Vivificat!

CWR: The Charismatic Renewal and the Catholic Church

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Mon, 20 May 2013 08:19:09 PDT

Brethren: Peace and Good to all of you in Jesus' Name.

The Catholic World Report published two days ago a great article about the Catholic Charismatic Renewal which you all ought to read. Here's an excerpt:

As Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the Pope would celebrate Mass on a monthly basis for the Charismatic Renewal of Buenos Aires. And despite the conflicts between Catholics and Pentecostals in Latin America, word has it that Pentecostal pastors rejoiced at the election of the new Catholic pope.

Pope Francis’ frequent mentions of the Holy Spirit—whom he has described as someone who “annoys us” and “moves us, makes us walk, pushes the Church to move forward”—as well as his unprecedentedly frequent references to the devil (rather than to a generic “evil”), indicate his affinity for the Charismatic Renewal. The election of such a back-to-basics man as Supreme Pontiff provides us with an opportunity to look at the road traveled by the Charismatic Renewal and to “hold on to what is good” (1 Thess 5:21).

Despite the openness of its approach, for many the Charismatic Renewal is either undecipherable or a clear-cut deviation into “modernism.” Having made its appearance in the Catholic world after Vatican Council II, with spectacular aspects such as prophecies and miracle-healings, it was obviously lumped in with the many other challenging and controversial novelties that surfaced at the time under the banner of “renewal.” Yet the Charismatic Renewal in its Catholic expression is generally painstaking in its strict adherence to the Church and to Catholic doctrine, a fact which, in itself, can cause controversy and sometimes alienates Pentecostal, Evangelical, non-denominational, or other ecumenical counterparts.

Continue reading here.

Commentary. I just want to add that I am an "alumnus" of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, that I experienced the so-called baptism in the Holy Spirit when I was 14 and that my life took a radical turn toward God and the Church at that time. Praised be the Holy and August Trinity, Father, Son, and + Holy Spirit, now and ever and forever, Amen.

I tell you that this blessing is given freely to all in the Sacrament of Baptism and that all you've got to do to activate this effect of baptism is to pray and ask for those gifts of the Holy Spirit that will sanctify you, and those other that are meant to build up the Church - the charisms. The latter won't make you holier for these are oriented to others but they've been deemed useful by the Spirit himself and that's why He grants them so liberally.

I am convinced that the emergence of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal is the most visible answer to Blessed John XXIII's prayer for a "new Pentecost" in the Church.

Today's Pentecost, AD 2013

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Sat, 18 May 2013 21:00:02 PDT

Come, Holy Spirit

Come, Holy Spirit, come!
And from Thy celestial home
Shed a ray of light divine!

Come Father of the poor!
Come source of all our store!
Come within our bosoms shine!

Thou, of comforters the best;
Thou, the soul's most welcome guest;
Sweet refreshment here below;

In our labor, rest most sweet;
Grateful coolness in the heat,
Solace in the midst of woe.

O most blessed Light divine
Shine within these hearts of Thine.
And our inmost being fill!

Where you are not, man has naught,
Nothing good in deed or thought,
Nothing free from taint of ill.

Heal our wounds, our strength renew;
On our dryness pour Thy dew;
Wash the stains of guilt away:

Bend the stubborn heart and will;
Melt the frozen, warm the chill;
Guide the steps that go astray.

On the faithful who adore
And confess you, evermore
In your sev'nfold gift descend;

Give them virtue's sure reward;
Give them Thy salvation, Lord;
Give them joys that never end.
Amen. Alleluia

R.I.P. Jonathan Cunningham

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Fri, 17 May 2013 13:36:12 PDT

Brethren, Peace and Good to all of you.

This week we're finishing was very busy and rewarding to me, but also very sad. Last Sunday, May 12, my son's college roommate for the last three years, Jonathan Sherrick Cunningham, was called home to the Lord. My son is very distraught and I can guess how Jonathan's parents, grandparents, sister, and all his family feel at such an untimely departure.

We had the opportunity to say goodbye yesterday at his home church in Uniontown, PA. The only thing I can say is this poem by Robert Bridges. We'll talk later.

On a Dead Child

By Robert Bridges

Jonathan Sherrick "Finny" Cunningham

Perfect little body, without fault or stain on thee,

      With promise of strength and manhood full and fair!

            Though cold and stark and bare,

The bloom and the charm of life doth awhile remain on thee.

Thy mother’s treasure wert thou;—alas! no longer

      To visit her heart with wondrous joy; to be

            Thy father’s pride;—ah, he

Must gather his faith together, and his strength make stronger.

To me, as I move thee now in the last duty,

      Dost thou with a turn or gesture anon respond;

            Startling my fancy fond

With a chance attitude of the head, a freak of beauty.

Thy hand clasps, as ’twas wont, my finger, and holds it:

      But the grasp is the clasp of Death, heartbreaking and stiff;

            Yet feels to my hand as if

’Twas still thy will, thy pleasure and trust that enfolds it.

So I lay thee there, thy sunken eyelids closing,—

      Go lie thou there in thy coffin, thy last little bed!—

            Propping thy wise, sad head,

Thy firm, pale hands across thy chest disposing.

So quiet! doth the change content thee?—Death, whither hath he taken thee?

      To a world, do I think, that rights the disaster of this?

            The vision of which I miss,

Who weep for the body, and wish but to warm thee and awaken thee?

Ah! little at best can all our hopes avail us

      To lift this sorrow, or cheer us, when in the dark,

            Unwilling, alone we embark,

And the things we have seen and have known and have heard of, fail us.

Source: PoetryFoundation.org

‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” ~ Revelation 21:4, NIV.

Thank you Campbell, Ohio!

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Thu, 16 May 2013 05:13:31 PDT

Brethren, Peace and Good to all of you in Jesus Christ our Lord.

I want to thank the Society of St. John Chrysostom's Campbell, Ohio chapter, the parishioners of St. Lucy and St. Rose of Lima, the assistant pastor, and the priests attending from local Orthodox churches, for a delightful evening of conversation and mutual exchange. May the Lord make grow the seeds we're sowing unto reconciliation of our churches.

Tonight in Campbell, Ohio

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Wed, 15 May 2013 10:20:52 PDT

If you live in the Youngstown, Ohio area you'll have the chance to hear me speak at St Rose of Lima Parish, 394 Tenney Ave in Campbell, on the subject of "Icons Not-made-by-Hands of East and West." The talk starts at 7 PM. You are all invited!

#Gosnell guilty verdict reveals moral bankruptcy of #abortion industry and its supporters

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Mon, 13 May 2013 16:17:09 PDT

Brethren, Peace and Good to all of you.

Kermit Gosnell has been found guilty of multiple counts of murder, but the moral implications of all abortions, especially so-called "late term abortions", remains unexplored by the talking heads.

