Katolsk

Hvordan kan Bibelen studeres historisk-kritisk?

Katolsk, Teologi /

En samtale her på bloggen om modernisme (se her) har utviklet seg til en samtale om bibelstudier/-kritikk i forholdvis stor grad. Bispesynoden i Roma høsten 2008 hadde Bibelen som sitt hovedtema, og jeg ser nå at jeg skrev følgende i et innlegg da:

«Denne overskrifta bringer mine tanke tilbake til mine studieår på MF på 70-tallet; jeg kjempa da mye med spørsmål om Bibelens sannhetsgehalt og om hvordan man best skulle tolke den, hvilke metoder som var fruktbare. Jeg var lite fornøyd med svara jeg fikk på MF; man la seg litt for flatt i forhold til de teologiske trender, og etter mitt syn klarte man i liten grad å vise hvorfor Bibelen grunnleggende sett er troverdig – slik at troen ble hengene mye i lufta (fideisme).

Nå ser det ut til at bispesynoden i Roma har tatt opp de samme problemstillingene – mer radikalt og grunnleggende. John Allen skriver om hvordan disse to spørsmåla er blitt diskutert på en ganske grunnleggende måte, og at biskopene ikke ser ut til å nøye seg med enkle eller “moderne” svar. Slik spissformulerer han det:»

The historical-critical method is valuable, but it’s not enough. It has to be integrated into the broader theological reflection of the church, which implies that theologians and exegetes need to work and play well together.

How much of the Bible is “inspired” and free from error? Is it just what one might call the Bible’s “theological” content, meaning what it teaches about salvation? Or is the whole Bible inerrant, and therefore “true,” even if that doesn’t necessarily mean literally, factually true?

Les også gjerne hele hans vurdering av denne tematikken:

The Historical-Critical Method

If all that mattered on this point were generalizations, there would be no problem. Some formula like the following would command almost overwhelming assent: The historical-critical method is valuable, but it’s not enough. It has to be integrated into the broader theological reflection of the church, which implies that theologians and exegetes need to work and play well together.

The devil, however, is in the details. Some in the synod clearly strike a more positive tone with regard to academic study of the Bible, using the essentially secular tools of historical research and literary criticism, than others. Levada characterized the contrast: “Some have criticized the historical-critical method, on the grounds that it’s difficult to overcome the philosophical suppositions which formed its basis for many of the method’s original followers,” he said. “Others see it as a useful tool for coming to a better understanding of the literal and historical sense of scripture.”

In his lone talk to the synod so far, Pope Benedict XVI touched on precisely this point, essentially arguing that scholars using the historical-critical method need to take the faith of the church as their point of departure.

On this point, two challenges present themselves.

First, the proper balanced has to be struck in the synod’s concluding documents. If there’s too much criticism of exegetes and the historical-critical method, Catholic Biblical scholars may feel under attack, or that the clock is being rolled back on tools they now take for granted. If the language is too soft, however, then the clear desire for a more “theological” reading of scripture could get lost in the mush.

Second, there’s the practical question of how, exactly, to put theologians and exegetes into deeper conversation, especially given the hyper-compartmentalized nature of academic life these days. This may well be the point upon which much drama turns—will the synod restrict itself to a fervorino about the relationship between exegesis and theology, simply echoing the basic points made by Pope Benedict XVI on Tuesday, or will it actually offer concrete suggestions for fostering closer links among Biblical specialists, theologians, and pastors?

Basilian Fr. Thomas Rosica, a Canadian who’s handling press briefings for the synod in English, and who is also a biblical scholar himself, offered a memorable metaphor for what’s at stake.

“Most of us were trained as surgeons,” he said on Thursday, by which he meant that exegetes learn to make very precise cuts on the Biblical text—determining what the exact meaning of a given verb form is, for example, or detailing the social contexts of the Johannine and Lucan communities.

“What we sometimes forgot is that we’re operating on a living body, not a corpse,” Rosica said. “We’re supposed to be heart surgeons, not coroners. Success is defined by whether the body survives the surgery.”

Inerrancy of the Bible

Some bishops, such as Cardinal George Pell of Sydney, Australia, have floated the idea that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith produce a document on the inerrancy of the Bible, in order to resolve what has been an open question since the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) and its document on divine revelation, Dei Verbum.

This point gets technical in a hurry, but in essence, here’s what’s at stake: How much of the Bible is “inspired” and free from error? Is it just what one might call the Bible’s “theological” content, meaning what it teaches about salvation? Or is the whole Bible inerrant, and therefore “true,” even if that doesn’t necessarily mean literally, factually true?

Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, widely seen as one of the leading thinkers at the senior levels of the church, said in an interview this week that the second option better represents “where we’re at today,” but acknowledged that the issue hasn’t been resolved.

There’s something of a Scylla and Charybdis dynamic inherent to this debate. Veer too far towards saying that only the theological parts of the Bible are inspired, and it can seem like the church is flirting with skepticism; go too far toward saying inerrancy applies to every jot and tittle, and it can end in a kind of Catholic fundamentalism.

