Eucharist for Dead Bodies Condemned

Wow, this is a very strange canon from the early Church:

The fourth canon of the Council of Hippo (AD 393) declared, "The Eucharist shall not be given to dead bodies, nor baptism conferred upon them."

The weird thing about it is that this canon would only have been decreed because the Eucharist was being given to dead people...

Praying for the Dead at Marked Intervals

In the Eastern Church in particular, there are certain intervals at which the faithful pray for their departed. This correspond roughly to biblical increments.

St. Simeon of Thessalonika explains that "the Third Day service is celebrated for the reason that the reposed one received his being through the Trinity." It also invokes the resurrection of Christ on the third day.

The ninth day after death is kept in remembrance of the nine choirs of angels since it is our hope that the souls of the faithful departed shall dwell with the angelic host.

The fortieth day after death hearkens back to the Old Testament. Joseph mourned his father Jacob for forty days. The Israelites also mourned for Moses for the length of forty days. Moreover, our Lord remained on earth for forty days after His resurrection before ascending to heaven.

The one year anniversary, according to St. Simeon, "is celebrated because it is the consummation, and our God, the Trinity, is the life of all and the cause of being and shall be the restoration of all the renewal of human nature."

So don't forget to pray for your beloved departed.

The Devil, not Pope Benedict, wears Prada

During the Holy Father's US visit, there was much buzz about the "fact" that the "pope wore Prada shoes". Esquire magazine even named His Holiness as the "accessoriser of the year" for 2008. However, the pope does not wear Prada shoes, rather he wears what popes have traditionally worn for the last one hundred years: red leather loafers.

The Vatican newspaper, the Osservatore Romano explained: "The Pope does not wear Prada, but Christ. His worries are not about accessories, but the essential." Nice!

By the way, if you thought Benedict has nice shoes, check out the ones worn by Paul VI:


Personally, I prefer those worn by Benedict. The shoes of Paul VI look like something that Elton John would wear.

More about the Osservatore Romano and the pope's shoes from the Telegraph.

Why Purgatory?

"If Christ died for all of our sins," asks the Evangelical, "why then do we need Purgatory? Isn't this notion of double expiation redundant?"

From the Catholic point of view, sin has eternal and temporal effects corresponding to eternal and temporal punishment.

Eternal punishment and temporal punishment are both expiated by the cross of Jesus Christ. The former regards ones final destination, the latter regards how we are transformed into the image of Christ.

Although it's not entirely correct, I find that Protestants find it helpful if I compare eternal punishment as regarding justification (are you saved or not), and temporal punishment as regarding sanctification (the process of mortifying sin and our attachment to it).

If one has faith, hope, and charity (i.e. is in a state of grace) at the moment of death he is saved from hell, which is the state eternal punishment. However, our attachment to lesser sins falls under the paternal judgment of God who requires us to be holy as he is holy. Thus, we must undergo chastisement worthy of our status as sons of the Father (either in this world or the next) so that we are like Him and can therefore see Him. Romans 8:28 says that we have been predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ. This conformity must be actual and not merely imputed. This paternal discipline relates to temporal punishment. If we living a penitent life on earth and perform acts of love, then we need less purgation. If we trust Christ but conform our lives to a lesser extent to His cross, then we need more discipline in the world to come.

Our God is a consuming fire...

The Hindu Oprah: Amma

Has anyone else heard of "Amma" the living Hindu "hugging saint"? It is all very odd. She is acquiring a large following and has Western adherents, as well.

Her true name is Mātā Amritanandamayī Devi. She is a female Indian guru revered as a living saint. She is called "Amma" or "Mother". She is rising up as the "Oprah of the East". She is well-known for hugging people and she apparently hugs hundreds if not thousands of people everyday.

More on "Amma" from Wiki.

America's Religious Indifference

America remains a nation of believers, but a new survey finds most Americans don't feel their religion is the only way to eternal life — even if their faith tradition teaches otherwise.

