Teologi

Streng reaksjon mot prest – fordi han arbeidet for ordinasjon av kvinner

Katolsk, Teologi /

Hos National Catholic Reporter i USA kan vi lese om en prest som i 2008 deltok i en ulovlig (og ugyldig) ordinasjon av kvinner – og som nå er blitt utestengt (av Troskongregasjonen) fra prestetjeneste og fra sin orden. (Protestantiske kristne, som nå er blitt ganske vant med kvinnelige prester, vil nok syns dette er kraftig kost.) Første leser vi:

… …. about Bourgeois’ role in the order following his participation in the ordination of Roman Catholic Womanpriest Janice Sevre-Duszynska in August 2008. Shortly after, Bourgeois was notified by the Vatican congregation that he had incurred a latae sententiae, or automatic, excommunication for his participation.

Deretter refererer de Troskongregasjonens avgjørelse fra oktober i år:

The Congregation For The Doctrine Of The Faith
Canonically Dismisses Roy Bourgeois

Maryknoll, New York – November 19, 2012 – The Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on October 4, 2012, canonically dismissed Roy Bourgeois from the Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America, also known as the Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers. The decision dispenses the Maryknoll priest from his sacred bonds.

As a priest during 2008, Mr. Bourgeois participated in the invalid ordination of a woman and a simulated Mass in Lexington, Kentucky. With patience, the Holy See and the Maryknoll Society have encouraged his reconciliation with the Catholic Church.

Instead, Mr. Bourgeois chose to campaign against the teachings of the Catholic Church in secular and non-Catholic venues. This was done without the permission of the local U.S. Catholic Bishops and while ignoring the sensitivities of the faithful across the country. Disobedience and preaching against the teaching of the Catholic Church about women’s ordination led to his excommunication, dismissal and laicization.

Mr. Bourgeois freely chose his views and actions, and all the members of the Maryknoll Society are saddened at the failure of reconciliation. With this parting, the Maryknoll Society warmly thanks Roy Bourgeois for his service to mission and all members wish him well in his personal life. In the spirit of equity and charity, Maryknoll will assist Mr. Bourgeois with this transition.

11. oktober: Jomfru Marias moderverdighet

Katolsk, Liturgi, Teologi /

11. oktober var det i lang tid i Roma en fest for å marker at Jomfru Maria i konsilet i Efesus i 431 ble erklært å være Guds mor. Sr Anne Bente nevner også dette på sin blogg: «et år som starter på 50-årsdagen for åpningen av Det annet vatikankonsil – som forøvrig i sin tid ble åpnet på årsdagen for dogmet om Marias guddommelige moderskap i Efesos 1500 år tidligere.»


Pave Pius XI skrev en encykklika om dette i 1931 (LUX VERITATIS), og bestemte også at det på denne dagen hvert år skulle feires en messe med navn «MATERNITATIS B. MARIÆ VIRGINIS» – en fest som falt bort i 1970. Men i de tradisjonelle tidebønnene leser vi i dag, i 6. lesning:

In the year 1931, amid the applause of the whole Catholic world, solemn rites were celebrated to mark the completion of the fifteen centuries which had elapsed since the Council of Ephesus, moving against the Nestorian heresy, had acclaimed the blessed Virgin Mary, of whom Jesus was born, as Mother of God. This acclamation had been made by the Fathers of the Church under the leadership of Pope Celestine. Pius XI, as Supreme Pontiff, wished to commemorate the notable event and to give lasting proof of his devotion to Mary. Now there had existed for many years in Rome a grand memorial to the proclamation of Ephesus, the triumphal arch in the basilica of Saint Mary Major on the Esquiline Hill. This monument had already been adorned by a previous pontiff, Sixtus III, with mosaics of marvellous workmanship, now falling to pieces from the decay of the passing ages. Pius XI, therefore, out of his own munificence, caused these to be restored most exquisitely and with them the transept of the basilica. In an Encyclical Letter Pius set forth also the true history of the Council of Ephesus, and expounded fervently and at great length the doctrine of the prerogatives of the Blessed Virgin Mary as Mother of God. He did this that the doctrine of this lofty mystery might sink more deeply into the hearts of the faithful. In it he set forth Mary, the Mother of God, blessed among women, and the most holy Family of Nazareth as the exemplars to be followed above all others, as models of the dignity and holiness of chaste wedlock, as patterns of the holy education to be given youth. Finally that no liturgical detail be lacking, he decreed that the feast of the Divine Motherhood of the Blessed Virgin Mary be celebrated annually on the 11th day of October by the universal Church with a proper Mass and Office under the rite of a double of the second class.

Kardinal Burke om kirkeretten og «ånden» fra Vatikankonsilet

Katolsk, Teologi /

For noen år siden arbeidet jeg sammen emd en prest som ofte ga uttrykk for at han ikke hadde noe sans for eller respekt for kirkeretten. Jeg tenkte på det da jeg nylig leste om et foredrag kardinal Burke holdt om kirkeretten i slutten av august. Om det foredraget leser vi bl.a.:

Lamenting a clerical culture dismissive of canon law in the decades following the Second Vatican Council, Cardinal Raymond Burke addressed a Kenyan canon law convention on August 28 2012 about “the essential service of canon law in the work of the new evangelization.”

