mar 232016

Det har nylig blitt offentliggjort et intervju med pave (emeritus) Benedikt XVI, som tar opp temaer som “mercy and our need for forgiveness, salvation through the cross, the necessity of baptism, and the importance of sharing in Christ’s redeeming love.” Intervjuet ble gjort i oktober i fjor, før en konferanse om rettferdiggjørelse og tro i Roma (i Jesuittenes kirke Il Jesu) – der teksten ble lest opp av erkebiskop Georg Gänswein.

Forandringer i synet på rettferdiggjørelse blir tatt opp tidlig i intervjuet, er der leser vi bl.a.:

For the man of today, compared to those of the time of Luther and to those holding the classical perspective of the Christian faith, things are in a certain sense inverted, or rather, is no longer man who believes he needs justification before God, but rather he is of the opinion that God is obliged to justify himself because of all the horrible things in the world and in the face of the misery of being human, all of which ultimately depend on Him. In this regard, I find it significant that a Catholic theologian may profess even in a direct and formal this inverted position: that Christ did not suffer for the sins of men, but rather, as it were, had “canceled the guilt of God.” Even if most Christians today would not share such a drastic reversal of our faith, we could say that all of this reveals an underlying trend of our times. When Johann Baptist Metz argues that theology today must be “sensitive to theodicy”, this highlights the same problem in a positive way. Even rescinding from such a radical contestation of the Church’s vision of the relationship between God and man, the man of today has in a very general way the sense that God cannot let most of humanity be damned. In this sense, the concern for the personal salvation of souls typical of past times has for the most part disappeared. …

Også vanskelige spørsmål om frelse og misjon tas opp i intervjuet:

… There is no doubt that on this point we are faced with a profound evolution of dogma. While the fathers and theologians of the Middle Ages could still be of the opinion that, essentially, the whole human race had become Catholic and that paganism existed now only on the margins, the discovery of the New World at the beginning of the modern era radically changed perspectives. In the second half of the last century it has been fully affirmed the understanding that God cannot let go to perdition all the unbaptized and that even a purely natural happiness for them does not represent a real answer to the question of human existence. If it is true that the great missionaries of the 16th century were still convinced that those who are not baptized are forever lost – and this explains their missionary commitment – in the Catholic Church after the Second Vatican Council that conviction was finally abandoned.

From this came a deep double crisis. On the one hand this seems to remove any motivation for a future missionary commitment. Why should one try to convince the people to accept the Christian faith when they can be saved even without it? But also for Christians an issue emerged: the obligatory nature of the faith and its way of life began to seem uncertain and problematic. If there are those who can save themselves in other ways, it is not clear, in the final analysis, why the Christian himself is bound by the requirements of the Christian faith and its morals. If faith and salvation are no longer interdependent, faith itself becomes unmotivated.

mar 182016

Coat_of_arms_Ratzinger_l En presteblogger i England, Fr Ray Blake, har skrevet et interessant innlegg om pave Benedikt og hans vektlegging på sannheten. Han skriver bl.a.:

… … Truth was front and centre of the Benedictine pontificate, and along with it a certain intellectual precision and a desire to define precisely what we mean and what the Church believes. This type of precision was always at the heart of Ratzinger’s ministry, it was there in his time of Prefect of the CDF. I think a great turning point occurred with his commissioning of Cardinal Schönborn to produce the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I remember speaking to a seminarian who said, “Until the Catechism was published in 1994 we were told any old rubbish was Catholic teaching, then we were able to check for ourselves. It was amazing the effect a copy of it in a seminary class room on even the most way out lecturer”. Therefore 1994 became a significant turning point, when ‘the faith’ was placed in the hands of ordinary Catholics, rather than something which was claimed by ‘specialists’. Another great turning point was Dominus Jesus in 2000 which brought precision to our christology and ecclesiology.

Benedict’s pontificate was a search for truth that animated countless Catholics, I suspect this was one of the reasons for the rise in numerous Catholic citizen journalists and the flourishing of the Catholic blogosphere. More importantly I believe that it gave rise to a culture for transparency, openness and accountability in the Church. Benedict made it possible for us to ask the simple question, “Is this true?” and to expect an answer, He gave us a point of reference to understand that there were not many truths but one Truth and that this Truth is the Incarnate Word, the 2nd Person of the Holy Trinity, Jesus Christ himself an objective and real presence that should be at the heart of the Church. For Benedict a denial of Truth was a denial of Christ himself, an obfuscation of it an obfuscation of Christ, a lack of clarity about it, a lack of clarity about Christ.

