Paven

Flere utdrag fra «Laudato si’, mi’ Signore»

Generelt, Katolsk, Paven /

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.

THE THEMES OF THE SIX CHAPTERS (15)
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.

……………………
THE EMBRYO IS ALSO NATURE TO BE DEFENDED (120)

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?

………………
SEXUAL DIFFERENTIATION IS A LAW OF NATURE (155)

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”.

……………..
THE CHURCH DOES NOT GIVE SCIENTIFIC SOLUTIONS (188)

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.

……………………….
IN PRAISE OF THE FAMILY (213)

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.

………………….
PRAYER AT MEALTIME (227)

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.

…………………
IN PRAISE OF SUNDAY (237)

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.

…………………….
IN WAITING FOR ETERNAL LIFE (243 and 244)

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.

KATOLSK ANTIMODERNISME KOMMER TILBAKE

Generelt, Katolsk, Paven /

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. …… ………

Pave Frans med mer tradisjonelle synspunkter om familien

Katolsk, Paven, Teologi /

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. …

Dristige tanker om liturgien

Katolsk, Liturgi, Paven /

polyester_vestments

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?

solemn_mass

Blir pave Frans ikke sittende særlig lenge?

Katolsk, Paven /

Vi har lest ulike nyhetsmeldinger de siste dagene, som pave Frans kommer til å gå av om ikke mange år. Man bør ikke stole på alt som står i avisene eller på nettet, for ofte misforstår journalistene en hel del. Men når det gjelder internasjonale katolske nyheter, stoler jeg alltid på John Allen. Og han skriver 14/3 om denne saken:

Pope Francis marked the second anniversary of his election on Friday with yet another blockbuster media interview, this one with the Mexican network Televisa. One headline from the conversation with veteran Vatican reporter Valentina Alazraki focused on his expectations for a short papacy.

As he has on other occasions, Francis hinted that he doesn’t expect to be around very long. “I have the feeling that my pontificate will be brief … four or five years. I don’t know, even two or three,” he said. The pontiff called this nothing more than a “vague sensation.”

“Maybe it’s like the psychology of the gambler who convinces himself he will lose so he won’t be disappointed, and if he wins, he’s happy,” Francis said. “But I feel that the Lord has placed me here for a short time, and nothing more … But I always leave the possibility open.”

This isn’t the first time the pontiff has augured a short reign. …..

Allen legger til at paven har snakket om dette bare når han har blitt direkte spurt om det, at han var 76 år da han ble valgt, og at alle husker meget godt hvordan pave Benedikt abdiserte for to år siden. Så skriver han videre:

And yet … if you want a five-star, banner headline-style insight about this pope, here it is: Beneath his humble, simple exterior lies the mind of a brilliant politician. He’s a media- and politics-savvy figure, and so the question has to be asked: What political advantage does Francis derive from publicly suggesting he’ll have a short shelf life?

Three points suggest themselves.

1. Mobilizing his base
First, it helps Francis mobilize his base by dropping hints that they may not have very long to take full advantage of having him at the top of the system. …

2. Putting off the opposition
Logically speaking, forecasts of a short papacy might have the same impact on his opposition, but in fact, they may actually have the effect of encouraging it to bide its time. …

3. Making the job manageable
The third advantage Francis may derive from talking about a short papacy is making the job more manageable for himself.

As it’s come to be understood in our time, the papacy is really an impossible post. …

Les mer hos John Allen selv.

Opplevde pave Frans et mirakel?

Katolsk, Paven /

John Allen skriver her om sin siste bok: «The Francis Miracle: Inside the Transformation of the Pope and the Church», at han har fått mange reaksjoner på tittelen.

Han skriver at tittelen ikke er en evaluering av pave Frans’ arbeid så langt, men:

… the point is that there’s something about this pope that can’t be adequately accounted for in terms of purely human calculations, something that requires a supernatural or mystical point of reference in order to be properly understood.

