A new entry (finally!) on my Year of Grace retro-conversion blog

Yes, dear, patient reader: I have finally gotten around to continuing the ongoing saga of my conversion to the Catholic Church with this blog at Year of Grace: http://yearofgrace.blogspot.com/2008/08/sunday-11th-march-2001-on-eve-of-my.html. There's some really serious stuff there, well worth reading, if I may say so, including this statement:

My only hope is to fully submit myself to Christ's Lordship and authority on the matter, and to do this, I must seek out those who exercise this authority. If they judge me to be free to remarry, I will accept their judgement. If they judge me not to have been free to enter into a new marriage relationship, I will accept their judgement on this too. I will never sever my marriage with Cathy--what? shall we sin all the more that grace may abound even more?--but I will live to the full the covenant of marriage with her that I should have lived with my first wife, and I will live a life of prayer and faith and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. And I will go to every mass knowing that in this mass the body and blood of Christ is indeed being offered for my sin whether I commune or not.

There is probably so much here that you would say is not "rightly dividing law and gospel". But things are not always as black and white as "law" and "gospel". I am a broken, sinful human being, who never the less is justified through faith in Christ in baptism, and I live by the mercy of God. I do not demand that he change his law for me. It is enough to know that Christ has died for me, and that I will sit at God's table in eternity when I will be free from all brokenness, and all the grey stains of sin.

If you have never read my Year of Grace blog, check it all out here.

The battle is on in St Mary's South Brisbane?

Take a look.

A final comment: The Difference between Schütz (David) and Schütz (Roger)

Reflecting on the two previous posts, I want to add a final statement that most clearly clears up the confusion I was feeling in regard to Cardinal Kasper's comments about Brother Roger.

The difference between Roger Schütz and David Schütz with regard to communion with the Catholic Church (I am limiting myself here - the most obvious difference between Br Roger and myself is that he was a saint, and I am a long way from achieving that goal) is that he did not believe that he was called to enter into full formal communion with the Bishop of Rome. The main reason for this appears to have been that he believed formal unity with Rome would have worked against his personal vocation to promote Christian unity.

I, on the other hand, did feel that God was calling me to enter formal communion with the Catholic Church. My own committment to ecumenism was (and is) no less than Brother Roger's. In my own conscience, formal communion with the See of Peter is the only way in which I believe I can be true to that my vocation to promote Christian unity.

Unfortunately, that means that at the same time I have had to embrace the pain of ruptured communion with the "the faith of my origins" - pain that goes to the very heart of my personal life with family and friends. It is my profound prayer and hope that within "the mystery of the Catholic faith" this communion will one day be fully restored.

Some resolution on the Brother Roger question?

In the dicussion about Brother Roger's ecclesial status in the post below, Dr Mike Liccione pointed to a comment by one of his commentators on his blog. For the record, Mike, I think your commentator has it exactly right.

Question: Was Brother Roger in full Eucharistic Communion with the Catholic Church or not?
Answer: He was not.
Question: Was Brother Roger given Eucharistic Communion in the Catholic Church or not?
Answer: He was.

Although it sounds contradictory, this is fully in keeping with the practice of the Church. Baptised Christians who have not been received into full Eucharistic Communion with the Catholic Church may be given communion under certain circumstances.

The canon law that applies is as follows:

CIC 844 p. 3: "Catholic ministers may licitly administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist and anointing of the sick to members of the oriental churches which do not have full Communion with the Catholic Church, if they ask on their own for the sacraments and are properly disposed. This holds also for members of other churches, which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition as the oriental churches as far as these sacraments are concerned"

CIC 844 p. 4: "If the danger of death is present or other grave necessity, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or the conference of bishops, Catholic ministers may licitly administer these sacraments to other Christians who do not have full Communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and on their own ask for it, provided they manifest Catholic faith in these sacraments and are properly disposed"

While on the surface, paragraph 4 appears fairly restrictive, it has in fact been exercised pastorally with some latitude.

I will give an example. My Lutheran wife and oldest daughter do not (as a rule) receive communion when the come with me to mass (my second daughter is doing her first communion at her Lutheran parish in a few weeks time). They respect me and my beliefs and they respect the Church's beliefs. However, they do have a genuinely Catholic belief in the sacrament, and are very well disposed toward the Catholic Church. But at World Youth Day, after a week of immersion in the whole Catholic thing, and then to be at the Eucharist with the Holy Father while at the same time having no access that day to a Lutheran eucharist, they asked me if it would be permissable to receive communion. I pointed out the Church's teaching on the matter, and then said that they should judge for themselves. They both communed.

This was, however, a highly exceptional circumstance, and they have not used this one reception of communion as an excuse to begin receiving communion at other times when they come to mass with me. I imagine, however, that if I were to die tomorrow, they would all receive communion at my funeral mass. And this too would be according to the Church's practice, which makes allowance for such pastoral situations.

So it would be wrong, I think, to view the (admittedly repeated) instances in which Br Roger received communion in the Catholic Church as a statement that he was in full communion with the Catholic Church. The Ecumenical Directory of 1993 (p. 101) states clearly that

"In the present state of our relations with the ecclesial Communities of the Reformation of the 16th century, we have not yet reached agreement about the significance or sacramental nature or even of the administration of the sacrament of Confirmation. Therefore, under present circumstances, persons entering into full communion with the Catholic Church from one of these Communities are to receive the sacrament of Confirmation according to the doctrine and rite of the Catholic Church before being admitted to Eucharistic communion."

Roger had not received Catholic confirmation, so he cannot have been said to have been "admitted to" Eucharistic communion.

However he was GIVEN Eucharistic communion. This must be taken as recognition that (as the canons say) he "manifested Catholic faith in these sacraments and was properly disposed". And that is about the sum of what Cardinal Kasper says in his interview. Nothing more and nothing less. It was the repeated instances in which Br Roger was given communion which led to the impression that he had been "admitted to" full Eucharistic communion.

I might end by quoting a little of the Ecumenical Directory (1993), p.129ff:

129. A sacrament is an act of Christ and of the Church through the Spirit. Its celebration in a concrete community is the sign of the reality of its unity in faith, worship and community life. As well as being signs, sacraments—most specially the Eucharist—are sources of the unity of the Christian community and of spiritual life, and are means for building them up. Thus Eucharistic communion is inseparably linked to full ecclesial communion and its visible expression.

At the same time, the Catholic Church teaches that by baptism members of other Churches and ecclesial Communities are brought into a real, even if imperfect communion, with the Catholic Church and that "baptism, which constitutes the sacramental bond of unity existing among all who through it are reborn... is wholly directed toward the acquiring of fullness of life in Christ". The Eucharist is, for the baptised, a spiritual food which enables them to overcome sin and to live the very life of Christ, to be incorporated more profoundly in Him and share more intensely in the whole economy of the Mystery of Christ.

It is in the light of these two basic principles, which must always be taken into account together, that in general the Catholic Church permits access to its Eucharistic communion and to the sacraments of penance and anointing of the sick, only to those who share its oneness in faith, worship and ecclesial life. For the same reasons, it also recognises that in certain circumstances, by way of exception, and under certain conditions, access to these sacraments may be permitted, or even commended, for Christians of other Churches and ecclesial Communities.

...Catholic ministers will judge individual cases and administer these sacraments only in accord with these established norms, where they exist. Otherwise they will judge according to the norms of this Directory.

Schütz (David) still confused on Schütz (Roger)

Sandro Magister is very helpful in giving us the complete interview with Cardinal Walter Kasper on the "Riddle of Brother Roger". Does Magister have his tongue firmly planted in his cheek when he says that through this interview Cardinal Kasper "solved" the riddle of Brother Roger's confessional belonging? For me, it raises so many questions. Such as "If Brother Roger could be Catholic without breaking communion with his protestant roots, why did I have to?" or "Does such an ecumencal solution only apply to people who have access to a personal friendship with the pope?" or "Can we expect a cause for Brother Roger's sainthood to be opened in two years time (ie. five years after his death)?"

