des 142014
 

14des_brann_nordstrand2

Avisa Dagen skriver mer om brannen hos Elisabethsøstrene på Nordstrand. Bl.a.:

Søster Katarina Hodyr er priorinne ved klosteret på Munkerud på Nordstrand i Oslo. Hun har bare vært leder for virksomheten et par måneder og hadde knapt rukket å bli kjent med sin nye arbeidsplass da St. Elisabethhjemmet lørdag formiddag ble rammet av brann.

Hennes eget rom på toppen av bygningen er blant dem som ble totalskadet i brannen – men hun er mest opptatt av de andre som bodde i boligdelen av klosteret.

Søster Katarina hadde ikke klare forestillinger om hva som ville møte henne da hun gikk for å se nøyere på skadene da slukkingen var over.

– Jeg visste ikke noe, men brannmannskapene forberedte meg på hva jeg ville få se. Likevel er det én ting å høre hva som har skjedd, men noe annet å møte virkeligheten og se hvordan den ser ut. Jeg opplevde det som et sjokk. Rommene er berørt i forskjellig grad, men det ser dramatisk ut enkelte steder der inne. Men jeg kunne ikke forestille meg omfanget av skadene før jeg så dem, sier priorinnen med tårer i øynene. … …

Også søster Natanaela Hess, priorinnens nestkommanderende, eller såkalt provinsvikar for Elisabethsøstrene i Norge, er sterkt berørt. Hun var bortreist da brannen oppsto, men sier at også hun fikk sjokk da hun ankom klosteret mandag.

– Det var mer enn dramatisk. Det er jo totalskadet, sier hun til Dagen onsdag. …..

… Boligdelen ble bygget i 1974, mens tilbygget kom i 1996. Det er boligdelen som totalskadet i brannen, mens tilbygget er uskadd. …..

Konstruksjonen i den skadde delen er i betong og murstein, men det er også brukt materialer av tre, og en del skader er lette å se utenfra. De største skadene er imidlertid innvendig, og omfanget av brann-, røyk-, sot- og vannskader er stort.

Arbeidet er godt i gang med å sikre det som kan berges ut. Siden prosessen med skadebegrensning akkurat er kommet i gang, er det for tidlig å si hvor store skadene er. Bygningen er imidlertid fullverdiforsikret og vil bli renovert.

– Har dere rukket å tenke på hvordan dette skal repareres, og når kan det skje?

– Det er vanskelig å forutsi hvor fort det kan gå, men våre første vurderinger er at vi ikke kan flytte inn igjen før tidlig i 2016. …

des 132014
 

hotel_lanzarote

Vi er nå to uker på Lanzarote og Fuerteventura på Kanariøyene, slapper av, går lange turer, svømmer og soler oss – men er tilbake i Oslo før jul. (Bildet viser det første hotellet vi bor på; Timanfaya Palace på Playa Blanca.)

des 052014
 

Da Norge for noen få år siden vedtok i Stortinget at også mennesker av samme kjønn kunne gifte seg med hverandre, var det (med rette) etter motstand fra Den katolske Kirke og andre kirkesamfunn. Men da noen (heldigvis ikke mange) deretter sa at dette også ødela ekteskapene mellom en mann og en kvinne, var det en misforståelse. (I Norge skjer det nå noe fra motsatt side; noen begynner å argumentere for at kirkene må miste vigselsretten fordi de ikke vil vie homofile par – se her i Aftenposten. Det er vel også en helt unødvendig konklusjon, som vel likevel ikke vil få så stor betydning for Den katolske Kirke; det vil bare bety at den kirkelige og den statlige bekreftelsen av ekteskapet vil måtte skje i to seremonier (noe som allerede er tilfelle i flere land i Europa), isteden for begge deler i én seremoni.)

I USA er det nå kristne i noen stater der homofile ekteskap nylig har blitt godtatt, som ønsker å nekte å samarbeide med myndighetene om ekteskapsinngåelsen. Dette mener kirkerettseksperten Edward Peters er en svært dårlig idé og bygger på en misforståelse av hva som konstituerer et ekteskap. Se HER og her en samling av artikler. Han skriver:

The gist of a recent poll is that one in three Americans do not want religious ministers to “sign marriage licenses as representatives of the state” so as to avoid, I guess, a connection between “civil marriage” and “religious marriage”, as if, you know, those are two fundamentally different things. Let me rephrase the poll findings: one in three Americans don’t understand what clergy signing marriage certificates are doing (and aren’t doing!) and so don’t know a good thing when they see it.

The call for ministers to boycott civil wedding certificates proposed under the wrongly-named “Marriage Pledge” (it is actually a Pledge Not to Acknowledge Real Marriages) probably would have gone nowhere except that it found an ally in the journal First Things. Well, that’s their responsibility. Mine is to make sure that as many people as possible see that the Radner-Seitz “Marriage Pledge” rests on a faulty understanding of what makes marriage and, in turn, of what ministers of religion do in certifying that a given marriage took place before them. I am not going to review all of the problems inherent in Radner-Seitz’s proposal, though they are many. Here I address just two points.

In the West (yes, I know Eastern Christianity thinks differently, but that problem is for another day), it has been settled matter among all Christians (though secular elements of the West do not realize that Christian thought has permeated their consciousness, too), it has been, as I say, settled matter in the West that the consent of the parties establishes marriage. If you think that the State made up marriage and confers it on a couple, or if you think that the Church created and bestows marriage on believers, or that God, or Zeus, or the Big Cosmic Other sends this thing called marriage on two people who want it, or if you hold any other theory of marriage whatsoever, besides that the consent of the parties makes marriage—then you need to stop reading this blog post and start studying solid treatises on marriage going back to the ancient Romans in some cases, and virtually everything since the 13th century, secular and religious alike.

