Vatican confirms excommunications for US dissident group

Dec. 7, 2006 (CWNews.com) -- The Vatican has confirmed the 1996 decision of American Bishop Bruskewitz to excommunicate members of the dissident group Call to Action. Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, the prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, wrote to Bruskewitz that Call to Action is “causing damage to the Church of Christ.” The dissident group had appealed Bruskewitz' decision to the Vatican, but Cardinal Re's letter of November 24, 2006, reports the Vatican’s finding that the disciplinary action was “properly taken.” The CWNews.com report stated:

The Vatican has determined that “the activities of ‘Call to Action’ in the course of these years are in contrast with the Catholic Faith due to views and positions held which are unacceptable from a doctrinal and disciplinary standpoint,” Cardinal Re writes. He concludes: “Thus to be a member of this Association or to support it, is irreconcilable with a coherent living of the Catholic Faith.”

The excommunication that Bishop Bruskewitz announced covered not only to Call to Action, but also to members of Catholics for a Free Choice, Planned Parenthood, the Hemlock Society, the Freemasons, and -- as some readers of this blog will find particularly interesting -- the Society of St. Pius X. Although the excommunication order is said to apply only within the Lincoln, Nebraska diocese, the Vatican’s judgment against Call to Action obviously raises questions about the status of the group’s members in other dioceses.

[Hat tip to M. Forrest]

Feast of the Immaculate Conception

You alone and your Mother
are more beautiful than any others;
For there is no blemish in you,
nor any stains upon your Mother.
Who of my children
can compare in beauty to thee?

(St. Ephraim, The Nisibene Hymns,
27, 8; ca. A.D. 370)

Giovanni Benedetto Castiglione
The Immaculate Conception with Saints Francis
of Assisi and Anthony of Padua
1649-1650

Lift me up bodily and in the flesh, which is fallen in Adam. Lift me up not from Sara but from Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin (ut incorrupta sit virgo, sed virgo per gratiam ab omni integra labe peccati)."

(St. Ambrose, Expositio in psalmum 118, 22, 30; inter A.D. 387-388)

Having excepted the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom, on account of the honor of the Lord, I wish to have absolutely no question when treating of sins, -- for how do we know what abundance of grace for the total overcoming of sin was conferred upon her, who merited to conceive and bear Him in whom there was no sin? -- so, I say, with the exception of the Virgin, if we could have gathered together all those holy men and women, when they were living here, and had asked them whether they were without sin, what do we suppose would have been their answer?

(St. Augustine, De Natura et gratia ad Timasium et
Iacobum contra Pelagium, 36, 42; A.D. 415)

In the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin."


The feast of the Conception of Mary (Conception of St. Anne) originated in the monasteries of Palestine at least as early as the seventh century, but its object was not completely identical to that of the modern feast of the Immaculate Conception.

For historical background, attestations from Scripture, tradition, and theological interpretation, see Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. "Immaculate Conception."


Also recommended:

• Joseph Regina, ed., The Mystical Rose: Thoughts on the Blessed Virgin from the Writings of John Henry Cardinal Newman (Scepter Publisher, 1996); and
• John Henry Cardinal Newman, Mary the Second Eve (TAN Publishers, 1982)

Conservative Jews ok gay rabbis

In a move that would definitely delight the notorious Fr. Joseph O'Leary, Rabbi Kassel Abelson, speaking for the 25-member Rabbinical Assembly Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, opened the door to the ordination of homosexual rabbis and the recognition of same-sex marriage, but made clear that the more orthodox Jewish tradition would likel continue to oppose such liberalization. (Michelle Nichols, "Conservative Jews ok gay rabbis," Wed Dec 6, 2006 Reuters)

" ... a low Mass in the old rite, read silently in a garage, is more solemn ..."

