Did the pope predict US market crash back in 1985?

From American Papist: Not Your Average Catholic! by Thomas Peters

So say some:

Pope Benedict XVI was the first to predict the crisis in the global financial system, a ``prophecy'' dating to a paper he wrote when he was a cardinal, Italian Finance Minister Giulio Tremonti said.

``The prediction that an undisciplined economy would collapse by its own rules can be found'' in an article written by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who became pope in April 2005, Tremonti said yesterday at Milan's Cattolica University.

German-born Ratzinger in 1985 presented a paper entitled ``Market Economy and Ethics'' at a Rome event dedicated to the Church and the economy. The future pope said a decline in ethics ``can actually cause the laws of the market to collapse.''

Pope Benedict in an Oct. 7 speech reflected on crashing markets and concluded that ``money vanishes, it is nothing'' and warned that ``the only solid reality is the word of God.'' (Bloomberg)

Here is the text of the article of Cardinal Ratzinger's that the report refers to.

Hat tip to Eric Wilson.

Peter Leithart on Liturgical Politics

“Liturgies give to ordinary people the right to make the world conform to their words: to be honored as indeed married, or to have their names and words remembered even at death. To be taken seriously, as free and responsible members of a commonwealth that has no historical boundaries, is the right of all who take part in the Christian liturgies.”

Read the whole thing over at leithart.com: Liturgical politics

Another Calvinist is now Catholic!

Everyone, please welcome Jennifer of "On the Road to Rome" into the Catholic Church and take a look at her blog.

Welcome home, Jennifer!

The Catholic Origins of Thanksgiving!

This history books will tell you that the first Thanksgiving was celebrated by the pilgrims in 1621. Not true.

An interesting bit of trivia is that the first American Thanksgiving was actually celebrated on September 8, 1565 in St. Augustine, Florida. The Native Americans and Spanish settlers held a feast and the Holy Mass was offered.

A second similar "Thanksgiving" celebration occurred on American soil on April 30, 1598 in Texas when Don Juan de Oñate declared a day of Thanksgiving to be commemorated by the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

The Catholic origins of Thanksgiving don't stop there. Squanto, the beloved hero of Thanksgiving, was the Native American man who mediated between the Puritan Pilgrims and the Native Americans. Squanto had been enslaved by the English but he was freed by Spanish Franciscans. Squanto thus received baptism and became a Catholic. So it was a baptized Catholic Native American who orchestrated what became known as Thanksgiving.

All that being said, Thanksgiving is traditional Protestant and marks the tradition of religious toleration (something in which the Puritan pilgrims did not actually believe - they set up a "theocracy").

My wife once taught at an high-church Episcopalian/Anglican classical school in Philadelphia. The school consciously played down the significance of Thanksgiving. Why? The reason is simple. At root, Thanksgiving commemorates the good fortune of political and ecclesiastical rebels against the Church of England and the Anglican tradition as a whole.

It all started with Richard Clyfton who was a Church of England parson in Nottinghamshire in the early 1600s. Clifton sympathized with the Separatists of that era. Separatists were Calvinistic non-conformists to the doctrine and liturgy of the Church of England. The Hampton Court Conference held by King James I (1604) condemned those who would not conform to the more outwardly Catholic usages in the Church of England (e.g. robes, candles, bowing the head at the name of Christ, processions). The result was that Richard Clyfton was “defrocked” and stripped of his clerical status in the Church of England. Shortly thereafter Richard Clyfton went to Amsterdam and was followed by his disciples: the Pilgrims.

These Pilgrims moved around a bit until finally coming to America in 1620. An interesting bit of trivia is that one child was born on board the Mayflower while at sea. The child was given the rather lame name: “Oceanus”. Poor child.

In 1621, the Pilgrims allegedly celebrated a happy meal with the Native Americans and the rest is history. So why would an Anglican school be against Thanksgiving? It celebrates those who defied the Church of England and the Crown of England.

Now that I’m a no longer an Anglican and now a Catholic, things are a bit different. The penal laws of England regarding non-conformists affected not only the rigorous Calvinistic Puritans in England, but also the English Catholic recusants. The Pilgrims shared the same lot as the Catholic faithful of England. Interestingly enough, the Catholics who lived in Nottinghamshire where the Pilgrims originated were persecuted mercilessly.