I’m serious. If you do not really see that the couple’s consent makes marriage then you don’t understand what’s at stake.

Now, for those who do know that the consent of the parties makes marriage, the fundamental supposition of the Radner-Seitz Pledge—namely, that the State has changed the definition of marriage (which it can’t do and, even by its own count, has not succeeded in doing yet!) and, as a result, ministers who care about real marriage should not confer or cooperate in conferring marriage (as understood by at least some States), that supposition, I say, collapses: The State does not confer marriage on couples, couples confer marriage on each other! All the State does, and for that matter all the Church does, (and, for that matter, all that God does between baptized persons, but that discussion is more complex and is not immediately relevant to a discussion of Church-State cooperation in the matter of marriage), is to recognize what the couple did, namely, they married. …

Jeg leser FirstThings som Peters her kritiserer – de skriver om the Marriage Pledge bl.a. her.

des 052014
 

14des_p_benedikt Tidligere i år brukte kardinal Kasper en artikkel av en 40-år gammel teolog i 1972 (p. Ratzinger), til å argumentere for at gjengifte katolikker likevel kan motta kommunion – det har vært mye skrevet om dette både under kardinalmøtet i februar og under bispesynoden i oktober. Nå viser det seg at Ratzinger/Benedikt har skrevet om hele konklusjonen på sin artikkel fra 1972. Slik leser vi hos Sandro Magister:

In the Opera Omnia, Ratzinger is republishing – with the help of the prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, Gerhard Ludwig Müller – all of his theological writings, grouped according to theme. In the latest of the nine volumes published so far in German by Herder, numbering almost 1,000 pages and entitled “Introduction to Christianity. Profession, baptism, discipleship,” there is a 1972 article on the question of the indissolubility of marriage, published that year in Germany in a multi-author book on marriage and divorce.

That 1972 article by Ratzinger was dusted off last February by Cardinal Walter Kasper in the talk with which he introduced the consistory of cardinals convened by Pope Francis to discuss the issue of the family, in view of the synod of bishops scheduled for October.

In cheering for the admission of the divorced and remarried to Eucharistic communion, Kasper said: “The early Church gives us a guideline that can serve as a means of escape from the dilemma, to which Professor Joseph Ratzinger referred in 1972. [. . .] Ratzinger suggested that Basil’s position should be taken up again in a new way. It would seem to be an appropriate solution, one that is also at the basis of these reflections of mine.”

… That 1972 article was the first and last time in which Ratzinger «opened up” to communion for the divorced and remarried. Afterward, in fact, he not only fully adhered to the rigorist position of the ban on communion, reaffirmed by the magisterium of the Church during the pontificate of John Paul II, but he also contributed in a decisive way to the argumentation on behalf of this ban as prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith. …

Ratzinger/Benedikt konkluderer den nye avslutningen av artikkelen fra 1972 slik:

From what has been said so far it emerges that the Western Church – the Catholic Church – under the leadership of the successor of Peter, on the one hand knows that it is strictly bound to the word of the Lord on the indissolubility of marriage, but on the other has also sought to recognize the limits of this guideline in order not to impose on persons more than is necessary.

So on the basis of the suggestion of the apostle Paul and basing itself at the same time on the authority of the Petrine ministry, for non-sacramental marriages it has further elaborated the possibility of divorce in favor of the faith. At the same time it has examined the nullity of a marriage under every aspect.

The 1981 apostolic exhortation “Familiaris Consortio” of John Paul II went one step further. At number 84 it states: “Together with the Synod, I earnestly call upon pastors and the whole community of the faithful to help the divorced, and with solicitous care to make sure that they do not consider themselves as separated from the Church […] Let the Church pray for them, encourage them and show herself a merciful mother, and thus sustain them in faith and hope.”

This gives pastoral care an important task, which perhaps has not yet been sufficiently incorporated into the Church’s everyday life. Some details are indicated in the exhortation itself. There it is said that these persons, insofar as they are baptized, may participate in the Church’s life, which in fact they must do. The Christian activities that are possible and necessary for them are listed. Perhaps, however, it should be emphasized with greater clarity what the pastors and brethren in the faith can do so that they may truly feel the love of the Church. I think that they should be granted the possibility of participating in ecclesial associations and even of becoming godfathers or godmothers, something that the law does not provide for as of now.

There is another point of view that imposes itself on me. The impossibility of receiving the holy Eucharist is perceived as so painful not last of all because, currently, almost all who participate in the Mass also approach the table of the Lord. In this way the persons affected also appear publicly disqualified as Christians.

I maintain that Saint Paul’s warning about examining oneself and reflecting on the fact that what is at issue is the Body of the Lord should be taken seriously once again: “A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor 11:28 f.). A serious self-examination, which might even lead to forgoing communion, would also help us to feel in a new way the greatness of the gift of the Eucharist and would furthermore represent a form of solidarity with divorced and remarried persons.