The liturgy of the reform and its adornments will never be able to constitute a seminal fact in the life of the nations. It is too anemic, too artificial, too little religious, too lacking in form to do this. The old liturgy, on the other hand, is not as poorly equipped for the terrible trials it has to face as we might often think, beholding its daily woes. The struggle against the old liturgy has helped us toward greater insights into its nature. Initially it must have felt like a deathblow when the liturgy was driven from the magnificent old churches that had been created for it. Then, however, it became clear that it was the churches that died, once the spirit of the sacred vanished from them; the liturgy itself stayed alive, albeit in lamentable circumstances. For it is the liturgy that produces all that is solemn and festive -- art can contribute nothing essential to it. Once, I recall, the dean of a cathedral, very annoyed, asked me why on earth I wanted to go to the old Mass; after all, he said, very elaborate orchestral Masses were celebrated in the cathedral from time to time. I simply could not make him see that a low Mass in the old rite, read silently in a garage, is more solemn than the biggest church concert with spiritual trimmings. We have come to see, in a time without holy images, without sacred places and sacred music, that the old liturgy was itself the greatest possible image; we have realized that, if there is eve to be a significant religious art again, this art will come from liturgy that expresses the sacred.

Once, I recall, the dean of a cathedral, very annoyed, asked me why on earth I wanted to go to the old Mass; after all, he said, very elaborate orchestral Masses were celebrated in the cathedral from time to time. I simply could not make him see that a low Mass in the old rite, read silently in a garage, is more solemn than the biggest church concert with spiritual trimmings.

The period of iconoclasm in Byzantium lasted for more than a hundred years; it, too, contained a certain tincture of ecumenical calculation -- Islam, of course, was hostile to images. In the nineteenth century Dom Prosper Guéranger had already predicted the Roman iconoclasm that was to proliferate in the wake of the Second Vatican Council: he called it the "antiliturgical heresy". In Byzantium, after vast destruction, the holy images wee victorious. Resolute monks had taken some of the icons and hidden them. We, too, need many resolute priests who will guard and keep for us the sacred rite of the Incarnation.

Martin Mosenbach, The Heresy of Formlessness: The Roman Liturgy and Its Enemy, translated by Graham Harrison, Foreword by Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003), 220 pages; paperback; $16.95

Michael Davies on liturgical reform

Michael Davies authored a two-part article on "True and False Liturgical Reform" before he passed away in 2004. It was published in two installments in the Summer and Fall (2002) issues of Latin Mass magazine. I have received permission to reproduce these articles online, but I have decided to publish them in one of my other blogs, since they are rather long and I did not want to post anything quite so long in this venue. The first installment of Davies' article reviews the history of the Mass from antiquity up through the Protestant revolution and the reform of St. Pius V. He traces the development of the Mass through the first four centuries to the end of Roman persecution in the Constantinian period, with particular attention to the subsequent Gregorian reforms and the Gregorian Sacramentary. Most of the balance of this this first installment is devoted to a fairly detailed summary of the radical changes effected by Protestantism and the ingenious (or insidious) strategies by which these were often implemented. For example, he quotes Francis Clark, who writes, in Eucharistic Sacrifice and the Reformation:

The first Prayer book of Edward VI could not be convicted of overt heresy, for it was adroitly framed and contained no express denial of pre-Reformation doctrine. It was, as one Anglican scholar puts it, "an ingenious essay in ambiguity," purposely worded in such a manner that the more conservative could place their construction upon it, and reconcile their consciences to using it, while the Reformers would interpret it in their own sense and would recognize it as an instrument for furthering the next state of the religious revolution."

Sound familiar?

Davies then states what he sees as the essential difference between true and false liturgical reform. True reform, he says, contains no drastic revision of the liturgical traditions that have been received, and its most evident characteristic is fidelity to these traditions, as in the example of the Gregorian reforms he reviews earlier. He then concludes with a final example of authentic liturgical reform from Rome's response to the Protestant challenge in the reforms of St. Pius V.

What Davies offers in his article is only a mere sketch of the much more substantial three-volume study of the Mass: Liturgical Revolution: Vol I: Cranmer's Godly Order (1976); Vol II: Pope John's Council (1977); Vol III: Pope Paul's New Mass (1980). Yet, as always, Davies is lucid, reliable, and engaging.

• To read Davies' article, go to: Michael Davies, "True and False Liturgical Reform: The First of Two Parts" (Scripture and Catholic Tradition December 6, 2006).
  
  
• To comment on Davies' article, please go to the comment box following the full article on the Scripture and Catholic Tradition blog. The comment box below is reserved for those who have not read, or do not wish to read, Davies' article.