Even NARAL, in its crocodile-tears statement, while condemning Gosnell, stops short from condemning a "procedure" they support in principle.

What's more laughable, both NARAL and the NRA make a similar claim: that less regulation will make abortion (or schools) safer. Of course, the talking heads will never call of NARAL the way they did the NRA, for the same reason they covered banalities over Gosnell's trial in depth: hypocrisy and moral blindness.

I pray every day for the closing of every abortuary in America, and the demise of entities such as Planned Parenthood and NARAL, for the good of the country and the glory of God, the Author of Life.

Sandro Magister: "Francis and the Devil"

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Mon, 13 May 2013 08:50:41 PDT

Brethren, Peace and Good to all of you in Jesus' Name.

Well-regarded Vaticanista Sandro Magister made several observations regarding Pope Francis' frequent references to the devil in his usual column in Italy's la Republicca newspaper. He also shared an essay on the subject of How the Scriptures Speak of the Devil, by Innos Biffi. I want share with an excerpt and invite you to read it in its entirety at Magister's website.

In the preaching of Pope Francis, there is one subject that returns with surprising frequency: the devil.

It is a frequency on a par with that with which the same subject recurs in the New Testament. But in spite of this, the surprise remains. If for no other reason than that with his continual references to the devil, pope Jorge Mario Bergoglio parts ways with the current preaching in the Church, which is silent about the devil or reduces him to a metaphor.

In fact, the minimization of the devil is so widespread that it casts its shadow over the very words of the pope. Public opinion, both Catholic and secular, has so far met this insistence of his on the devil with indifference, or at the most with indulgent curiosity.

One thing, however, is certain. For pope Bergoglio, the devil is not a myth, but a real person. In one of his morning homilies in the chapel of the Domus Sanctae Marthae, he said that not only is there a hatred of the world for Jesus and the Church, but that behind this spirit of the world is “the prince of this world”:

"With his death and resurrection, Jesus has ransomed us from the power of the world, from the power of the devil, from the power of the prince of this world. The origin of the hatred is this: we are saved and that prince of the world, who does not want us to be saved, hates us and gives rise to the persecution that from the earliest times of Jesus continues until today."

One must react to the devil - the pope says - as did Jesus, who “replied with the word of God. With the prince of this world one cannot dialogue. Dialogue is necessary among us, it is necessary for peace, it is an attitude that we must have among ourselves in order to hear each other, to understand each other. And it must always be maintained. Dialogue is born from charity, from love. But with that prince one cannot dialogue; one can only respond with the word of God that defends us.”

In speaking of the devil, Francis demonstrates that he has very clearly in mind his biblical and theological foundations.

And precisely for a fresh understanding of these foundations, "L'Osservatore Romano" of May 4 published an article by the theologian Inos Biffi that reviews the presence and role of the devil in the Old and New Testament, both in that which is revealed and manifest and in that which still belongs to a “hidden panorama” and in a definitive manner to the “inscrutable ways" of God.

The article is reproduced below, and concludes with a criticism of the current ideology that “trivializes” the person of the devil.

The ideology against which Bergoglio wants to call everyone back to reality.

Please, continue reading here.

Be wary of certain “higher critics” of Sacred Scripture

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Fri, 10 May 2013 09:07:33 PDT

Brethren, Peace and Good to all in Jesus Christ.

Many of you are already familiar with the different approaches to biblical interpretation. There are many because the Word of God is such a versatile collection of writings that no single approach is sufficient to fathom its riches.

Higher criticism and the Bible student

Among the approaches developed in the 17^th century that survives to this day is that of “higher criticism.” This approach is really a toolkit of techniques that requires seeing Holy Scripture and its constituent books as primarily literary works made by human beings. Theology and doctrine are secondary concerns to higher critics. In other words, they would focus on the work of human writers as the principal authors of Holy Scriptures, if not always ruling out God as the primary author – but many, in fact, deny the divine authorship or inspiration of the Bible, period.

Among the tools available to the higher critics are textual criticism, or the study of the evolution of a text from as near as the original writing as possible down to the canonical text as received and read today; form criticism, or the study of the oral tradition and communities that may have had a hand in choosing – some say “creating” – discrete sets of “memories” that were later redacted by one or more writers or editors into the canonical text. In fact, the “redaction process” has its own study, redaction criticism, which is the attempt to recreate “the plan” followed by the redactors in putting together what later became the canonical text, as well as the religious, social, and political cultures and realities informing their redaction plan. Finally, literary critics of Holy Scripture explore the different literary genres one often finds in the Bible: poetry, narrative, stories, novels, songs, history, legislation, even translations from older forms of Hebrew or Greek, etc.

Higher critics often also invoke the help of auxiliary empirical sciences to perform their work. As such, the findings – and also often highly interpreted findings – by archeologists, historians, comparative religion scholars, paleographers, paleodemographers, paleontologists, geologists, geographers, language specialists, antiquarians, you name it, often influence the work of the higher critics.

There is nothing wrong a priori with higher criticism. The different criticisms often mutually influence each other, bringing greater clarity to words and meanings of Holy Scripture, resulting in better, more accurate translations and theological insights. The findings from the scientific disciplines mentioned above also enrich these methodologies, helping set the Holy Scriptures in their rightful geographical, cultural, religious, literary, and historical setting.

In fact, the adoption and judicious application of the tools of higher criticism in biblical studies is what distinguishes Catholic exegetes from those who cling to a literal-grammatical interpretation of Holy Scripture, often called “fundamentalists” in the United States. What’s more, even conservative Christians in Protestant ecclesial bodies are increasingly aware of these aids to interpretation aids and the results are showing up on their teachings and sermons.

By this I don’t mean that one needs to be a “higher critic” in order to understand Holy Scripture. The Bible is a singular composition in that respect: its teaching, particularly its moral teaching, can be apprehended plainly and its organic evolution traced throughout the history bound between its cover. Higher criticism, for example, becomes very useful in the elucidation of difficult passages where the received text may record an archaic word, a word borrowed foreign words, or in detecting transposed sections, even entire chapters, where the traditional order preserved such transpositions and “broke the flow” of a given narrative, oracle, etc. It also help us understand the historical setting of the biblical stories, by illuminating the daily life, local customs, laws, and religions of the Middle East, which are often acknowledged, but not described in the biblical text. One final – among the many I can come up with – is that higher criticism helps us to make sense of obscure sayings or proverbs, or of highly symbolic prophecy like that contained in the book of Daniel and Revelation.

All things considered, the higher criticism of Holy Scripture is similar to a surgeon’s scalpel: in the right hands it does a lot of good. However, when does it do evil?