Whatever view one takes, there’s also the practical question of whether now is the right time for the Vatican to say something. Though this is admittedly a fairly cynical view of things, it’s often the case that people clamor for a Vatican statement when they think they’ll get the answer they want; otherwise, they tend to suggest that it’s not yet “opportune” to put out a document.

Exactly how the synod phrases its recommendation on this point—should it choose to make one at all—will therefore be fascinating to watch.

Den amerikanske bispekonferansen fordømmer bok

Katolsk, Teologi /

For et par uker siden ble det kunngjort at den amerikanske bispekonferansens dogmatiske utvalg hadde fordømt (dette sterke ordet passer her) en bok om katolsk seksualetikk. De skriver:

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Committee on Doctrine has issued a statement in response to a request from the former and current archbishops of Omaha to review the content of a book by Creighton University professors Todd Salzman and Michael Lawler, The Sexual Person: Toward a Renewed Catholic Anthropology. In the statement, «Inadequacies in the Theological Methodology and Conclusions of The Sexual Person: Toward a Renewed Catholic Anthropology,» the Committee asserts that the authors of The Sexual Person «base their arguments on a methodology that marks a radical departure from the Catholic theological tradition» and «reach a whole range of conclusions that are contrary to Catholic teaching.»

The Committee concluded that «neither the methodology of The Sexual Person nor the conclusions that depart from authoritative Church teaching constitute authentic expressions of Catholic theology. Moreover, such conclusions, clearly in contradiction to the authentic teaching of the Church, cannot provide a true norm for moral action and in fact are harmful to one’s moral and spiritual life.» ….

En sogneprests ekstra løfter

Katolsk /

Mer ang. eder, løfter, trosbekjennelser (for det er ikke bare anti-modernist-eden som Kirken har brukt/ bruker); når en sogneprest innsettes i et nytt embede, avlegger han følgende løfter. Jeg hørte dem senest avlagt i juni i år, og selv om jeg ikke har den norske teksten her (kanskje noen kan skaffe den?), så regner jeg med at innholdet er det samme som her på engelsk:

I, N., in assuming the office of __________, promise that in my words and in my actions I shall always preserve communion with the Catholic Church.

With great care and fidelity I shall carry out the duties incumbent on me toward the Church, both universal and particular, in which, according to the provisions of the law, I have been called to exercise my service.

In fulfilling the charge entrusted to me in the name of the Church, I shall hold fast to the deposit of faith in its entirety; I shall faithfully hand it on and explain it, and I shall avoid any teachings contrary to it.

I shall follow and foster the common discipline of the entire Church and I shall maintain the observance of all ecclesiastical laws, especially those contained in the Code of Canon Law.

With Christian obedience I shall follow what the Bishops, as authentic doctors and teachers of the faith, declare, or what they, as those who govern the Church, establish.

I shall also faithfully assist the diocesan Bishops, so that the apostolic activity, exercised in the name and by mandate of the Church, may be carried out in communion with the Church.

So help me God, and God’s Holy Gospels on which I place my hand.

Eden man avlegger før prestevielsen

Katolsk /

I 1996 signerte jeg en troskapsed/ trosbekjennelse, som så ble sendt til Troskongregasjon, sammen med mange andre papirer, som kongregasjonen hadde bedt om i forbindelse med biskop Schwenzers søknad om det kunne dispenseres fra sølibatskravet for meg – etter de reglene som gjelder for tidligere protestantiske pastorer. Jeg underskrev dokumentet på latin og norsk, men inntil jeg finner originalen, viser jeg til den samme trosbekjennelsen på engelsk:

I, N., with firm faith believe and profess everything that is contained in the Symbol of Faith: namely:

I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation, he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

With firm faith, I also believe everything contained in the Word of God, whether written or handed down in Tradition, which the Church, either by a solemn judgement or by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, sets forth to be believed as divinely revealed.

I also firmly accept and hold each and everything definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals.

Moreover, I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act.

Bør modernist-eden innføres igjen?

Katolsk, Teologi /

Det kom i dag et forslag til denne bloggen om at (anti)modernist-eden (innført i 1910, og så vidt jeg forstår brukt av alle katolske prester i ca 50 år) bør gjeninnføres, for å få bukt med all modernisme, relativisme, liberalisme etc. i Kirken – og jeg fikk også dette forslaget fra noen andre katolikker for en ukes tid siden.

Eden kan leses under i engelsk utgave (fins den på norsk?), men personlig mener jeg at det er (i alle fall) to grunner til at den ikke kan innføres igjen. For det første avspeiler den den teologiske og filosofiske debatten og utfordringene for akkurat 100 år siden. Hvis den skulle brukes i vår tid, måtte den i alle fall oppdateres ganske dramatisk – selv om enkelte elementer selvsagt vil være de samme. For det andre ligger det i vår tid ikke til rette for at prester kan avkreves å underskrive en slik ed; jeg tror rett og slett ikke paven vil kunne klare å få alle prester til å underskrive den. Det må en svært lang og grundig forberedelse til, før man eventuelt kan gjeninnføre en ed av denne typen – om man ønsker det.