Don't get me wrong. I truly believe Br Roger was a saint, and I also believe that he was, to all extents and purposes, a Catholic, even if not "formally" so. But no matter how sincere he was in his attachment to the Catholic faith, how come the canons did not apply to him, but apply to the rest of us?

And a couple more questions: If Br Roger daily received communion at the Catholic liturgy in Taize, did he still receive communion from Protestant altars? (although, I understand that protestant eucharists are not celebrated at Taize). And did he continue, as an ordained Reformed minister, to celebrate the Eucharist himself?

I only ask.

A real storm brewing over Pro-Abortion "Catholic" Politicians in the US

In case you have been living under a rock, in the last 48 hours a "perfect storm" has begun to brew in the United States over pro-abortion politicians who are publicly known to be practicing (if not actually "faithful") Catholics. And, as with our "test case" here in Oz, the bishops are the ones caught in the centre (since responsibility for the administration of the eucharist in their dioceses ultimately falls upon them).

Here are the links. Read them for yourself.

whispersintheloggia "Hail Columbia... Hello controversy
John Allen: "With Biden Pick, America's Bishops face a familiar headache
Perlosi interview transcript from "Meet the Press" (go down the page or search for "abortion" and you will find the relevant section)
whispersintheloggia "Egan: Pelosi positions utterly incredible"
USCCB statement
Sandrao Magister at chiesa.come " Obama's pick for Vice President is Catholic. But the Bishops Deny him Communion (well, some anyway - Magister includes the interview with Raymond Burke, now Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura)

More good news from Melbourne - Thanksgiving Program Increases!

The latest newsletter from Catholic Fundraising in Melbourne has good news: giving in the Archdiocese is up, it has been rising for the last six years, and there is room for more growth! All this is despite the falling massing attendances:

Thanksgiving income in the Archdiocese of Melbourne continues to rise, despite dwindling Mass attendances.The latest figures suggest that many Catholics are very happy to support their parish financially, even if they do not attend Mass every Sunday. Credit card and direct debit giving continues to grow with one Melbourne parish now receiving 53% of its Thanksgiving income from these sources. Highlights from the past six years (2001-2006) included:

· 126 Melbourne parishes used the services of Catholic Fundraising
· Their Thanksgiving income increased by 36%
· The remaining parishes’ income increased by 6%, during the same period
· The socio-economics of client and non-client parishes are identical
· Client parishes experienced a drop in Mass attendance of 9%
· Non-client parishes lost 14% of their congregation
· The average household giving in client parishes was 20% higher than in non-client parishes
o The participation rate among Mass-goers in client parishes was 57%, in non-client parishes it was 52%
· Client parish average annual income was $ 149,639
· Non-client parish average annual income was $81,180
· Client parishes, therefore, were $68,459 a year better off—or $1,317 a week

All of this information is based on actual receipts, as submitted by parishes in their Annual Returns to the Diocese from 2001-2006.

I take all my hats off (and I own quite a few) to the team at Catholic Fundraising. They are doing a great job. And keeping me, at least, in full time employment (or, more to the point, with a full time salary).

And here are some real life reports:

East Keilor
St Peter the Apostle Parish had not used the services of Catholic Fundraising since I 99 I. Fr Anthony Doran and the Parish Finance Commiftee decided it was time to do so again, It paid off! Income increased from $2,263 a week to $4,404 weekly with 47 new givers. Fr Doran summed it up “Overall, the feedback has been very positive from the parish and the results exceeded our expectations”.

Rushworth
Fr Owen Doyle parish prest of St Marys Rushworth took on a professional renewal of the parish Thanksgiving Programme at a time when others of his age have long since retired. This youthful octogenarian has always done things differently — like becoming a late vocation to the priesthood when his wife and mother to his nine children died.Today Fr Doyle still celebrates four weekend Masses at Rushworth, Stanhope, Cornella and Murchison — a round trip of 120 kilometres. The result of the programme reflected the high esteem in which Fr Doyle is held by parishioners. Income increased from $339 weekly to $1,134 weekly, with 43 new contributors joining the programme.

Now if only we can initiate a Catholic Mass Attendance program along the same lines as the Thanksgiving program, which (like the Thanksgiving program) includes an every member visitation, but focused on getting non-active members to sign up to attend mass each Sunday, then the Archdiocese will be booming! I guess we only have to invent a way for them to attend mass "electronically" on Sunday so that they don't have to get out of bed...

The Fifth Mark of the Church

I would suggest this as an addition to the Creed, but it would probably endanger the Orthodox/Catholic relationship more than the filioque. Thanks to the Ironic Catholic who linked it from Orthometer.

Don Vincente: Erik, always remember the fifth mark of the Church.

Me: Fifth mark?? (Thinking that father had gone off into lala-land.)

Don Vincente: The Church is One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and funny.

A new meaning of the word "Reformed" that I was not previously aware of...

Cardinal Pole (still blogging after almost 500 years) asks the question "Where do they find these people?" We at SCM wonder too. The article in question is from the Sydney Morning Herald "A heart divided finds a new path to peace".

Well, "Sister Meg" has certain found a "new" path, but where it leads is anyone's guess. All I can say about this so-called "Reformed Catholic Church" is that it seems to use the adjective "reformed" in the sense of "revolutionary". (cf. Chesterton's quote at the top of this page).

The kindest cut...

In our discussion below about St Mary's, Perigrinus said:

You can’t force people to be in communion with you. You can certainly force them out of communion with you, though, or accelerate that rupture, but that is pretty much the last thing any bishop ought to do, ever, to anyone. Hence, if he is to err, a bishop ought to err on the side of maintaining connections, building bridges and seeking to repair relationships, not terminate them.

Sure, he could reassign the administrator, appoint a new administrator or paster and thereby reassert control over the church building. But the church building is just bricks and mortar, and is of no real consequence. If the price of doing that is irrevocably driving the community out, then that action does not build up the church; it breaks it down.

There are obviously difficult decisions facing the archbishop here, and no choice open to him is free of downside, or will insulate him from criticism. But I think his instinct here is sound; he wants this community in the church, not out of it, and he’s inviting – or perhaps challenging - them to want the same thing, and to act like they want it.

And Joshua made the comment:

As David would no doubt say, the real issue here is that the people of St Mary's have not only been cut off from true catechesis, they have been subject to false catechesis for decades - this is spiritual abuse of the faithful, surely a terrible crime.

Before I comment further, I want to make it clear that I am not criticising or trying to advise Dr Bathersby on what he should have done or should do, I am simply wanting to discuss this as a "test case" situation, in the abstract, as it were.

I regard to Perry's and Josh's comments, I must say I am with Joshua on this one. Sometimes acting "compassionately" can be an excuse for inaction or indecision, and the lack of action and decision can end up causing more hurt in the end. Classic sayings come to mind (which can be added to the one I originally cited of "a stitch in time saves nine") such as "you've got to be cruel to be kind" or "spare the rod and spoil the child". Of course, declaring an entire parish to be out of communion with the Catholic Church (= excommunicated) is a drastic action (and hopefully will not be required). And the removal of a much loved pastor and the insertion of a new pastor can be vehemently resented. However, if the over all health of the parish and its members is what is in view, sometimes these things need to be done.

As Joshua says, it is truly a form of abuse to turn a blind eye when a man who is supposed to be a spiritual father leads the children of the Church astray. The Church (and its bishops in particular) are currently copping a lot of (genuinely deserved) flack for turning a blind eye toward priests who were sexually abusing those in their charge. Although the world will not see it as the same thing, turning a blind eye toward the activities of heterodox pastors in our Catholic parishes is just as culpable.

It is not an act of compassion when the surgeon hesitates to amputate while gangrene spreads in a limb for fear of the pain that would be caused by such an operation. For the sake of the children of the Church, the kindest cut is the quickest and most decisive one.

