Transfiguration

Our Destiny. Notice how much smaller the figures of the apostles are. Jesus is gigantic.

A New Reader

Cardinal Pell in Oxford

Cardinal Pell visited Oxford recently as guest of the Newman Society. Vespers was sung in Merton College, he gave a lecture at the Divinity Schools, (pictures above) and here he is celebrating Mass at St Aloysius (the Oxford oratory where G.M.Hopkins was served as an assistant priest and where J.R.R.Tolkien attended regularly.)

More splendid pictures of the event at NLM here.

Fish Eaters

A lot of questions this Lent about the 'no meat on Friday' rule. "Why do we not eat meat? I don't really like meat that much, and I like macaroni and cheese better, and what if we went for a nice seafood dinner on Fridays, that wouldn't be much of a hardship, so why not meat?"

Lots of good reasons: No meat because is it is a way to do something together. No meat because it makes you stop and pay attention. No meat because even if the only hardship is that you have to re-arrange your menu, it's still a little hardship. No meat because it makes you ask yourself what it is that you really ought to give up. No meat because it makes you think again about the whole reason for Lent. No meat because it is a simple, universally understood way for the whole church to do something concrete as a sacrifice. It would be pretty hard to come up with any other rule that would be possible and universal, and just saying, "It is good to fast and abstain on Fridays in Lent" is not solid and concrete enough. 

When the church gives just guidelines and not rules very often the discipline goes out the window completely. The specific rules are there not as an end in themselves, but to get us to examine the real reasons and ask the right questions and discover the real point of it all. If all you get is guidelines soon the discipline goes out the window entirely. Look at what has happened when the church shifted from 'No meat on Fridays' to 'fasting and abstinence on Fridays'. How many Catholics do you know who seriously fast on Fridays? Not many. Once it stopped being a specific rule it stopped being a guideline too.

So give up the meat on Fridays, but not blindly. Do it with an open heart, an open mind and with a searching intellect.

That Alternative Lent Service...

This photograph has emerged of the Alternative Lent Liturgy published here last week.

OK, a few liberties have been taken with the liturgy itself, but that is not a problem, after all it's all about bring our own gifts and ideas to the liturgy isn't it?

Pro Choice

I'm a pro-choice Catholic. That is to say, I'm in favor of doctors and nurses having the choice of whether they'll participate in abortions or not.

Has anybody else noticed the blatant hypocrisy of the pro-choice crowd? Choice, choice, choice, but no choice if a medical professional wants to choose not to do an abortion.

I had an email saying that on Tues. March 3, Fr. Mitch Pacwa on EWTN informed his audience that the legislature is giving the public one week to give them feedback on how they feel regarding eliminating the "conscience rights" put in by Pres. Bush.

This would mean that doctors and nurses would not be able to refuse to participate in abortions because of their religious/moral views. If they do refuse they are open to be sued. They want to see if anyone cares. Let's show them that we do!

Here are some ways to contact them:

Sen. Barbara Boxer http://boxer.senate.gov
San Berdo Dist. Office 909-888-8525,
Wash. D.C office 202-224-3553

Sen. Dianne Feinstein http://feinstein.senate.gov
Los Angeles Dist. Ofc 310-914-7300
Wash.D.C. office 202-224-3841

Congressman Ken Calvert http://calvert.house.gov
Riv. Dist. Office 951-784-4300
Wash. D.C. office 202-225-1986

U.S. Capitol switchboard: (202) 224-3121

The White House (202) 456-1111

or write and send this letter:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington DC 20500

Dear Mr President,

If you were truly pro-choice you would continue to allow doctors and nurses the choice not to participate in abortion.

Please do not remove this freedom from our health care professionals.

Work instead to guarantee the rights of hospitals and all health care professionals to make their own choice to be involved in abortion or not.


Sincerely yours,

Deep or Wide 2

I have been asked to explain further the 'deep or wide' anecdote about Anglo Catholics.

I really did not mean to offend, and sincerely apologize if the comment caused offense.

What I meant was this: that the external differences between Anglo Catholicism and Catholicism present a rather narrow gap. Indeed, the theological and liturgical differences also present a fairly narrow gap (at least between Catholics and what we might call 'historic' or orthodox Anglo Catholics)

However, the chasm between us is deep. I say it is 'deep' because it is deep down and hidden.  It is written into the genetic code of Anglicanism and Catholicism. Because it is so deep down I find it hard to articulate, and if I do recognize this it is not meant to be a criticism of Anglicanism per se.

