Benedict XVIShould we not once again realize and admit to one another that no age should be a cause of shame for us if we accept it interiorly and live it as it should be lived?  Should we not, at this jucture of time past and time renewed, learn once again that to be what we should be we need the fullness of the time allotted to us from childhood to old age?  Should we not - each of us - try to accept with better grace the entire span of our human ife and to find tolerance - no, recognition - for the time of life other people are experiencing because we know that all of us have something to give one another? 

To state the matter more concretely, let us ask ourselves what a world and a Church would be like without the cheerful, guileless, and infeigned by a premature puberty as is so often the case today.  What would a world and a Church be like without the urgent restlessness and questioning of young people as they strive toward their future?  What would they be like without the strength and determination of those who are at the height of their powers?  What would they be like without the mature experience, the quiet patience, and the resigned serenity of the elderly?  And what would all of us be like without trust in one another, without the readiness to see and accept one another as we are? 

At this time, when the future is our dominant concern and when, for that very reason, we would like to stop the clocks at a definite time, perhaps the most important thing we can do is, by far, to learn to say Yes to older people and to our own growing old and, in doing so, to accept time and the future.

From: Dogma und Verkungdigung, pp. 400-401

 

47 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net which was thrown into the sea and gathered fish of every kind;
48 when it was full, men drew it ashore and sat down and sorted the good into vessels but threw away the bad.
49 So it will be at the close of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous,
50 and throw them into the furnace of fire; there men will weep and gnash their teeth.
51 “Have you understood all this?” They said to him, “Yes.”
52 And he said to them, “Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.”
53 And when Jesus had finished these parables, he went away from there,

He is generous even to exhaustion; and what is most wonderful is, that He gives Himself thus entirely, not once only, but every day, if we wish it. Every fresh Communion is a new gift which Jesus Christ makes of Himself.

– St. Ignatius of Loyola

Benedict XVIMen expect redmption from themselves, and they seem quite prepaired to provide it.  Thus there is linked to the primacy of the future the primacy of practice, the primacy of human activity above all other activities.  Theology, too, shows itself more and more open to this concept - orthopraxis replaces orthodoxy. 

“Eschatopraxis” seems more important than eschatology.  If in earlier days it was left to popular enlightenment to tell the lower class that artificial fertilizer was more effective than prayer, now, after a suitable interval, we can read similar commentaries in the kind of “religious” literature that strives to reflect the argument that under certain circumstances prayer itself will have to be “refunctioned”: it can hardly be considered any longer an appeal for divine assistance; on the contrary, it must be regarded as a period of quiet composure in preparation for the practice of human self-help. 

Belief in progress, which has often been declared dead, has taken a new hold of life, and the optimistic confidence that the human race will eventually be able to build the city of man is finding new believers.  The city of man - for many the words were the symbol of all their desires; for others, they have a melancholy sound.  For along with hope, fear is also beginning to spread.  The anxiety that seemed almost banished by the optimism of the post-war years is reappearing.  When, for the first time, men set foot on the moon, no one could help feeling the excitement, the pride, the joy at this enormous achievement of mankind.  Their success was regarded, not as the victory of one nation, but as a victory for the human race. 

But there was felt as well, in the moment of victory, a deep sadness that the same men who were capable of such a magnificent feat were not able to prevent thousands, perhaps millions, of their fellow men from starving to death year after year; that they were not able to provide for other millions, lives characterized by human dignity; that they were not able to put an end to war or to stem the flow of crime.  The way to the moon is easier to find than the way to the human heart and mind.  Technical ability does not necessarily include the ability to deal with men.  The ability to govern one’s self is quite clearly on a very different plane from that of technical achievement.

From: Glaube und Zukunft, pp. 100-101 

 

44 “The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and covered up; then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.
45 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls,
46 who, on finding one pearl of great value, went and sold all that he had and bought it.

The soul possesses freedom; and though the devil can make suggestions, he does not have the power to compel you against your will.