I would like to add another practical suggestion. In many countries it has become customary for persons who are not able to receive communion (for example, the members of other confessions) to approach the altar with their hands folded over their chests, making it clear that they are not receiving the sacrament but are asking for a blessing, which is given to them as a sign of the love of Christ and of the Church. This form could certainly be chosen also by persons who are living in a second marriage and therefore are not admitted to the Lord’s table. The fact that this would make possible an intense spiritual communion with the Lord, with his whole Body, with the Church, could be a spiritual experience that would strengthen and help them.

des 042014
 

bilde_sjk-l Jeg leste nyheten på nettsidene til Nettverk for katolsk teologi, der de sier:

Fredag 12. desember disputerer Ståle Johannes Kristiansen ved Universitetet i Bergen. Avhandlingens tittel er Avdekning og tilsløring: Dionysius Areopagitens symboltekning og Jean-Luc Marions ettermoderne kunstfilosofi.

Dessverre kan jeg ikke reise til Bergen for å være med, men jeg gratulerer Ståle allerede nå på forhånd.

des 032014
 

Det er kardinal Angelo Scola, Milanos erkebiskop, som sier dette; at han ikke tror paven vil komme til å tillate at gjengifte kan motta kommunion. Han sa dette i et intervju med “Corriere della Sera” 2. desember, og i engelsk oversettelse sa han bl.a.:

Q: On the point of communion for the divorced and remarried, what is your position?

A: I have discussed this intensely, in particular with cardinals Marx, Danneels, Schönborn, who were in my “smaller circle,” but I am unable to see adequate reasons for a positon that on the one hand affirms the indissolubility of marriage as beyond question, but on the other seems to deny it in fact, almost effecting a separation between doctrine, pastoral practice, and discipline. This way of maintaining reduces it to a sort of Platonic idea, which lies in the Empyrean and does not enter into the concreteness of life. And it raises an educational problem: how can we tell young people who are marrying today, for whom the “forever” is very difficult, that marriage is indissoluble, if they know that in any case there will always be a way out? It is a question that is hardly raised, and this astonishes me.

….

Q: And if instead at the end of the synod the pope should take a position that you do not share?

A: I believe he will do no such thing.

Min kilde er Sandro Magister – nederst denne artikkelen.

nov 282014
 

Sist søndag var det et arrangement i Akersveien i Oslo (kalt «Lille Vatikanet»), som jeg dessverre ikke kunne delta på pga en messe jeg skulle feire her i St Hallvard kirke. Der skulle bl.a. Ulf og Birgitta Ekman intervjues om sin vei til Den katolske Kirke. Nå er heldisvis dette interessante intervjuet (med sr Anne Bente Hadlan) lagt ut på Youtube – se under.

nov 232014
 

På liturgi-bloggen PrayTell kan man lese et intervju med en nytt medlem av Vatikanets Internasjonale teologiske kommisjon, Karl-Heinz Menke, professor i dogmatisk teologi ved universitetet i Bonn. Han sier bl.a.:

One must admit that the Church is polarized. That applies also to the Germans. There is tension between those who wish to adapt to modernity and those who have more conservative tendencies. It is found in the bishops’ conference. This internecine battle has made its way right into the Vatican.

On the question of the day, communion for the divorced and remarried, Menke spoke honestly about the state of affairs in Germany: I have the impression that there are only a few divorced and remarried people in our communities who wish to live a church life. And those who want this have found a path for themselves. I have never heard of a pastor who turns someone away at the communion rail.

And this: I’ll name another topic for you: we keep acting as if we’re still a church of the whole population [Volkskirche]. At Confirmation, for example, the bishop receives the promises of the youth that they will be models of faith. But certainly 90 percent of them have utterly no intention of keeping this promise – one sees that they do not observe the law to go to church on Sundays. The official teaching and reality have spun free of each other.

Menke hopes that the International Theological Commission will take up such issues. Speaking of topics such as sexual ethics he remarked: Long term, it can’t continue that we teach something that is ignored by 90% and more of the grass-roots.

He hopes for a middle path: It’s not an “either/or.” It is just as false to adapt to the zeitgeist as it is to work toward a ghetto Catholicism in which those remaining think of themselves as the elite believers. A healthy middle way would be important.

nov 182014
 

Søndag 23. november kl 08.00 feires den tradisjonelle latinske messen i St Hallvard kirkes kapell.

Det er 24. og siste søndag etter pinse som skal feires, og alle messens tekster og bønner kan leses her.

I evangeliet på denne domssøndagen hører vi bl.a.:

… Et tunc parébit signum Fílii hóminis in cælo: et tunc plangent omnes tribus terræ: et vidébunt Fílium hóminis veniéntem in núbibus cæli cum virtúte multa et majestáte. Et mittet angelos suos cum tuba, et voce magna: et congregábunt eléctos ejus a quátuor ventis, a summis cælórum usque ad términos eórum. …

… Og da skal Menneskesønnens tegn komme til syne på himmelen, og da skal alle jordens slekter jamre seg, og de skal se Menneskesønnen komme i himmelens skyer med stor kraft og herlighet. Og han skal sende ut sine engler med basuner og mektig klang; og de skal samle hans utvalgte fra de fire verdenshjørner, fra den ene ende av himmelen til den andre. …

nov 172014
 

sandro_magister Etter bispesynoden for noen uker siden har flere viktige biskoper/ kardinaler rundt om i verden begynt å undere seg over hva pave Frans egentlig ønsker. I et intervju med den svært kjente «vatikanisten» Sandro Magister – som bl.a. står bak nettsiden WWW.CHIESA – sier leser vi bl.a.:

Q: And so the Americans?
R: They are somewhat uneasy. The Cardinals and Archbishops, like Timothy Dolan from New York, Patrick O’ Malley from Boston, José Gomez from Los Angeles or Charles Chaput from Philadelphia, are all uneasy. This is the episcopate that Burke himself comes from and is certainly not restricted to the marginal traditional circuits, but continues to be part of one of the most solid national Churches.

