This is sooo exciting: the Pope will soon be releasing an apostolic exhortation on the Bible, which will include the input of the Bishop’s Synod on the Bible held in October 2008. I’m holding out hope that he will declare next year the “Year of the Bible”.

Details from Rome Reports:

H/t: Michael Barber over at The Sacred Page.

If you are a member of the Latin Church, the answer, of course, is “yes”. In the West we have a strong tradition of celibate clergy, and those priests who are married – such as Anglican converts – are the exception, not the rule. Celibacy in the priesthood is a cherished tradition in the West, and there has never been a strong movement here to push for married priests.

Thus, Father Laurent Touze, a spiritual theology professor at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, was quite correct to speak of married priests as an “exception” in an interview with Zenit News Agency. However, the good Father went off the tracks a bit when he tried to apply this practice to the Christian East:

ZENIT: With this measure, do you think that one day, celibacy might become voluntary also for priests of the Latin rite?

Father Touze: No, because the Church is understanding more and more the relation between priesthood, episcopate and celibacy. It is something that could be likened to the revelation of a dogma, though it isn’t so at this time; one tends increasingly to understand that a practice must be promoted among all priests and also among Eastern Catholic priests which is truly similar to the one lived in the first centuries.

This statement of Fr. Touze’s shows either an ignorance or a disrespect for the legitimate traditions of the East. As we in the West have a strong tradition of celibate clergy, so too does the East have a strong tradition of married priests (note, however, that their bishops and monks are always celibate). To wish to “promote” a celibate clergy in the East goes against their praxis which has existed for centuries.

Furthermore, it goes against the teachings of Vatican II, which commanded that the traditions of the East be respected by those of us in the West:

“…the Churches of the East, as much as those of the West, have a full right and are in duty bound to rule themselves, each in accordance with its own established disciplines, since all these are praiseworthy by reason of their venerable antiquity, more harmonious with the character of their faithful and more suited to the promotion of the good of souls,” (Orientalium Ecclesiarum, no. 5)

Vatican II also explicitly commends the practice of married priests in the East:

“This holy synod, while it commends ecclesiastical celibacy, in no way intends to alter that different discipline which legitimately flourishes in the Eastern Churches. It permanently exhorts all those who have received the priesthood and marriage to persevere in their holy vocation so that they may fully and generously continue to expend themselves for the sake of the flock commended to them.” (Decree on Priestly Life and Ministry, 16)

Finally, the code of canon law for the Eastern Churches, promulgated by Pope John Paul II, demands that the practice of married priests in the East be “held in honor”:

“Clerical celibacy chosen for the sake of the kingdom of heaven and suited to the priesthood is to be greatly esteemed everywhere, as supported by the tradition of the whole Church; likewise, the hallowed practice of married clerics in the primitive Church and in the tradition of the Eastern Churches throughout the ages is to be held in honor.” (Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, 373)

It is unfortunate that Fr. Touze chose to ignore these teachings of our Church in his public comments. We in the West should zealously honor our celibate clergy, and should always work to explain and defend the practice of celibacy in the priesthood. But that defense should not come at the expense of our brothers and sisters in the East, who have their own, just-as-legitimate, tradition of married priests.

Misdialed call connects woman who had scheduled an abortion to pro-life help

I can just see her guardian angel moving her fingers to “misdial”!

Today’s Gospel reading addresses one of the most contentious issues in the early Church:

Jesus said to his disciples:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.
I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.
Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away,
not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter
will pass from the law,
until all things have taken place.
Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments
and teaches others to do so
will be called least in the Kingdom of heaven.
But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments
will be called greatest in the Kingdom of heaven.”
(Matthew 5:17-19)

Although it may appear clear to us what Jesus means here, it was not so clear to the first Christians. The debate regarding the validity of the Jewish law for Christians divided the Church for decades. Some, such as James, followed the Mosaic law very precisely and did not stop attending the Temple and celebrating the Jewish feasts. Others, however, eventually stopped following the ceremonies of the Old Covenant. And some proposed a compromise between the two extreme positions. This debate underlies much of Paul’s letters and was a constant concern for him.