St. Nicholas

Nicholas, called "of Bari," was the fourth-century bishop of Myra, a city in Lycia, a province of Asia Minor. His feast day is today. Myra, the capital, not far from the sea, was an episcopal see, and this church falling vacant, the holy Nicholas was chosen bishop, and in that station became famous by his extraordinary piety and zeal and many astonishing miracles. The Greek histories of his life agree that he suffered imprisonment of the faith and made a glorious confession in the latter part of the persecution raised by Dioletian, and that he was present at the Council of Nicaea and there condemned Arianism. The silence of other authors makes many justly suspect these circumstances. He died at Myra, and was buried in his cathedral.

Perhaps the best-known story about Nicholas concerns his charity toward a poor man who was unable to provide dowries for his three daughters of marriageable age. Rather than see them forced into prostitution, Nicholas secretly tossed a bag of gold through the poor man’s window on three separate occasions, thus enabling the daughters to be married. Over the centuries, this particular legend evolved into the custom of gift-giving on the saint’s feast. In the English-speaking countries, St. Nicholas became, by a twist of the tongue, Santa Claus—further expanding the example of generosity portrayed by this holy bishop.

[Acknowledgements: American Catholic, Saint of the Day; Catholic Online, Saints & Angels; Patron Saints Index.]

What can one say? This is America ...

Flatulence forces American Airlines plane to land (WBIR.com Knoxville, TN).

Congratulations, Fr. Al Kimel!

Al Kimel, of the Pontifications blog, was ordained to the sacred priesthood of the Catholic Church yesterday, Sunday, December 3rd, at Our Lady of Sorrows Church in South Orange, New Jersey. Fr. Kimel, who was formerly a career priest of the Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh, PA, and has been involved for some years as a thoughtful and substantial contributor to theological dialogue within the blogging community under the name of Pontificator, resolved to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church after tending his resignation to the Vestry of St. Mary's Episcopal Church in 2005. As he declared at that time in "A Decision Reached":

"It is my intention to renounce my orders as an Episcopal priest and to enter, for the sake of my salvation, into full communion with the Catholic Church. I freely affirm the Catholic Church to be the one true fold of Jesus Christ."

We rejoice with Fr. Kimel in his vocation and ordination to the Holy Priesthood. As he wrote last Saturday on his blog, quoting Pope John Paul II:

[P]riests are called to prolong the presence of Christ, the one high priest, embodying his way of life and making him visible in the midst of the flock entrusted to their care. We find this clearly and precisely stated in the first letter of Peter: “I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ as well as a partaker in the glory that is to be revealed. Tend the flock of God that is your charge, not by constraint but willingly, not for shameful gain but eagerly, not as domineering over those in your charge but being examples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd is manifested you will obtain the unfading crown of glory” (1 Pt. 5:1-4).

In the Church and on behalf of the Church, priests are a sacramental representation of Jesus Christ — the head and shepherd — authoritatively proclaiming his word, repeating his acts of forgiveness and his offer of salvation ...

The truth of the priest ... is thus proclaimed with joyful gratitude by the Preface of the liturgy of the Chrism Mass: “By your Holy Spirit you anointed your only Son high priest of the new and eternal covenant. With wisdom and love you have planned that this one priesthood should continue in the Church. Christ gives the dignity of a royal priesthood to the people he has made his own. From these, with a brother’s love, he chooses men to share his sacred ministry by the laying on of hands. He appointed them to renew in his name the sacrifice of redemption as they set before your family his paschal meal. He calls them to lead your holy people in love, nourish them by your word and strengthen them through the sacraments. Father, they are to give their live in your service and for the salvation of your people as they strive to grow in the likeness of Christ and honor you by their courageous witness of faith and love.”

Soli Deo gloria.

Fr. Kimel's ordination in pictures: "Memories of an ordination" (Pontifications)

"St. Francis Xavier, give us a zeal for souls!"

A reader writes:

"Francis Xavier was the saint that first tugged me towards Catholicism. I was mesmerized by the noble stories and photo gallery of heroes in Woodbridge's Moody Press book 'Great Leaders of the Christian Church.' Tucked among the mostly Evangelical episodes were chapters on the steely Saints Ignatius and Francis Xavier. Xavier's conversion hinged on the verse so pivotal to much stereotypical tract-type evangelism, 'What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?' I was somehow profoundly intrigued to find this sort of thing in a Roman Catholic's life. From there I discovered McGinley's 'Saint-Watching' and Chesterton's 'St. Francis,' the Middle Ages, and, well, you can imagine the remaining thrills and throes of confusion...