“After I began my studies of Canon Law in September of 1980, I soon learned how much the Church’s discipline was disdained by her priests, in general,” he recounted. “Institutes of the Church’s law, which, in her wisdom, she had developed down the Christian centuries, were set aside without consideration of their organic relationship to the life of the Church or of the chaos which would necessarily result from their neglect or abandonment.”

“The ‘hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture,’ which has tried to hijack the renewal mandated by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, is marked by a pervasively antinomian culture, epitomized by the Paris student riots of 1968, and has had a particularly devastating effect on the Church’s discipline,” he continued

. “It is profoundly sad to note, for instance, how the failure of knowledge and application of the canon law, which was indeed still in force, contributed significantly to the scandal of the sexual abuse of minors by the clergy in our some parts of the world.”

The prefect of the Apostolic Signatura continued: The years of a lack of knowledge of the Church’s discipline and even of a presumption that such discipline was no longer fitting to the nature of the Church indeed reaped gravely harmful fruits in the Church. For example, I think of the pervasive violation of the liturgical law of the Church, of the revolution in catechesis which often rendered the teaching of the faith vacuous and confused, if not erroneous; of the breakdown of the discipline of priestly formation and priestly life, …..

Hele kardinal Burkes foredrag kan leses her.

Oppsummering av foredragene ved den siste Fota-konferansen

Katolsk, Paven, Teologi /

Her er første del av en rapport fra the Fifth Fota International Liturgy Conference, Clarion Hotel, Cork City, Ireland, 7-9 July 2012. Det gis en kort oppsummering av 8 foredrag, og om Mariusz Biliniewiczs foredrag sies det:

Reasonable Worship (Rm 12:1): Joseph Ratzinger’s Theology of Sacrifice, presented the main highlights of Joseph Ratzinger’s theology of sacrifice and placed them in the context of his thought and in the context of contemporary theological discussion. The paper began with a short introduction showing the importance of the topic of sacrifice in the writings of Joseph Ratzinger and outlined the reasons for his interest in this subject. Biliniewicz continued by presenting Ratzinger’s understanding of sacrifice in pre-Christian religions and in the Old Testament. Turning to the New Testament, he showed Ratzinger’s understanding of the Christ event as the fulfilment of the promises and expectations of Israel and of the whole of humanity; and Ratzinger’s view of the Eucharist as the actualization of Christ’s unique and ultimate sacrifice for the people of all times and places. Biliniewicz concluded by assessing the importance of Ratzinger’s theology of sacrifice for the contemporary Church in the light of his election to the Chair of Peter.

Kan liberale kirker overleve?

Apologetikk, Generelt, Teologi /

Kan liberale kirker overleve (det er vel nokså tvilsomt)? Spørsmålet stilles i New York Times, og der leser vi bl.a.:

… today the Episcopal Church looks roughly how Roman Catholicism would look if Pope Benedict XVI suddenly adopted every reform ever urged on the Vatican by liberal pundits and theologians. It still has priests and bishops, altars and stained-glass windows. But it is flexible to the point of indifference on dogma, friendly to sexual liberation in almost every form, willing to blend Christianity with other faiths, and eager to downplay theology entirely in favor of secular political causes.

Yet instead of attracting a younger, more open-minded demographic with these changes, the Episcopal Church’s dying has proceeded apace. Last week, while the church’s House of Bishops was approving a rite to bless same-sex unions, Episcopalian church attendance figures for 2000-10 circulated in the religion blogosphere. They showed something between a decline and a collapse: In the last decade, average Sunday attendance dropped 23 percent, and not a single Episcopal diocese in the country saw churchgoing increase. …

Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth om liturgien – del 4

Liturgi, Teologi /

Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth avslutter sitt foredrag med å sitere pave Benedikt som sier at «mye mer må gjøres for å fornye liturgien», og Wadsworth kommer så med en del konkrete forslag:

– A sense of reverence for the text: the unity of the Roman Rite is now essentially a textual unity. The Church permits a certain latitude in the interpretation of the norms that govern the celebration of the liturgy and hence our unity is essentially textual: we use the same prayers and meditate on the same Scriptures. This is more clearly evident now with a single English text for universal use.

– A greater willingness to heed Sacrosanctum concilium rather than continual recourse to the rather nebulous concept of the ‘spirit of the Council’ which generally attempts to legitimize liturgical abuses rather than correct them. Currently, these teachings are more likely to be evidenced in a well prepared presentation of the Extraordinary Form than in most Ordinary Form celebrations.