Truth for Benedict was the disinfecting sun-light, it was the answer to corruption and self-seeking within the Church, as much as it was to false teaching or to obfuscation or a lack of transparency or on a more mundane level bishops covering up child abuse, financial corruption or lobby groups, gay or otherwise, or plain heresy.

The search for Truth seems to have stimulated vocations to the priesthood, it certainly gave an impetus to Catholic intellectual life and the desire of Catholic intellectuals to teach and give ordinary Catholics an intellectual underpinning to their faith. … …

feb 172016

John Allen skriver om dette besøket:

Upon arriving in Mexico, Francis clearly wanted to make four statements, and he underscored each with a symbolically fitting destination:

1 The importance of popular faith and devotion, which he highlighted Saturday with a Mass in the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe.

2 The dignity of Latin America’s indigenous population, expressed on Monday by an outing to Chiapas, home to an armed Zapatista uprising fueled in part by a legacy of injustices directed at indigenous communities.

3 The indecency of the drug trade and drug-related violence, hammered home on Tuesday when the pontiff traveled to Morelia, a state in which scores of ordinary people and an estimated 40 Catholic priests have been killed by criminal gangs in the past decade.

4 The human dignity of immigrants, captured in the border stop on Wednesday.

Aides said Francis personally chose these destinations, and it’s hard to imagine an itinerary better reflecting his priorities. When the pope goes some place, a good chunk of the world’s media also travels with him, and it’s clear Francis wanted to exploit that spotlight.

Pave Frans snakket også til biskopene i Mexico, og om dette sier Allen:

In effect, what the Mexico trip underlined was the kind of bishop Francis wants. Key qualities include:

– A preference for ordinary people and the poor rather than elites.
– Close contact with social realities, including concrete humanitarian and charitable efforts.
– Political moderation and dialogue with all parties.
– Simplicity of lifestyle and approach.
– Personal integrity and a distaste for wheeling and dealing.
– Rejection of careerism; that is, a prelate who thinks more about this job than the next one.

jan 102016


“Hodie caelesti sponso iuncta est Ecclesia, quoniam in Iordane lavit eius crimina.
Currunt cum munere Magi ad regales nuptias et ex aqua facto vino laetantur convivia.
Baptizat miles Regem, servus Dominum suum, Joannes Salvatorem.
Aqua Iordanis stupuit, columba protestatur. Paterna vox audita est:
Filius meus hic est, in quo bene complacui. Ipsum audite“.

“Today the Church is joined to the heavenly bridegroom, because he has washed her sins away in the Jordan. The Magi hasten to the royal wedding with gifts and the guests are gladdened with the water turned to wine. The soldier baptizes the King, the servant his Lord, John the Savior. The water of the Jordan is amazed, the dove bears witness. The voice of the Father is heard: This is my Son, with whom I am well pleased. Listen to him.”

Sandro Magister presenterer denne teksten fra den ambrosianske liturgien i starten av et innlegg der han presenterer:

… all fifteen of the baptismal homilies delivered by Joseph Ratzinger in the six years of his pontificate, at the Easter Vigil and on the Sunday of the Baptism of Jesus.

They are “mystagogical” homilies, of initiation into the mystery of baptism. Like those of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, of Saint Ambrose of Milan, of other Fathers of the Church.

It is an anthology collected for the first time here, of extraordinary richness. As can be perceived from the passages of each homily as they gradually unfold.

Pave Benedikts prekener er fra påskenatt 2006-2012 og fra festen for Jesu dåp 2006-2013. Her er et utdrag fra påskenatt 2012:

… Through the sacrament of baptism and the profession of faith, the Lord has built a bridge across to us, through which the new day reaches us. The Lord says to the newly-baptized: Fiat lux – let there be light. God’s new day – the day of indestructible life, comes also to us. Christ takes you by the hand. From now on you are held by him and walk with him into the light, into real life. For this reason the early Church called baptism “photismos” – illumination.

Why was this? The darkness that poses a real threat to mankind, after all, is the fact that he can see and investigate tangible material things, but cannot see where the world is going or whence it comes, where our own life is going, what is good and what is evil. The darkness enshrouding God and obscuring values is the real threat to our existence and to the world in general. …

des 222015

I dag er det 10 år siden pave Benedikt holdt sin berømte første juletale til den romerske kuriaen, der han aller mest sentralt definerte Kirkens liv, arbeid og utvikling som noe som skjer innenfor og i kontinuitet med Kirkens tradisjon, aldri som brudd med tradisjonen. Her er starten av talen, samt det han sier om forandring i kontinuitet med tradisjonen:

“Expergiscere, homo: quia pro te Deus factus est homo – Wake up, O man! For your sake God became man” (St Augustine, Sermo, 185). With the Christmas celebrations now at hand, I am opening my Meeting with you, dear collaborators of the Roman Curia, with St Augustine’s invitation to understand the true meaning of Christ’s Birth. ….

