Contra Sola Scriptura

See also this.

Nicea II and Papal Supremacy

Pope Francis rejects title of "co-redemptrix" for the Virgin Mary

Vatican City, Mar 24, 2021 / 05:00 am MT (CNA).- Pope Francis on Wednesday said that Jesus entrusted the Virgin Mary to us as a Mother, “not as co-redeemer.”

Speaking at his general audience on March 24, the pope said that while Christians had always given Mary beautiful titles, it was important to remember that Christ is the only redeemer.

He was addressing a theological debate about whether the Church should issue a dogmatic definition declaring Mary “Co-Redemptrix,” in honor of her role in humanity’s salvation.

“Jesus extended Mary’s maternity to the entire Church when He entrusted her to his beloved disciple shortly before dying on the cross,” the pope noted.

“From that moment on, we have all been gathered under her mantle, as depicted in certain medieval frescoes or paintings. Even the first Latin antiphon -- sub tuum praesidium confugimus, sancta Dei Genitrix: the Madonna who ‘covers,’ like a Mother, to whom Jesus entrusted us, all of us; but as a Mother, not as a goddess, not as co-redeemer: as Mother.”

He continued: “It is true that Christian piety has always given her beautiful titles, as a child gives his or her mamma: how many beautiful things children say about their mamma whom they love so much! How many beautiful things.”

“But we need to be careful: the things the Church, the saints, say about her, beautiful things, about Mary, subtract nothing from Christ’s sole Redemption. He is the only Redeemer. They are expressions of love like a child for his or her mamma -- some are exaggerated. But love, as we know, always makes us exaggerate things, but out of love.”

Read the rest here.

Why I’m Not A Universalist

 Well worth a read.

LGBT ‘Catholic’ groups: If Pope can reverse Church teaching on death penalty, why not homosexuality?

Now who didn't see this coming?

 (Image HT: E. T. Ybarra)

Pope Francis Declares Capital Punishment Inadmissable in All Circumstances

It's all over the news, and the blogosphere. My views on this Pope have been firm for quite some time. Pope Francis is a heretic. And no, I am not referring to the various theological differences dividing Rome from Orthodoxy. He is essentially a liberal Protestant.

I have no idea how serious Catholics, who have been doing contortions to try and reconcile themselves with this papacy, are going to jam this particular square peg into the theological round hole. But I expect most will find a way. What alternative do they have? The Catholic concept of Doctrinal Development has been used to explain some crazy stuff before, but this is going to be on an altogether new level. To accept this is to effectively concede that there is no fundamental article of faith that cannot be revised or in this case, de facto reversed.

[Longtime readers will know that I am generally opposed to capital punishment. But my opposition is not based on Christian morality. It is pragmatic and utilitarian. And I do concede some rare exceptions.]

Vatican Radio: Anglicans and Catholics discuss recognition of ministry

Catholic and Anglican theologians have been meeting together near Rome to discuss ordination rites within the two communions, as well as the significant ecumenical implications of Pope Francis’ recent document ‘Amoris Laetitia’.

A meeting of the Malines Conversation group took place from April 17th to 22nd at Rocca di Papa, south of Rome, culminating in an ecumenical evensong celebrated by Archbishop Arthur Roche of the Congregation for Divine Worship.

A communique issued after the encounter said the theologians from seven different countries discussed “contemporary and historic ordination rites” and the developments that have taken place in both communions since Pope Leo XIII declared Anglican orders to be “null and void”.

To find out more about the conversation and about prospects for progress in the dialogue, Philippa Hitchen spoke to one of the Catholic participants, Fr Tony Currer of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity.

Read the rest here.

Encyclical on just war theory ‘plausible’, says Cardinal

Cardinal Peter Turkson, the head of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, has called for a “broad and deeply felt” debate on the question of just war theory and said a papal encyclical on the issue was possible. He also said that proposals to drop the concept of just war were “legitimate”.