Q: And also the Italian Episcopal Conference as you said before, appears to be a bit in difficulty.
R: Yes, there are many difficulties in trying to keep up with this Pope. The President, Angelo Bagnasco seems to be the one in most difficulty.

Q: Also since his successor Archbishop of Perugia, Gualtiero Bassetti has already been indicated. He was made a Cardinal by Bergoglio.
R: But, as far I know also Bassetti is among the Italian bishops who are uneasy.

Q: Among the Italians, the most explicit were perhaps the Milanese, Angelo Scola and the Bolognese, Carlo Caffarra.
R: Yes, they were with their interventions before and during the Synod. But it was all inevitable considering the Pope’s decision to assign the opening of the discussions to Cardinal Walter Kasper, and so this basically was the start of the hostilities.
Q: Why?
R: Because Kasper is proposing again today exactly the same theses defeated in 1993 by John Paul II and Joseph Ratzinger, the latter being the Prefect of the Holy Office at the time.

Les mer på gloria.tv.

nov 172014
 

Kardinal Francis George i Chicago er 77 år gammel, alvorlig kreftsyk, og skal tre av fra sitt embede i morgen. For et par dager siden ga han et langt intervju til John Allen, der han bl.a. nevner noen spørsmål han gjerne skulle ha stilt pave Frans:

… I’ve described George before as the “American Ratzinger” for his blend of intellectual chops and tenacious commitment to Catholic tradition, in the spirit of the former Joseph Ratzinger, the man who became Pope Benedict XVI. (For the record, George shuns the label, insisting he’s not of Benedict’s intellectual caliber. He is, in any event, the closest thing to it on these shores.) …

… To begin, George said he’d like to ask Francis if he fully grasps that in some quarters, he’s created the impression Catholic doctrine is up for grabs. Does Francis realize, for example, “what has happened just by that phrase, ‘Who am I to judge?’ ”

Francis’ signature sound-bite, George said, “has been very misused … because he was talking about someone who has already asked for mercy and been given absolution, whom he knows well,” George said.

“That’s entirely different than talking to somebody who demands acceptance rather than asking for forgiveness,” George said. “Does he not realize the repercussions? Perhaps he doesn’t,” George said. “I don’t know whether he’s conscious of all the consequences of some of the things he’s said and done that raise doubts in people’s minds.”

“The question is why he doesn’t he clarify” these ambiguous statements, George said. “Why is it necessary that apologists have to bear the burden of trying to put the best possible face on it?”

He said he also wonders if Francis realizes how his rhetoric has created expectations “he can’t possibly meet.” …

… Second, George said he’d like to ask Francis who is providing him advice — which, he said, has become the “big question” about this pope. “Obviously he’s getting input from somewhere,” George said. “Much of it he collects himself, but I’d love to know who’s truly shaping his thinking.”

Third, George noted that Francis often makes references to the Devil and the biblical notion of the end-times, but said it’s not clear how that shapes his vision and agenda. …

nov 162014
 

Forrige uke valgte den amerikanske bispekonferansen hvilke biskoper som skal delta i neste års bispesynode i Roma – og de valgte ikke biskoper som vil ønske å støtte den radikale linjen. Dette referatet har jeg hentet fra den nokså progressive nettstedet Catholic News Agency:

… More than a year and a half into the papacy of Pope Francis, the U.S. bishops still appear like deer in headlights, not knowing which way to jump. There are no leaders in the tradition of Joseph Bernardin, John Roach, John Quinn, or James Malone who can articulate a vision for the conference in light of the new papacy.

There are no liberals among the bishops, and the moderates are a minority. The conservative majority is divided into two groups: the ideologues and the pastors.

The ideological conservatives make up 10 to 20 percent of the conference, and they are convinced that Francis is sowing confusion in the church where certitude and stability should be the marks of the church. Francis’ statement that «facts are more important than ideas» is incomprehensible to them; they believe reality must bend to their theological ideas.

The pastoral conservatives, on the other hand, are simply confused. They were raised in conservative families, went to conservative seminaries, don’t pretend to be intellectuals but are loyal churchmen who never questioned anything under the last two papacies. They like Francis, but they are not sure what he is doing. They are in need of a leader who can reassure them and point them in the right direction.

The election of delegates to next year’s synod of bishops reflected the makeup of the USCCB.

Archbishops Joseph Kurtz and Daniel Dinardo, the USCCB president and vice president, were elected as expected. Also elected were Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia and Jose Gomez of Los Angeles. Chaput had been critical of the confusion surrounding the synod. He will also host next year’s international conference on the family. Elected alternates were Blaise Cupich, newly appointed by Pope Francis to Chicago, and Salvatore Cordilone of San Francisco, the bishops’ point man on gay marriage.

If the bishops were totally behind Pope Francis they would have elected as delegates his best friend in the American hierarchy, Cardinal Sean O’Malley, and Archbishop-designate Cupich, his first major appointee.

A big part of the trouble with the American hierarchy is that the bishops have no one to consult. The conservative theologians, who have been advising them during the last two papacies, are as upset as the ideologically conservative bishops. Since progressive theologians were labeled heretics, kicked out of seminaries, and shunned like Ebola patients, bishops have no one to explain to them how to thrive with the discussion and debate being encouraged by Francis.