God became man for our sake: this is the message which, every year, from the silent grotto of Bethlehem spreads even to the most out-of-the-way corners of the earth. Christmas is a feast of light and peace, it is a day of inner wonder and joy that expands throughout the universe, because “God became man”. From the humble grotto of Bethlehem, the eternal Son of God, who became a tiny Child, addresses each one of us: he calls us, invites us to be reborn in him so that, with him, we may live eternally in communion with the Most Holy Trinity.

Our hearts brimming with the joy that comes from this knowledge, let us think back to the events of the year that is coming to an end. ….

…… The last event of this year on which I wish to reflect here is the celebration of the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council 40 years ago. This memory prompts the question: What has been the result of the Council? Was it well received? What, in the acceptance of the Council, was good and what was inadequate or mistaken? What still remains to be done? No one can deny that in vast areas of the Church the implementation of the Council has been somewhat difficult. …

….. there is an interpretation that I would call “a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture”; it has frequently availed itself of the sympathies of the mass media, and also one trend of modern theology. On the other, there is the “hermeneutic of reform,” of renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us. She is a subject which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God.

The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church. It asserts that the texts of the Council as such do not yet express the true spirit of the Council. It claims that they are the result of compromises in which, to reach unanimity, it was found necessary to keep and reconfirm many old things that are now pointless. However, the true spirit of the Council is not to be found in these compromises but instead in the impulses toward the new that are contained in the texts. …..

Her kan hele talen leses.

des 222015

Det skriver John Allen, og han åpner sin artikkel slik:

Let’s face it: In some ways, 2015 has been a rough year for Pope Francis.

Despite continuing to bask in wide popularity, the pope presided over a tumultuous Synod of Bishops in October that exposed deep internal fractures over issues such as divorce and homosexuality, and which began with a Vatican official doing a round of sensational media interviews in which he acknowledged being in a committed gay relationship.

He’s watched a burgeoning Vatican leaks scandal that’s led to three former insiders and two journalists facing criminal charges, and he’s seen his own press office forced to release details of the autopsy of a former papal diplomat accused of sexual abuse, who died in August, because of persistent rumors he may have been killed to avoid the embarrassment of a trial.

Recently there have been indications of resentment from some of the pontiff’s own aides, including publication in a German newsmagazine of a stinging letter to the pope from a former Vatican official accusing him of weakness on doctrine, “authoritarianism,” and “wrath” toward critics.

Francis also took five successful but extremely demanding foreign trips during the past year. He recently celebrated his 79th birthday, and is poised to spend much of the next 12 months presiding over a grueling calendar linked to his special jubilee Year of Mercy.

Some might naturally wonder if all that has worn Francis down, perhaps lessening his resolve about the direction and pace of his reform agenda. In response, the pontiff on Monday effectively delivered a very clear, and very simple, answer: “Nope.”

“Reform will move forward with determination, clarity, and firm resolve,” he said …

des 062015

John Allen skriver en artikkel der han stiller akkurat dette spørsmålet – og foreslår at fem ting kommer til å skje:

I did something that’s basically an act of madness: I delivered a set of predictions for 2016 regarding the almost metaphysically unpredictable Pope Francis. …

1. The next US cardinal Francis names will be a shocker.

It’s not clear whether Francis will create new cardinals in 2016, or whether one of them would be an American. If so, however, it probably won’t be anyone people are expecting — Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles, for instance, or Blase Cupich in Chicago.

When distributing red hats, Francis likes to bypass the usual centers of power. …

2. Francis will have a health issue.

So far, this pope has not had a serious health crisis. A bogus report in October of a benign brain tumor doesn’t count, since it fell apart almost as soon as it appeared.

On the other hand, Francis turns 79 on Dec. 17 and keeps up a schedule that would destroy people half his age. Those closest to Francis have long said they’re worried about the pope not taking care of himself, for instance by canceling his summer vacation at Castel Gandolfo. Watching him up close, he often seems visibly fatigued …

3. The pope will be a player in the US elections.

Pope Francis is likely to emerge as a major factor in the US elections in 2016, an especially plausible prospect given that five of the GOP contenders are Catholic (Jeb Bush, Rick Santorum, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, and George Pataki; Bobby Jindal dropped out of the race in November).