"A year into the Church my own journey is proving rocky as I have to battle suspicion of leaders' judgments and my own decision, against the backdrop of a robust evangelical community and what I find to be some, alternatingly, terribly triumphalist or nominally pagan conversations in Catholic blogdom. Your own site has been a real lifesaver for me. So thank you.

"I felt this item on Xavier and on the changes in a post-Vatican II Church applied to your earlier request for helpful material on the topic. At least it spoke to my confused and troubled (and still quite Evangelically-inclined) soul. Also good is Tiessean's massive and massively helpful book 'Who Can Be Saved?' (IVP). [chapter 12 on 'Why Send Missionaries' especially to the point, with the rest actually echoing much of Ratzinger, DeLubac and Danielou].

"Anyway, thank you again. Here is a prayer you will persist in your work. No reply necessary."

Then, from Gashwin Gomez's blog, Maior autem his est caritas, the following is provided: "The Feast of St. Francis Xavier: On the Missions" (Dec. 2, 2006):

This year is the 500th anniversary of the birth of St. Francis Xavier, whose feast is tomorrow [today] (Sunday, Dec. 3) and whose zeal for souls is legendary. I’m sure the celebrations in Goa, where most his body remains (somewhat) incorrupt (his arm is encased in a jeweled reliquary in the Gesù, the Jesuit mother church in Rome. And a pious devotee bit off one of his toes at one point, I think.), will be quite festive. I don’t know whether the body will be carried out in procession, like it is every ten years (the next such display is scheduled for 2014, I believe).

The Office of Readings for the memorial has an excerpt from the letters of St. Francis to St. Ignatius. His earnest zealousness is clear in this passage:

Many, many people hereabouts are not becoming Christians for one reason only: there is nobody to make them Christians. Again and again I have thought of going around the universities of Europe, especially Parish, and everywhere crying like a madman, riveting the attention of those with more learning than charity: “What a tragedy: how many souls are being shut out of heaven and falling into hell thanks to you!”

I wish they would work as hard at this as they do at their books, and so settle their account with God for their learning and the talents entrusted to them.

This thought would certainly stir most of them to meditate on spiritual realities, to listen actively to what God is saying to them. They would forget their own desires, their human affairs, and give themselves over entirely to God’s will and his choice. They would cry out with all their heart: “Lord, I am here! What do you want me to do?” Send me anywhere you like – even to India!

It’s a sentiment that, at least to us post-Conciliar Catholics (who’ve never heard a “Save the Pagan Babies” pitch), is a little embarrassingly zealous, a bit too much like those Southern Baptist or evangelical zealots whose rhetoric makes us cringe. The truths of Nostra Aetate have combined with the relativism of our era to elevate indifferntism, under the guise of tolerance as one of the hightest goods, and has dulled any sense of missionary zeal to the point of non-existence. This is not to say that the change in attitude has been entirely wrong-minded. I don’t really believe, for instance, that my entire family is destined for eternal damnation, for instance, and if that belief were required of me, I doubt that I’d have really become Catholic.

It’s interesting to note what one young peritus at the thought about the whole issue of missions, soon after the Council ended, in his insightful and quite readable notes, published as the “Theological Insights of Vatican II” by Paulist Press in 1966. This excerpt is taken from his discussion on the “Schema on the Missions” (which became the Conciliar Decree Ad Gentes.)

The crucial issue, which gravely affected the whole context in the question, especially for the missionary bishops, was the crisis in which the very idea of missions found itself. The cause of this crisis lay in profound changes in modern thinking about the necessity of missions. The motive which had driven missionaries in the past to bring other people to Christ had increasingly lost its urgency. What drove the great missionaries in the beginning of the modern era to go out into the world, and what filled them with holy unrest, was the conviction that salvation is in Christ alone. The untold millions of people who suddenly emerged from unknown worlds beyond the horizon would thus be hopelessly doomed to eternal ruin without the message of the Gospel. Therefore, the sacred obligation of the faithful to preach the Gospel everywhere seemed the most compelling responsibility of brotherly love, since love not only concerned particular earthly needs, but the destiny of all men. What was involved was either eternal salvation or eternal damnation.