It need not be so.
– In relation to both forms of the Roman Rite, a careful attention to the demands of the calendar and the norms which govern the celebration of the liturgy, not assuming that it is possible or acceptable to depart from these norms.
– A re-reading of the encyclical Mediator Dei of Pope Pius XII in conjunction with more recent Magisterial documents. In this way, the light of tradition might be perceived to shine on all our liturgical celebrations.
– The widespread cultivation of a dignified and reverent liturgy that evidences careful preparation and respect for its constituent elements in accordance with the liturgical norms.
– A recovery of the Latin tradition of the Roman Rite that enables us to continue to present elements of our liturgical patrimony from the earliest centuries with understanding. This necessarily requires a far more enthusiastic and widespread commitment to the teaching and learning of Latin in order that the linguistic culture required for interpreting our texts and chants may be more widely experienced and our patrimony enjoy a wider constituency.
– We should seek to see the exclusion of all music from the Liturgy which does not a ‘liturgical voice’, regardless of style.
– The exclusion from the liturgy of music which only expresses secular culture and which is ill-suited to the demands of the liturgy. A renaissance of interest in and use of chant in both Latin and English as a recognition that this form of music should enjoy ‘first place’ in our liturgy and all other musical forms are suitable for liturgical use to the extent that they share in the characteristics of chant.
– An avoidance of the idea that music is the sole consideration in the liturgy, the music is a vehicle for the liturgy not the other way around!
– A commitment to the celebration and teaching of the ars celebrandi of both forms of the Roman Rite, so that all priests can perceive more readily how the light of tradition shines on our liturgical life and how this might be communicated more effectively to our people.
– A clearer distinction between devotions, non-liturgical forms of prayer and the Sacred Liturgy. A lack of any proper liturgical sense has led to a proliferation of devotions as an alternative vehicle for popular fervour. This was a widespread criticism of the liturgy before the Council and we now have to ask ourselves why the same lacuna has been identified in the newer liturgical forms.
– A far greater commitment to silence before, during and after the Liturgy is needed.

Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth om liturgien – del 3

Liturgi, Teologi /

Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth sier videre i sitt foredrag om liturgien at den viktige «deltakelsen» i liturgien ikke er det samme som ytre aktiviteter – og han nevner som et eksempel til skrekk og advarsel hovedmessen ved den Eukaristiske kongressen i Dublin nylig:

The Holy Father then went on to say that: 4. “not infrequently, the revision of liturgical forms has remained at an external level, and «active participation» has been confused with external activity”

In my view, this is the very crux of the matter and I would like to illustrate it with reference to the Mass at which Pope Benedict’s remarks were heard – the closing Mass of the recent Eucharistic Congress in Dublin. The improvements in liturgical culture and particularly the improvements in liturgical music, that have become increasingly evident throughout this papacy, particularly in large-scale celebrations were sadly almost entirely absent from this occasion, giving the event a sort of ‘eighties’ feel to it. More specifically:

– the entire liturgy had a ‘performance’ quality to it, with the assembly as the principal focus. This was borne out by the fact that musicial items were frequently greeted with applause.

– There was a frequent disregard for the provisions of the GIRM. This was particularly evident with reference to music:

+ None of the antiphons of the proper were sung for the entrance, offertory and communion processions (cf GIRM #40)

+ Gregorian Chant was conspicuous by its absence (cf GIRM #41). None of the Missal chants was used for the people’s parts of the Order of Mass (with the single exceptions of the gospel and preface dialogues), even though the liturgy was predominantly in English and these chants would have been known by most people present.

+ In the Profession of Faith, after the Cardinal celebrant had intoned Credo III, lectors read the Apostles’ Creed (which has a different intonation to the Nicene Creed) in a variety of languages, spoken paragraphs were punctuated by the sung response ‘Credo, Amen!” This is not recognizably one of the modes for the Creed described in the GIRM (cf GIRM #48).

+ Much music did not ‘correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action’ [GIRM #41] such as the celebrity spot during the distribution of Holy Communion of 3 clerical tenors, ‘The Priests’, singing the impossibly sentimental song “May the road rise up to meet you”. I feel like asking, just what is wrong with the Communion antiphon and psalm?

+ Despite the international character of the occasion, the use of Latin in the people’s sung parts was almost non-existant (cf GIRM #41).

The depressing cumulative effect of the disregard for all these principles in a major liturgy, celebrated by a papal legate, and broadcast throughout the world, is hard to underestimate. If I were given to conspiracy theories, I would almost feel persuaded that this was a deliberately calculated attempt to broadcast a different message and to oppose the better liturgical spirit of recent times. But surely it cannot be so?

Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth om liturgien – del 2

Liturgi, Teologi /

Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth referer videre til pave Bendikts hilsen til den Eukaristiske konferansen i Dublin. Paven vurderer liturgiforandringene fra 1970, og monsignoren legger til hva han selv syns har vært mislykket:

2. «a great deal has been achieved» and
3. «it is equally clear that there have been many misunderstandings and irregularities»

– A sense of the communion of the Church has become limited to local communities that are in many ways self-selecting – many Catholics have a poor understanding of what it means to belong to the Universal Church but a highly developed understanding of what it means to belong to a self-selecting parish community of people like themselves.

– Any notion of the shape of the Liturgical year has been greatly lessened by an ironing-out of those features which characterized the distinctive seasons of the year.

– The universal tendency to ignore sung propers and to substitute non-liturgical alternatives. …

– The frequent tendency to gloss or paraphrase the liturgical texts, supplying continuous commentary, has contributed to an improvised or spontaneous character in much liturgical celebration. …

– The liturgy often seems to have the quality of a performance with the priest and liturgical ministers cast in the roles of performers and behaving accordingly. Consequently, congregations are often expecting to be ‘entertained’ rather as spectators might be at a theatre.