The problem with certain higher critics

Continuing with the scalpel metaphor I used above, higher criticism becomes problematic when higher critics wield the scalpel as a machete, or better still, when these critics see their object of study – Holy Scripture – as a corpse they are performing an autopsy upon. These are the critics who deny what we call a sensus plenior, the salvific meaning of the Bible which we understand by approaching the Bible as the Word of God in the words of men. Higher critics for whom the Bible is just another literary creation in the world of myth and stories of national or religious origins feel no compunction in interpreting the Bible according to particular ideologies or personal or academic prejudices. I can multiple the examples, but in the interest of time and length I’ll just mention two, one for each Testament:·

Many higher critics engage in a systematic fragmentation of the Pentateuch, following an over-application of the documentary hypothesis, and creating a tabula rasa which the critic fills with his or her own pet interpretive theory. Some critics pretend to discover the motivations of the redactors and describe them in terms of local or international political intrigue or rivalries; or in terms of class warfare: the rich vs. the poor; women against men; nobility vs. common citizens; etc. Once they achieve their preferred interpretive mode, they proceed to thread entire new theologies based upon their findings. We heart then about liberation theology, feminist theology, psychological theology – all the while forgetting, or burying the simple truth under tons of jargon or footnotes, that there is no one shred of empirical evidence substantiating their claim to know the mind of the redactor. Would a pre-exilic redactor of the Torah recognize himself in the claims made about him by some higher critics? Probably not.

Mainstream higher critics of the New Testament – or at least, the ones who get the most media coverage – are stuck with a fundamental premise they seldom challenge, at least in public: that there is little or nothing in the New Testament that gives us ground facts attesting to the historical Jesus, his acts and words, much less his miracles and resurrection. These critics see, the Gospels as the product of a complex interactions between early Christian communities which, after receiving the early kerygma – early apostolic teaching – and bits and pieces of oral tradition that may have had bits of historical data about Jesus – and much exaggeration – and created their own narratives to fit their own understanding of the kerygma. Author-redactors then consolidated the stories and contributed their own theological understanding to form the Gospels as we know it. The author also invested the Gospel with his own cosmology, mythic understanding of the world, and his social, cultural, and class prejudice. As a consequence we see the rise of all sorts of controversies: the unending quests for “the historical Jesus”; the “invention” of Christianity by Paul and the supposed mutual opposition between “Pauline communities” and “the Jerusalem Mother Church”; the elevation of heterodox movements to the rank of “alternative Christianities”; the characterization of one Gospel as “more historical” than another; and the expunging of every hierarchical ecclesiology in the New Testament smacking of Catholicism. The problem is: there is no archeological, textual, or otherwise empirical proof for the existence of such “creative” communities, redactors, and conflicts. Nada, zero, zilch. These entities are nothing but hypothetical constructs existing only in the mind of these critics.

What’s the result of these approaches? Utter confusion among the masses, particularly when these views are popularized in documentaries in the History, Science, Smithsonian, or National Geographic channels. The impression given by these documentaries and other publications aimed at the public is that “orthodoxy” is a political construct, concocted by either the Pope or “the imperial Church” or other theological class enemy, aiming at the destruction of the other “Christianities” and to the oppression of women, the enforcement of monastic and then clerical celibacy, and enforced by persecution, excommunication, banishment, etc.

These critics have help recast Christian theology as a quest to restore these other Christianities, e.g., the Gnostics, Monophysites, Nestorians, and other sects; and to empower women; the variously disenfranchised; and those who hold to “alternative sexualities” or genders, to embrace their self-defined identities as wholesome and good, over and against the antique, oppressive, obsolete, and “patriarchal” dictats proposed as true and binding for all ages by orthodox Christianity.

These are the problems and the challenges we believers face in today’s marketplace of ideas. The other side has recast the entire Gospel in the name of “science” into postmodern narratives of freedom and liberation. Meanwhile, they’ve sidelined those who hold to the Gospel as originally preached to the margins of ridicule, bigotry, and oblivion.

There’s good, there’s bad

I finish with some brief recommendations. Check out the website of The Society of Biblical Literature. The society groups scholars of all persuasions to foster research into the Bible using the toolkit I described above. Their sheer number of participants brings by itself a balanced view of today’s trends in biblical scholarship. Also, if you want to know what it takes to write a peer-reviewed research paper on biblical interpretation, this is the place to go. If you are Catholic, please don't forget to visit The Sacred Page, an excellent blog about biblical interpretation and scholarship.

Read two authors that bring the latest biblical scholarship to Christian theology who actually strengthen historical Christian claims: the Anglican bishop N.T. Wright and Pope (Emeritus) Benedict XVI. If you want to attain competence on the subject of higher criticism and its fruitful application to central issues in theology, they are your men.

Don’t buy into the theses put forward by The Jesus Seminar, John Dominic Crossan, and Elaine Pagels. The last two star in many of the most popular documentaries about the Bible you see on TV. I don’t tell you not to read anything by them – I am not a censor – but, be skeptical. “Criticize the critics,” I would say. Take whatever they say with a grain of salt.

And may Almighty God, Father, Son, and +Holy Spirit be with us as we pursue a greater knowledge of Him through Sacred Scripture.

Pope Francis to US sisters: living with Jesus but without the Church "an absurd dichotomy"

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Thu, 09 May 2013 09:30:56 PDT

Brethren, Peace be with you.

I share this report by the Catholic News Agency:

Vatican City, May 8, 2013 / 10:01 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Pope Francis told leaders of women’s religious orders today that their vocations can only be recognized within the fold of the Church.

“Your vocation is a fundamental charism for the Church's journey and it isn't possible that a consecrated woman or man might 'feel' themselves not to be with the Church,” he told around 800 female superiors general on May 8.

The International Union of Superiors General has been meeting for its general assembly in Rome since May 3.

Present this year were more than 150 American sisters, some of whom also belong to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, which has had a strained relationship with the Vatican since it was required in April 2012 to undergo reform.

Bishop Leonard Blaire of Toledo carried out a four-year review and found “serious doctrinal problems” and the need for the LCWR to undergo renewal.

The assessment of the leadership conference expressed concern over “certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith” that were in some presentations sponsored by the conference.

One such address discussed religious sisters “moving beyond the Church” and beyond Jesus.

In addition to highlighting the need for the organization to provide adequate doctrinal formation for its members, the report also voiced concern over letters from LCWR officers suggesting “corporate dissent” from Church teaching on topics such as the sacramental male priesthood and homosexuality.

Pope Francis seemed to address this history during today’s meeting. He told the sisters about the “‘feeling’ of being with the Church,” given to them through baptism.

It is a “feeling,” he said, “that finds its filial expression in fidelity to the Magisterium, in communion with the pastors and Successor of Peter, Bishop of Rome, visible sign of that unity.”

