Sentire Cum Ecclesia

There’s been a bit of news about the fact that the Italian daily edition of L’Osservatore Romano is now online. My Italian is not very good, so I will probably stick with the weekly edition in English – which, nevertheless, is a good thing to have on the web.

In his Encyclical Ut Unum Sint, Pope John Paul II drew our attention to the “ecumenism of the martyrs”:

The courageous witness of so many martyrs of our century, including members of Churches and Ecclesial Communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church, gives new vigour to the Council’s call and reminds us of our duty to listen to and put into practice its exhortation. These brothers and sisters of ours, united in the selfless offering of their lives for the Kingdom of God, are the most powerful proof that every factor of division can be transcended and overcome in the total gift of self for the sake of the Gospel… [B]elievers in Christ, united in following in the footsteps of the martyrs, cannot remain divided. If they wish truly and effectively to oppose the world’s tendency to reduce to powerlessness the Mystery of Redemption, they must profess together the same truth about the Cross.(1)

and

All Christian Communities know that, thanks to the power given by the Spirit, obeying that will and overcoming those obstacles are not beyond their reach. All of them in fact have martyrs for the Christian faith. Despite the tragedy of our divisions, these brothers and sisters have preserved an attachment to Christ and to the Father so radical and absolute as to lead even to the shedding of blood… In a theocentric vision, we Christians already have a common Martyrology. This also includes the martyrs of our own century, more numerous than one might think, and it shows how, at a profound level, God preserves communion among the baptized in the supreme demand of faith, manifested in the sacrifice of life itself. The fact that one can die for the faith shows that other demands of the faith can also be met. I have already remarked, and with deep joy, how an imperfect but real communion is preserved and is growing at many levels of ecclesial life. I now add that this communion is already perfect in what we all consider the highest point of the life of grace, martyria unto death, the truest communion possible with Christ who shed his Blood, and by that sacrifice brings near those who once were far off (cf. Eph 2:13).
(83,84)

Why all this? Because a little problem has arisen, according to the Huffington Post, with the plans to beatify three Catholic priests (Johannes Prassek, Hermann Lange, and Eduard Mueller) who, together with a Lutheran pastor (Karl Friedrich Stellbrink), were martyrs under Nazism in the town of Lubeck in Germany. The Lutheran pastor was no mere bystander caught up in the martyrdom of the priests – by all accounts, the three priests were martyred because they joined themselves to Pastor Stellbrink’s initial action of defiance. Is it not divisive, the Protestants of Lubeck are asking, for the Catholic Church to beatify the three who were Catholic, and not the one who was Lutheran?

It is a good question, but perhaps not well expressed by one Pastor Heinze Russman, who is reported in the article to have written in an editorial in a local newspaper:

Many Christians, including me, are disappointed that the current pope seems to be doing little for the ecumenical solidarity of churches, especially regarding Lutherans.. All four should be beatified. When that doesn’t go, then none!

As I have also pointed out on this blog before, the Catholic Church has never, to this date, beatified or canonised anyone who was not in communion with the Catholic Church. From one point of view, to do so could itself be viewed as an “anti-ecumenical” act – the attempt to co-opt for ourselves someone who belonged to another Christian community. From another point of view, the reason for not doing so can be understood as a witness to the fact that the Catholic Church has always seen communion within the Church as at least a basic requirement of that sine qua non for sainthood of perfect communion with God.

But Pope John Paul’s statements in Ut Unum Sint would seem to open up that latter question. He does seem to suggest that the act of the ultimate sacrifice for the name of Jesus is itself an indication of that perfect communion with God that we see as fundamental for sainthood. Was it not for this very reason that the Church invented the term “baptism of blood”?, ie. to cover the case where someone who was not yet a full initiate of the Catholic Church (eg. a catechumen) and who yet made the ultimate sacrifice could be included in the Church’s canon of saints?