Read whole story from NBC.

Hat tip to Klemens Raab.

Bring back the Subdeacons, a solution to the Eucharistic Minister problem

I often hear grumbling about the sometimes excessive number of extraordinary ministers of the Holy Eucharist of the Ordinary Form huddled around the altars of our Church. Let me propose the following solution.

We need to return to the minor orders - but especially to the subdiaconate. Subdeacons would be male and would vest in cassock, alb, and tunicle as they traditionally worn. They could serve as adult altar servers who have been authorized by the bishop to administer Holy Communion in extraordinary circumstances.

What think ye? Of course, the traditional require of continence for subdeacons is something that would need to be studied.

PS: Of course, the best answer to the problem is to reserve the chalice to the priest. It's really the advent of providing the chalice to the faithful that has led to the proliferation of "lay extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist."

Is Mel Gibson a Sedevacantist? Sedevacantism verses Sedeprivationism

Are you ready to be confused? Then read on.

Most Catholics by now are aware of the heresy called "sedevacantism". In short, it teaches that there is no pope on earth, and that Pope Pius XII was the last valid pope. All those since then are popes in name only. The term sedevacantism comes from the Latin sedes vacans, meaning "empty chair" - in other words, the chair of the Saint Peter is empty. So the sedevacantist teaches that John Paul II was an impostor and the same for Benedict XVI. The incredibly strange and non-Catholic Society of Saint Pius V (not the Society of Saint Pius X) is officially sedevacantist. Click here to learn about the Society of Saint Pius V.

Okay, so that's sedevacantism. I think it's sheer lunacy, but at least I can understand it. Here's another position that is even more odd: sedeprivationism. Sedeprivationism follows the thought of the quasi-schismatic French theologian Michel Louis Guérard des Lauriers. The term means that there is a privation in the occupant of the chair of Saint Peter, i.e. something lacking.

According to sedeprivationism, Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI were and are defective popes because they espoused the heresies of "Modernism".

Here is where sedeprivationism becomes difficult to understand. According to sedeprivationists, the consent of these five men (J23 through B16) to become pope was faulty or defective on account of their so-called heretical views. As a result, they each became potentially pope, but did not attain to fullness of the papacy. In other words, they became pope materialiter sed non formaliter or "materially but not formally".

Apparently, Mel Gibson is sedeprivationist and not a sedevacantist. I had a conversation with someone who recently met with Gibson to discuss this issue and Gibson seemed to grant that Benedict XVI is the pope but also that he is a faulty or defective pope. This would make him a sedeprivationist of sorts.

Thus, the sedeprivationist (like Gibson) does not believe that the papal chair is empty, only that the material popes who have occupied it are formally defective.

Does that makes sense?

Theologically, it doesn't make sense to me.

Capuchin Franciscan Beards

The constitutions of the early Capuchin Franciscans describe the beard as something "severe, austere, manly, natural, and despised."

How great is that?

McCaain meets with Fr. Frank Pavone about abortion issues

Before his remarks, McCain met privately with Rev. Frank Pavone, president of Priests for Life. Father Pavone’s organization promotes voter education and registration throughout the nation, and his pro-life advocacy has been crucial in bringing the non-negotiable life issues to the attention of Catholic voters.

In his prayer before McCain spoke, Father Pavone prayed that the “Lord would let all Christians know they are still His sons and daughters when they are in the voting booth.”

Read story hear from the Catholic Exchange.

Will President Bush become Catholic?

Tony Blair did it. Why not George W.? Read the story here.

St Maximus the Confessor on Rome's Universal Jurisdiction

photo from flexibleart.net
The Eastern Orthodox claim that Rome does not possess universal jurisdiction is a later doctrinal development.