To be otherwise, he said, would be against their vocation.

“It is an absurd dichotomy to think of living with Jesus but without the Church, of following Jesus outside of the Church, of loving Jesus without loving the Church,” he stated.

“Feel the responsibility that you have of caring for the formation of your institutes in sound Church doctrine, in love of the Church, and in an ecclesial spirit,” Pope Francis added.
The Vatican’s doctrine department put Archbishop J. Peter Sartain of Seattle in charge of working with the sisters to reform the organization for a period of up to five years.

On May 5, Cardinal João Braz de Aviz, who heads the Vatican’s Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, made waves when he told the sisters gathered in Rome that he was not consulted about the doctrine department’s decision on reforming the LCWR.

His words drew a rare May 7 statement from the doctrine office, which aimed to dismiss the idea of a “divergence” between the doctrine and religious congregations.

Commentary. Now we see why Pope Francis kept the findings and process against the LCWR intact. Though keeping the reformation of the LCWR moving ahead was downplayed by some commentators, Pope Francis had at least four alternative courses of action that he could have chosen: move the process forward as is; modify the process, but move it forward; scratch and start over again; or stop and do nothing. Since he chose to keep the canonical correction of the LCWR moving forward, it stands to reason - and we now know - that Pope Francis is convinced that there was something truly wrong with the LCWR that needed fixing.

I applaud our Holy Father Francis and once again invite - and pray for - the LCWR sisters to exercise their fruitful services within the Church and in communion with the lawful pastors, not outside, over, under, or against the Church.

Some Pro-Aborts Call #Abortion What it is: Killing

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Tue, 07 May 2013 09:50:26 PDT

Brethren, Peace and Good to all of you in Jesus our Lord.

Recently, I left a comment in an article at Politico.com, titled The euphemism imperative, in which the author discussed the use of euphemisms by the media and pro-abortion supporters to avoid the unpleasant moral implications of calling it by its name or by more accurate nouns (i.e. "killing"). After I left a brief comment, the following conversation ensued (click on it to enlarge it):

You see, some pro-abortion supporters are more than willing to avoid euphemisms. Not that we should sleep easier every night, mind you. Clearly, they can't think the question through to its final implications, much less apply moral thinking to the gravest genocide of our times.

Mary, Full of Love

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Mon, 06 May 2013 18:19:56 PDT

Fr. Nicolas Schwizer

The first title which the Gospel gives to Mary is that of “full of grace.” Having found grace before God means having been “favored” by his gifts: by those gifts which He doles out through his own generosity. And these gifts are ultimately one: his love. “Full of grace” is then “full of love.” I believe it would be good for all of us to renew our love while looking at an attractive model. And this model could be the Blessed Virgin.

Mary is the woman full of love. Her life proves that is true because what characterizes her most is that She lives in full communion of love, not only with God, but also with mankind. In the Annunciation, this communion of love is extended to all humanity: Mary accepts being the Mother of the Mesiah, the Savior of mankind. Thus appears the Virgin from the first scenes of the Gospel, attached by deep bonds of love to concrete persons: to Joseph, to Jesus, to Elizabeth and Zacary, to the bride and groom at Cana, to the disciples.

The Lord was always with Mary. From the very instant in which she was conceived, He filled her with his grace and his love. Therefore, Mary is also “the Immaculata,” the one without sin….. because sin is man’s “no” to love and there would never have been room for that in her heart. To sin is to say no to the two basic commandments of the Gospel: to the love for God and to the love for one’s neighbor. It is to refuse to be children and to be brothers and sisters. It is rupturing the communion to the height and to the breadth, isolating oneself and withdrawing into one’s own self, into one’s pride, selfishness, ambition or vanity.

The salvation of Jesus Christ – as it is resplendent in Mary – begins through the liberation of sin and returns to communion in love. What is decisive is the first moment it takes place in the interior of the human heart: the openness to love, the victory over selfishness and pride. The one who has decided in his heart for love, to live in communion with God and mankind, he is already saved. He is already liberated: liberated from solitude, from anxiety, from bitterness and self-destruction which produces isolation within oneself.

But salvation and that communion must grow, they must project themselves beyond the pure heart. The final stage of this process will be in Heaven. There our body will also be liberated forever from the effects of sin: from pain, sickness and death.

By her attitude, Mary teaches us that love motivates to be in solidarity and to share. She shares her life and her goods with Joseph.

She shares with Jesus his mission, with Elizabeth, her domestic chores, with the bride and groom of Cana, their concern. Her love has become communion of life and goods, in communion of destinies and tasks, in communion with joy and affliction.

Because she is Mother, Mary possesses a charism, a special gift for uniting the hearts and opening them to love, to make us brothers and sisters.

And Mary also wants to send us to create an atmosphere of unity and love. She asks us to create it, to cultivate it and to permanently bring it to perfection in our homes, in our places of work, in our neighborhoods and in our groups. And She invites us, likewise, to build together a society more in solidarity and manifesting it in real help to those who suffer, to those who depend on us and to those who approach us.

Let us ask the Blessed Virgin to help us liberate ourselves from all that – in the heart of each one of us – opposes love. May She give us the strength to overcome in ourselves sin and selfishness which separates us from others and destroys unity. May Mary open our hearts to love, to communion with God and with our brothers and sisters, just as Jesus taught and lived.

Questions for reflection

1. What is my relationship to the Virgin Mary like?

2. Am I a community person?

Translation: Carlos Cantú, Schoenstatt Family Federation, La Feria, Texas USA 02212013

“Show us the Father” – Brief reflection on John 14: 6-14

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Fri, 03 May 2013 09:51:48 PDT

Brethren, Peace and Good to all of you.

Today we remember the holy apostles Phillip and Nathaniel. Phillip in particular had a memorable intervention in John’s Gospel which is the one read at Mass today (John 14: 6-14):

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.

If you had known me, you would have known my Father also; henceforth you know him and have seen him."

Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied."

Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, `Show us the Father'?

Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does his works.

Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me; or else believe me for the sake of the works themselves.

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father.

Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; if you ask anything in my name, I will do it.

These verses reflect the beauty and the depth so much present throughout the soaring Gospel of John. These from today’s Mass in particular caught my special attention:

If you had known me, you would have known my Father also; henceforth you know him and have seen him."

God’s Eternal Image of Himself

Why is the Father known in Jesus? This is because Jesus reflects the Father perfectly, as mirror image can be said to reflect the original subject. However, as with all analogies when we talk about God, this one breaks down when we consider that God is pure act, eternal, without beginning or end. In Him there’s no past or future, but an ever present in which His nature is to be, transcending space and time. Let me expand a bit.