One moment when the pope appears destined to inject himself into the race will come in February, when he travels to Mexico. The trip will feature a stop in Ciudad Juarez at the US/Mexico border, where Francis will make a major statement about immigration. …

4. The pope will make two significant gestures of mercy.

Francis opens his special jubilee Year of Mercy Tuesday, and at least two unscripted papal gestures of compassion may roll out at some point along the way.

First, he may offer a hand to divorced and civilly remarried Catholics. The question of whether they could receive Communion was hotly debated at the recent Synods of Bishops on the family, and while there was no consensus, there was agreement that the Church needs to do a better job of making them feel included.

Second, and possibly more quickly, Francis may offer pardons to least some of the five people currently facing a Vatican criminal trial for leaking secrets. …

5. Resistance to Francis’ initiatives will continue, but shift.

All along, there’s been resistance to Francis in some quarters inside and outside the Catholic Church. In 2016, that blowback will almost certainly continue, but it may become less about left vs. right and more about north vs. south and rich vs. poor.

A sign of things to come appeared before Francis’ November trip to Africa with a controversial essay by an editor for a web site operated by the largely progressive German bishops’ conference, suggesting that Francis may have an overly romanticized vision of the global South and an overly negative approach to Europe. …

nov 172015

Pave Frans var i Romas lutherske kirke søndag kveld, og fikk da et spørsmål fra en luthersk kvinne som lurte på om hun kunne motta katolsk kommunion/ nattverd når hun gikk i kirken sammen med sin katolske mann. Paven svarte ganske langt og nokså uklart, men så ut til å antyde at hun her måtte følge sin egen samvittighet. Men han la også til:

The Pope added: “I wouldn’t ever dare to allow this, because it’s not my competence. One baptism, one Lord, one faith. Talk to the Lord and then go forward. I don’t dare to say anything more.”

Jeg har lest om dette herCatholic Herald og Father Z skriver også om det.

sep 282015

Mercatornet stiller dette spørsmålet, og svarer bekreftende (selvsagt). Samtidig skriver de at pave Frans ikke ønslet å gå så direkte inn i den amerikanske debatten, som også preges ganske mye av svart-hvitt argumenter. Slik skriver de bl.a.:

… although the Pope’s opposition was crystal clear, he still declined to anathematize abortionists and “marriage equality” during his recent trip. Instead, in a speech before a joint sitting of Congress, he took aim at the death penalty, global poverty, the international arms trade and responsibility for the environment.

New York Times columnist Ross Douthat, who often speaks for “conservative” Catholics, felt betrayed. Pope Francis, he wrote, “has been a gift to liberals who are also Christians, to religious believers whose politics lean left”. It remains to be seen, he concludes, “whether, after the cheering ends, the same winter that enveloped liberal Protestantism after the 1960s will claim Franciscan Catholicism as well.”

This just about hits the gong on the grouch scale and, I think, is almost entirely unwarranted. Let me explain.

Although it is hardly unique to Americans, they are particularly susceptible to dividing the world between good and evil, between liberals and conservatives, between friends of America and its foes. Having clearly defined enemies makes the world easier to understand and easier to grapple with.

Its corollary is the rhetoric of denunciation. The killer argument is knock-out punch which sends an opponent to the canvas. It wins the applause of your friends – even if it fails to persuade your enemies.

But Pope Francis is committed to a different kind of rhetoric. It’s not overly simplistic to say that he is trying to win souls, not arguments. …

sep 192015


George Weigel skriver i First Things slik om det kommende pavebesøket i USA:

…. John Paul II’s first papal pilgrimage to the United States was, I think, a surprise for him. He had previously visited the U.S. on two occasions, but his exposure to Catholic life in America was rather limited on those trips. That changed in October 1979, when everything that happened during John Paul’s visit—from the cheers of raucous teenagers in Madison Square Garden to the piety of Iowa farmers gathered around the Bishop of Rome in a cornfield—testified to the vitality of American Catholic life. America was not, it seemed, a trans-Atlantic version of western Europe: religiously dessicated, vaguely guilty about its impiousness, and thus aggressively secular.

And as the Church in the United States continued to pay far more serious attention to John Paul II’s challenging teaching than the Church in Great Britain, France, the Low Countries, and the German-speaking lands of western Europe, John Paul began to encourage the new democracies of central and eastern Europe to look to the United States for one important model of how to be Vatican II’s “Church in the modern world,” after the Wall came down.