Take for example St. Maximus the Confessor, the great defender of the two wills of Christ, a resident of Constantinople, and an interpreter of Dionysius the Areopagite. He provides an example of the Byzantine doctrine of Rome's universal jurisdiction before the polemical debates of the 9th century. The quote below is from about AD 650:

How much more in the case of the clergy and Church of the Romans, which from old until now presides over all the churches which are under the sun? Having surely received this canonically, as well as from councils and the apostles, as from the princes of the latter (Peter and Paul), and being numbered in their company, she is subject to no writings or issues in synodical documents, on account of the eminence of her pontificate .....even as in all these things all are equally subject to her (the Church of Rome) according to sacerodotal law. And so when, without fear, but with all holy and becoming confidence, those ministers (the popes) are of the truly firmand immovable rock, that is of the most great and Apostolic Church of Rome. (in J.B. Mansi, ed. Amplissima Collectio Conciliorum, vol. 10)

How many Eastern Orthodox theologians speak about Rome like that? "She is is subject to no writings or issues in synodical documents!!!" And again, "all are equally subject to her." And yet their esteemed Maximus the Confessor speaks of Rome as do only the most vigorous Ultramontanists.

Was Maximus wrong? Was he misrepresenting the Apostolic faith?

The Sacred Relic-Bridle of Constantine

Saint Helen had one of the nails which pierced the holy Body of Christ in the crucifixion made into a bridle for her son, Constantine the Great.

"A bridle?!" You might ask. "What business does Constantine's horse have chomping on the nail of Christ?

Apparently it was an attempt to fulfill the prophecy of Zechariah 14:20

"In that day that which is upon the bridle of the horse shall be holy to the Lord."

Theodoret in his Ecclesiastical History (ch. 7) records the emperor's sacred bridle and specifically cites it as fulfilling Zechariah 14:20. Pretty cool.

The church historian Socrates (5th century) relates that one of the sacred nails was made into a helmet for Constantine and the other into a bridle.

N.T. Wright verses R.J. Neuhaus - Battle Royale

Has anyone else been following this battle royale between Anglican bishop N.T. Wright and Father Richard John Neuhaus of First Things magazine?

It's nasty.

Fr. Neuhaus spoke some hard words against N.T. Wright's new book Surprised by Hope. Theologically, I side with Fr. Neuhaus. I do think that Wright sometimes caricatures the Catholic position and he is, by his own admission, Protestant, i.e. one who protests against the Catholic Church. So we shouldn't be surprised if he doesn't line up squarely with the Catholic magisterium.

Nonetheless, Bishop Wright is a good guy and he has composed perhaps the best defense of Christ's bodily resurrection ever written: The Resurrection of the Son of God. It's solid. We used to sell it at the Catholic Information Center. Even Neuhaus recognizes it as colossal. It should be on your shelf, if it isn't already.


A couple of years ago, I read a short "sequel" to the Resurrection of the Son of God by NT Wright. It was at the library at Nashotah House. I can't find it online. I think it was named For All the Saints, or something like that. Has anyone seen it?

It sounds like this new book is a rehashing of this previous work. I was on cloud nine after reading his Resurrection of the Son of God, but even as an Anglican I was not impressed by the follow up volume. He basically bashed the historic idea that the faithful departed suffered or in any way needed our prayers. He also took jabs at black vestments and requiem Masses. It was all very strange. I need to get this new book and see if it's more of the same.

However, I don't want to end on a sour note. N.T. Wright is great, as I have said before, Wright helped lead me into the Catholic Church because he wrenched from my grip the the doctrine of imputed righteousness through justification by faith alone.

Does N.T. Wright lead to the Catholic Church? I believe that he does. Perhaps Father Neuhaus is frustrated that Wright himself won't cross the line and enter into full communion with Rome. Oremus pro eo.

Read: Does N.T. Wright lead to the Catholic Church?

Saint Thomas Aquinas - Book Recommendations

If you're interested in studying Thomas Aquinas, you should start with a simple biography. The biography by G.K. Chesterton is a fun read and I recommend it by way of introduction.


