These folks sold Catherina S. and me pictures when we met the Pope this summer. They have a fun, if somewhat frustrating, website containing many many recent and old papal photos. It’s worth a browse.

I got my kicks for today from a story I found through a link from the “Ephemeris” column of our own blog. The story was from the news section of Catholic Online, and it was about recent archaeological discoveries that seem to confirm that the traditional burial place of St. Paul is in fact his tomb. It was an interesting little piece, but it concluded with the following helpful lines:

“Paul was a Roman Jew, born in Tarsus, in modern-day Turkey, who started out trying to fight Christianity but later converted after seeing a shining light on the road to Damascus.

The saint, who called himself the apostle to the Gentiles, was a great traveler and writer. His 14 letters, which form part of the New Testament, are largely written to churches that he had founded or visited.”

Now, was it really necessary to explain that to the readers of Catholic Online? Heaven help us!
Continue reading

My favorite personal story in connection with the Feast of the Immaculate Conception happened during my first year at Cornell. I had just finished a year at Oxford of Hebrew and Jewish studies, and I was eager to keep up my knowledge of Biblical Hebrew. So I was sitting in on a class in the Near Eastern Studies department - one isn’t allowed do theology at Cornell, certainly not to have a department with that name - a class which was basically a glorified reading group for selected Old Testament texts. There was one graduate student, not Jewish, and the rest were very much undergraduates and very much Jewish. (Keep in mind that at Cornell, out of every three undergraduate students, one is a well to do WASPy person, the other a Corean, and the third a Jew. And the latter two both come from the greater NYC area.)

I can’t remember exactly what the context was, but it must have been something to do with the development of Hebrew theological thought as seen through the different eras in which the Old Testament texts were written. (Warning: when going into such a class or course of studies, it is very, very difficult to avoid referring to the Old Testament by that name; the preferred nomenclature is the “Hebrew Scriptures”, which can avoid offending both Jew and Christian, I think.)
Continue reading

My favorite personal story in connection with the Feast of the Immaculate Conception happened during my first year at Cornell. I had just finished a year at Oxford of Hebrew and Jewish studies, and I was eager to keep up my knowledge of Biblical Hebrew. So I was sitting in on a class in the Near Eastern Studies department - one isn’t allowed do theology at Cornell, certainly not to have a department with that name - a class which was basically a glorified reading group for selected Old Testament texts. There was one graduate student, not Jewish, and the rest were very much undergraduates and very much Jewish. (Keep in mind that at Cornell, out of every three undergraduate students, one is a well to do WASPy person, the other a Corean, and the third a Jew. And the latter two both come from the greater NYC area.)

I can’t remember exactly what the context was, but it must have been something to do with the development of Hebrew theological thought as seen through the different eras in which the Old Testament texts were written. (Warning: when going into such a class or course of studies, it is very, very difficult to avoid referring to the Old Testament by that name; the preferred nomenclature is the “Hebrew Scriptures”, which can avoid offending both Jew and Christian, I think.)
Continue reading

Declaramus, pronuntiamus et definimus doctrinam quae tenet beatissimam Virginem Mariam in primo instanti suae conceptionis fuisse singulari Omnipotentis Dei gratia et privilegio, intuitu meritorum Christi Jesu Salvatoris humani generis, ab omni originalis culpae labe praeservatam immunem, esse a Deo revelatam, atque idcirco ab omnibus fidelibus firmiter constanterque credendam. Ineffabilis Deus Pp. Pius IX.

We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful
go to main page

A reader writes in that a special traditional Latin Mass will be said at the Church of the Holy Name of Jesus in Providence, Rhode Island at 11AM on December 17th, with Bishop Tobin, pictured here, presiding from his Throne and giving an indulgenced blessing therefrom. A potluck lunch and Advent concert will follow the Mass. Visitors are very welcome: if you are at all nearby, please help encourage this Bishop in his outreach to traditional Catholics! More details below.