Developments in the Glorious See of Melbourne

Just a few bits of news I thought I would share with you all - for your prayers and thanksgivings:

The Archbishop has announced that there will be a change of Director at the Archbishop’s Office for Evangelisation. Father Greg Bennet has asked to return to full time parish ministry. We say "Well done, good and faithful servant", and pray God's blessing on his future ministry.

Brother Mark O’Connor will be the new Director of the Office as of 2009. Again, this is a case of "Well done, good and faithful servant", since as as director for Melbourne's Days in Diocese program, he successfully pulled off an event bigger than our Commonwealth Games a few years ago. Brother Mark is a man who knows something about evangelisation, was a part of the team in the old Catholic Adult Education Melbourne days, and is known around the traps as the "Cardinal Hunter" (due to his relentless efforts in getting well known cardinals to visit Melbourne for lecture tours). They say the guys in red run a mile when they see him coming in Rome!

And we congratulate Fr Mark Withoos, a young priest of the diocese who has been studying in Rome. Fr Mark has been requested by the Holy See to serve in the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments. A good start in life, and a bloke eminently suited to the task.

Finally, your prayers for those who will be ordained priest on 6 Sept at 10am in the Cathedral. You could not say that Deacons Binh Le, Thang Vu, Dispin John and Anh Nguyen are a reflection of the Anglo-Irish past of this archdiocese, but they are certainly the face of the Church today! They are all terrific blokes who will be energetic workers in the Lord's vineyard.

Crickey.com on the Gold Medal tally

I must be a bit thick. I can't make out this article on Crickey.com "The Real Olympic Medal Tally".

They have a couple of really helpful tables giving the tally adjusted for population and GDP:



Where I feel that I am missing the point is in the "citizens per medal" category. How does this differ from "medals per population" category, and how does it give such a different result? For instance, the article claims that

When we calculate how many citizens it takes to earn a gold medal, Australia rockets to the top of the standings. It's beyond doubt: Australia converts citizens into gold medals more efficiently than any other nation in the top ten. And into that list you can add New Zealand, which takes 4,173,460 citizens to produce one gold medal. That makes Australia roughly three times more efficient at converting citizens into gold medals than our cross-Tasman rivals, and more than twice as efficient as the Brits.

But 4,173,460 is the population of New Zealand - give or take a few thousand non-naturalised residents. What do they mean that it takes "4,173,460 citizens to produce one gold medal" - didn't New Zealand get three gold medals? What sort of maths are they using here at Crickey? And then why, if New Zealand got 1 medal per 4,173,460 citizens, didn't it get included in the second table above in fourth place?

I'm confused.

Weeding the garden in South Brisbane

On Saturday, I weeded my lawn. I had let it go for a long time, and during the winter it had turned into a field of lush, green onion weed. Yech. If I had left it any later it would have flowered. I understand that once this happens, the bulbs begin to multiply or something. Any way, a stitch in time saves nine, as they say. Better to be merciful and pull up the tares now, so that the lawn has a chance to grow come Spring.

Not withstanding Jesus' own advice to leave the tares growing among the wheat until the last judgement, the weeding metaphor relates well to the pastoral ministry. Deal with a problem now, and deal with it properly, because if you leave it for later it will only come back ten times bigger to bite you.

It is a lesson that Archbishop Bathersby might well be pondering at this time.

_________________

See further:

St Mary's South Brisbane

The Courier Mail: Future of St Mary's South Brisbane Church in doubt

Letter to AD2000

Cathnews article - which quotes a parishioner rather disingenuously saying that a "very right wing parishioner came and was offended by...an image of a praying monk which they mistook as a Buddha"

However, from St Mary's own blogsite:From St Mary's Blog site

MINDFULNESS MEDITATION GROUP In the Buddhist tradition of the Most Venerable Thich Nhat Hanh (Thây), Practices on Monday evenings in the Church from 6.45pm till 8.30pm. Contact Lyndall a/h on 33001855 for further info

Hmmm. So was it a "Buddha" or a "praying monk"? But wasn't the Buddha a "praying monk"?

_________________

More thoughts...

Isn't this a rather strange way of handling the situation? I mean, effectively, His Grace appears to be suggesting (in the kindest possible way) that he intends to excommunicate the entire parish. And he says this in a letter, for goodness sake; a letter which doesn't really spell out the procedure from here on in.

Now, I know this is really none of my business, but if you were the bishop, wouldn't you simply move quickly to appoint a new orthodox parish priest? Nb. according to the letter, the current parish priest is in fact simply an administrator, not the "parish priest" as has been continuously said; and it appears that this administrator has permitted a priest from another diocese to effectively run the show. The current administrator has been in the parish for 28 years. A recipe for disaster. Long pastorates can sometimes lead to ensconced idiosyncrasies, whereas regular changes of pastors generally keeps a parish more conscious of the fact that it belongs to a diocesan church and is not a self-contained community. It was the same situation in Redfern in Sydney. Archbishop Pell dealt with that - although not with entirely happy consequeces to be sure.

Still. Have a look at that church building. Isn't there going to be property issues if in fact the parish as a whole does accept the Archbishop's ultimatum? And what will orthodox Catholic parishioners (those who are still there) be told to do? Travel elsewhere?

It all begs too many questions. I expect that we will hear more.

When 14 Gold Medals are not enough!

Australia is still 5th on the overall medal tally (with 46 medals in total - I don't agree with Roy and H.G. that losing begins with silver), JUST ONE medal behind Great Britain (who, I have agreed with Tony, are "doing OK" - just "OK"). And with a whopping 14 gold medals.

But a quick glance here and you will see that we have actually gone DOWNHILL since the 2004 Athens Olympics which saw the end of our upward surge in the gold mine with 17 Gold medals (one up on Sydney 2000), and way down in the total medal tally at Sydney which was 58.

Is it - and I ask this as one who doesn't know much in this area - that we Australians are not SPENDING ENOUGH on sport????

The paper this morning estimated that each of our gold medals cost us about 100 million dollars in sport related investment.

Hmmm...

One wonders whether if we spent a little less on the arts, and perhaps on overseas aid, we might not be able to edge in a few more gold medals when we get to London in four years time...?

Peter the first Pope?

Did your priest tell the congregation this morning that "Peter wasn't the first pope"? It was almost predictable really.

Which got me thinking. Of course, he wasn't the first pope. Of course the papacy per se came much later.

But he WAS the first "Peter". That is, he was the first to exercise the Petrine ministry in the Church, which existed right from the time Jesus told him to feed his sheep and strengthen his brothers.

Since then, there have been 264 "Peters". Since at least the late second century, these "Peters" have been known as the "pope". They were all chief pastors ("bishops") of the Church of Rome.

So, to say Peter was "not the first pope" is just being contentious. The real point is not that Peter was the first Pope, but that the Pope is the 264th Peter.

In case you are having trouble grasping the concept, it looks like this:

Australia! Olympic World Champions!

Well, okay, we're only fifth on the Olympic Medal Tally - but HEY! That's FIFTH!!! We're ahead of Germany, Korea, Japan, Italy, France, Spain, New Zealand, Canada - just about everywhere except for those really, really BIG nations, China, the US, Russia and Great Britain (okay, GB is titchy in size, but they have heaps more people than us).

Let's do the maths, guys.

China: Population 1,321,851,888; Medals 81
Medals per head of population = 0.000000006127

United STates: Population 301,139,947; Medals 83
Medals per head of population = 0.00000027561

Great Britain: Population 60,776,238; Medals 39;
Medals per head of population = 0.00000064169

Russia: Population 141,377,752; Medals 47;
Medals per head of population = 0.00000000707

Australia: Population 20,434,176; Medals 37;
That equates to a WHOPPING 0.00000181069 medals per head of population!!!!!

And in case THAT doesn't sound impressive, on these figures, if Australia was as big as:

Great Britain, we would have 110 medals
Russia, we would have 256 medals
United States, we would have 545 medals
China, we would have 2,393 medals.