This current instance of the Lubeck martyrs is not in fact the first time this situation has arisen. Famously, in his homily for the canonisation of the Ugandan Martyrs, Pope Paul VI did not ignore the fact that among them were not only Catholic Christians, but also Anglicans. He said:

And the others are worthy of mention also, who, professing the Anglican religious customs, were afflicted with death for the name of Christ

There is no easy answer to this problem. It is not unrelated to the wider ecumenical problem of the recognition of one another’s “saints” – at some points in history, saints have been recognised by some Christian jurisdictions precisely because they were “martyred” by Christians of another separated Christian jurisdiction. Recognising each other’s martyrs is therefore not without ecumenical problems. I have before on this blog wondered about the death of Brother Roger of Taize – whether it could be seen as a “martyrdom”, and whether or not that, beyond the question of whether or not Roger had been at some stage personally received into Catholic communion by John Paul II, might be a reason for recognising him as a saint of the Church.

Unfortunately, the simplest solution – that the German Evangelische Kirche themselves recognise Pastor Stellbrink as a martyr and beatify him by methods proper to their own communion – is not possible, since the Protestant Churches do not have a process analogous to that of the Catholic Church’s canonisation process. If they did, it would be a simple matter of a both communions raising their respective martyr(s) “to the altars” on the same day, perhaps even (in a fit of ecumenical niceness) in a joint ceremony. Herein lies one of the continuing issues between Catholics and Protestants – the place and role of the saints in our theology and practice. Do those Protestants in Lubeck who ask that the Catholic Church beatify Pastor Stellbrink along with with his brother Catholic martyers really desire that the Church should propose one of their own pastors as an “intercessor” before God in heaven? Would this not mitigate against their insistance that there can be no other “mediator” than Christ himself? If not, would we not then be at a point where they can recognise that our proposition of the saints as “intercessors” does not, in fact, mitigate against the doctrine of the “One Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus”?

Ah. So many questions. As Melanchthon would have said, in the “heavenly academy”, these debates will all be solved…

Lent officially ends this evening. Deacon John has been discussing the pros and cons of taking on an “ambitious” Lenten discipline. This Lent, I didn’t try anything definitive, in other words, not total rules about giving up this or that entirely, or doing this or that every day. Rather I tried a “more or less” style Lent, and in this I feel I was pretty successful.

On the “more” list:

• Going to daily mass (tick – as often as possible anyway)
• Praying Morning and Evening Prayer (tick – thanks to the Divine Office app on my iPhone)
• Spontaneous giving to charities (tick – the idea was that if I saw a collector I gave without another thought)
• Weekly confession (tick. As for why, see the last item on the “less” list)

On the “less” list:

• Alcohol (tick – I have certainly cut down, and noticed that my appetite for it has reduced too)
• Tobacco (no tick, I’m afraid. I wasn’t trying to give up, just cut down from two pipes to one pipe a day for financial reasons)
• Food and Meat (tick – no complete bans or fasts – except as mandated by the Church – but a general cut down. I’ve lost some weight too – no, really, I have – so some of my old trousers fit me again.)
• Sin (big fail).

Of course, it really is sin that one is supposed to “give up” for Lent. But I can say that regular – really regular – confession has been a great aid in this department.

It hasn’t been a perfect Lent for me, but it has been more beneficial than many of my other rather more “heroic” attempts.

Enough introspection for now.

I pray that Lent has been a positive time for you, and that you have become more “convicted”, “committed” and “converted” as a disciple of our Lord. I wish you all the best for the holy days now upon us. As Fr Z. says: Pray for me, as I will for you.

With the appointment yesterday of the second new bishop for Australia in as many weeks, I am wondering if the “Australian File” has had the dust blown off it and is lying open on someone’s desk in Rome…

In which case, sooner or later, they will come across the fact that we have a couple of vacancies here in Victoria, ie. in Sandhurst (to fill the vacancy of the dearly beloved Bishop Joe) and one here in Melbourne, where we usually have four active auxiliaries. I wonder if the file works “up the coast” or “down”?

Of course, as everyone is always pointing out, we have a number of Archdiocesan seats due for retirement. Perhaps the “Australian File” has been opened to fill some of the lesser vacancies first? All speculation, of course. And what would I know. So don’t tell anyone you got it from me if you want to continue to be respected as “knowlegable” on these things!

Lots of nice piccies here on the CAM website of yesterday’s Chrism Mass in St Patrick’s, along with the text of the Archbishop’s homily.

I always enjoy this liturgy, which I rather naughtily refer to as the “cooking show”. I especially enjoy the opportunity to play “spot your parish priest”.