And speaking of surpises, who could have imagined, in 1945, that a former German prisoner-of-war, held briefly by American forces as the Nazi regime crumbled, would be welcomed as pope on the South Lawn of the White House by the President of the United States and the U.S. Army band? Or that that same pope, long pilloried in the more ignorant sections of the American press as reactionary and authoritarian, would, in New York, make the gothic beauties of St. Patrick’s Cathedral the central metaphor in a stunning homily on the openness and spaciousness of the Church when viewed “from inside”? Lots of people were surprised by the joy and warmth of Benedict XVI’s visit to the U.S. in 2008; but a German pope who could thank the British people for winning the Battle of Britain during World War II proved capable of far more surprises than his cultured detractors imagined.

The popes in America have spoken words of both challenge and encouragement, and that will surely continue with Pope Francis’s visit this month. Unlike Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI, however, Francis will be visiting the United States for the first time. Here he will find the Church that, for all its difficulties, is the best example of his “Church permanently in mission” in the developed world. As Francis encourages his American flock—and likely challenges us, too—my hope is that he is also challenged, encouraged, and perhaps even instructed by the vibrant faith he experiences among us.

sep 082015

Mens vi fortsatt venter på detaljene om hvordan ekteskapstribunalenes arbeid med gyldighen av ekteskap vil komme til å se ut, skriver John Allen om konsekvensene at pavens Motu proprio:

In Catholic parlance, an “annulment” means a ruling by a Church court that a union between a man and a woman, even if it featured a Church wedding, is not a valid marriage because it fails one of the traditional tests, such as a lack of genuine consent or a psychological incapacity to undertake the obligations.

Annulments are hugely important at the retail level of the faith, because for Catholics whose relationships break down and who want to get married in the Church to someone else, they first have to obtain one.

It’s no accident that Francis is making this move on the cusp of a special “Holy Year of Mercy” that he has decreed will begin Dec. 8, the same day these changes take effect. …

The decision will recalibrate the discussion at October’s second edition of the Synod of Bishops on the family, likely reducing the emphasis on the question of Communion for divorced and remarried Catholics and creating space for other issues to emerge.

Last October, the matter of whether the traditional ban on Communion for Catholics who divorce and remarry outside the Church ought to be softened was the hot-button issue par excellence, with cardinals and other senior leaders exchanging barbed commentary and activist groups on both sides egging them on.

All along, reform in the annulment process seemed the most obvious compromise measure, a way of giving both camps at least part of what they wanted. Those opposed to revising the Communion ban could take comfort that the Church was not softening its stand on divorce, while progressives would be pleased that the Church was at least trying to show greater compassion and outreach. ….

The reform may lead over time to a cultural shift within the canon law community — the lawyers, judges, academics, and others engaged in the theory and practice of Church law.

In recent decades, a general tendency among many canon lawyers has been to try to make the annulment system as user-friendly as possible, on the grounds that it could be unwieldy, time-consuming, and costly.

As this new reform is rolled out, it may be that concern over cumbersomeness will be replaced with concern about the possibility of abuse, ….

On the eve of his first-ever trip to the United States, one could argue that Pope Francis has delivered a major thumbs-up to American Catholicism.

Over the years, bishops, canon lawyers, and other Church personnel around the world sometimes have complained that America makes it too easy to obtain an annulment, with some going so far as to call the United States an “annulment factory.”

US prelates and canonists often reply that America is one of the few countries that takes the annulment process seriously, investing significant resources in training lawyers and judges and making the process available to whoever wants it. ….

sep 012015

Pave Frans har annonsert et Nådens år som skal begynne 8. desember i år. I et brev som ble offentliggjort i dag, skriver paven bl.a. at alle prester i løpet av dette året kan tilgi de som har vært involvert i provosert abort, og at også absolusjonen til SSPX-prester vil være gyldig. Slik skriver Catholic Herald:

… the Pope wrote: “I have decided, notwithstanding anything to the contrary, to concede to all priests for the Jubilee Year the discretion to absolve of the sin of abortion those who have procured it and who, with contrite heart, seek forgiveness for it.

“May priests fulfil this great task by expressing words of genuine welcome combined with a reflection that explains the gravity of the sin committed, besides indicating a path of authentic conversion by which to obtain the true and generous forgiveness of the Father who renews all with his presence.”

Pope Francis also wrote that lay people who attend Confession with SSPX priests will receive valid absolution during the year of mercy.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that abortion incurs excommunication and as a result absolution can only be granted by a Pope, bishop or priest authorised by them. …

… Regarding the Fraternity of St Pius X, Pope Francis said: “This Jubilee Year of Mercy excludes no one.” He continued: “From various quarters, several Brother Bishops have told me of their good faith and sacramental practice, combined however with an uneasy situation from the pastoral standpoint. I trust that in the near future solutions may be found to recover full communion with the priests and superiors of the Fraternity.

