POD Discoveries at Nashotah House
While cleaning out an old office at Nashotah House during work crew on Wednesday, Taylor Marshall and I found, unexpectedly, this beautiful (and very POD) statue of Saint Eugenius. Since no one was quite sure what to do with it, I adopted it. We immediately came up to my room and did a little research on this little-known and terribly unappreciated Bishop of the Church. As it turns out, Saint Eugenius was an Arian-Fighter, and the persecuted Bishop of Carthage in the late 5th Century. The Catholic Encyclopedia claims that he turned away Arian bishops from council because of their lack of literacy in Latin. Eugenius wrote Expositio Fidei Catholicae, proving the consubstantiality of the Word and Divinity in the Holy Ghost. We decided that as men training to stand up to nasty heretics, Saint Eugenius deserves our utmost devotion, and we began begging his prayers immediately.

Butler's Lives has the following to say:

"In the year 481, the episcopal see of Carthage had been vacant for twenty-four years, when Huneric, barbarian King of the African Vandals, decided to allow the Catholics to fill it, provided certain conditions be met. The people, impatient to enjoy the consolation which a pastor would bring to the church, chose Eugenius, a citizen of Carthage, eminent for his learning, zeal, piety and prudence. His charities to the distressed had already been very abundant, and in his new office he refused himself the slightest convenience, in order to be able to give all he had to the poor.

His virtue gained him the respect and esteem even of the Arians; but at length envy and blind zeal overcame their better sentiments, and Huneric sent Saint Eugenius an order never to sit on the episcopal throne, preach to the people, or admit into his chapel any Vandals, even if Catholic. The Saint courageously replied that the laws of God commanded him not to shut the door of His church to any who desired to serve Him there. The Vandal king, enraged at this answer, persecuted the Catholics in various ways. Many nuns were so cruelly tortured that they died on the rack. Great numbers of bishops, priests, deacons, and eminent Catholic laymen were banished to a desert filled with scorpions and venomous serpents. Many also were put to death.

During this persecution the people followed their bishops and priests to execution with lighted tapers in their hands. Mothers carried their little infants in their arms and laid them at the feet of the confessors, crying out with tears, “On your way to receiving your crowns, to whom do you leave us? Who will baptize our children? Who will impart to us the benefit of penance, and free us from the bonds of sin by the grace of reconciliation and pardon? Who will bury us with solemn prayers at our death? By whom will the divine Sacrifice be offered?” By the intervention of Providence, Saint Eugenius was liberated on the very scaffold, but exiled to an uninhabited desert in the province of Tripoli and committed to the guard of Anthony, an inhuman Arian bishop. The latter treated him with the utmost barbarity, shutting him up in a narrow cell and allowing no one to visit him. Before entering that prison, however, he had found a way to write to his diocesans a splendid letter, in which he said: “If I return to Carthage, I will see you in this life; if I do not return, I will see you in the other. Pray for us and fast, because fasting and almsgiving have always obtained the mercy of God; but remember above all, that it is written we must not fear those who can kill only the body.”

When a new king named Gontamund succeeded to Huneric, he recalled Saint Eugenius to Carthage, opened the Catholic churches, and allowed all the exiled clergy to return. After reigning twelve years, Gontamund died, and his brother Thrasimund was called to the crown. Under that prince Saint Eugenius was again banished. He died in exile in France on July 13, 505, in a monastery which he had built and governed, at Albi, near Toulouse. Saint Gregory of Tours assures that many miracles occurred at his sepulchre."

A Song I Should Like to Sing When Properly Priested

CLERICAL:
I am the very model of an Anglo-Catholic Clerical,
I've information ethical, dogmatical, and scriptural,
I know the Cardinal Virtues, and the Summa Theologica,
From Nicaea to Chalcedon, in vicissitudes canonical;
I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters systematical,
I pontificate when asked about all issues ecumenical,
About the Rubrics of the Book I'm teeming with a lot o' news,
With many cheerful facts about the glory of the Sarum Use.

ALL:
With many cheerful facts about the glory of the Sarum Use.
With many cheerful facts about the glory of the Sarum Use.
With many cheerful facts about the glory of the Sarum Use.

CLERICAL:
I'm very good at Greek and the meaning of Theotokos;
I chant with great alacrity Venite and at night the Phos:
In short, in matters liturgical, ascetical, heretical,
I am the very model of an Anglo-Catholic Clerical.

ALL:
In short, in matters liturgical, ascetical, heretical,
He is the very model of an Anglo-Catholic Clerical.

