Principium Unitatis

An OPC Pastor Enters the Catholic Church

2012-02-07T08:52:00.001-06:00

Jason Stewart was an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC), having earned his Master of Divinity from Mid-America Reformed Seminary (Dyer, IN) in 2005, and subsequently served for 5 1/2 years as pastor of Trinity OPC in eastern Pennsylvania. He and his wife Cindy were received into full communion with the Catholic Church on January 10, 2011 at St. Jane de Chantal Catholic Church in Easton, PA. Many people have asked Jason why he became Catholic. Here, in the following article, he explains why he became Catholic. He writes:

"I hope to tell my story simply, because it is genuinely uncomplicated. Complex, yes. Multi-layered, sure. Who's journey in the Christian faith isn't? But I do promise to keep the telling of it simple by concentrating on the main catalysts that gave my wife Cindy and me the courage to approach the doors of the Catholic Church and with confidence begin to knock...." (Continue reading)

A Response to Scott Clark and Robert Godfrey's “The Lure of Rome”

2012-01-30T12:19:00.000-06:00

In November of last year, Scott Clark and Robert Godfrey, both professors at Westminster Seminary in California, made a podcast titled "The Lure of Rome," in which they attempted both to explain why so many Evangelicals and even Calvinists are becoming Catholic, and why such persons are mistaken in doing so. Andrew Preslar has written a helpful response to Clark and Godfrey, in which he takes up the issue of the development of doctrine, because in their argument against becoming Catholic, Clark and Godfrey presuppose the denial of the development of doctrine.

Andrew's article is titled "A Response to Scott Clark and Robert Godfrey on "The Lure of Rome"."

Reformation Sunday 2011: How Would Protestants Know When to Return?

2011-10-30T23:08:00.001-05:00

Imagine that the Occupy Wall Street protest continued for years, during which time the community of protesters divided into different factions, each with different beliefs, different demands, and different leaders. But the protests continued for so long that the protesters eventually built makeshift shanties and lived in them, and had children. These children grew up in the protesting communities, and then they too had children, who also grew up in the same communities of protesters, still encamped in the Wall Street district. Over the course of these generations, however, these communities of protesters forgot what it was that they were protesting. They even forgot that they were protesting. Life in the shanties in Wall Street was what these subsequent generations had always known. They did not even know that they had inherited a protesting way of life, separated from the rest of society. When asked by a reporter what Wall Street would have to change in order to get them to return home, they looked at him confusedly, and responded, "We are home; this is home." They no longer had any intention to 'return to society' upon achieving some political or economic reform. For them, camping out on Wall Street was life as normal, and those with whom they had grown up camping simply were their society. Continue reading

Into the Half-Way House: The Story of an Episcopal Priest

2011-10-26T00:19:00.000-05:00

The Renniers and Archbishop Carlson

At Yale, there used to be an auxiliary library buried underneath the green in front the Sterling Memorial Library. One fine fall day, I happened to find myself not out amongst the foliage but rather tucked away below the sunshine and the sod, reading a book. I suppose it was an odd choice. This was the ugliest space I know of on an otherwise beautiful campus. So ugly, in fact, that it was targeted for a remodel and is now gone. But there I was, and perhaps even more odd, I, a good Anglican-priest-in-training, was reading Cardinal Newman. Not the good parts that we Anglicans agreed with; the parts about the Oxford movement and the Church Fathers. No, I was reading the Apologia; the story of his conversion to the Catholic Church. I was particularly bothered by one specific bit. Continue reading

Philosophy and the Papacy

2011-08-21T19:11:00.002-05:00

The School of Athens
Raphael (1509)

The Scripture readings for today's liturgy provide a biblical basis for the papacy, as John Bergsma explains. But as a Protestant, I was not able to see those verses as providing that basis, until I read Plato's Republic. Of the various philosophical factors that helped me become Catholic, one was teaching through Plato's Republic. I had taught it a few times before, but this time, I was teaching it with an eye toward its implications regarding unity. My conclusion was that for philosophical reasons we could expect Christ to have established for the Church an enduring office for her government, an office occupied by one person at a time. That conclusion allowed me to be more open and receptive to the Catholic understanding of Matthew 16:18-19, Luke 22:32, and John 21:15-17. So how did Plato's Republic help me reach that conclusion?

In order to explain the role of Plato's Republic in helping me become more open to the Catholic understanding of St. Peter's unique office in the Church, I need to lay out the broader line of reasoning to which it contributed. That line of reasoning was as follows.

(Continue reading)

Solemnity of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary

2011-08-15T08:15:00.001-05:00

The Assumption

Today, August 15, is the Solemnity of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary into Heaven. On this day, the universal Church celebrates what took place at the end of our Blessed Mother’s earthly life. “The Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.” This dogma is the great antidote to materialism and the moral corruption that follows despair, because in Mary’s Assumption into heaven we see our own glorious destiny as fellow creatures like her, united to her Son. In her Assumption we see the eschatological finale awaiting the Church, of which she is the icon.

This doctrine was not formally defined as a dogma until 1950, when Pope Pius XII did so in an Apostolic Constitution titled Munificentissimus Deus. Although the Orthodox have not formally defined the doctrine as a dogma, this doctrine is not a point of dispute between Catholics and Orthodox, because the Feast of the Assumption has been celebrated in the universal Church (both East and West) on this same date (August 15) since the sixth and seventh centuries. However, this doctrine is not accepted by most Protestants, and is therefore an occasion of difficulty with respect to the reconciliation of Protestants and the Catholic Church.

Recently Peter Leithart responded to Christian Smith's claim that sola Scriptura is the belief that Christians have "the Bible alone and no other human tradition as authority." Leithart protested against this definition, claiming that the Reformed do acknowledge the authority of tradition, but hold Scripture to have final authority. My response to Leithart can be found here, where I argue (briefly) that to subject tradition to the test of one's own interpretation of Scripture is to deny the authority of tradition, and thus to vindicate Smith's claim. ...

(Continue reading)

A Reflection on PCA Pastor Terry Johnson’s “Our Collapsing Ecclesiology”

2011-08-08T16:15:00.000-05:00

Terry Johnson

Terry Johnson, senior minister of Independent Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Savannah, Ga., wrote an article titled "Our Collapsing Ecclesiology" in the March issue of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church's magazine New Horizons. The article is well worth reading, because it examines the recent trends in Evangelicalism away from attendance in Sunday morning services, even away from organized institutional church altogether. It cites George Barna's announcement of the "New Church," which is "without structure, organization, clergy, officers, accountability, or discipline. It has no location, commitments, or physical presence. It is merely an informal, ad hoc, uncovenanted association of believers." According to this view "the local church ceases to exist. The requirement of Hebrews 10:25 (that believers assemble together) could be fulfilled ... "in a worship service or at Starbucks." In the mind of these Evangelicals, "I am not called to attend or join a church. I am called to be the church." For them, writes Terry, "Church ... is like the YMCA, except that one actually has to join the YMCA. It's good to go there to exercise, but sometimes one can do just as well at home—or maybe somewhere else. "Do what feels right for you," we hear said. "Go where your needs are met."

Continue reading

St. Vincent of Lérins and St. Optatus of Milevis

2011-06-01T16:11:00.001-05:00

Milevis

May 24 was the feast day of St. Vincent of Lérins, a soldier who became a monk at the monastery in Lérins, and wrote his famous Commonitory in AD 434, three years after the third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus, and seventeen years before the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon. He wrote to explain the rule he had received, by which the truth of the Catholic faith can be distinguished from the falsehood of heresy. June 4 is the feast of St. Optatus, a fourth-century bishop of Milevis, about ten miles from the Mediterranean Sea on the coast of northern Africa in what is now Algeria. He was a convert to the Catholic faith, and an African by birth. His major work is titled Against the Donatists, written between AD 372 and 375. How are the writings of these two saints related to the ecumenical effort to bring all Christ's followers into full and visible unity? See "The Commonitory of St. Vincent of Lérins" and "St. Optatus on Schism and the Bishop of Rome."

Imputation and Infusion: A Reply to R.C. Sproul Jr.

2011-05-11T14:43:00.000-05:00

R.C. Sproul Jr.

In "Imputation, Infusion and Eternal Consequence: A Parable," R.C. Sproul Jr. recently claimed that the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican (St. Luke 18: 9-14) not only supports the Reformed notion of imputation over the Catholic doctrine of infusion, but also shows that those holding the Reformed doctrine of imputation are justified, while those holding the Catholic doctrine of infusion "will spend eternity weeping and gnashing teeth."

Sproul appeals to the Pharisee's use of "Lord, I thank you" as evidence that the Pharisee knows that he needs the grace of God, that the power to make him righteous came from God, and that God deserves all the glory for his obedience to God. The Publican too, notes Sproul, knows that he needs grace from God. Thus, according to Sproul, the difference between the Pharisee and the Publican does not lie in their awareness of the divine origin of grace and righteousness. They both know that grace and righteousness come from God.

According to Sproul, the difference between the Pharisee and the Publican is this: the Pharisee believes that God’s grace has “made him whole” while the Publican knows that he is an unrighteous sinner. Because of this difference, claims Sproul, the Publican will spend eternity walking with God, while the Pharisee will spend eternity weeping and gnashing his teeth. But here’s the kicker: (continue reading)

Rome's non-enemy seeks full communion with her

2011-05-05T16:37:00.000-05:00

William Chellis

I first 'met' Bill Chellis through his blog De Regno Christi back in September of 2007. He was the pastor of Rochester Reformed Presbyterian Church in Rochester, New York, which is a member of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America. During the last two weeks of September of 2007, Bill hosted a two week discussion/debate between proponents and opponents of the theological position known as the Federal Vision, on De Regno Christi. I followed the discussion carefully, and commented there occasionally. The discussion prompted my post here titled "Darryl Hart on the Need for Sacramental Magisterial Authority," and a few days later "Protestantism "left only with opinions".

Two years later, in October of 2009, Bill published a post titled "Why Rome is not my enemy," which I wrote about in "William Chellis: Why Rome is not my enemy."

Then a few weeks ago Bill started a new blog named The Augustinian Anglo-Papist, on which, in a post titled "From Geneva to Rome," he announced that he is now seeking full communion with the Catholic Church. He writes:

This is a pilgrim's blog. It is the story of a journey in progress. I once took my stand with the militant Presbyterians. I served as a Pastor of small confessional, orthodox Presbyterian congregation in a small conservative and strident denomination. The Reformed Presbyterian Church was my home.

More than my home, she was my mother. She gave me life by pointing me to the riches of Christ. She fed and nourished my spiritual life on a steady diet of Word, sacrament and prayer. I will always love and honor her, as I will always love an honor my friends in Christ who remain within her.

If I am a catholic today, it is because she taught me to love the catholic faith. If she is not able to recognize the catholic faith in Rome, then I will lovingly disagree and pray for the unity of Christendom!

For, over time, my mind has changed. My search for the catholic faith has lead me to an unexpected place. Convinced that our Puritanism was another century's liberalism, my family began worshipping among the Anglicans. A fan of C.S. Lewis and T.S. Eliot, Anglicanism was an easy friend. The beauty of Anglo-Catholic liturgy and devotion, the wholesome goodness of the Book of Common Prayer, the Sermons of John Henry Newman were sources of great blessing. I even began to consider incardination into Anglican Holy Orders.

The more I prayed, however, the more restless I became. Anglicanism was an easy fit but was it the right fit? Could I really keep one foot in Geneva while having the other in Rome? Would I not be spewed out for being lukewarm?

After much prayer, sweat, blood, tears my Puritanism has transformed into Popery. From Geneva to Canterbury to Rome, this was my path. ... (continue reading)

Please pray for Bill and his family as they make this transition, and welcome them warmly into full communion with the Catholic Church.

Michael Liccione and Neal Judisch Reply to Keith Mathison

2011-02-25T16:51:00.000-06:00

Sacra Conversazione
Fra Angelico (c. 1443)

Michael Liccione and Neal Judisch have both written replies to Keith Mathison's Reply.

Michael's article is titled "Mathison’s Reply to Cross and Judisch: A Largely Philosophical Critique." In it he focuses on what he claims is the most important philosophical issue in the debate, namely, that the disagreement is paradigmatic, that is, that the differences between the Protestant and Catholic positions are not intra-paradigmatic, but involve two distinct paradigms that must be understood as distinct paradigms to be understood rightly and to be compared properly. In other words, resolving the disagreement requires comparing the paradigms, and thus comparing the framework that constitutes the respective paradigms. Michael examines and compares the interpretive paradigms operative between Catholicism and Protestantism, and explains how those paradigms can be evaluated against each other.

Neal's article is titled, "Some Preliminary Reflections on Mathison’s Dialectic." In it he offers a critical evaluation of Keith's claim that the principled distinction between Solo Scriptura and Sola Scriptura is visible to the inquirer only if the inquirer presupposes Catholic ecclesiology. Neal argues that Keith's claim is not plausible, and that it does not address the argument we raised in our 2009 article "Solo Scriptura, Sola Scriptura, and the Question of Interpretive Authority." He writes:

[T]he “Catholic presupposition-induced blindness” to the distinction Mathison draws is a putative psychological-cum-epistemological fact about Catholics. But the allegation that our case for the No Distinction Thesis is “circular and question-begging” is a putative fact about the logic of the argument. And there is a principled distinction between these things, which Mathison has perhaps not seen. For arguments (like offspring) need not inherit their parents’ defects; a fortiori when the defects are of categorically different kinds.

Once an argument marches forth into the wider world, the umbilical cord is severed and it takes on a life very much its own – to be praised or to be blamed in accord with its merits. And no amount of blaming its authors for blindness can imply that an argument they gave is guilty of circularity. For it is at any rate possible that Bryan and I in Athenian fashion groped hazily about, read incautiously and uncharitably, or embraced the No Distinction Thesis merely via some quasi-Freudian wish-fulfillment mechanism; but, like the proverbial blind hog, we might for all that have delivered into the world an acorn without so much as knowing how we’d done it.

(continue reading Neal's article)

Keith Mathison's Reply

2011-02-16T15:41:00.004-06:00

In November of 2009, Neal Judisch and I posted an article titled "Solo Scriptura, Sola Scriptura, and the Question of Interpretive Authority." The article provoked a good deal of discussion, the comments now number over 1,200. Our article was a reply to Keith Mathison's book The Shape of Sola Scripura, and focused on the distinction Keith makes between sola scriptura and what he calls "solo scriptura."

Keith Mathison

In his book Keith argued strongly against solo scriptura, and endorsed sola scriptura as the rightful alternative. In our article, we argued that there is no essential difference between solo scriptura and sola scriptura. The defining feature of solo scriptura is the retention by each individual of ultimate interpretive authority, but under sola scriptura, each individual likewise retains ultimate interpretive authority, even if that fact is somewhat hidden by forming associations of those sharing similar interpretations of Scripture and appointing officers among such associations.

Last year Keith assured us that he would write a reply. Yesterday, he announced that he has completed his reply. It can be read at the following link: "Solo Scriptura, Sola Scriptura, and Apostolic Succession: A Response to Bryan Cross and Neal Judisch." A pdf version of his reply is available here. I expect that in the coming weeks we will write a reply to Keith's reply; in the mean time, follow the discussion of Keith's reply here.