Jeg har heller ikke hørt noen antydning om at pave Benedikt tenker å gjøre noe slikt. Men les gjerne eden selv, og se og skriv hva dere syns:

To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical’ misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.

Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.

Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.

I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. . .

Anglikanere kan bli tatt opp i Den katolske Kirke i år

Katolsk, Liturgi, Økumenikk /

Her snakker man altså om at de kan bli tatt opp i Kirken etter bestemmelsene i pave Benedikts dokument «Anglicanorum Cætibus», der de kan tas opp sammen i grupper (prest og menighet) og får beholde noe av sin egen liturgiske tradisjon. (Dvs. sine flotte liturgier, og også (får vi håpe) sine flotte kirker og altere – se bildet over.) Slik kan vi lese i Catholic Herald:

Britain could have an Ordinariate by the end of the year, it emerged today. … Sources say that the Rt Rev Keith Newton, the flying bishop of Richborough and the Rt Rev Andrew Burnham, the flying Bishop of Ebbsfleet will take up the special canonical structure, which allows groups of Anglicans to come into full Communion with Rome without losing their Anglican identity, before the end of the calendar year.

Groups of Anglicans are already forming across the country in preparation for joining an ordinariate …

… Anglicanorum coetibus offered “Anglo-Catholics the way to full communion with the Catholic Church for which they worked and prayed for at least a century and it is a way in which they will be ‘united and not absorbed’.”

He said that discussions were under way about how the “vision of the Apostolic Constitution” could be implemented” and said the first people to take up the initiative would require vision and courage.

He quoted Pope Benedict’s speech to the bishops of England, Wales and Scotland, saying the Holy Father set his offer to Anglicans “firmly within the developing ecumenical dialogue” and said it was an “an exciting initiative for those for whom the vision of Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) of corporate union has shaped their thinking over recent years”.

The issue, he said, was “the ministry of the Pope himself, as the successor of St Peter. Anglicans who accept that ministry as it is presently exercised will want to respond warmly to the Apostolic Constitution”. He said: “Those who do not accept the ministry of the Pope or would want to see that ministry in different ways will not feel able to accept Anglicanorum Coetibus.” …

Nye tidsskrifter

Katolsk /

Nokså nylig er det kommet ut et nytt nummer av kirkebladet St. Olav – som kom i posten før det kom på nett denne gang. Last det ned i pdf-format her.

I St Olavs lederartikkel kan vi lese:

«Medjugorje eller Nidaros?
Ekte pilegrimer går, rir eller sykler, ifølge den offentlige utredningen som ble lagt frem på pilegrimskonferansen i Trondheim i august i fjor. («På livets vei – Pilegrimsmotivet – et nasjonalt utviklingsprosjekt», skrevet av Per Kvistad Uddu for Kirke- og kulturdepartementet.) I så måte innfridde de kravene, de unge katolikker som kom vandrende over Dovre inn mot Nidaros tidsnok til feiringen av hellig Olav i år. Gruppen som gikk til Røldal tidligere i sommer, likeså. Men forhåpentligvis var de «ekte» pilegrimer også i andre henseender. Til alle tider har pilegrimer benyttet seg av tilgjengelige fremkomstmidler og vanlige ferdselsveier for å ta seg mot målet. Og målet – det være seg Medina eller Jerusalem – er på sett og vis viktigere enn veien, og gudshengivenheten, løftet, ønsket, takken som driver pilegrimen, mer vesentlig enn fremkomstmiddelet. ….

Kanskje valget at Medjugorje i overskrifta var litt uheldig, siden det ikke er blant pilegrimsmål som vår Kirke har godkjent.

Vår egen menighets Hallvardsvaka er også klar på nett – og kommer vel hjem i postkassene om en ukes tid. Les det i pdf-format her.

Onsdagsaudiensen: Om besøket i Storbritannia

Katolsk, Paven /

Som vanlig snakket pave Benedikt om sin siste reise på første onsdagsaudiens etter at var tilbake i Roma, og om besøket i Storbritannia sa han følgende:

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
Today I would like to speak about my apostolic journey to the United Kingdom, which God enabled me to carry out over the past few days. It was an official visit and, at the same time, a pilgrimage to the heart of the history and the present of a people rich in culture and faith, as the British are. It was a historic event, which marked a new important phase in the long and complex history of relations between those peoples and the Holy See.

The main objective of the visit was to beatify Cardinal John Henry Newman, one of the greatest Englishmen of recent times, an outstanding theologian and man of the Church. In fact, the beatification ceremony represented the climax of my apostolic journey, the theme of which was inspired in the motto of Blessed Newman’s cardinal insignia: «Heart Speaks Unto Heart.» And in the four intense and very beautiful days spent in that noble land, I had the great joy of speaking to the heart of the inhabitants of the United Kingdom, and they spoke to mine, especially with their presence and the testimony of their faith. I was able to see how the Christian heritage is still strong and also active in all strata of social life. …

Les resten her.