Yes, these are the GREATEST GAMES EVER!!!! and the Ozzies are the CHAMPIONS OF THE WORLD!

(For more evidence, just here's H.G. Nelson's latest column in Crikey.com)

Dormition and Assumption - "A Twofold Tradition" - No contradiction, says Pope

I don't know if this has been picked up on much in the Blogosphere, but according to HH, Benny Sixteen, there is no contradiction between the Eastern and Western traditions surrounding our Lady's final destiny. Together they form a part of "the uninterrupted faith of the Church".

While noting that the Scripture's "last reference to her earthly life" is that she was in the Cenacle with the apostles on the day of Pentecost (placing her squarely "situated in the mystery of Christ and of the Church"), "subsequently, a twofold tradition -- in Jerusalem and Ephesus -- attests to her "dormition," as the East says, that is, her "falling asleep" in God."

He then goes on as if to say that the "Dormition" - Mary's bodily death - is to be accepted as an authentic part of the Catholic (Western) Faith also, despite the deliberate manner in which Pius XII left the question open in his declaration in 1950:

That [her "falling asleep"] was the event that preceded her passage from earth to heaven, confessed by the uninterrupted faith of the Church. In the eighth century, for example, John Damascene, great doctor of the Eastern Church, established a direct relation between Mary's "dormition" and Jesus' death, affirming explicitly the truth of her corporal assumption. In a famous homily he wrote: "It was necessary that she who bore the Creator in her womb when he was a baby, should live with him in the tabernacles of heaven" (Second Homily on the Dormition, 14, PG 96, 741 B).

Could it be that Pope Benedict is not only offering an "olive branch" to the Eastern Churches on this matter, but the whole bloody tree?!

The continuing enigma of Brother Roger

I am very interested in this report from Zenit. My one question: Is this a road open to others? Which of course leads to two other questions: If not, why not? and if so, under what conditions?

Cardinal Kasper also addressed continued uncertainty about Brother Roger's relationships with the Catholic faith.

He explained that when the religious received holy Communion publicly at Pope John Paul II's funeral, this was nothing new, as he "received Communion on many occasions."

Roger Schutz, pastor of the Reformed Church, "already from his youth nourished his faith and spiritual life from the sources of other Christian traditions, thus crossing over certain confessional limits. His desire to follow a monastic vocation and, with that intention, to found a new community with Reformed Christians, says much about this search," the cardinal explained.

With the passing of the years, he continued, "the faith of the prior of Taizé was enriched with the patrimony of the faith of the Catholic Church. According to his own testimony, referring precisely to the mystery of the Catholic faith, he understood certain elements of the faith, such as the role of the Virgin Mary in the history of salvation, the real presence of Christ in the Eucharistic gifts and the Church's apostolic ministry. In response, the Catholic Church accepted his access to Communion."

Brother Roger "received Communion on many occasions from the hands of John Paul II, who had a bond of friendship with him since the time of the Second Vatican Council, and who was familiar with his journey in the Catholic faith," Cardinal Kasper affirmed. "In this connection, there was nothing secret or concealed in the posture of the Catholic Church, either in Taizé or in Rome."

Cardinal Kasper recalled Brother Roger's words at a European meeting of young people in Rome in 1980, in which he "described his own path and Christian identity," stating that he had found his identity "reconciling in himself the faith of his origins with the mystery of the Catholic faith, without breaking communion with anyone."

"In his conscience, he had entered into the mystery of the Catholic faith as one who grows, without the need to 'abandon' or 'break' with what he had received or lived before," said the cardinal. He added that "out of respect for the journey of faith of the prior of Taizé, it would be preferable in his case not to apply categories that he considered inappropriate for his experience and that, moreover, the Catholic Church never wished to impose on him."

Friend of Popes

The cardinal also highlighted Brother Roger's personal friendship with the most recent Popes.

"On one hand, the prior of Taizé felt very close to the Bishops of Rome, in their concern to lead the Church of Christ on the path of spiritual renewal, Christian unity, service to the poor and witness of the Gospel," he said. Brother Roger also felt "profoundly understood and supported by the Popes in his personal spiritual journey and in the direction that the young Community of Taizé was taking."

The desire to "act in harmony with the thought of the Bishop of Rome was for him a compass in all his actions," Cardinal Kasper concluded. "He would never have implemented an initiative that went against the opinion or will of the Pope."

"Abortion Law Victory"?

I just about fell off my chair when I read this headline in The Age this morning: "Campaigner Kirner hails abortion law victory". Victory?! My God, I thought, that was fast! You mean they've passed the bill already?

Well, no, not yet. The Age has shouted its triumph just a tad early. The bill (to completely legalise abortion for whatever reason up to 24 weeks by removing it from the criminal code and put it under the health act) is still under debate, and will be for some time yet. Apparently the "victory" was simply the presentation of the bill in the House.

I am not confident that it will be defeated. In other words, despite the best efforts of pro-life campaigners (and worst - some of thes guys are really inept when it comes to the art of persuasion), I believe the bill will be passed on the strength of the power of the twin tyrannies of democracy: individual autonomy and public opinion. That, coupled with the fact that there is no forum in which rational debate suffers more than in politics.

It is also emerging that there is only one clear opponent to fully legalised abortion in our Australian society: Christianity. And within the Christian community, there is only one Church which speaks with a united, consistent and philosophically rational voice: The Catholic Church.

The supporters of legalised abortion know that the Church is "the enemy", and the only opponent who really counts. So this article in yesterday's edition of The Age is no surprise. Neither is this argument, presented in that article:

Her Catholic upbringing clashed with her fierce conviction that she had ownership of her own body. The latter won. "And I think that's where the church has got it so hideously wrong, in celibate men telling people how to live their lives. It's just not appropriate."

Funny thing though (and I can't speak for the Catholic Church elsewhere in the world, just here in Australia), the Catholic community as a whole appears to be amazingly united in its opposition to abortion. There's no lack of compassion for mothers who are faced with pregnancies that present them with possible hardships, but in general, the rank and file of Australian Catholics are anti-abortion. And that's NOT because they are doing what "celibate men" (ie. the priests) tell them to believe. The average Australian Catholic is notoriously apt to make up their own minds on a whole range of issues. But folk who would accept a married priesthood (or a female priesthood) tomorrow still remain convinced that their Church has called it right on the issue of abortion.

I think the reason for this is that when you sit down and look at the plain evidence, you don't need an ounce of religion to tell you that abortion is the killing of a human being. You don't need a "celibate man" to tell you that, you can work it out for yourself. Where religion comes into it is in the conviction that killing another human being is actually wrong. In all circumstances.

True as in Genuine as in Authentic

Years ago I went shopping in North Adelaide at a shop called "Le Cornu's" (some of you will remember it - it proudly claimed to have had the longest "non-reflective window" in the world). There I found a "rustic country kitchen hutch" that was very attractive. I went to move it, and almost threw it against the ceiling of the store. It looked like solide timber, but was as light as a feather. Upon closer inspection, I found that the wooden "panels" were in fact hollow. Someone had constructed a cupboard out of a whole lot of "veneer" panels. Think about it. Instead of one piece of timber, they used one sheet for the top, one for the bottom, and separate pieces tacked on for the sides. What kind of effort had to go into creating such a false - though admittedly attractive - piece of furniture? Would it not have been easier to make it out of REAL timber planks?

That day I decided that one of my values in life would be authenticity. When I think of "truth", I am not simply thinking of an intellectual/rational concept. I am thinking of a virtue. A virtue of genuineness. A virtue of reality. A virtue of authenticty.

Some of you will know that one of my reasons for becoming a Catholic (along with continuity and authority) was authenticity. I was looking for the real deal, the genuine thing, the true Church. I sincerely, truly, genuinely believe I have found it (no cheek out of you, PE!).

And so we come to the Chinese lip-synching Karaoke Miaoke scandal.