– The manner of the distribution and reception of Holy Communion (including the appropriateness of one’s reception of Communion at a particular Mass) has led to a casual disregard for this great Sacrament. …

– The appalling banality of much liturgical music and the lack of any true liturgical spirit in the use of music in the liturgy has been a primary generating force in anti-liturgical culture.

Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth om liturgien – del 1

Liturgi, Teologi /

Jeg nevnte for et par dager siden at Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth holdt et foredrag kalt: «The Reform of the Roman Rite». Han begynner dette foredraget med å sitere fra et budskap pave Benedikt kom med til den nylig avholdte Eukaristiske konferansen i Dublin, Irland:

«The Congress also occurs at a time when the Church throughout the world is preparing to celebrate the Year of Faith to mark the fiftieth anniversary of the start of the Second Vatican Council, an event which launched the most extensive renewal of the Roman Rite ever known. Based upon a deepening appreciation of the sources of the liturgy, the Council promoted the full and active participation of the faithful in the Eucharistic sacrifice. At our distance today from the Council Fathers’ expressed desires regarding liturgical renewal, and in the light of the universal Church’s experience in the intervening period, it is clear that a great deal has been achieved; but it is equally clear that there have been many misunderstandings and irregularities. The renewal of external forms, desired by the Council Fathers, was intended to make it easier to enter into the inner depth of the mystery. Its true purpose was to lead people to a personal encounter with the Lord, present in the Eucharist, and thus with the living God, so that through this contact with Christ’s love, the love of his brothers and sisters for one another might also grow. Yet not infrequently, the revision of liturgical forms has remained at an external level, and «active participation» has been confused with external activity. Hence much still remains to be done on the path of real liturgical renewal.»

Etter å ha sitert dette, kommenterer Msgr Wadsworth flere ting i pavens budskap, og begynner slik (ved å spørre om liturgiomveltningene virkelig bygget på en korrekt forståelse av liturgihostoien):

1. “the Second Vatican Council, an event which launched the most extensive renewal of the Roman Rite ever known”

Very few people could have foreseen the wholesale revision of the liturgy which would come in the wake of the Second Vatican Council and certainly few could foresee that the unifying experience of a Latin liturgy would become entirely alien to most Catholics born in the last third of the twentieth century. The unchangeable nature of this characteristic of the Liturgy was a view largely shared by Blessed John Henry Newman, … …

The factors which fed into the liturgical reform after the Council were complex and in some ways, not entirely contemporary. I think we must admit that until relatively recently there has been very little scholarship that is able to accurately identify the sources of the liturgical reform. In some cases, the scholarly opinions upon which some decisions were based does not stand the test of time. We must hope that scholarly commentary which unravels some of the mystery surrounding the making of the new liturgy becomes more readily available in the near future.

Whether or not we have any scholarly insight, many of us have lived in the Church through this period and have thereby accumulated a vast reservoir of experiences which for good or ill shape our perceptions in relation to the liturgy and guide our expectations when we consider what we would hope to find when we come to worship God in the liturgy. While there is a sort of commonality to these observations across a wide spectrum of liturgical preference, it goes without saying that whether something is considered desirable or not will largely depend on your view of what the liturgy is meant to achieve. I have come to the view that there is little agreement in this important matter and many people proceed on what is essentially a privatized view of something which is by definition common property.

Om man vil, kan man under høre pave Benedikts budskap til den Eukaristiske konferansen i Dublin, som Msgr Wadsworth siterer utdrag fra.

P. Nicola Bux forsvarer den nye prefekten for Troskongregasjonen

Katolsk, Teologi /

P. Nicola Bux, en konservativ teolog som jeg har nevnt her på bloggen flere (14) ganger (skriv Bux i søkefeltet, så kommer innleggene opp) har kommet med et forsvar av erkebiskop Müller. Det er Rorate cæli som som har oversatt et intervju med p Bux fra italiensk (se her) til engelsk, der det bl.a. står:

In 2002, Müller, in his book «Die Messe – Quelle des christlichen Lebens» [The Mass – Source of the Christian Life], speaking of the Eucharistic Sacrament, writes that, «the body and blood of Christ do not mean the material components of the human person of Jesus during his lifetime or in his transfigured corporality. Here, body and blood mean the presence of Christ in the signs of the medium of bread and wine.»

It was precisely in Capernaum that the terms used by Jesus, flesh and blood, were misunderstood as anthropomorphic and the Lord had to reiterate their spiritual sense, which does not mean that its presence is less real, true, and substantial. See the Catechism of the Catholic Church regarding this. Saint Ambrose says that it is not the the element formed by nature, but the substance produced by the formula of consecration: its very nature is transformed, so body and blood are the being of Jesus. The Tridentine Council says that in the Eucharist Our Lord, true God and true man, is «substantially» present. He is sacramentally present with his substance, a mysterious mode of being,admissible on faith and possible from God.

St. Thomas [Aquinas] had said that the mode of «substance» and not the «quantity», characterizes the presence of Christ in the sacrament of the Eucharist. The bread and wine as a species or appearances mediate our access to the «substance», something that happens especially in communion. All the same, the Tridentine Council sees no contradiction between the natural way of the presence of Christ in heaven and his sacramental being in many other places. All this was reaffirmed by Pope Paul VI in his Encyclical Mysterium Fidei, unfortunately forgotten. The senses are not enough, but faith is required from us. It is a mystery of the faith.