So how did the Church resolve this issue? Since we no longer practice any of the ceremonial laws of the Mosaic Law, didn’t we in fact “abolish” the law, contra Christ’s explicit command? In my article Abolished or Fulfilled? I did an in-depth study of this issue and found that the  early Church divided the law into different parts, and each part was fulfilled by Christ, but its fulfillment took different forms, depending on the type of law involved.

For example, St. Justin Martyr divided the Old Law into three parts:

(1) Ethical commands
(2) Commands symbolic of Christ (such as the Passover lamb)
(3) Laws due to the hardness of the Jews’ hearts

For Justin, then, only the first type of law was still to be followed, for Christ’s work had fulfilled the others in such a way to make them unnecessary.

Another common delineation in the Law by the Church Fathers was to see two types of Law in the Mosaic Covenant:

(1) Ceremonial Laws
(2) Moral Laws

Christ’s saving works brought an end to the ceremonial laws because his life, death and resurrection brought them to complete fulfillment. But the Christian must still follow the moral laws (such as the Ten Commandments) because they were still necessary to follow Christ fully.

So in fact Christ did not “abolish” the law, but brought it to fulfillment. However, that fulfillment in some cases meant that certain particular laws were no longer necessary to follow.

For those of us who are discouraged by the seemingly constant debates that rage within the Church today should take heart that similarly intense debates also existed at the beginning, and that they were eventually resolved. Sometimes it takes hundreds of years, but the Holy Spirit is always faithful in bringing resolution to our own hardness of heart.

Over the centuries, Christians have represented the Cross of Jesus Christ in a wide variety of forms. The original Cross was most likely a simple one, but meditation on the mysteries of the Passion have lead to more elaborate Crosses which represent many theological truths about Christ’s redemptive death.

One of my favorite Crosses is the “three-bar Cross” which is typical to the East. Here is a good explanation of that particular Cross, courtesy of Fr. Theodore Jurewicz over at Charming the Birds from the Trees:

The Top Bar – The Explanation:
The top bar is the title-board, which Pilate ordered to be hung in mockery over Christ’s head on the Cross. On this board was inscribed: “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews” in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin (abbreviated to the Greek initials ‘INBI’ or the Latin initials ‘INRI’ in the Western tradition). This is replaced with the Christian inscription: “King of Glory” – below the knees of the angels. On the title-board is inscribed the initials ‘IC XC’, being the first and last letters of Christ’s name in Greek. In addition, just above Christ’s arms we see the inscription: ‘NIKA’, which in Greek means: “He conquers” or “He is victorious.” Frequently, we see these last two inscriptions together: ‘IC XC NIKA’, meaning: “Jesus Christ is victorious” (over death and sin).

The Middle Bar – The Explanation:
The middle bar is that on which the Lord’s hands were nailed. On either top corner we see the depiction of the sun (left) and the moon (right), for “The sun hid its light, and the moon turned to blood.” (Joel 2:31) The inscription: “Son of God” is placed on both sides of Christ’s head, and below His arms we read the inscription: “Before Thy Cross we bow down, O Master, and Thy holy Resurrection, we glorify”. The halo of Christ is inscribed with three Greek letters meaning “The Being” or “He Who Is”, to remind us that Christ is the same God Who identified Himself with those words to Moses in the Old Law.

The Bottom Bar – The Explanation:
The slanted bottom bar is the footrest. There is some question of whether it was actually on the Cross of Christ, but it is acknowledged to be a necessary attribute of the Cross, worthy of veneration and prophetically alluded to in the words [Let us] worship the footstool of His feet… (Ps. 98:5). In prayers for the Ninth Hour, the Church likens the Cross to a type of balance of righteousness: “Between two thieves Thy Cross did prove to be a balance of righteousness: wherefore one of them was dragged down to Hades by the weight of his blasphemy whereas the other was lightened of his transgressions unto the comprehension of theology. O Christ God, glory to Thee.” The meaning of this prayer is as follows: the Cross of Christ stood for a scale of justice between the two thieves: for one of them sank in to hell, dragged down by his blasphemous words; and the other, the wise thief, ascended into heaven, because of his repentance. The church fathers attempted to render tangible the thought of the unfaithful thief going to hell for his blasphemy through the just judgment of God (the lower end of the bar), and of the wise thief going to heaven for his repentance and his praise of God (the upper end).