From The Age editorial:

A Politburo member said: "The child on camera should be flawless in image, internal feelings and expression. Lin Miaoke is excellent in those aspects. But in the aspect of voice, Yang Peiyi is flawless." So China, in effect, combined the two girls to present to the world the perfect child. It may have been superb television, but it wasn't the real thing, and trying to find the real thing in China is a Herculean task.

And a government or culture which does not know the value of a "real thing", which honestly believes that appearances are more valuable than authenticity, is below my contempt.

I have known "Le Cornu's" churches, where the appearances are all there but not the reality. China is a "Le Cornu's" government.

In my experience, children have a good sense of justice. My kids were infuriated by the story. They really felt for little Yang Peiyi, the same age as my youngest daughter, whose voice it really was. It was a good opportunity for me to emphasise to them that they must always value truth above lies. True as in Genuine as in Authentic.

Revising songs that use "Yahweh"?

There have been some who have asked whether it would be possible to give a list of songs that use the pseudo-name Yahweh for God, and to suggest possible alternatives.

For instance, the popular (with a certain set) Frank Anderson song "Strong and Constant" has the line "I will be Yahweh who walks with you". You could sing this as "I the Lord will always walk with you" (which also actually makes better sense).

But my question is: Name one song that uses "Yahweh" which might actually be worth singing or might be worth perpetuating with alterations?

I think this is a good opportunity just to completely scrap the whole sorry lot. There is a saying that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", but if it is completely stuffed, one could say, don't bother stuffing around with it.

[Actually, I can name ONE song that uses "Jehovah" and is worth singing, but most hymnals have already altered it: "Guide me, O thou Great Jehovah" is now universally sung as "Guide me O thou Great Redeemer". It is worth singing, but then it comes from a different time and a different school of hymnody than the modern "Yahweh is my buddy" stuff.]

Full text of the CDW "Yahweh" directive ("Letter to the Bishops' Conferences on "The Name of God")

Of course, the story has been all over the blogosphere for some time now (most citing this CNS news story that has interesting statements from the big publishers OCP and GIA), but you may be interested to read the source document in this regard (when dealing with the Vatican, always, ALWAYS find the actual document in question rather than rely on news reports).

As far as I can tell, this document is not on the Vatican website for you to "cut and paste", so, in the service of the cause, I have transcribed the entire document on my liturgical music blog, "Sing Lustily". See here.

Mary had a little Lamb...

And wherever that little Lamb went, Mary was sure to go.

Or so it is in the faith of all Catholic and Orthodox Christians. We disagree on what to call tomorrow's feast - Dormition ("Falling Asleep") or Assumption ("the Taking Up") - and the rather precise (or imprecise, depending on how you look at it) Catholic formulation of the doctrine (see here) allows for the possibility that Mary didn't actually experience death as such - but we do agree that Mary's body did not experience the corruption of the grave, and that she is now body and soul in heaven with the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, her Son. (See this good Wikipedia article for more info).

In other words, she has followed where he has gone. As indeed we all shall at the resurrection on the last day.

Now, Pastor Weedon has a beautiful meditation for the "Dormition" on his blog, well worth reading and meditating upon.

But his meditation ends with the words:

My Son, I am not afraid. I go to you, to you who have conquered death, to you who are the Forgiveness of all sins. Receive me, child. Receive me.

My question to Pastor Weedon is: In what sense has Mary "gone" to her Son?

Sometimes I just sits and thinks...

A lovely picture. HT to Rocco Palmo.

Caption competition on Ironic Catholic

The Ironic Catholic has a caption competition going with this picture. Here's my entry. You can check out the others in the combox here.



Mother Superior: "I thought you said Sr Agnes could swim?"

Sister Euphemia: "She said she could."

Sister Veronica: "You shouldn't have pushed her."

Sister Euphemia: "I know."

The pastoral heart of Benedict XVI

I have already mentioned the Holy Father's most recent Q&A session, and having now read the whole thing, I think it is one of his best. I will, over the next few days, put up a few bits and pieces from this discussion. Above all, he here reveals how truly pastoral his vision and care for the flock of Christ.

In the last Question, Fr Paolo Rizzi wants to hear the Pope's opinion "regarding the sacraments of First Communion and Confirmation [when] more and more the children and young people who receive these sacraments prepare themselves well during catechetical sessions, but then don’t come to Sunday Mass. It’s natural to ask what sense this makes." Here is part of Benedict's response:

Well, I can’t give an infallible answer right now [Chuckle! Good one, Holy Father!], I can only try to respond based on what I see. I have to say that I’ve followed a path similar to yours. When I was young I was rather more severe [Something of an admission there]. I said: the sacraments are the sacraments of the faith, and when the faith isn’t there, where there’s not practice of the faith, the sacraments can’t be conferred. When I was Archbishop of Munich I always discussed this with my pastors, and there too there were too factions, one severe and one more generous. I too in the course of time have realized that we have to follow instead the example of the Lord, who was very open also with the people who were at the margins of Israel at that time. He was a Lord of mercy, too open – according to many of the official authorities – with sinners, welcoming them or allowing himself to be welcomed by them at their dinners, drawing them to himself in his communion.

Thus I would say in essence that the sacraments are naturally sacraments of the faith [That's straight from the Catholic Catechism folks, p. 1122 - in the light of our traditional "ex opere operato" doctrine, it still sounds very Lutheran doesn't it? ]. Where there is no element of faith, where First Communion would just be a party with a big lunch, nice clothes and nice gifts, then it can’t be a sacrament of the faith [We had first communions in our parish on Sunday, and believe me, the impression that this is all it is about was very strong]. But, on the other hand, if we can see even a tiny flame of desire for communion in the church, a desire also from these children who want to enter into communion with Jesus, it seems right to me to be rather generous. Naturally, for sure, it must be part of our catechesis to make clear that Communion, First Communion, is not automatic, but it demands a continuity of friendship with Jesus, a path with Jesus. I know that children often have the intention and desire to go to Sunday Mass, but their parents don’t make it possible [ie. Don't blame the kids!]. If we see that the children want it, that they have the desire to go, it seems to me almost a sacrament of desire, the ‘vow’ of participation at Sunday Mass. In this sense we naturally should do everything possible in the context of sacramental preparation to also reach the parents [every pastor who has stopped to think about this question ultimately realises that this is the only answer: don't just catechise the kids - use the sacramental program to evangelise the parents!]and – let’s say – also awaken in them a sensibility for the path that their children are taking. They should help their children to follow their own desire to enter into friendship with Jesus, which is the form of life, of the future. If the parents have the desire that their children should make the First Communion, this somewhat social desire should be expanded into a religious desire to make possible a journey with Jesus.

I would say, therefore, that in the context of catechism with children, the work with parents is always very important [and yet so many parishes still fail to put their resources into this area]. It’s an occasion for meeting the parents, making the life of faith present also to the adults, so that they themselves can learn anew from the children – it seems to me – and to understand that this great solemnity makes sense only, and it’s true and authentic only if, it’s realized in the context of a journey with Jesus, in the context of a life of faith. The challenge is to convince the parents a bit, through the children, of the necessity of a preparatory path, which reveals itself in participation in the mysteries and begins to foster love for those mysteries. [Those of us who are (or have been) pastors know that this is what we have to do - it takes planning and a lot of work - and yet it happens. Thus the parish school becomes a brige for the new evangelisation of the home.]

Atheism and Evil

I recently listened to this debate on the perennial "Does God exist?" question between Peter Kreeft and Micheal Tooley.

Of course, the big issue for Tooley was the existence of evil in the world. How can there be a God (in the sense of all powerful, all knowing and all good) if bad things happen in the world?