Cardinal Turkson spoke to the Sunday Times after a conference sponsored by Pax Christi International, the Catholic peace movement, and the Vatican’s justice and peace office, earlier this month. At the conclusion of the conference participants called for the Catholic Church to renounce its just war doctrine and for Pope Francis to write an encyclical on nonviolence and “just peace.”

In a closing statement, attendees at the conference said that too often the doctrine had been used to justify and endorse military action rather than prevent it.

Cardinal Turkson said he hoped “the debate on these issues, now as pressing as ever, will continue.”

Read the rest here.

Fr. Thomas Hopko: The One True Church

 Orthodox Christians claim that the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Chalcedonian Orthodox Church, is the one true Church of Christ. That’s the confession of faith that we make. Of course, we have to say right away that there are members of the Orthodox Church who are relativistic, especially in America, there would be those who could say, “Well, all churches are the same,” and, “no one can claim the truth,” and, “different churches have different things,” so we really shouldn’t be so proud and so arrogant as to say that our church is the only church or the only true church, that we really should not do that. However, that is the teaching.

I mean, it really is the teaching of the Holy Scripture and certainly of the Councils and certainly of the Holy Fathers and the saints. There would be no doubt at all, absolutely no doubt, that it is really a dogma. I would say that, a kind of a formal, official conviction and teaching in the Eastern Orthodox Church, that the Eastern Orthodox Church and only the Eastern Orthodox Church is really, truly, fully the one Church of Christ.

It is the Church of the Messiah. It is the qahal Israel. It is the assembly of Israel in the Messiah, in Jesus, to which Gentiles like myself may now be included by faith and grace. And that indeed this church is the Church. Certainly it would be a dogma, an absolutely official teaching of the Eastern Orthodox Church, that at baptisms and at the Holy Eucharist, at the Divine Liturgy—and we also do this at the compline service at the daily services in church—we say the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. And we say it in the singular: not “we” as the Council said it, but “I,” meaning “I accept it, I believe this.”

Read the rest here.

Cardinal Marx on Francis, the Synod, Women in the Church and Gay Relationships

Two issues at the present synod are divorced and remarried Catholics and gay Catholics, especially those in relationships. Do you have opportunities to listen directly to these Catholics in your present ministry?

I have been a priest for 35 years. This problem is not new. I have the impression that we have a lot of work to do in the theological field, not only related to the question of divorce, but also the theology of marriage. I am astonished that some can say, “Everything is clear” on this topic. Things are not clear. It is not about church doctrine being determined by modern times. It is a question of aggiornamento, to say it in a way that the people can understand, and to always adapt our doctrine to the Gospel, to theology, in order to find in a new way the sense of what Jesus said, the meaning of the tradition of the church and of theology and so on. There is a lot to do.

I speak with many experts—canon lawyers and theologians—who recognize many questions related to the sacramentality and validity of marriages. One question is: What can we do when a person marries, divorces and later finds a new partner? There are different positions. Some bishops at the synod said, “They are living in sin.” But others said, “You cannot say that somebody is in sin every day. That is not possible.” You see, there are questions we must speak about. We opened a discussion on this topic in the German bishops’ conference. Now the text is published. I think it is a very good text and a good contribution for the discussion of the synod.

It is very important that the synod does not have the spirit of “all or nothing.” It is not a good way. The synod cannot have winners and losers. That is not the spirit of the synod. The spirit of the synod is to find a way together, not to say, “How can I find a way to bring my position through?” Rather: “How can I understand the other position, and how can we together find a new position?” That is the spirit of the synod.

Therefore it is very important that we are working on these questions. I hope that the pope will inspire this synod. The synod cannot decide; only a council or pope can decide. These questions must also be understood in a broader context. The task is to help the people to live. It is not, according to “Evangelii Gaudium,” about how we can defend the truth. It is about helping people to find the truth. That is important.