CLERICAL:
I know our Church's history, both the Roman and the Orthodox;
I answer hard agnostics, but refuse to talk to Heterodox,
I quote in Philokalia all the sayings of the Palamites,
If navel-gazing is just heresy then why do I see all these great lights?

I can tell undoubted Icons from Harrowings and Pantokrators,
On Good Friday I am creeping to the cross on all Fours!
Then I can hum a hymn of which I've only seen the notes before,
And whistle all the bass-lines from the bottom of the hymnal score.

ALL:
And whistle all the bass-lines from the bottom of the hymnal score.
And whistle all the bass-lines from the bottom of the hymnal score.
And whistle all the bass-lines from the bottom of the hymnal score.

CLERICAL:
Then I can write a sermon which exudes hand-signals cruciform,
And tell you ev'ry detail of the Trentian Counter-Reform:
In short, in matters liturgical, ascetical, heretical,
He is the very model of an Anglo-Catholic Clerical.

ALL:
In short, in matters liturgical, ascetical, heretical,
He is the very model of an Anglo-Catholic Clerical.

CLERICAL:
I've discriminating taste as to what will go upon my head,
At Canterbury Caps, I scoff "no thanks, Birettas fit me fine instead."
At the Name of Jesus I can gracefully just tip my hat,
Admonish simple laymen when they call a Mitre "bishop's hat",
When I have learnt of innovation in the Churchman's Haberdashery,
I tie my amice in the front and think of Dear Old Salisbury--
In short, the cassock-alb is just a lazy priest's good strategy,
About all this and other things I'll write a Latin elegy.

ALL:
About all this and other things he'll write a Latin elegy!!!
About all this and other things he'll write a Latin elegy!!!
About all this and other things he'll write a Latin elegy!!!

CLERICAL:
For when it comes to sherry I've a veritable treasury,
I've sipped it on vacation with the A-B-P of Cant'bury;
But still, in matters liturgical, patriarchial, and heretical,
I am the very model of an Anglo-Catholic Clerical.

ALL:
But still, in matters liturgical, patriarchial, and heretical,
He is the very model of an Anglo-Catholic Clerical.

Prayer to Saint Michael for the Protection of the Church
O glorious St. Michael,
guardian and defender of the Church of Jesus Christ,
come to the assistance of this Church,
against which the powers of hell are unchained,
guard with especial care her august Head,
and obtain that for him and for us
the hour of triumph may speedily arrive.
O glorious Archangel St. Michael,
watch over us during life,
defend us against the assaults of the demon,
assist us especially at the hour of death;
obtain for us a favorable judgment,
and the happiness of beholding God
face to face for endless ages.

Saint Michael, Archangel, defend us in battle.
Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the Devil.
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray;
And do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all the other evil spirits who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

One Week to the Saved! DVD Release

Saved! is a fine example of what we are calling ePOD.

Rumble at the Sepulchre

Things got out of hand when a Greek monk said to a Roman monk - "Give us back our relics, you dirty Latin!!!" I don't know, that's just my guess. Maybe it had something to do with the Filioque. Seriously though, this is out of hand on both sides - Christians fighting amongst each other on the ground where Our Lord was both Crucified and Resurrected is shameful.

Wisconsin Rummage Sales

Saturdays in Wisconsin always bring me to the rummage sales, which in this area are quite a delight. Living on donations amidst the affluent elite of Delafield leaves me able to find some great stuff. The first purchase of the day was an old Royal typewriter ($5) and a number of old rulers at an estate sale. Later I went to Office Depot to buy a new ribbon for it - it is now working perfectly. Second, to another rummage sale in Oconomowoc. I found Wilco's "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" and a nice glass decanter for my bourbon. Price tag - $3 for both. Then to Delafield, where I found a very nice ceramic Bavarian stein, as well as a strainer for my bar shaker. The typewriter reminds me of how great technology is, but at the same time, how refreshing it can be to return to the old ways every once in a while. The thrill of typing out a letter, the click of the keys, the ding of the bell when you reach the end of the line and pass the margin, the feel of a chrome lever as you push the spool onward to the next line. Not great for writing a thesis, for that I'll use my Powerbook, thank you very much, but for letters, and scholarship applications, maybe even the occasional forgery of Vietnam-era National Guard papers (ooops, did I say that?), it does have its uses.

The Earliest Example of a Chalice and Paten

This is the Gourdon Chalice, shown with Paten. It dates to before 527 AD. This makes it quite obvious that the wafer had not been invented yet. Thanks to Taylor Marshall for pointing the Chalice out.