Meantime, in recent generations, the idea had more and more come to prevail that God can save and wants to save all men even though outside the Church, although ultimately not without the Church. This idea was hitherto only applied by way of concession and exception. Moreover, in recent times a more optimistic interpretation of the meaning of the world religions has been propounded. … This idea is, if anything, alien to the biblical-thought world or even antipathetic to its spirit. The prevailing optimism, which understands the world religions as in some way salvific agencies, is simply irreconcilable with the biblical assessment of these religions.

It has become clear that the implantation of Christianity in Asia has so far failed. Conversion to Christianity has so far, for all practical purposes, meant conversion to Europeanism. Thus it has been limited to marginal areas of the Asiatic mind. A Christian faith which wants to be and really should be the universal religion of mankind has been unable to genuinely move beyond an Occidental culture. To this hour there has arisen no really indigenous Asiatic Christianity reflecting a genuine grasp of the spirit and culture of the Orient.

There then follows a comparison with the rise of Marxism as a “universal religion” and how its “missionary activity” has been remarkably successful (remember, this was the 1960s, and Marxism was still seen as the wave of the future), transcending cultural barriers of all kinds.

If it is a fact that human history moves relentlessly toward unification of mankind, then this unifications must not be a mere economic unification through technological achievement. It must become a unification in view of human values, a unification of the spirit and of what is highest in the human spirit, its relationship to God. A unification which is not a unification in spirit would lead mankind to ultimate self destruction through a conflict between external cooperation and inner antagonism. In evaluating the need for the spiritual dimension of the historical process, the atheistic sector, which calls itself materialistic, thinks on a much higher level than some Christians do. If such insights, which see Christianity not within a narrowly individual perspective but rather on the level of historical interaction among men – if these insights are pursued to their logical conclusion, then we might be astonished to see how necessary missions are even today for the salvation of mankind.

(The young peritus is none other than Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI.)

Having a missionary zeal can, and is, easily misunderstood. It’s not about pride, or being obnoxious, or a numbers game, or about getting on the right bus to the after-life, just about ensuring our “ticket to heaven.” If Christianity is true, then its truths, and its particular perspective on life and reality has a universal significance, valid for all people. We are duty bound, by the Great Commission, to share the Good News, in our own way. And yes, this does mean entering into respectful dialogue with the religions of the world, or rather, with people of other faiths. That is, however one puts it, an attitude that is seen as spiritually violent in India. “Conversion” is a politically incendiary question, and being “for conversions” is seen as uncouth bigotry of the worst kind. The question is thorny, and I’m not really giving it justice here. I guess the main point is, as Christians, we should always keep the Lord’s missionary mandate in mind, and be beacons of the Good News in all circumstances, and not hide our light under a bushel basket.

Yesterday, near the hospital, I was at a “Xerox stand” getting various papers from my dad’s file photocopied. I noticed that there was a picture of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary on the wall, and a picture of Jesus next to it, with “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life,” (in Marathi) underneath it, a holy card of Blessed Theresa, and a flier promoting (of all things) a Benny Hinn crusade!

St. Francis Xavier, give us a zeal for souls.

[A heartfelt 'thank you' to our reader, and a tip of the hat to Gashwin Gomez.]

Making their Roman obedience

It is an excercise in patience and humility, as well as a joy (not always unmixed with sadness), for an established Anglican clergyman to give up his Anglican orders, cast off his vestments, swim the Tiber, and submit to the new Roman obedience leading to ordination within the Catholic Church.

Dwight Longenecker, former Anglican priest, was ordained as a deacon in the Catholic church this past Wednesday. He will be ordinaed to the priesthood later this month. He shares his story in the National Catholic Register. Al Kimel, of the Pontifications blog, also solicits your prayers as he prepares for ordination to the sacred priesthood of the Catholic Church on Sunday, December 3rd, at Our Lady of Sorrows Church in South Orange, New Jersey. Please keep him in your prayers.

