraging upturn.

Since 1996, the number of recruits for the Melbourne Archdiocese has increased significantly for the first time since the original decline set in - from 12 to 31 in 2002. And the number of inquiries continues to grow thanks to the efforts of the Catholic Vocations office (see opposite page), offering promise of further steady increases.

By Michael Gilchrist, AD2000 Vol 15 No 8 (September 2002), p. 6

I haven't been able to access the statistics on the Corpus Christi Seminary website referred to in this article, but current enrollment for Melbourne at the Seminary also stands at 31, with an intake of around 10 each year.

Just thought that was interesting.

So Pastor Inqvist gave up scotch for Lent...

(A story by Garrison Keillor from Lake Wobegon)

So Pastor Inqvist gave up scotch for Lent...

It happened one evening when Fr Wilmer called him from Our Lady of Perpetual Responsibility and called him up to come over. He said: "I need a little professional consultation."

So Pastor Inqvist went down to see his friend, the priest, who was feeling so down, just feeling utterly abandoned and alone in this world, as if he didn't have a single friend, just a whole lot of parishioners, who expected him to be holy and wise and reverent and everything that they wanted, but not a real human being.

He went back to the kitchen in the rectory and Fr Wilmer brought out a bottle of Pastor Inqvist's favourite scotch. It's one and half malt scotch. It's called "Mackay" and its made from water that's in the Hazel river in Scotland and that flows through sheep meadows and it flows through potato fields and it flows through pine forest and through this salt marsh, and it picks up the essence of juniper, and of starch and of lanolin, and of salt, and they pump it out of the ground and they mix it with malted barley and with yeast and then it sits there in the mash and the barrels. It's a beautiful, beautiful thing. It's a golden colour, and Fr Wilmer brought out the bottle and two glasses.

And he said: "Would you like a glass of it?"

Well, it was a complicated theological decision to make right there on the spot. I mean the wisdom of sacrifice and giving up something for Lent and the rightness of righteousness versus the goodness of fellowship and Fr Wilmer here in need, coming to assist a fellow pastor in his moment of need, the humility of giving up the pride of sacrifice. It was a very complicated theological calculation. And Pastor Inqvist made it in an instant, he is a trained theologian.

He said: "Yes. Yes."

I just thought that might add something to the discussion on fasting and abstinence I have been having with my friend Pastor Weedon!

The Age reports death of "Mild Mannered Archbishop" Little on page 4

John Button (one of our ex-pollies who died the same day) got front page.

Anyway, here are some of the things the late Archbishop's friends say about him in the article:

"I had 13 lovely years sitting opposite him at breakfast every morning. He was a holy man. He loved God and God's people. He was always fearful of hurting priests, and found it hard to correct or reprimand a priest." (Ballarat Bishop Peter Connors — Sir Frank's private secretary, then Vicar-General, then auxiliary bishop)

"The priests liked him. He understood Vatican II (1960s reforms of the Catholic Church) and its spirit, and was also an intelligent bishop and a reader." (Retired priest Eric Hodgens)

VALE ARCHBISHOP FRANK LITTLE DD KBE

(From press release from Catholic Communications)

The former Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne Thomas Francis Little died peacefully in his sleep last night at his home in Camberwell at the age of 82 years.

He was appointed the sixth Archbishop of Melbourne by Pope Paul VI, succeeding Cardinal Knox on the 1 July 1974. He resigned from the position in 1996 for health
reasons.

Melbourne’s Catholic Archbishop Denis Hart said today that the death of Archbishop Little will be felt deeply by many people in Melbourne.

“Archbishop Little will be fondly remembered as a dedicated caring leader of the Church for 22 years,” Archbishop Hart said today. “His sincere pastoral style and concern for his people was admired by all who met him.”

Archbishop Little was born in Werribee on 30 November 1925. He entered Corpus Christi College, then at Werribee, in 1943 to begin studies for the priesthood. In 1947, he continued his studies at Propaganda Fide College, Rome, and was ordained to the priesthood in the chapel of the College on 3 October 1950, by Cardinal Fumasoni Biondi.