Dumitru Staniloae on Mystery
"God in himself is a mystery. Of his inner experience nothing can be said. But through creation, through providence and his work of salvation, god comes down to the level of man. He who has made us thinking and speaking beings has made himself accessible to our thought and our speech. Touching our spirit he awakens in us thoughts and words which convey the experience of his encounter with us. But at the same time we realize that our thoughts and our words about him do not contain him completely as he is in himself. For us men they are flowers grown up from the depths of his ineffable mystery. Our words and thoughts of God are both cataphatic and apophatic, that is they say something and yet at the same time they suggest the ineffable. If we remain enclosed within our formulae they become idols; if we reject any and every formula we drown in the undefined chaos of that ocean. Our words and thoughts are a finite opening towards the infinite, transparencies for the infinite, so they are able to foster within us a spiritual life."

St. Diadochos of Photiki On Spiritual Knowledge
"Spiritual discourse always keeps the soul free from self-esteem, for it gives every part of the soul a sense of light, so that it no longer needs the praise of men. In the same way, such discourse keeps the mind free from fantasy, transfusing it completely with the love of God. Discourse deriving from the wisdom of this world, on the other hand, always provokes self-esteem; because it is incapable of granting us the experience of spiritual perception, it inspires its adepts with a longing for praise, being nothing but the fabrication of conceited men. It follows, therefore, that we can know with certainty when we are in the proper state to speak about God, if during the hours when we do not speak we maintain a fervent remembrance of God in untroubled silence.

Whoever loves himself cannot love God; but if, because of 'the overflowing richness' of God's love, a man does not love himself, then he truly loves God (Eph. 2:7). Such a man never seeks his own glory, but seeks the glory of God. The man who loves himself seeks his own glory, whereas he who loves God loves the glory of his Creator. It is characteristic of the soul which consciously senses the love of God always to seek God's glory in every commandment it performs, and to be happy in its low estate. For glory befits God because of His majesty, while lowliness befits man because it unites us with God. If we realize this, rejoicing in the glory of the Lord, we too, like St. John the Baptist, will begin to say unceasingly, 'He must increase, but we must decrease.'"

More on Evangelical Division on Priestesses
A storm has been brewing at titusonenine. Funny how a site which directly denies a woman may be a Bishop or a Priest in its name, a reference to Titus 1:9, could be so divided on such a simple theological issue.

A Great Article on "Anglo-Orthodoxy"

"Once having tasted of this transcendent food, it is difficult to be satisfied with anything less. It is for good reason that the Eastern church refers to its worship as "The Divine Liturgy" rather than the "Mass" or "Eucharist." If you have ever wondered why Eastern Orthodoxy is not interested in liturgical renewal, it is because they are waiting for the rest of us to catch up. Though the Eucharistic portions of Anglican and Roman liturgies hint at this notion of a heavenly ascent (beginning with the sursum corda-"lift up your hearts"), it is all but invisible to most participants and plays a relatively minor role in shaping their overall theology and practice. However, if worship is the eschatological destiny of the church as Scripture teaches, then, according to Orthodoxy, it must order and condition our theology, our method, and our practice in the present."

Admittedly, the article make some fairly hasty generalizations, and neglects to speak about Anglican priests who may want to convert, and the difficulties thereof. It is also weak on contraception. As well, Anglicanism and Orthodoxy are in no way together on the question of divorce. I would say, however, that theologically and mystically, Anglicanism and Orthodoxy are very much on the same page. In terms of worship, this article is dead on - the liturgies are not alike. The transcendent quality of Orthodox Liturgy is seldom compared in Anglicanism, not even at Nashotah House.

Read the whole article here.

New Latin Words
One of the many benefits of a magisterium, and one which I had not thought of before - the ability to produce new latin vocabulary for new modern words. Here's the list. But, as Simon Winchester points out, the English language expands at the rate of hundreds of thousands of words every decade. This is too difficult a task for even the Vatican.

Broadhurst Speaks Out on the State of Anglicanism in Britain and the US
One of my heroes, John Broadhurst, gave what seems to have been an excellent briefing on the state of Anglicanism in the Church of England, and in the United States. The story is posted here.

