Thursday, June 23, 2016
I am not too sure today's referendum is about 'in or out'. It is about trust, do we trust Dave and the stream of his predecessors who have appeared defending Remain or do we trust Boris, Gove and Nige. All of them seem more than dodgy. I don't trust any of them.
There has been talk about 'repatriating democracy' - in or out that isn't going to happen, our government will not concede greater democracy. Brexit Catholics have been emphasising subsidiarity but again it is highly unlikely that Westminster will concede anything to a strata of government below national level, it is not its nature.
There is a vast gulf between those who govern and those who are governed, whether it is Europe, and it isn't just the British with a problem with Europe, or the US; who could make a choice between Hilary and Trump, there seems to be a vaccum in leadership, a governing class that is concerned only about its maintenance of power.
Our beloved Holy Father has often criticised careerist bishops but the problem in the world is careerist politicians where politicking and the exercise and the maintaining of power itself becomes all consuming. Such leadership hardly evokes trust in those who are led, because of course there is is no vision to which we are led, it is ultimately hopeless.
Today after much pondering I voted to Brexit. I loathe the little England vision of my fellow Brexiteers, and yes I think we are setting off on something unknown. If we go, the result will be revolutionary, I hope there will be a new politics, with new party alignments, I hope there will be more scrutiny of government. I voted 'out' because I am afraid of where Europe will be five or ten years time. From the European press it seems that 'in' Europe the future is as uncertain as 'out'. As someone with a certain anarchist tendency Britain's leaving I hope will encourage European nations will consider leaving too.
For wealthy nations in the North West of Europe I am sure we have become wealthier but as a Catholic there must be more to our lives than the creation of wealth which has been placed increasingly in the hands of the few. Elsewhere in Europe, and yes, beyond its immediate borders poverty and unemployment, the creation of an underclass seem to be part of the European project, it is not good for the future.
Monday, June 20, 2016
The view from my sitting room window - it is the 'i360', Brighton's latest attraction. The chimney-like structure which has taken over year to erect it now has a shiny glass pod for passengers that will slowly ascends and descend, they have been practising.
Its a grey shiny doughnut that goes up and down a dull grey stick of Brighton rock.
Today through the mist one can look out on grey Brighton to the north and to the south, out at sea, to the wind farm which minces our incoming birds.
Not quite as exciting as the Blackpool Tower, or even Portsmouth's Spinnaker Tower or even Weston's Dismaland - where is Banksy when you need him?
Is it going to be another Brighton bar? Apparently not - you get have to go through airport style security first
Saturday, June 18, 2016
Friday, June 17, 2016
With characteristic charm our beloved Holy Father has described priests who refuse to baptise the children of single mothers as 'animals'. I would not refuse baptism for that reason, I do say that I expect to see parents or parent at Mass, that is about the only criteria I ask for.
My friend Fr Alexander Lucie Smith makes the very reasonable point:
By the time the engaged couple present themselves, saying they want to get married in Church, it is already too late to start preparation. Preparation for marriage needs to start before the couple have met; it needs to start in childhood, or even, to be on the safe side, at birth. After all, whom you marry is the most important decision you will ever make.The problem is that the child of a parent who doesn't practice or live according to the Church's teaching -sometimes actually rejecting large portions of it- is unlikely to practice the faith or live it. Statistics prove that they are themselves unlikely to be able to make a stable marriage themselves, thus in a sense proving the Pope's second point which simply rocks the whole structure of Catholicism, that majority of marriages are invalid.
Perhaps we really do need to be more rigorous in our baptismal preparation. Though we might not decline to baptise, perhaps we should defer it. Perhaps using the baptism of children to encourage parents to marry, to form a stable relationship in which to educate or bring up a child is not such a bad thing.
Maybe the Church, and couples but especially children might be better served by a few animals.
Thursday, May 26, 2016
I am sure Archbishop Ganswein used the term 'expanding papacy' to mean simply a changing or developing papacy: de facto the Papacy has changed since the First Vatican Council. De facto Pope Benedict's resignation was the key change. Ganswein describes Benedict as homo historicus, quite what he means I don't know but Benedict has the clarity of vision to see what is likely to happen in the future. I am sure he expected the St Gall mafia's candidate to be elected. I am sure he understood the inevitable confusion that would result. I am sure he would look beyond his papacy to the next and beyond. One of the principles that seems to be at the basis of Benedict's thought is that truth will triumph, because Christ is truth.