(Rev. John Jay Hughes, a former Anglican now serving as a Catholic priest, reflects on some of the ambivalences involved in this journey in "The Joy of Priesthood" in the current issue of Crisis magazine, which should be available online soon. I'm not sure whether any of you subscribe to Crisis. If so, I would be interested in your thoughts on that article. I remember having mixed feelings about what struck me as a number of ineluctable ambiguities in the article vis-à-vis the state of the Church in crisis.)

Te Deum Laudamus

Te Deum laudamus
Te dominum confitemur.
Te æternum Patrem
omnis terra veneratur.
Tibi omnes angeli,
tibi cæli: et universæ Potestates.
Tibi Cherubim
incessabili voce proclamant:
Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus:
Sanctus Dominus Deus Sabaoth.
Pleni sunt cæli et terra
majestates gloriæ tuæ.
Te gloriosus
Apostolorum chorus.
Te Prophetarum
laudabilis numerus.
Te Martyrum candidatus laudat exercitus.
Te per orbum terrarum
sancta confitetur Ecclesia.
Patrem immensæ majestatis:
Venerandum tuum, verum,
et unicum Filium.
Sanctum quoque Paraclitum Spiritum.
Tu Rex gloriæ, Christe, tu Patris
sempiternus es Filius.

Tu ad liberandum
suscepturus hominem,
non horruisti Virginis uterum.
Tu devicto mortis aculeo,
aperuisti credentibus
regna cælorum.
Tu ad dexteram Dei sedes,
in gloria Patris.
Judex crederis, esse venturus.
Te ergo quæsumus, tuis famulis subveni,
quos pretioso
sanguine redemisti.
Aeterna fac
cum Sanctis tuis in Gloria numerari.

Salvum fac populum tuum Domine,
et benedic hereditati tuæ.
Et rege eos, et extolle illos,
et extolle illos usque in æternum.
Per singulos dies, benedicimus te,
et laudamus nomen tuum in sæculum sæculi.
Dignare Domine
die isto sine peccato nos custo dire.
Miserere nostri Domine, miserere nostri.
Fiat misericordia tua Domine super nos,
quem admodum speravimusin te.
In te Domine speravi
non confundar in æternum.



English translation:

We praise Thee, O God,
we acknowledge Thee to be the Lord;
all the earth doth worship Thee,
the Father everlasting.
To Thee all Angels cry aloud,
the Heavens, and all the Powers therein;
to thee Churubim and Seraphim
continually do cry:
Holy, Holy, Holy
Lord God of Sabaoth,
heaven and earth are full of the
Majesty of thy Glory.

The glorious company
of the Apostles praise thee,
the goodly fellowship
of the Prophets praise thee,
the noble army of Martyrs praise thee,
the holy Church throughout all the world
doth acknowledge thee:
the Father of an infinite Majesty,
Thine honourable, true,
and only Son,
also the Holy Ghost, the Comforter.
Thou art the King of Glory, O Christ!
Thou art the everlasting Son of the Father.

When thou tookest upon thee
to deliver man,
thou didst not abhor the Virgin’s womb.
When thou hadst overcome the sharpness of death,
thou didst open the Kingdom
of Heaven to all believers.
Thou sittest at the right hand of God
in the Glory of the Father.
We believe that thou shalt come to be our Judge.
We therefore pray thee, help thy servants
whom thou hast redeemed with thy
precious blood.
Make them to be numbered
with thy Saints in glory everlasting.

O Lord, save thy people
and bless thine heritage.
Govern them, and lift them up for ever.
Day by day we magnify thee,
and we worship thy Name,
ever world without end.
Vouchsafe, O Lord,
to keep us this day without sin.
O Lord, have mercy upon us: have mercy upon us.
O Lord, let thy mercy lighten upon us:
as our trust is in thee.
O Lord, in thee have I trusted:
let me never be confounded.

[See Wikipedia article, "Te Deum," for history and details; Wikimedia audio download: Tonus Sollemnis - Gregorian Chant (help·info) ]

Pope Benedict XVI Departs Istanbul

Pope ends visit to Turkey (RTE News, 01 December 2006 14:48):

Pope Benedict XVI has ended his visit to Turkey by concelebrating Mass with the Orthodox Patriarch, Bartholomew, at the Cathedral of the Holy Spirit in Istanbul. The Pontiff said the Church was not seeking to impose anything on anyone, but was asking to be allowed to carry out its work. He and the Patriarch have pledged to work more closely together....