God sees Himself in a supreme pure act of self-consciousness in which He beholds Himself. We can barely approximate this act of self-awareness in ourselves, when we construct an idea of ourselves as bodily, personal beings in our minds and label this image “I” or “me”. But this image is just that, a kind of “projection” to which we ascribe certain qualities and attributes that may (or may not) approximate our reality because, due to sin or its effects, we can distort the very image we have of ourselves nor can we contemplate this image at all times without distraction and when we do, we do run the risk of becoming selfish, self-centered.

Yet, God’s image of Himself is Perfect, flawless, and coextensive with His very being. He contemplates Himself for all eternity in one single act which is, again, coextensive with His one

Being without risk of degenerating into selfish self-centeredness.

We can see this notion of Christ being an image of God – without the further attenuation of likeness in those instances found elsewhere in the Bible describing man as being created “in the image and likeness of God – in Colossians 1:5. In a language very similar to that of John, the apostle Paul calls Jesus the image of the invisible God.

To put it bluntly, this image that God has of Himself is Himself and that Image became incarnate in Jesus Christ. That’s why in the Man Jesus – the firstborn of all creatures, also according to Colossian 1:5 – we see God perfectly in human form.

Man’s pining for God answered in Jesus Christ

Phillip fails to understand the import of Jesus’ explicit declaration, since Phillip asks Jesus again:

Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied."

What Phillip saw in Jesus’ humanity did not exhaust the mystery of God in Phillip’s eyes because, for Phillip, Jesus’ humanity was ordinary, compact, finite and circumscribed to the carpenter’s son standing before him. “God” – Phillip thought – has to be bigger than this man Jesus who claims to be the very image of God. Was Phillip on to something?

I think that another letter of Paul provides an answer to Phillip and those of us who like him want to see the Father, God in all His glory:

Have among yourselves the same attitude that is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness, and found human in appearance, he humbled himself…(Philippians 2: 5-8, NAB)

Despite being God’s very image (again, Colossians 1:5) Jesus did not cling to the glory proper to his nature and stature as God, but out of humility, he emptied himself into a human nature such that the first experience that Phillip had of God was Jesus in his human nature.

God had made the impossible: without stopping being God he became man. We can compare this to the emptying of the world’s oceans into a golf-ball hole! God fitted into a finite, circumscribed, compact, small human nature!

In effect, the only way in which we are to experience and encounter the Image of God who is God from the beginning is in the very humanity of Jesus Christ himself, who by virtue of being God’s Image, indwells in the Father and the Father in Him.

In Jesus, then, we find He for whom our heart pines for, the Eternal one from whom love gives Himself inexhaustibly in…the Holy Spirit.

That will be the subject of a future post…

Archbishop Chaput: The Gosnell story and its lessons

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 08:29:47 PDT

Author: Archbishop Charles Chaput | Source: Catholic Philly

Archbishop Charles Chaput
of Philadelphia

Some stories, no matter how unsettling, just can’t be ignored — even when some people are determined to look away.

The murder trial of Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell will soon go to jury. And like every other criminally accused person under the law, Gosnell is innocent until proven guilty. Whatever the verdict though, there’s no ambiguity about the kind of business he ran at his West Philadelphia “Women’s Medical Center” — an abortion clinic that critics have likened to a meatpacking plant or a butcher shop, with unborn children delivered into a toilet, and jars of fetal body parts stored around the facility.

Dr. Gosnell was originally charged with one count of infanticide and five counts of “abuse of corpse” for killing fetuses born alive by plunging scissors into their necks. Without explanation, the judge in the case accepted a motion to acquit Gosnell of these charges earlier this week. Gosnell still faces four counts of first-degree and one count of third-degree murder. Eight of his coworkers have already pleaded guilty in the case, including three to third-degree murder.

Or so said The New York Times in a report dated April 23. The date is important. Gosnell’s trial began March 18, more than a month ago. The Times coverage, while modest, is significant. Why? The answer is simple. The Inquirer – Philadelphia’s hometown paper – has done a good job following the trial. But most prestige national media have seemed remarkably eager to ignore the story until shamed into covering it.
Gosnell is much more than a “local” story. The continuing debate over legalized abortion is a hot-button national issue that drew half a million pro-life demonstrators to Washington in January. The battle over abortion restrictions continues in every state. Forty years after the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, resistance to permissive abortion remains high. And the vivid details of the Gosnell clinic tragedy have the kind of salacious appeal that few national media would normally avoid — if the issue were anything else. But abortion is too often, and in too many news rooms, exactly the kind of topic that brings on a sudden case of snow blindness.

The real story in the Gosnell trial is bigger than the ugly allegations against Gosnell himself; it includes the failure — the allergic disinterest — of some of our most important national media. A headline in The Atlantic magazine, April 12, states the obvious: “Why Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s Trial Should Be a Front-Page Story: The dead babies. The exploited women. The racism. The numerous governmental failures. It is thoroughly newsworthy.”

The Atlantic story by Conor Friedersdorf is worth reading. But don’t stop there. Read this by Kirsten Powers, columnist for The Daily Beast, in USA Today. And these excellent analyses by journalists Terry Mattingly, Mollie Hemingway and George Conger.

The irony is that much of the media’s lethargy in covering the Gosnell case really doesn’t surprise. It’s part of the fabric of a culture that simply will not see what it doesn’t want to see about the realities of abortion. And it leads to the kind of implausible claim made recently by one local commentator that “no sense of guilt is warranted” by the media because “there is no causal connection between coverage of [the Gosnell] case and bias.” It’s hard to imagine a more untenable alibi.

The brutality in abortion is intimate, personal and permanent. It violates women, and it kills a developing human life every time — whether the venue is a “Women’s Medical Center”-style meat factory or a soothing suburban clinic. What makes the Gosnell story unique is that it should distress anyone with its details, pro-choice or pro-life, regardless of religion or politics.

But of course, people need to know about an evil before they can do anything about it.

I visited the Holy Land right in Washington, DC

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 11:14:15 PDT

Brothers and sisters: Peace and Good to all of you (again!).

This weekend I visited The Franciscan Monastery of the Holy Land in America, located in the District of Columbia – that’s Washington, DC for you outsiders. I wanted to because it advertised replicas of sorts of holy places found in the Holy Land, Rome, and elsewhere.

The monastery is located at the corner of Quincy and 14th streets and I think it’s a place worth visiting for its architecture, beautiful grounds, and spiritual power.

I wanted to share with you a few other pictures below. This next picture is a copy of the aediculum, the chapel enshrining the tomb of Jesus Christ inside the Basilica of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem :

I went in and indeed, there is a replica, hanging lamps and all. There’s also a replica of Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity. This is the place where Jesus was born:

And here’s the manger:

There’s also a replica of a short span of a Roman catacomb with the most interesting (to me) early Christian artwork on the walls.

Outside there’s a replica of The Portiuncula, the first Franciscan church, the one St. Francis rebuilt first in his original program of church repair.