Personally, I have never really thought much of this argument against God, even though Kreeft concedes that it is the most persuasive. I have a difficulty, for instance, in seeing the catastrophic tsunami of a few years back as "evil" in the same sense that the abuse of a child is "evil" or the fact that thousands die in the world every day of hunger when there is plenty of food to go around as "evil". The latter two examples are caused by human decision and action (or the lack of it). This, I think, is true evil, evil which has its source in the free will of human beings which is itself a good. The former, on the other hand, is a "natural" disaster, a disaster which came about because we live on a planet that is just a thin solid crust of land floating on a ball of molten metals. Yet were our world not "constructed thus", many other goods (such as a most fundamental good, the magnetic field of the earth) would not be able to exist.

Listening to the debate, I was put in mind of a novel by Anne Rice, Memnoch the Devil. While written before her 1998 reversion to Catholicism, this book struggles with the question of evil - and interestingly it is the Devil himself who accuses God of being "a monster" when he sees that that death and decay have a "natural" place in what at first appears to be a magical, marvelous, flawless creation. He reacts in anger against God, accusing God of being evil, and hence his rebellion against God. It is an interesting take on the old question.

So I was interested to read two articles on the First Things Blog just recently, which you might also find interesting.

The first is by Michael Novak, simply called "Atheism and Evil". The second is an interview of Anne Rice herself by Fr Dwight Longenecker. Tell me what you think.

Alexander Downer: "No wonder Tony Blair converted to Catholicism"

Get a load of this article by our ex-foreign minister. HT to Br Pelagius at the Cooees Novice Wing.

"Our" Ancestors?

Politically correct thinking is that the first human inhabitants of Australia were environmentally attuned to the land. This indigenous "care for the environment" is contrasted with the rapacious effects of European settlement.

Well, this story about extinctions in Tasmania 'due to humans not climate' gives evidence that the first inhabitants were not so environmentally attuned as legend has it.

One hilarious blooper is Professor Chris Turney's reflection that "It is sad to know that our ancestors played such a major role in the extinction of these species". "Our" ancestors, Professor?

What is sad - in fact criminal - is that the human indigenous population of Tasmania was itself wiped out - and that was indeed due to European settlers. I might fell justified in pointing out that it was not my ancestors who did this; but then I pause and reflect on the fact that there are not many indigenous people living in the Barrossa Valley these days either...

Mind you, there are plenty of folk who will not accept this new finding (that the aboriginal migration 46,000 years ago and not climate change was the cause of mass extinction). For eg. Dr Judith Field, who says in this SMH article that "the conclusion that humans wiped out the megafauna remained 'in the realms of speculative fantasy'".

Science, like religion, has its heretics.

Do you know what I like about Catholics?

Well, one thing anyway. They believe that to everything there IS an answer, and so the asking of the question and the investigation into it is never illegitimate, even if all we find out is that "We don't know". Hence there is no such thing as a silly question. What happens to unbaptised babies? NOT a silly question, according to Catholics. It is possible to use bread without gluten in the Eucharist? NOT a silly question, according to Catholics. Will resurrected human beings in heaven still be "male and female"? NOT a silly question, according to Catholics.

Well, now, here is a question I have never thought about before, and Fr Kenneth Baker, editor of the excellent Homiletic and Pastoral Review, attempts to seek out an answer, for an answer there must, logically, be: Do resurrected human persons wear clothes?. As he points out, there are only two possible answers, Yes and No. Read here and learn something about how Catholics do theology - even with "silly questions".

Pope's latest Q&A: on the Australian Media during WYD

He's at it again with another Q&A session with clergy, this time in the diocese of Bolzano-Bressanone. I really appreciate this novel form of papal magisterium - it is in these fora that we get closest to the Holy Father's thinking on many practical subjects affecting the daily life of the Church.

I haven't finished reading this one yet, but was struck by this part of an answer to the question of a young seminarian who attended WYD in Sydney:

For the Australians, too, it was a great experience. In the beginning they looked at this World Youth Day with great skepticism, because obviously it could have created many problems in daily life, many inconveniences, such as traffic delays and so on. But in the end – and this was seen also by the media, whose prejudices were disassembled piece by piece – everyone felt caught up in the atmosphere of joy and of faith. They saw that the young people who came did not create security problems or any other kind of difficulty, but rather they knew how to be together in joy. They saw that even today faith is a living force, a force capable of giving the right orientation to people. It was a moment in which we truly felt the breath of the Holy Spirit, who dispenses with prejudices, and who makes people understand that, yes, here we find what touches us most closely, this is the direction in which we have to go; this is the way one should live, this is how the future opens.

Ironic Catholic - My Source of Catholic Humour

They say that laughter is the best medicine. Perhaps I just don't laugh enough these days. Thanks then to these three videos linked from The Ironic Catholic.

The Saint Song from SPQN - I love Gilbert and Sullivan, and so this really made me chortle.



"Charlie Bit Me" - delightful in so many ways - all entirely human!



After my encounter with Fr Stan the Rapping Franciscan in Sydney, here now is the Skate Boarding Franciscan! Boy, have the Jesuits got a lot to learn about relating to the world. These blokes have it all sewn up!

Roy and H.G. start today!

I thought they would be at it already, but the first Roy and H.G. Olympic special "The Golding Ring" will air today on Triple J Radio at 4:30pm.

On Monday, 11th August, triple j will kick-off its daily dose of Olympics highlights THE GOLDEN RING SHOW!!! Brought to you by those two old China hands, the Crouching Tiger Rampaging ROY SLAVEN and the Hidden Dragon H.G. NELSON. Turn up your radio for news and updates from the Mongolian Club in The Forbidden City!

If you miss it, you can get the podcast. Here is the subscription URL: http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/thissportinglife/podcast/tsl.xml

And if you need more, there is Crikey.com's "Golden Nugget" column by H.G. Nelson. Today's has not yet appeared, but Friday's pre-Opening column is up.

Snow!

As we were coming out of mass today, it began to snow. It didn't last once it hit the ground down here, but we (Mia and I) went for a drive up the hill to Sassafras to take in the strangeness of the experience.






We didn't stay up there long, because the snow was falling fairly heavily, and the roads were getting very slippery - the usual Sunday crowd plus the extra sightseers like us were slipping around on the road and I could see a disaster happeing before long. Any way, it was cold too, and (surprise for those of us who are not familiar with this stuff) wet.

When Maddy came home from her friend's place a few hours later we went back up so she could see the snow too - but by then it had almost all melted.

No matter. There was still enough to make a snow man. What is it about snow that brings out the "idol-making" streak in our nature?

Do I look amused by this nonsense? Lombardi on HV Dissenters.

It does not touch – in anyway – the true question at the center of 'Humanae Vitae', which is the connection between spouses' human and spiritual relationship and the exercise of their sexuality as an expression of it and its fruitfulness.

In the entire letter," he said, "the word 'love' does not appear once.

"He" is Fr Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesperson. "It" is a protest letter published in Corriere della Sera by various disparate dissenting groups such as Catholics for Choice and We are Church. You can read about it here. A more damning assessment would be hard to imagine.

The dissenters' letter used the old chestnut that the church's ban on artificial contraception had "catastrophic effects on the poor and the weak throughout the world, placing in danger the lives of women and exposing millions of people to the risk of contracting HIV." This, said Fr Lombardi quite simply, "is demonstrably unfounded."

Finally, regarding the appearance of the letter in the Italian magazine as a commercial advertisment, he ended with the question: "One also could ask who paid for it and why."

Coo-ees Novice Wing Now Open

Thank God for that. Ecclesiastical life in Australia would have been boring without the Coo-ees crowd's take on things. The Novice Wing may be accessed here.

Which also reminds me to comment that I am pissed off that there will not be any Roy and H.G. show this Olympics. Time-zone problems, my arse (as H.G. would say). They did it for Sydney and they did it for Athens - you can't get more disparate time zones than that, can you? Thank God there will still be the podcasts from Triple J. Although the visual aspects were indeed half of the fun of "The Dream".

For overseas readers of SCE who don't know about these guys, take a look at this archive file on You Tube. They are to the Olympics what Cooees is to the Australian Church.