Please Welcome David Meyer and his Family

2010-12-18T16:10:00.000-06:00

In June I posted a note here that David Meyer had decided to seek full communion with the Catholic Church. Tomorrow (Dec 19), he and his wife and children will be received at Holy Family Catholic Church in St. Louis Park, MN. Please go to his blog and congratulate and welcome him.

St. Josaphat and the Internal and External Unity of the Church

2010-11-12T00:01:00.049-06:00

St. Josaphat of Polotsk

Today is the feast day of St. Josaphat of Polotsk, an Eastern Rite bishop who gave his life for the unity of the Church on this day in 1623. (Read an account of his martyrdom here.) The following is an excerpt from the Encyclical Letter Ecclesiam Dei, promulgated on this day in 1923 by Pope Pius XI in commemoration of St. Josaphat. In this excerpt we see the nature of the unity Christ established in His Church.

The Church of God, by a wondrous act of Divine Providence, was so fashioned as to become in the fullness of time an immense family which embraces all men. The Church possesses-a fact known to all-as one of its visible marks, impressed on it by God, that of a world-wide unity. Christ, Our Lord, not only entrusted to His Apostles and, to them alone, the mission which He had received from His Father when he said: "All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations;" (Matt. xxvii, 18, 19) He also wished the College of Apostles to possess perfect unity, a unity based on a twofold and well-knit bond, one bond internal, that of the selfsame faith and charity which is "poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Ghost" (Romans v, 5); the other external, that of the rule of one of the Apostles over all the others, for He conferred upon Peter a primacy over the Apostles as a perpetual principle and visible foundation for the Church's unity. At the close of His mortal life, he impressed upon the Apostles in the strongest possible terms the supreme need of this unity. (John xvii, 11, 21, 22) In His last soul-stirring prayer he asked His Father for this unity and His prayer was heard: "He was heard for his reverence." (Hebrews v, 7)

The Church was born in unity and grew into "a single body," vigorous, animated by a single soul, of which "the head is Christ from whom the whole body is compacted and fitly joined together." (Ephesians iv, 15, 16) Of this body, following the reasoning of St. Paul, He is the visible head who takes the place of Christ here upon earth, the Roman Pontiff. In him, as the successor of St. Peter, the words of Christ are being forever fulfilled: "Upon this rock I will build my Church." (Matt. xvi, 18) And the Pope who, down the ages, exercises the office which was bestowed upon Peter never ceases to confirm in the Faith, whenever it is necessary, his brethren and to feed all the sheep and lambs of the Master's flock.

No prerogative of the Church has been assailed more bitterly by "the enemy" than this unity of government, by means of which the "unity of the Spirit" is joined "in the bond of peace." (Ephesians iv, 3) It is quite true that the enemy has never, and never will, prevail against the Church. He has, however, succeeded in wresting from her bosom many of her children, and in some cases, even whole nations. These great losses were brought about in many instances by the wars which divided nations, by the enactment of laws inimical to the interests of religion and of virtue, or by an unbridled love for the passing goods of this world. (continue reading Ecclesiam Dei)

St. Josaphat, pray for us, that all those who seek to follow Christ would be reconciled in full and visible unity. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

A Lutheran Theology Professor and an Anglican Priest become Catholic

2010-09-05T08:12:00.001-05:00

Rev. Giles Pinnock

Dr. Michael Root

Recently Dr. Michael Root, Professor of Systematic Theology at Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary in Columbia, South Carolina, announced that he will be received into the Catholic Church.

And today Giles Pinnock, Vicar of St Mary-the-Virgin, in Kenton, announced his intention to pursue full communion with the Catholic Church. (See also here.)

H/T Jeffry Steel

Barrett Turner's "Pelagian Westminster?"

2010-06-30T10:50:00.000-05:00

Barrett Turner

I recommend this essay by Barrett Turner. Barrett completed his undergraduate studies at the University of Virginia. This Spring he graduated from Covenant Theological Seminary with an M.Div. This Fall he will be pursuing his doctorate in moral theology at the Catholic University of America. He lives with his wife and son in Alexandria, Virginia. They were members of the Presbyterian Church in America until they were received into full communion with the Catholic Church at the Easter Vigil this year. In this essay he shows the Pelagian character of the Covenant of Works apart from infused grace.

Continue reading

David Meyer and Christopher Lake seek full communion with the Catholic Church

2010-06-20T07:50:00.000-05:00

Yesterday Christopher Lake and David Meyer independently announced their intention to seek full communion with the Catholic Church. Christopher was raised in the Catholic Church but has been a Protestant for fifteen years. David has never been Catholic; he has been a Reformed Protestant the past ten years.

Christopher wrote:

On Tuesday of this now-almost-past week, I met with a wonderful, orthodox, kind, wise, 80-year-old Catholic priest (with age, indeed, comes much wisdom!) and expressed my desire to return to the Church. We talked for 90 minutes, every single one for which I very grateful to God. Lord willing, he will hear my confession as soon as it can be arranged– and then, soon after, the Eucharist, the Real Presence of the Body and Blood of the one Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

David wrote a letter to the session of his PCA church explaining his decision. He posted his letter at New Christendom. Toward the end of his letter he writes:

The Catholic Church is the only option left. In many ways it is a bitter pill to swallow for me. I have been very critical of Catholic doctrine as a Protestant. Much that they believe I am not inclined to believe. But I will have to submit to the mind of what I must believe is the church Christ founded.

Read the rest of David's letter.

Please welcome them and pray for them.

How John Calvin Made me a Catholic

2010-06-01T01:20:00.006-05:00

John Calvin

Dr. David Anders received his Ph.D. from the University of Iowa in 2002, in Reformation history and historical theology. He was received into the Catholic Church in 2003. He has recently written an article titled "How John Calvin Made me a Catholic." He will be on EWTN Live on June 23rd, 7:00 pm Central (8 EST), and may be discussing some of the material from this article.

(Continue reading)

Pentecost, Babel, and the Ecumenical Imperative

2010-05-22T19:03:00.000-05:00

"But as the old Confusion of tongues was laudable, when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety, even as some now venture to be, were building the Tower; (Genesis 11:7) for by the confusion of their language the unity of their intention was broken up, and their undertaking destroyed; so much more worthy of praise is the present miraculous one. For being poured from One Spirit upon many men, it brings them again into harmony." (St. Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 41)

(Continue reading)

Holy Orders and the Sacrificial Priesthood

2010-05-14T10:33:00.000-05:00

Tim Troutman has just published an article at Called To Communion. The article is titled "Holy Orders and the Sacrificial Priesthood." He writes:

At the heart of the separation of Catholics and Protestants lies a disagreement about the ecclesial hierarchy. Who are the rightful shepherds of Christ’s flock? This article will examine the Catholic Church’s doctrine of the sacrificial priesthood, and in doing so, will lay the foundation for our subsequent discussion on the critical issue of apostolic succession. We will argue for the following four claims. The hierarchical difference between the clergy and the laity was ordained by God and is supported by the Biblical data. The distinction between presbyters and bishops existed from apostolic times and was intended by Christ. Christian ministers are ordained into a visible priesthood that is distinct from the general priesthood of all believers. Finally, Holy Orders is a sacrament.

(continue reading)

An opportunity to study orthodox Catholic theology

2010-05-02T22:30:00.005-05:00

At Called to Communion I posted a link to two lectures recently given by Professor Lawrence Feingold on the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon. As usual, these lectures are outstanding both historically and theologically. In my opinion, Professor Feingold is one of the premier Catholic theologians in the United States. (See the latest issue of The Thomist for responses to his book The Natural Desire to See God According to St. Thomas Aquinas and His Interpreters.) And yet his lectures are clear and accessible even to those with very little theological training. This, in my opinion, is an additional mark of a good theologian.

If you are looking for an opportunity to deepen your understanding of Catholic theology or become qualified to take on some pedagogical role of service in your diocese or parish, and would like to study under Professor Feingold and other well qualified and orthodox Catholic theologians, consider taking classes in the Institute for Pastoral Theology (IPT) through Ave Maria University. The IPT is currently accepting applications for the Master of Theological Studies degree program for classes beginning in August 2010. Classes meet one weekend per month in various locations around the US, ten months each year. Deadline for applications is June 1, 2010. For further information, visit their web site at www.ipt.avemaria.edu.

Hadley Arkes becomes Catholic

2010-04-27T01:30:00.004-05:00

Hadley Arkes and Michael Novak

In October of 2008 I sat in a large room in Boston College and listened to probably the wittiest-yet-substantive lecture I have ever heard. The lecturer was Hadley Arkes, the Edward Ney Professor of Jurisprudence and American Institutions at Amherst College, prolific author and frequent contributor to First Things. This past Saturday in Washington D.C., Hadley, who is Jewish, was received into the Catholic Church. Read more here and here.

UPDATE: Hadley tells his story here.

Photo courtesy of Frank Beckwith.

What does catholicity feel like? #3

2010-04-24T14:55:00.000-05:00

Here's a third video in the "What does catholicity feel like?" series:

Five years ago today

2010-04-22T13:08:00.001-05:00

Five years ago today, I decided to seek full communion with the Catholic Church. This was three days after Pope Benedict's election as the 265th successor of St. Peter, and two days after Pope Benedict, in his first message as Pope, said the following:

Nourished and sustained by the Eucharist, Catholics cannot but feel encouraged to strive for the full unity for which Christ expressed so ardent a hope in the Upper Room. The Successor of Peter knows that he must make himself especially responsible for his Divine Master's supreme aspiration. Indeed, he is entrusted with the task of strengthening his brethren (cf. Lk 22: 32).

With full awareness, therefore, at the beginning of his ministry in the Church of Rome which Peter bathed in his blood, Peter's current Successor takes on as his primary task the duty to work tirelessly to rebuild the full and visible unity of all Christ's followers. This is his ambition, his impelling duty. He is aware that good intentions do not suffice for this. Concrete gestures that enter hearts and stir consciences are essential, inspiring in everyone that inner conversion that is the prerequisite for all ecumenical progress.

Theological dialogue is necessary; the investigation of the historical reasons for the decisions made in the past is also indispensable. But what is most urgently needed is that "purification of memory", so often recalled by John Paul II, which alone can dispose souls to accept the full truth of Christ. Each one of us must come before him, the supreme Judge of every living person, and render an account to him of all we have done or have failed to do to further the great good of the full and visible unity of all his disciples.

The current Successor of Peter is allowing himself to be called in the first person by this requirement and is prepared to do everything in his power to promote the fundamental cause of ecumenism. Following the example of his Predecessors, he is fully determined to encourage every initiative that seems appropriate for promoting contacts and understanding with the representatives of the different Churches and Ecclesial Communities. Indeed, on this occasion he sends them his most cordial greeting in Christ, the one Lord of us all.

Pray to God that many young men and women would rise to this call, and join with Pope Benedict in rebuilding the full and visible unity of all Christ's followers, through the charitable pursuit of truth and peace in Christ. May this be our ambition, and our impelling duty. May the heart of the Shepherd be the heart of Christ's sheep. As Pope Benedict said, each of us will come before Christ to give an account to Him of all that we have done or have failed to do to further the great good of the full and visible unity of all His disciples. May our labor of love now be such that on that Day we are not ashamed.

Video H/T: dans la tradition

Michael Spencer (1956-2010) R.I.P.

2010-04-06T09:53:00.003-05:00

Michael Spencer

I learned last night that Michael Spencer (aka IMonk) has passed from this life into the next. He began suffering symptoms less than a month after our interview in November, and was diagnosed with cancer right before Christmas.

I didn't know Michael well. Over the past two years, he occasionally commended or criticized things I wrote, and from time to time I did the same to some of the things he wrote. But, it was clear to both of us, I think, that under the disagreements, there always remained a mutual respect, and a mutual recognition of a shared faith in Christ. My experience with him through the interview only confirmed that. He was a gracious gentleman to me. From my point of view, Michael was a kind of visionary. He saw the problems in Evangelicalism that few inside seem to see, and he had the courage to look for solutions outside of what he called the "evangelical wilderness." What I said about him at the time of the interview is this:

Especially over the last year or so Michael has been doing things that no other prominent Evangelicals (that I know of) are doing. It might be called an honest and transparent self-examination of Evangelicalism, seeking to determine its strengths and its weaknesses, its identity and its future. He's not doing it to be critical, but to save it. The fascinating part of this endeavor, from my point of view, is that in seeking to understand and preserve Evangelicalism, Michael, in a sense, has flung open the doors to receive insight from other Christian traditions. And that has begun an ecumenical conversation. Such conversations can easily devolve into ugliness, especially on the internet. But Michael runs a tight ship, and so has fostered a safe context in which these discussions can take place. The result is often that Baptists and Lutherans and Calvinists and Catholics and Pentecostals and Orthodox and Anglicans are all talking to each other in a friendly, respectful way, about their theology and practice. In this respect, what Michael is doing ecumenically is pioneering. So I'm grateful for his invitation to contribute to the discussion.

Michael, thank you for all you did. You will be missed.

Requiem aeternam dona ei Domine; et lux perpetua luceat ei. Requiescat in pace. In nomine Patris et fillii et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.

Tom Brown comes home

2010-04-03T10:11:00.002-05:00

Regular readers of this blog know my friend Tom Brown (who also goes by 'Thos'), who has commented here for several years, and runs his own blog titled Ecumenicity, and is an editor at Called To Communion.

Tom and his family are being received into full communion with the Catholic Church tonight at the Easter Vigil. The Archdiocese of Seattle has the story.

To welcome and congratulate Tom and his wife, go here and leave a note in the combox.

Telegraph: 100 US Anglican parishes to enter the Catholic Church

2010-03-05T16:37:00.002-06:00

Telegraph: 100 US Anglican parishes to enter the Catholic Church

Each of the bishops of the Anglican Church in America have made this request to the Holy See, but apparently each individual parish must decide whether to accept it.

Adoro Te Devote

2010-01-28T23:27:00.011-06:00

Adoro te devote, latens Deitas,
Quæ sub his figuris vere latitas;
Tibi se cor meum totum subjicit,
Quia te contemplans totum deficit.
Visus, tactus, gustus in te fallitur,
Sed auditu solo, tuto creditur:
Credo quidquid dixit Dei Filius:
Nil hoc verbo veritatis verius.
In cruce latebat sola Deitas;
At hic latet simul et humanitas:
Ambo tamen credens, atque confitens,
Peto quod petivit latro pœnitens.
Plagas sicut Thomas, non intueor,
Deum tamen meum te confiteor:
Fac me tibi semper magis credere,
In te spem habere, te diligere.
O memoriale mortis Domini,
Panis vivus vitam præstans homini,
Præsta meæ menti de te vivere,
Et te illi semper dulce sapere.
Pie pellicane Jesu Domine,
Me immundum munda tuo sanguine,
Cujus una stilla salvum facere
Totum mundum quit ab omni scelere.
Jesu, quem velatum nunc aspicio,
Oro fiat illud quod tam sitio,
Ut te revelata cernens facie
Visu sim beatus tuæ gloræ.

