Ubi Petrus

With a hat tip to Thomas at American Papist, two nice Benedict wallpapers from Ignatius Press. I’ve already made one my desktop background. I love the slightly mischievous look on his face in the second one.

Traipsing around the wonder that is the Catholic blogosphere yesterday I came upon Newman Reader with a good collection of his works, biographical information and more. The many works of John Henry Cardinal Newman are broken down into his Anglican and Catholic periods and include his major works as well as several sermons. For someone looking to embellish his or her Catholic understanding with some wisdom from this Catholic hero this is a good place to start. From his Catholic Encylopedia entry:

His biglietto speech, equal to the occasion in grace and wisdom, declared that he had been the life-long enemy of Liberalism, or “the doctrine that there is no truth in religion, but that one creed is as good as another”, and that Christianity is “but a sentiment and a taste, not an objective fact, not miraculous.”

H/T to Mike Aquilina.

It’s possible you’ve seen this already, since Fr. Z knew about it already, but following a tip from one of the comments on his blog today I found a nice little resource for those interested in Latin. Basically it’s an online Latin dictionary with the added bonus that you can get the listing from the Lewis & Short Latin Dictionary by just a single click. From my little checking so far it’s pretty snappy and it found the random words I plugged in. This is something people like me who never took the opportunity to learn Latin when we were young really need.

In case you were wondering, I had the choice of French, Spanish and Latin in my high school; given the large Hispanic population in the neighboring town my mother thought it would be good to speak at least a little Spanish in case I ever needed it. I now regret not having another free period to have been able to take Latin as well. How could I ever have guessed as a 13-year-old non-religious person that I’d ever grow up to want to be fluent in Latin for the love of God and His Church? Mysterious are the ways…

Ratzinger finishes the book (yes, I’m finally done) with an Epilogue on the state of the Church after Vatican II. The Epilogue was written in 1975, ten years after the close of the Council, but much of what he writes is still very much valid today. Since this is a subject that seems on the tips of everyone’s tongue, I’ve extracted several tidbits from this Epilogue.

I must say, before I go on, this book is an absolute don’t-miss for anyone with a serious interest in their faith or even those who just want a better view into the thinking of the man who is now Pope Benedict XVI. There are sections of the book not for the faint-hearted neophyte, but if one can make his or her way through them the struggle is certainly worth it. I heartily recommend this as reading for anyone who wishes to sentire cum ecclesia. There I go again with that phrase… Anyway, on with the quotes (emphasis mine)!

…The return of the old prosperity in the sixties brought with it a similar change in thinking. The new wealth and the bad conscience that accompanied it fostered that remarkable mixture of liberalism and Marxist dogmatism that we have all experienced. We should not, therefore, exaggerate the part played by Vatican Council II in the most recent developments; Protestant Christianity underwent a similar crisis without any council, and political parties have also had to deal with a phenomenon of like origin. Nevertheless, the Council was one of the factors that shared in the development of world history. When an institution as deeply rooted in souls as is the Catholic Church is shaken to its very roots, the earthquake extends to all mankind.

…

The Council understood itself as a great examination of conscience by the Catholic Church; it wanted ultimately to be an act of penance, of conversion. This is apparent in the confessions of guilt, in the intensity of the self-accusations that were not only directed to the more sensitive areas, such as the Reformation and the trial of Galileo, but were also heightened into the concept of a Church that was sinful in a general and fundamental way and that feared as triumphalism whatever might be interpreted as satisfaction with what she had become or what she still was. Linked with this excruciating plumbing of her own depths was an almost painful willingness to take seriously the whole arsenal of complaints against the Church, to omit none of them. That implied as well a careful effort not to incur new guilt with respect to the other, to learn from him wherever possible and to seek to see only the good that was in him. Such a radical interpretation of the fundamental biblical call for conversion and love of neighbor led not only to uncertainty about the Church’s own identity, which is always being questioned, but especially to a deep rift in her relationship to her own history, which seemed to be everywhere sullied.[me: Someone tell me this doesn't echo the exact state the Church finds herself in now, after the sex abuse scandal. As Father Corapi described it once, the Church finds herself like a boxer with a cut over the eye, and her opponent is relentlessly going after that wound, that perceived weakness. I consider a renewal of pride in what we are, in what the Church is, at our very core to be the primal step that must be taken, not unto triumphalism of a distorted sort, but to the willingness to acknowledge in word and deed that we are a part of the Mystical Body of Christ and the willingness to bring that light out from the bushel of shame it has been pushed under that it might again (and still) be the light that leads to the Light of the World.]

…

The real content of Christianity is not the discussion of its Christian content and of ways of realizing it: the content of Christianity is the community of word, sacrament and love of neighbor to which justice and truth bear a fundamental relationship. The dream of making one’s whole life a series of discussions, which, for a time, brought even our universities to the brink of paralysis, also exercised an influence on the Church under the label of the conciliar idea. If a council becomes the model of Christianity per se then the constant discussion of Christian themes comes to be considered the content of Christianity itself; but precisely there lies the failure to recognize the true meaning of Christianity. [me: I take this to suggest that dialogue is good, but dialog for its own sake cannot be presumed to take the place of the act of a valid, thorough Christian life.]

…

Whether or not the Council becomes a positive force in the history of the Church depends only indirectly on texts and organizations; the crucial question is whether there are individuals – saints – who, by their personal willingness, which cannot be forced, are ready to effect something new and living. the ultimate decision about the historical significance of Vatican Council II depends on whether or not there are individuals prepared to experience in themselves the drama of the separation of the wheat from the cockle and thus to give to the whole a singleness of meaning that it cannot gain from words alone.