In a nutshell, the enigma is this: What accounts for the sharp contrast between Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio in Argentina and Pope Francis today?

For sure, that contrast is not absolute. During his 15 years as the archbishop of Buenos Aires, Bergoglio was committed to the poor, strove to re-light the Church’s missionary fires, and lived a life of gospel simplicity. All are traits he’s carried into the papacy.

Yet there clearly is a difference in style and personality, because the Bergoglio of Argentina was nobody’s idea of a pop culture sensation.

The cardinal rarely appeared in public and almost never gave formal interviews. When he did have to take the public stage, friends would call him “shy” and critics “boring.” Nobody came away saying he turned the world on with his smile. In fact, it’s hard to find a photo of a beaming Bergoglio taken before his election two years ago.

Neither was he the spontaneous, shoot-from-the-hip sound bite machine the world sees today. He came off as more controlled, more circumspect, always preferring to operate quietly behind the scenes rather than in public view.

When I asked her in April 2013 what she made of the change, Maria Elena Bergoglio, the pope’s only surviving sibling, said jokingly: “I don’t recognize this guy!”

Allen skriver også om en kardinal som har snakket med pave Frans, og som har en forklaring på denne dramtatiske personlighetsforandringen:

“Over Christmas 2013, a veteran Latin American cardinal who has known Bergoglio for decades made an appointment to see his old friend in the Santa Marta, the hotel on Vatican grounds where the pope has chosen to reside. (He lives in Room 201, a slightly larger room than the one he stayed in during the conclave that elected him, giving the pontiff enough space to receive guests comfortably).

“The cardinal, who didn’t wish to be named, said he looked at Francis and, referring to the exuberance and spontaneity that are now hallmarks of his public image, said to him point-blank: ‘You are not the same man I knew in Buenos Aires. What’s happened to you’?

“According to the cardinal, this was Francis’ answer:

“ ‘On the night of my election, I had an experience of the closeness of God that gave me a great sense of interior freedom and peace,’ the cardinal quoted the pope as saying, ‘and that sense has never left me.’ ”

Les hele artikkelen her.

50 år siden første messe ble feiret på morsmålet

Liturgi, Paven /

p_paul6_messe
7. mars feiret pave Paul VI det som regnes som første messe på morsmålet (selv om jeg tro en del ting fortsatt var på latin, som Canon). Vi leser om dette på NLM-bloggen:

On March 7, 1965, Blessed Paul VI…celebrated the first Mass in Italian in history in the parish of Ognissanti (All Saints), Rome,” Vatican Information Services tells us. … This anniversary, and the celebration of it, may seem a little anomalous—after all, the ‘new’ Mass came into force on the first Sunday of Advent in 1969. Why the celebrations now?

March 7th, 1965, was in fact the date on which the Instruction Inter Oecumenici “On the Proper Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy,” dated September 26, 1964, came into force. It was the first significant implementation of the liturgical reform. Hence Paul VI’s words at the beginning of his homily at Oggnisanti: “Today we inaugurate the new form of liturgy in all the parishes and churches of the world.” …

… Let us return to the church of Ognissanti on the Via Appia Nuova in Rome’s Appio-Latino quarter, and “the first Mass in Italian in history” celebrated by Paul VI (well, given the canon &c., mostly in Italian). To arrive at an extensive use of the vernacular merely 459 days after the promulgation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy on December 4, 1963, was quite an accomplishment—a direct fruit of the requests submitted by the Italian bishops to the Consilium and of the prompt and positive responses it increasingly gave to such requests.

The leadership of the Consilium and, seemingly, most Italian bishops, regarded the maximum use of the vernacular as being of great importance, if not as indispensable, in achieving a participatory and truly pastoral liturgy. “The fundamental norm from today and in the future is to pray understanding every phrase and word, to complete [them] with our personal feelings, and to make them one with the soul of the community that sings with us in unison,” Paul VI said in his homily.