Next, you'll need a basic introduction to the history of Thomism. I recommend Romanus Cessario's A Short History of Thomism. It gives you the big picture so that you can wade through the debates that have occured inside and outside of Thomism:


Then you'll need a good English version of Thomas' Summa theologiae. I like the five volume edition depicted below. The translation closely follows the Latin:

If you're to be more extensive, you'll need Thomas' Summa contra gentiles, as well.


If you're into philosophy, you need to pick up Thomas' De ente et essentia:

That's enough reading, for now. If you're able to read Latin, go straight to the Corpus Thomisticum, which is online. You'll find everything you need there, and then some.

Click here to be redirected to the online Corpus Thomisticium.

Two former Episcopalian bishops prepare to become Catholic priests, Pastoral Provision Update

Msgr. Bill Stetson has a new blog and an update about the Pastoral Provision:

On May 22 & 23, seven married former Episcopal priests or bishops met at Immaculate Conception Seminary with the faculty of the Pastoral Provision for assessment or certification. Among them were Dr. Jeffrey Steenson and Dr. John Lipscomb. Following the official meetings with the members of the theological faculty several of us had dinner with the president and chaplain of the Anglican Use Society. This occasion was a great step forward for the people involved and for me in my work for the Pastoral Provision. Continue to keep us in your prayers.

Check on Msgr. William Stetson's blog by clicking here.

The Gentile Mission and the Septuagint (LXX)

The New Testament makes several "Gentile-inclusive" arguments that depend on the Greek of the Septuagint (LXX). The Hebrew Masoretic text does not lend itself to the arguments made by the Apostles in certain cases.

Compare Acts 15:16-17 to Amos 9:11-12
LXX: "that the rest of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name."

MT: "that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations who are called by my name."

In the LXX, we have "Adam" or "mankind" whereas the MT has "Edom". Saint James' argument in Acts 15 only works if you follow the Septuagint.

Compare Romans 11.26-27 to Isaiah 59.20-21
LXX: "The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob"

MT: "And he will come to Zion as Redeemer, to those in Jacob who turn from transgression."

Saint Paul here follows the LXX to show that Christ's reign will come from Jerusalem. This relates to the next quote.

Compare Romans 15.12 to Isaiah 11.10
LXX: "The root of Jesse shall come, he who rises to rule the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles hope."

MT: "the root of Jesse shall stand as an ensign to the peoples; him shall the nations seek."

Saint Paul's affirmation that the Christ will "rule the Gentiles" is omitted in the MT.

As one can see in these three examples, the Septuagint (LXX) must be the inspired text upon which Saint James and Saint Paul make their Christological arguments.

Any thoughts? Leave one in the comments box below.

The Septuagint and the Catholic Church

The Septuagint is Greek version of the Old Testament. I don't say here "Hebrew Scriptures" since the Septuagint is more expansive that the canon received by rabbinical Judaism after the time of Christ.

It is called the Septuagint because legend has it that seventy Hebrew scholars each translated the Scriptures into Greek only to find that they all had created the exact same translation. Thus, it is the translation of the seventy - septuaginta or LXX.

What is the place of the Septuagint in the Catholic Church? Well, it is our official version of the Old Testament. I think that it was Matt Leonard of the St Paul Biblical Institute who pointed out to me that the Vatican II document Dei Verbum on Sacred Scripture states:

"The Church from the very beginning accepted as her own that very ancient Greek translation; of the Old Testament which is called the Septuagint; and she has always given a place of honor to other Eastern translations and Latin ones especially the Latin translation known as the Vulgate" (Dei Verbum, 22).

Note that the Septuagint was "her own" from "the very beginning". Not even the Vulgate gets that much attention. The Latin Vulgata and the other Eastern translation, e.g Syriac, hold a place of honor but are not accorded the status of the Greek Septuagint. It should be noted that the Latin Vulgate follows the Old Testament of the Greek Septuagint. Why is this? Because the authors of Scripture most often quote from the Septuagint and not the Hebrew Scriptures. In fact, there are often times when the Apostles agree with the Septuagint against what we know as the Hebrew Masoretic text. More on this later.