I just got off the phone with the leader of our parish’s RCIA team. With any luck, and by God’s grace alone, I’ll be part of the team helping to lead folks into the fullness of communion with the Church founded by Christ, built on the Rock of Peter, centered on the Eucharist. I’ve always wanted to teach in this way, but I’m normally far too shy (although those who know me would suggest otherwise). In a way, I suddenly understand to some miniscule amount the pressure priests must feel in being responsible for guiding souls on their path. Contemplating that makes me even more nervous than before. Ora pro me!

Working from a tip from Amy, I received The Didache Series from the Midwest Theological Forum (yes, I’m told that’s run by Opus Dei) yesterday. From what I’ve been able to gather, this should definitely sate my desire to learn more about the Fathers and early foundations of our Catholic faith. At least for now. If I do my math correctly, it’s somewhere over 3,000 pages – that should keep me out of trouble for a while. I expect this should be a very enjoyable time, albeit one very long one. I mean, how bad can it be – have you ever seen a textbook with a ribbon page marker?

Now I really, truly need that bookshelf I’ve been meaning to build.

In other words: the reality that is the Church transcends any literary formulation of it. Of course, what she believes and lives can be, and is, contained in books. But it is not totally assimilated by these books. On the contrary, the books fulfill their function as books only when they point to the community in which the word is to be found. This living community cannot be replaced or surpassed by historical exegesis; it is inherently superior to any book. By its very nature, the word of faith presupposes the community that lives it, that is bound to it and that adheres to it in its very power to bind mankind. Just as revelation transcends literature, so it also transcends the limits of the pure scientism of historical reason. In this sense, it can be said that the inner nature of faith justifies the Church’s claim to be the primary interpreter of the word and that this claim cannot be abdicated in favor of enlightened reason without rendering questionable the very structure of faith as a possibility for mankind. Community of faith is the situs of understanding. It cannot be replaced by the science of history. (Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 329-330)

By these words, Benedict condemns at least in some way several errors of our times. Among those that stood out to me were the concept of Sola Scriptura and an over-reliance on the historo-critical method (as in the infamous “search for the historical Jesus”). It is in reading things like this that I am reminded of my first inclination as a non-religious person way back when that the Catholic Church was the One True Church – simply, the 2,000 years of unbroken Tradition going directly back to the Apostles and Jesus himself. The Tradition that continues to unfold in front of me only reaffirms my first impressions. Deo gratias!

Haloscan commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.

I recently discovered, and I can’t remember quite how, the Catholic Catechism Dialog Blog (CCDB for short) which is the home of an effort to read through the Catechism over the course of a year. Since they started at Easter and I just got started going through, needless to say I haven’t had a chance to review all the content but from my reading so far it appears top notch. I’m working myself into their format, since I’ve needed a tool (okay, more like a cattle prod) to help me read the Catechism for a while now.

The catechism is truly God’s timely gift to the whole Church and to every Christian at the approach of the new millenium. Indeed, I pray that the Church in the United States will recognize in the ctechism an authoritative guide to sound and vibrant preaching, an invaluable resource for parish adult formation programs, a basic text for the upper grade of Catholic high schools, colleges and universities. The catechism presents in a clear and complete way the riches of the Church’s sacramental doctrine based on its genuine sources: Sacred Scripture and tradition as witnessed to by the fathers, doctors, and saints, and by the constant teaching of the magisterium. — (Pope John Paul II, Ad Limina Address to Bishops for Alabama, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee, June 5, 1993)

Continuing my riff of quotes from then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s book, Principles of Catholic Theology (which I swear I’m almost finished with, honest), here’s one that seems both enticingly timely and subtly prophetic (and somewhat long, but bear with me):

I venture to close these reflections with a personal comment that will shed another light on the whole. At the end of a lecture on the historical character of dogma, a student priest remarked to me that, however one may twist and turn it, dogma is still the principle obstacle to every kind of proclamation. This remark seems to me to be symptomatic of the misunderstanding of the priestly function that is so prevalent today. For, in reality, the opposite is true. Today, many Christians, myself included, experience a quiet uneasiness about attending divine services in a strange church; they are appalled at the thought of the half-understood theories, the amazing and tasteless personal opinions of this or that priest that they will have to endure during the homily – to say nothing of the personal liturgical inventions to which they will be subjected. No one goes to church to hear someone else’s personal opinions. I am simply not interested in what fantasies this or that individual priest may have spun for himself regarding questions of Christian faith. They may be appropriate for an evening’s conversation but not for that obligation that brings me to church Sunday after Sunday. Anyone who preaches himself in this way overrates himself and attributes to himself an importance he does not have. When I go to church, it is not to find there my own or anyone else’s innovatinos but what we have all received as the faith of the Church – the faith that spans the centuries and can support us all.

To express that faith gives the words of even the poorest preacher the weight of centuries; to celebrate it in the liturgy of the Church makes it worthwhile to attend even the externally most unlikely liturgical service. Hence the substitution of one’s own invention for the faith of the Church will always prove to be too superficial, however intellectually or technically (seldom aesthetically) impressive this substitution may be.

Certainly, if it is to remain vital, the objective content of the Church’s faith needs the flesh and blood of human beings, the gift of our thinking and willing. But it must be a gift, not just the sacrifice of the moment. The priest always fails in his duty when he wants to stop being a servant: an emissary who knows that it does not depend on him but on what he himself can only receive. Only by letting himself become unimportant can he become truly important, because, in that way, he becomes the gateway of the Lord into this world – of him who is the true Mediator into the immediacy of everlasting Love.