Sadly, few bishops would feel comfortable inviting theologians from the local Catholic college over for dinner and conversation, yet that is exactly what is needed. …

okt 202014
 

Dette er essensen i en artikkel St Sunniva av Selja lenker til – som er skrevet av Fr Robert Barron. Han siterer kardinal Newman som skriver at det er fint å være ombord i kirkeskipet, men ikke så hyggelig å være i maskinrommet. Etter de første dagene med en hel del forvirring under årets bispesynode, skriver han:

… The interim report on the Synod represents a very early stage of the sausage-making process and, unsurprisingly, it isn’t pretty. Two more weeks of discussion will follow; then a full year during which the findings of the Synod will be further refined, argued about, and clarified; then the Ordinary Synod on the Family will take place (the one going on now is the Extraordinary Synod), and many more arguments and counter-arguments will be made; finally, some months, perhaps even a year or so, after that, the Pope will write a post-Synodal exhortation summing up the entire process and offering a definitive take on the matter. At that point, I would suggest, something resembling edible sausage will be available for our consumption; until then, we should all be patient and refrain from bloviating. …

okt 192014
 

14okt_bispesynoden
John Allen skriver her en ganske grundig oppsummering av bispesynoden. Den er gitt følgende overskrift – Divided bishops water down welcome to gays and the divorced – og begynner slik:

A dramatic Vatican summit of bishops ended Saturday night by significantly watering down an opening to both gays and divorced and remarried Catholics contained in an interim report released Monday.

Paragraphs on those two points were the only items that failed to receive a two-thirds majority of the Synod of Bishops in voting on its final document. While there’s no magic to the two-thirds threshold in this sort of Vatican ballot, the results clearly reflect a divided hierarchy on both issues.

Så langt jeg forstår ble alle paragrafene i det avsluttende dokumentet fra synoden vedtatt med minst 2/3 flertall (dvs mer enn 123 stemmer) bortsett fra de følgende tre. Det var artiklene om gjengifte og om homofile som vakte en hel del oppstyr for en uke siden. De hadde blitt ganske mye moderert i denne endelige teksten, men fikk likevel ikke 2/3 flertall:

… [52. The possibility for the divorced and remarried to accede to the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist was considered. Several Synod Fathers insisted in favor of the current discipline, in consideration of the constitutive relationship between participation in the Eucharist and communion with the Church and her teaching on indissoluble marriage. Others expressed themselves in favor of a non-generalized welcoming to the eucharistic table, in certain particular situations and in very specific circumstances, especially in cases that are irreversible and linked to moral obligations towards children who would [otherwise] be subjected to unjust suffering. The eventual access to the sacraments should be preceded by a penitential path under the responsibility of the diocesan Bishop. The matter should still be deepened, taking into consideration the distinction between an objective situation of sin and attenuating circumstances, considering that the «Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified» by several «psychological or social factors.» (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1735)]

[This paragraph did not reach the required 2/3 of the Fathers: 104 in favor, 74 against]

[53. Some Fathers maintained that divorced and remarried persons can fruitfully accede to spiritual communion. Other Fathers asked why they cannot accede now to the sacramental one. A deepening of this question is hereby demanded so as to make clear the particularity of both forms and their connection with the theology of matrimony.]

[This paragraph did not reach the required 2/3 of the Fathers: 112 in favor, 64 against]

[55. Some families live the experience of having within them persons with a homosexual orientation. Regarding this, it was asked what pastoral attention is suitable concerning this situation, with reference to what the Church teaches: «There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family.» Nevertheless, men and women with homosexual tendencies must be welcomed with respect and gentleness. «Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.» (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons, 4)]

[This paragraph did not reach the required 2/3 of the Fathers: 118 in favor, 62 against]

okt 172014
 

Det er lettest å forstå engelsk syns jeg (og sikkert mange andre), så her er to korte intervjuer med to engelsktalende kardinaler som deltar i bispesynoden. Den første er Australias kardinal Pell, som har vært ganske tydelig i sin kritikk av organiseringen av synoden. Han sa i går:

Den andre er kardinal Napier fra Sør-Afrika, som i går ble valgt inn i redaksjonskomiteen for synodens endelige dokument (som skal stemmes over lørdag ettermiddag, paragraf for paragraf, og trenger 2/3 flertall for å bli vedtatt). Dette intervjuet er fra forrige uke:

okt 162014
 

I dag var det ganske intens debatt under bispesynoden, da det ble gjort kjent at rapportene fra gruppesamtalene (som skulle vurdere synodens hoveddokument) ikke skulle offentliggjøres, mens det kontroversielle hoveddokumentet etter synodens første uke hadde blit offentliggjort. Father Z skriver slik om dette:

The General Secretary of the Synod [Card. Balidsseri] announced the decision not to publish the reports of the Circuli Minores. The announcement provoked the protest of Card. Erdo [the president or chairman for this Synod], and numerous other Synodal Fathers. The Pope, silent and very serious. …

Erdo took the floor, implicitly distancing himself from the report that bore his name, and saying that if that “disceptatio” had been made public, then the others of the Circulo Minores ought to be made public.

His speech was followed by an avalanche from many others along the same line, underscored by thunderous applause.

The Secretary of the Synod, Card. Balidisseri, was watching the Pope, as if in search of advice and lights, and the Pope remained silent and very serious.