On Protestantism and the salvific unicity of Jesus, Müller said, in October 2011: «Baptism is the fundamental sign that sacramentally unites us in Christ, and which presents us as the one Church in front of the world. Thus, we as Catholic and Evangelical Christians are already united even in what we call the visible Church.»

St. Augustine defended against the Donatists the truth that baptism is an indestructible bond, which does not abolish fraternity among Christians, even when they are schismatics or heretics.

Unfortunately today debate is feared in the Church, but moves on theses and ostracism of those who think differently. I refer to theology, of course, in which different opinions may be acceptable.

However, doctrinal development benefits from debate: who has more arguments, convinces. In the charges against Bishop Müller, there is extrapolation from the context: it is easy to condemn anyone like this. A true Catholic must trust the authority of the Pope, always. In particular, I believe that Benedict XVI know that he does. And I would like to renew to the Society of St. Pius X the invitation to trust the Pope.»

Og i en av kommentarene på Rorate cæli står det ganske interessant: «Abp Muller seems perfect for this position. He is tough against the extreme liberals … and he is tough against the extreme conservatives …» Jeg må selv si at jeg ikke uroer meg over utnevnelsen, og jeg tror også pave Benedikt vet hva han gjør.

Prestenes fokus på messens hellige offer

Katolsk, Liturgi, Teologi /

Vatikanet har utgitt et dokument som forberedelse til festen for Jesu hellige hjerte, 15. juni i år, til det som hvert år er (men vel ikke er så godt kjent): «World Day of Prayer for the Sanctification of the Clergy.»

Der har de med (på s 7) en liste med 20 punkter en prest kan gå gjennom som en samvittighetsransakelse. Her er de første fem punktene, der den tradisjonelle betegnelsen (som få bruker i dag), «messens hellige offer», brukes flere ganger:

1. “It is for their sakes that I sanctify myself, so that they, too, may be sanctified by the truth” (Jn 17:19).
Do I really take holiness seriously in my priesthood? Am I convinced that the success of my priestly ministry comes from God and that, with the grace of the Holy Spirit, I have to identify myself with Christ and give my life for the salvation of the world?

2. “This is my body” (Mt 26:26).
Is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass the centre of my spiritual life? Do I prepare well to celebrate Mass? Do I devoutly celebrate the Mass? Do I make an act of thanksgiving after Mass? Is the Mass the centre of my day in giving thanks and praise to God for his blessings? Do I have recourse to his goodness? Do I make reparation for my sins and for those of all mankind?

3. “Zeal for your house consumes me” (Jn2:17).
Do I celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass according to the rites and rubrics established by the Church? Do I celebrate Holy Mass with a right intention and according to the approved liturgical books? Am I attentive to the sacred species conserved in the tabernacle and careful to renew it periodically? Do I pay due attention to the sacred vessels and ensure their conservation? Do I wear in a dignified fashion all of the sacred vestments prescribed by the Church? Am I conscious that I actin persona Christi Capitis?

4. “Remain in my love” (Jn 15:9).
Do I enjoy being in the presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, in meditation and in silent adoration? Am I faithful to the daily visit to the Blessed Sacrament? Is the tabernacle my true treasure?

5. “Explain the parable to us” (Mt 13:36).
Do I carefully make a daily meditation and try to overcome all distractionsthat separate me from God? Do I seek illumination from the Lord whom I serve? Do I assiduously meditate on the Sacred Scriptures? Do I carefully say my habitual prayers? …

Ikke heldig å legge for stor vekt på realpresensen og tilbedelse av sakramentet

Katolsk, Teologi /

Tittelen på dette innlegget kan muligens forbause mange, spesielt siden vi i disse dager feirer Corpus Christi, som nettopp fokuserer på tilbedelsen av sakramentet. men alle ting kan overdrives, og enda mer presist; man kan legge så mye vekt på en sannhet, at en annen sannhet lider under dette.

Og det er faktisk den berømte (og beryktede) erkebiskop Lefebvre som sier akkurat dette. Jeg har nylig lest ferdig Tissier de Mallerais’ bok «Marcel Lefebvre, A Biography», der man kan lese på s 592-93:

Through the priestly character the priest receives the power to renew in persona Christi the sacrifice of obedience and charity accomplished on the cross; he offers it in an unbloody way on the altar at each Mass he celebrates. This doctrine belongs to Tradition and is found in St. Thomas, the Council of Trent, and Pius XII. The priest essentially is made for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, for the sacrifice, for sacrum facere, «to do sacred things»; he is defined by the Mass.