Reaksjoner etter pavens besøk i Storbritannia – på engelsk

Generelt, Katolsk, Paven /

Fra Catholic Herald har jeg tatt med noen reaksjoner etter pave Benedikts besøk – det legges stor vekt på pavens tale om religionens plass i samfunnet i Westminster Hall:

There were two high points – from the perspective of the state visit the event in Westminster Hall was memorable for the depth of the Holy Father’s insight and for the warmth of the reception from the British parliamentarians present.

This was a great compliment to Britain in its ability to welcome a religious voice on to the public stage. The Prime Minister’s words at the airport confirmed how his words had struck a chord.

Secondly from the pastoral point of view the beatification of Cardinal Newman has brought to the attention of many people a great Englishman whose memory will now be celebrated in new ways.

Finally the sheer volume of people on the streets both in Edinburgh and London meant that more than half a million people saw the Pope in person and this demonstration of public support has deeply touched the Holy Father and the entire delegation from the Holy See.

En engelsk katolsk biskop sa.

“A television interviewer said to me on Sunday ‘You look absolutely radiant’. And that’s been my reaction to four incredible days, which really couldn’t have gone better.”

Om hvorfor tonen i media snudde nokså tidlig (i pavens favør):

I suspect the Pope’s gentle manner and even his very evident physical frailty really did play a part in a reversal of rhetoric by what one might describe as the anti-clerical press. When someone is conjured up as a monster (or “a leering old villain in a frock”, as Richard Dawkins put it) and emerges as a modest scholarly figure visibly ill at ease with the political bombast of a state visit, the opinion-formers sense that their readers will want a more gentle tone.

Reaksjoner etter pavens besøk i Storbritannia – på norsk

Generelt, Katolsk, Paven /

Andreas Dingstad skriver om pavebesøket i Storbritannia; en svært positiv oppsummering av det som skjedde, men så gikk det jo også veldig bra. Han lagt lagt ut sin innlegg på egen blogg og på verdidebatt.no. (Reaksjonene på Verdidebatt må man si er groteske, og jeg lurer fortsatt på når Vårt Land vil gjøre noe med debattene på dette forumet som bør være svært viktig for dem.) Her er starten av Andreas’ oppsummering:

Pave Benedikt har akkurat gjennomført sin kanskje vanskeligste utenlandsreise så langt – og det med glans.

Politiet rapporterer om over 200 000 mennesker i Londons gater lørdag. I Hyde Park senere på kvelden var over 80 000 tilstede under bønnevigilien. Demonstrantene talte mellom 7 – 10 000. Demonstrasjonene i Skottland skal ha blitt avlyst grunnet manglende interesse, mens i Edinburgh møtte mellom 60-80 personer opp – ledet av den ekstreme protestanten Ian Paisley.

Den fryktede fiendtlige mottakelsen og de massive motdemonstrasjonene har altså uteblitt. I stedet har verden vært vitne til en fire dager lang fest, noe som må ha vært et aldri så lite sjokk for den liberale medie-eliten. Tilbakemeldingen fra folk på nettet handler om gleden over den store bredden i oppmøtet – inkludert alle barna og ungdommene som tok imot paven med åpne armer. ….

Pavens preken ved saligkåringsmessen i dag

Katolsk, Paven /


Cardinal John Henry Newman er nå offisielt erklært salig, og i dagens saligkåringsmesse sa pave Benedikt bl.a.:

While it is John Henry Newman’s intellectual legacy that has understandably received most attention in the vast literature devoted to his life and work, I prefer on this occasion to conclude with a brief reflection on his life as a priest, a pastor of souls. The warmth and humanity underlying his appreciation of the pastoral ministry is beautifully expressed in another of his famous sermons: «Had Angels been your priests, my brethren, they could not have condoled with you, sympathized with you, have had compassion on you, felt tenderly for you, and made allowances for you, as we can; they could not have been your patterns and guides, and have led you on from your old selves into a new life, as they can who come from the midst of you». He lived out that profoundly human vision of priestly ministry in his devoted care for the people of Birmingham during the years that he spent at the Oratory he founded, visiting the sick and the poor, comforting the bereaved, caring for those in prison. …

The definite service to which Blessed John Henry was called involved applying his keen intellect and his prolific pen to many of the most pressing «subjects of the day». His insights into the relationship between faith and reason, into the vital place of revealed religion in civilized society, and into the need for a broadly-based and wide-ranging approach to education were not only of profound importance for Victorian England, but continue today to inspire and enlighten many all over the world. … …

Les hele prekenen her.

Messen i Westminster Cathedral i formiddag

Katolsk, Liturgi, Paven /

Fr. Finigan skriver grundig om pave Benedikts messe i Westminster Cathedral, den katolske hovedkirken i England (og mange av oss har sikkert vært der):

Westminster Cathedral has one of the finest choirs in England and it was a fitting reward for their dedication that this morning they were seen and heard throughout the world providing the music for the Votive Mass of the Precious Blood celebrated by Pope Benedict. The backbone of the music was Byrd’s Mass for five voices which was sung impeccably with great depth and character. Credo III was sung antiphonally, providing a stirring contrast between the purity of the voices in the choir and the enthusiastic participation of the congregation. The offertory motet was Bruckner’s Christus Factus est, and Hassler’s O sacrum convivium was sung at Holy Communion, in addition to the proper communion chant and the hymn O bread of heaven.