The Eucharist and reconciliation are necessary for people. We say to some people, “You will never be reconciled until your death.” That is impossible to believe when you see the situations. I could give examples. In the spirit of “Evangelii Gaudium,” we have to see how the Eucharist is medicine for the people, to help the people. We must look for ways for people to receive the Eucharist. It is not about finding ways to keep them out! We must find ways to welcome them. We have to use our imagination in asking, “Can we do something?” Perhaps it is not possible in some situations. That is not the question. The focus must be on how to welcome people.

Read the rest here.

There is a crisis building in the Catholic Church and I suspect that after decades of building pressure things may be approaching the boiling point.

Survey Shows Poor Grasp of Doctrine by Evangelicals

My guess is that similar rather embarrassing results would be returned by a survey of Catholic or Orthodox laity. In any case you can read it here.

HT: Dr. Tighe

UN slams Catholic Church on sex abuse scandal and doctrine

BERLIN — A United Nations committee on Wednesday issued a scathing indictment of the Catholic Church’s handling of child sexual abuse involving clerics, releasing a report that went far beyond how the church responded to abuse allegations and included criticism of its teachings on homosexuality, gender equality and abortion.

“The Committee is concerned that the Holy See and Church-run institutions do not recognize the existence of diverse forms of families and often discriminate against children on the basis of their family situation,” the report by the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child said. 

Read the rest here.

I'm not going to defend the Roman Church's handling of the sex abuse crisis. Until very recently that could fairly be characterized, depending on location and other factors, as ranging somewhere between poor and appalling. But the UN is way out of line when they start meddling in religious doctrine. I hope the Vatican tells them to go pack sand. For that matter the US government should put the new world order guys on notice that they have overstepped their brief. Unfortunately, with things as they are that's likely to happen on or about the day pigs fly.

On a side note, am I the only one who sees some pretty rich irony in an organization with an ugly history of sexual abuse allegations against its own staff and so called "peace keepers" lecturing others on that subject?

Dr. Adam DeVille Responds to the Russian Church's Statement on Primacy

Dr. DeVille has written a critical response to the MP's long awaited document on primacy. As I have said repeatedly, the document was only incidentally addressed to Rome. The real target was Constantinople, and it definitely got their attention. In all honesty I was not exactly bowled over by the Moscow document. It seems like a fairly cavalier and breathtakingly short document for such a weighty subject. And I don't think Adam is too far off the mark in his suggestion that Moscow is trying to reduce the Ecumenical Patriarch to an ecclesiastical equivalent to The Queen of England, i.e. a figurehead.

All of which lends further weight to my long held view that we have no business holding discussions aimed at ending a thousand year schism with Rome, until we have our own ducks in a row. Conversations with Rome should be limited to areas of mutual interest, such as charity and the collapse of western civilization before the twin threats of militant secularism and militant Islam while we sort out our internal issues.

I will be most interested to see what becomes of this much discussed but never quite materializing Pan-Orthodox Synod.

Constantinople Responds to Moscow on Primacy

The Ecumenical Patriarchate has posted a response to the position paper from the Holy Synod of the Russian Church on primacy. As I noted in an earlier post, the Russian paper seemed to be directed more towards Constantinople than Rome, to whom it was ostensibly addressed.

The Russian Church on Primacy

This is a new and important document that lays out the position of the Russian Orthodox Church on the subject of Primacy. I suspect (the cynic in me) that it was meant as much for Constantinople's eyes as Rome's.

HT: Byzantine Texas

Pope Francis is Polling Catholics on Hot Topics

Vatican watchers say Francis' polling attempt is extraordinary on two levels: first, because it seeks input from rank-and-file Roman Catholics and second, because it touches on issues that might have been considered off-limits in past papacies.

The document sent to every nation's conference of bishops notes that the ancient church and its members are grappling with "concerns which were unheard of until a few years ago."

Same-sex unions, mixed marriages, single-parent families and surrogate mothers are all mentioned in the prelude to a list of questions that get into the nitty-gritty of 21st century life:

    "What pastoral attention can be given to people who live in these types of [same-sex] union?"
    "In the case of unions of persons of the same sex who have adopted children, what can be done pastorally in light of transmitting the faith?"
    "Do [the divorced and remarried] feel marginalized or suffer from the impossibility of receiving the sacraments?"
    "In cases where non-practicing Catholics or declared non-believers request the celebration of marriage, describe how this pastoral challenge is dealt with."