According to Archbishop Lefebvre, after Bérenger and the Protestants had denied the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, catechisms and piety then insisted too exclusively on the real presence and adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, and blurred devotion towards the Mass itself:

And that is very serious because it changes the perspective on the Holy Eucharist itself, which becomes only food or a spiritual restorative; this new perspective does not focus as much upon immolation and our Lord Jesus Christ the Victim who offers Himself as a sacrifice of propitiation for our sins. This is why it was so easy to go over to the idea of a meal-mass similar to the Protestants … who hate this veritable, propitiatory sacrifice. Now, this sacrifice is the essential work of the Church; when the Church gives out Communion, she unites the faithful to the Victim who continues to offer Himself to God the Father. We therefore have a participation in this state of victimhood …. If we do not insist on this aspect, we will end up no longer having a truly Catholic spirit …. The spirit of Christianity consists in making us into victims united to our Lord Jesus Christ: suffering and offering are the most beautiful, profound, and real treasures in the Catholic religion.

One must then be careful not to separate the sacrament from the sacrifice, just as one must not separate the sacrifice of the Mass from the sacrifice of Calvary. St. Thomas sums up these two indissoluble unions in one sentence: «In the celebration of this sacrament of the Eucharist Christ is immolated» (III, q. 83, a. 1).

Archbishop Lefebvre said that the Mass is the «reactualization of the sacrifice of Calvary (which is the reason for the Incarnation), the bringing about of Redemption, and the act that infinitely glorifies God and opens the gates of heaven to sinful humanity.»

«The more we study the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the more we realize that it truly is an extraordinary mystery. The priest is like someone who is outside of time and who passes almost into eternity because all his words have an eternal value …. [The Mass] is not a simple rite carried out today, but an eternal reality that exceeds time and which has eternal consequences for the glory of God; it saves souls from purgatory, and sanctifies us. Each Mass truly has the weight of eternity in it.» …

Tankevvkkende, syns jeg. Etter at tilbedelse av sakramantet ikke var særlig «in» i Kirken på 70-80-90-tallet, er dette nå blitt mye mer akseptert, i alle fall her i Norge. I St Hallvard kirke har vi f.eks. tilbedelse fem dager hver uke, og vi har nettopp kjøpt en ny, flott baldakin, som vi skal bruke til Corpus Christi-prosesjonen på søndag. Men etter min mening vil det ta en hel del mer tid før vi mer tydelig forstår hva det innebærer at messen er et offer som presten bærer frem for Gud.

En bok av en katolsk nonne i USA er ikke katolsk

Katolsk, Teologi /

Etter en grundig prosess – som man kan lese om her – har Troskongregasjonen konkludert med at en bok om seksualetikk ikke forkynner katolsk lære (og det er ganske opplagt om man leser litt mer om dette). Troskongregasjonen konkluderer slik:

With this Notification, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith expresses profound regret that a member of an Institute of Consecrated Life, Sr. Margaret A. Farley, R.S.M., affirms positions that are in direct contradiction with Catholic teaching in the field of sexual morality. The Congregation warns the faithful that her book Just Love. A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics is not in conformity with the teaching of the Church. Consequently it cannot be used as a valid expression of Catholic teaching, either in counseling and formation, or in ecumenical and interreligious dialogue. Furthermore the Congregation wishes to encourage theologians to pursue the task of studying and teaching moral theology in full concord with the principles of Catholic doctrine.

The Sovereign Pontiff Benedict XVI, in the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect on March 16, 2012, approved the present Notification, adopted in the Ordinary Session of this Congregation on March 14, 2012, and ordered its publication.

Kommunion for gjengifte

Katolsk, Teologi /

Det er kjent blant mange (men vel ikke alle) at katolikker som lever i et andre (eller tredje etc) ekteskap, som Kirken altså ikke kan anerkjenne, ikke kan motta sakramentene – og det er spesielt kommunionen det legges vekt på. Jeg leste tidligere i dag at i Sveits har 40 prester og pastoral-assistenter (på tysk: Seelsorgerinnen und Seelsorger) protestert mot dette, og sagt at de vil gi slik personer kommunion likevel:

… have issued a statement that they will continue to offer communion to the divorced and remarried. They appeal to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council that the Church is the entire People of God; the People of God are taking responsibility for the Church. Furthermore, the Catholic Church recognizes the decision in conscience of each individual person.

Det er biskopen i denne del av Sveits som med sin tradisjonelle lære har fått noen til å reagere:

In March Bishop Vitus Huonder of Chur wrote in a pastoral letter that according to Church teachings, those divorced and remarried are not to be admitted to the sacraments.

I Tyskland har visst en erkebiskop sagt at han vil arbeide for at gjengifte kan motta kommunion, men at det vil nok ta tid før dette kan skje:

Archbishop Robert Zollitsch, continues to work for the admission to Communion of those divorced and remarried, Kathweb reports. “We are working on this subject, and you may rest assured that I am in conversation on the subject at widely varying levels.” He acknowledges that the topic requires “patience and slow breathing.”

Les den første nyheten på tysk her og her om Zollitsch will weiter Kommunionempfang für Wiederverheiratete.

Intervjuet som gjorde kardinal Daniélou upopulær

Katolsk, Teologi /

www.chiesa skrev for noen dager siden om kardinal Daniélou:

«Windows open on the mystery»: this is the title of the conference with which, two days ago, the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross broke the silence on one of the greatest theologians of the twentieth century, the French Jesuit Jean Daniélou, made a cardinal by Paul VI in 1969. A silence that lasted almost forty years, and began with his passing away in 1974. …

Og så trykker de intervjuet som gjorde ham så upopulær:

Interview of Cardinal Jean Daniélou on Vatican Radio, October 23, 1972

Q: Your Eminence, is there really a crisis of religious life, and can you give us its dimensions?