Inside, you’ll see a replica of the Cross of St. Damiano, from which Christ called him to repair the Church:

All things considered, The Franciscan Monastery of the Holy Land in America will be spiritually worthwhile. If you are in the area, don’t forget to visit!

Vivificat’s Global Reach

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 10:31:42 PDT

Brothers and sisters, Peace and Good to you.

Periodically, I check the health of this blog and the Spanish sister blog, just to see how they are doing and who are they reaching. Well, these are the provenance of the latest 100 or so visitors to both blogs in the last 24 hours. (Click on the image to enlarge it).

Global reach indeed. Thank you all kindly for taking the time to read this blog.

Papal catechesis on the Final Judgment

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:06:32 PDT

Source: Zenit.org

Dear brothers and sisters,

Good morning!

In the Creed we profess that Jesus "will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead." Human history begins with the creation of man and woman in the image and likeness of God and ends with the final judgment of Christ. Often these two poles of history are forgotten, and, above all, faith in the return of Christ and the last judgment sometimes is not so clear and steadfast in the hearts of Christians. Jesus, during his public life, often focused on the reality of his last coming. Today I would like to reflect on three Evangelical texts that help us enter this mystery: that of the ten virgins, the talents and the final judgment. All three are part of the Jesus' discourse on the end of times, in the Gospel of St. Matthew.

First of all remember that, with the Ascension, the son of God brought to the Father our humanity that he took on and he wants to draw all men to himself, to call the whole world to be welcomed into the open arms of God, so that, at the end of history, all of reality will be handed over to the Father. There is, though, this "intermediate time" between the first coming of Christ and the last, which is precisely the time that we are living. The parable of the ten virgins is placed within this context (cf. Mt 25:1-13). It involves ten girls who are waiting for the arrival of the bridegroom, but he delays and they fall asleep. At the sudden announcement that the bridegroom is coming, all prepare to welcome him, but while five of them, who were wise, have oil to trim their lamps, the others, who are foolish, are left with unlit lamps because they have no oil; and while they go out to find some, the groom arrives and the foolish virgins find the door closed that leads to the bridal feast. They knocking persistently, but it is too late, the groom replies: I do not know you. The groom is the Lord, and the waiting time of arrival is the time He gives us, all of us with mercy and patience, before his final coming, it is a time to be vigilant; a time in which we need to keep lit the lamps of the faith, hope and charity, a time in which to keep the heart open to the good, to beauty and to the truth; a time to live according to God, because we know neither the day nor the hour of Christ's return. What is asked of us is to be prepared for this encounter – prepared for an encounter, for a beautiful encounter, the encounter with Jesus - which means being able to see the signs of his presence, to keep alive our faith through prayer, with the sacraments, to be vigilant in order not to sleep, not to forget God. The Christian life asleep is a sad life, it isn’t a happy life. The Christian must be happy, have the joy of Jesus. Let’s not fall asleep!

The second parable, that of the talents, makes us reflect on the relationship between how we use the gifts received from God and his return, when he will ask how we used them (cf. Mt 25:14-30). We know the parable: before departure, the master gives each servant some talents, to use well during his absence. To the first he gives five, to the second, two, and to the third, one. During the period of his absence, the first two servants multiply their talents - ancient coins -, while the third prefers to bury his and deliver it intact to the master. Upon his return, the master judges their work: he commends the first two, while the third is kicked out into the darkness, because he kept his talent hidden out of fear, closing in on himself. A Christian who closes in on himself, who hides everything that the Lord has given him as a Christian that is…he isn’t a Christian! He is a Christian that does not thank God for all that he has given him! This tells us that the time of waiting for the Lord's return is the time of action, - we are in the time of action - the time in which to put to use the gifts of God not for ourselves, but for Him, for the Church, for others, the time during which always to try to increase the good in the world. And especially now, in this time of crisis, it is important not to close in upon oneself, burying one's talent, one’s own spiritual, intellectual, material riches, everything that the Lord has given us, but to open oneself, to be in solidarity, to be attentive to the other. In the square, I saw today there are many young people. Is it so? Are there very many young people? Where are they? To you, who are at the beginning of the journey of life, I ask: have you thought about the talents that God has given you? Have you thought about how you can put them at the service of others? Don't bury your talents! Bet on big ideals, those ideals that enlarge the heart, those ideals that will make your talents fruitful.

Life is not given to us so that we can keep it jealously for ourselves, but is given to us so that we may donate it. Dear young people, have a great soul! Don't be afraid to dream great things!

Finally, a word on the passage of the final judgement, that describes the second coming of the Lord, when He will judge all humans, living and dead (cf. Mt 25:31-46). The image used by the Evangelist is that of the Shepherd separating sheep from goats. On the right are those who acted according to the will of God, helping their neighbor who was hungry, thirsty, stranger, naked, sick, imprisoned, thus following the Lord himself; while on the left are those who haven't come to the aid of their neighbour. This tells us that we will be judged by God on charity, on how we loved him in our brothers, especially the weakest and neediest. Of course, we must always keep in mind that we are justified, we are saved by grace, by an act of God's gratuitous love which always precedes us; we alone can do nothing. Faith is first of all a gift that we have received. But to bear fruit, God's grace always requires our openness, our free and concrete response. Christ comes to bring us the mercy of God who saves. We are asked to trust him, to match the gift of his love with a good life, with actions animated by faith and love.

Dear brothers and sisters, may we never be afraid to look to the final judgment; may it push us rather to live better lives. God gives us with mercy and patience this time so that we may learn every day to recognize him in the poor and in the little ones, may we strive for good and we are vigilant in prayer and love. May the Lord, at the end of our existence and history, may recognize us as good and faithful servants. Thank you!

In my opinion: No #DeathPenalty for #BostonBombings suspect

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:08:22 PDT

Brethren, Peace and Good to all of you in Jesus’ Name.

Most of my life I’ve held the prudential judgment that capital punishment is fitting to a few cases in which the offense committed is so egregious that the only fitting punishment would be death. The Boston bombings during the marathon one week ago today certainly fit the kind of crime fit for capital punishment. Furthermore, I’ve struggled to bring my own conscience to the view prevailing today in our Church which deemphasizes capital punishment in almost all situations, and although this situation may indeed fit the exception in the Church’s moral teaching, I find myself wishing for a non-lethal judicial outcome for the surviving bomber.

My first argument against the surviving bomber’s eventual execution is one of proportion: the punishment must fit the crime, but his crimes are so numerous and each one so deadly and unsettling that the mere taking of his life would not “redress the balance” as it were. He would deserve much more punishments than those the justice system can meet out. It can be said that the Boston bomber’s execution would be insufficient punishment in proportion to the deeds he would be guilty of.