The Mass was celebrated versus populum at the High Altar. The big six candlesticks were used in their normal place on the marble platform behind the altar. There was an additional crucifix placed upon the altar itself. As with all of the public Masses of the visit, the Preface and Eucharistic Prayer were said in Latin (today, the Roman Canon was used.) As is customary at Pope Benedict’s Masses, there was an extended time of silence both after the sermon and after Holy Communion. …

Behandlingen av Sacrosanctum concilium – del 4

Katolsk /

Her er siste utdrag fra Fr. O’Malleys bok om behandlingen av Vatikankonsilets dokument om liturgien (se første, andre og tredje del). Her nevnes konflikten som viste seg mellom kuriaen og flertallet av biskopene, diskusjonen avsluttes og det stemmes for eller mot å godta dokumentet:

… Discussion of the schema dragged on from October 22 to November 13-three weeks, fifteen sessions, with 328 interventions from the floor and 297 submitted in Written form. Although speakers were held to a ten-minute limit, the «Regulations» failed to provide a procedure for closing debate on a topic. Bishops began to fear that the discussion on the liturgy would go on forever. Speaker after speaker repeated the same points. On November 6 Pope John intervened, making an ad hoc change in the «Regulations» to allow the presidents to close discussion if they felt an issue had been adequately addressed. Timely closure was now legal, an important step in moving the agenda along more quickly.

Where did the schema stand when, on November 13, the presidents successfully called for a vote to halt the interventions? It obviously had strong support, perhaps most notably from African and Asian bishops, but it had also received much criticism. Two issues attracted the most attention and generated the most heat. The first was the vernacular. Eighty-one interventions focused on that issue. The second revolved around the competence of local bishops or episcopal conferences to make decisions, and thus concerned the limits of the authority of the Congregation of Rites. Early on, therefore, the crucial issue of center-periphery bounded to the surface. …

As early as October 24 Archbishop Pietro Parente, the assessor (administrative director) of the Holy Office, complained in an angry intervention about criticisms of his Congregation: «We in the Holy Office are martyrs, martyrs.» He called on the innovators at the council-novatores to learn a thing or two from the caution with which the Holy See operated and not rush into changes. Although novatores could have a less nocuous meaning, in ecclesiastical parlance it was a synonym for heretic.

A few days earlier Ottaviani had criticized Sacrosanctum for its literary style. The language was often ambiguous, he said, even in the doctrinal parts. I hose parts, furthermore, «invaded» the doctrinal camp and hence needed to be reviewed by theologians, by which he meant his own Doctrinal Commission. His patience was wearing thin. He took the floor again on October 30, opening his intervention with a series of rhetorical questions that made clear how utterly unacceptable he found the schema. Among the questions: «What, now, are we dealing here with a revolution regarding the whole Mass?»

He insisted that the Mass not be changed and that reception of the Eucharist under both forms was a bad idea, as was concelebration, that is, more than one priest officiating at a single Mass. He then hit his adversaries at their most vulnerable point. It was well and good to quote popes like Pius XII when they agreed with one’s position, but what about quoting them when they did not? In 1956, he reminded the council, Pius XII had made it clear to liturgists who had just completed an important meeting at Assisi that Latin was and would remain the language of the Mass.

He was well over the ten-minute limit. Cardinal Alfrink, presiding that day, interrupted the powerful head of the Holy Office to inform him that he had already spoken for the maximum amount of time. This was treatment to which Ottaviani was not accustomed: «I’ve finished! I’ve finished! I’ve finished!» The basilica broke into applause. Ottaviani , insulted and humiliated, boycotted the council for the next two weeks, a dramatic and extraordinarily meaningful gesture from somebody of his stature.

Finally, on November 14 Cardinal Tisserant, the presiding president of the day, put Sacrosanctum Concilium to a vote on whether to accept the schema as the base text. Because so many interventions on the document had been critical, this vote, the council’s first on a schema, was awaited with considerable tension. A positive vote meant that the document was fundamentally sound, so that after revisions by the Liturgical Commission, it could later in the council be resubmitted for approval of the changes and then for final approval. It also implicitly meant that it need not be submitted to the Doctrinal Commission, as Ottaviani had asked, to have its orthodoxy ensured. The outcome of the voting astounded everybody-a landslide in favor, 2162votes, with only 46 opposed. That was a 97 percent approval.

The next year, on December 4, 1963, the council overwhelmingly gave its approval to the revised text of Sacrosanctum Concilium, and Paul VI then promulgated it. The final vote was even more of a landslide: 2,147 in favor, 4 against. This was the first document approved by the council and, compared with others, was remarkable for how little it had changed from the original version.