“In the meantime, motivated by the need to respond to the good of these faithful, through my own disposition, I establish that those who during the Holy Year of Mercy approach these priests of the Fraternity of St Pius X to celebrate the Sacrament of Reconciliation shall validly and licitly receive the absolution of their sins.”

jun 282015

15juni_p_frans_ungdommer Sandro Magister skriver om hvordan pave Frans ofte (bevisst) misforstås som veldig liberal og moderne av pressen. Og så siterer han hva paven sa til de unge i Torino 21. juni:

Even the pope must sometimes take a risk to speak the truth. Love is in works, in communicating, but love is very respectful of persons, it does not use persons, and love is chaste. And to you young people in this world, in this hedonistic world, in this world where all the publicity goes to pleasure, to fun, to the good life, I say to you: be chaste, be chaste.

All of us in life have gone through moments in which this virtue is very difficult, but this is nothing other than the way of a genuine love, of a love that knows how to give life, that does not seek to use the other for one’s own pleasure. It is a love that considers the life of the other person as sacred: I respect you, I do not want to use you. It is not easy. We all know the difficulties in overcoming this “facilistic” and hedonistic conception of love. Forgive me if I am telling you something that you were not expecting, but I ask you: make the effort to live love chastely…

We are living in a culture of the disposable. Because that which is of no economic utility is discarded. Children are discarded because they are not had or are killed before they are born; the elderly are discarded because they are not needed and are left there to die in a sort of hidden euthanasia.

Magister skriver i samme artikkel om hvordan pavens encyklika “ladato si” er gjort lettere tilgjengelig fordi den teologiske innledningen er flyttet lenger ut i brevet, men likevel er den teologiske sammenhengen og helheten tydelig med:

“The encyclical, as it is presented to us today, shows a face different from that of the first draft, which was to include a long introduction of a theological, liturgical, sacramental, and spiritual character. If the initial configuration had remained, the encyclical would have been addressed more immediately to the Catholic world. Pope Francis, instead, preferred to change this configuration, moving the theological part to the middle and end, as he also did with the parts concerning spirituality and education. In this way he restructured the material made available to him, arranging it according to a method of analysis and discernment that implies a consideration of the situation, an evaluation and a prefiguration of practical guidelines for working on a solution of the problems. He thus wanted to involve the largest possible number of readers, including nonbelievers, in a thought process that to a large extent can be shared in by all.”

Another interesting observation has come from an economist who contributed to the composition not of this encyclical but of the “Caritas in Veritate” of Benedict XVI, former IOR president Ettore Gotti Tedeschi.

In an interview with “la Repubblica” and a commentary in “Il Foglio,” he has said that the profound meaning of the encyclical can be grasped only when to “Praised may you be” is added “my Lord.” Because the ultimate cause of the behavior that leads to environmental degradation “is sin, the loss of God,” while the proximate cause “is the exaggerated consumerism induced in order to compensate for the collapse of the birth rate in Western countries.” ….

jun 222015

Jeg presenterer her enda et annerledes perspektiv på pave Frans’ encyklika, skrev av Matthew Schmitz, assisterende redaktør i First Things. Han skriver bl.a.:

Laudato Si, Pope Francis’ encyclical letter on the environment, is the work of a profoundly pessimistic man. John Paul II may have spoken of the “culture of death” and Benedict XVI of the “dictatorship of relativism,” but not since the publication of the Syllabus of Errors in the nineteenth century has a leader of the Catholic church issued a document so imbued with foreboding. Critics will seize on his dark tone, but Francis’ letter offers a challenge worthy of serious consideration.

“People no longer seem to believe in a happy future,” he writes. “They no longer have blind trust in a better tomorrow based on the present state of the world and our technical abilities. There is a growing awareness that scientific and technological progress cannot be equated with the progress of humanity and history.”

Despite these portents, we “do not grasp the gravity of the challenges before us,” nor the “spiral of self-destruction which currently engulfs us.” “We stand naked and exposed in the face of our ever-increasing power, lacking the wherewithal to control it.” There are no clear solutions. “Halfway measures simply delay the inevitable disaster.”

… As evidence of the coming disaster, Francis adduces environmental calamities—climate change, pollution, deforestation, monoculture, extinction — and yet he leaves no doubt that the crisis is fundamentally a spiritual one. Its source is our desire to master and manipulate nature, which leads us to use technology that ends up mastering us.