Indeed, reading the memoirs of the Consilium’s Secretary, Annibale Bugnini CM, it becomes clear that the question of arriving at a liturgy that was completely in the vernacular was a burning quest which left the clearly nuanced provisions of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy far behind (“In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue” § 54; see also § 36). Bugnini himself had to admit that “it cannot be denied that the principle, approved by the Council, of using the vernaculars was given a broad interpretation.” Indeed, he held—somewhat arrogantly—that since its introduction “millions and hundreds of millions of the faithful…have at last achieved worship in spirit and truth” and “can at last pray to God in their own languages and not in meaningless sounds.” Paul VI himself asserted that March 7th, 1965, was “a great event, that shall be remembered as the beginning of a flourishing spiritual life, as a new effort to participate in the great dialogue between God and man.” …..

Pave Frans snakker med prestene i Roma om liturgien

Liturgi, Paven /

Vi kan her lese om et møte pave Frans hadde med alle Romas prester torsdag 19. februar:

The liturgy should help the faithful enter into God’s mystery and to experience the wonder of encountering Christ, Pope Francis told priests of the diocese of Rome.
People should feel the wonder and allure «that the apostles felt when they were called, invited. It attracts — wonder attracts — and it lets you reflect,» the pope said during an annual Lenten meeting with Rome pastors in the Paul VI audience hall.

Sitting behind a table and talking off-the-cuff, glancing occasionally at a few pages of notes in front of him, the pope led the pastors Thursday in a reflection on the homily and «ars celebrandi,» the art of celebrating the liturgy well. ….

Pope Francis told the priests that «the homily is a challenge for priests» and he said he, too, had his own shortcomings — pointed out in a reflection he prepared for a plenary meeting of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments on «ars celebrandi» in 2005.

As Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, he was a cardinal-member of the congregation. After he presented the reflection, he said, Cardinal Joachim Meisner «reprimanded me a bit strongly over some things,» as well as then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who «told me that something very important was missing in the ‘ars celebrandi,’ which was the feeling of being before God. And he was right, I had not spoken about this,» he said, adding that both cardinals had given him good advice. …

Les mer hos National Catholic Reporter.

Liturgibloggen PrayTell har også en lang og interessant diskusjon om dette.

To år siden pave Benedikts svært overraskende kunngjøring

Katolsk, Paven /

p_benedict_resigns

Det er i dag to år siden pave Benedikt kunngjorde at han ville gå av som pave. Den skotske erkebiskopen Leo Cushley skriver om hvordan han opplevde det:

Once the Holy Father had been readied for the Liturgy of the Hours, we all followed him into the Sala del Concistoro to pray with the waiting cardinals. We sang midday prayer for the memorial of Our Lady of Lourdes (February 11) then Cardinal Angelo Amato made his announcement regarding those soon to be promoted to the altars. So far so good.

The Holy Father then took the floor. This was the first time I had sat in a consistory, so I had no idea if this was normal or not. He spoke in Latin, so a greater effort than normal was going to be required by all of us – Italian being the normal language of the Curia – so a little strain was evident as we tried to grasp where he was going.

Within seconds it was clear what was happening. This was no ordinary address. He did not speak about the consistory and the soon-to-be saints, or a few changes in administration, or the anniversary of the Lateran treaties, or the end of the historic dispute with Italy. Instead, he made history. I felt my stomach turn over as I realised that here before us was something not seen for centuries: the voluntary resignation of the Roman Pontiff.

It seemed that, in slow motion before me, an assistant television cameraman put his hand to his mouth in a cartoonlike gesture of astonishment, the monsignor sitting next to me started to sob quietly, Archbishop Gänswein’s shoulders seemed to drop. The cardinals leaned forward to make sure they understood precisely what was being said and I found myself checking that my jaw wasn’t dropping open. Then there was silence.

Erkebiskop Gänswein uttaler seg om kommunion for gjengifte

Katolsk, Paven /

Det danske Katolsk Orientering har i sitt siste nummer følgende hovedoppslag:

Ingen uoverensstemmelse mellem de to paver om kommunion til gengifte
Det siger pave emeritus personlige sekretær ærkebiskop George Gänswein.