Finally, Fr. Lombardi announced that the reports of the Commission would be made public.

okt 152014
 

Jeg følger godt med på hva som skjer i bispesynoden i Vatikanet, men jeg har ikke skrevet så mye om den. Det virker nok som dokumentet som ble offentliggjort mandag formiddag ikke var særlig representativt. Også en ganske «progressiv» katolsk kilde (The Tablet) skriver slik om dette:

A key document from the bishops’ Synod on the Family calling for the Church to make radical changes to its pastoral approach to gays, divorce and remarried and those in civil marriages has been criticised by Cardinal George Pell as “tendentious and incomplete”.

The text – known as the relatio – was released at the synod’s midway point and sought to summarise the discussions at the gathering so far. It has been described as a “pastoral earthquake” and suggests the Church should recognise the good in unions outside marriage.

But Cardinal Pell, one of Pope Francis’ close advisers, who has been tasked with reforming Vatican finances, said that the document was an “incomplete resumé” of what the Synod Fathers had said it needed to be “enhanced and corrected”.

He added that after the relatio had been presented three-quarters of the participants in the synod hall who had made interventions had voiced problems with the text.

Og AP/CBS skriver om dette, og siterer kardinal Dolan i New York City:

It’s one of the great mysteries of the meeting on family life taking place behind closed doors at the Vatican this week: Just where did the authors of a draft report come up with such ground-breaking language that gays had gifts to offer the church and that even homosexual partnerships had merit?

Officially speaking, the draft report was a synthesis of the interventions from more than 200 bishops, a starting point for small working groups to propose amendments, elaborations, additions and subtractions to the drafting committee preparing a final report that will be released on Saturday.

But conservative cardinals have said their views were not reflected in the draft, they blasted the report as «unacceptable» and said it was in sore need of an overhaul.

U.S. Cardinal Timothy Dolan said his fellow American, hardline Cardinal Raymond Burke, reflected the view of «a good number of people in saying, boy, this document is a rough draft, does it ever need major revisions.»

«I think he’s right, he’s picked up on the side that a lot of bishops, and I would include myself, feel that it needs some major reworking,» Dolan told «CBS This Morning.» …

okt 122014
 

En av de engelske preste-bloggene jeg leser skrives av Fr John Hunwicke, og kalles nå «Fr Hunwicke’s Mutual Enrichment«. Han skriver nå at han nylig har vært i København:

Privileged, once again, to be invited to sing Mass for the Latin Mass Group in Copenhagen and to deliver a lecture (on the Fiftieth Anniversary of Unitatis Redintegratio), I again had a marvellous weekend. Danish hospitality is immensely warm; and a lead in this is given by Bishop Czeslaw. He seems to know priests and people intimately and individually, and is very much liked. I can see why. On my first visit, last year, I had breakfast with him, preceded by an invitation to celebrate the Extraordinary Form in his private Chapel … which the Bishop served. After breakfast, he took me on a fascinating tour of some spectacular Lutheran churches. (This year, because of the timing of my flight back, we could only find time for coffee together.) He is a very nice man and a fine example of a model of episcopacy which is simple, warm, immediate, and unprelatical. He was very interested to have an update on the Ordinariate.

Deretter beskriver han et par museumsbesøk – les hele dette innlegget her.

okt 112014
 

John Allen intervjuet i går erkebiskop Joseph Kurtz fra Louisville, Kentucky om den pågående bispesynoden om familien (de amerikanske biskopene ser ikke ut til å være for at gjengifte skal kunne motta kommunion):

There’s no consensus yet in the Oct. 5-19 Synod of Bishops on the controversial question of allowing divorced and civilly remarried Catholics to receive Communion, according to president of the US bishops’ conference, but he said many American bishops have their doubts.

American prelates generally have “a great concern with maintaining the bond of marriage, the integrity of that bond,” said Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky, who is taking part in the synod.

Both American bishops and bishops from around the world taking part in the synod do appear, Kurtz said, to support a streamlined process for annulment, which is a Church declaration that a first union was never a real marriage because it failed to meet one or more of the tests for validity.

He also predicted that if a reformed process ends up meaning more annulments each year, any backlash over such an increase will be manageable. …

okt 082014
 

Den amerikanske presten P. Raymond J. de Souza skriver om den nokså langvarige uenigheten mellom de to tyske kardinalene, Ratzinger og Kasper. Først skriver han:

… St. John Paul had called the special synod in January 1985 to assess how Vatican II had been received in the life of the Church, examining both achievements and failures. In 1985, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was still in his first years as John Paul’s doctrinal lieutenant, and Cardinal Danneels was the boy wonder of the College of Cardinals, having recently been made a cardinal while in his 40s. John Paul’s biographer, George Weigel, explains that the Belgian was not happy with the German as the synod opened.

“Shortly after the extraordinary synod convened on November 24, 1985, Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Belgium complained at a press conference that ‘this is not a synod about a book; it is a synod about a council!’” Weigel wrote. “The book in question was Cardinal Ratzinger’s review of the post-conciliar state of the Church, a lengthy interview with the Italian journalist Vittorio Messori, which had been published in early 1985 under the provocative title The Ratzinger Report. Danneels was right, of course, and Ratzinger would be the first to admit it. … [But] The Ratzinger Report was a major factor in setting the intellectual framework in which the synod’s deliberations were conducted and its recommendations framed.” ….