Benedict has introduced the idea of a Pope not dying in office, he himself promising obedience retired to a Vatican monastery and has rarely broken his silence. The important question is not what Benedict will do but what would Francis do if retired or was forced from office. Presumably he would not retire to life of prayer but probably become a curate in some poor South American parish, would he remain quiet? It is highly unlikely, and probably impossible for him.
With a chatterbox former-Pope giving daily interviews with Scalfari or some other journalist of choice, or just picking up the phone and sharing his ideas with anyone in the world he wants to - well this produces a very interesting slant on an 'expanded papacy'. Not only will the Cardinals in the future be electing a Pope but also someone who might in just a few years become an ex-Pope.
John Paul set down strict rules about forbidding lobbying amongst Cardinals, human nature would suggest this unreasonable. I am sure wherever two are three Cardinals are gathered, and they have kicked their shoes off they start talking about who is likely to be the next Pope, and who is likely to vote for who. For the good of the Church it would be irresponsible not to do so. In the same way I am sure any conversation between Cardinal is a bit like a job interview - with the under-riding idea of will this man be a suitable next Pope.
I think one of the things that could well develop is a fixed term papacy, an expectation that the Pope will retire after five or six years or when he has reached 80 or 85 he will become a former-Pope. Would it be possible that with two or three pope's emeritus around they develop a particular role, as advisers to the reigning Pope? I rather like the idea of retired Popes Home with popes in vary states decrepitude eager to advise their successor, whilst they scheme and skype friends in the media, some maybe doing an occasional television interview or 'going viral' on the net.
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
Archbishop Georg Gänswein’s recent remarks are always interesting, his recent interview is of particular interest. Gänswein, like his master Pope Benedict, is a subtle creature and should not be underestimated. I have always admired Ratzinger, especially as over the years his thought has developed.It is unlikely that Gänswein speaks with out Ratzinger knowing what he will say.
It is fascinating what Gänswein says about the two rival groups before the last Conclave, it is also fascinating what he leaves us to speculate about the election of Pope Francis in the light of these rival factions.
People have been pondering what the Archbishop meant by an 'expanded Papacy'. I think that we need to start with Pope John Paul's Et in Unum Sint 88ff - a document which seems to be as much the work of Cardinal-Prefect Ratzinger, as Pope Wojtyła. It recognises the role of the Pope today. it goes beyond the teaching of Vatican One's Pastor Aeternus, where the Pope is seen as the locus of the authentic Church, and the ultimate judge, or rather definer. of where authentic Christianity ends and heresy begins. It is role well suited to a non-travelling Pope, with a limited staff, whose concern was essentially doctrinal, with a Secretariate of State, whose role was essentially concerned with relationships Catholic princes, and few other Cardinal's with a tiny staff who held particular offices.
Mass communications above all have changed the role of the Papacy, today he is no longer the prisoner of the Vatican. We are more likely to be familiar with the image, actions and words of the Bishop of Rome than we are with our own Bishops. The Pope is no longer 'just for Catholics', he has another role, that of pre-eminence not only among Christians but among 'faith leaders' too. As a 'world leader' he has a moral authority which goes beyond that of any other leader. He is also the head of one of the largest and most active NGO in the world.
I think Benedict has always wanted to reform the Papacy, it is not unconnected with his attempt to reform the Liturgy. His writings recognise the rootlessness both in scholarship and tradition of Paul VI's liturgical reforms, which rather than being a popular movement was something imposed from above through Papal authority. Vatican II, I am sure he welcomes but he has spoken and written about the Council of the Documents and the Council of Media. He has spoken of course of two hermeneutics, of rupture and continuity. Most especially in regard to the liturgy the Papacy itself has been the source of the hermeneutic of rupture, a rupture in the liturgy would for Benedict be a rupture in the entire fabric of the Church.
My personal feeling is the Archbishop is right that neither Vatileaks or conspiracies were responsible for Benedict's resignation, his devotion to Pope Celestine, his his symbolic leaving of his pallium on his shrine happened as early as April 2009, in retrospect it was an obvious sign of his intention to resign. I am sure his increased tiredness and difficulty in walking hastened it somewhat.