For the next three years he pursued his doctoral studies through the Urban University in Rome and was awarded his doctorate in 1953. On his return to Melbourne in 1953 he was appointed as assistant priest to Carlton, then assistant at St Patrick's Cathedral in 1955. From 1956 to 1959, he worked as Secretary to the Apostolic Delegate, Archbishop Romolo Carboni, in Sydney. He returned to Melbourne as assistant priest to St Patrick's Cathedral in 1959, Dean of the Cathedral in 1965 and parish priest of St Ambrose's, Brunswick in 1971.

In Melbourne at this time he was actively involved in a wide range of activities. He was a lecturer in the Provincial seminary, a member of the Diocesan Ecumenical Affairs Commission, a member and Chair of Victorian Action for World Development, Episcopal Vicar for the Apostolate of the Laity and chaplain to teams of Our Lady.

He was ordained as a Bishop on 21 February 1973 by Cardinal James Knox during the International Eucharistic Congress held in Melbourne that year. Residing in Moonee Ponds as Parish Priest, and as a regional Bishop, he was given pastoral responsibility for the north western region of Melbourne.

In 1977 he was created a Knight Commander of the British Empire.

On the 10 April 1992 he was awarded an Honorary Doctorate of Theology by the Melbourne College of Divinity.

A Way out of the Maze? Cardinal Christoph Schönborn on Evangelisation and the Jews

Writing in the most recent edition of the Tablet ("Judaism’s way to salvation", 29 March 2008) Cardinal Christoph Schönborn suggests a way out of the maze surrounding the question of evangelisation and the Jewish people (most recently stirred up by the Good Friday prayer for the Jews in the Extraordinary Use of the Latin Rite).

What he suggests is quite radical, but I think it clearly shows a way ahead in this discussion. Here is how the Cardinal summarises his own essay:

The following short article tries - very simply - to consult the New Testament in an attempt to give an answer to the theory of the "Two Ways to Salvation". The article tries to show that according to the New Testament and from the Christian point of view there is only one salvation in Jesus Christ, but two clearly distinguishable ways of proclaiming and accepting this salvation. In this respect it must be made clear that the overture/offer to the Jews to recognise Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah cannot simply be equated with Christ's mandate to evangelise all (heathen) nations and make them his disciples (cf. Matthew 28: 18-20). That is what I have tried to explain below.

I think he is really onto something here, and he demonstrates this from the New Testament.

However, the article is a bit light on. It makes a suggestion, and gives reasonable basis for that suggestion, but there isn't room in a Tablet article for greater scholarly expansion. We understand that the editors do not wish to overtax their general readership. In this sense, the article is a little like Cardinal Schönborn's famous New York Times article on Creation and Evolution. Hopefully, as with that article, the good Cardinal will follow up this suggestion with an entire book.

My Review of "Ratzinger's Faith" by Tracey Rowland

I don't think I have put up the link to my review of this fine book. Here it is in the last edition of "The Kairos".

Giving Tony Blair a fair go over his speech at Westminster Cathedral

There are some out there who obviously have it in for Tony Blair. Fair enough. He was a political leader, and you are allowed to have it in for political leaders. Look how many people had it in for (and still do have it in for) our own Little Johnny Howard.

But some Catholic bloggers and commentators are still very hesitant to give Blair "a fair go" even though he has a whole new identity as an private citizen and as a Catholic to that which he had as a politician and a protestant. One example is Fr Tim at the Hermeneutic of Continuity) in reference to a recent and significant speech Tony Blair made in Westminster Cathedral as part of the "Cardinal's Lectures" last Thursday.

As a political leader and before he entered the Catholic Church he and his government did things and supported things that Catholics would have a right and duty to question. There was probably a large dose of "Real Politik" about all that. I find his explanation of that famous comment by his press secretary ("We don't do God") most interesting, and if you are looking for an explanation of why he did what he did when he was Prime Minister, you could probably find it there as clearly as anywhere.