I am observing this subjectively, and yet I think dispassionately. The deep down differences have to do with how Catholics understand themselves, and Christ and history and the Church and (it must be said) their ethnicity. This is very different from the way Anglicans (and this includes Anglo Catholics as a subset) understand themselves and Christ and history and the Church and their ethnicity.

As a convert I am still gazing deeply into this crevasse and trying to understand. It is all tied up with (among other things) Irishness and Italian-ness and Spanish-ness and Hispanic-ness. It is linked with the absurdity and radical nature of Catholic sanctity and saints. Deep down it is about the depth and strangeness of Catholic spirituality and sacramentality. It has to do with antiquity and universality and infallibility and being part of a supernaturally subversive world order within the realm of history. Somehow Catholicism is a product of the ancient world of paganism and Judaism and the Middle East and Rome whereas Anglicanism in all its forms, (and Anglo Catholicism, for all it's virtues, is simply another expression of Anglicanism) is a product of Protestantism and Rationalism and Northern Europe and the sixteenth century.

It has to do with depths I can't explain, but which I know are there operating within myself and within the cosmos--depths that I never sensed in Anglicanism, depths which my experience in Anglicanism prepared me for, but which I did not find there except in part.

Again, I do not say this with any sense of animosity or blame. I am simply reflecting my own experience and say that it feels like I have moved from the entrance hall into a vast and ancient country mansion, from a tributary into a mighty river that is bearing me to the endless sea.

Sola Scriptura and the Fathers of the Church - 4

That the Church is the interpreter of the Scriptures:

"To him that believes, all will be plain, if he read diligently the Scripture with the aid of those who are the priests in the Church, and in whose hands, as we have shown rests the doctrine of the Apostles."  -  St Irenaeus,  Adv. Heres. 1.iv.c.52

"Those who are out of the Church cannot have any understanding of the Divine Word...they all quote Scripture, but without the sense of Scripture." Hilary of Poitier, In Matthaum xiii.1

"To attain to the truth of the Scriptures, we must follow the sense of them as entertained by the Universal Church, to which the Scriptures themselves bear testimony."  St Augustine of Hippo, Contra Crescon, 1.i.c.33

Deep or Wide

Having a cup of tea with Mrs Longenecker, I was discussing an email from an Anglo-Catholic who asked if they may attend Mass at St Mary's and receive Holy Communion.

"Yes and No" was the reply.

I said to Mrs. L with some exasperation, "The dear old Anglo Catholics think they're so close to us. They see the gap and think it is so narrow, but in fact it's not narrow. It's wide."

"Not wide. Deep. Very Deep" says Mrs. L.

She's quite the theologian in her own way.

More on Sola Scriptura

A reader has asked me to elaborate further on the problems with the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura:

1. Protestants like to blame Catholics for promoting non-Biblical, human created, late invented doctrines, but sola Scriptura--on which the entire edifice of Protestantism is based--is a doctrine unheard of until the sixteenth century. It is a doctrine invented by the Reformers and it is a doctrine with no Biblical basis. Ask a Protestant to defend sola Scriptura from Scripture and he can't. There are a few proof texts that uphold Scripture as 'profitable for doctrine, reproof etc' but none teach the doctrine of Scripture alone.

2. Even if you could prove sola Scriptura from Scripture it would be a circular argument. "The Bible is the inspired Word of God and our only authority." "Where does it say that?" "In the Bible." "How do you know the Bible is true?" "Because the Bible says it is and we know that the Bible is the inspired Word of God and is true." "How do you know that?" "Because its in the Bible." And so on....and on...

3. If sola Scriptura is true and "all you need to do is pray for the Holy Spirit's guidance and read the clear words of Scripture you will understand" then why are there tens of thousands of Protestant denominations--each of which has prayed for the Holy Spirit to guide them, picked up their Bibles and came to radically different conclusions? Does the Holy Spirit get it wrong?

4. How could sola Scriptura be right when there were so many people down the ages who never had Bibles or couldn't read? For hundreds of years the first Christians did not have the complete Bible as we have it. For many more hundreds of years people were illiterate and Bibles were expensive and rare. In many other places people did not have the Scriptures in their own tongue. Could it be that God would base salvation on a person's ability to read, and if not read, to understand the written word? This doctrine was invented with the printing press when suddenly everyone could have a Bible, and without this invention I doubt if anyone would have cooked up sola Scriptura.