Nine Foot Monstrance!

This is amazing. Can someone please find a picture of the new nine foot tall monstrance that is the parish in St. Stanislaus Kostka in Chicago? Perhaps this monstrance has shown up just in time to make reparation for Fr. Pfleger's (a priest of Chicago) statements.

The whole thing is so POD. The monstrance is built so that the Blessed Sacrament is placed in the center of Our Lady as a sign of the Incarnation. I've often said that the best tabernacle would be a gold statue of our Lady in which the door opened to her pregnant belly. I saw a tabernacle like this once at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.

Read about the nine foot monstrance from Catholic News Service.

Hat tip to Spirit Daily.

Thanks to Ryan who made us aware of the photo.

The Origin of Holy Oil in the Catholic Church

There are three kinds of holy oil in the Catholic Church:

1) Oil of the Sick ("Oleum Infirmorum")
2) Oil of Catechumens "Oleum Catechumenorum")
3) Sacred Chrism ("Sanctum Chrisma")

These three are often identified by their initials, respectively:

1) OI
2) OC (sometimes "OS")
3) SC

We learn from Tertullian (Ad Scapulum, 4) that there were only two sacred oils in the late second century: sacred chrism (oil mixed with balsam) that was solemnly blessed by a bishop and plain oil that was blessed with less solemnity. The former was used in baptism/confirmation and the latter was used for catechumens and the sick.

The Oil of the Sick was prescribed by Saint James for use by the Church's presbyters (the English word priest derives from the Greek presbyteros) in James 5:14.

The Oil of the Catechumens was originally used for exorcisms as it denoted the presence of the Holy Spirit. Since Catechumens (that is, those seeking baptism) were often possessed or afflicted by demons, they received anointings prior to their baptism. Thus, oil of the catechumens.

The Sacred Chrism is very ancient and likely apostolic in origin. Today the Catholic Church uses sacred chrism in the post-baptismal anointing for infants, in Confirmation, for Holy Orders, the consecration of churches, altars, and even bells. In Holy Orders, the bishop is anointing on the head and priest are anointed on the hands.

I have also discussed the significance of Sacred Chrism elsewhere.

Canon 7 of the Second Ecumenical Council, that of Constantinople held in 381, mentions the importance of sacred chrism.

Saint Thomas Aquinas taught that sacred chrism (blessed oil mixed with balsam) was instituted immediately by Christ (Summa theologiae IIIa, 72, a. 4).

Pope Eugene IV declared in his bull Exultate Deo that chrism of the "matter" of the Sacrament of Confirmation and this was reaffirmed by the Council of Trent (Session 7).

Oktoberfest: I just bottled five gallons of homebrew

I just bottled five gallons of my Oktoberfest homebrew. I'm going to let it cellar till September, at least.

Now I just need some beer steins like these...

Pope Benedict to meet with President Bush in a medieval tower

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Benedict will unusually host talks with U.S. President George W. Bush in a restored medieval tower on Friday, to repay him for a warm reception at the White House, the Vatican said.
ADVERTISEMENT

The pope usually receives heads of state in his private study in the Apostolic Palace, overlooking St Peter's Square.

But Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi said the change was to repay Bush for "the cordiality of the meeting at the White House" when the pope visited the United States in April.

Full story via Yahoo news.

Thomas Aquinas as a Biblical Commentator

When we discuss Saint Thomas Aquinas we often think of him as a philosopher (the five arguments for the existence of God) or as a theologian (transubstantiation). However, he was also a biblical scholar who wrote a number of commentaries.

Thomas wrote five Old Testament commentaries (that I know of). He wrote a commentary of the book of Job; a commentary on the Psalms (albeit only Psalms 1 through 51). He also wrote a commentary on the Canticle of Canticles. He also wrote a commentary on Isaiah and another on Jeremiah.