The Pope flew back to Rome on a Turkish Airlines aircraft.

Images and reality

John Allen writes:

"If Benedict XVI’s Nov. 28-Dec. 1 trip to Turkey leaves behind a defining image, especially in the Muslim world, it will no doubt be the shot of the pope and Istanbul's chief Islamic cleric, Imam Mustafa Cagrici, inside the city’s famed Blue Mosque, standing before the mirhab, a niche indicating the direction of Mecca, and praying side-by-side.

In an instant, that image projected a message of inter-faith fraternity that seemed in stark contrast to the specter of a 'clash of civilizations' which followed Benedict’s Sept. 12 lecture at the University of Regensburg, which produced its own defining images of angry, and sometimes violent, protests across the Muslim world."

Allen Pizzey (CBS Evening News' "Reporters Notebook" 11/30/06) observes:

"The press then had to go through its usual round of asking each other 'did-he-didn't-he,' agree that he did — and then wait for confirmation from the Vatican spokesman, who more or less confirmed that the pope had indeed prayed, in a manner of speaking.

Turkish TV, which carried the event live, had no doubts — and was almost universally breathless in its coverage. 'We are shocked ... it is fabulous … fantastic ... they pray together ... pope and mufti pray together ... historical ...' were among the comments." [Hat tip to Christopher, Against the Grain, Nov. 30]

Pope Benedict has gone out of his way to mend fences with the Muslim world after the outrage provoked by his remarks at Regensburg University earlier this Fall. He has deliberately avoided gestures that would be taken as offensive by Muslims. He did not make the sign of the cross upon entering the Museum of Hagia Sofia, which was once a great Christian church. Contrary to earlier habit, he has even seemed to concede that Islam is a religion of peace. He seemed, as the New York Times reported, to back Turkey's bid to join the European Union.

Yet, as Catholic League president Bill Donohue said yesterday, “All the news reports which said that Pope Benedict XVI now supports the admission of Turkey into the European Union were wrong. He never said any such thing." What the Pope actually said was:

"We have viewed positively the process that has led to the formation of the European Union. Those engaged in this great project should not fail to take into consideration all aspects affecting the inalienable rights of the human person, especially religious freedom....In every step towards unification, minorities must be respected, with their cultural traditions and the distinguishing features of their religion."

“In other words," said Donohue, "Pope Benedict XVI has not flip-flopped: admission of Turkey into the European Union is conditioned on its willingness to respect the religious rights of minorities (something it has failed to do).

As for the Pope's conciliatory gestures toward Islam, Sandro Magister sees these, if not as confrontational, yet as wholly consistent with Benedict's earlier statements and positions on Islam. He writes, for example:

On the feast of saint Andrew, Benedict XVI entered the Blue Mosque in Istanbul with the cross of Jesus clearly visible upon his chest. He paused before the mihrab facing Mecca, and prayed in silence beside the grand mufti, who murmured the opening words of the Qur’an: all this took place with the freedom and clarity marked out by his lecture in Regensburg.

As to what some press has been calling Benedict's 'prayer' in the Blue Mosque, the Vatican press office has suggested that it might better be called a 'moment of meditation.'

Again, Magistro writes

The dialogue “according to reason” between Christianity and the other religions, and Islam in the first place, is for Benedict XVI inseparably tied to the search for unity among Christians.

And dialogue with Islam “according to reason” demands that every link between faith and violence be severed. In his homilies and addresses in Turkey, pope Joseph Ratzinger incessantly called for religious freedom. He did this with repeated references to the martyrs – including those of today, like Fr. Andrea Santoro – who lost their lives for being peaceful witnesses to their Christian faith.

The Turkish political and religious leaders, who are highly anxious to be admitted to the European Union, now know much better than before that religious freedom is a requisite step for this admission. And also in this, Benedict XVI brought comfort to the non-Muslim minorities in Turkey.

Your thoughts?