Flere medier har i den senere tid antydet, at der skulle være en uoverensstemmelse mellem pave Frans og pave emeritus Benedikt XVI’s syn på spørgsmålet om gengifte fraskiltes adgang til kommunionen. Det afvises nu af den tyske ærkebiskop George Gänswein i et interview i det tyske ugemagasin Christ & Welt, hvor han kalder denne påståede uoverensstemmelse for ”kunstig”.

”Jeg deler ikke denne opfattelse”, siger han. ”Det er en kunstig modsætning, som ikke eksisterer. Paven er den øverste garant og beskytter af Kirkens lære og samtidig dens øverste hyrde og præst. Der er ikke en modsætning mellem undervisningen og den pastorale omsorg – de er tvillinger”.

Ærkebiskop Gänswein kalder det ”absurd” at hævde, at pave Frans læremæssige udtalelser skulle modsige hans forgængere. ”Én ting er tydeligt at understrege den pastorale indsats fordi situationen kræver det. Noget helt andet er at ændre undervisningen. Jeg kan kun agere pastoralt følsomt, konsekvent og samvittighedsfuld når det sker på grundlag af den fulde katolske lære. Sakramenternes indhold er ikke overladt til præsternes eget skøn, men er blevet givet af Vorherre til Kirken. Det gælder navnlig ægteskabets sakramente”.

Ærkebiskoppen afviser også at Benedikt XVI skulle havde ændret konklusionen i en artikel om kommunion for gengifte fraskilte fra 1972 med det formål at påvirke sidste års ekstraordinære synode om familien. ”Revideringen af den nævnte artikel fra 1972 var afsluttet og sendt til forlæggeren lang tid inden synoden. Enhver forfatter har selvfølgelig lov til at rette i sine egne tekster. Enhver velinformeret person vil vide, at pave Benedikt ikke har delt konklusionerne i den omtalte artikel siden 1981, altså i mere end 30 år! Som præfekt for Troslærekongregationen har han tydligt givet udtryk for dette i forskellige kommentarer”.

Gänswein afviser også rygtet om, at flere bekymrede kardinaler skulle have bedt pave emeritus’ om at gribe ind under den ekstraordinære familiesynode som ”rent opspind”. ..

LES ALT SAMMEN HER – erkebiskopen uttaler seg også om pave Benedikts abdikasjon om mulige stridigheter i kurien.

Pave Frans gleder seg over store familier

Katolsk, Paven /

På sin tur til Sri Lanka og Filippinene sa pave Frans enkelte ting som ikke var ganske upresise, og som ble slått stort opp i media. Men under dagens onsdagsaudiens i Vatikanet, sa han bl.a. dette:

The meetings with families and young people at Manila, were salient moments of the visit to the Philippines. Healthy families are essential to the life of society. It gave us consolation and hope to see so many large families that welcome children as a true gift of God. They know that every child is a gift of God. I heard it said that families with many children and the birth of so many children are among the causes of poverty. It seems to me to be a simplistic opinion. I can say that the main cause of poverty is an economic system that has removed the person from the center and put the god of money there; an economic system that excludes, that always excludes, children, the elderly, the youth, without work…- and that creates the throwaway culture that we live in. Recalling the figure of Saint Joseph, who protected the life of the “Holy Child,” so venerated in that country, I reminded that it is necessary to protect the families that face different threats, so that they can witness the beauty of the family in God’s plan. It is also necessary to defend them from the new ideological colonizations, which attempts threatens their identity and their mission.

Les alt han sa under denne audiensen – om turen til om Sri Lanka og Filippinene

Dokumentet «Dominus Jesus» under angrep?