As for the New Testament, Thomas composed what was later called the Catena Aurea, which is Latin for "Golden Chain". This is a collection of saying of the Church Fathers for each verse of the four Gospels.

He also wrote a commentary on all the epistles of Saint Paul, in which Thomas included the epistle to the Hebrews as Pauline. Thomas attributes the more ornate style of Hebrews to Saint Luke and describes the epistle sicut a Paulo editae (as edited by Paul). Furthermore, Thomas explains that Paul left off his name because he was odious to the Jews of Palestine and was merely the Apostle to the Gentiles.

If you have a chance, check out Thomas Aquinas' commentaries, especially his commentary on Hebrews.

Here's an English translation:

Recommended Book: Thomas Howard's Evangelical Is Not Enough

This is an excellent book to give to an Evangelical friend as an introduction to the Catholic Church. Dr. Howard affirms his Evangelical past, but lucidly demonstrates how the ecclesial and sacramental world-view of the Catholic Church fulfills our life in Christ.

Purchase Thomas Howard's Evangelical Is Not Enough here:

My review of Indiana Jones 4: The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

It's been nearly twenty years since Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade came out in theaters. I was thrilled when I heard that new a Indiana film starring Harrison Ford was due to be released this summer. After an impatient wate, I saw it a couple of nights ago with my sister and my uncle.

It was entertaining, but I was left disappointed. It started off like an Indiana Jones movie and ended like a cheesy Star Trek episode. Never would I have expected an Indy movie to devolve into a Sci-Fi movie. Toward the end I was wondering if Will Smith was about to jump out wearing a black suit.

Harrison Ford was good and Shia LaBeouf proved once again that he's an excellent actor. Cate Blanchett mastered yet another accent, this time Russian, and she made a very convincing villain.

My biggest disappointment is that the film (like the flop Temple of Doom) lacked the spiritual romance of Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Last Crusade. Those two movies revealed that Indy was a kind of Samson - he could fight, pull down temples, and could be tangled up by beautiful women; however, he had reverence for the sacred. Recall how Indy closed his eyes when the Ark was opened and how Indy Sr. (Sean Connery) slapped "Junior" across the face for taking the name of the Lord in vain. And I'll never forget the constant stuttering of Indy as he entered the shrine of the Holy Grail: "Only the penitent man shall pass. Only the penitent man shall pass. Only the penitent man shall pass."

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was about space aliens and their crystal skulls entombed in Meso-America. That kind of plot does not resonate with me and it does not pull the heartstrings of your typical American. For example, was it convincing to see Indy squirm while looking into the eyes of the crystal skull? No! Didn't George Lucas learn his lesson with The Temple of Doom? People like Judeo-Christian motifs. They add adventure. Everyone basically recognizes the Ark of the Covenant or the Holy Grail. But crystal skulls belonging to space aliens? Give me a break.

The movie had several deus ex machina sequences that were funny. First, Indy survives a nuclear blast by hiding in a lead-lined refrigerator. Again, Indy and gang survive three sequential waterfall drops. Unbelievably comic. I enjoyed them and had a good laugh.

I will say, that the ant scene is awesome.

So if you see Indy 4, you'll likely be both entertained but saddened by the ending. I think that George Lucas is quirky and he has so much money that he can do whatever he wants, even if it's silly (Jar Jar Binks, the gophers in Indy 4?).

I'd be interested to hear the thoughts of anyone else who has seen it. What did you think? Drop a line in the comments below.

Why did God reveal things figuratively in the Old Testament?