His resignation has changed the Papacy, more than any other event could have done. It has 'de-mystified' it. It has taken away the sense that the Pope is in some sense a sacred person, rather than a human being, brilliant or otherwise, fulfilling a sacred role. It strikes me as being highly unlikely that Pope Benedict was blind and deaf to "the so-called St. Gallen group” that included “Cardinals Danneels, Martini, Silvestrini or Murphy O’Connor”, what is perhaps interesting is that the Archbishop should mention them by name, and it is unlikely that he was unaware of who was their preferred candidate and where he would take the Papacy.
So what are we to make of the idea of an 'expanded' papacy? I cannot help see that it is significant that in the light of Amoris Laetitia and the confusion that it has created that Archbishop Gänswein should point out that the Pope Emeritus is still alive and able to comment, albeit by his choice through the Archbishop. The 'expanded papacy' is presumably a reference to the fact that as long as Benedict is alive Pope Francis has to take his legacy into account. In the past once a Pope was safely in his grave his successor had the freedom to make use of his predecessor's legacy as he wished, this is not an option for Francis. Benedict still has the capacity to cry out from his cloister, as we have seen recently over a misrepresentation of his words about Fatima.
Gänswein, by this speech has rather clearly shown himself to be one of the chief custodians and defenders of the Ratzingarian legacy. It is not by chance that he reminded the world that Ratzinger was elected after his sermon on the evils of Relativism. Perhaps when Pope Benedict is dead we will see what those who keep legacy which has perhaps grown rather and will grow rather than fade, will do and are capable of doing.
Wednesday, May 18, 2016
I am very pleased to hear that Fr Serafino Lanzetta's book on Vatican II has just been published in English, it is the translation of his lectureship thesis presented at Lugano in Switzerland. it has a preface by Bishop Philip Egan.
The book aims at clarifying and indicating a possible hermeneutical principle, leading towards a more faithful reception of the Second Vatican Council, which respects the Council in its precise identity and so gives the conciliar teaching its true place in a revealed and defined structure. Hopefully this historical and theological research, involving numerous archive documents, might help looking at Vatican II as a way which will foster unity within the Church.
Sunday, May 15, 2016
A thought for discussion:
A real reading of Vatican I gives us a rather beautiful understanding of the role the Pope, it is moderate, it is far from the idea of secular leaders of the 19th or 20th centuries or even our current age, it places the Pope as the servant of the Church, and yet its interpretation, the Spirit of VI produced some of the most inflated, aggrandised Popes ever. Popes who on a whim chose to abolish centuries old Tradition, Popes who saw themselves as innovators, rather than faithful servants who passed on intact what they themselves had received.
Whilst this going on there is a movement which at least has the appearance of being against, or to diminish the Holy Spirit, first of all Pius XII abolished the ancient Vigil of Pentecost and Paul VI abolished the Octave of Pentecost. Presumably this was done so as not to overshadow Pius XII's reform of Easter and Holy Week, but I can't help thinking it gave an imbalance to our understanding of the Holy Spirit and therefore our theology as whole.
Paul VI introduces oriental epliclesis into the Rite of Mass - Fr Hunwick has pointed out that in the ancient Eucharistic prayer of the West, the Roman Canon preserves within it a theology of God which is pre-Nicean, the point of being in the Eucharist, at least, almost binaterian . The Eucharist is confected by the Church through the priest offering bread and wine to the Father and he in turn giving us his Son. It is an exchange of gifts and there is no mention of the Holy Spirit in the Eucharistic Prayer, apart from the present doxology at its end. In the East Eucharistic prayers, and the novelty Eucharistic Prayers introduced by Paul VI all, except the earliest, have a calling down of the Spirit.
What has happened is an abandonment in the post-VII of a very Western understanding of God - I wonder if the disorientation this caused has resulted in the rise of the Charismatic movement, a movement where the saving death of Christ is often replaced by a personal, ecstatic or emotional experience of the Spirit. Our Western understanding seems to be that the Holy Spirit is the unseen agent of Holiness, drawing us gradually into a deeper communion with the Father and the Son, within the Church. He is unseen but he is experienced. I think this was very much the understanding prior to Nicea and the later Christological Councils.