A: I think that there is now a very grave crisis of religious life, and that one should not speak of renewal, but rather of decadence. I think that this crisis is hitting the Atlantic area above all. Eastern Europe and the countries of Africa and Asia present in this regard a better state of spiritual health. This crisis is manifesting itself in all areas. The evangelical counsels are no longer considered as consecrations to God, but are seen in a sociological and psychological perspective. We are concerned about not presenting a bourgeois facade, but on the individual level poverty is not practiced. The group dynamic replaces religious obedience; with the pretext of reacting against formalism, all regularity of the life of prayer is abandoned and the first consequence of this state of confusion is the disappearance of vocations, because young people require a serious formation. And moreover there are the numerous and scandalous desertions of religious who renege on the pact that bound them to the Christian people.

Q: Can you tell us what, in your view, are the causes of this crisis?

A: The essential source of this crisis is a false interpretation of Vatican II. The directives of the Council were very clear: a greater fidelity of religious men and women to the demands of the Gospel expressed in the constitutions of each institute, and at the same time an adaptation of the modalities of these constitutions to the conditions of modern life. The institutes that are faithful to these directives are seeing true renewal, and have vocations. But in many cases the directives of Vatican II have been replaced with erroneous ideologies put into circulation by magazines, by conferences, by theologians. And among these errors can be mentioned:

– Secularization. Vatican II declared that human values must be taken seriously. It never said that we should enter into a secularized world in the sense that the religious dimension would no longer be present in society, …

FSSPs sogneprest i Roma sier

Katolsk, Teologi /

Fr Kramer (i videoen) sier bl.a.:

… A large segment of Father Kramer’s flock is people born decades after the Tridentine Mass ceased to be the norm. He says they are frequently drawn by the older liturgy’s emphasis on the sacrificial dimension, which makes it «more obvious that Christ is pouring out his blood for the forgiveness of sins.»

The 59-year old priest says that Catholic clergy of his generation, reacting to the severe moralizing that prevailed before Vatican II, were «very reluctant to talk about the punishments for sin.» But the «new generation,» recoiling from the more libertine mores with which it grew up, «needs to talk about sin and how the problem of sin is resolved,» he said.

Younger people also are «more sophisticated than they used to be, and they’re looking for something at a higher level,» Father Kramer says. «And I think that is connected with finding the great tradition and richness of the last 2,000 years.» …

Jeg fant innlegget på Rorate cæli (mange kommentarer også der) og teksten på CNS.

Troskongregasjonen irettesetter katolske nonner

Katolsk, Teologi /

Jeg er tre dager for seint ute med å rapportere at Troskongregasjonen denne uka offentliggjorde en rapport der de sterkt kritiserer LCWR (Leadership of Catholic Women Religious) – den organisasjonen som organiserer ca. 80% av katolske ordenssøstre i USA. Det danske nettstedet Katolsk Tradition skriver om dette:

… Troslærekongregationen har netop offentliggjort en doktrinær undersøgelse af organisationen. Man kan heri erfare, at organisationens møder og publikationer regelmæssigt indeholder budskaber, som er i åbenlys modstrid med de mest basale dele af Kirkens lære, og så er der naturligvis den udbredte forvirring omkring seksualmoral og kvindens stilling i Kirken. … I rapporten hedder det bl.a.:

1) Den nuværende læremæssige og pastorale situation i LCWR er kritisk og giver anledning til alvorlig bekymring, givet den indflydelse,som LCWR har på ordenssamfund også i andre dele af verden;

2) Så snart den igangværende visitation af de kvindelige ordner i USA er afsluttet, skal den hellige Stol gribe ind for at gøre hvad der er nødvendigt for at reformere LCWR;

3) Troslærekongregationen vil undersøge forskellige muligheder for kanonisk indgriben mhp. at afhjælpe de problemer som findes i LCWR.

Enhver med blot en smule kendskab til romerske skrivelser vil forstå, at der her tales med meget store bogstaver. ….

Den amerikanske bispekonferansens nettsider skriver også om dette, og har også en lenke til selve rapporten til Troskongregasjonen HER (pdf-fil).

Father Z. skrev om dette for noen få dager siden. Også det ganske liberale katolske tidsskriftet America melder om dette – med en nokså nøytral presentasjon, men kommentarene viser hvem som leser dette bladet.

Hvilken vei skal presten vende seg?