Pave Benedikt snakker om kardinal Newman

Katolsk, Paven /

På flyet på vei til Edinburgh i går fikk pave Benedikt også et spørsmål om kardinal Newman, som han svarte på svært klart og utfyllende – og viste oss hvordan Newman er en viktig person for vår tid:

Q. – Your Holiness, the figure of Cardinal Newman is obviously very significant: you have made an acception for Cardinal Newman to preside over the beatification. Do you think that his memory will help to overcome divisions between Anglicans and Catholics? What are the aspects of his personality which you would like to give stronger emphasis to?

A. – Cardinal Newman is mainly, on the one hand, a modern man, who took on all of the problems of modernity, he experienced the problem of agnosticism, the impossibility of knowing God, of believing; a man who throughout his life was on a journey, a journey to let himself be transformed by the truth, in a search of great sincerity and great willingness, to learn more, to find and to accept the path to true life. This modernity of his inner-being and life points to the modernity of his faith: it is not a faith in the formulas of a bygone age, it is a most personal form of faith, lived, suffered, found through a long process of renewal and conversion.

He is a man of great culture who on the one hand participates in our sceptical culture of today, in the question: “Can we understand something certain about the truth of man, of the human being, or not? And how can we arrive at the convergence of the verisimilitude? “. A man who, on the other hand, with a great knowledge of the culture of the Church Fathers, he studied and renewed the internal genesis of the faith, thus acknowledging his figure and his inner constitution, he is a man of great spirituality, a great humanism, a man of prayer, of a deep relationship with God and a relationship with himself, and therefore also of a deep relationship with the other men of his and our time.

So I would say these three elements: the modernity of his existence, with all the doubts and problems of our existence today, his great culture, knowledge of the great cultural treasures of mankind, his constant quest for the truth, continuous renewal and spirituality: spiritual life, life with God, give this man an exceptional greatness for our time. Therefore, it is a figure of Doctor of the Church for us, for all and also a bridge between Anglicans and Catholics.

Her kan man lese alt som ble sagt uden pressekonferansen på flyet.

En flott første dag i Skottland

Katolsk, Paven /

Fr. Finigan skriver begeistret om den første dagen av pave Benedikts besøk:

At the end of a long day, it is a great pleasure to look back over the glorious success of the first stage of the visit of the Holy Father to Britain. I was premature in thinking that the negative coverage would cease last night. It continued well on into the morning but the tide has now turned. 125,000 Scots turned out to cheer and wave flags as the Holy Father drove along Princes Street in Edinburgh. (In the interests of balance, I should note that there were about 60 protesters.) There were another 70,000 at the Mass at Bellahouston Park, near Glasgow. They had to get there early so must be counted in addition to those lining the streets of Edinburgh. ….

A Vatican insider to whom I spoke last week was nervous about the visit (and particularly about the lack of enthusiasm of some Catholics who should know better.) He said to me that the first day would be crucial. I agree with him – and thankfully the first day has been a roaring success.

I did make some negative comments about some aspects of the liturgy at Bellahouston Park. These need to be kept in perspective. Whilst it is right to push for a better celebration of the Sacred Liturgy, we should not lose sight of the tremendous success of today: and you are in for a rare liturgical treat at the Papal Mass at Westminster on Saturday morning. The arrangements for that are superb and will stand as a model for the celebration of the usus recentior. ….

Han skriver også om at den tyske paven (som hadde blitt tvangsinnmeldt i Hitler Jugens i ungdommen, og sendt ut som soldat mot slutten av krigen) som takker Storbritannia for å ha stått imot nazismen:

Earlier today, we witnessed the extraordinary spectacle of a German who had been dragooned into the Hitler Youth and then conscripted into the army, visit Britain as Pope, and praise our country for standing up to Nazism.

He also spoke of how atheist extremists give us sobering lessons and how the exclusion of God from public life adversely affects how we view the human person. Yes, the Pope is indeed a Catholic. Here is the relevant text:

«Even in our own lifetime, we can recall how Britain and her leaders stood against a Nazi tyranny that wished to eradicate God from society and denied our common humanity to many, especially the Jews, who were thought unfit to live. I also recall the regime’s attitude to Christian pastors and religious who spoke the truth in love, opposed the Nazis and paid for that opposition with their lives. As we reflect on the sobering lessons of the atheist extremism of the 20th century, let us never forget how the exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus to a ‘reductive vision of the person and his destiny’ (Caritas in Veritate, 29).»

Behandlingen av Sacrosanctum concilium – del 3

Katolsk, Liturgi /

Videre kan vi lese i Fr. O’Malleys bok om behandlingen av Vatikankonsilets dokument om liturgien (se første og andre del):

… When Fr. Antonelli finished his introduction, the president for the day opened the floor for discussion. How would the document be received? The first six speakers that day included some who would turn out to be among the most influential in the whole council. Cardinal Frings of Cologne led off from the presidents’ table. His opening words: «The schema before us is like the last will and testament of Pius XII, who, following in the footsteps of Saint Pius X, boldly began a renewal of the sacred liturgy.» Frings thus sounded what would become a leitmotif of the majority: the council was carrying forward work that had already begun. His next sentence was equally significant: «The schema is to be commended for its modest and truly pastoral literary style, full of the spirit of Holy Scripture and the Fathers of the Church.» He then made four brief suggestions, three of which pertained to use of the vernacular. Within ten minutes of beginning and letting it be known how highly he thought of the draft document, he sat down.