We need to remember too that our brother in Christ, Tony, has chosen to enter the Catholic Church. That he chose to take that action only last December, and not years ago when he first married his Catholic wife, is an indication that his conversion is an honest one, and not just done for convenience. One presumes then that over the years he has gone through some process of development. One also needs to remember that he retired from his office of Prime Minister--he wasn't voted out. The reasons for his retirement may have been many, but at least one of them appears to have been so that he could enter the Catholic Church without creating a legal furore in England.

So I think we should give the bloke a fair go, as we say in this country.

And (apart from his citation of Karen Armstrong), I believe that he has put it about as clearly and as straight as he possibly could have done in his speech. You will find little that he said that was not completely in line with documents such as Nostra Aetate, "Dialogue and Mission", "Dialogue and Proclamation", or even the recent CDF statement on Evangelisation.

Here are some snippets:

One of the oddest questions I get asked in interviews (and I get asked a lot of odd questions) is: is faith important to your politics? It’s like asking someone whether their health is important to them or their family. If you are someone ‘of faith’ it is the focal point of belief in your life. There is no conceivable way that it wouldn’t affect your politics.

Let me be clear. I am not saying that it is extreme to believe your religious faith is the only true faith. Most people of faith do that. It doesn’t stop them respecting those of a different faith or indeed of no faith. We should respect humanists too and celebrate the good actions they do. Faith is problematic when it becomes a way of denigrating those who do not share it, as somehow lesser human beings. Faith as a means of exclusion.

Reading the Dawkins book – The God Delusion – I am struck by how much the militant secularist and the religious extremist need each other. The God Delusion is a brilliant polemic but rests entirely – as does the more reasonable The Blind Watchmaker - on the view that those who believe in God believe in Him as a means of exclusion, as a frightening, irrational piece of superstition and mumbo-jumbo which then justifies the unjustifiable.

I could quote many other fine passages of his speech.

He wasn't preaching a sermon--he was speaking to all people of goodwill ("people who have religious faith and those who have none")--so you can't expect him to have used "church speak". There is a certain "diplomacy" that is appropriate for us to adopt as Christians in the public square. It has nothing to do with going "soft" or "flakey" and everything to do with being as "wise as serpents and innocent as doves", to quote Someone. In other words, if this was a "political" speech, it was political in that Blair was using every trick in the political manual to persuade as many of those who listened to him as possible.

And what he is trying to persuade us to do is so very important. Like it or not, the people's of the world are divided by religion as much as by race or nation. I hope that you, like me, believe that the evangelising mission of the Church is our essential Christian calling. Learning the skills to co-exist in harmony with those of other religions (and none) is no enemy to this evangelising mission. In fact, I would say, the evangelising mission will not progress without it. The only way you can convert someone with whom you live in enmity is by force, and to seek conversions by such means is completely against God's will.

So let's give Brother Tony a fair go. I think his speech was a fine example of the way in which this new convert intends to live out his Catholic apostolate.

"Theology@ThePub": Starts Tuesday, 8 April

No, this is not "Spirituality In the Pub"--that's another mob. This program is run by the Victorian Catholic Students and Youth Association (VCSYA), and it is well worth attending. They asked me to be a speaker for this meeting, but unfortunately I couldn't fit it in. But have a squiz at who they got! and who they will be getting at future events! I don't think they need me!

Check out their Theology@thepub facebook page for details.

If you are between 18 and 35, get yourself down to the pub tomorrow night for a really good night out!

Third Colloquium on the New Evangelisation Evangelical Preaching (April 11–12, 2008)

By golly, this sounds good. Anyone in or around Syndey is strongly urged to enrol and attend. I am jealous that time and budget prohibit me from doing so. Check out the speakers!

Third Colloquium on the New Evangelisation Evangelical Preaching (April 11–12, 2008)

An open Letter to Dr Matthew Del Nevo of the Broken Bay Institute

Thanks to Church Resources, I received today a copy of Dr Matthew Del Nevo's ruminations on the matter of leadership in the Church. I don't know Matthew from a bar of soap, but his general instinct appears to be good, although some of his thoughts might lead off in the wrong direction. So I have written to him about his article. Here is the letter I wrote.