"The whole warfare of the demons against us is waged with the one purpose of alienating those who obey them from the glory of God and the grace of the Holy Spirit. But, as I see it, we have already deprived ourselves of such a gift before they even attack us, because we have forsaken the commandments of God and have not been eager to seek Him with all our soul. Had we sought Him we should not have lived so idly and carelessly! Had we been concerned for the things of heaven we should not have shown such great eagerness for the things of earth. Had our thoughts been on things incorruptible we should not have gaped greedily after the things that are transitory and corruptible. Had we striven for things eternal we should not thus have pursued things temporal. Had we loved God we should not thus have turned away from those who guide us to Him. Had we sought to acquire virtues we would not have abhorred the teachers of virtues. Had we gladly embraced fasting we should not have complained of the lack of food and drink. Had we fought to gain control over our passions we should not have given ourselves unrestrainedly to pleasures. Had we a right and firm faith we should not have performed the works of faithlessness...Had we been found worthy to attain true love we should have known God."
- Simeon the New Theologian

There are many who believe the knowledge of God to be possible without any sort of holiness, without mortification, without fasting. The saints remind us that "friendship with the world is enmity with God." (James 4:4) If there is enmity, we trust that the great chasm between ourselves and our Lord will be bridged. The long and arduous road of repentance and self-denial is the path in which the knowledge of God abides, not in quick "quiet times" and bible studies, meant only to gratify our own evil intents further. I have been reading St. John of the Cross recently. He describes the beginner in the spiritual life, and I find that I am one of the beginners. But, it has begun and will continue, and God willing, will find fruit when perfect knowledge and union is revealed.

John Calvin on Baptism
"What he intimated in the last verse -- that Christ destroys sin in his people, he proves here by mentioning the effect of baptism, by which we are initiated into his faith; for it is beyond any question, that we put on Christ in baptism, and that we are baptized for this end -- that we may be one with him. But Paul takes up another principle -- that we are then really united to the body of Christ, when his death brings forth in us its fruit; yea, he teaches us, that this fellowship as to death is what is to be mainly regarded in baptism; for not washing alone is set forth in it, but also the putting to death and the dying of the old man. It is hence evident, that when we become partakers of the grace of Christ, immediately the efficacy of his death appears. But the benefit of this fellowship as to the death of Christ is described in what follows."
From Commentary on Romans, concerning Chapter 6, vs. 3.

A very funny site from the Scottish Episcopal Church.

"The claim that the altar of the early Church was always designed to celebrate facing the people, a claim made often and repeatedly, turns out to be nothing but a fairy tale." - Josef Jungmann

As it turns out, the Second Vatican Council never even mentions versus populum celebration. The tide of scholarship was clearly against it, yet those in favor of "community" and "togetherness" valued these more than facing our Lord. I have been thinking lately that there is a clear relation between the ordination of priestesses and westward celebration. It seems that in this manner, there is a somewhat exalted notion of the priesthood, to the point where the only valid ministration is to be the focal point of liturgy, the focal point of the work of the people, and thus the life of the whole Church is that of man behind the altar. If this be the case, the role of the people is drastically diminished and unnatural, to the point where a woman would clearly have a desire to be in that place. Any thoughts?

Sin is still in us and we constantly fall away from the new life we have received. The fight of the new Adam against the old Adam is a long and painful one, and what a naïve oversimplification it is to think, as some do, that the “salvation” they experience in revivals and “decisions for Christ,” and which result in moral righteousness, soberness and warm philanthropy, is the whole of salvation, is what God meant when He gave His Son for the life of the world. The one true sadness is “that of not being a saint,” and how often the “moral” Christians are precisely those who never feel, never experience this sadness, because their own “experience of salvation,” the feeling of “being saved” fills them with self-satisfaction; and whoever has been “satisfied” has received already his reward and cannot thirst and hunger for that total transformation and transfiguration of life which alone makes “saints.”
- Alexander Schmemann

St. Ambrose of Milan on the Eucharist
I have posted an excerpt from Ambrose of Milan's On the Mysteries, this chapter concerning the nature of the sacrament. It is offered due to recent discussion of Ambrose's theology of the Eucharist on Ecclesia Anglicana and on The Shrine of the Holy Whapping, as quoted by John Jewel. I have not found that quote yet, it is not offered by Schaff.

This particular writing is interesting, for it mirrors the Classically Anglican comparison of the Eucharist to Holy Baptism, saying that both sacraments reflect not natural reality (birth in Baptism and bread and wine in the Eucharist), but supernatural reality. Ambrose is approaching those who look for what is natural (and are unable to find it) in the Sacrament, namely the Body and Blood of Christ in a natural manner. This is the summary of the entire debate between Anglicans and Roman Catholics in the 16th and 17th Centuries. We do not find a bloody host or blood in the wine, because the Eucharist is given by supernatural means. It seems that Ambrose is working from a standpoint of proclaiming the mystery, not explaining it. This is the fundamental problem one comes to in attempting to prove eucharistic theology from the texts of the Fathers. Secondly, Ambrose does not approach the sacraments from an Aristotelian worldview or metaphysic. This is the second problem with either a proof or disproof of transubstantiation in the light of the Fathers.