Have you ever wondered why Did God reveal things figuratively in the Old Testament? Why not just reveal Christ and fullness of the economy of grace? St. Thomas Aquinas, in discussing the ceremonial precepts of the Old Law, takes up the need for figurative revelation in this way:

The things of God are not to be revealed to man except in proportion to his capacity: else he would be in danger of downfall, were he to despise what he cannot grasp. Hence it was more beneficial that the Divine mysteries should be revealed to uncultured people under a veil of figures, that thus they might know them at least implicitly by using those figures to the honor of God. (STh I-II, q. 101, a. 2, ad. 1)

This follows Saint Paul's doctrine of "pedagogy" in Galatians. Humanity needed to be prepared and cultivated for the fullness of divine revelation. We reveal things to children in the same way. We don't read theological treatises to five-year-olds. We tell them about the Gospel through figures. Hymns and songs, hand signs, rote memorization, games, set prayers, etc. All of these cultivate the undeveloped mind to desire and grasp greater divine realities as they age.

Franciscan Friars of the Renewal Video (featuring Father Louis)

Hat tip to my former student Tyler Pearson.

Heortology: Word of the Week

Heortology is the study of sacred festivals. The word comes from the Greek word heorte meaning festival.

The 2008 Letter and Spirit Summer Institute

Last week I was in Steubenville, Ohio for the Letter and Spirit Summer Institute. It was incredible.

Each day began at 6am with the Office of Readings, lead by the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal who were with us: Fr. Luke Fletcher, Br. Sebastian, Br. Felix, Br. Jacob, and Br. Paschal. Then there was an hour of silence. At 7:30pm there was Morning Prayer followed by breakfast.

We then traveled to Dr. Hahn's home for morning lectures by Dr. Hahn.

At noon we attended the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass on the campus of Franciscan University, followed by noonday prayer.

We then returned to the Hahn's home for a Bible study with Curtis Mitch (drafter of the Ignatius Study Bible) over the book of Matthew.

This was followed by Evening Prayer an an hour of Eucharistic Adoration.

We had excellent dinners every night, seasoned with stimulating conversations.

After dinner, we listened to individual presentations by a different speaker each evening. This was my favorite part of the day.

Dr. Jeremy Holmes of Ave Maria University (though soon to be part of the faculty at Wyoming Catholic College) presented “Participation, Exegesis and Liturgy”. Dr. Holmes focused on how Scripture exhibits a hermeneutic of participation. For example, Christ is not simply a replacement for King David, but rather that King David participates in the divine reality that is Christ. There interesting and important.

Dr. Ben Wiker of Steubenville presented “The Bible Politicized” which examined how the liberal textual studies that came to reign in the 19th century have their origin in nominalist tendencies arising in the 14th century.

Dr. Jeff Morrow of the University of Dayton presented, “Modern Biblical Interpretation and the Sacramental Hermeneutic” in which he familiarized us with Leo XIII's Deus Proventissumus and Pius XII's Divino Afflante Spritu and the modernist controversy of the early 20th century in Catholic biblical studies.

On Thursday night, Dr. Bryan Stewart, the only non-Catholic presenter gave an interesting presentation entitled “Levitical Paradigms for Christian Ministers in the Third and Fourth Century Church”. In his presentation, Dr. Stewart demonstrated how early church fathers already described the Christian clergy with sacerdotal language and concepts.

On Friday night, Dr. John Bergsma presented “All Israel: The Eschatalogical Self-Identity of the Qumran Community”. Dr. Bergsma drew out the distinctions between "Jew, Judean, Israelite, and Hebrew" in the second temple era. The Qumran community understood itself as "children of Israel" and not "Jewish". Similar distinctions can be found in the New Testament, especially in John's writings and those of Paul.

Each evening concluded with Compline (Night Prayer), the chanting of the Salve Regina, and the Holy Rosary.

It was a fantastic week. The Friars of the Renewal were like sacred leaven in our midst. There is always a temptation at academic gatherings to leave behind the heart in pursuit of the mind. This week reminded me once again that academic pursuits should lead us more deeply into the Sacred Heart of Christ. The week was as much a retreat as it was a summer institute.

A special thank you to Dr. Scott Hahn and Matthew Leonard of the Saint Paul Biblical Center for putting together such a wonderful week. I can't wait for next year.