– St. Cyril of Jerusalem


The newspapers, and especially their columnists, are having a field day writing about Ozamis Archbishop Jesus A. Dosado’s decision to deny Catholic politicians who are pro-abortion and pro-artificial contraception the Sacrament of Holy Communion. Some writers caution of a backlash, warning that decision appears too confrontational, and others seem sympathetic to the affected legislators, as if they were the underdogs. Some would even praise them for taking a principled stand.

But just how principled a stand is that of these politicians? And are the other considerations even relevant? Let’s examine the situation at hand.

Integrity

We are all sinners and are guilty of not living up to all our beliefs. It would seem, however, that these Catholic politicians have radically disconnected their faith from their actions. They claim membership in a Church that emphatically teaches one very fundamental tenet, and then openly announce their support for — and will work to bring about — the opposite. It’s one thing to be privately inconsistent with one’s beliefs, but to do so repeatedly, publicly, without remorse, and to claim that it is right, is another thing altogether. It’s a scandal.

What does that say about their integrity?

Here are the definitions of “integrity” from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:

1: firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values
2: an unimpaired condition
3: the quality or state of being complete or undivided

“Firm adherence” and “complete or undivided” all imply consistency in belief, word, and deed, don’t they? To have integrity means to behave in accordance with declared and freely held belief.

It’s obvious that these arrogant politicians want to have their cake and it it too. They want to advocate and pass coercive laws that promote and condone abortion and abortifacient contraceptives, while at the same time demand that they be considered Catholics in good standing!

What kind of chicanery is this? A Catholic “in good standing” is one who tries his best to follow the doctrines of the Catholic Church. What kind a Catholic is someone who refuses to believe in Catholic doctrine? Can such a person even be a Catholic except in name only? A How then, can one be in “good standing” with the Church when one promotes laws that are directly contrary to the Catholic doctrine?

Atty. Jose C. Sison, in his article “A bishop’s courageous stand” (July 18, Philippine Star) hit the nail on the head when he wrote:

So Catholic politicians in Congress or in city councils who sponsored and supported these pro abortion measures should not complain if they are denied the Sacraments; or try to sway public opinion against the Church for their predicament. They “should have the integrity to acknowledge” that their stand is contrary to their Faith, and voluntarily refrain from receiving the Sacraments “until they have a change of heart”, as Archbishop Dosado admonished.

Can we expect integrity from these politicians? If we cannot expect such, then why elect them? They will have their day of reckoning.

Read more

Benedict XVIWhat are the qualifications of the Christian philosopher? the Christian scholar? James mentions several, of which I propose to discuss only the first two.  he says that true wisdom - the wisdom that comes from above - is first of all “pure” (James 3:17), which can also be translated “chaste”, “immaculate”, “undefiled”.  It is, consequently, also peacable and peacemaking… It need hardly be pointed out how aptly that relates to us today.  It is natural and necessary for theologians to discuss.  But when theological discussion ceases to be a striving for truth and becomes, instead, a struggle for power in the Church, then the nature of theology has been radically falsified; it introduces party politics into the Church and becomes the medium of party power; it divides the Church.  Whenever theology generates theological parties and these parties become Church parties, it has become a false wisdom.  It creates enmities and embitters people.  I must admit that what schocks me most depply in many letters and publications is the rank hatred of the Church and her members that speaks through them.  The role of true wisdom and hence of the authentic teacher of theology in the Church is to create peace, not strife, to create goodness and inner openness, not embitterment.

From: Chirstlicher Glaube und Europa, pp.104-5

 

19 and many of the Jews had come to Martha and Mary to console them concerning their brother.
20 When Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went and met him, while Mary sat in the house.
21 Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.
22 And even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you.”
23 Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.”
24 Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”
25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,
26 and whoever lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
27 She said to him, “Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, he who is coming into the world.”

It is not in human nature to deceive others for any long time, without in a measure deceiving ourselves also.

– John Henry Cardinal Newman

Next Page →