The Images – The Explanation:
On the Cross is our Savior, Jesus Christ. Note that He does not wear a crown of thorns, and that His feet are nailed with two nails. Behind the body of Christ, on either side, are a lance (which pierced Him) and a sponge (which was soaked with gall and offered to Christ to drink) on a pole made of reed or cane. On the body of Christ is depicted blood and water flowing forth from His side. Below the feet of Christ is four Slavonic letters meaning: “The place of the skull became Paradise”. Hidden in a cave under the earth is ‘the skull of Adam’. We are thus reminded that Adam our forefather lost Paradise through the tree from which he wrongly partook; Christ is the new Adam, bringing us Salvation and Paradise through the tree of the Cross. The city of Jerusalem is depicted in the background, for He was crucified outside the city wall.

The Unitive Way
Seventh in a seven-part series
(Previous posts in this series: Part I,  Part II,  Part III,  Part IV,  Part V,  Part VI)

Now we are at the last stages of prayer, the unitive way. This is the way of the “perfect,” those who have totally abandoned themselves to God and His holy will. At these stages, the soul does not experience distractions and has a complete certitude of intimate union with God. There is no tedium or weariness in prayer, even though it is quite intense at this level. This is the highest level of purification: the saint can only make a naked act of faith. He is not dependent on any consolations, either of the senses or the higher facilities of intellect, will or memory; in other words, he does not believe in and love God because of what God does for him, but instead simply because He is God.

Level 7: Simple Union
During the prayer of simple union, all internal faculties, including the intellect and the will, are gradually captivated and occupied with God. What is not captivated? Only the external bodily senses. Otherwise, the soul is totally united to God.

Level 8: Conforming Union
This is also called “spiritual betrothal,” where both the internal and external senses are absorbed in the presence of the divine. At this stage, the person is in “ecstacy” where their body no longer responds to outside stimuli and is completely captivated by God.

Level 9: Transforming Union
If Level 8 is “spiritual betrothal,” then Level 9 is “spiritual marriage.” Conforming union involved the consent of the will to union, but transforming union is the union itself. This is the highest grade of perfection in prayer, and St. John of the Cross said it is “nothing less than a transformation into God.” It is at this stage that deification occurs, and by grace we become more divine than human. Our entire being is captivated by God and everything we do is completely united to God. The soul and God are so united at this stage that they cannot be separated.

The observant reader of this series might notice that I spent much less space describing these three levels than any of the other six. The reason for this is simple: they are so beyond human language, and they have been experienced by so few people, that detailed explanations are impossible. At these stages, one must simply follow the promptings of God as He leads you into complete union with Him.

Hopefully this blog series has whet your appetite for learning more about Christian prayer. The following books all should help you in that process. I would recommend first reading Dubay’s books (especially “Fire Within”), as they give the “lay of the land” that you need before you can really understand the works of the Spanish saints.

• “Deep Conversion, Deep Prayer” by Fr. Thomas Dubay
• “Fire Within: St. Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, and the Gospel-On Prayer” by Fr. Thomas Dubay
• “The Way of Perfection” by St. Teresa of Avila
• “Interior Castle” by St. Teresa of Avila
• “Ascent of Mount Carmel” by St. John of the Cross
• “The Dark Night” by St. John of the Cross

But by far the best way to learn about prayer is to pray! So keep praying!

I recently got the following question by email:

The scriptures tell us that among those born of women there have been none  greater than John the baptist.  So how do we reconcile this with Mary being more blessed than all?

The question is referring to Matthew 11:11, in which Jesus declares:

Amen, I say to you, among those born of women there has been none greater than John the Baptist; yet the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

In this passage, our Lord is extolling the importance of John the Baptist in the plan of salvation. As the last of the prophets, he had the unique role as the forerunner to Christ. Furthermore, his greatness is seen in his humility: instead of his important role leading to pride, John the Baptist chose the humble path, making his whole life one that points to another. As Scripture constantly repeats, it is the humble who are exalted and the exalted who are humbled.