Francis’ broadsides against technology are loaded with quotations from “The End of the Modern World,” a book written by the midcentury German priest Romano Guardini. Francis has a longstanding love of the German thinker who, like him, was the son of Italian émigrés and studied chemistry. Drawing on Guardini, the pope denounces the excessive use of air-conditioning, broods over genetically modified crops, worries about automobiles “causing traffic congestion, raising the level of pollution, and consuming enormous quantities of non-renewable energy,” and pans “megastructures” that express “the spirit of a globalized technocracy.”

jun 212015

Sandro Magister har presentert noen utdrag fra pave Frans’ encyklika, som mange kanskje ikke legger merke til. Og her presenterer jeg noen få av Magisters punkter, om hvordan dette rundskrivet er organisert, og om hvordan menneskefosteret også trenger beskyttelse, at kjønnsforskjeller og -identitet er viktig, begrensninger ang hva Kirken kan uttale seg om vitenskapelig usikre temaer, om betydningen av familien, at bordbønn kan minne oss på at Gud er verdens skaper og opprettholder, om betydningen av søndagen, og om det evige liv.

I will begin by briefly reviewing several aspects of the present ecological crisis, with the aim of drawing on the results of the best scientific research available today, letting them touch us deeply and provide a concrete foundation for the ethical and spiritual itinerary that follows.

I will then consider some principles drawn from the Judaeo-Christian tradition which can render our commitment to the environment more coherent.

I will then attempt to get to the roots of the present situation, so as to consider not only its symptoms but also its deepest causes.

This will help to provide an approach to ecology which respects our unique place as human beings in this world and our relationship to our surroundings.

In light of this reflection, I will advance some broader proposals for dialogue and action which would involve each of us as individuals, and also affect international policy.

Finally, convinced as I am that change is impossible without motivation and a process of education, I will offer some inspired guidelines for human development to be found in the treasure of Christian spiritual experience.


Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties?


Human ecology also implies another profound reality: the relationship between human life and the moral law, which is inscribed in our nature and is necessary for the creation of a more dignified environment. Pope Benedict XVI spoke of an “ecology of man”, based on the fact that “man too has a nature that he must respect and that he cannot manipulate at will”… Also, valuing one’s own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary if I am going to be able to recognize myself in an encounter with someone who is different. In this way we can joyfully accept the specific gifts of another man or woman, the work of God the Creator, and find mutual enrichment. It is not a healthy attitude which would seek “to cancel out sexual difference because it no longer knows how to confront it”.


There are certain environmental issues where it is not easy to achieve a broad consensus. Here I would state once more that the Church does not presume to settle scientific questions or to replace politics. But I am concerned to encourage an honest and open debate so that particular interests or ideologies will not prejudice the common good.


I would stress the great importance of the family, which is the place in which life – the gift of God – can be properly welcomed and protected against the many attacks to which it is exposed, and can develop in accordance with what constitutes authentic human growth. In the face of the so-called culture of death, the family is the heart of the culture of life.

In the family we first learn how to show love and respect for life; we are taught the proper use of things, order and cleanliness, respect for the local ecosystem and care for all creatures. In the family we receive an integral education, which enables us to grow harmoniously in personal maturity.

In the family we learn to ask without demanding, to say “thank you” as an expression of genuine gratitude for what we have been given, to control our aggressivity and greed, and to ask forgiveness when we have caused harm. These simple gestures of heartfelt courtesy help to create a culture of shared life and respect for our surroundings.


One expression of this attitude is when we stop and give thanks to God before and after meals. I ask all believers to return to this beautiful and meaningful custom. That moment of blessing, however brief, reminds us of our dependence on God for life; it strengthens our feeling of gratitude for the gifts of creation; it acknowledges those who by their labours provide us with these goods; and it reaffirms our solidarity with those in greatest need.


On Sunday, our participation in the Eucharist has special importance. Sunday, like the Jewish Sabbath, is meant to be a day which heals our relationships with God, with ourselves, with others and with the world. Sunday is the day of the Resurrection, the “first day” of the new creation, whose first fruits are the Lord’s risen humanity, the pledge of the final transfiguration of all created reality. It also proclaims man’s eternal rest in God… Rest opens our eyes to the larger picture and gives us renewed sensitivity to the rights of others. And so the day of rest, centred on the Eucharist, sheds it light on the whole week, and motivates us to greater concern for nature and the poor.


Eternal life will be a shared experience of awe, in which each creature, resplendently transfigured, will take its rightful place and have something to give those poor men and women who will have been liberated once and for all.