Devoutly I adore Thee, O hidden God,
Truly hidden underneath these veils:
To Thee my whole heart submits,
Since in contemplating Thee it completely fails.
Sight, touch, and taste, about Thee are deceived,
But hearing only is sufficient to believe;
I believe everything that God the Son has spoken;
Nothing than this Word of Truth is truer.
On the Cross only Thy Divinity was veiled,
Here Thy humanity lieth hidden too;
Yet both I believe and confess,
I ask that, which asked the contrite thief.
Thy wounds, not as Thomas do I see,
But I confess Thee as my God:
Make me more and more to believe in Thee,
To Hope in Thee, and love Thee.
O Memorial of the Lord's death,
Living Bread, that givest life to man;
Grant my soul on Thee to live,
And always Thy sweetness to taste.
Tender Pelican, Lord Jesus,
Wash me clean in Thy blood,
Of which a single drop can save
the whole world from all that defiles.
Jesus, whom now I see hidden,
I ask, grant that for which I so thirst,
That on seeing Thee face to face
I may be happy in the vision of Thy glory.

Feast of St. Thomas Aquinas, 2010. (The words of Adore Te Devote are about Christ in the Eucharist.)

St. Thomas Aquinas on the Unity of the Church

2010-01-25T11:28:00.001-06:00

Today, on this eighth and last day of the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity, we will look at what St. Thomas Aquinas says about the unity of the Church, drawing from his commentary on the Apostles’ Creed in his catechism, his Summa Contra Gentiles and his Summa Theologica. (Continue reading)

St. Francis de Sales: Reconciling Calvinists to the Catholic Church

2010-01-24T11:16:00.001-06:00

Today, the seventh day of the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity, is the feast day of St. Francis de Sales, (1567-1622), bishop of Geneva and Doctor of the Church.

In 1594 he volunteered to go to Le Chablais, south of Geneva, where the population had become Calvinist and separated from the Catholic Church. The encyclopedia article explains St. Francis' subsequent activity:

He journeyed through the entire district, preaching constantly; by dint of zeal, learning, kindness and holiness he at last obtained a hearing. He then settled in Thonon, the chief town. He confuted the preachers sent by Geneva to oppose him; he converted the syndic and several prominent Calvinists. At the request of the pope, Clement VIII, he went to Geneva to interview Theodore Beza, who was called the Patriarch of the Reformation. The latter received him kindly and seemed for a while shaken, but had not the courage to take the final steps.

Through his work in this region over the course of four years (from 1594 to 1598), 72,000 Calvinists were brought back into the Catholic Church. When he initially went from house to house to talk with the Calvinists, they refused to talk with him or even listen to him. So he started writing pamphlets, and slipping them under doors in the villages and towns. Those pamphlets have been collected into the book now published under the title: The Catholic Controversy: St. Francis de Sales' Defense of the Faith.

One of the more important points in these pamphlets is that the Church comes from the Apostles, as the Apostles come from Christ, and as Christ comes from the Father. The Father sent the Son. The Son authorized and commissioned the Apostles. The Apostles authorized and commissioned the bishops. And these bishops authorized and commissioned bishops. This is a top-down transmission of divine authority and mission, from the Father to Christ, from Christ to the Apostles, and from the Apostles to the bishops they ordained. Only those persons authorized and sent by the Apostles should be received by Christians as rightful shepherds, and thus only those authorized and sent by the bishops sent by the Apostles should be received by Christians as rightful shepherds. We should not follow those who are self-sent, or self-appointed, for such persons are not authorized by Christ to shepherd the Lord's sheep. Anyone can claim to be authorized, but only those who have been authorized by those whom the Apostles authorized are actually authorized. The Calvinists were following self-appointed men who were not authorized to speak for the Church. St. Francis taught that these men had not entered the sheepfold by the door, but were climbing in some other way.

St. Francis explained that the unity of the Church derives directly from the unity of Christ Himself, through a continuous organic relation to the incarnate Christ, by holding to the shepherds who have authorization from the Apostles. Just as an organism grows, so by apostolic succession the Church retains within itself the unity it received directly from the incarnate Christ, its Head. "We are to grow up in all aspects into Him, who is the head, even Christ from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by that which every joint supplies ...." (Ephesians 4:16)

The bust at right is located on the west side of the Saint Louis Cathedral Basilica.

The Canon Question

2010-01-23T23:21:00.001-06:00

How do we know which books belong in the canon of Scripture? In what way do we necessarily depend upon the Church in order to answer this question? If the Church has the authority to determine the canon of Scripture, what does this entail regarding the Church's authority to determine the authentic interpretation of Scripture? What difficulties face the sola scriptura position regarding the Canon Question? Tom Brown posted a challenging and well-researched article today that addresses the Canon Question in relation to the Protestant-Catholic dialogue. Read it here.

Club Church

2010-01-21T00:01:00.003-06:00

"One altar/sacrifice/bishop forces the breaking down of those barriers that we naturally erect (along ethnic lines and nationalist lines and class lines and …) as a function of the sin that expresses itself not just in Gen 3 but quite fundamentally in Gen 10. Otherwise the church is built-bottom up in our own image (or our collective, ethnic, nationalist … image), and becomes a club for those who associate with others who think like them and act like them (…), others whom they’d be comfortable associating with in any case, and fails utterly to appreciate the radical newness and inclusiveness of the religion centered around the Gospel."

- Neal Judisch, professor of philosophy at the University of Oklahoma.

(Source)

Pope Benedict dedicates weekly general audience to Christian unity

2010-01-20T09:03:00.000-06:00

Seeing Schism as Schism

2010-01-18T00:01:00.002-06:00

Today marks the beginning of the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity.

When a sin becomes sufficiently commonplace, we tend to lose the ability to see it for what it is. It becomes merely something that 'everyone does.' We lose sight of its evil, and take it for granted. It blends into the background of our daily lives. And when we no longer see it as evil, we no longer labor to eliminate it. We refer it to fallen 'human nature,' whose only cure is the Second Coming. We might even mock those who work against it, treating them as foolish idealists.

What is true of sin in general is also true of schism. The fact of schism has become so commonplace that very few recognize it for what it is. It is as if schism simply disappeared, one of those evils of long ago, but one which has no referent or application among us today. It disappeared by becoming ubiquitous and ordinary. We swept schism under the rug of diversity, making the fact of division the new unity. We think nothing of there being Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican, Pentecostal, Independent, Seventh Day Adventists, ... etc., etc., buildings on each block. We look at them and think that's the way it is supposed to be. We do not think, "Wow, look at all the schism." That's not how we see. Schism is so normal that we don't see it as schism.

The first step in overcoming an evil is recognizing it as an evil. And the first step in overcoming schism, is seeing it for what it is, seeing our divisions as divisions. May God give us the eyes to see.

Pray the prayer for the first day of the Octave.

Let's pull together for the people of Haiti

2010-01-13T17:46:00.001-06:00

Let's pull together for the citizens of Haiti, who just endured a devastating earthquake. Donate at Catholic Relief Services, or Food for the Poor, or the American Red Cross, or World Vision, or Samaritan's Purse.

Photo credit: (REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz)

Is Rome the True Church?

2010-01-12T23:46:00.000-06:00

Norman Geisler and Joshua Betancourt published a book by that title in November of 2008, arguing over the course of 240 pages that the answer to that question is "No." But it was brought to my attention today that Joshua Betancourt has since been received into the Catholic Church. See here.

Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God

2010-01-01T23:17:00.007-06:00

Holy Theotokos, please pray for the full unity of those who love your Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Please pray for Michael Spencer and his family

2009-12-24T01:18:00.001-06:00

I recently learned that Michael Spencer (aka IMonk) has been quite seriously ill. Ryan at BHT explains:

After being very dizzy and sick for three weeks, Michael was given a non-specific cancer diagnosis last week. He was scheduled for a biopsy, and possibly more tests, today (Tuesday, [Dec 22]), but he was too weak and dehydrated from being so sick lately. The doctors decided to admit him to the university hospital in Lexington to hydrate him, and get him ready for the biopsy. The latest word was that he was feeling better after receiving fluids. We are expecting a more concrete diagnosis/prognosis later this week.

According to the most recent update, Michael is presently in the University of Kentucky Medical Center, scheduled to undergo surgery today (Dec 24) at 7:15 AM (EST). Please pray for Michael and Denise and their family.

Still looking for a Christmas gift?

2009-12-16T09:01:00.002-06:00

Consider the new CD titled "Christmas at Ephesus" by these Benedictine sisters in Kansas City, Missouri. Last year I described our visit to Kansas City to be there when a friend of ours become a postulant. She is now a novice, and her new name is Sister Justina.

These sisters have recently produced a CD of twenty-three beautiful Christmas songs, including some that they have composed. Many are in the form of traditional chant. Here's their version of Silent Night:

Listen to four more tracks on this CD (and purchase it) here. By doing so you will do two good things at the same time; you will acquire beautiful and edifying music for you and your loved ones, and you will help support these amazing sisters, who now number over twenty.

Two Bad Arguments Against The Immaculate Conception

2009-12-14T00:57:00.007-06:00

The Virgin Enthroned
c. 1120
Fresco
Maria zur Höhe, Soest, Germany

This past Tuesday (December 8) was the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception, a holy day in which Catholics celebrate the conception of Mary without original sin, in the womb of her mother Anne. Over the past week I encountered two arguments against this doctrine.

The Orthodox Church in America recently stated this on on its website:

The Orthodox Church does not accept the teaching that the Mother of God was exempted from the consequences of ancestral sin (death, corruption, sin, etc.) at the moment of her conception by virtue of the future merits of Her Son. Only Christ was born perfectly holy and sinless, as St Ambrose of Milan teaches in Chapter Two of his Commentary on Luke. The Holy Virgin was like everyone else in Her mortality, and in being subject to temptation, although She committed no personal sins. She was not a deified creature removed from the rest of humanity. If this were the case, She would not have been truly human, and the nature that Christ took from Her would not have been truly human either. If Christ does not truly share our human nature, then the possibility of our salvation is in doubt.

Grace, in Catholic theology, is not merely divine favor, but is also a participation in the divine nature. (2 Peter 1:4) To receive sanctifying grace through baptism is to be granted a participation in God's own nature, and in that sense to be deified is to be granted to share by a divine gift in God's very nature. That participation in God's nature is in seed-form in this present life, and is perfected in the life to come, in the Beatific Vision, where we shall be like Him perfectly, because we will see Him just as He is. (1 John 3:2) Glory is the culmination of grace; grace is the seed of glory.

So this first argument against the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception runs like this:

(1) If Mary had been immaculately conceived, then during her life on earth she would have been deified.

(2) If Mary had been deified while on earth, she would not have been truly human, and the nature Christ took from her would not have been truly human.

(3) But Christ was truly human.

Therefore,

(4) Mary was not immaculately conceived.

What is wrong with this argument? The first premise is true, if we understand 'deified' in the Catholic sense I explained above. The third premise is also true. The second premise, however, is not true if we understand 'deified' in the Catholic sense. Deification, whether in this life, or in the life to come, does not detract from our humanity or make us non-human. The baptized infant does not cease to be human at the moment of baptism. Grace builds on nature; grace does not destroy or nullify nature. Even if Mary was given the preternatural gifts enjoyed by Adam and Eve prior to their Fall, this would not have made Mary non-human, because it did not make Adam and Eve non-human. Adam and Eve did not change species when they fell. They lost sanctifying grace and the preternatural gifts, but they remained human by nature. So the argument is not sound, because the second premise is false. In order to make the argument sound, we would have to use a definition of 'deified' that is contrary to Catholic theology. In other words, in order for the argument to be sound, we would have to construct a strawman of the Catholic position. That's the first argument.

I discovered the second argument when I was recently directed to a post titled "The Holy Tradition and the Veneration of Mary and other Saints in the Orthodox Church," written by Very Reverend John Morris, and posted on the "Self-Ruled Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America" site. He too offers an argument against the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. He writes:

The Orthodox Church calls Mary "immaculate," and "all pure," as a manifestation of the Orthodox understanding of salvation as deification. Orthodox Christians believe that through the grace of God Mary has been deified or made by grace what God is by nature or, as St. Paul wrote, "And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another …" Vladimir Lossky wrote, " … the very heart of the Church, one of her most secret mysteries, her mystical center, her perfection already realized in a human person fully united to God, finding herself beyond the resurrection and the judgment. This person is Mary, the Mother of God." Thus salvation for Orthodox theology is more than the forgiveness of sins or justification, but is also the transformation of the believer by the grace of God to become a partaker of the Divine Nature. Orthodox Christians see the realization of salvation in the deification of Mary.

However, Orthodox Christians do not accept the Roman Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. On the contrary, Orthodox believe that the Blessed Virgin was born in ancestral sin just like any other person. This is important because if Mary had not been born in ancestral sin, God could not have assumed sinful human nature from her. As St. Gregory Nazianzen wrote, "For that which He has not assumed He has not healed." If God had not assumed sinful human nature from the Blessed Virgin, He could not have saved sinful human nature through the Incarnation of Christ. Indeed, a prayer addressed to the Virgin Mary from the service of Compline contains the beautiful words, “thy glorious birth-giving has united God the Word to man and joined the fallen nature of our race to heavenly things."

A Catholic can fully agree with everything in the first paragraph, but Rev. Morris' argument against the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is found in the second quoted paragraph. The argument goes like this.

(1) If Mary had not been born in ancestral sin, God could not have assumed sinful human nature from her.

(2) If God had not assumed sinful human nature from the Blessed Virgin, He could not have saved sinful human nature through the Incarnation of Christ.

(3) But God saved sinful human nature through the Incarnation of Christ.

Therefore,

(4) Mary must have been born in ancestral sin.

It is one thing to assume human nature from sinful humans. It is quite another to assume a sinful nature. There are not two human natures, because there are not two species within a genus 'human'; 'human' is a species, not a genus. There is human nature with sanctifying grace, and human nature without sanctifying grace. Human nature without sanctifying grace is human nature in a state of original sin. Human nature with sanctifying grace is human nature participating in the divine nature.

So the second premise of Rev. Morris' argument amounts to this: Unless Christ received a human nature lacking sanctifying grace, He could not redeem those lacking sanctifying grace. That is essentially saying that unless Christ had original sin, He could not save those in sin. But that is false. If Christ Himself had original sin, then as the Church Fathers teach, Christ too would have needed a Savior. So Christ did not need to lack sanctifying grace in order to redeem those lacking sanctifying grace. On the contrary, He needed to be free from original sin in order to redeem those under sin. So the second premise of this argument is false. Christ needed to receive our human nature in order to redeem us, but He did not need to receive sinful human nature (i.e. human nature in a state of sin) in order to redeem man from sin. And because the second premise is false, therefore the argument is unsound.

Moreover, because Christ did not need to receive sinful-human-nature (i..e human nature in a state of sin), He did not need to receive human nature from someone lacking sanctifying grace in order to redeem those lacking sanctifying grace. Otherwise, Mary would have had to be in a state of mortal sin when Christ was conceived. But no one in the history of the Church has ever believed such a thing, nor do the Orthodox believe such a thing.