What I fear it has brought with it is a sense that the Holy rather than 'welling up' and being 'within' is something which comes down from above. In the day to day experience of Christians it is something from outside. There is a connection here between S Vincent of Lerins, understanding of Catholicism as quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est - everwhere, always and by all believed - to what the modern neo-Con might believe, which put crudely, is Catholicism is that which the Pope believes and it is imposed from above on those below. It is the most hideous Ultramontane distortion of the faith, and I suspect it relies on a distortion of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Yet it does seem that from VII onwards the role of the Holy Spirit is greatly diminished whilst the significance of the Papacy increases, these two things are surely not unconnected.
Saturday, May 14, 2016
Octave of Pentecost – I have always regretted that Pope Paul VI abolished the Octave of Pentecost in the Ordinary Form of Mass, This year, in our Ordo, there are no feasts during the coming week, so I shall offer votive Masses of the Holy Spirit throughout the coming week, remembering most especially the Vicar of Christ, and safety of the Church in her mission to teach, with clarity, the nations.
Join me in this petition.
Monday, May 09, 2016
It seems as though England is going to have yet another Oratory, this time in Bournemouth, yes another pastoral initiative in the diocese of Portsmouth
From the parish website - A new Oratory in-formation is being inaugurated at Sacred Heart Church in Bournemouth on the 8th of September of this year (2016).
Bishop Philip Egan of Portsmouth has invited Fr Dominic Jacob CO (co-founder of the Oxford Oratory) and Fr Peter Edwards and Fr David Hutton, generously released by the Archbishop of Southwark for this project, to begin an Oratorian Community of St Philip Neri as part of a major evangelisation drive for the diocese.
Fr Peter, Fr Dominic and Fr David will begin their ministry on the feast of Our Lady’s Birthday, at the church which is situated in the heart of Bournemouth, surrounded by students living in university accommodation, many international language schools, diverse ethnic communities, and the homelessness, beside long-standing residents, all within an active town center known its hospitality industry, business and commerce.
In accordance with the charism of their Patron, St Philip Neri, the Oratory in-formation will be devoted to offering sacramental support through daily Mass and confessions, Eucharistic Adoration and formation in the spiritual life, alongside pastoral care of students, the growing number of homeless, others in need, all who make up the local population, and the thousands who pass the doors of Sacred Heart each year.
Bishop Philip Egan of Portsmouth states: “The Diocese has areas of real deprivation and poverty. There are immigrants and foreign nationals from Eastern Europe and overseas, as well as university and college students living far away from home. This is a pastoral situation that is urgent. It impels action.”
Bishop Philip goes on to say, “We need to engage with those who have not yet met the Lord Jesus in Person nor taken to heart the salvation and eternal life He offers. More than ever we need today to be confident and clear in witnessing to the Person of Jesus Christ and the truths of the Catholic faith, in order to help people find the Way to authentic humanism and happiness. This is why I am delighted by this new project beginning at Sacred Heart parish.”
St Philip Neri, Apostle of Rome and Saint of Joy, continues to inspire secular priests today to form communities, without vows, living together in the bond of charity, with the Oratorian charism of prayer, preaching and celebration of the Sacraments, not least in the confessional.
St Philip’s primary apostolate of forming young people in the life of prayer and pastoral care, particularly for the sick and needy, also attracts many by excellence in liturgy and music, through catechesis, and in the New Evangelization through culture and the arts.
This latest Community of St Philip Neri is a Society of Apostolic Life under the direction of the Oratorian Confederation’s Procurator General in Rome for whom the Oxford Oratory and York Oratory-in-Formation have been the formative inspiration.
More information about the Oratory-in-Formation for Sacred Heart Church will be forthcoming in the parish newsletter and on the parish website.
Parishioners and friends of Sacred Heart church are asked to please keep Fr Peter, Fr Dominic and Fr David in their prayers as they prepare for this wonderful apostolate.
Sunday, May 01, 2016
Yesterday was the annual St Margaret Clitheroe Procession and Mass in York, it was a nasty wet day, not a day for the best vestments to be out. Attendance was down, so what is interesting is youth of those attending. There are obviously people of all ages but it is the number of younger people that is significant. Here is a link to picture file.