I see one immediate counterargument to my position and that involves the Nuremberg Trials. The Nazi upper echelons were guilty of monstrous crimes for which they were ultimately executed, despite the disproportion between their individual deaths and the deaths and damages the Nazis caused through waging offensive war, genocide and other crimes against humanity, and material destruction. I further counter argue that the Nazi crimes and the Nuremberg Trials stand on a moral and legal category by itself. Therefore, I don’t think that we should follow the Nuremberg Trial precedent in the Boston Bombing legal outcome.

Besides, Nazis and Islamic fascists – yes, there’s such a thing as “Islamic fascism” – differ in one key respect: the worship of martyrdom the latter hold dear over the former as a religious imperative. For all their stated goals of “fatherland or death”, Nazi war criminals did their best to escape just punishment, highlighting the fact that, to them, staying alive and free was of higher value than becoming a dead patriot who died for a despised ideology. Not so with Islamic fascists for whom the death of a believer in the cause of Islam is the crowning jewel of a life of jihad or “struggle.” My point is that denying them this final satisfaction is worse punishment for the Islamic jihadist than a legal execution; therefore, since death by either capital punishment or in “action” fits the perpetrator’s mindset, I say our legal system should not cater to him. I say we should let him live because to him remaining alive and dying of old age in a cage represents dishonor and failure.

Yes, I confess that my reasons are still far from what my Church considers the principal reason for abrogating capital punishment and that’s the intrinsic value of human life itself, even the life of the Boston bombing and mayhem’s surviving perpetrator. Under this light, the perpetrator is still considered a son of God, albeit one in which this image and likeness has been blurred by great evil. However, since he remains a son of God, he also remains an object of God’s love and redemptive will, and therefore, also an object of our own disinterested love and instrumental redemptive will. That's the contemporary teaching of the Church regarding capital punishment and I want to be faithful to that teaching.

Emotionally, I am not “there” but I want to exercise this higher Christian way, so much higher than the Islamic prescription for a similar case and not only Islamic, but to other “Christian” and secular common sense, accepted wisdom often governing cases such as this. As Catholic Christians we need to recognize that even someone like 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has not strayed so far from God’s mercy that Tsarnaev is forever lost. Let us keep in mind that, as illustrated in the Good Shepherd’s parable, even if Tsarnaev had been the world’s only sinner, Jesus would still have died the death he died to save Dzhokhar Tsarnaev from sin and eternal death. That’s how much God loves each and every one of us and what sets Christianity apart from Islam and every other religion. As a human being he has the right to exercise the same ultimate choice, for or against God that we all have.

Setting aside the death penalty for the Boston bombing perpetrator does not mean I advocate his impunity. The perpetrator should confess his crimes in a court of law; he should be made to sit and listen to every impact statement made by every surviving victim or family member he hurt; and he should spend the rest of his life in insolation in a maximum security prison thinking of all he did. An American flag should be set just outside his cell, so that it is the only thing he would be able to see during the day and hear during the night until his natural death; and a crucifix hung just outside his cell door so that he sees it every time he’s led to the showers or to the exercise yard twice a week for the rest of his life.

For an Islamic terrorist there would be no greater shame, and no greater opportunity for salvation, than seeing an American flag waving free or a representation of the Son of God whose death saved the world without having to kill anyone else in the process. Human shame and Christian hope will be more appropriate daily “punishments” for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, than dying a “martyr’s” death for others to exalt and emulate.

Lock him up forever, but don’t kill him. That’s where I stand.

The difference between the gods of pagan, Classical Antiquity and the One God

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Sat, 20 Apr 2013 15:48:37 PDT

"The Graeco-Roman world did not have a creator God; according to its vision, the highest divinity could not, as it were, dirty his hands in the business of creating matter. The “making” of the world was the work of the Demiurge, a lower deity. The Christian God is different: he, the one, real and only God, is also the Creator. God is working; he continues working in and on human history. In Christ, he enters personally into the laborious work of history. “My Father is working still, and I am working.” God himself is the Creator of the world, and creation is not yet finished. God works, ergázetai! Thus human work was now seen as a special form of human resemblance to God, as a way in which man can and may share in God’s activity as creator of the world. Monasticism involves not only a culture of the word, but also a culture of work, without which the emergence of Europe, its ethos and its influence on the world would be unthinkable. Naturally, this ethos had to include the idea that human work and shaping of history is understood as sharing in the work of the Creator, and must be evaluated in those terms. Where such evaluation is lacking, where man arrogates to himself the status of god-like creator, his shaping of the world can quickly turn into destruction of the world."

Pope Benedict XVI, Address, Collège des Bernardins, Paris, 12 September 2008

Blessed John Paul the Great: "Man is called to a fullness of life..."

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 08:30:27 PDT

Man is called to a fullness of life which far exceeds the dimensions of his earthly existence, because it consists in sharing the very life of God. The loftiness of this supernatural vocation reveals the greatness and the inestimable value of human life even in its temporal phase. Life in time, in fact, is the fundamental condition, the initial stage and an integral part of the entire unified process of human existence. It is a process which, unexpectedly and undeservedly, is enlightened by the promise and renewed by the gift of divine life, which will reach its full realization in eternity (cf. 1 Jn 3:1-2). At the same time, it is precisely this supernatural calling which highlights the relative character of each individual's earthly life. After all, life on earth is not an "ultimate" but a "penultimate" reality; even so, it remains a sacred reality entrusted to us, to be preserved with a sense of responsibility and brought to perfection in love and in the gift of ourselves to God and to our brothers and sisters.

Blessed John Paul the Great: The Gospel of Life: 2

Pope Francis reaffirms apostolic visitation of LCWR

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 10:00:12 PDT

Brothers and Sisters: Peace be with you.

This, according to the Catholic News Service:

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Pope Francis reaffirmed the Vatican's call for reform of the U.S.-based Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR).

Archbishop Gerhard Muller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, told the U.S.-based nuns' group that he had "recently discussed the doctrinal assessment with Pope Francis, who reaffirmed the findings of the assessment and the program of reform for this conference of major superiors."

The doctrinal congregation met April 15 with the LCWR leadership and Seattle Archbishop J. Peter Sartain, who had been assigned by the Vatican to oversee the reform of the pontifically recognized leadership group.

Please, continue reading here.

Commentary. This is great news for those of us following LCWR developments during the past year or so. As you may recall, the LCWR suffered from widespread doctrinal shortcomings, as well as a notorious lack of support to the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. In my view, the LCWR set itself as an alternate "magisterium" where those dissenting from normative Catholic teaching often found refuge and support.

The continuation of the LCWR apostolic visitation and reform shows Pope Francis' continuing commitment to Popes John Paul and Benedict's "hermeneutic of continuity" in the Catholic Church, and the quest for Catholic solutions to urgent Catholic problems.