Katolsk, Paven, Teologi /

Nokså overraskende leste jeg hos Sandro Magister at det kjente dokumentet Dominus Jesus fra år 2000 (LES DET HER), om Jesus som eneste vei til frelse, og et tillegg om hva som kreves for å virkelig kunne kalles en Kirke. Jesuitten Jacques Dupuis kritiserer dokumentet i en bok som kom ute etter hans død, skriver Magister, og:

The Bolognese historian (Professor Alberto Melloni) dismisses “Dominus Iesus” as “the most fragile document of the Wojtylian pontificate,” portrays it as “not accepted by Catholic theologians” and attributes its composition – on a par with the notification that Dupuis was made to sign at that time – to the “incompetence” of unspecified “collaborators of the congregation,” which Ratzinger “in direct conversations demonstrated he did not value and did not know,” and to which John Paul II “did not react,” in spite of the fact that the “maneuver” had as its “target” – again in Melloni’s view – precisely “the papacy of Wojtyla and his peculiar fidelity to Vatican II, the prayer of Assisi on the on hand and the ‘mea culpa’ of the Jubilee, his ecumenical attitude, his ideas about the God of the Quran and about the permanence of Israel’s covenant.”

Men kardinal Ratzinger skriver selv om hvordan pave Johannes Paul tydelig støttet utgivelsen av dette dokumentet, og forstod hva det handlet om:

In refutation of the timidity and indolence of Ratzinger and John Paul II, who according to Melloni permitted rather than intended the composition and publication of “Dominus Iesus,” letting it be done by anyone whatsoever, there is no mistaking what the pope emeritus wrote a year ago in a book on pope Wojtyla:

“Among the documents on various aspects of ecumenism, the one that prompted the greatest reaction was the declaration ‘Dominus Iesus’ of 2000, which summarizes the indispensable elements of the Catholic faith. […]

“In the face of the firestorm that had developed around ‘Dominus Iesus,’ John Paul II told me that he intended to defend the document unequivocally at the Angelus. He invited me to write a text for the Angelus that would be, so to speak, airtight and not subject to any different interpretation whatsoever. It had to be completely unmistakable that he approved the document unconditionally.

“So I prepared a brief address: I did not intend, however, to be too brusque, and so I tried to express myself clearly but without harshness. After reading it, the pope asked me once again: ‘Is it really clear enough?’ I replied that it was.

“Those who know theologians will not be surprised that in spite of this there were afterward some who maintained that the pope had prudently distanced himself from that text.”

«Et incarnatus est» – Mozart

Katolsk, Liturgi, Paven /

I årets jule-midnattsmesse fra Peterskirken var setningen der man kneler under trosbekjennelsen ganske kraftig bygget ut ( 8:15 min) med dette leddet fra Mozarts messe i C-moll. Under kan man høre hele Credo III, inkl innskuddet fra Mozart.

Maria i sentrum 4. søndag i advent

Katolsk, Paven /

Hvert år er fokus 4. søndag i advent veldig mye på jomfru Maria. I årets tekster (se her) hører vi i første lesning om byggingen av tempelet, og blir minnet om et bilde der Maria lignes med tabernakelet, som bærer av den aller helligste. I år (år B) hører vi i evenageliet selve teksten om engelen Gabriels besøk hos Maria, som avsluttes med at Maria svarer slik på den sjokkerende utfordringen om å bli frelserens mor: «Jeg er Herrens tjenerinne. Det skje meg som du har sagt.»

Pave Frans tok selvsagt opp dagens tema i sitt Angelus-budskap i dag (les det her) og sa:

Today, the fourth and last Sunday of Advent, the liturgy wants to prepare us for Christmas, which is «already at the gates,» inviting us to meditate on the passage of the Annunciation of the angel to Mary. The Archangel Gabriel reveals to the Virgin the will of God that she become the mother of his only begotten Son. «You will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus. He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High.»

We fix our gaze upon this simple young woman of Nazareth in the moment in which she makes herself available to the divine message with her «yes.» We take in two essential aspects of her attitude, which is for us a model of how to prepare for Christmas.