My own take on Ambrose is that we would do well to return to the mysticism of the Patristic Church in explanation of the Sacraments, as well as the use of Old Testament typology. Rationalizing the mysterious is always a dangerous enterprise.

"Would that, instead of vain and profane disputings, we could but catch the echoes of these hallowed sounds, and forgetting the jarrings of our earthly discords, live in this harmony and unity of Heaven, where, through and in our Lord, we are all one in God. Would that, borne above ourselves, we could be caught up within the influence of the mystery of that ineffable love whereby the Father would draw us to that oneness with Him in His Son, which is the perfection of eternal bliss, where will, thought, affections shall be one, because we shall be, by communication of His Divine Nature, one. Yet such is undoubted Catholic teaching, and the most literal import of Holy Scripture, and the mystery of the Sacrament, that the Eternal Word, Who is God, having taken to Him our flesh and joined it indissolubly with Himself, and so, where His Flesh is, there He is(30), and we receiving It, receive Him, and receiving Him are joined on to Him through His flesh to the Father, and He dwelling in us, dwell in Him, and with Him in God. "I," He saith, "in the Father, and ye in Me, and I in you." This is the perfection after which all rational creation groans, this for which the Church, which hath the first fruits of the Spirit, groaneth within herself, yea this for which our Lord Himself tarrieth, that His yet imperfect members advancing onward in Him, and the whole multitude of the Redeemed being gathered into the One Body, His whole Body should, in Him, be perfected in the Unity of the Father. And so He also, as Man, truly the Mediator between God and Man, in that being as God, One with the Father, as man, one with us, we truly are in Him who is truly in the Father. He, by the truth of the Sacrament, dwelleth in us, in Whom, by Nature, all the fulness of the Godhead dwelleth; and the lowest is joined on with highest, earth with heaven, corruption with incorruption, man with God."
- Edward Bouverie Pusey

Ratzinger on Kneeling

"If we look at history, we can see that the Greeks and Romans rejected kneeling. In view of the squabbling, partisan deities described in mythology, this attitude was thoroughly justified. It was only too obvious that these gods were not God, even if you were dependent on their capricious power and had to make sure that, whenever possible, you enjoyed their favor. And so they said that kneeling was unworthy of a free man, unsuitable for the culture of Greece, something the barbarians went in for. Plutarch and Theophrastus regarded kneeling as an expression of superstition.

Aristotle called it a barbaric form of behavior (cf. Rhetoric 1361 a 36). Saint Augustine agreed with him in a certain respect: the false gods were only the masks of demons, who subjected men to the worship of money and to self-seeking, thus making them "servile" and superstitious. He said that the humility of Christ and His love, which went as far as the Cross, have freed us from these powers. We now kneel before that humility. The kneeling of Christians is not a form of inculturation into existing customs. It is quite the opposite, an expression of Christian culture, which transforms the existing culture through a new and deeper knowledge and experience of God.

Kneeling does not come from any culture -- it comes from the Bible and its knowledge of God. The central importance of kneeling in the Bible can be seen in a very concrete way. The word proskynein alone occurs fifty-nine times in the New Testament, twenty-four of which are in the Apocalypse, the book of the heavenly Liturgy, which is presented to the Church as the standard for her own Liturgy."
From The Theology of Kneeling, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
Found at:http://www.adoremus.org/1102TheologyKneel.html

The Exaltation of the True Cross
Today is the commemoration of the revealing of the True Cross in Jerusalem in 629 AD by the Emperor Heraclius, after he had recovered it from the Persians. This date was originally in the Spring, but was later lumped together with the Feast of the Dedication of the Church of the Resurrection in Jerusalem. The Cross was originally discovered by Saint Helena in 326, when she found three crosses in a cavern in Jerusalem after threatening a man named Judas with starvation to get him to tell her where it was. He gave in after 6 days. How did she know which cross was the true one? Bishop Macarius of Jerusalem was called onto the scene. He placed a sick woman on each of the crosses. On the first two, nothing happened. But, on the third, she was healed. Helena sent the three nails to her son, the Emperor Constantine. Constantine put two of the nails in a statue of himself in Constantinople, in belief that this would make the city impregnable. "One of the nails was fastened to the emperor's helmet, and one to his horse's bridle, bringing to pass, according to many of the Fathers, what had been written by Zacharias the Prophet: 'In that day that which is upon the bridle of the horse shall be holy to the Lord'"

The True Cross was kept in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher until 614, when the Persians captured Jerusalem. The True Cross was kept safe by the Church after that, until it was revealed in 1099 in the First Crusade. When Saladin captured Jerusalem, he heinously dragged the Cross behind his horse through the streets of Jerusalem. The Second Council of Nicaea states that the Cross is to receive an adoration of honor - honorariam adorationem. Now, relics of the True Cross are scattered all over the world. I have held one, encased in a processional crucifix.