So both of these Orthodox arguments against the Catholic doctrine of Mary's Immaculate Conception are unsound.

Immaculate Theotokos, bring all your children to unity in the truth. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe

2009-12-12T15:43:00.000-06:00

Today, December 12, is the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe. Many people do not know anything about this historical event, even though it is undoubtedly one of the most important events in the history of Christianity in the Americas. As a result of the miracle of Mary’s apparition to a native American peasant named Juan Diego and the appearance of her image on his tilma, over eight million native Americans were converted to Christianity in the seven years from 1531 to 1538. Prior to this event, the Aztecs were offering thousands of human sacrifices per year in central Mexico, including child sacrifice. The conversion of the Aztecs to Christianity ended the brutal practice of human sacrifice.

The image above is the image that miraculously appeared on the tilma of Juan Diego when he opened it before the bishop. The image shows Mary as a humble but royal maiden. Under her feet is the moon, which for the Aztecs represented the devil. In this image we see Mary as the woman described in Revelation 12. To read a fuller account of this miraculous event see here, here, and here. Or read Warren Carroll’s Our Lady of Guadalupe and the Conquest of Darkness (Christendom Press, Front Royal, Virginia, 2002).

Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen..

(cross-posted at CTC)

Ecumenical flowchart

2009-12-07T08:43:00.006-06:00

The Early Church Fathers on the Eucharist and the Liturgy

2009-12-03T00:37:00.007-06:00

The Last Supper (c. 1470)

Jaume Huguet

Last night, Professor Feingold (Ave Maria University) continued his lecture series on the early Church Fathers for the Association of Hebrew Catholics. Last night's lecture was titled "The early Church Fathers on the Eucharist and the Liturgy." He first presented what we know about the early liturgy of the Church, and its continuity with the liturgy of the synagogue. Then, starting in the first century, and ending with St. John Chrysostum in the late fourth century, he showed that the Fathers believed and taught the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the ecclesial dimension of the Eucharist, the sanctifying power of the Eucharist, and the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist. He showed that the idea of transubstantiation was present in the Fathers, and was not a medieval novelty. The Q&A following the lecture included a number of very good questions from a Protestant point of view. During the Q&A he explained exactly why Protestant communities do not have the Eucharist, and why having Holy Orders is essential for a valid Eucharist. The lecture and Q&A are both freely available for download as mp3 files here. Or listen to them by pressing 'play' below:

Lecture

Q&A

Pope Greets Ecumenical Patriarch on the Feast of Saint Andrew

2009-11-30T13:39:00.005-06:00

The photograph at right (and the one at left) were taken three years ago today, on the Feast of St. Andrew. Pope Benedict's line of succession goes back to the Apostle Peter. The Patriarchs of Constantinople trace their succession back to the Apostle Andrew, Peter's brother. One source in the tradition tells us that St. Andrew preached in "Cappadocia, Galatia, and Bithynia," and "afterwards in Byzantium where he appointed St. Stachys as its first bishop."

Today Pope Benedict XVI sent the following letter to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I.

To His Holiness Bartholomaios I
Archbishop of Constantinople
Ecumenical Patriarch

Your Holiness,

It is with great joy that I address Your Holiness on the occasion of the visit of the delegation guided by my Venerable Brother Cardinal Walter Kasper, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, to whom I have entrusted the task of conveying to you my warmest fraternal greetings on the Feast of Saint Andrew, the brother of Saint Peter and the protector of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

On this joyful occasion commemorating the birth into eternal life of the Apostle Andrew, whose witness of faith in the Lord culminated in his martyrdom, I express also my respectful remembrance to the Holy Synod, the clergy and all the faithful, who under your pastoral care and guidance continue even in difficult circumstances to witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The memory of the holy martyrs compels all Christians to bear witness to their faith before the world. There is an urgency in this call especially in our own day, in which Christianity is faced with increasingly complex challenges. The witness of Christians will surely be all the more credible if all believers in Christ are "of one heart and soul" (Acts 4:32).

Our Churches have committed themselves sincerely over the last decades to pursuing the path towards the re-establishment of full communion, and although we have not yet reached our goal, many steps have been taken that have enabled us to deepen the bonds between us. Our growing friendship and mutual respect, and our willingness to encounter one another and to recognize one another as brothers in Christ, should not be hindered by those who remain bound to the remembrance of historical differences, which impedes their openness to the Holy Spirit who guides the Church and is able to transform all human failings into opportunities for good.

This openness has guided the work of the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue, which held its eleventh plenary session in Cyprus last month. The meeting was marked by a spirit of solemn purpose and a warm sentiment of closeness. I extend once again my heartfelt gratitude to the Church of Cyprus for its most generous welcome and hospitality. It is a source of great encouragement that despite some difficulties and misunderstandings all the Churches involved in the International Commission have expressed their intention to continue the dialogue.

The theme of the plenary session, The Role of the Bishop of Rome in the Communion of the Church in the First Millennium, is certainly complex, and will require extensive study and patient dialogue if we are to aspire to a shared integration of the traditions of East and West. The Catholic Church understands the Petrine ministry as a gift of the Lord to His Church. This ministry should not be interpreted in the perspective of power, but within an ecclesiology of communion, as a service to unity in truth and charity. The Bishop of the Church of Rome, which presides in charity (Saint Ignatius of Antioch), is understood to be the Servus Servorum Dei (Saint Gregory the Great). Thus, as my venerable predecessor the Servant of God Pope John Paul II wrote and I reiterated on the occasion of my visit to the Phanar in November 2006, it is a question of seeking together, inspired by the model of the first millennium, the forms in which the ministry of the Bishop of Rome may accomplish a service of love recognized by one and all (cf. Ut Unum Sint, 95). Let us therefore ask God to bless us and may the Holy Spirit guide us along this difficult yet promising path.

(Continue reading)

H/T: ByzTex

What a homily: An Anglican on the Unity of the Church

2009-11-29T10:49:00.000-06:00

'We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.’

+ In the name of the Father …

Every Sunday, week by week, and on certain other feast days, we recite the Creed, and during this Advent, I shall preach on each of its four Sundays on the Church that we say in the Creed we believe to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic. ...

So I start by examining the statement that we believe that the Church is One – although it is very much the case that every part of ‘We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church’ supports and is supported by each of the others. It is one statement, not four.

We believe that the Church is One.

continue reading

The Early Church Fathers on Mary as the New Eve

2009-11-19T01:11:00.010-06:00

Madonna and Child with Angels
Duccio di Buoninsegna (1300-1305)

Last night Professor Lawrence Feingold (Institute for Pastoral Theology, Ave Maria University) gave a lecture to the Association of Hebrew Catholics on the subject of the early Church Fathers on Mary as the New Eve. The full audio (and Q&A) of the lecture can be downloaded for free here.

First he spoke briefly about the Catholic conception of the development of doctrine, and how Mary herself provides the model for understanding the Church's ever-deepening understanding of the deposit of faith. Then he showed how Scripture itself points to Mary as the New Eve, and how the early Church Fathers recognized and developed this doctrine of Mary as the New Eve, all holding her to be without sin. He carefully explained how the developing understanding of Mary as the New Eve gradually unveiled the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.

In the second part of his lecture he examined the later Church Fathers. From the sixth century on in the East, three Marian feasts were celebrated: the Annunciation on March 25, the Nativity of Our Lady on September 8, and the Dormition commemorating Mary's holy death on August 15. In this part of his lecture Professor Feingold presented a summary of the Mariology of the Eastern Fathers after Nicea. Then he discussed the theological debate concerning the Immaculate Conception in the Latin West, as that led into the time of the Scholastics. He explained why theologians such as St. Bernard, St. Thomas, and St. Bonaventure denied the Immaculate Conception, and how Bl. Duns Scotus resolved the problem. Eventually in 1477 the feast of the Immaculate Conception was made a feast for the universal Church, and in 1708 it became a holy day of obligation in the universal Church (though it had already been a holy day of obligation for centuries in the East). Then in 1854 Pope Pius IX defined it as dogma with the solemn bull, Ineffabilis Deus.

Since the Catholic doctrines concerning Mary remain one of the difficulties for Protestant-Catholic reconciliation, and since understanding Mary as the New Eve serves as the key, I think, to understanding the basis for the other Marian dogmas, considering together what the Church Fathers say about Mary as the New Eve is a very helpful way of resolving the Protestant-Catholic disagreements concerning Mary. Those disagreements can be seen clearly in the recent Evangelicals and Catholics Together document titled "Do Whatever He Tells You: The Blessed Virgin Mary in Christian Faith and Life." It presents both points of view (Catholic and Evangelical Protestant), as well as the common ground both sides share. Some of the Protestant concerns raised in the ECT document are addressed in Professor Feingold's lecture. (Click here to download the mp3 of Professor Feingold's lecture and the Q&A following it.) Or listen to them directly below:

Lecture

Q&A

Evangelicals and the Crisis of Authority

2009-11-17T18:49:00.004-06:00

Jim Tonkowich has written a must-read article titled "Evangelicals and the Crisis of Authority." The article describes a present authority crisis at Calvin College regarding homosexuality and academic freedom. One person is quoted as saying "academic freedom means I can interpret Scripture in any way I see fit." The article considers the possibility that this seeming primacy of individual interpretive judgment is intrinsic to the essence of Protestantism. But in the last third of his article Jim concludes that that is a false understanding of Protestantism. I have quoted that last section in full:

[Timothy] George argues that Luther and the other Reformers were far more nuanced than a cursory reading of the dialogue at Worms indicates. Rather than seeing themselves as creating something new based on individual insights, they "saw themselves as part of the ongoing Catholic tradition, indeed as the legitimate bearers of it." The Reformers had a "sense of continuity with the church of the preceding centuries." Neither Luther nor John Calvin rejected the past or even the Roman Church in its entirety.

While the Reformers believed Scripture alone was the final authority for life and doctrine, they insisted that assent to ancient creeds was also incumbent upon Christians. They were so strongly persuaded, says George, that they saw justification by faith, the cornerstone of the Reformation, as "the logical and necessary consequence of the ecumenical orthodoxy embraced by Catholics and Protestants alike."

As to academic freedom, the Reformers were marked, "by their desire to read the Bible in dialogue with the exegetical traditions of the church." George writes:

In their biblical commentaries… the Reformers of the sixteenth century revealed an intimate familiarity with the preceding exegetical tradition, and they used it reverently as well as critically in their own expositions of the sacred text. The Scriptures were seen as the book given to the church, gathered and guided by the Holy Spirit.

These three, the sense of continuity with the Church through the ages, an embrace of ecumenical orthodoxy as expressed in the creeds, and a determination to read the Bible with the Church, form guardrails for academic and personal freedom and inquiry. They prevent biblical interpretation from falling prey to the latest cultural fad, the hippest intellectual fashion, and individual predilections.

As John Armstrong comments:

[W]e need to recover a proper emphasis upon tradition. Some Christians are accused of being stuck in the past, especially by progressive and more liberal Christians. I believe the much greater danger is an uncritical acceptance of new teachings and practices that undermine the historic faith itself. We need what my friend, the late Robert Webber, called "ancient-future faith." It is right to lean into the future and to prepare for what the Spirit will do. But the Spirit does not lead us to abandon the historic faith in the process.

Christian freedom—academic freedom and personal freedom—is not the right to interpret the Bible in any way we see fit and then act on our interpretation. It is the freedom to be fully human in company with and under the authority of the Church throughout the ages and in accord with the unchanging truth that is in Jesus Christ.

The solution to this authority problem, according to Jim, is that present-day Protestants need to recover a sense of continuity with the Church, embrace the orthodoxy of the ancient creeds, and read the Bible in dialogue with the exegetical traditions of the Church. The problem with Jim's suggestion is that it is just that, a mere suggestion. It has no authority. The things he proposes are all good things, but they are not, and cannot be, the solution to the authority vacuum within Protestantism. An authority problem cannot be solved without authority. Appealing to "the authority of the Church,"as he does in the last line of his article, is impossible when "the Church" is ultimately defined by each individual in terms of "those who agree with my general interpretation." Jim is trying to hang on to the solo scriptura / sola scriptura distinction in order to salvage Evangelicalism's decay. But as Neal Judisch and I recently argued in "Solo Scriptura, Sola Scriptura, and the Question of Interpretive Authority," there is ultimately no real distinction between solo scriptura and sola scriptura. By its rejection of apostolic succession Protestantism necessarily makes the individual the ultimate interpretive authority. And that entails that anyone can reject the ancient Church and her creeds as outdated and antiquated, and give no heed to the various exegetical traditions. Merely calling for a "sense of continuity" and an "embrace" of the ancient creeds and for reading the Bible in continuity with ancient exegetical traditions will not stop the flowering of the seeds sown almost five hundred years ago, when Protestants rejected apostolic succession and the authority of the Church. In doing so, they unwittingly made each man his own pope, though the full fruits of this sowing remained hidden under the gradually declining inertia of Catholic Tradition. Those who sow rejection of apostolic succession must ultimately reap the individualism and fragmentation of "solo scriptura." As Louis Bouyer argued:

The Protestantism which rejects the authority of the Church because it rejects all authority has come out of the Protestantism which rejected the authority of the Church because of the fear it wronged that other authority, held to be sovereign, of the Scriptures. If it was possible for the first to come from the second, it must somehow have been contained therein.

The only solution to this authority problem is a recovery of apostolic succession.

Guide to Rational Ecumenical Dialogue

2009-11-15T00:10:00.036-06:00

Aristotle

Two years ago today I wrote, "One Precondition for Genuine Ecumenical Dialogue," in which I pointed out the distinction between rational dialogue and sophistry, and then described three signs of sophistry.

As surprising as it may sound, a major impediment to fruitful ecumenical dialogue is an unfamiliarity with the rules of rational dialogue, including the basic rules of logic. Many persons in the general populace have never taken a course in logic or even studied logic, and the result is that relatively few people know how properly to engage in rational dialogue. The new media encourages a soundbyte mode of interaction, which is usually unproductive and often counterproductive. It lends itself to sophistry rather than furthering mutual understanding and converging upon the truth. When the rules of rational dialogue are not followed, discourse tends to descend into the cacophony of narcissism and verbal violence. In many cases this is precisely what we find in comboxes. Here are some things that anyone who wishes to participate in ecumenical dialogue needs to know.

First, we need to know what an argument is. In common popular usage, an 'argument' is thought of as a quarrel or debate. But with respect to logic, an argument is a set of propositions or statements, one of which (called the 'conclusion') is said to follow from the others (called 'premises'). An argument is the smallest unit of speech containing reasoning from one proposition to another. So if some instance of communication does not include arguments, then that communication is only a series of assertions or questions. If it is part of an interchange, asking and answering questions can allow for shared contemplation and consideration of respective positions. And such exchanges can be very effective at paving the way for presenting arguments from shared common ground, because sincere questions and authentic answers are absolutely essential for coming to understand each other. And sometimes when we come to understand two positions more clearly, the superiority of one over the other becomes self-evident, and does not need to be demonstrated by further argumentation. But merely exchanging assertions is not shared reasoning by which two or more persons move together rationally toward agreement about the truth. In general, without arguments there can be no mutual movement of the intellect toward a shared conclusion. Merely trading assertions is futile, and for that reason a wise person will not do it.