Above all, her faith, her attitude of faith, which consists in listening to the Word of God to abandon herself to this Word with complete availability of mind and heart. Responding to the Angel, Mary said, «I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word.»

In her «here I am» full of faith, Mary does not know which paths she will have to trod, which sorrows she will have to suffer, which risks she will face. But she knows that it is the Lord who is asking, and she trusts totally in Him and abandons herself to His love. This is Mary’s faith.

The other aspect is the capacity of the Mother of Christ to recognize the time of God. Mary is the one who has made possible the incarnation of the Son of God, the «revelation of the mystery kept secret for long ages.»

She has made possible the incarnation of the Word, thanks to her humble and courageous «yes.» Mary teaches us to welcome the favorable moment in which Jesus comes into our lives and asks for a generous and prepared response. And Jesus comes.

In fact, the mystery of the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, which occurred historically more than 2,000 years ago, is implemented as a spiritual event in the «today of the liturgy.» The Word, who dwelled in the virginal womb of Mary, in the celebration of Christmas, comes to call anew the heart of each Christian. He comes by and calls. Each one of us is called to respond, as Mary did, with a personal and sincere «yes,» placing ourselves fully at the disposal of God and his mercy. How many times Jesus comes in our lives and how many times he sends us an angel. And how many times we don’t realize it because we are very busy, submerged in our thoughts, in our activities, and in these days, in the preparation for Christmas, and we don’t realize the one who is passing by and knocking at the door of our hearts asking to be welcomed, asking for a «yes» like that of Mary. A saint said, «I fear that the Lord will pass by.» Do you know why he was afraid? It was fear of not realizing, of allowing him to pass by.

When we feel in our hearts, «I would like to be better. I repent of this thing I’ve done,» there is the Lord who calls, who makes us feel this, the desire to be better, the desire to be closer to others, to God. If you feel this, stop. The Lord is there. Go to pray, and maybe go to confession to clean up the dwelling a bit. This is good. But remember well, if you feel this desire to improve, it is He who is calling. Do not let him pass by.

In the mystery of Christmas, beside Mary, in silence, is the presence of St. Joseph, as is represented in all the nativity scenes, also in this one that you can admire here in St. Peter’s Square. The example of Mary and of Joseph is for all of us an invitation to welcome Jesus with an entirely open soul, Jesus who out of love has made himself our brother. He comes to bring to the world the gift of peace. «Peace to those on whom his favor rests,» as the choir of angels announced to the shepherds. The precious gift of Christmas is peace and Christ is our true peace. And Christ calls to our hearts to give us peace. Peace of the soul. Let us open the gates to Christ.

We entrust ourselves to the intercession of our Mother and of St. Joseph, to live a Christmas that is truly Christian, free of all worldliness, prepared to welcome the Savior, the God-with-us.

Ai divorziati niente comunione. Credo che il papa deciderà così.

Katolsk, Paven, Teologi /

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

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

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

….

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

A: I believe he will do no such thing.

Min kilde er Sandro Magister – nederst denne artikkelen.

En hel del erkebiskoper og kardinaler undrer seg over pave Frans

Katolsk, Paven /

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

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

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

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

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

Les mer på gloria.tv.

Kardinal Francis George om pave Frans

Katolsk, Paven /

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Om den kommende bispesynoden – forskjeller mellom pave Johannes Paul II og pave Frans

Katolsk, Paven /

Jeg lar en ganske progressiv, katolsk stemme komme til orde nå jeg her referer til en artikkel i National Catholic Reporter, som gelder seg til bispesynoden som arrangeres 5.-19. oktober 2014. Artikkelen er skrevet av skrevet av Robert Mickens:

When the Vatican held its first synod on the family in 1980, the Polish-born John Paul II — a man «from a far-away country» — had been pope for only two years. Curiously, next week’s gathering of bishops on the very same theme also comes quite early in a new pontificate. It is less than 19 months from the day a Jesuit from Argentina, «the end of the earth,» was elected bishop of Rome and took the name Francis.