Ved flere anledninger på 90-tallet viste det seg at pave Johannes Paul støttet kardinal Ratzingers synspunkter:

What might Benedict himself think of all this? He likely would be surprised — perhaps rueful? — that the long Ratzinger-Kasper theological rivalry has followed them both into retirement. In a peculiar symmetry, the role that he played before the 1985 synod in advancing John Paul’s agenda is apparently now being done for Pope Francis by Cardinal Kasper. The synod of 2014 marks just the latest twist in the intertwined careers of him and Cardinal Kasper. In 1993, Kasper, like Ratzinger, a gifted academic theologian appointed a diocesan bishop in Germany, issued a pastoral letter advocating admitting the divorced and remarried to Communion. Ratzinger, then doctrinal prefect, rejected Kasper’s claim in no uncertain terms on behalf of the Holy See.

In 1999, Pope John Paul appointed Kasper as secretary of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity. When, during the Great Jubilee of 2000, Cardinal Ratzinger published the declaration Dominus Iesus, teaching that Jesus alone is the unique Savior of mankind and that the Catholic Church alone is the fullness of the Church he founded, Kasper was publicly critical. So great was the criticism, fanned by then-Archbishop Kasper, that Pope John Paul took the unusual step of voicing his support for Dominus Iesus at a Sunday Angelus address, making it clear that in the sharp conflict between the two German Curial cardinals, it was Ratzinger who spoke for the pope. …

Før denne synoden har pave Frans valgt kardinal Kasper legge fram synspunkter som går tydelig imot det Ratzinger alltid har hevdet:

(In 2013), Pope Francis would invite Cardinal Kasper to address the consistory of cardinals, wherein he reiterated his 1993 proposals. …

The degree to which Cardinal Kasper’s proposals have been publicly criticized reflects primarily their contradiction of the clear teaching of Jesus in Matthew 19, but there is undoubtedly an element of loyalty to Pope Benedict too, as many who consider Ratzinger/Benedict a great gift to the Church in our time are astonished that Cardinal Kasper should be given a leading role in this synod. …

okt 072014
 

George Deek er førstesekretær ved den israelske ambassaden i Oslo, og fortalte lørdag 27/9 sin egen families historie fra Jaffa/ Tel Aviv. Hans bestefar flyktet først til Libanon – i 1948 da krigen begynte – men kom senere tilbake til Israel og fikk tilbake sin gamle jobb. Hans familie i Israel har klart seg godt, det samme har familiemedlemmer som reiste til Canada, Australia og andre vestlige land – men de som ble værende i arabiske land har fortsatt ikke fått statsborgerskap eller andre rettigheter i landene der de bor.

Med Israel for fred har her lagt ut en norsk oversettelse av talen.

okt 062014
 

John Allen skriver ved starten av årets ekstraordinære bispesynode (et stykke ned) på denne siden:

A viewer’s guide to the Synod of Bishops

Sunday marks the formal opening of the Synod of Bishops on the family, though to be honest there’s been so much public jockeying in the run-up it feels like the Oct. 5-19 summit of bishops actually started months ago.

… Communion for divorced and remarried Catholics is likely to be one flashpoint, but all manner of other issues should be in play too, given that there’s almost no hot-button concern that doesn’t somehow fall under the rubric of the family. … Here I’ll lay out a brief viewer’s guide to the Synod of Bishops, with four things to bear in mind as the drama unfolds.

1. It’s truly the journey that matters rather than the destination.

The point applies generically to any synod, since a synod is merely consultative. This isn’t a political convention, in which platform items will be voted in or out, candidates nominated or rejected, and so on.

At most, what a synod does is present recommendations to the pope, and it’s always up to him what to do. As a result, there will be no new policy in Catholicism on anything as of Oct. 19, when the synod ends.

This time the final product is even less decisive, because this synod is merely preparatory for another, larger synod on the family set for October 2015. At most, all that will be accomplished over the next two weeks is setting an agenda for the second meeting, and presumably Francis won’t make big-picture final decisions before both synods run their course.

As a result, the best way to view this synod is as a way to take the temperature of the bishops on a variety of issues, looking for clusters of opinion and surprising notes along the way, rather than investing much importance in whatever they come up with at the end.

2. There is no single narrative about “what happened” at the synod on any given day.

Although in theory there are themes for each day’s discussion in the synod, they’re extremely broad: “natural law,” for instance, or “difficult pastoral situations,” which can apply to basically everything under the sun.

In reality, the roughly 180 bishops and few dozen other participants can talk about whatever they want. Francis also has asked that time be set aside each afternoon for free discussion, and there’s no set theme for that period.

Each day, therefore, a wide variety of points will surface, and different media outlets and advocacy groups will highlight things of interest to them. One account may stress what a bishop from Europe said about gay marriage, and another what an African said on polygamy. Viewers probably will have to piece together the full picture.

Moreover, it’s also important to realize that the working sessions of the synod are closed, so reporters have to rely on daily briefings and after-the-fact conversations with participants. Given that, accounts will likely vary in terms of reaction in the room when certain points were made, what people were buzzing about over coffee breaks, and so on.

The bottom line is that covering a Synod of Bishops is like putting together a jigsaw puzzle, only without the picture on the box telling you what it’s supposed to look like at the end.

3. Perhaps the best thing about a Synod of Bishops is the global perspective on Catholicism it provides.

Truth to be told, most American Catholics probably won’t be terribly surprised by the kinds of things American and European bishops say at this synod, especially if you already know who the players are and the views they represent.