In rational dialogue, when someone presents an argument, we evaluate the argument according to two criteria. First we evaluate the truth of the premises. That is, we check each premise to determine whether it is true. If we find that one or more of the premises is not true, then we show why those premises are false, or why the available evidence indicates that those premises are false. Then we evaluate the form of the argument. That is, we make sure that the conclusion follows from the premises. If the conclusion does not follow from the premises, then we show how the truth of the premises does not guarantee that the conclusion is true. However, if we find that the premises are all true, and that the conclusion follows by necessity from the premises, then we accept the argument as a sound argument, and we accept the truth of its conclusion.

So there are essentially three possible proper responses to a deductive argument. Either we show the argument to be unsound, or we accept the truth of its conclusion, or we withhold judgment for the time being, explaining that we need time to think about it or investigate it more deeply, and we take the time to think about it, until we can either refute the argument or accept the truth of its conclusion. We do not change the subject or criticize the person presenting the argument or talk about ourselves. Arguments are not properly evaluated by self-referring statements, such as, "I don't buy that argument" or "I am unpersuaded" or "I am skeptical" or "I am ...." The question at hand is not about oneself, but about whether the argument is sound. So talking about oneself is changing the subject, and avoiding the question at hand. The only two ways to refute an argument are to show the premises to be false or show that the conclusion does not follow from the premises. That is why none of the following ten statements refutes an argument:

(1) "That argument does not work."

(2) "That argument is unconvincing."

(3) "That argument is unhelpful."

(4) "That argument is old."

(5) "That argument is convenient."

(6) "That argument is tired/tiresome."

(7) "That argument is impossible."

(8) "That argument is unsatisfactory."

(9) "That argument is offensive."

(10) "That argument is unpersuasive."

Other points:

(11) "I'd like to suggest that ... " or "I suggest that ..." are not arguments; they are mere suggestions.

(12) An assertion is not an argument; it is merely an assertion.

(13) Avoid begging the question (i.e. presuming precisely what is in question between you and your interlocutor).

(14) We rightly accept or reject claims ultimately by their truth or falsity.

(15) "Your attempt rings hollow" transfers focus to the will (i.e. an 'attempt'), which is internal and subjective, rather than keeping the focus on one's argument, which is external and objective). It also uses an entirely subjective and vague evaluative criterion (i.e. "rings hollow"), rather than using "truth" and "falsity", "soundness" and unsoundness" as criteria.

(16) "That argument doesn't hold water" is not a refutation of an argument.

I will be updating this page on a regular basis, with the intention of making it into a more thorough guide for rational ecumenical dialogue. If you have any suggestions, I'd be glad to hear them.

Russian Orthodox Relations: a Warming and a Cooling

2009-11-14T13:37:00.004-06:00

Rorate Caeli posted an article two days ago indicating a possible forthcoming meeting between Pope Benedict and Patriarch Kirill, the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church. Yesterday the Telegraph published an article titled, "Russian Orthodox and Catholic Church may end 950-Year Rift." The article begins:

Relations between the Vatican and the Russian Orthodox Church have been tense for centuries, but in a sign that relations are finally thawing, Archbishop Ilarion, who heads the Russian Orthodox Church’s foreign relations department, said that both sides wanted a meeting, although he emphasised that problems remained.

Ilarion spoke of a rapprochement under Pope Benedict XVI that would allow for a meeting with the new Russian Orthodox Patriarch, Kiril, who took up his office in February after the death of the previous patriarch.

"There have been visits at a high level," said Illarion. "We are moving towards the moment when it will become possible to prepare a meeting between the Pope and the Moscow patriarch." (Continue reading)

This comes after yesterday's news that the Russian Orthodox Church may sever relations with the German Evangelical Church over the latter's election of Margot Kassman (in the photo at right) as its bishop.

The Russian Orthodox Church may sever relations with the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD), a major Protestant church of Western Europe that has elected a woman to chair the EKD's council.

The Orthodox clergy say this runs counter to evangelical principles. Analysts fear this could provoke a big inter-faith conflict.

Bishop Margot Kassmann, the first woman to lead the Evangelical Church in Germany, which unites some 24 million Protestants of more than 20 Lutheran and Reformed churches, was elected at the council's meeting on October 28. The 51-year-old bishop of Hanover is divorced and has four daughters.

"We plan to celebrate 50 years of dialog with the German Lutheran Church in late November and early December," Hilarion, the bishop of Volokolamsk and head of the Moscow patriarchy's external church relations department, said on Wednesday. "The celebrations will also mark the end of that dialog."

The Russian Orthodox Church does not accept female clergy. (Continue reading)

H/T: Koinonia, ByzTex, Ad Orientem.

The Early Church Fathers on Scripture (Prof. Feingold lectures)

2009-11-12T08:50:00.009-06:00

Christ Appears to two Apostles on the way to Emmaus
Duccio Buoninsegna (1308-1311)

Dr. Lawrence Feingold of Ave Maria University recently presented two lectures on the early Church Fathers and Scripture, continuing his series of lectures sponsored by the Association of Hebrew Catholics, and devoted to the subject of the early Church Fathers. Last week's lecture was titled "The Early Church Fathers on the Authorship of the Four Gospels." The most recent lecture was titled "Patristic Exegesis: Biblical Typology." Both lectures can be downloaded as audio files (mp3) here. Or listen to them by pressing 'play' below. In the latter lecture he explained how the early Church Fathers understood Scripture to have a spiritual sense in addition to its literal sense. This spiritual sense could include an allegorical, moral, or eschatological meaning. He gave more detailed treatment to some of the writings of St. Melito (bishop of Sardis around AD 170) and of Origen.

Next Wednesday (November 18), Dr. Feingold will be giving a lecture titled "The Early Church Fathers on Mary as the New Eve." If you have questions about the subject of Mary as the new Eve, and you would like Dr. Feingold to address those questions during his lecture (or the Q&A following the lecture), please send them to me as soon as possible at my email address listed in my profile (lower left of this page), and I will forward them to him. A very helpful book on the subject of Mary in the Fathers is titled Mary and the Fathers of the Church: The Blessed Virgin in Patristic Thought, by Luigi Gambero.

Early Church Fathers on the Authorship of the Four Gospels

Q&A

Patristic Exegesis: Biblical Typology

Q&A

Is Sola Scriptura in the Bible? A Reply to R.C. Sproul Jr.

2009-11-06T23:50:00.000-06:00

R.C. Sproul Jr. recently wrote a short article titled "Is Sola Scriptura in the Bible?" In light of our recent article treating the subject of sola scriptura, it might be helpful to examine Sproul's comments from a Catholic point of view. (Continue reading)

Solo Scriptura, Sola Scriptura, and the Question of Interpretive Authority

2009-11-03T23:47:00.002-06:00

According to Keith Mathison, over the last one hundred and fifty years Evangelicalism has replaced sola scriptura, according to which Scripture is the only infallible ecclesial authority, with solo scriptura, the notion that Scripture is the only ecclesial authority. The direct implication of solo scriptura is that each person is his own ultimate interpretive authority. Solo scriptura is, according to Mathison, an unbiblical position; proponents of sola scriptura should uphold the claim that Scripture is the only infallible authority, but should repudiate any position according to which individual Christians are the ultimate arbiters of Scriptural truth. In this article Neal Judisch and I argue that there is no principled difference between sola scriptura and solo scriptura with respect to the holder of ultimate interpretive authority, and that a return to apostolic succession is the only way to avoid the untoward consequences to which both solo scriptura and sola scriptura lead. (Continue reading)

The Internet Monk Interview

2009-11-02T05:32:00.014-06:00

I mentioned a few days ago that Michael Spencer (aka Internet Monk) had asked me to do an interview for his site. He is going to post the interview in five parts. He has already posted Part 1.

Especially over the last year or so Michael has been doing things that no other prominent Evangelicals (that I know of) are doing. It might be called an honest and transparent self-examination of Evangelicalism, seeking to determine its strengths and its weaknesses, its identity and its future. He's not doing it to be critical, but to save it. The fascinating part of this endeavor, from my point of view, is that in seeking to understand and preserve Evangelicalism, Michael, in a sense, has flung open the doors to receive insight from other Christian traditions. And that has begun an ecumenical conversation. Such conversations can easily devolve into ugliness, especially on the internet. But Michael runs a tight ship, and so has fostered a safe context in which these discussions can take place. The result is often that Baptists and Lutherans and Calvinists and Catholics and Pentecostals and Orthodox and Anglicans are all talking to each other in a friendly, respectful way, about their theology and practice. In this respect, what Michael is doing ecumenically is pioneering. So I'm grateful for his invitation to contribute to the discussion.

UPDATE: Part 2 is posted.

UPDATE: Part 3 is posted.

UPDATE: Part 4 is posted.

UPDATE: Part 5 is posted.

UPDATE: Michael's response.

Litany of the Saints

2009-11-01T23:59:00.002-06:00

Litany of the Saints

If Luther had lived in our time . . .

2009-10-31T00:01:00.004-05:00

... instead of doing this ...

... he might have used buses.

BSG

A Parable for Philosophers

2009-10-30T00:01:00.007-05:00

"Homer and Hesiod have ascribed to the gods all deeds
which among men are a reproach and a disgrace:
thieving, adultery, and deceiving one another."

- Xenophanes, quoted by Sextus Empiricus in Against the Mathematicians.

There was once a religion whose adherents believed that God sometimes spoke falsehoods. One day a lover of wisdom came and rebuked them for believing this about God. They first replied by denying that they believed this about God. "We do not call it speaking falsehoods," they said, "We think of it as God's speech not being restricted to matching reality." The lover of wisdom replied, "If it were speaking falsehoods, what would be different about it?" They were silent, looking down anxiously and shuffling their feet. Finally, their high priest responded, speaking not to the wisdom lover, but to the others concerning the wisdom lover, saying, "The power of the a priori notion that God's speech must match reality is patent in him." The others all immediately looked relieved, and joined in patronizing derision of the wisdom lover. In response, the lover of wisdom walked away quietly. That evening he nailed the following notice to the door of their temple: "Here a god is feared; here no god is worshiped."

When the notice was discovered the people rioted, dragged the wisdom lover outside the city and picked up stones to kill him. "Why do you seek to kill me? he asked. "Because you falsely claimed that we do not worship God," they replied. The lover of wisdom looked intently at them and said, "If my speech did not match reality, then I have imitated the God you claim to worship, in which case you should praise me. But if I did not speak falsely, then why are you angry?" No one could answer him. The wisdom lover turned and walked through their midst toward the neighboring city, and no one touched him or said another word to him.

The Early Church Fathers and Greek Philosophy (audio)

2009-10-29T00:15:00.004-05:00

Professor Feingold (Ave Maria University), gave a lecture last night to the Association of Hebrew Catholics. His lecture was titled, "The Early Church Fathers and Greek Philosophy: St. Justin, St. Clement of Alexandria, and Origen." I think this was his best lecture so far in his series on the early Church Fathers. (Download the audio of last night's lecture and the Q&A following the lecture here.) He explained the different possible attitudes toward Greek philosophy, drawing from the writings of St. Justin, St. Clement of Alexandria (represented in the icon at right), and Origen. He also explained the difference between rationalism and fideism, showed why they are both errors, and how Catholicism avoids both errors. In addition he showed how Origen's misuse of philosophy led him into certain errors, and how Tertullian's rejection of philosophy led him into error. Both rationalism and fideism are common errors today among Christians. Rationalism requires that every mystery of the faith be verified by reason; fideism denies that philosophy has a role as handmaiden to theology. Professor Feingold also discussed the Church Fathers' understanding of the passage in Exodus regarding the plundering of the Egyptians on the night they departed from Egypt. In the last part of the lecture he discussed Pope Benedict's Regensburg Address on the relation of faith and reason, and the attempt by some to de-hellenize Christianity.

A Reply from a Romery Person

2009-10-27T17:25:00.005-05:00

Last week as I was preparing to go out of town for a conference, I received an interview request from Michael Spencer (aka IMonk) regarding the recent announcement by the Vatican concerning the establishment of Personal Ordinariates. These Personal Ordinariates will allow former Anglicans to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church while retaining distinctive elements of Anglican "spiritual and liturgical patrimony." Among other things, Michael mentioned that he wanted to ask me some questions pertaining to a post titled "All the Romery People" authored by someone named JDK on a blog titled Mockingbird. I hadn't yet received the interview questions from Michael, so on the flight back to St. Louis, I wrote the following comments in response to JDK's "All the Romery People." (Continue reading)

Stanley Hauerwas on Reformation Sunday

2009-10-25T00:01:00.007-05:00

In the Reformation tradition, today is referred to as "Reformation Sunday." It is the Sunday in October closest to October 31, when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the Wittenberg door (in the photo at right) in 1517. Some Protestants treat Reformation Sunday as a day to be celebrated. That is understandable if one conceives of Luther as a 16th century Moses who led God's chosen people out of the "Babylonian Captivity" of the Church into the promised land of Protestantism. But there is another way to conceive Reformation Sunday, even as a Protestant. In this other way, while there were indeed abuses in the Church that needed correcting, the Protestant schism was a tragedy with terrible effects on the world, especially in Europe, as many people lost their faith in God altogether on account of religious wars and all sorts of incompatible interpretations of Scripture. Indifferentism, liberalism and rationalism filled the authority vacuum. This schism to this day prevents Protestants and Catholics from sharing the same Eucharist, which is that sacrament by which we are one Body. (1 Cor 10:17) For these reasons, the other perspective sees Reformation Sunday as a day of mourning, not rejoicing. Celebrating an event causes the celebrants to overlook what was harmful about the event. The danger of celebrating Reformation Sunday is that one can, at the same time, even without intention, end up celebrating schism, when instead we should be mourning this schism, so as to remind ourselves of the daily need to be working to resolve this schism.

Stanley Hauerwas helps us see Reformation Sunday from that other perspective. His article can be found here.

Bulgarian Orthodox Leader Affirms Desire for Unity with the Catholic Church

2009-10-24T05:00:00.002-05:00

Bulgarian Orthodox Leader Affirms Desire for Unity

VATICAN CITY, OCT. 22, 2009 (Zenit.org).- A Bulgarian Orthodox prelate told Benedict XVI of his desire for unity, and his commitment to accelerate communion with the Catholic Church.

At the end of Wednesday’s general audience, Bishop Tichon, head of the diocese for Central and Western Europe of the Patriarchate of Bulgaria, stated to the Pope, “We must find unity as soon as possible and finally celebrate together,” L’Osservatore Romano reported.

“People don’t understand our divisions and our discussions,” the bishop stated. He affirmed that he will “not spare any efforts” to work for the quick restoration of “communion between Catholics and Orthodox.”
Bishop Tichon said that “the theological dialogue that is going forward in these days in Cyprus is certainly important, but we should not be afraid to say that we must find as soon as possible the way to celebrate together.”