Dear Dr Matthew,

I read with interest your short article in the Mission and Spirituality News about leadership.

I agree with you that the church in Australia is in a period of "de-evangelisation"--quite catastrophically so.

You speak of the "objectification" of leadership, and the need for a more spirit-led notion of leadership.

I presume you are quite aware of the distinction between charismatic and institutional leadership. The historical fact is that the Church has always had both, valued both, and required both. They should not be seen in tension. In the new Testament there were both the "apostle" and the "prophet". In the Old Testament the two types of leadership can be seen in the "judge" and the "king". The institutional leadership needs the charismatic leadership for life and energy, and the charismatic leadership must also be loyal to the institutional leadership.

I believe that today the Catholic Church has a notion of "charismatic" leadership in the terminology of "apostolate". Non-institutional/non-"office" leaders can answer their vocation and their apostolate without the need for the institutional leadership to do anything but "allow" it to happen, and only curb it when such "leadership" is being exercised against the well-being of the Church and her faith. In the same way, Charismatic leaders are authentic "Spirit-led" leaders when they lead in accordance with the Church and her faith.

I believe that to a large degree we are already seeing this happen.

God bless your research.

Thank you, Sisters of Nazareth of Ballarat

My wife and daughters and I have just had the most wonderful "holiday" in Ballarat, a regional Victorian city, which came to prominence with the discovery of gold in 1851. It has been, in the past and is still today (to a lesser extent, but we have hopes for its future), a centre of Catholic life in Victoria.

We went up there because I was teaching a course for Anima Education called "A walk through the scriptures"--more of a "hundred metre dash" really, as it was to be done in just six two hour sessions over this past weekend.

We were the guests of the Sisters of Nazareth at Nazareth House on the shores of Lake Wendouree in Ballarat. The old Convent is now almost totally dedicated to Aged Care, and the eight or so sisters in the community have lots of lay help. We want to thank especially Sr Paula and the indomitable Mary (the very model of the traditional Irish housekeeper). Sister Dominca, the superior in the house, was absent, but we owe her a debt of thanks for the hospitality of the whole community. It was Maddy and Mia's first time in a real convent, and they found its proportions suitably impressive (and perfect for "adventures" and "exploring").

And here is it's chapel (Mass 7am in the morning weekdays--still dark as it was before the end of daylight saving)

Although I spent the last three days teaching, the Sisters were kind enough to put us up for a couple of extra days, which allowed us to explore the Ballarat gold fields together as a family. Of course, Soveriegn Hill was a great attraction. It is a very good reproduction goldfield town, a sort of theme park, where the girls could pan for gold (and yes, we did find some small flecks to bring home) and we could tour the old mines.


The girls also got to handle some real gold nuggets--recently found by metal detector gold seekers--worth about $8-10,000:


Of course, the big news story in Ballarat is now over 150 years old--the Eureka Stockade. It is a complicated story, not helped by the fact that leftist political factions and unions continue to use it as their defining image today (the flag is used by the Union movement--quite provocatively). Australians have never really agreed on the meaning of the battle of the Eureka Stockade, but that doesn't stop the modern commentary designed for young people and schools using the most ideological language to describe these events. I like to think I used the opportunity well to educate the children in the difference between "facts" and the interpretation given to "facts" when we string them together to make a story or an "history". Any way, it was still impressive to see the original 150 year old flag at the Ballarat Fine Art Gallery. Cathy took this picture of it, dim because it is in a very dark room to stop it from fading:

The Gallery has some truly fine art, such as this:

But it was also playing host to an exhibition of prize winning Year 12 student art projects. I must admit that I found none of it fine or beautiful or morally uplifting. I was most embarrased to see that this example won this prize:


Says it all really.

Of course the whole point of spending time at a convent is to learn a little of the "Imitatio Christi"... Here are the girls imitating our Lord in their own special way by walking across Lake Wendouree. Remember we are in a drought here in southern Australia. And yes, those are boat sheds in the background...