In the meantime, we come together to take charge of this home which has been entrusted to us, knowing that all the good which exists here will be taken up into the heavenly feast.

jun 202015

Et litt overraskende perspektiv på pave Frans’ encyklika om miljø og klima kan vi finne på First Things nettsider, der redaktør R. R. Reno skriver:

Commentators are sure to make the false claim that Pope Francis has aligned the Church with modern science. They’ll say this because he endorses climate change. But that’s a superficial reading of Laudato Si. In this encyclical, Francis expresses strikingly anti-scientific, anti-technological, and anti-progressive sentiments. In fact, this is perhaps the most anti-modern encyclical since the Syllabus of Errors, Pius IX’s haughty 1864 dismissal of the conceits of the modern era.

Francis describes the root of our problem as a failure to affirm God as Creator. Because we do not orient our freedom toward acknowledging God, the Father, we’re drawn into the technological project. We seek to subdue and master the world so that it can serve our needs and desires, thus treating “other living beings as mere objects subjected to arbitrary human domination.” By contrast, if we acknowledge God as Creator, we can receive creation as a gift and see that “the ultimate purpose of other creatures is not found in us.”

In short, without a theocentric orientation, we adopt the anthropocentric presumption that we are at the center of reality. This tempts us to treat nature—and other human beings—as raw material to do with as we wish. For Francis, “a spirituality which forgets God as all-powerful and Creator is not acceptable.”

Of course, God is exactly what modernity has forgotten, which means that it too is “not acceptable”—exactly Pius IX’s conclusion. The Syllabus of Errors is exquisitely succinct. Laudato Si is verbose. But in a roundabout way Francis makes his own case against the modern world. …… ………

mai 132015

Sandro Magister skriver slik om den siste utviklingen rundt høstens bispesynde om familien:

…. Until the synod of October 2014, Jorge Mario Bergoglio had repeatedly and in various ways shown encouragement for “openness” in matters of homosexuality and second marriages, each time with great fanfare in the media. Cardinal Kasper explicitly said that he had “agreed” with the pope on his explosive talk at the consistory.

But during that synod the resistance to the new paradigms showed itself to be much more strong and widespread than expected, and determined the defeat of the innovators. The reckless “relatio post disceptationem” halfway through the assembly was demolished by the criticism and gave way to a much more traditional final report.

In accompanying this unfolding of the synod Pope Francis also contributed to the turning point himself, among other ways by rounding out the commission charged with writing the final report – until then under the brazen dominion of the innovators – by adding personalities of opposing viewpoints.

But it is above all from the end of the synod on that Francis has taken a new course with respect to the one that he initially traveled.

From the end of 2014 until today, there has not been even one more occasion on which he has given the slightest support to the paradigms of the innovators.

On the contrary. He has intensified his remarks on all the most controversial questions connected to the synodal theme of the family: contraception, abortion, divorce, second marriages, homosexual marriage, “gender” ideology. And every time he has spoken of them as a “son of the Church” – as he loves to call himself – with ironclad fidelity to tradition and without swerving by a millimeter from what was said before him by Paul VI, John Paul II, or Benedict XVI. …

mai 052015


Peter Kwasniewski skriver følgende om liturgien på NLM-bloggen:

Let’s give this Ognissanti rhetoric some careful thought. “Backwards” and “forwards” are inherently ambiguous metaphors. If we decide to stick with polyester vestments, guitars, wide fat candles, and banners, are we not looking backwards into the 1960s/1970s? If we sing Gregorian chant, are we trapped in the Middle Ages—or are we singing a timeless music that is always and everywhere simply Catholic, as the Popes have taught? Is Latin a “dead language of the past” or is it the sacred language of eternal Rome, through which we signify the apostolic truth and constancy of what we celebrate? And so on and so forth. Those who love traditional things are interested in neither “going backwards” nor “going forwards.” We are interested in worshiping God worthily in the present, in continuity with the past, and for the future health of the Church and the conversion of the world.

Det er litt dristig å ta dette opp, fordi det referer til noe pave Frans sa for kort tid siden, da han markerte 50-årsjubileet for den første messen feiret på italiensk. Da sa han:

Let us thank the Lord for what he has done in his Church in these 50 years of liturgical reform. It was truly a courageous gesture for the Church to draw near to the people of God so that they are able to understand well what they are doing. This is important for us, to follow the Mass in this way. It is not possible to go backwards. We must always go forward. Always forward (applause)! And those who go backward are mistaken.

Kwasniewski siterer så Fr. James V. Schall, som svarer slik:

What, one wonders, does “forward” imply? The notion of “progress” for the sake of “progress” avoids the question of “progress to what?” or “forward to where?” To go “forward”, we must first look backward to the Gospel. Chesterton said progress can only be made by looking backwards. The future is blank, but history contains real people, real choices for good or bad.

Kanskje messen under feires mer passende enn om man bruker de billige, syntetiske messehaklene vi ser øverst i denne artikkelen?