“A Catholic will not become an Orthodox and vice versa, but we must approach the altar together,” he added.
The prelate told the Pontiff that “this aspiration is a feeling that arose from the works of the assembly” of his diocese, held in Rome, in which all the priests and two delegates from every Bulgarian Orthodox parish took part.

“We have come to the Pope to express our desire for unity and also because he is the Bishop of Rome, the city that hosted our assembly,” he stated.

H/T: Overheard in the Sacristy

Tertullian and St. Cyprian: On the Unity of the Church (audio)

2009-10-23T18:22:00.000-05:00

Professor Feingold's fifth lecture in his series on the early Church Fathers is now available for download here. The title of the lecture is "Tertullian and St. Cyprian: On the Unity of the Church." This lecture in particular is directly relevant to the purpose of this blog, in pursuing the reconciliation of all Christians in full visible unity. Tertullian and St. Cyprian [represented in the icon at right] were both African Christians, writing at the beginning and middle of the third century, respectively. In their writings we have a window into the early Church's understanding of the nature of the Church and the principle of the Church's unity. As you listen, ask yourself this: What are the implications of Tertullian and St. Cyprian's understanding of the Church for contemporary Christians, especially for Protestant-Catholic reunion? If you have thoughts or questions about the lecture (especially regarding Church unity), please free to comment below.

William Chellis: "Why Rome is not my enemy"

2009-10-21T00:01:00.032-05:00

Bill Chellis, the pastor of Rochester Reformed Presbyterian Church in Rochester, New York, recently wrote a post titled, "Why Rome is not my enemy." He writes:

Some readers may be disturbed about the DRC trend toward inclusion of Roman Catholics. I wish to say a word in response. I am not unfamiliar with the Reformed Confessions' descriptions of the Bishop of Rome as the anti-Christ. I am also perfectly aware that our theologians have often argued that the Mass as a form of idolatry. I understand that there are many conservative Protestant for which these statements are meaningful. While I understand these things, I cannot affirm them. In fact, the more I learn about Roman Catholic theology and church history, the more respect I have for our brothers and sister in Christ within the Roman Catholic communion.

(Continue reading)

I'm deeply grateful for Bill's charitable spirit toward the Catholic Church. This kind of approach by Protestant leaders is a beautiful example of the work of the Holy Spirit in bringing Christians toward unity through the charity that seeks unity in the truth. In this stance of charity, openness and mutual respect, ecumenical dialogue can be fruitful and efficacious.

Pope Benedict Creates a New Structure for Anglicans to Enter into Full Communion with the Catholic Church

2009-10-20T08:11:00.010-05:00

Damian Thompson's report is here. Fr. Z's comments are here. See also the CNA report and the AP article. The CDF document is here. The Joint Statement by The Archbishop of Westminster and The Archbishop of Canterbury (both pictured at right) can be found here.

This action by the Holy See opens the way for the reception into the Catholic Church of at least 400,000 Anglicans who in 2007 had requested full visible communion with the Catholic Church. This is one significant step in healing the schism that took place under King Henry VIII in the 16th century, separating Anglicans from the Catholic Church for now almost five hundred years. As a former Anglican myself, I'm delighted by this news. For all those praying and working for the reconciliation of all Christians in full visible unity, this news is a cause for celebration.

UPDATE: The Primate of the TAC responds.

UPDATE 2: Video

H/T: Kansas Catholic

Grace in action: Mother Teresa, an image of the Church

2009-10-19T00:01:00.013-05:00

Six years ago today, Mother Teresa was beatified by Pope John Paul II, and became Blessed Teresa of Calcutta. At her death, the former U.N. Secretary-General Javier Pérez de Cuéllar said: "She is the United Nations. She is peace in the world." In this way, in her own person she typifies the Church, which in its catholicity is the United Nations, and as Christ's Body is peace in the world. We are Christ's hands and feet. The head cannot say to the feet, "I have no need of you." (1 Cor 12:21)

Archbishop Burke: Contraception and Abortion

2009-10-18T00:01:00.007-05:00

Archbishop Burke is making history today, and by his most recent appointment stands poised to influence the future direction of Catholicism in America. Here I wish to talk about something he said recently. But first let me explain.

There comes a time when to remain silent is to become complicit. In the face of evils so grievous, there is only one upright option; we must speak up, speak out and do everything in our power to resist them. Which evils? Things like this, and this, and this. How do we respond to such evils? We have to expose the falsehood of the underlying causes, and show to the world the way of life and truth. The underlying causes of these evils include fundamental philosophical and theological errors. One such error is the nominalism that denies that things have natures, or that we can know the natures of things. When nominalism is combined with empiricism, the result is a scientism by which an abortionist sees no ontological difference between an unborn human and an unborn dog. If a person loses sight of that ontological difference, he has lost sight of the basis for ethical differences between dogs and humans. Without recognizing that ontological difference, one cannot see the intrinsic value and intrinsic right to life of a human being. That leads to the mistaken notion that the unborn child is valuable only if he or she is wanted by his or her mother, and that the child has 'rights' only if human laws grant rights to the child.

Another fundamental philosophical error is John Locke's notion of personhood as self-consciousness, according to which there can be a human being without a human person, when self-consciousness seems to be lost or not yet manifest. This error allows people to think that when they are killing unborn human beings, they are not killing human persons, only potential persons. It allows people to think that in starving Terri Schiavo, no person was being starved, only a 'vegetable.' In actuality, wherever there is a human being, there is a human person, because a person is an individual substance of a rational nature, as Boethius explained long ago. A human being is not a person inhabiting a body, or a body occupied by a another being -- i.e. a person. Rather, a human being is a human person. Wherever there is a human being, that human being is a human person, whether or not he or she presently has or manifests self-consciousness.

Another fundamental philosophical error, is an error about sex. In an age in which sex education is so strongly emphasized, it is no small irony that our culture is deeply uninformed about the philosophy of sex. We have become experts in the technique of sex, but we have become ignorant of the telos of sex. We have become like little children who have not yet learned of the "birds and the bees," because we have forgotten what sex is for. Like children in sweatshops we know all the ways this product can be put together, but we have no idea what is its purpose. So, as children do when they do not know the purpose of a thing, by default it becomes a toy. But life and death, joy and laughter, trust and betrayal, love and abuse, flourishing and extinction, fulfillment and suffering lie in potency in this 'toy.' And that is why it is no toy at all.

And that sets up what I want to say about some recent comments by Archbishop Burke. Last month he delivered a talk in which he said the following:

A second context of my remarks is the essential relationship of the respect for human life and the respect for the integrity of marriage and the family. The attack on the innocent and defenseless life of the unborn has its origin in an erroneous view of human sexuality, which attempts to eliminate, by mechanical or chemical means, the essentially procreative nature of the conjugal act. The error maintains that the artificially altered conjugal act retains its integrity. The claim is that the act remains unitive, even though the procreative nature of the act has been radically violated. In fact, it is not unitive, for one or both of the partners withholds an essential part of the gift which is the essence of the conjugal union. The so-called "contraceptive mentality" is essentially anti-life. Many forms of so-called contraception are, in fact, abortifacient, that is, they destroy, at its beginning, a life which has already been conceived.

The manipulation of the conjugal act, as Pope Paul VI prophetically observed, has led to many forms of violence to marriage and family life (Pope Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Humanae vitae, "On the Proper Regulation of the Propagation of Offspring," 25 July 1968, no. 17). Through the spread of the contraceptive mentality, especially among the young, human sexuality is no longer seen as the gift of God, which draws a man and a woman together, in a bond of lifelong and faithful love, crowned by the gift of new human life, but as a tool for personal gratification. Once sexual union is no longer seen to be, by its very nature, procreative, human sexuality is abused in ways that are profoundly harmful and even destructive of individuals and of society itself. One has only to think of the devastation which is daily wrought in our nation by the multi-million dollar industry of pornography. Essential to the advancement of the culture of life is the proclamation of the truth about the conjugal union, in its fullness, and the correction of the contraceptive thinking which fears life, which fears procreation.

Archbishop Burke reminds us of the prophetic words of Pope Paul VI regarding the social consequences of disconnecting sex from its intrinsic telos by accepting the use of contraceptives. Given that disconnect, warned Pope Paul VI, sexuality will come to be reconceived as a channel for self-gratification, as opposed to self-donation. But when self-gratification becomes the conceived end of sexuality, then anyone or anything obstructing the way to that self-gratification is conceived as an impediment to the fulfillment of one's sexuality. And Pope Paul VI was right. In the sex-as-self-gratification mindset, when an unborn child frustrates that self-gratification, the child must be destroyed [warning, obscene language at the link]. In this way, contraception is intrinsically linked to the violence of abortion.

Many Christians do not realize that prior to 1930, all Protestant denominations agreed with the Catholic Church and with all Christians since the first century, that contraception is sinful. The Anglicans at the Lambeth Conference in 1930 were the first Christians in the history of Christianity to deny the immorality of contraception. Pope Pius XI responded to the Lambeth decision by writing Casti connubii, in which he taught that whenever the marital act is "deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life, [this] is an offense against the law of God and of nature." (Casti connubii, 56) All Christians had always understood that it was wrong to treat our sexual organs or the sexual act as a toy to do with according to our pleasure. But soon after the Anglicans gave in, all other Protestant denominations went along. Now, even the most conservative Protestant denominations think nothing of contraception, and many Catholics do not follow the Church's teaching against the use of contraceptives.

But let's consider some uncomfortable questions. What if there is an intrinsic connection between the popular acceptance of contraceptives, and the legalization of abortion? And what if there is an intrinsic connection between the acceptance of contraception among Christians, and the popular acceptance of contraception? If so, then there is an intrinsic connection between the acceptance of contraception among Christians, and the legalization of abortion. In that case there is a deep contradiction between picketing in front of an abortion clinic, and using contraceptives or being in a Christian denomination that condemns abortion but condones the use of contraceptives.

Given this intrinsic causal relation between contraceptives and abortion, if Catholics and Protestants seek to stand united in opposition to abortion, we must stand united in opposition to the use of contraceptives and the contraceptive mentality. As important and worthwhile as protesting outside of abortion clinics is (especially in saving the lives of children whose mothers are persuaded by our presence not to abort their child), we are there confronting the deadly symptoms of the moral disease, not its fundamental cause. To stop abortion we must teach society the "birds and the bees" in its true sense. We must show the intrinsic evil of contracepted sex by showing the personal and teleological nature of sex in its God-given beauty and fullness. But this teaching cannot be only in words; it must first be in deeds. If Christians wish to stop abortion, we must throw out our prophylactics, and get off the pill. Protestants and Catholics cannot effectively teach the "birds and the bees" to society until we ourselves know and practice the virtue of chastity, i.e. true sexual excellence.

Becoming Catholic: Deconstruction of a Deconstruction

2009-10-15T14:38:00.110-05:00

Anthony Bradley recently wrote a short article in World magazine titled "Church hoppin' to Rome."Anthony's intention in the article is to address some of the conditions within Evangelical Protestantism that contribute to Protestants becoming Catholic. In his article he refers to a 2002 JETS article by Scot McKnight, writing:

In the September 2002 edition of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Scot McKnight’s article, "From Wheaton to Rome: Why Evangelicals Become Roman Catholic," offered good insight regarding the phenomenon of Protestants converting to Catholicism. The list included: (1) a desire for certainty, (2) a desire for history, (3) a desire for unity, and (4) a desire for authority.

Anthony then goes on to discuss each of these four desires. It should be pointed out that Scot's list leaves out the most important desire, the one that trumps all the others: the desire for truth. By this omission Scot implies that Protestants who become Catholic are doing so not primarily because of their desire for truth, and thus not because in their search for truth they believe they have found the true Church Christ founded, and in it the true doctrine of Christ handed down from the Apostles. In this respect Scot's deconstruction of Protestants who become Catholic implicitly treats them as persons who love something else more than truth, and are willing to sacrifice truth to attain it. That would not be a charitable assumption. In fact, it would be a subtle ad hominem, impugning the character of all those Protestants who become Catholic, and thus discrediting their decision to seek full communion with the Catholic Church.

In Scot's article we see that when converts to Catholicism talk about being motivated by a desire for the truth, he construes that as a desire for certainty. It is as though, for him, they aren't sacrificing truth for certainty; what they really want is certainty. But truth and certainty are not the same. Certainty is a subjective phenomenon, and many people who are certain about a position later come to discover that they were wrong about that position. Many Muslims and Mormons, for example, are certain that they are right. But presumably Scot would agree that Muslims and Mormons are in error in many important respects. Hence, since truth and certainty are not the same thing, it follows that the desire for certainty is not the same as the desire for truth. Therefore, Scot has indeed excluded "desire for truth" from his list.

Some forms of postmodernism construe the desire for truth as a desire for certainty, as though truth reduces to certainty, or is something entirely beyond our grasp as humans, and hence entirely beyond our capacity to desire or attain. Given that Protestants who become Catholic describe their journey as motivated by a desire for truth, an attempt to deconstruct their conversions as driven fundamentally by a desire for certainty, not for truth, deconstructs itself by revealing the influence of that postmodern philosophy.

St. Irenaeus and the Battle against Gnosticism (audio)

2009-10-15T00:31:00.001-05:00

Professor Feingold's fourth lecture in his series on the Early Church Fathers is now available for download as an mp3 here. In this lecture he speaks about the second-century Gnosticism that St. Irenaeus refuted, and summarizes various aspects of the theology we find in the writing of St. Irenaeus, bishop of Lyon, who lived from about AD 135 to around AD 200. St. Irenaeus was a pupil under St. Polycarp, who had sat under the Apostle John. Professor Feingold shows that the faith St. Irenaeus defends is the Catholic faith.

Professor Feingold on St. Ignatius bishop of Antioch (audio)

2009-10-08T14:30:00.000-05:00

Last night the Association of Hebrew Catholics sponsored a lecture by Professor Lawrence Feingold (Ave Maria University) on St. Ignatius of Antioch, who was martyred about AD 107. The audio of the lecture can be downloaded as an mp3 here.

St. Ignatius was a direct disciple of St. John (d. AD 100), and quite possibly had been ordained by St. Peter. For that reason his testimony gives us a window into the mind of the Apostles and into the Scriptures and the early Church. Pope Benedict calls St. Ignatius the "Doctor of Unity," because he teaches the basis for unity and the nature and sinfulness of schism. Concerning St. Ignatius' seven epistles, Cardinal Newman wrote that "the whole system of Catholic doctrine may be discovered, at least in outline, not to say in parts filled up, in the course of them." In his lecture Professor Feingold shows that to be the case, laying out St. Ignatius' participatory understanding of redemptive suffering and Christ's Passion, the hierarchical structure of the Church through sacramental authority in succession from the Apostles, and the implications regarding the Eucharist and schism, the primacy of the See of Rome, the true humanity and true divinity of Christ and the implications for the Eucharist and works of charity, St. Ignatius' understanding of the fulfillment of Judaism in Christianity, and his reference to the practice of consecrated virginity. The letters of St. Ignatius of Antioch can be read online here.

Fr. Barron: Protestantism and Authority

2009-10-03T00:53:00.001-05:00

"Clement of Rome: First Known Exercise of Papal Primacy"

2009-10-01T11:13:00.001-05:00

Yesterday Professor Feingold (Ave Maria University) gave a lecture titled "Clement of Rome: First Known Exercise of Papal Primacy." Audio of the lecture can be found here.