Today's and tomorrow's papal schedule

Thursday, 30 November

• Divine Liturgy at the Patriarchal Church of St. George - Address of the Holy Father; Joint Declaration
• Visit to the Museum of Saint Sofia
• Moment of prayer to the Armenian Apostolic Cathedral and meeting with H.B. Patriarch Mesrob II Greeting of the Holy Father
• Meeting with H.E. the Syrian Orthodox Metropolitan
• Meeting with the Grand Rabbi of Turkey
• Meeting and dinner with the members of the Catholic Episcopal Conference

Friday, 1 December

• Holy Mass at the Cathedral of the Holy Spirit - Homily of the Holy Father
• Farewell ceremony at the Airport of Istanbul
• 13.15 Departure from the Airport of Istanbul to Rome
• 14.45 Arrival at the Airport of Ciampino (Rome), Deo Volente, safe and unharmed. (Pray.)

[Hat tip to Christopher, "Pope Benedict XVI's Apostolic Journey to Turkey Nov. 28 - Dec. 1, 2006"]

Update on Pope's visit to Hagia Sofia and Blue Mosque

Istanbul - Pope Benedict XVI's visit to the Hagia Sofia and the Blue Mosque in Istanbul went off without incident early Thursday evening despite fears that conservative Muslim or nationalist groups might try to upset the visit.... Unlike his predecessor Pope John Paul II who visited the museum in 1979, Benedict did not make a sign of the cross when entering the Hagia Sophia. After the Hagia Sophia the pope was driven the small distance across to the equally huge 17th century Sultan Ahmet Mosque (or Blue Mosque as it is widely known), his first visit to a mosque since the beginning of his pontificate in April 2005, where he made a silent prayer alongside the Mufti of Istanbul Mustafa Cagrici. Earlier on Thursday the pope renewed an invitation to Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I to discuss how to overcome the biggest dispute between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, namely the failure to come to agreement over the concept of apostolic primacy.... After his visit to the Hagia Sophia and the Blue Mosque the pope was scheduled to meet Armenian Orthodox Patriarch Mesrob II.

Visit the Blessed Sacrament. Fast. Pray.

Koran to replace Bible at swearing-in oath?

Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress, has announced that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran (Dennis Prager, "America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on," Townhall.com, Tuesday, November 28, 2006).

For a contrary view, see Stephen Bainbridge, "Dennis Prager goes off the Rails re Keith Ellison" (Professor Bainbridge's Journal, 11/28/06):

Prager's argument strikes me as fundamentally misguided. In the first place, Prager appears to be misinformed. He posits that:

"... for all of American history, Jews elected to public office have taken their oath on the Bible, even though they do not believe in the New Testament ...."

In fact, however, my understanding is that Jewish politicians and civil servants often take the oath of office by swearing on the Torah rather than the Christian Bible. (Anybody got any empirical evidence on way or the other?)

In the second, and more importantly, while I am a firm believer in the idea that immigrants to the United States (and their children) should be encouraged to assimilate to American culture, I don't share Prager's notion that it's necessary for politicians and government officials to "take their oaths of office with their hands on the very same book" in order to "affirm that some unifying value system underlies American civilization."

Bainbridge's argument is essentially that freedom of religious exercise is a core value of American civilization.

The deeper question which neither Prager nor Bainbridge really addresses here is the question about the overarching framework of values that holds together a pluralistic culture allowing for religious diversity and freedom. Those who celebrate multicultural diversity often use culinary metaphors. The metaphor of a 'fruit basket' is usually preferred to that of a 'melting pot' these days, because not everyone favors assimilation. We may prefer our diverse cuisines -- Chinese, Japanese, Italian, French, Thai, Vietnamese, Lebanese, Greek, etc. -- to retain their distinct flavors, rather than being blended down into one Genuine All-American [TM] Stew. Sticking with the 'fruit basket' metaphor allows the plum and strawberry and banana and peach and melon to each remain what it is. Fair enough. The question that remains, however, is this: What is the basket that holds all this fruit together? Prager is panicked about the erosion of what he terms "American civilization," which sounds a trifle Normal Rockwellesque. On the other hand Bainbridge's apologia for religious liberty leaves unaddressed the question of what context of values provides a foundation for liberty, since liberty simpliciter can mean everything and so means nothing. Liberty -- and equality -- are two ideas that require a third, justice, to give them meaningful definition; and justice requires a discussion of natural law.