Schmemann on Liturgy

"The Eucharist is liturgy. And he who says liturgy today is likely to get involved in a controversy. For to some - the "liturgically minded" - of all the activities of the Church, liturgy is the most important, if not the only one. To others, liturgy is esthetic and spiritual deviation form the real task of the Church. There exist today "liturgical" and "nonliturgical" churches and Christians. But this controversy is unnecessary for it has its roots in one basic misunderstanding - the "liturgical" understanding of the liturgy. This is the reduction of the liturgy to "cultic" categories, its definition as a sacred act of worship, different as such not only from the "profane" area of life, but even from all other activities of the Church itself. But this is not the original meaning of the Greek word leitourgia. It meant an action by which a group of people become something corporately which they had not been as a mere collection of individuals - a whole greater than the sum of its parts. It meant also a function or "ministry" of a man or of a group on behalf of and in the interest of the whole community. Thus the leitourgia of ancient Israel was the corporate work of a chosen few to preapre the world for the coming of the Messiah. And in this very act of perparation they became what they were caled to be, the Israel of God, the chosen instrument of His purpose.

Thus the Church itself is a leitourgia, a ministry, a calling to act in this world after the fashion of Christ, to bear testimony to Him and His kingdom. The eucharistic liturgy, therefore, must not be approached and understood in "liturgical" or "cultic" terms alone. Just as Christianity can - and must - be considered the end of religion, so the Christian liturgy in general, and the Eucharist in particular, are indeed the end of cult, of the "sacred" religious act isolated from, and in opposition to, the "profane" life of the community. The first condition for the understanding of liturgy is to forget about any specific "liturgical piety.""
From For the Life of the World, Alexander Schmemann

Put that in your liturgical revisionist pipe and smoke it!

Cardinal Ratzinger Speaks
"A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons."

Agreed, but what, pray tell, would be "proportionate reasons"?

I would argue that even if proportionate reasons could be found, and Fr. Bryce Sibley has offered two, the great difficulty is that proportionate reasons are based on a contemplation that the aversion of some disaster by some matter of policy would have to be equal to the gravity of the abolition of abortion, or greater. This is about as close to an impossibility as one can come. As to the question of whether individual politicians have any potency on the matter of abortion - it is a moot point, for the reason that a mobilized Catholic and Christian majority voting for pro-life candidates would have this country rid of legalized abortion in relatively little time at all. To look at individual votes is absurd, for very few voters vote for only one candidate at a time, but rather for whole blocks. It is shameful, however, that most of the proportionate reasons given are blatantly hedonistic and based upon situational ethics. Voting for economic interests rather than moral interests, especially in regards to abortion, is a prime example of walking in a way of ease rather than the way of Our Lord. Thus, I find it next to impossible that proportionate reasons could be found. Oh that the Curia could simply be clear on this subject!

Father Vasiliy is on a roll.

Just War Theory and TerrorismIn the last few days, a lively discussion has arisen on Titusonenine regarding Richard Hays and his theology of pacifism. The article quotes Hays:

"Ignoring traditional “just war” criteria, the United States launched a pre-emptive war on Iraq that has killed at least 10,000 Iraqi civilians, more than three times the number of people killed in the tragic 9-11 attacks. Additionally, more than 900 American soldiers have died in Iraq. Thousands more have been wounded and maimed on both sides of the conflict."

The issue here is that the war in Iraq does not defy traditional Just War criteria, only Hays' re-evaluation of it. A more concise definition comes from Thomas Aquinas:

"In order for a war to be just, three things are necessary. First, the authority of the sovereign by whose command the war is to be waged. For it is not the business of a private individual to declare war, because he can seek for redress of his rights from the tribunal of his superior. Moreover it is not the business of a private individual to summon together the people, which has to be done in wartime. And as the care of the common weal is committed to those who are in authority, it is their business to watch over the common weal of the city, kingdom or province subject to them. And just as it is lawful for them to have recourse to the sword in defending that common weal against internal disturbances, when they punish evil-doers, according to the words of the Apostle (Rm. 13:4): "He beareth not the sword in vain: for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil"; so too, it is their business to have recourse to the sword of war in defending the common weal against external enemies. Hence it is said to those who are in authority (Ps. 81:4): "Rescue the poor: and deliver the needy out of the hand of the sinner"; and for this reason Augustine says (Contra Faust. xxii, 75): "The natural order conducive to peace among mortals demands that the power to declare and counsel war should be in the hands of those who hold the supreme authority.
  