Horton on being made "One Flesh with Christ"

2009-09-27T22:27:00.024-05:00

At the West Coast Ligonier conference, Dr. Michael Horton was asked the following question:

"You said that we are not an extension of Christ’s kingdom. How does that cohere with our being the body of Christ? Our being the hands and feet of Christ, as it were?"

(Continue reading)

"I unite you to My Passion"

2009-09-23T05:10:00.016-05:00

St. Padre Pio

I heard this voice: ‘I unite you to my Passion’. And immediately, the vision having disappeared, I came to and I saw these signs from which blood was flowing. I did not have them before.” (Source)

Union with Christ is for us now a union with His Passion. "We are fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him in order that we may also be glorified with Him." (Rom 8:17) Hence it follows that the union of Christ's followers, one with another, is perfected through suffering, even our suffering, joined to His. Stigmata are a sign to all Christians of the continuing presence of God with His Church, and of our call to lay aside our pride, and take up our cross. Our crosses and wounds are usually not extraordinary as were the stigmata of St. Padre Pio. But by dying to our own primacy, even in little ways, we find our true place in His Mystical Body under His Headship, and our true home in that eternal Kingdom. Only in so dying is our life given out to others, and Christ's through ours. Bearing the wounds of Christ is a great honor, as Peter recognized himself not worthy to be crucified upright as was the Lord. There is no greater humiliation in the eyes of men than death upon the cross of Christ, but no greater glory in the eternal life that awaits us, for those who share Christ's cross with Him. The dying one, through suffering, sees the end, and the End. For that reason he is quick to seek peace and make peace, because he sees himself with another on the way with him, together approaching the Judge. (Matt 5:25) This is now our opportunity as Christ's followers, to seek peace with one another, in charity and patience, yet with the urgency of those who know they are dying, and so have little time to give what they can. Christ came preaching peace to those who were far away and to those who were near. (Eph 2:17) What will our generation have suffered, and what we will have sacrificed, to bring the peace of reconciliation and reunion to those with whom we are on the way? What Christ said to St. Padre Pio, He says to us as His people: "I unite you to My Passion." While we have the opportunity, may we bear His cross for the joy that is set before us, despising the shame, to bring to others the peace He brought to the whole world, and especially to the household of faith.

St. Padre Pio, pray for us, that with God's help we may heal those wounds that separate Christ's followers, bearing them in ourselves instead.

Social Trinitarianism and the Catholic Faith

2009-09-22T07:15:00.002-05:00

The Shield of the Trinity, informed by the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed.

In his chapter titled “Social Trinity and Tritheism,” Cornelius Plantinga Jr., the current president of Calvin Theological Seminary, argues in support of what is known as ’social trinitarianism.’ This position is not compatible with the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity, so here I want to show the difference between the two positions, and why they are incompatible. (continue reading)

Benedict XVI receives Orthodox Archbishop Hilarion

2009-09-20T00:02:00.003-05:00

Optimistic comments earlier this week by the Most Rev. Paolo Pezzi, Catholic Archbishop of Moscow about the future of Catholic-Orthodox reunification elicited quite a 'buzz' in the blogosphere. A few days later, Orthodox Archbishop Hilarion, president of the Department for External Church Affairs of the Patriarchate of Moscow, arrived in Rome for a planned meeting with Pope Benedict.

Here is a selection from Archbishop Hilarion's speech in Rome delivered on Thursday, September 17.

We live in a de-Christianized world, in a time that some define—mistakenly—as post-Christian. Contemporary society, with its practical materialism and moral relativism, is a challenge to us all. The future of humanity depends on our response, as Christians, to this challenge, and maybe even whether life continues on our planet. It is a common challenge and also our answer must be common. Only together can we put forward all the spiritual and moral value of the Christian faith; only together can we offer our Christian vision for the family, only together can we affirm our concept of social justice, of a more equal distribution of goods.

These moral values are traditional because they have been affirmed by Christians for 20 centuries and have formed our cultural and European civilization. They are, at the same time, very new and modern, because the Gospel of Jesus is eternally new and modern. With this common challenge, the contemporary world challenges us, and we Christians must be together. It's time to pass from confrontation to solidarity, mutual respect, and esteem. I would say without hesitating that we must pass to mutual love, living out Jesus’s commandment to love one another. As Jesus said, all will know you are disciples of mine if you have love for the other. This is what our preaching demands and it can be effective, it can be convincing, also in our contemporary world, if we are able to live this mutual love among us as Christians. (my emphases)

Please continue to pray for the reconciliation and reunion of Orthodox, Protestants, and Catholics.

H/T: ByzTex

Ecclesial Deism or Catholicism?

2009-09-19T00:46:00.005-05:00

David Cloud provides an example of ecclesial deism when he writes:

"The fact is that the "early Fathers" were mostly heretics!"

At what point does one's own disagreement with the early Church Fathers become evidence against one's own position, rather than an indication that the early Church Fathers were "mostly heretics"? St. Justin Martyr, born around the time that the Apostle John died, describes a Catholic mass in the video below, explaining in his Apology that they had received their belief and practice from the Apostles. St. Justin's testimony counts far more than does the testimony of a contemporary twenty-first century figure, precisely because of St. Justin's closer proximity to the Apostles. So claiming that the early Fathers were "mostly heretics" is in that respect self-refuting. But it is forthright and correct in its recognition of the distinctively Catholic nature of the early Church Fathers.

Why Protestantism has no “visible catholic Church”

2009-09-16T06:58:00.011-05:00

St. Peter (c. 1708-13)
Pierre Etienne Monnot
San Giovanni in Laterano, Rome

Part of the content of the Christian faith is the "one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church," because that is one article of the Church’s Creed. Concerning the Church, the Westminster Confession of Faith reads:

The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; and of their children: and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.

But, as I show below, Protestantism itself has no visible catholic Church. It has only denominations, congregations, believers and their children. Within Protestantism there is not some one additional entity to which the term “visible catholic Church” refers, consisting of these denominations, congregations, believers and their children.
(continue reading)

Beckwith and George: Can You Be Catholic and Evangelical?

2009-09-12T10:00:00.003-05:00

On September 3, Wheaton College hosted a friendly discussion between professors Timothy George and Francis Beckwith focused primarily on the following question: Can you be Catholic and Evangelical? Timothy George is a Southern Baptist and dean of Beeson Divinity School, and a co-signer of The Gift of Salvation. Francis Beckwith was the president of the Evangelical Theological Society when he reverted to the Catholic Church in 2006; he is now Professor of Philosophy & Church-State Studies at Baylor University. The video of the discussion and the following Q&A can be found here.

Such a discussion, and the way it was conducted, are very encouraging signs with respect to the goal of seeking the reunion of all Christians, especially Protestants and Catholics. In my opinion this event is exactly the sort of conversation Protestants and Catholics should be having. The discussion often just touched on various points of disagreement, without going into significant depth. But the purpose of the discussion was not to go into depth on these issues, only to sketch out the overall picture and develop a better mutual understanding of the common ground and the differences between Evangelicals and Catholics in relation to the question that titled the event.

My comments below focus only on Professor George’s statements. My purpose is to advance the discussion of our disagreements, by pointing to the deeper reasons underlying our disagreements.

(continue reading at Called To Communion)

Does the Bible Teach Sola Fide?

2009-09-04T20:08:00.005-05:00

St. Paul Enthroned with Saints and Angels (c. 1360)
Unknown Italian Master
Collezione Vittorio Cini, Venice

One primary impediment to the reconciliation of Protestants and Catholics concerns the doctrine of justification. Protestants endorse justification by faith alone (sola fide), while the Council of Trent condemned justification by faith alone. (Session 6, Canon 9) The question I ask here is this: Is there any Biblical evidence for "justification by faith alone"? (continue reading)

Supernatural Temperance in the Mystical Body

2009-08-29T21:30:00.006-05:00

Ecclesial consumerism manifests itself more explicitly in certain sorts of doctrines. Health and Wealth is one of them; nobody wants suffering. Assurance is another such doctrine. Recently I participated in a few conversations about Catholic and Protestant conceptions of assurance. The most telling aspect of the conversations was that truth seemed to take second place to desireability. I heard words such as "like," "prefer," "attracted," "couldn't handle" and "frightful." The terms "truth" and "false" disappeared. Switch out the nouns, and I could have been listening to an order being placed at a fast-food 'drive-thru.' To be sure, if "once saved always saved" is the standard of security one has come to expect, then without a developed sense of the difference between mortal and venial sin, the possibility of losing one's salvation is frightening and therefore repugnant. But such a person can recognize that truth must remain his foremost objective, because a theology guaranteeing that salvation cannot be lost, if false, is giving false assurance and endangering his soul. Ecclesial consumerism, however, is not ultimately about conforming to divinely revealed truth, but about "happiness on prescription; isn't that the whole point of getting religion?"

If I were constructing my own personalized religion, I'd make sure it guaranteed health and wealth, prevented all suffering, discomfort, and minor annoyances, as well as granted indubitable assurance of my elect-to-glory status, and ensured that 'Church' would always be "fun" and not "boring." But I would be like an unsupervised child in a candy store, on the short road to diabetes. To become like a child, in relation to an omniscient and perfectly loving Father, means that we receive revelation from Him in trust and humility, not ordering it up as we like it. The difference between those two stances toward God is the difference between heaven and hell; this is precisely why ecclesial consumerism is no trifling matter. Made-to-order religion was the downfall of our first parents as they chose what seemed in their own eyes to be a delightful and desirable means to become truly happy like God. Jude Simpson, in the video above, plays a modern day Eve.

As I wrote elsewhere, ecclesial consumerism "turns things exactly upside-down, creating Church in our image, rather than conforming ourselves to the Church that Christ founded, and in doing so conforming to the image of Christ." We conform to Christ by conforming to His Body, the Church. I'm not speaking of some mere abstraction called "the catholic Church," some invisible mental construct to which anyone in schism can claim to be already united and already conformed. I'm speaking of the Catholic Church, headed by the two hundred and sixty-fifth successor of that one Apostle to whom Christ the God-Man gave the keys of the Kingdom, that is, the Church.

Ecclesial consumerism also lies behind the divisions that now separate Christians into so many schisms. It operates not only on the demand side, but also on the supply side, feeding and enlarging the demand. The ecclesial consumerist is reluctant to acknowledge the logical implications of the myriad conflicting interpretations. These conflicting interpretations entail that a great many persons who claim to speak for God, cannot possibly be speaking for God. That is because God is one, and God cannot contradict Himself. These many persons are the demand side's self-accumulated ear-itchers in the Christian market of ear-itching. He who has ears to hear, let him hear, said Christ. But he who has ears to be itched, has forgotten what ears are for, exchanging the pursuit of truth for the pursuit of its concomitant pleasure. "God-Bearer" is fine, they say, but "Mother of God" gives offense to our ears. Talk of absolute assurance is delightful; talk about mortal sin is repugnant to our ears. And so on.

The unity that Christ wants His followers to have only comes through supernatural humility, through accepting in faith and trust the one divine message as explicated by the divinely authorized teacher, and the one divine life as offered to us by the divinely authorized priest. Mary the Second Eve, demonstrates this humility before God in her submission to divine authority: "be it done unto me according to thy will." She recognized the divine authority of the one whom God had sent to speak on His behalf. In Gethsemane Christ Himself demonstrates for us this humility before His Father. "Not my will but thine be done." As His human will conformed to His divine will, so our will as individuals must conform to the will of His Body, the Church. To take up our cross is to conform to His crucified Body.

For that reason, our pursuit of truth cannot limit itself to true interpretations of Scripture, but must also seek to discover the true Church, i.e. the very Church that Christ founded, and to which belongs the authoritative determination both of the canon and interpretation of Scripture. The same two stances that are the difference between heaven and hell, are manifested in our stance toward His Body, the Church. The same Apostle who learned that to persecute Christ's Body is to persecute Christ (Acts 9:4-5), understood that to give ourselves in service to His Body is to give ourselves in service to Him. St. Paul knew that if we love Christ, we will devote ourselves to building up His Body, the Church.

But how do we build up the Church in unity? Within the soul of the individual, according to Aquinas, the virtue of temperance restrains us from desires and pleasures contrary to reason. Furthermore, in Book IV of the Republic Plato describes the virtue of temperance at the level of society as a kind of harmony grounded in the agreement of each part of the society concerning who is the rightful ruler. Therefore because grace builds on nature, supernatural temperance within the Mystical Body can likewise be described rightly as a kind of harmony grounded in the agreement of each member concerning who has the primacy in magisterial authority. Supernatural temperance in the Body of Christ is the agreement of each member regarding who holds the keys of the Kingdom. In this way, supernatural temperance as a virtue of the Mystical Body restrains her members from the ecclesial desires and delights that are contrary to the divinely guided determinations and counsels of her visible head. Find the primacy in magisterial authority, and we find not only the antidote to ecclesial consumerism, but also the key to ecclesial unity, the principium unitatis (principle of unity). Building up the Church in unity through this supernatural virtue thus requires the pursuit of agreement among all Christians concerning who now holds those keys.

Video H/T: Energetic Processions

A Catholic Reflection on the Meaning of Suffering

2009-08-09T22:19:00.001-05:00

If God is all powerful, and truly seeks our good, then why does He allow bad things to happen to us? Why does God allow all the suffering we experience in this life, if He loves us and is all-powerful and all-knowing? What does the Catholic Church say about the meaning of suffering?

We believe in an all-loving, all-power God. Not only does all love come from God, but the Apostle John says that God is Love. And we know that genuine love seeks the good for the beloved. If you love someone, you want that person to have what is truly good for him, what truly and most perfectly makes him happy. But God loves us infinitely more than we love each other. Therefore we know that God wants us to have what is good for us, what truly makes us happy.

But that is just what makes the sufferings of this present life so odd, perplexing, even apparently contradictory. If God is all powerful, and truly seeks our good, then why does He allow all the suffering we experience in this life?

(Continue reading)

An Ecumenical Moment for One

2009-07-31T08:24:00.006-05:00

Russell E. Saltzman

Russell E. Saltzman is pastor of Ruskin Heights Lutheran Church, Kansas City, Missouri. Today, his article titled "An Ecumenical Moment for One" was published in the "On the Square" online forum of First Things. Here's an excerpt:

Frankly, the creation of one more Lutheran church body in America is a dauntingly depressive possibility. I'm not entirely certain I want anything to do with it . . . unless we're talking about a ministerium organized to open dialogue on becoming a Roman Catholic affiliate, congregations, pastors, the whole caboodle, eventually seeking full communion with the bishop of Rome. If Rome cooperates, this ought to be pretty easy. Just think of us as inactive members seeking reinstatement. In my congregation, an officially inactive member is welcomed back to full fellowship by making a contribution and receiving Holy Communion, and sometimes we've been known to even skip the contribution part. Couldn't the Church of Rome handle that? There might be a few subsidiary issues to settle, but get us inside first and everything else becomes manageable. What is needed here is a brave archbishop or two, together taking cognizance of what is about to happen to the ELCA, and stepping forward as potential shepherds. Can't really call it stealing sheep if the previous shepherd has run off, can you?