If you haven't bought them already, do yourself a favor and get the Letter and Spirit journals:

Why Dionysius the Areopagite did not write the Corpus Areopagiticum

There are three pieces of evidence that demonstrate conclusively that St. Dionysius the Areopagite (cf. Acts 17), did not write the Corpus Areopagiticum.

1) First, the author describes the place of the Credo in the Eucharistic liturgy!!! (Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 3, 436c) This is clearly anachronistic. The creed (presumably the Nicene Creed) was not composed until 325-381. Moreover, the creed did not have a liturgical place until the 5th century.

2) Secondly, the author borrows from the Neo-Platonist Proclus (AD 411-485). (Interestingly enough, I've been told that there are certain Eastern Orthodox apologists who claim that it was the other way around: Proclus was plagiarizing Dionysius!)

3) The Christological terminology of the Council of Chalcedon (AD 451) is employed by Dionysius. An amazing feat for a first century author.

Still, the significance of these writings (likely from the late 400s) are significant and we should not avoid them on account of their pseudopigraphical origins. As Jaroslav Pelikan remarked, it is odd that the the name of Dionysius was not employed as a pseudonym earlier than the 5th century. Dionysius would have been the pseudonym par excellence for an ambitious Gnostic author. He represents the Pauline tradition (Acts 17) and the Greek mystical tradition. Providentially, the pseudopigraphical "Dionysian" writings were crafted by an orthodox genius, who may have had tendencies that later were identified as monothelite. Do yourself a favor and pick up a copy of the writings of Dionysius.

Dionysius and Thomas Aquinas on Holy Chrism

Holy Chrism is sacred anointing oil consisting of balsam and olive oil, and blessed by a bishop in apostolic succession. According to the Eastern and Western Church Fathers and the medieval writers, the use of Holy Chrism was instituted by the Twelve Apostles.

Holy Chrism is employed in the sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders. It was also sometimes employed in medieval coronation ceremonies.

In discussing Holy Chrism in his Summa theologiae, St. Thomas Aquinas cites Pseudo-Dionysius two times. (Although, I believe that Dionysius of Acts 17 did not write the Corpus Areopagiticum, I hate prefixing the Areopagite with "pseudo". We all know who we are talking about here.)

Here is how Aquinas uses Dionysius. Both citations are found in STh III, q. 72:

However, the apostles commonly made use of chrism in bestowing the sacrament, when such like visible signs were lacking. For Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iv): "There is a certain perfecting operation which our guides," i.e. the apostles, "call the sacrifice of Chrism." (STh III, q. 72, a. 2, ad. 1)

And then, they used both matter and form according to Christ's command. For the apostles, in conferring the sacraments, observed many things which are not handed down in those Scriptures that are in general use. Hence Dionysius says at the end of his treatise on the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy (chap. vii): "It is not allowed to explain in writing the prayers which are used in the sacraments, and to publish their mystical meaning, or the power which, coming from God, gives them their efficacy; we learn these things by holy tradition without any display," i.e. secretly. (STh III, q. 72, a. 4, ad. 1)

If we go back and read the passages in The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy of Dionysius, we observe that Dionysius understands "Chrism" itself as a sacrament proper. It seems that Confirmation and Holy Orders fall under this sacrament of Chrism, as well as the consecration of altars.

Given the importance on Christ as the Anointed, the institution of a kind of sacred chrism in Exodus 30, and the ancient usage of chrism in baptismal liturgies, it would seem that the institution of Sacred Chrism is apostolic. The apostolic origin of chrism has been controversial. Although the New Testament doesn't mention chrism per se, there does seem to be allusions to Christians having received an "anointing". See 1 John 2:20-27. Also, Revelation 3:18 connects anointing to wearing white robes.

Great Picture of Pope Benedict

Yes, this is a picture of Pope Benedict. You can see him under the white canopy.