Secondly, a just cause is required, namely that those who are attacked, should be attacked because they deserve it on account of some fault. Wherefore Augustine says (Questions. in Hept., qu. x, super Jos.): "A just war is wont to be described as one that avenges wrongs, when a nation or state has to be punished, for refusing to make amends for the wrongs inflicted by its subjects, or to restore what it has seized unjustly."

Thirdly, it is necessary that the belligerents should have a rightful intention, so that they intend the advancement of good, or the avoidance of evil. Hence Augustine says (De Verb. Dom. [*The words quoted are to be found not in St. Augustine's works, but Can. Apud. Caus. xxiii, qu. 1]): "True religion looks upon as peaceful those wars that are waged not for motives of aggrandizement, or cruelty, but with the object of securing peace, of punishing evil-doers, and of uplifting the good." For it may happen that the war is declared by the legitimate authority, and for a just cause, and yet be rendered unlawful through a wicked intention. Hence Augustine says (Contra Faust. xxii, 74): "The passion for inflicting harm, the cruel thirst for vengeance, an unpacific and relentless spirit, the fever of revolt, the lust of power, and such like things, all these are rightly condemned in war.""
Summa Theologica II-II: 40.

Certainly, President Bush has sovereign authority to wage war. It is interesting to note that terrorists are "private individuals" and not sovereign authorities, so it is questionable whether Just War Theory applies to terrorists at all, since they are better classified as criminals. On the second point, it is quite clear that Iraq has refused to make amends for numerous wrongs, namely the gassing of Kurds and the harboring of numerous terrorist groups which need to be brought to justice. Further, prevailing intelligence found Iraq to be in violation of numerous U.N. sanctions, which qualifies as a violation of international law. I still believe fully that WMD's were in Iraq, and destroyed during a notably lengthy search. Regardless these infractions are quite serious. On the third point, the intent of U.S. policy in Iraq is clearly the establishment of peace and the punishing of evil. The intention is clear, for the administration clearly does not seek vengeance (the invasion was clearly preemptive), nor a passion for inflicting harm.

Thus, even assuming that the "War" in Iraq is a "War," it is just by classical standards. But, the problem is that the "War" should never have been classified as such. It is rather the punishment of criminal action and what Augustine describes: passion for inflicting harm, an unpacific and relentless spirit, and the lust for power.

Just received word of the death of the Patriarch of Alexandria, Petros, in a Helicopter crash in Greece. May light perpetual shine upon him!!!

Ad Orientem is Cool!!!

Taylor Marshall put it well yesterday - Ad Orientem is cool!!! I was thinking about it today on a trip to Holy Hill, seeing the altar and then the table in front of it. Getting virtually rid of Ad Orientem in the Western Church was one of the most incredible feats of trickery in the history of the Church, and it's reversal is coming near. So, here's the deal, I've been thinking about making the restoration of proper liturgical orientation a top priority, when God willing, I am ordained a priest. Any ideas as to how we could pull this off?

Thoughts on Martyrdom
Recently, it has come to mind that all Christians, not merely those suffering persecution, are called to be martyrs. The sacrifice we make may not be bloody, but it will certainly be humiliating, and even more certainly, it will cost us our lives. For, in exchange, we receive the very life of Our Lord. His Blood becomes our own. Even the enterprise of doing theology in a seminary has its cost, if done faithfully. The great bishop Robert Terwilliger says this:

"Witness can be costly. The word martyr is the Greek word for witness. It means theology with blood on it. The knowledge of God comes through a cross, and it is not surprising that Christians make this sign both liturgically and in life. A Christian himself is supposed to be a sign of contradiction because he knows something about God and man that the world rejects. It is dangerous not to be conformed to the world but to be transformed by the renewing of our minds, which is what theology is. When believing "Jesus is Lord" is in conflict with society, something - even something fatal - can happen. This is always the test of the sincerity of our belief. It is also the most persuasive witness."

Even more importantly, the way of suffering for the Christian is something chosen - a choosing of death in this world and life with God as opposed to life in this world and eternal death. We choose to suffer pain received from hours on our knees, because a theology in which we are the creature and God is the Creator demands it. Theology with blood on it indeed.

Happy Birthday Momma!!!
Today is the feast of the Nativity of the Ever Blessed Virgin Mary. We had a wonderful time of things at an unnamed friend's place, complete with a birthday cake and ice cream, port and gin. Ora Pro Nobis!!!