Americans will have something to learn from bishops and other participants from Asia, and from Latin America, and Africa, and the Middle East. They will relate experiences and perspectives we don’t generally hear, and thus the Synod of Bishops is a sort of graduate-level crash course in the realities of living in a global church. …

4. Finally, expect the unexpected.

This will be the ninth Synod of Bishops I’ve covered over the years, and in each of the previous eight there was some “black swan” development, meaning something out of the blue, that at least momentarily steered the debate down an unpredictable path. … The basic message is, don’t go to sleep on the synod, because you never know when something out of left field might change the game.

okt 042014
 

Før bispesynoden om ekteskapet begynner, leser jeg en artikkel som tar opp forberedelsen til katolske ekteskap. Katolikker skal lære om ekteskapet gjennom hele sitt liv; i sin egen familie og i Kirkens katekese f.eks. før konfirmasjon, og så er det endelig et obligatorisk ekteskapskurs før man gifter seg. De kursene jeg har nå består av 5×2 timer om katolsk ekteskapsteologi og noen praktiske tips om hvordan man kan få et godt ekteskap. Dette kurset kort tid før vielsen skal visst tas opp på bispesynoden:

On the eve of the Synod of Bishops on the family, battle lines have been drawn on hot-button issues such as divorced and remarried Catholics and annulments. Yet little is being said about two reasons that often cause a marriage to fail in the first place: lack of preparation, and forced marriages.

An approved marriage preparation program is one of the four usual requirements to marry in the Church, the others being a six-month notification to the parish priest, Catholic baptism of at least one of the partners, and documentation certifying the freedom to marry of both partners.

Yet according to a preparatory document that will guide discussion for the synod, preparation is often more honored in the breach than the observance.

Programs come in different formats, such as intensive weekends, a series of weekly encounters, on-line formation, and “in-home” mentor couple programs.

They can be offered by priests, experts, and married couples, and the content of the programs varies from one country to another. The one thing they have in common is that they generally require less time than the hours spent by many brides choosing their wedding dresses.

Compared to the lead-in time for the other two sacraments that require mandatory preparation — confirmation and holy orders — eight hours preparing for a lifetime commitment seems a fairly modest requirement. Yet as the synod document notes, it’s often seen “more as an obligation than a freely undertaken opportunity for growth.”

Cardinal Raúl Eduardo Chiriboga of Ecuador certainly sees it that way. “Preparing for marriage shouldn’t be seen as part of the routine that couples have to go through to finally get married,” he said.

Speaking in March, Chiriboga said the Church “should carefully examine these ‘marriage prep classes,’ so that they give couples a deep formation and take all the time that is necessary.” …

The Rev. Héctor Franceschi, one of Rome’s leading church lawyers at the University of the Holy Cross, said the Church needs to rethink the preparation for marriage. “Many times, it’s reduced to two or three lessons on theoretical issues, with priests not even knowing what the future spouses are being taught,” he said.

Franceschi says the Church actually has rich teaching on family issues, with documents such as Familiaris Consortio, Mulieris Dignitatem, Gratissimam Sane, and Humanae Vitae. “The problem is that very few pastors and laymen have read them,” he said. …..

okt 012014
 

Man antar at et ekteskap er gyldig, og i alle fall én av ektefellene er sikker på at alt er i orden, men så kan det vise seg – ut fra katolsk kirkerett eller også sivil rett – at det likevel ikke er gyldig. Etter sivil rett erklæres ekteskap ugyldige nokså sjelden, men etter katolsk kirkerett kan dette skje noe oftere – og det er Tribunalene som avgjør slike spørsmål.

Kirkerettseksperten Edward Peters skriver om dette i et innlegg, der han uttrykker svært stor forbauselse over at en kjent katolsk kardinal (Kasper) ikke ser ut til å forstå disse tingene:

Misunderstanding – sometimes seasoned with plain ignorance – about canon law, annulments, and tribunal work is common among Catholics and pervasive among non-Catholics. What is unnerving to see, however, in the wake of Cdl. Kasper’s call for holy Communion to be administered to those living in “public and permanent adultery” (CCC 2384), is how high up in Church life such problems apparently reach.

In his latest remarks on annulments, Kasper says: “There are situations in which annulments are possible. But take the case of a couple with ten years of marriage, with kids, which in the first years [was] a happy marriage, but for different reasons fails. This marriage was a reality and to say that it was canonically null makes no sense.”

Taking the cardinal’s words at face value, he flatly rejects (for it “makes no sense”) declaring null any putative (a term Kasper does not use, but which I will discuss below) marriage if it seemed happy for a time, produced children, and lasted ten years. Let’s look at these factors.

Though some these days are put off when canon law is quoted in correction of canonical errors, nevertheless, a legal principle from the thirteenth century is important here: Non firmatur tractu temporis quod de iure ab initio non subsistit, or, “What is null at the start does not become valid with the passage of time.” Regula Iuris XVIII (1298). …

Om «putavive marriage» (et antatt gyldig ekteskap) sier engelsk Wikipedia:

A putative marriage is an apparently valid marriage, entered into in good faith on the part of at least one of the partners, but that is legally invalid due to a technical impediment, such as a preexistent marriage on the part of one of the partners. Unlike someone in a common-law, statutory, or ceremonial marriage, a putative spouse is not legally married. Instead, a putative spouse believes himself or herself to be married in good faith and is given legal rights as a result of this person’s reliance upon this good-faith belief.

Putative marriages exist in both Catholic canon law and in various civil laws, though the rules may vary. In some jurisdictions, putative marriages are a matter of case law rather than legislation. …