5. Catholics teach that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but that the Church came first. Jesus commanded that a Church be founded, but he never said a word about New Testament being written. The Holy Spirit who inspired and founded the Church also inspires the Scriptures as they are written, preached and studied and expounded. 

6. From earliest days it has been the witness of the Apostolic Church which was the mark of belonging to the Body of Christ. It was the Church from which the New Testament came, the Church which determined the canon of Scripture, and it is the Church which is necessary to set out the proper interpretation of the Scriptures today.

There is plenty of good literature on this, but I recommend my book More Christianity (chapters 1&2) and Mark Shea's book By What Authority? Most of all read the documents of the Church: esp. Dei Verbum to understand the Catholic teaching.

Blackfriars

The chapel of the Dominican friary in Oxford is just a few doors down from the famous Bird and Baby pub where the Inklings met. In between them is Pusey House--the Anglo Catholic study center, and further along is St Benet's Hall--the Benedictine House in Oxford.

The English Dominicans are enjoying a resurgence at this time, and one of their number, Br Lawrence takes great photographs of their goings on. When I was a student at Oxford I discovered this chapel. Oxford is crammed with beautiful places of worship--all the college chapels, the ancient churches, great Victorian churches and the cathedral.

This was always one of my favorites. I'm not sure why. It is not spectacular, but very simple and austere. The light from the East Window is always pure and when it radiates in over the tabernacle and you're looking right into heaven for a moment. 

Sola Scriptura and the Fathers of the Church - 3

That we take the Scriptures from the Church, and that her authority is the sole warrant of their inspiration.

"I would not have believed the Gospel if I had not been moved thereto by the authority of the Catholic Church."               St Augustine of Hippo, Contra. Epist. Fundamenti.

Something Fishy Going On

They've found some fish in Korea that have human faces. Curious!

Morals and Money

We were discussing the financial crisis the other day when I was reminded of a very sweet comment by someone on this blog. He said that when he began his career as an investment banker his supervisor would gather all the team together every day and start the day with prayer.

The problem with out nation and our economy is not a question of this economic policy or that. It is not a question of communism or capitalism or any other economic 'ism.' The question is simply that of individual morality. Communism or capitalism or socialism or distributism or whatever would work if individuals were honest and self sacrificial and caring for their neighbor. Our Lord said, "Love God and love your neighbor. All the law and the prophets hang on these two." What if our money men loved God and loved their neighbors? Think how different things would be.

I realize that the secularist says that morality does not necessarily have to be linked with religion, and I suppose in theory he is right, but I have never known it to be true in practice, and this is why: it is because morality most often requires a reward or a deterrent to work. It would be nice if people were good because they wanted to be good, and this is indeed the highest form of virtue. However, the reality is that most people are good because they want to be rewarded or because they fear punishment. While this is a lower motivation for virtue, it is nevertheless, effective as far as it goes.

With this in mind, religion begins to play an interesting role in morality. A religion that teaches personal responsibility through the real possibility of heaven or hell is a religion that takes morality seriously. My actions may be modified if I seriously believe there is a price to pay one way or the other. Hopefully I will, through this, learn to love virtue for its own sake, and through the first step of responding through desire for reward or fear of punishment I may move on to a higher response.

Too often we have appealed to people's higher response while neglecting or dismissing the need for the lower motivation. This is a mistake. People at a lower level of spiritual and moral development need a lower level of motivation--just like a child first learns absolute obedience then learns to understand the reason for the commandment of love.

Think how different, therefore, our society would be if every investment banking department opened the day with prayer. Think how different things would be if every stock broker and every insurance magnate and every commodities broker began his day with prayer and really believed that the decisions he made that day impinged not just on his securities, but on his eternal security.

Sola Scriptura and the Fathers of the Church - 2

That the Scriptures were never intended to teach complete Christian doctrine:

"Hence it is plain that the Apostles did not deliver to us everything by their epistles, but many things without writing. These are equally to be believed. Wherefore let us believe the tradition of the Church. It is tradition. Seek no further."

St John Chrysostom, (commenting on 2 Thess. 2:14)  Hom. iv.in 2 Thess.