But does this statement mean that John the Baptist is “greater” than Mary? After all, both were “born of women”. To understand this saying of Jesus, one must understand that Jesus spoke in the way of the people around him; in other words, as a 1st century Jew (after all, he WAS a 1st century Jew). One of the common ways rabbis in that time spoke was to make an absolute statement to make a point, but which was understood as one that was not to be taken literally. For example, Jesus commanded that we call no one “father”, yet no one stopped calling their father by that name. He commanded that we cut off our hand if it causes us to sin, and none of his followers actually believed that they should dismember themselves. These “absolute” statements have a way of making a strong point that impresses upon the mind the point being made, but they are not to be taken literally.

But how do we know that this particular instance is an example of this type of “absolute” statement? Because we know for a fact that there is one “born of women” that is greater than John the Baptist: Jesus himself. After all, Jesus was truly born of Mary, and he is far greater than John the Baptist. Matthew himself in his Gospel takes pains to show us that Jesus is both born of a woman and that he is greater than John the Baptist, yet he has no problem in reporting this saying of Jesus in his Gospel. So we know that Jesus highly honors John the Baptist, but also that his statement should not be taken completely literally.

The Dark Night of the Soul
Sixth in a seven-part series
(Previous posts in this series: Part I,  Part II,  Part III,  Part IV,  Part V)

“The Dark Night of the Soul” is a commonly used phrase, but as we saw when exploring the first Dark Night (that of the senses), it is most often misunderstood and misused. The true Dark Night of the Soul is the bridge between the illuminative and unitive ways, in which the soul is purged not of the lower elements of the soul, but instead of the higher faculties of intellect, will and memory.

At this stage, even infused contemplation is not possible; every faculty of the soul experiences dryness. In many ways, it is like a purgatory before death. But God reveals Himself in this darkness, and it leads to total union with Him.

But why is this necessary? Like the first Dark Night, it purges the soul of defects. One might be tempted to think that a soul at this advanced stage of prayer has no real defects, but this is not the case. A few of the defects the Dark Night of the Soul purges include:

(a) Involuntary distractions in prayer. At this stage one can still encounter the inability of the intellect and will to keep focus.

(b) Dullness in prayer. As one grows accustomed to infused contemplation, he can begin to lack full sensitivity to spiritual things. It is a type of spiritual sloth.

(c) Temptation to over-zealousness instead of charity. It is very easy at this stage to desire the same joys for our brothers and sisters in Christ that we overwhelm them in trying to help them. Instead of relying on God to move them forward, we try to force them along.

During this Dark Night of the Soul, the person experiences the final purification of the will. Any egotism, either conscious or unconscious, is replaced by a complete acceptance to the will of God. And that is the point of this stage: to unite one’s will completely with God’s will, so that the soul wants nothing other than what God wants.

After passing through the Dark Night of the Soul, one moves onto the unitive way of prayer, which we will explore in the next (and final) post of this series.

I am currently running a series on my blog on the Nine Levels of Prayer, which is primarily based on the writings of St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross. These two saints were Spanish mystics living in the 16th century, and one of the fruits of their work was a flowering of ultra-realistic spiritual artwork throughout Spain, including both paintings and sculptures.

I am very excited to discover that 22 of these works of art will be on display in the coming months at the National Gallery of Art here in Washington DC. Called “The Sacred Made Real,” the exhibit will include works by Diego Velazquez, Francisco de Zurbaran and Juan Martinez Montanes. Coincidentally, my wife happens to be teaching about Velazquez in her art class for my kids. Needless to say, we are soooo going to this exhibit! I look forward to seeing how these great artists make the writings of the great mystical saints tangible.

If you can make it to DC in the coming months, be sure not to miss this exhibit – it promises to be even better than the cherry blossoms!

For those in the Baltimore area, there is an interesting talk coming up by Rita Marker, executive director of the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide. Entitled “End of Life Issues and What Can Be Wrong with Advance Directives,” the talk will focus on the legal and moral aspects of end of life issues and what to look for when making advance directives. Here are the details:

ST. JOHN THE EVANGELIST CHURCH, SEVERNA PARK
TUESDAY MARCH 16, 2010
7:00 P.M.

Pan Hu, a recent revert to the Catholic Faith by way of a detour into Evangelical Protestantism, has started a new blog dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Check it out!