The Church is located at 99 Camp Street in Providence, RI. The parish pastor reports that, though the Bishop will not be saying the Mass, this is chiefly because he has never yet learned it (he was ordained after 1969); presumably indicating that he would be willing to learn to celebrate the traditional Mass. All the more reason to turn out and encourage him!

Holy Name Church is located on the East Side of Providence at the corner of Camp and Pleasant Streets. From Rt. 95, take the Branch Avenue Exit. Proceed to North Main Street (bear right onto North Main at the fire station) and continue to Doyle Avenue. Turn left onto Doyle, then left onto Camp Street.
go to main page

As our dear readers have by now guessed, St. Ambrose is my chosen patron. Today is his Feast Day, which is what got me thinking about him and about the Bishops of today. These thoughts are by no means novel, but it is worth returning to them again and again.

St. Ambrose was Bishop of Milan in the 4th century, during the height of the Arian heresy; he famously was chosen bishop by an angry crowd of orthodox Catholic and Arians who could not decide who would be their next bishop: he spoke so well to calm them, that they spontaneously elected him, even though he was not yet baptized at the time! Anyway, here was St. Ambrose’s postion: he was Bishop of a large and influential city (say, like Boston today in the US); the secular powers were heretics (the Empress of Constantinople was an Arian); and the faithful of his Diocese were sharply divided. Can you begin to see the parallels? The big difference between this “honey-tongued Doctor” and today’s major Archbishops is that he was tough, tough like I think we don’t even know how to describe these days. He was holed up in his Cathedral with several hundred faithful one night by imperial troops who were striving to make him bow to their power; he responded by refusing to bend, and spent the night teaching the faithful chant and hymns! Why can’t our Bishops take him as their example, even a little?

Consider: what is keeping our Bishops from infuriating the world, hewing close to the Faith, and renewing the Church as Ambrose did? Nothing! They have all the same resources at their disposal as he did, and though we cannot of course expect every Bishop to be a Doctor of the Church, we can expect them to learn from their betters. Why aren’t we holding our Bishops to a much, much higher standard? Why isn’t the Vatican?

This is what I propose: that each Bishop first become fully Catholic, and learn to love his Faith more than he loves kind words from the local newspaper. This being accomplished, he needs to chop down his bureaucracy and actually take personal charge of much, much more. Yes, I know that this is virtually impossible. Get over it: that’s his job. Every single soul in his diocese is his personal responsibilty. Recent history has proven that Bishops can’t trust so-called experts, and so he needs to actually stop doing this. Be unpopular, really! We want you to be unpopular, your Excellencies! We want you to be hated and mocked by the world: if you are, then we will defend you with our lives, and support you with our wallets and our backs. I want my Bishop to ask me to do something I have no desire to do, and for me to have to do it because I love and respect him. Can you imagine? There is no reason why this can’t be reality. Let’s pray for it! And stop defending these dudes when they’re indefensible: it is not charity to gloss over grave errors; neither is it kind to support the wicked. We as laymen can never do their job for them. The Bishops must radically take responsibility, and we must radically expect it of them, and be willing to sacrifice for them. I want my Bishop to fight the US government so hard on abortion that the National Guard has to lock me up in the Cathedral with him; for him to stand at the door of his cathedral and prevent publicly wicked “Catholic” politicians from entering, as St. Ambrose did with the Emperor Theodosius, who had slaughtered innocents (see painting above): don’t you? I want him to be such a symbol of love and true charity that the New York Times will despise him. I want him to take the restoration of liturgy so seriously that he would himself spearhead the return to truly sacred music, even to the point of teaching it to us himself: Ambrose did so, and so can he. And only then, when the powers of the world quail at the power of Christ — humble but unyielding; firm and fast — will some in power, at least, come and kneel before our Lord in the person of the Bishop who has rebuked them, as St. Ambrose’s unyielding stance eventually brought the very Emperor to his knees, repenting of his sins.