Read the rest here.

Pope Francis Criticizes Emphasis on Doctrinal Orthodoxy and Morals

Pope Francis, in the first extensive interview of his six-month-old papacy, said that the Roman Catholic church had grown “obsessed” with preaching about abortion, gay marriage and contraception, and that he has chosen not to speak of those issues despite recriminations from some critics.

In remarkably blunt language, Francis sought to set a new tone for the church, saying it should be a “home for all” and not a “small chapel” focused on doctrine, orthodoxy and a limited agenda of moral teachings.

“It is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time,” the pope told the Rev. Antonio Spadaro, a fellow Jesuit and editor in chief of La Civiltà Cattolica, the Italian Jesuit journal whose content is routinely approved by the Vatican. “The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently.

“We have to find a new balance,” the pope continued, “otherwise even the moral edifice of the church is likely to fall like a house of cards, losing the freshness and fragrance of the Gospel.”

Read the rest here.

Oh my... this is going to cause a serious firestorm in the blogosphere. And yes, I do find this disturbing. I really hope the Pope has been grossly and maliciously misquoted. Please take a deep breath before commenting.

P.S. For the record, the full interview can be read here. The NY Times, not surprisingly, is focusing on a very small part.

Orthodoxy and Gay Marriage

An interesting article with a lot of supporting links can be read here. Please leave your comments there.

Can the dead repent and be saved?

It's been a while since I have posted on, or linked to a weighty theological topic. I think this one fits the bill though. Please leave your comments on the respective posts.

Here  Here  and Here

Fr David Bissias Refutes Valerie A. Karras on Women's Ordination

The eminent physicist Wolfgang Pauli was well-known for his abrupt and scathing criticism of colleagues, often proclaiming their work “utterly wrong” (ganz falsch).  Once, when asked for a comment on an article by a younger physicist, he replied, “Not only is this not right, this is not even wrong [das ist nicht einmal falsch]!”  He meant that the article’s assertions could not be tested and therefore proven correct or wrong.  Scientifically, “not even wrong” meant something worse than “utterly wrong”: that the effort provided no benefit whatsoever to the scientific endeavor, for even disproven theories contribute to scientific progress.

If Pauli were an Orthodox Christian theologian, he might have responded in a similar manner to Valerie A. Karras’ article, “Theologies of Women and Ordained Ministry.”[1]  Obviously, her general argument cannot be scientifically “tested,” but that is not the point.  The article makes numerous valid observations, but none of them amounts to even a single “theology” of women; nor is there criticism of several such “theologies of women.”  However, the questions that Karras rightly poses merit answers by the contemporary Church.  Unfortunately, the answer she suggests or, often more accurately, implies, cannot be judged right or wrong based on the argument she presents.  Thus, es ist nicht einmal falsch—it is not even wrong.

The ultimate point of her article is that there is no “theological” justification for the Church to continue excluding women from the ranks of the presbyter and bishop, not to mention other ministries in the life of the contemporary Church.  To make this point more attractive, Karras relies on anecdotal evidence of women’s “subservient” position in the Church, a limited reading of patristic authorities, false analogies, a narrow view of an Orthodox “anthropology,” an overly-schematized view of “history” and an eschatology which is certainly subject to dispute.  If this is not enough, she has also neglected apparently more contrary evidence from ancient and contemporary authors and canonical sources (including Holy Scripture), largely dismissed contemporary “hard” science and social science and, perhaps most importantly, ignored a great deal of the liturgical-sacramental life of the Church.  The discerning reader cannot but help notice that her argument reveals a predetermined conclusion which is not at all supported directly and positively by the evidence Karras provides, and she certainly has not provided convincing arguments to account for the more obvious contrary evidence (such as Holy Scripture) that seems to support a conclusion opposite of her own.

Read the rest here.
HT: Dr. Tighe