Snow Day

(click to enlarge)

A snow day in Greenville. No school! This is chez Longenecker with Greenville's biggest Frosty--nine feet tall!

Pink Dolphin

There's a pink dolphin out there. 

Here starts a regular (if sporadic) series called 'Curious George' which features curiosities and oddities in the natural world. Fr.Z gives you chickadees. I give you freaks.

BJ

Here's a perceptive article on Bobby Jindal.

Irrelevant Religion

A friend had a German exchange student living with them. He was a nice kid. Middle class and smart, but when they took him to Mass he said, "I don't know why people need God. I don't need God."

My friend said, "Believing in God gives me peace of mind."

"But I already have peace of mind" said the German kid. Of course. He felt okay because he doesn't need God. He has a secure life. He enjoys health, good contacts, prosperity and a seemingly secure future. The poor kid mistakes complacency for peace of mind. His mind isn't at peace. It's just dead. He's never looked misery in the face and never yet asked the big questions.

He's typical of the young generation of European atheists. They really, honestly do not see any need for God. Without having any moral education they feel no guilt over anything. Without having any religious education that includes heaven and hell they have no worries about the afterlife. They do what they like when they like and see no need for God. What catechesis they have had is universalist (the merciful God will ensure that everyone goes to heaven) so of course he concludes that religion (and God) are irrelevant to him.

The irony of this is that he is the result of a great Christian experiment in which we have tried harder than ever before to show how very relevant God and religion is to the human race.

When my friend tried to argue for God by saying he met a need (he gives me peace of mind) he articulates the main problem with modernist religion. It is this: we have tried to argue for God and for religion according to utilitarian methods. We want to make God necessary for people. We want to show how God meets their needs, makes them happy, and how religion makes them nicer people and how religion will make the world a better place. In other words, we have a marketplace mentality. If we can just show people how great God is and how super dooper religion is we're sure they'll buy the product.

To do this we inevitably sugar coat the product and therefore sell them a false religion. When they realize they've been duped they clear off and never try Christianity again. So, for example, a person is told by some Evangelical preacher that Jesus will save them from their sins, heal them, fill them with the Holy Spirit and they will belong to a wonderful, warm and genuine family of God as they belong to the Church. Then they join the church and find a group of struggling sinners just like they are. They feel they've been sold a bill of goods, and they're off.

The permutations of this false religion are endless in America. We Catholics have our own version. It's called AmChurch. It's comfort religion. Sickly sentimental worship songs, masses that are all about ourselves and how good we feel.  Songs and sermons about how we are going to change the world 'We can make a difference' etc. It's all a big pep rally to make people feel good and feel relevant and feel alive and most of it's fake.

I'm for preaching what they call here in the South the 'ole time religion'. It's a tough, uncompromising religion that believes in heaven and hell and preaches the simple truth that we're all sinners headed away from God unless we turn and repent and believe the gospel, and take up our cross to follow Christ.

The modernist will cry out in horror, "But people just don't believe that sort of thing these days!" Well some people don't, but in my experience, most people who take religion seriously at all are crying out for this sort of message. This is exactly what they believe and they wish their clergy did too.

The modernist will cry, "But it is so irrelevant to modern people!" Well, making religion 'relevant' hasn't done anything but empty churches. Let's try the irrelevant for a change. After all, to paraphrase St Therese of Lisieux, "There is no merit in doing something that is relevant."

PS:  This post is a re-write of one posted last week with the title 'The Crux of the Matter'. The first version was hastily done. I took it down, but someone asked for it to return. So here's a new version.

Sola Scriptura and the Fathers of the Church - 1

That the Church is, by its origin, independent of, and previous to the New Testament:

Supposing that the Apostles had left us nothing in writing, should we not still follow the rule of doctrine which they delivered to those to whom they entrusted the churches? This rule many barbarous nations follow, who, being without ink or parchment, have the word of salvation written by the Spirit in their hearts, and guard diligently the tradition which has been delivered."  --St Irenaeus, Adv. Heres. 1.iii.c.4

Anglo Catholics...

...in Northwest England Celebrate Holy Eucharist on the First Sunday in Lent. More pictures here.

Standing Still

Fr. Z has a nice post here about standing still. 

Homily - First Sunday of Lent

Desert is the title of the homily for the First Sunday in Lent from St Mary's. Link to it here.

There will be four other homilies during Lent in a little series: Desire, Discipline and Detachment