Study Text of new Missal for you to download

A big HT to Marco for this one: The "Ordo Missae White Book" (Study Text) from the USCCB. We can hardly wait for the real thing!

While the TAC waits for a decision from Rome, the US Church prepares for expansion of Anglican Use

It might make the whole question of the reception of the Traditional Anglican Communion into full communion with Rome a mute point - at least in the US if Bishop John Myers' comments are any indication:

“The Catholic Church will expand its provision of "Anglican Use" parishes in the United States in order to allow whole communities of traditionalist Anglicans into the Roman fold, a senior Catholic archbishop has announced.

The Most Rev John J Myers, Archbishop of Newark and Ecclesiastical Delegate for the Pastoral Provision, told a conference of ex-Anglicans on Friday that "we are working on expanding the mandate of the Pastoral Provision [of Catholic parishes using Anglican-inspired services] to include those clergy and faithful of 'continuing Anglican communities'.

"We are striving to increase awareness of our apostolate to Anglican Christians who desire to be reconciled with the Holy See. We have experienced the wonder of several Episcopal bishops entering into full communion with the Catholic Church and we continue to receive requests from priests and laity about the Pastoral Provision."

In a sense, if this method were to be followed throughout the world, it would open a way for local groups of Anglicans to enter into full communion with Rome under the current diocesan structure of the Latin Church. They would not form an independant "Western Rite" Church within the Catholic Church as TAC is proposing to Rome (using the model of the Eastern rites), but would bring into existence a number of Anglican Use parishes under the jurisdiction of the local Latin bishop.

Of course, one of the reasons why the TAC bishops are pushing for recognition of their communion as a independant "Rite" in the Catholic Church is that they wish to retain not only the liturgical rites and current married clergy, but also the right to continue with a married priesthood (and perhaps even episcopate???) and to continue in some sense to maintain their episcopal jurisdiction over their flocks.

Offensive? "Only Women Bleed" Triptych in Blake Prize competition

More Blake prize controversy. This time over this picture:

It took me a bit to find a photo of the picture, as most sites running this news story don't include it.

I do find the caption "Only women bleed" offensive - but also odd, as the figure on the cross is not obviously a woman. If it was, I'd find it offensive. I don't like the clawed hands, but I must say that overall the picture puts me in the mind of another (much more celebrated and worthy of praise) triptych of the crucifixion by Grunewald (in which the hands are also "clawed"):

And honestly, I find another entry not just offensive but trite and silly, namely the Corey Worthington "Sacred Heart" which most of the news stories included in their story. From the media's point of view, they seem to think this one more news worthy too.

What would be the result if the Womenpriests movement got up and running?

I expect you have now read the Sandro Magister piece on the "Roman Catholic Womenpriests" movement. It appears that there have been more than a dozen attempts to ordain women to the priesthood, and that some have even attempted ordination to the episcopate. They claim that they have 150 other women ready to make the same attempt.

Of course, it is quite clear that none of these are real priests or bishops, and certainly they do not operate within the institution we know of as "The Catholic Church". They, and those who participated in their ordinations, are all excommunicated latae sententiae. They are not, and never will be, in communion with the Bishop of Rome. They might one day even attempt to set up their own papacy (who knows?) - with the result being some sort of mix between the madness of the sedevacantists and the myth of Pope Joan - but it will always be perfectly clear that this group of people is NOT the Catholic Church.

Nevertheless, they are active and calling themselves "Catholic" priests and bishops. And they seem to be attracting congregations. So, what effect would this have if this "movement" really got off the ground?

The result would be two-fold:

1) a new "ecclesial community" would be formed (has been?), without valid orders or sacraments, and therefore without the true character of a "local church"

2) A good number of dissenters (but possibly not as many as we might think - dissenters, despite all their complaints, show a marked reluctance to leave the Catholic Church - they can tell the difference between the real deal and imposters) will leave the Catholic Church for the "Womenpriests Church". Thereby shifting the balance in the pews of the Catholic Church toward the position of faithfulness to the magisterium.

An interesting thing about the Chiesa.com piece is the claim that real, active bishops in the Church have been involved in these ordinations. The ordained women are keeping mum about the identity of their ordinators. Yet if they want to claim "validity" of their ordination, they really do have to be able to cite WHO ordained them (an ordination certificate at least should be able to be produced). So to substantiate their claims to validity, the identity of the ordinators must be put forward, and once that comes out, these bishops will be excommunicated, no? (Technically, they are already, which raises other interesting questions...)

Read it and weep

Tracy Rowland sent me a copy of this speech by Cardinal James Francis Stafford: "Humanae Vitae: The Year of the Peirasmos - 1968". I don't think any faithful Catholic could read it without a tear in his or her eye. Forty years afterwards, and we are just beginning to grasp what happened.

Interestingly, the speech and the event at which it was given was noted by the (generally) dissenting journal, the National Catholic Reporter.

Magister gets it wrong on Bishop Robert Forsyth

One glaring error in Sandro Magister's column on Kasper's address to Lambeth is the description of Sydney bishop Robert Forsyth as "anglo-catholic". He is most definitely NOT an "anglo-catholic", but decidedly evangelical. Crikey.com has interesting comments on Forsyth's speech to the Pope (full text here). Of special notice was the fact that he began his address to Pope Benedict (whom he called "sir") with the disclaimer that

there are, and remain, very great and significant differences between us; differences which still matter today, including, if I may say so, even your very office.

He was at least gracious to acknowledge that he accepted the Holy Father "as a fellow Christian brother" - a acceptance which Pope Benedict certainly would have reciprocated, even if neither would have meant as a "brother in the episcopate". He warmly acknowledged (and this is the point to which Magister was referring) that the Catholic Church has been

on many issues...a rock in the rapids that has actually helped the rest. Were it not for Rome's strong insistence upon Christ as the only Saviour of the world, upon the "Catholic faith", the nature of the Triune God, the divinity of Christ, the importance of sacred Scripture and of the objectivity of Christian morality, then the life of other Christian churches would have been so much more difficult, certainly for us here in the West.

The Crikey.com article noted that he did not point out the especial agreement between the Catholic Church and the Anglican diocese of Syndey over the matters of the ordination of women and homosexuals, but I think we can take what he said as referring to that. He was keen too on the Church's "Year of Paul", which, it should be pointed out, is being observed not only by the Catholic Church, but by many orthodox churches as well.

This report from CNA says that there were 15 leaders from other Christian communities present, including "Anglican..., Syrian Orthodox, Maronite Catholics [how were these included in an "ecumenical" meeting?], Indian Orthodox, Chinese Methodist, the Lutheran and Uniting churches". This report adds that the AOG's were represented and others report that there were Presbyterians there. That still leaves a few leaders unaccounted for. Does anyone have an exact list?

According to the same report

Youth representatives were also present at the event, where approximately fifty guests were present because of their involvement in the Ecumenical Council of New South Wales.

Several months ago, yours truly tried to talk his way in, but I never got beyond the initial and final answer "NO".

This one is priceless

This is Fr Z.'s work. Beautiful picture. Great caption.

Not to be outdone by his brother’s Ray Charles stylin, Pope Benedict practices his new air piano moves.

Not your average Lutheran Pastors...

Two friends, oft mentioned on this blog, from Left to Right, including all in between they are:

Pastor Fraser Pearce, Parish Pastor Bendigo, Victoria
Pastor Adam Cooper, Senior Lecturer at John Paul II Institute for Marriage and the Family

Walter Kasper to the Lambeth Conference: What the Catholic Church thinks of the Anglican Communion (Or: Calling for a "New Oxford Movement")

Cardinal Kasper doesn't mince words in his July 30 address to the Lambeth Conference. You can find all sorts of comment all over the internet (eg. this on the America Magazine blog and here on CNS), but you would be well advised to read the original here.