The nearly 35 years that have passed between these two international meetings of bishops span a bit more than two generations. And while there is a similarity in two non-Italian popes confronting issues related to marriage and the family early in their papal ministry, their approaches could not be more different.

John Paul II was a forceful and charismatic 60-year-old, and his 1980 synod came in the wake of a determined program to crack down on dissent, put an end to open debate on thorny pastoral and theological issues, and to ensure that the world’s bishops were in lockstep with directives issued by the Holy See.

To reform-minded Catholics, his surprisingly successful effort to get all the church’s pastors singing from the same song sheet, undertaken relatively soon after the Second Vatican Council, has been devastating. Avenues for discussing and debating ways to change pastoral approaches that clearly no longer work have been tightly closed off. But this has not stemmed the widening gap that many Catholics — both priests and people — experience between themselves and the doctrinaire approach of many so-called John Paul II and Benedict XVI bishops. Nowhere is this disconnect more apparent than how their own convictions differ from the hierarchy’s official teaching and policy on family life, marriage and human sexuality.

Francis, who will soon be 78, clearly understands this. And although he professes to be a loyal «son of the church,» the Jesuit pope has decided that conversation, dialogue and, yes, even debate are healthy and necessary for the life of the community of believers. …

Pave Frans velger å opptre ganske egenrådig ved bispeutnevnelser

Katolsk, Paven /

Sandro Magister skriver med utgangspunkt i utnevnelsen av ny erkebiskop i Chicago at pave Frans ikke ser ut til å ta så mye hensyn til hva andre mener når han utnevner nye biskoper. Han overrasket alle ved sin utnevnelse av biskop Cupich, og en del er svært så overrasket over valget:

…. So Cupich seems to be bringing Chicago back to the heyday of Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, George’s predecessor, a champion of “liberal” Catholicism in the United States and the creator of the mountainous bureaucratic machine of the episcopal conference, of which he was president from 1974 to 1977 and “dominus” until his death in 1996.

And the Bernardin era seems to be coming back thanks to a move of Pope Francis, who has taken by surprise and wrongfooted an episcopate, like that of the United States, today widely characterized by appointments made by John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

That it was a surprise can be noted from the fact that a few days before the appointment the newspaper “Our Sunday Visitor,” the most official of the American Catholic periodicals – its president is the journalist Greg Erlandson, a member of the commission for the reorganization of the Vatican media that met in Rome for the first time last week – in listing eight names of possible successors to Cardinal George did not present the one selected by pope Jorge Mario Bergoglio, that of Cupich.

The fact that the appointment wrongfooted the U.S. episcopate is evident from the results of the elections of the current president and vice-president of the episcopal conference that were held less than a year ago, in November of 2013.

At that electoral cycle, in fact, the ten candidates included Cupich. And his was considered by his colleagues the most distinctly “progressive,” ecclesiasticaly speaking, of the candidacies presented.

So then, at the first round of voting, which saw the immediate election as president of the outgoing vice-president, Archbishop Kurtz, with 125 votes out of 236, Cupich was back in seventh place with only 10 votes.

More ballots went to Houston cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo (25), Philadelphia archbishop Chaput (20), archbishop of Los Angeles José H. Gomez and of Baltimore William E. Lori (15 votes each), and New Orleans archbishop Gregory M Aymond (14).

In the two rounds of voting for the vice-presidency, Cupich was far from being elected, coming in fifth (out of nine) both at the first round, with 24 votes out of 236, and at the second, with 17 votes out of 235.

For Chicago, then, Pope Francis did not take the outlook of the local episcopate into account, unlike for example what he did in Spain, … Nor does it seem that the pope took account of the recommendations of Cardinal George, who is believed to have asked for a priest of his diocese as coadjutor. …

There is only one point on which Francis used the same procedure in Chicago as he did in Madrid and Sydney. In all three cases he proceeded with the appointment without having it discussed first by the cardinals and bishops of the congregation for bishops, …

Skroll til toppen