The only pro-life pharmacy in the DC-area, founded by my wife’s OB/GYN Dr. John Bruchalski, is closing due to financial difficulties.

It really is unfortunate that a region with a population of the DC-area cannot support even one pro-life pharmacy. God bless Dr. Bruchalski and all the people that were involved in DMC pharmacy. I’m sure the Lord will bless them for their faithfulness.

The Illuminative Way
Fifth in a seven-part series
(Previous posts in this series: Part I,  Part II,  Part III,  Part IV)

With the fifth level of prayer, we have moved through the Dark Night of Senses and into the illuminative way of prayer. We have moved from prayer that is initiated by man to prayer initiated by God. We have moved from meditation to contemplation.

Level 5: Infused Contemplation
One of the most important things to note about this level of prayer is this: every Christian is called to infused contemplation. It is a common belief that only contemplative nuns or monks are called to infused contemplation, but one of the corollaries of Vatican II’s emphasis on the universal call to holiness is the recognition that all followers of Christ can – and should – eventually be at this level of prayer.

What is infused contemplation? It is the experiential knowledge of God that is infused into the soul by God. In other words, it is the invasion of the soul by the supernatural. In this stage, the soul is permeated and penetrated by Someone else. Note that to reach this level, the soul must be in the state of sanctifying grace; someone in mortal sin is not a receptive vessel for the Holy Spirit. Also, the soul who reaches this level of prayer does not discontinue the practice of virtue or charity; in fact, it usually will intensify.

There are a number of characteristics of this level of prayer, including:

(a) The impossibility of producing this mystical experience by one’s own efforts. One cannot “turn on” infused contemplation or turn it off, for that matter.

(b) The soul is more passive than active. In the previous forms of prayer, the soul was actively reaching for God; in this stage, the soul reclines and waits to receive God.

(c) The knowledge gained through infused contemplation is indescribable. When reading the writings of a St. Theresa or St. John of the Cross, one often notes how these saints struggle to actually describe their mystical experiences. They use metaphors, but even these must fall far short of the mark.

(d) A dramatic new living of Christian virtue. At this stage, one can truly do what St. Paul so often writes about: live “in Christ.” It is truly “no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me.”

Level 6: Prayer of Quiet
At this stage, one is still involved in infused contemplation, but it includes a special captivating of the will. It is “infused contemplation plus,” so to speak. This level of prayer brings great spiritual delight, as the soul is absorbed in contemplating the presence of God. Whereas level 5 has a special emphasis on the intellect (knowledge of divine things), this stage has a special emphasis on the will (love of divine things). There is an analogy between levels 5/6 and levels 2/3: levels 2 & 5 primarily work in the arena of the intellect, whereas levels 3 & 6 are involved in the arena of the will.

One of the great benefits of this level of prayer is that often it can be experienced while the intellect is otherwise occupied. For example, the farmer tending his garden can experience the prayer of quiet during his gardening. St. Theresa said that at this level, the person experiences such an interior peace and quiet that even speaking wearies it.

In my next post in this series, I’ll explore the bridge between the illuminative and unitive ways: the Dark Night of the Soul.

I realize that I tend to write longish posts on this blog, so I have added a link at the end of each post which gives you the option to create a printer-friendly version of the post, so you can print out a post and then read it in the comfort on your favorite chair and without the eye-strain that comes from reading on the computer screen. I know that any article longer than about 400 words I cannot read very easily on the screen, so hopefully this new feature will be of help for some people!

Zenit is reporting that there will soon be a forum at the Vatican to discuss the possibility of a 5th Marian dogma. Note that this forum, although including bishops and theologians from around the world, is not actually sponsored by any Vatican congregation, but instead by Inside the Catholic magazine and St. Thomas More College. So whereas it might be influential, it is not an official meeting of the Church.

What does it mean to have a “5th Marian Dogma”? To understand this possibility, let’s first review the existing four Marian dogmas and also what exactly is a “dogma”.

A dogma is a defined belief of the Church which must be believed by all Catholics. It is not open to debate and it is considered infallible by virtue of the grace given to the Church to define beliefs definitively. There are many beliefs that are common among Catholics, but not all of them are dogma. Some – such as limbo – have even been very commonly held, but later determined to not be adequate in explaining a specific mystery. But dogmas are irreformable.