That’s enough for now
Read more about St. Ambrose’s life and work here and here
Finally, a sage observation from the good Doctor:

To avoid dissensions we should be ever on our guard, more especially with those who drive us to argue with them, with those who vex and irritate us, and who say things likely to excite us to anger. When we find ourselves in company with quarrelsome, eccentric individuals, people who openly and unblushingly say the most shocking things, difficult to put up with, we should take refuge in silence, and the wisest plan is not to reply to people whose behavior is so preposterous.
Those who insult us and treat us contumeliously are anxious for a spiteful and sarcastic reply: the silence we then affect disheartens them, and they cannot avoid showing their vexation; they do all they can to provoke us and to elicit a reply, but the best way to baffle them is to say nothing, refuse to argue with them, and to leave them to chew the cud of their hasty anger. This method of bringing down their pride disarms them, and shows them plainly that we slight and despise them.

And a photo of St. Ambrose’s body, dressed in Episcopal splendor, buried between the Martyrs Sts. Gervase and Protase, in the Basilica built in his honor in the city of Milan.

go to main page

Since we’ve been discussing what constitutes belief in God, as opposed to Faith in Him, I thought I should send folks back to an excellent post by Iosephus on this subject, from February. Please do give it a read.

It’s one of those things that unites traditional Catholics: a sense of longing for those days in the past when the Popes and Bishops taught, not just with authority, but authoritatively; in those days when (it seemed) ecclesiastical mandates had real teeth; when Vatican Prelates spoke like prophets, not politicians.

I often feel that longing, too, but it’s good to remember that not everything being said by Churchmen in these latter times is wussy watered down nonsense. Every once in a while a Vatican official, or even a Pope, catches the “big mo” momentum fever and tells it like it is. And so, I think it might be worthwhile to pull together a little collection of the best no-nonsense, strait talk out of Rome from the past couple of decades. I’ll put a few of my favorites up; readers, please add your own faves in the comments!

Let’s start with Iosephus’ favorite, from the most Luminous of John Paul the Fair’s apostolic letters, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis

Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.

Meanwhile, some of the ones I like best come from the relatively little-known Observations on the English-language Translation of the Roman Missal issued by the Holy See to ICEL on their last attempt to translate the Roman Missal into English (pre-Liturgiam Authenticam)

. . .The Structure of the Collects: Relative clauses often disappear in the proposed text (especially the initial Deus, qui . . ., so important in the Latin Collects), so that a single oration is divided into two or more sentences. This loss is detrimental not only to the unity of the structure, but to the manner of conveying the proper sense of the posture before God of the Christian people, or of the individual Christian. The relative clause acknowledges God’s greatness, while the independent clause strongly conveys the impression that one is explaining something about God to God. Yet it is precisely the acknowledgement of the mirabilia Dei that lies at the heart of all Judaeo-Christian euchology. The quality of supplication is also adversely affected so that many of the texts now appear to say to God rather abruptly: “You did a; now do b.” The manner in which language expresses relationship to God cannot be regarded merely as a matter of style.. . .

. . .”Opening Song” does not translate “Cantus ad introitum” or “Antiphona ad introitum” as intended by the rites. The Latin is able to express the musical processional beginning of the Liturgy that accompanies the entrance of the priest and ministers, while “Opening Song” could just as well designate the beginning number of a secular musical performance.

The Congregation in the course of its various contacts and consultations has encountered widespread ­indeed, virtually unanimous-opposition to the institution of any change in the wording of the Lord’s Prayer. More than one reader cited poignantly the experience of having seen this prayer coming to the lips of Christians who had otherwise appeared unconscious, its familiar wording having been learned by them from infancy. By contrast, the Mixed Commission’s justification for its changes, in its Third Progress Report on the Revision of the Roman Missal, seem inadequate and somewhat cerebral. . .