Katolsk, Liturgi, Teologi /

Una Voce har skrevet flere artikler om liturgiske spørsmål som de har samlet på denne siden. De skriver:

While the Holy Father makes reference to two areas of possible change to the 1962 books, new Saints and Prefaces, debate about the future of these liturgical books is not limited to those matters. For that reason, and also because of the first mentioned purpose of these papers, we will be addressing topics on a wide range of issues. As well as an introductory paper, giving something of a disclaimer about our remit, the first six topics planned are:

Introduction
The Service of Men and Boys at the Altar
Liturgical Piety and Participation
The Manner of Receiving Communion
(The Vulgate and Gallican Psalter)
Liturgical Orientation
(Holy Week)

De to i parentes over er ikke ferdige, og nå nylig er en artikkelen om liturgisk orientering klar (pdf-fil her), en artikkel som har følgende oppsummering (og som jeg kommer til å dekke litt gundigere om ikke lenge):

The celebration of Mass ad orientem (towards the East, away from the people) is a very visible difference between the Extraordinary Form and most celebrations of the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite. Celebration versus populum was known in the early centuries, and in certain churches later (notably, St Peter’s Basilica in Rome), but celebration ad orientem was more common, and in any case the value of the practice cannot be determined solely by ancient practice. Rather, as Pope Benedict has argued, celebration ad orientem emphasises both the escatalogical nature of the liturgy, and the common orientation of priest and people towards the Lord, as opposed to an excessive focus by the Faithful on the celebrating priest (and vice versa). It also emphasises the sacrificial nature of the Mass. In all these ways it is central to the character and value of the Extraordinary Form as a whole.

«Vi trenger ikke en redningsmann fra et fall som aldri har funnet sted.»

Teologi /

Avisa Dagen skriver i dag på sinde nettsider:

Søndag kunne vi på vei til gudstjeneste høre Helge Hognestad forklare noen av sine tanker i NRK P1s Mellom himmel og jord. I stedet for å snakke om arvesynden og behovet for tilgivelse vil han snakke om et såkalt visdomsnivå som menneskene skal finne i sitt guddommelige indre.

Austad, Grønningsæter, Lønning og Østnor viser til et innlegg Hognestad skrev på sine egne nettsider i 2010, hvor han hevder at vi ikke trenger «en redningsmann fra et fall som aldri har funnet sted, men impulser til å gripe fylden av vår menneskelighet». Man skal ikke ha lest mye i Bibelen for å oppdage at Hognestads forkynnelse her befinner seg på siden av det kristne evangeliet.

Dagen skriver videre at man på side tre i dagens avis kan lese «et sjeldent brev til Bispemøtet. Torleiv Austad, Fredrik Grønningsæter, Per Lønning og Lars Østnor har sammen henvendt seg til Den norske kirkes fremste ledere og etterlyst en avklaring i forhold til presten Helge Hognestads teologi. ..»

Hognestad er ikke den første som mener at synd er noe avlegs, og det er godt at noen av Den norske kirke solide teologer (selv om de nå er pensjonister) protesterer. Så langt har visst ikke vårt lands lutehrske biskoper reagert særlig mye – og det er vel dessverre tvilsomt om de vil gjøre det.

Er messen et offer eller et måltidsfelleskap?

Katolsk, Liturgi, Teologi /

Jeg har skrevet om dette mange ganger før, men tar med et lett-å-forstå innlegg om temaet av Fr. Longenecker. Han har forøvrig flyttet sin blogg for ikke lenge siden – les om det her. Han skriver at noen katolikker mener (men de tar feil):

…. the Mass is like the Last Supper when we all gather around Jesus in a fellowship meal! That’s why the priest should face the people–because it’s like we’re all sitting around the family dinner table with Jesus.”

It’s easy to see how this thinking came about, and within the “spirit of Vatican 2″ it’s not hard to draw the conclusion that the Mass is essentially a fellowship meal and a re-enactment of the Last Supper. However, this is not the case. …

… The Mass of the Lord’s Supper is the one commemoration of the Lord’s Supper in the liturgical year. The regular daily and weekly masses, while they may echo the Last Supper, are not primarily a commemoration of the Last Supper. The Mass is first and foremost a commemoration of Calvary. Through the holy sacrifice of the Mass the one, full, final sacrifice of Christ, both priest and victim, is brought into the present moment and it’s eternal benefits are applied to our needs here and now.

When we go to Mass therefore, we stand at the foot of the cross, we do not sit down with Jesus at the Last Supper. To be sure, the Mass is a “fellowship meal” but it is a ritual meal into which the Jewish Passover is echoed and the sacrifice of Calvary is made present. The Last Supper was the bridge between these two–a bridge between the Passover and the death of Christ the Lord.

Why does this matter? For several reasons: first of all, if the Mass is a fellowship meal it is easy to forget the importance of the sacrifice of Our Lord. Is it any mistake that in Catholic churches where the emphasis is on the fellowship meal that the crucifix is often small in size, relegated to a side position, replaced with a resurrected Lord or absent completely?

When the emphasis is on the fellowship meal too often the emphasis of worship shifts from Christ the Lord and his once for all sacrifice for the sins of the world and moves to us, our fellowship, our feelings …

Finally, the shift to fellowship meal rather than the sacrifice of the Mass reduces the sense of reverence. If it is all about us and our community then what is the need for reverence in worship? If it is a fellowship meal the church becomes our house not God’s temple. The mood is therefore one of the campfire, the shared picnic or the family reunion.

The ironic thing is, that when we focus on the sacrifice of the Mass we, in the end, get the fellowship we desire as well. As we face the altar together we are drawn togethers. As we focus on the same eternal beloved we come to regard one another as beloved. As we move to the same destination we also move closer to one another. Like lines from different starting points converging we come together in a mystical communion which is far more profound and eternal than an enjoyable, but earthly fellowship.

Skroll til toppen