With that said, the first four Marian dogmas are:

(1) Mary is the Mother of God (“theotokos”): At the Council of Ephesus in 431, the Church declared that Christ is one divine person (the person of God the Son) and therefore Mary can be properly called the Mother of God.

(2) Mary is perpetually a virgin – before, during and after her pregnancy: Most Christians accept that Mary was a virgin before she conceived Christ, but the Church at the First Lateran Council in 649 defined that she also was a virgin during and after his birth as well.

(3) Mary was immaculately conceived: Pope Pius IX infallibly defined in 1854 that Mary, by the grace of God, was conceived without the stain of original sin.

(4) At the end of her life, Mary was assumed body and soul into heaven: In 1950, Pope Pius XII infallibly declared that Mary received the singular grace of being assumed body and soul into heaven at the end of her earthly life.

These are the only four dogmas related to Mary. Obviously, there are many other beliefs surrounding the Blessed Virgin, but these four are the only ones to which we must give our full consent of the intellect and will.

But in recent decades, many have noticed what they believe to be a “hole” in the Marian dogmas. The four dogmas define special graces given to Mary in her life, but they do not answer the question: what is the relationship of the Blessed Mother to me? How does she help each person on the path to salvation? Mary has been integral to the salvation of countless souls over the years, so some have asked if there is a need to define her role in salvation history.

To that effect, there is a movement to make a three-fold definition about Mary as the “5th Marian Dogma”. This three-fold definition would be that Mary is:

(1) Co-Redemptrix
In meaning of “co-” in this term is “with”, so this term means “the woman with the Redeemer”. Those who advocate this title for Mary note that she had a unique role as the New Eve in the Redemption. By her fiat, she gives the body to the Redeemer. Furthermore, she uniquely united her suffering with the suffering of Christ’s Passion. Although this title might at first sight seem blasphemous on the surface, note that all of us are called to be “co-redeemers” with Christ, as we should offer up our sufferings in union with Christ’s for the salvation of the Body (cf. Col. 1:24).

(2) Mediatrix of all graces
Proponents of this title state that Mary has a role in distributing all the graces merited by Christ in our redemption. As each person can be a mediator of graces to others by praying for them and suffering for them, Mary uniquely has the job of being the mediator of all Christ’s graces.

(3) Advocate
There is a strong tradition within the Church which has seen Mary as the advocate par excellence – she is constantly pleading for us to the Father. Every saint in heaven prays for us, but Mary, as the unique vessel of the Son, has a special power in her prayers and she uses that for our benefit.

Although there are many prominent theologians, bishops and even cardinals (along with millions of the faithful) who are pushing for this new dogma, there are also many who oppose it. The main reasons argued against these definitions are two-fold:

(1) They would damage ecumenical relations: Those of us in Protestant America instinctively see the issue these definitions would have, especially the first two. On the surface, they appear to deny the unique role of Christ as our redeemer and mediator. Regardless of what the titles really mean, many people would automatically assume an understanding of them which opposes the clear words of Scripture on this matter. (Note that the Orthodox would also have serious issues with these definitions as well and so their definition could harm relations with them).

(2) They would be easily misunderstood by the Catholic faithful: It seems obvious that many non-Catholics would misunderstand these titles, but it is also quite possible that many Catholics would as well. Some argue that there is a danger that over time these titles would create an improper understanding of Mary’s role in salvation which would obscure the unique role given to Christ. There have been heresies in the past which have elevated Mary to divine status, and also some practices over the years which do the same on a practical level, so some fear that these titles might foster that type of error again.

What is the real possibility of these three-fold titles actually being proclaimed as dogma? Under the pontificate of John Paul II, many believed it was imminent. During the 1990′s you heard a number of people proclaiming that he would define them by the year 2000. But of course that did not happen. In recent years the movement seems to have cooled, and that might be because Pope Benedict seems less receptive to them. Not that he necessarily opposes the titles (to my knowledge, he has not commented on them), but instead that he is less likely to take a such a radical step, unlike his predecessor, who was known to be more open to such measures.