. . .Certain texts included in the project, such as the seasonal introductions and the hagiographical notes in the Proper of Saints, by virtue of their genre as well as their bulk, should not be published within a liturgical book. At times, their very content militates against such an intention. For example, the statement that [St.] Jerome “began work on a new Latin translation of the Bible, known as the Vulgate”, is historically inexact, since he selected and compiled existing texts of the Vetus Latina for many parts of the Bible, while his characterization as “irascible and intolerant” is hardly an appropriate appendage to the prayers prescribed for his liturgical Memorial. In the same vein, one might cite the inappropriateness of the reference to Santa Claus in commemorating St. Nicholas, or the unexplained statement that St. Callistus I “served a sentence as a convict”, or the assertion that St. Pius V’s “excommunication of Queen Elizabeth I of England hardened the split between Catholics and Protestants.” While there is an admitted distinction between a liturgical and a hagiographical text, these are neither. The present Observations are not the context in which to address question of the veracity of these statements; it is sufficient to point out that that they are out of place in the Missal. . .

And, though not an official Vatican letter or anything, an
interview given by Fr. Robert Taft, SJ, of the Pontifical Oriental Institute concerning the possible erection of a Ukrainian Patriarchate is pure gold:

. . .It’s extremely difficult for the Orthodox to face up to their own reality. They don’t really understand the uses of history. For example, there are hundreds of thousands of Catholics today in Siberia. How come? Because the Russians dragged them there in cattle cars, that’s how come. Let’s say it the way it is. Furthermore, before the war, 20 percent of the population of Siberia was Catholic. Were there Catholics dioceses in Russia before the revolution wiped them out? Yes, there were. I mean real dioceses, not just fictitious apostolic administrations. Real dioceses. If there are Catholic bishops now in regions where there weren’t before the revolution, it’s for the reason I just gave – these people were dragged to those regions in cattle cars. The pope didn’t drag them there. Let’s say it the way it is. They’re incapable of facing reality. . .

. . .There seems to be a predictable pattern of crisis/reconciliation/crisis in Catholic-Orthodox relations. Are we doomed to keep repeating this cycle?
I think so. In part, because we live in a free world and nobody really controls all of their own people. If the Neocatechumenate crowd decides to show up in some Russian city and cause trouble, who’s going to put them under control? Part of the problem is that this papacy hasn’t controlled some of these new movements. Matter of fact, it encourages them. It’s not the Jesuits who are causing trouble in Russia. It’s not the Franciscans. Part of the problem too is that the Russians are always reacting not so much to what we do, as to how their own constituency reacts to whatever we do. Basically, there are three groups in the Russian hierarchy. You’ve got a real wacko kind of right-wing fringe. These are the ones who would agree with calling Rasputin a saint and that kind of garbage. Then you’ve got people like Kirill, who are open and ecumenical and intelligent, because he’s got an education. Then you’ve got kind of a middle group that’s very conservative but not frothing at the mouth. Kirill’s group is a very small minority. The patriarch is a juggler trying to keep all these balls in the air. . .

go to main page

A non-Catholic friend asked me the other day whether it is true that one of the Supreme Court justices (they mentioned a few obvious names, but weren’t sure which one) was a member of Opus Dei. I immediately scoffed at the idea, but then reflected that I don’t definitively know that they’re not; after all, being a member of Opus Dei is not, as many seem to think, tantamount to joining the Men in Black and there’s no reason why Alito, Scalia or Thomas shouldn’t be members except that I probably would have heard about it already. The question “Is X really in Opus Dei” is put to me reasonably often, and generally speaking the answer is probably “no” but it prompted me to wonder: are there, in fact, any “famous” Catholics who are (or were, if they are deceased) members of Opus Dei? I mean by this anyone who is famous for some other reason than their help in founding or leading Opus Dei. I tried to do some web research on this question, but the slew of paranoid, crazed, virulently anti-Catholic sites that came up when I searched was so frightening that I had to quickly flee. If anyone has any more information, please, tell me so that I can answer these questions accurately in the future!