Video: Gay Marriage and the Breakdown of Moral Argument: A commentary by Fr. Robert Barron

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:39:26 PDT

The St. Pius X - Bl. John XXIII Connection

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:38:23 PDT

Brethren: Peace and Good to all of you.

I’ve continued with my inspirational reading of Blessed John XXIII Journal of a Soul: The Autobiography of Pope John XXIII and among its many beautiful jewels, I found this one:

After my first Mass over the tomb of St. Peter I found the hands of the Holy Father Pius X laid on my head in a blessing full of good augury for me and for the priestly life I was just entering upon; and after more than half a century (fifty-seven years precisely) here are my own hands extended in a blessing to the Catholics, and not only of the Catholics, of the whole world, in a gesture of universal fatherhood. I am successor to this same Pius X who has been proclaimed a saint, and I am still living in the same priestly service as he, his predecessors and his successors, all place like St. Peter at the head of the same Church of Christ, one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic. (August 10, 1961, during a retreat at Castel Gandolfo)

I am sure that this deeply-felt connection between Blessed John and St. Pius X may come as a shock first to those who still cling to the fantasy of Blessed John being a closeted “progressive”, who, if he were alive today, would bless every scheme concocted by Hans Küng, Sr. Joan Chittister, John Curran and others. I assure you there’s no proof whatever of such inclination on any of Blessed John’s published works that I am aware of that his aggiornamiento included that kind of “reformation” and renewal. On the contrary, we can see that Blessed John was very conscious about who he was as Pope, his paternal mission not only to Catholics but to the whole world, and his duty to the Church professed in the Nicene Creed: One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. Moreover, he sees his connection to St. Pius X as a living connection, for Blessed John received ordination from the holy Pope, but in that he was also his successor in the Chair of Peter.

The connection proves to my mind that Blessed John was a Pope who exercised an “hermeneutic of continuity” and that his words and acts must be interpreted by this “hermeneutic”. He didn’t set out to reformulate the Church along strange patterns, but to reaffirm her in a dialogue with the modern world and the exercise of a new evangelization.

The Bl. John XXIII – St. Pius X connection will probably unsettled those so-called Catholics who believe that the See of Peter has been vacant since 1958, when Bl. John started his pontificate and others who are in or outside of the Catholic Church who belittle Bl. John’s pontificate for a variety of reasons. Blessed John’s firm self-consciousness of who he was as a priest, bishop, and pope flies in the face of those who enjoy concocting false reasons aimed at delegitimizing him. If one were to weigh these “reasons” against the consciousness of Blessed John and the cardinals who elected him, we’ll see these reasons crumbling before the mere, simple facts. What were these facts? Pretty much the ones that “progressives” will find quite disagreeable: that Bl. John saw himself pretty much as a Successor of Peter and all the others, specially of the man who was Pope when he was ordained a priest, and that he conceive the Church in terms of the Nicene Creed and not in terms of other, modernistic reformulations.

No, Blessed John XXIII was not a modernist by any definition. He says so right in this journal. But that will be the subject of a future post.

* Edited.

Sirach describes for us the profile of the true theologian

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:54:30 PDT

Brethren: Peace and Good to all of you.

Frequent readers of this blog know that the Book of Ecclessiasticus or “Wisdom of Ben Sirach” is one of my favorite books of the Bible. It is full of so much practical wisdom and plain observations and advice that I consult it often. I find this book a great consolation.

Today I found these verses that, although speaking about the ideal scribe, can be applied to the “perfect” theologian. In fact, I believe Sirach sketched a program for every student of Holy Scripture to follow. Here are the verses. I hope you enjoy them.

On the other hand he who devotes himself
to the study of the law of the Most High
will seek out the wisdom of all the ancients,
and will be concerned with prophecies;
²he will preserve the discourse of notable men
and penetrate the subtleties of parables;
³he will seek out the hidden meanings of proverbs
and be at home with the obscurities of parables.
⁴He will serve among great men
and appear before rulers;
he will travel through the lands of foreign nations,
for he tests the good and the evil among men.
⁵He will set his heart to rise early
to seek the Lord who made him,
and will make supplication before the Most High;
he will open his mouth in prayer
and make supplication for his sins.

⁶If the great Lord is willing,
he will be filled with the spirit of understanding;
he will pour forth words^[a] of wisdom
and give thanks to the Lord in prayer.
⁷He will direct his counsel and knowledge aright,
and meditate on his secrets.
⁸He will reveal instruction in his teaching,
and will glory in the law of the Lord’s covenant.
⁹Many will praise his understanding,
and it will never be blotted out;
his memory will not disappear,
and his name will live through all generations.
¹⁰Nations will declare his wisdom,
and the congregation will proclaim his praise;
¹¹if he lives long, he will leave a name greater than a thousand,
and if he goes to rest, it is enough^[b] for him.

- A quote from Sirach 39: 1-11, RSV-Catholic

Brief commentary on 1 John 4: 7-12

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Mon, 08 Apr 2013 09:48:37 PDT

Brethren: Peace and Good to all of you.

Another one of the books of the Bible I love is the First Catholic Epistle of St. John and, within it, the verses speaking about God's love. These are it:

7 Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9 This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. 11 Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us. (1 John 4: 7-12, NIV)

For me, these verses are a great summary of the nature, purpose, and end of our Christian vocation. This vocation derives from God himself as if from a fountain, who shares of his very self to us and then we're called to share that love - which is God - from our very selves toward others.

Think about it: by God loving us in Christ, we know God because then, and only then, we're empowered to love our neighbor with the same kind of sacrificial love Jesus showed everyone of us. God's love "crowds out" as it were, our sins, removing their hefty web from our hearts and enabling us to love others.

In this love we show others, we come to know God. It is His love - God himself - that which flows toward others, taking our own love and transforming it along the way. It is, so-to-speak, a "mini" Incarnation of the Word, the "hypostatic unioni" in miniature, as God's love assume us to his divine nature without He ceasing being God and us ceasing to be saints in training.

When we hear the question "where's God" in such-and-such situation, we should take the blame for God's perceived absence, for we are the carriers of God's love toward others. We are supposed to mirror God to our needy neighbors. It is in this transmission of Love - God himself - to us and then, to others who don't know Him where we come to know God.

Let us pray, then, to obtain the grace of an increasing opening to God's love in us, so that we can carry Him to others.

Humor: Better set up camp at the patch, Sister Joan...

http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=524931 (Teófilo de Jesús) — Mon, 08 Apr 2013 07:02:54 PDT

Brothers and Sisters: Peace be with you.

This, from the very talented hand of my colleague at the Catholic Cartoon Blog:

I concur with the sentiment wholeheartedly.