No, I'm not being facetious. Not altogether. The original intent of the sixteenth century Reformers wasn't to start a new church but to be a witness for evangelical reform within the one church. Our Lutheran confessional documents—notably the Augsburg Confession of 1530—forcefully argues that nothing Lutherans taught was contrary to the faith of the church catholic, nor even contrary to that faith held by the Church of Rome. As it has happened, much to our Lutheran chagrin, late twentieth century Rome itself become a better witness to an evangelical gospel than early twenty-first century Lutherans have proved capable of being. And for all the radical Lutheran polemic coming after Augsburg—you know, about the pope being the latest anti-Christ sitting on the throne of the whore of Babylon—truth is, these days, I get far less trouble from the bishop of Rome than I get from my own bishop.

Some time in the mid-1980s Richard John Neuhaus told me—with no little optimism, I might add—that fifty Lutheran pastors and their congregations seeking fellowship with Rome would become an ecumenical moment. After he himself became Roman Catholic following formation of the ELCA he lowered the number to a more modest twenty-five. Facing the August convention of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and its inevitable aftermath, I'm wondering, how about one?

Read the whole article.

Ecclesial Deism: Interview Podcast

2009-07-30T00:18:00.008-05:00

Assumption of St. John the Evangelist

Taddeo Gaddi (1348-1353)
Collezione Vittorio Cini, Venice

Tom Riello recently interviewed me regarding my Ecclesial Deism article. Listen to the podcast here on Called to Communion.

The Church Fathers

2009-07-19T00:01:00.002-05:00

H/T: Return to Rome

Philosophy and Faith: Two replies

2009-07-18T00:09:00.001-05:00

I wrote two brief replies involving the relation of philosophy and faith. One is to R. Scott Clark, and the other is to James Jordan.

The Gospel and the Meaning of Life

2009-07-16T00:10:00.003-05:00

The Last Judgment (c. 1450)
Fra Angelico
Staatliche Museen, Berlin

My post titled, "The Gospel and the Meaning of Life" can be found here on Called to Communion.

Branches or Schisms?

2009-07-09T07:05:00.003-05:00

My latest post, "Branches or Schisms?" is now up at Called to Communion. It is a revised version of one I posted here last year.

Bartholomew to Kyrill: "Dear Brother"

2009-07-08T17:32:00.003-05:00

Patriarch Kyrill of Moscow and Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople

"Dear brother! Even though the atheist regime has fallen, the atheist practices of hedonism and religious indifference flourish everywhere with all its consequences," the Patriarch said.

"Mass murder is committed in God’s name and entire populations are uprooted from their land. There is a disgraceful trade in human beings and an upsurge in nationalism and religious fanaticism. [. . .] Instead of standing united and offering convincing responses to the challenges of a desperately troubled world, we Christians are troubled by intrigue and divisions, scornfully unwilling to be conscious of our responsibility towards Our Pastor Jesus Christ, who wants to see love, peace and unity prevail among us. For only then, shall we be able to set a good example for the nations [of the world] and thus for the Father of Light! [. . .] Indeed our last meeting in Geneva, which took place in an atmosphere of unity, stands as an example and a point of reference, and this not only for Orthodox Christians." (emphasis added)

(Read more)

Ecclesial Deism

2009-07-06T07:14:00.006-05:00

Assumption of St. John the Evangelist

Taddeo Gaddi (1348-1353)
Collezione Vittorio Cini, Venice

St. Irenaeus and St. Clement of Alexandria, who both lived during the second century, tell us that after the Apostle John returned from exile on Patmos, he remained at Ephesus "till Trajan’s time." Trajan became emperor in AD 98. According to the tradition, St. John was the last of the twelve Apostles to die. When the angels carried his soul into Heaven, was the Church then left to fall into heresy and apostasy? (continue reading)

Like Head, Like Body

2009-07-06T05:35:00.007-05:00

The Supper at Emmaus
Diego Rodriguez de Silva y Velázquez (1620)
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

"Then their eyes were opened and they recognized Him." (St. Luke 24:31)

"If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you." (St. John 15:18)

Those who claim that Christ is "our present experience of life-giving love that transcends the human condition," had they lived in Jerusalem from AD 30-33, would have looked upon the man from Nazareth and seen at most only a rabbi who teaches us about the Christ-experience and through whose illumination we can encounter the Christ-experience. They would have been utterly scandalized by His claim to be God, but more likely they would have treated it as a mere metaphor, or as an invitation to us all to join him in discovering our own inner divine identity. They would have been many things rolled into one: Ebionites, because for them the rabbi from Nazareth was a mere man. They would have been Docetists, because for them the transcendent Christ-experience is not to be identified with any particular human being, though they grant that at one time in history the transcendent Christ-experience was most seemingly present in the rabbi from Nazareth. For them the true universal and timeless Christ-experience did not actually become, and could not become, this Nazarene, but is already subconsciously within every person, to be encountered concretely through inner exploration and deepening self-consciousness. They would have been Nestorians, because for them the teacher from Nazareth came to an inner harmony of self-discovery, and thus became for us a channel, one among many, in which we may encounter within us by transcendental enlightenment the one divine Christ-experience of loving self-awareness. They would have been monophysites, because for them the transcendent Christ-experience has no animal nature or physical body, but is the universal energy of divine love which we encounter within ourselves by abstracting ourselves from matter, the senses and our animal pole. In that way they would have denied Christ's human nature. They would have been monothelitists, for whom the teaching of the rabbi from Nazareth is neither authoritative nor infallible, but through whose enlightenment we too might encounter the all-embracing volitional dynamism of the trans-personal Christ-consciousness. They would have been iconoclasts, ridiculing those who revered His image as entirely missing the point, as mistaking the man for His spiritual message, and in doing so detracting from the attention due to the divine Christ-experience.

"If they have called the head of the house 'Beelzebub,' how much more shall they call them of his household?" (St. Matthew 10:25)

"Indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God." (St. John 16:2)

Those who think that the "holy catholic Church" referred to in the Apostles' Creed is "the invisible communion of all those who believe in Christ" look upon the Catholic Church, and see at most only an institution that teaches men about Christ and through whom people may experience Christ. They are utterly scandalized by the Catholic Church's claim to be the "holy catholic Church" of the Creed, or they treat it as a mere metaphor, a physical example of that creedal ideal toward which we all are striving. They are ecclesial Ebionites, because for them the Catholic Church is a merely man-made institution. They are ecclesial Docetists, because for them the "holy catholic Church" is not to be identified with any particular ecclesial body on earth, though they may grant that at one time in history the "holy catholic Church" was most seemingly present in the Catholic Church. For them the resurrected and glorified Christ did not literally become, and could not become, the Head of the Catholic Church, but is Head rather of a spiritual community to which are invisibly joined all believers by an inner movement of faith. They are ecclesial Nestorians, for whom the Catholic Church developed her own unique spirituality, and thus became for us a channel, one among many, through which we may encounter the message and life of the divine Christ. They are ecclesial monophysites, because for them the "holy catholic Church" is no unified visible hierarchy, identifiable body or particular institution, but is a universal and invisible union of all believing souls with the invisible Christ, a union we encounter not through matter or the senses, but within ourselves through an inner act of the will, a trusting prayer of faith that rests and receives. They treat the Church as having only a spiritual nature, hence an invisible communion of believers united spiritually, not necessarily visibly. By denying the visible hierarchical unity that is essential to a human society, ecclesial monophysitism drops the human nature of the Church, and retains only the divine nature of the Church. They are ecclesial monothelitists, for whom the Catholic Church's binding and loosing, teaching and disciplining are merely that of the will of men, and not also that of the will of Christ Himself, the Head of His Mystical Body. They are ecclesial iconoclasts, ridiculing those who revere the Catholic Church as the living image of Christ the Head as entirely missing the point, as mistaking a merely human thing for the spiritual message it teaches, and in doing so detracting from the attention due to the invisible Christ.

"... she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, and did not know that it was Jesus." (St. John 20:14)

"among you stands One whom you do not know." (St. John 1:26)

Where is Christ's Church? It is right in front of us. We have not recognized it, because her members have no form or majesty that we should look at them. They are in other respects quite ordinary. But there is something unique about Christ's Church, something that characterized the Man from Nazareth:

"He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not." (Isaiah 53:3)

"Now when they heard these things they were enraged, and they ground their teeth at him." (Acts 7:54)

To find the Man from Nazareth, we could have followed the hate, loathing and rage; it would have led us right to Him. Likewise, to find His Body today, follow the same. Notice the direction that the anger and hate are oriented, and follow it to its object.

And they said to him, "Where, Lord?" He said to them, "Where the body is, there also the vultures will be gathered." (St. Luke 17:37)

Cross-posted on Called to Communion

Introducing ... John Kincaid

2009-07-01T12:30:00.006-05:00

I mentioned three weeks ago (here) that I had met John Kincaid, a fellow graduate of Covenant Theological Seminary, at the 2009 Letter and Spirit Summer Institute, and that he was joining our team at Called to Communion. Since then, I wrote this post introducing him to Called to Communion.

More recently he gave a fascinating in-depth interview explaining how he came into the Catholic Church. You can listen to the podcast here, and read here about his description of the process by which that transition occurred.

Pallium: Unity by Participation in St. Peter's Authority

2009-06-29T14:12:00.007-05:00

Today, on the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul, Pope Benedict gave the pallium to 34 archbishops from 20 countries. The use of the pallium goes back at least to the early fourth century. It symbolizes the unity of the Church, by visually representing each archbishop's participation in the authority Christ gave to St. Peter to shepherd His flock. Prior to the investing, the pallia are laid on St. Peter's tomb beneath the high altar of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. The Catholic Encylopedia article includes the following:

"Worn by the pope, the pallium symbolizes the plenitudo pontificalis officii (i.e. the plenitude of pontifical office); worn by archbishops, it typifies their participation in the supreme pastoral power of the pope, who concedes it to them for their proper church provinces. An archbishop, therefore, who has not received the pallium may not exercise any of his functions as metropolitan, nor any metropolitan prerogatives whatever; he is even forbidden to perform any episcopal act until invested with the pallium. Similarly, after his resignation, he may not use the pallium; should he be transferred to anotherarchdiocese. He must again petition the Holy Father for the pallium. In the case of bishops, its use is purely ornamental. The new palliums are solemnly blessed after the Second Vespers on the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, and are then kept in a special silver-gilt casket near the Confessio Petri until required."

Below is the video of today's Pallium Mass at St. Peter's Basilica in Rome.

Pallium Mass (Part 1)

Pallium Mass (Part 2)

Pope Benedict receives delegation from Constantinople

2009-06-27T23:42:00.005-05:00

This morning at the Vatican Pope Benedict XVI greeted a delegation from the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, currently in Rome to attend celebrations to mark the closing of the Pauline Year on Monday 29th June, Feast of Saints Peter and Paul. On this occasion the pope highlighted the importance of ecumenical dialogue both at a theological and grass roots level. Your presence here the Holy Father went on to say is a sign of fraternity within the Church. And in this respect Benedict XVI praised the theological progress achieved by the International Catholic and Orthodox Commission which is due to meet in October to discuss the role of the Bishop of Rome. Finally, the Pope stressed, it is this climate of respect and love between us that has helped ovecome past controversies and tensions.

Here Pope Benedict encourages ecumenical dialogue at the grass roots level, something that takes place often now on the internet, where Christians of all traditions 'gather' to discuss what divides us and find ways to achieve reconciliation. At the same time Pope Benedict provides us with an example of how that dialogue should be conducted, with all civility, patience, hope, and charity.

"What will it take for a true ecumenical reconciliation?"

2009-06-26T19:07:00.004-05:00

Metropolitan Jonah calls for Full Communion With New Anglican Province

Speaking on Wednesday morning to the ACNA Assembly, His Beatitude, Jonah, Metropolitan of All America and Canada and leader of the Orthodox Church in America (OCA), called for a "full... intercommunion" with the Anglican Church in North America. "What will it take," he asked, "for a true ecumenical reconciliation? That is what I am seeking by being with you today." (Read the rest of the article).

H/T: Michael F. Bird

Fr. Longenecker's trilemma

2009-06-24T10:00:00.001-05:00

Fr. Longenecker, drawing from Cardinal Newman, lays out a trilemma between latitudinarianism, sectarianism, and Catholicism. Read more.

Play church

2009-06-19T06:18:00.001-05:00

What is "play church"? It is private judgment dressing itself up as though it is something other than private judgment. (Read more)

This Monday evening (June 22) I'll be giving a talk here in St. Louis on "Scripture and Tradition." If you are interested in attending, please send me an email.

The heart of a good shepherd

2009-06-16T16:30:00.005-05:00

Archbishop Burke reaches out to my daughter, Laura, outside the Saint Louis Cathedral Basilica, after the installation mass for Archbishop Carlson, on June 10, 2009.

The photo was taken by Lisa Johnston; click on the photo for a larger version.

Archbishop Carlson's installation

2009-06-10T10:47:00.007-05:00

Today I'll be at Archbishop Carlson's installation. Watch it live on EWTN starting around 1:30 pm (CST), or live stream it at the Archdiocese of St. Louis website. More than 50 bishops will be attending, including the current Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura Archbishop Raymond Burke, Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago and Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York.

UPDATE: A photo of Archbishop Carlson with my family made the St. Louis Post-Dispatch

What does the visibility of the Church mean?

2009-06-08T07:04:00.002-05:00

Thomas Brown and I recently addressed this question on Called to Communion in an article titled "Christ Founded a Visible Church."

2009 Letter and Spirit Summer Institute

2009-06-08T07:00:00.006-05:00

Left to right: Taylor Marshall, Neal Judisch, John Kincaid, myself, Br. Sebastian CFR, David Wills, and Curtis Mitch. At the far right of the photo, Scott Hahn is serving pasta.

Last week I attended the 2009 Letter and Spirit Summer Institute in Steubenville, Ohio, hosted by the St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology. It was an outstanding experience. I won't go into the details here just now. (See Neal's entry for more details.) I want to reflect on it and bring out some more developed thoughts in the near future. It was a privilege to meet Scott Hahn, and to sit under his teaching for a week. Though he is more well known for his popular works, he is a first-rate scholar in biblical theology. That can be seen clearly in his recent book Kinship by Covenant (Yale University Press, 2009). Praying the hours with the Franciscan brothers was also very edifing. I especially enjoyed meeting Neal, Taylor, and John Kincaid. John is also a graduate of Covenant Theological Seminary. He went on to study at Duke, and is now working on a PhD in theology at Ave Maria. He was received into the Catholic Church last year, and very shortly he will be joining our team of contributors at Called to Communion. Below is another photo from last week; this is of the four of us with Scott Hahn in front of his house.

Fr. Jeffrey Steel jumps into the Tiber

2009-06-07T06:55:00.005-05:00

Fr. Jeffrey Steel, a former Covenant Theological Seminary student, and former PCA pastor for 6.5 years, and more recently an Anglican priest, has decided to become Catholic. Please pray for him and his family as he makes this transition.