The question he was set was what we all want to know: "What Catholics think about the Anglican Communion" especially "in its present circumstances". His answer is predictable enough - there are real (really, REALLY real) problems for any hope of full communion in the future between the Anglican Communion and the Catholic Church due to the Anglican's ordination of women as bishops and priests and they way they have dealt with the issue of sexual morality - but the conclusions are important.

Here are the main parts of his paper:

I know that many of you are troubled, some deeply so, by the threat of fragmentation within the Anglican Communion. We feel profound solidarity with you, for we too are troubled and saddened when we ask: In such a scenario, what shape might the Anglican Communion of tomorrow take, and who will our dialogue partner be? [This is a VERY pertinent question: who represents the "Anglican" Church? Lambeth? GAFCON? TAC?]Should we, and how can we, appropriately and honestly engage in conversations also with those who share Catholic perspectives on the points currently in dispute, and who disagree with some developments within the Anglican Communion or particular Anglican provinces? [In terms of the ordination question, this means the TAC. In terms of sexual morality, it probably more strongly would fit the GAFCON stance - no aspersions being cast at the TAC, you understand] What do you expect in this situation from the Church of Rome, which in the words of Ignatius of Antioch is to preside over the Church in love? [Note that there were more official representatives of the Catholic Church present at and consulted by this Lambeth Conference than ever before - Kasper is right to ask "What is going on? What do you expect from us?"] How might ARCIC’s work on the episcopate, the unity of the Church, and the need for an exercise of primacy at the universal level be able to serve the Anglican Communion at the present time?

Rather than answer these questions, let me remind you of what we stated at the Informal Talks in 2003, and have reiterated on several occasions since then: “It is our overwhelming desire that the Anglican Communion stays together, rooted in the historic faith which our dialogue and relations over four decades have led us to believe that we share to a large degree.” [This is the Catholic desire, but that doesn't mean that Kasper isn't realistic enough to realise it probably won't happen. It means that Rome doesn't want to do something that could be construed as adding to the split up (eg. the reception of TAC into full communion) if somehow the Anglican communion as a whole can be brought back into unity on the basis of the Catholic faith and mores (see the reference to a "new Oxford Movement" below)] Therefore we are following the discussions of this Lambeth Conference with great interest and heartfelt concern, accompanying them with our fervent prayers...

Since it is currently the situation that 28 Anglican provinces ordain women to the priesthood, and while only 4 provinces have ordained women to the episcopate, an additional 13 provinces have passed legislation authorising women bishops, the Catholic Church must now take account of the reality that the ordination of women to the priesthood and the episcopate is not only a matter of isolated provinces, but that this is increasingly the stance of the Communion [This is Romes realism showing through]. It will continue to have bishops, as set forth in the Lambeth Quadrilateral (1888); but as with bishops within some Protestant churches, the older churches of East and West will recognise therein much less of what they understand to be the character and ministry of the bishop in the sense understood by the early church and continuing through the ages [ie. you may call them "bishops" and they may have a "ministry of oversight" (horrible term) but Apostolicae Curae was right: they ain't really REAL bishops after all].

I have already addressed the ecclesiological problem when bishops do not recognize other’s episcopal ordination within the one and same church, now I must be clear about the new situation which has been created in our ecumenical relations. While our dialogue has led to significant agreement on the understanding of ministry, the ordination of women to the episcopate effectively and definitively blocks a possible recognition of Anglican Orders by the Catholic Church. [There you have it folks. A magisterial confirmation that, without the complete abandonment of the current practice of ordaining women, the decision of Apostolicae Curae can never, NEVER be overturned.]

It is our hope that a theological dialogue between the Anglican Communion and the Catholic Church will continue, but this development effects directly the goal and alters the level of what we pursue in dialogue [This is very signficant. All ecumenical dialogue in the past has at least been carried out with the thought: how will this further the hope of full visible unity of all Christians? The definitive and categorical exclusion of this hope colours the whole Anglican/Catholic relationship from here on in]. The 1966 Common Declaration signed by Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Michael Ramsey called for a dialogue that would “lead to that unity in truth, for which Christ prayed”, and spoke of “a restoration of complete communion of faith and sacramental life”. It now seems that full visible communion as the aim of our dialogue has receded further, and that our dialogue will have less ultimate goals and therefore will be altered in its character. While such a dialogue could still lead to good results, it would not be sustained by the dynamism which arises from the realistic possibility of the unity Christ asks of us, or the shared partaking of the one Lord’s table, for which we so earnestly long [and that's the crux of the matter: Eucharistic fellowship between Catholics and Anglicans is excluded by the practice of ordaining women to the episcopate and presbytery.]...

In that vein, I would like to return to the Archbishop’s puzzling question what kind of Anglicanism I want. [Get ready for it: here comes his most audacious and brazen statement in the whole speech:] It occurs to me that at critical moments in the history of the Church of England and subsequently of the Anglican Communion, you have been able to retrieve the strength of the Church of the Fathers when that tradition was in jeopardy. The Caroline divines are an instance of that [even if not a very successful one in their own times...], and above all, I think of the Oxford Movement [also, eventually, a failure in many senses as some attempted to walk a "via media" - yet it breathed life into a stale, beurocratic state institution at the time, and continues to bear fruit in strange and surprising ways today]. Perhaps in our own day it would be possible too, to think of a new Oxford Movement, a retrieval of riches which lay within your own household. This would be a re-reception, a fresh recourse to the Apostolic Tradition in a new situation. It would not mean a renouncing of your deep attentiveness to human challenges and struggles, your desire for human dignity and justice, your concern with the active role of all women and men in the Church. Rather, it would bring these concerns and the questions that arise from them more directly within the framework shaped by the Gospel and ancient common tradition in which our dialogue is grounded. [In other words, it is never, NEVER "too late". A conversion is always possible. Anglicans are baptised Christians after all - they have the scriptures and the Church fathers. Above all they have the Holy Spirit and the name of Jesus. Where these are present, new life is always possible. But Cardinal Kasper's point is: it will only come with a radical change, a rejection of the current trajectory and an embrace of the true Catholic faith of which Anglicans claim to be a part.]

Update: Check out these two columns from Sandro Magister on the topic:

Women Bishops in the Catholic Church, Too? Some Are Trying
At Lambeth, Cardinal Kasper Calls for Another Newman

Take a look: Sixty Minutes on WYD and Theology on Tap

John Smyth sent through this link to a recent Sixty Minutes program on World Youth Day. It's worth a look. It's not all postive - but fairly good - including the look at Theology on Tap in Sydney.

Here in Melbourne, the next Theology on Tap features Bishop Christopher Prowse. Here are the details from John:

What a wonderful couple of weeks! I hope you all had a great time in Sydney for World Youth Day and the Days in the Diocese here in Melbourne. We are very blessed to have such a wonderful pope and to have had this event in our own country but what next....?

TAP is back with another great speaker, Bishop Christopher Prowse, who was in charge of the Archdiocese of Melbourne's activities for World Youth Day and Days in the Diocese. He will speak on the topic, "AFTER WYD: NOW WHAT?" This particular TAP will also be a bit of a forum for people to voice ideas and initiatives, so if you want to contribute come along.

Theology @ The Pub
DATE: 6.30pm, Tuesday, August 12th
VENUE: Pumphouse Hotel, 128 Nicholson St.
TOPIC: AFTER WYD: NOW WHAT?
SPEAKER: Bishop Christopher Prowse
www.theologyatthepub.com.au

BRING YOUR WYD PHOTOS AND VIDEO: We will have a data projector running at this TAP for videos and pictures of WYD both before and after the talk, bring along your WYD photos on a USB so you can show them to other people.

Contact: John Smyth 0430 032 666

The Foresight of Paul VI

It has often been said that Paul VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae was prophetic. But the Pope also had the foresight to write to the bishops of the world and prepare them for what is coming. In this letter, sent before the release of HV, we see how Pope Paul forsaw the need for a strong stand from the whole episcopal college if the teaching was going to be received by the whole Church. We know what happened when they failed to respond to his plea.