But seriously, this is a very significant moment in the yearly liturgical life of the Church. In one sense, it is a celebration of the source and origin of the life of the local Church: the Eucharist, which is Christ himself, our source and summit; the priesthood gathered with their Bishop, who represents (according to Ignatius of Antioch), God the Father in our midst; the oils that are used to initiate new members of the Church into this communion of the Holy Spirit. All mixed up with the colours and smells and tastes and words and actions that go with sacramental life. Deep, deep stuff.

From a purely aesthetical point of view – well, not purely, I guess – I was particularly impressed by the Schola of Corpus Christi Seminary. We used James Quinn’s verses of “O Redemptor”, but sung the English refrain (“O Redeemer, hear our singing as we praise you with one voice”) to the traditional chant rather than the modern Wilcock setting. Thanks Herr Kappelmeister Geoffrey! Apart from three excellent hymns, the entire mass, using the new translations of the Gloria and Sanctus and Memorial Acclamation, was sung in chant, and the people joined in very well. Simple. Dignified. Beautiful. I hope it was an encouragement to every parish priest who attended to implement the same model in their own parishes.

Sorry. I know it’s Holy Week, and we’re supposed to be all sombre and everything. But my kid’s have been telling these jokes lately, and in case you haven’t heard them:

How do you kill an elephant?
With an elephant gun.

How do you kill a blue elephant?
With a blue elephant gun.

How do you kill a red elephant?
Put it into the fridge until it turns blue, then shoot it with a blue elephant gun.

How do you kill a yellow elephant?
There are no such thing as yellow elephants!

How do you kill a white elephant?
Go into the jungle where there are white elephants. Bring with you a blueberry muffin (a favourite of white elephants). Put the muffin at the base of a tree. The white elephant will come an eat it. Do this for six days in a row. On the seventh day, put a muffin WITHOUT blueberries at the base of the tree. Climb the tree with a net. When the white elephant eats the muffin and realises that there are no blueberries in it, he will turn red with anger. Jump out of the tree and catch him with your net. Put him in the fridge until he turns blue. Shoot him with a blue elephant gun.

Cool, eh?

Listening to Stephen Fry rabbit on on QI while doing some late night blogging. They were talking about “666”, the “number of the beast” (Revelation 13:18), and Fry quickly raced off the following:

$665.95 = the retail price of the Beast
25.8069758… = the root of all evil
Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia = the fear of the Number of the Beast

Looking for these on the Internet found a number of sites, including this one, which give a whole list of them.

Herman Sasse (even more information here on the German Wikipedia) was a major German Lutheran theologian and contemporary of Karl Barth and Deitrich Bonhoeffer. After the Second World War, his life led him into the strange backwater of Immanuel (later Luther) Seminary in North Adelaide, South Australia. As it turns out, he is a favourite not only of Australian Lutherans, but also of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. The current president of the LCMS, Pastor Matt Harrison, is a leading expert on Sasse. He began translating Sasse’s works while he was living next door to me at the North Adelaide Seminary where he had access to many original Sasse documents.

Sasse was definitely influential in leading to my own conversion to the Catholic Church, through two of his works in English: His 1934 “Was heißt Lutherisch?” (in English “Here we stand: nature and character of the Lutheran faith”) and his “This is My Body: Luther’s Contention for the Real Presence in the Sacrament of the Altar” (1977).

Why do I mention this? Because two of our Lutheran friends on this blog, one being the aforementioned Pastor Harrison and the other being the well-beloved Pastor Weedon, have recently cited the Good Doctor Sasse in reference to the Catholic Church. From their blogs:

Pastor William Weedon citing Sasse here:

“If one asks for the secret of the vitality of the Catholic Church even in our time, one would have to admit that it is not is hierarchical organization, not its cult of saints and relics, not even, as many suppose, its traditional political astuteness that gives it its inner strength and predominance, but the fact that it celebrates the Sacrament of the Altar uninterruptedly throughout the world. This determines its whole life, even its whole theology.” — Hermann Sasse, *We Confess: The Sacraments* p. 99.