On Kneeling For Reception of the Eucharist
I have noticed recently that there are many here at the House who not only receive the Eucharist standing, but also, upon returning to their seats, immediately sit down. It has always irked me that this is so, but have never found words to express the reason. I found this from Thomas Jackson, sometime Dean of Peterborough in the late Caroline period:

"It will be farther replied that, albeit Our Saviour did not expressly forbid us to receive the Sacrament kneeling, yet He hath taught us by His example to receive it after another manner and gesture; and it is more convenient to follow His example than the ordinance of the Church. To this I answer that Our Saviour did not at all receive the Sacrament, because He had no sins to be remitted by it. His Apostles had, and did receive it; but whether standing, sitting, or kneeling, it is not expressed. All that can be gathered out of the Evangelist is this, that as they were eating Our Saviour took Bread and blessed it and brake it, and gave it to His disciples; so He did the Cup likewise. But whether they received the Bread or the Cup still sitting after the same manner as they did at their meat is not expressed, nor can hence be gathered. For so a man may truly say that whilst we are at Service and Prayers, we receive the Communion, yet it will not follow that because all or most of us sit in time of Service, we therefore sit at the receiving of the Communion. But be it granted that the Apostles ate the Bread and drank the Wine after the selfsame manner that they ate the Passover, yet it would be very hard to express the particular manner of their eating the Passover. I am persuaded that there is never a joiner in this Kingdom that could make us seats and tables of the same fashion that the tables and seats were of at which Our Saviour and His Apostles did eat the Passover; or in case we had such seats or tables made to our hands, for aught I can imagine we must have some famous Antiquary or Master of Ceremonies to instruct us how to sit or lie, or to dispose of our bodes at them...

If a man should ask whether the rite or custom observed in the Greek Church or in our Church be in itself the more decent or significant, or better befitting the use or end of this Sacrament, I dare confidently affirm that the ceremony or gesture observed and commanded by our Church doth much better befit the sue and end of the Sacrament than the rite or ceremony observed by the Greek Church doth; better than any other rite or manner can do, though otherwise as decent and fitting, or more decent and fitting, in all other parts of God's service. And my reason which I commend unto your impartial consideration is this, that this Sacrament was not instituted in remembrance of the first institution of it or to represent the Apostles' manner of receiving it, but in remembrance of Our Saviour's Death and Passion. Whence I would request such as urge Our Saviour's example for a patter of their behaviour or deportment at the Sacrament to look upon Our Saviour's bodily gesture or deportment in the heat and extremity of His Passion, wherein He presented Himself before His Father, in His Agony and Bloody Sweat in the garden. Being in His Agony, as St. Luke saith, He presented these supplications to His Father: Father, if Thou be willing, remove this cup from Me; nevertheless, not My Will but Thy Will be done. But after what manner or gesture of body did His perplexed soul utter these earnest supplications? - kneeling or fixing His knees upon the ground."

Blessed Evelyn Underhill on Priesthood and Prayer
"The man whose life is coloured by prayer, whose loving communion with God comes first, will always win souls; because he shows them in his own life and person the attractiveness of reality, the demand, the transforming power of the spiritual life. His intellectual powers and the rest will not, comparatively speaking, matter much. The point is that he stands as a witness to that which he proclaims. The persuasive preacher, the most devoted and untiring social worker, the most up-to-date theologian - unless loving devotion to God exceeds and enfolds these activities - will not win souls.

It follows from this, that the priest's life of prayer, his communion with God, is not only his primary obligation to the Church; it is also the only condition under which the work of the Christian ministry can be properly done. He is called, as the Book of Wisdom says, to be a 'friend of God, and prophet': and will only be a good prophet in so far as he is really a friend of God. For his business is to lead men out towards eternity; and how can he do this, unless it is a country in which he is at home? He is required to represent the peace of God in a troubled society; but that is impossible, if he has not the habit of resorting to those deeps of the spirit where His Presence dwells."

ECUSA's Position on Homosexuality Made Painfully Clear

Saw this article today. I guess this is now the official position of the Episcopal Church since Epting is the Bishop Deputy for Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations.

The problem with Epting's work here is that a sexual relationship between members of the same sex can never contribute to the Church's work, it can never be holy. Homosexuals abuse each other both sexually and emotionally - it is a sort of glorified torture. Because of this, these sorts of "unions" do not ever sacramentally model the union between Christ and His Church. This summer at my CPE site, a residential facility for AIDS patients, I saw this firsthand. A solid majority of homosexual residents were taking anti-depressants, they were solid drug addicts who relapsed time and time again, and they were extremely promiscuous. They are enabled by a system which applauds them for their "courage." What a pile of rubbish!

Forget orientation. The human race is oriented towards sin - the Church ought rightly to be oriented towards holiness and Christ himself.