Cardinal Ruffini spoke next, even more briefly and also from the presidents’ table. He criticized the text for being too exclusively focused on the Roman Rite, reminded the fathers that only the Congregation of Rites had authority in matters liturgical, and, more significant, expressed no praise for the document. Then came Cardinal Lercaro of Bologna. Clear in his approval for the text and insistent on how much it accorded with the tradition of the church, he tried to refute one of the standard criticisms leveled at liturgical reformers: «The changes the document mandates do not grow out of some sterile archeology or out of some insane itching for novelty but out of the requests of pastors and out of pastoral needs-active participation in the liturgy is, according to the memorable words of Pius X, the first and irreplaceable source of the Christian spirit.» He concluded: «*hen taken as a whole and with due allowance for appropriate emendation, I willingly and eagerly in the Lord give my approval to the document.»

Then Cardinal Montini. In substance he approved the text, especially because it rested on the principle of pastoral efficacy. The schema conceded nothing to those who arbitrarily wanted to make changes nor to those who insisted that the rite can in no way be changed, as if the historical form were inseparable from what it signified. Montini called for greater use of the vernacular, but with qualification.

Then came Cardinal Spellman of New York with one of the longer interventions, in which he managed never to say outright that he liked what he had read. His message was simple: caution. In particular, though the vernacular might be fine in the administration of some of the sacraments, it should not be introduced into the Mass. Later in the course of the debate he was seconded in this opinion by Cardinal McIntyre of Los Angeles: «The sacred Mass should remain as it iS.»14 Spellman had meanwhile taken a swipe at professional liturgists by reminding the council fathers that as far as the liturgy was concerned, the perspective of real pastors was often different from that of liturgical scholars.

Cardinal Döpfner of Munich stated immediately his wholehearted approval of the schema. He registered his disagreement with those who felt that the document should stick to general principles and not descend, as it did in some matters, to specific measures. He probably made this point because he feared what would happen in the Congregation of Rites if the provisions were left too vague. Then, seemingly in direct response to Spellman, he voiced his support for use of the vernacular even in the Mass. …

Aftenposten: «Paven advarer unge briter mot fristelser»

Katolsk, Paven /

Slik skriver Aftenposten om pave Benedikts første dag i Storbritannia:

Kampen mot det han tidligere på dagen kalte en «aggressiv verdslighet» ser ut til å bli et viktig tema under pavens fire dager lange besøk i Storbritannia.

Det er mange fristelser som kommer i deres vei hver dag: narkotika, penger, sex, pornografi, alkohol, som verden sier vil gi dere lykke, men som er ødeleggende og splittende, sa paven under messen i Bellahouston Park i Glasgow. Han advarte også mot det han mener er en tendens til å utelukke religiøs tro fra den offentlige debatten.

Ifølge nyhetsbyrået DPA var det 65.000 mennesker til stede. ….

Dronning Elizabeth og hennes mann, hertugen av Edinburgh, var på plass for å hilse paven velkommen da han kom ut av Alitalia-flyet i Edinburgh.

Det er andre gang siden Henrik VIII brøt med pavekirken og dannet den anglikanske kirke i 1534 at en katolsk pave besøker Storbritannia. Benedikts forgjenger Johannes Paul var på besøk i 1982. Det var imidlertid ikke et statsbesøk, men i regi av Kirken. Denne gangen brukes det millioner av britiske skattepenger på besøket.

Paven må trå en fin balanse i England og Skottland etter at han i fjor tilbød å gjøre det lettere for anglikanere å konvertere, selv om de er uenige i kirkens syn på kvinnelige og homofile prester. …

Behandlingen av Sacrosanctum concilium – del 2

Katolsk, Liturgi /

Videre kan vi lese i Fr. O’Malleys bok om behandlingen av Vatikankonsilets dokument om liturgien (se første del her):

… Fr. Antonelli went on to present the eight chapters of the text, which covered every aspect of liturgical celebration: 1) General Principles; 2) the Eucharistic Mystery (the Mass); 3) Sacraments and Sacramentals; 4) the Divine Office (the liturgical hours like Vespers); 5) the Liturgical Year; 6) Liturgical Furnishings; 7) Sacred Music; and 8) Sacred Art. In presenting them he underscored how the five criteria were operative throughout the text. He made no mention of what had been a burning issue in the commission and would be the most time-consuming aspect of the discussion in St. Peter’s, the use of vernacular languages in the Mass.

The text about which he spoke had 105 sections, running without the notes to about 25 pages of ordinary print. The notes to the text covered a wide variety of sources but with a generous sprinkling from the encyclical Mediator Dei, The «Preface» stated that the purpose of the council was to foster a more vigorous Christian life among the faithful, to promote union with the «Separated brethren» (fratres separati), and to call all into the church. Therefore, the council would make changes in those things subject to change, so as, in this case, to adapt the liturgy better to the conditions of modern life and to foster Christian unity – two themes from John’s opening address, Gaudet Mater Ecclesia. … …

Chapter one was especially important for its insistence on active participation by everyone in the congregation. Such participation was the right and duty of every Christian. It was demanded by the very nature of the liturgy and was conferred upon the faithful by virtue of their baptism. This principle was the most fundamental in the whole schema. It was a counterpoint to the long historical development that bit by bit had located all the action in the priest-celebrant.