And here is Pastor Matt Harrison, El Presidente of the LCMS on his blog:

“Let no one say that prayer is self-evident. After all, we have services once or twice a Sunday. No, that prayer of the church which we find everywhere in the New Testament where the life of an ecclesia is spoken of, unfortunately, is not something self-evident. Who would maintain that prayer is offered in our Lutheran Churches today with a fervor, which even approaches that with which the church of the New Testament prayed “without ceasing?” (Acts 12:5.) Where today is Luther’s mighty praying with its visible answers? Where is the prayer of those pious people, of which Luther spoke in his explanation of the Lord’s Prayer in the Large Catechism, the prayer which in those days held the Devil back from destroying Germany in its own blood? Yea, despite all the criticism which the Reformation has directed at the mumblings of Catholic prayer and which the modern liturgical movement within the Catholic Church undertook (quite independently from an entirely different viewpoint) must we not finally ask where, in which church, prayer is being offered with more fervor and perhaps also with better training—for prayer too must be learned? Will the answer be the Catholic Church or the churches of the Reformation?” (Hermann Sasse Ecclesa Orans (Letters to Lutheran Pastors V)):

An article in The Age today (not online) reads:

Holy Stairs cash call

Rome: Catholics seeking an indulgence by climbing the Holy Stairs, which Jesus reputedly mounted before his crucifixion, may soon be asked for a contribution to save the fixtures flaking frescoes. Every year 2 million pilgrims in Rome get on their knees to shuffle at the 28 marble steps, which tradition states once led to the room in Jerusalem where Pontius Pilate judged Christ. They were shipped to Italy in the fourth century. Wooden boards protect the steps, with small openings revealing where Christ’s blood reportedly stained the marble. Researchers say that 16th century frescoes that line the stairs and depict the passion of Christ and the crucifixion are disintegrating and 1.6million euros ($2.18 million) is needed to fix them.

I can just see the ideas forming in some Protestant minds: See! The Catholic Church is still charging for indulgences.

Short answer: no. Because it a practice open to abuse, the granting of indulgences for charitable donations and alms giving (which is a very ancient practice) was stopped after the Council of Trent. The story is a little clearer in its original form in the Telegraph, where one of the Passionist guardians of the stairs comments:

“It’s painful to see the frescoes in this state,” said Fr Tito Amodei, a member of the Passionists, the black-robed order that runs the site. “If just one pilgrim in two contributed a euro, the restoration could easily go ahead,”

In other words, it appears that the Passionists are considering requesting an optional contribution from all pilgrims who climb the stairs. And that is as it should be, one would think. But this contribution is not in any way attached to the indulgence that has traditionally been granted to those who climb the stairs. That won’t satisfy those who reckon the Church has no business granting indulgences in the first place, of course. But it pays to be accurate in these matters.

PS. When I was in Rome in Holy Week 2009, I didn’t get to climb the stairs as I was in a crowd waiting for admission to St John Lateran Basilica for the Maundy Thursday Papal Mass. Waste of time, as we ended up going to St Paul’s instead. I should have gone to the Scala Sancta instead. Ah well. Hindsight is a terrible thing for a pilgrim.

Good God, this makes me angry: “Monkey business lures children”.

I personally think that the 199 text “services” are a scam that should be declared illegal full stop, without adding insult to injury with this kind of thing. We knew nothing about these when we set our daughter, just starting high school and needing a way of staying in contact with Mum and Dad, with a mobile phone. She was taken in by a text messaging “service” and, before either she or we knew anything about it, had raked up an horrendous bill.

Looking in the fine print of our mobile phone account, it did mention “199” numbers, and the option of having these disabled, but it was not drawn to our attention. A huge amount of money went from us to someone we don’t know somewhere we don’t know for absolutely NOTHING in return. And this with a child under 13. When I looked at their website, one of the “terms of agreement” said that the person making the text calls had to ensure that the owner of the account knew about it – but what good is that? And how can one hold them accountable?

Answer is: you can’t. Check out this website for some other angry parents. A word of advice if you are getting a phone for your child: disable these 199 “services” at the time of buying the phone. We had “data” turned off so that she wouldn’t waste here money on the internet, but didn’t know about these.

As I said, such “services” should be illegal. Promoting them in the way described in this story should earn double time in the clanger.