Friday, April 29, 2016
I can't help thinking Jeremy Corbyn is rather like Pope Francis, trying hold things together but in reality is presiding over its fragmentation, God promises the survival of the Catholic Church but not the Labour party. Corbyn's election like the Pope's was a harking back to a time that many had thought had past, an attempt at popularism. The problem for both is the political environment they now face is not that of their youth.
Watching Ken Livingstone being confronted by John Mann seems to demonstrate how the 'Left' cannot hold. Limestone's defence too is bizarre, "Hitler was a Zionist", he says. It is half remembered and reinterpreted history, seen through a certain lens. Yes, Hitler certainly wanted Jews to have some kind of homeland, many politicians of the time did, suggestion ranged from Palestine, to a bit of Australia, to Madagascar and eventually to 'the East', and history reveals the atrocities that happened there. Hitler's 'Zionism' was borne out of a deep hatred for Jews, and a desire to enslave, and ultimately to destroy them.
I really do not think that Livingstone wants to apply any sanction to 'the Jews', the problem is one of modern intellectuals inability to understand that someone's religious identity, might actually have a social and political dimension. Livingstone's 'anti-Semiticism' is on the same level as his anti-Christianism, more specifically his anti-Catholicism, it is shared by the rest of the Guardian reading establishment. It stems from an inability to realise that a religion has a certain cultural impact that overreaches ordinary politics and claims an affiliation beyond national borders. Religion, politicians on both the left and right fail to understand, binds people together, it has a super-social dimension, it unites people to a history beyond a merely national one, it has a political vision beyond the narrowness of contemporary politics.
For post holocaust Jews the State of Israel has replaced an international Jewish fraternity that followed the diaspora caused of the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Jews were a distinct group marked not only by belief but by a distinct culture: kosha food and dress, the need to live together and separated from those they lived amongst, and their internationalism and their shared history of persecution make them distinct. The problem is that politicians like Livingstone underestimate the importance of this. In the same way they are incapable of realising the distinctiveness of other groups, like Catholics, whose vision incorporates the social Kingship of Christ.
The blind spot for people like Livingstone is their failure to understand the social, cultural and political significance of Islam. For them Islam merely represents potential Labour votes. Naz Shah whose unguarded pre-election comments started this brush fire for Labour probably do not represent the views of most Muslims but they do represent of some and I would suggest not an insignificant 'some'.
There is an inability of the 'Left' to recognise how distinct the culture of the Judaism makes Jews and also fails to understand how the culture Islam makes Moslem distinct. Livingstone and his ilk believe in assimilation, they cannot recognise that religion makes people distinct. Jews look to Israel, Christians to the Kingdom of Christ and Muslims to the Ummah. The failure to bother to understand and to take seriously the significance of the theology which underlies religious groups at the moment is a catastrophe for the Labour Party and Jeremy Corbyn.
In France, in Belgium, in Germany and through out Europe I am sure that most politicians believe that assimilation will eventually change immigrants but the truth is that religion is actually a much stronger bond than passing political parties, religions endure politics and politicians pass.
Saturday, April 23, 2016
Dragons exist, do not be deceived!
In the legend of St George the dragon is not slain but wounded and the fair maid once terrified of him ties a cord or a ribbon around his neck and leads him captive into the city.
This is a profound truth in the spiritual life, the dragon is still a dragon, the fair maid, the Christian soul, with the help of the victorious warrior, who is a type of Christ gives us power to subdue something which unchecked can be destructive.
We see this constantly in the conversion of the saints, they don't become different people but virtue takes on a courage and sin is tamed. Saint Peter is an obvious example, I doubt its historic truth but I love the quo vadis legend about Peter, Peter decides to leave Rome during the persecution, meets Christ on the Appian Way and immediately turns back to go to his death., it is so Peter, rash and impetuous always, until the end. It is same with St Francis or Ignatius of the Loyal or countless others, Christ tames the dragon, he is not slain.
Friday, April 22, 2016
I thought it was pretty obvious that Michael Voris had struggled with what he has revealed recently, He has made no bones about his distance from God, and hinted that part his problem, like many people's was sexual, this video reveals something rather beautiful that seems to be the experience of some of my parishioners.
... but moving on the real question every Catholic who has viewed the Votex has is about the hair,, err, is it a toupee? Will Cardinal Dolan's New York Archdiocese dirty tricks department reveal that? Apart from that, I don't think there is much to see here, the Church is full of repentant sinners - thank God!