The chapter was also important for enunciating other principles. Whatever obscured or distracted from the essential meaning of the liturgical celebrations was to be eliminated. Intelligibility and simplicity were thus to be norms in whatever changes were implemented. Christ was present in the Word of Scripture as well as in the Eucharist, and therefore the significance of that part of the liturgy-the «Liturgy of the Word»-was to be made more effective. This highlighting of «the Word» in Sacrosanctum presaged a new centrality of Scripture in Catholic preaching and piety, which would become another major theme of the council. While the essential structure of the Roman Rite was to be maintained, local adaptation, especially in mission territories, was legitimate and encouraged. Greater autonomy was to be granted to bishops in making adaptations appropriate to their cultures, which was a clear call for some decentralization.

About liturgical languages, the chapter said: Latin is to be retained in the liturgies of the Western church. Since, however, «in some rites it is clear that the vernacular has proved very useful for the people» [a quotation from Mediator Dei], it should be given a wider role in liturgy, especially in readings, announcements, certain prayers, and music. Let it be left to episcopal conferences in different parts of the world, in consultation if need be with bishops of nearby regions speaking the same language, to propose to the Holy See the degree and the modes for admitting vernacular languages into the liturgy. …

Behandlingen av Sacrosanctum concilium – del 1

Katolsk, Liturgi /

I Fr. O’Malleys bok om Vatikankonsilet har jeg funnet spesielt interessant hans beskrivelse av konsilets behandling av liturgidokumentet Sacrosanctum concilium i oktober og november 1962. Jeg siterer her noen utdrag fra O’Malleys bok.

Vi ser i første utdrag at det hadde vært noen stridigheter før dokumentet ble presentert for alle biskopene, og Bugnini hadde blitt avsatt som sekretær for arbeidet, selv om man nokså enstemmig ønsket å fortsette liturgirevisjonen slik den hadde blitt satt i gang bl.a. av pavene Pius X og Pius XII:

… on February 22 1962, the pope appointed Cardinal Larraona as the new prefect of the Congregation of Rites and therefore as head of the Preparatory Commission. … On that same February 22, the Vatican published Veterum Sapientia, the Apostolic Constitution that insisted on the intensification of study of Latin in seminaries. As noted, this text might be taken as indirectly confirming the place of Latin in the liturgy. not only signed the document but, in an address that day in St. Peter’s, singled it out for praise. Where did the pope himself stand on liturgical issues? It was anybody’s guess.

As was expected for the head of a Preparatory Commission, Cardinal Larraona became president of the Liturgical Commission of the council itself … On October 21, at the first meeting of the commission, moreover, he passed over Bugnini as secretary and replaced him with Ferdinando Antonelli, a priest working in the Curia at the Congregation of Rites. Larraona considered Bugnini too progressive and held him responsible for the disagreeable schema he inherited.

On October 22, the day after Bugnini’s dismissal, Larraona took the floor in St. Peter’s to say not much more than that Sacrosanctum Concilium would be introduced by Antonelli, who spoke for about twenty minutes. Antonelli began by making two general points. First, just as the Council of Trent and Vatican I had mandated revision and emendation of liturgical texts, experts were now unanimously convinced that, while holding fast to the liturgical tradition of the church, similar changes in texts and rites were needed «to accommodate them to the ethos and needs of our day.» The aggiornamento theme was clear.

Second, a great pastoral problem had to be addressed. The faithful had become «Mute spectators» at Mass instead of active participants in the liturgical action. This development, he said, dated back to the Middle Ages, and recent popes, beginning with Pius X, had taken steps to remedy it. To deal with these issues, Pius XII had established a commission in 1948 that produced a full volume of reflections and recommendations. In 1951 Pius, acting on the recommendations, had restored the Easter Vigil and, in 1955, the liturgy for the entire Sacred Triduum, the last three days of Holy Week. Antonelli, by convincingly arguing that Sacrosanctum Concilium was in keeping with recent papal teaching and actions, was able to forestall a problem that would dog other schemas at the council.

He listed five criteria that had guided the Preparatory Commission in drawing up the schema. First, the commission would exercise great care in conserving the liturgical patrimony of the church. Second, it would be guided by a few principles that would undergird a general renewal (instauratio) of the liturgy. Third, it would derive its practical and rubrical directives from a doctrinal base. Fourth, it would insist on the necessity of instilling in the clergy a deeper sense of «the liturgical spirit» so that they could be effective teachers of the faithful. Finally, it would take as its aim leading the faithful into an ever more active participation in the liturgy. The document in hand, he reminded his audience, had been approved by the Central Preparatory Commission and was thus ready for examination by the council fathers. …

Dette temaer fortsetter i nye innlegg.

Skroll til toppen