So while Thanksgiving may celebrate the Calvinists Separatists who fled England, Catholics might remember the same unjust laws that granted the crown of martyrdom to Thomas More, John Fisher, Edmund Campion, et al. are the same injustices that led the Pilgrims to Plymouth.

Another bit of trivia is that the truly “First Thanksgiving” celebration occurred on American soil on April 30, 1598 in Texas when Don Juan de Oñate declared a day of Thanksgiving to be commemorated by the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

And let everyone remember that “Thanksgiving” in Greek is Eucharistia. Thus, the Body and Blood of Christ is the true “Thanksgiving Meal”.

Do you know your Thanksgiving history?

Approximately what percentage of American homes eats turkey on Thanksgiving?

What is the name of the skin that hangs from a turkey's neck?

Which U.S. president specified that Thanksgiving would fall on the last Thursday of November?

Take the Thanksgiving Quiz.

Dostoevsky on the Battlefield of the Heart

"God and the devil are fighting there and the battlefield is the heart of man. But a man always talks of his own ache."

Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov Bk III, Chapter 3.

Saint Augustine on Solomon and the Davidic Covenant

In his City of God, Saint Augustine makes several observations concerning the Davidic Covenant and David's son King Solomon. You can find it in Book 17 of the City of God.

Augustine writes that Solomon erred greatly and could not possibly have fulfilled the Davidic Covenant. Augustine said that God allowed this inHis wisdom so that prideful Jews would be unable to claim Solomon as the true Davidic heir. Solomon filled his house with strange women and strange gods and his practices eventually led to the schism within Israel. Solomon in these ways is a kind of "anti-christ". As a king, he does appear to be like Christ, but at the same time his actions are contrary to the image of Christ (I don't mean to say that Solomon is an Antichrist is the traditional meaning of the word, by the way.)

This is why in Matthew 12:42, Christ says that he is the "greater than Solomon".

Historical Development of Calling Priests Father

For those unfamiliar with the biblical concept of identifying "fatherhood" with "priesthood" please first take a look at a post I wrote entitled "Calling Priests Father" as it examines the words of Saint Paul: "I became your father through the Gospel" (1 Cor 4:14-17).

Let's take a look at Church History. In the early Church, clerics did not generally bear standard titles. It seems that "pappa" (Greek for "daddy") was an accepted form of address for bishops in general. In the West, "pappa" or the Latinized form "papa" became almost exclusively associated with the Bishop of Rome since the time of Leo the Great (A.D. 440-461). A notable exception is the Coptic Patriarch of Alexandria who bears the title "Papa" or "Pope".

In the late medieval era, clergy bore titles of respectability. If you've read Eamon Duffy's Stripping of the Altars, you will have observed that priests prior to the Reformation were simply "Sir" which is the English version of the Latin "senior" meaning "older" a rather fitting title for one who is a "presbyter" meaning "elder" in Greek. One also finds "Dom" or "Don" as a title of address from the Latin "Dominus" or "Master" (especially in Italy). Benedictine monks on the continent retain the title of "Dom". Those who like champagne will remember "Dom Perignon" the Benedictine inventor of the bubbly.

Prior to the 1800s, priests belonging to religious orders were almost universally "Father, Pere, Padre, etc. The Benedictines however retained "Dom."

In the new world, Spanish speakers frequently referred to priests as "Padre" since the establishment of Catholicism in Latin America was laid by Franciscan, Dominican, and Jesuit missionaries, all who would have been religious "Padres."

In England, secular Catholic priests (priests not belonging to an order) were simply addressed as "Sir", "Mister", or "Doctor" (if he possessed a doctorate). This was the case for both Anglican and Catholic clergy. It seems that the title "Father" emerged as a universal English title of address among Catholics with the reestablishment of the Catholic hierarchy in England so that Catholic priests would be distinguished from Anglican priests.

As an aside, Catholic priests in England were not allowed to wear the cassock publicly in England (this right being reserved to Anglican clergy), and this oddity gave rise to the Anglo-American custom of the Catholic priest wearing the black suit instead of the black cassock in the streets. Ironically, wearing of the cassock in public in England was a symbol of Protestantism!

Philosophy of the Soul

The philosophy of the soul is certainly an interesting one. Below are some of the "options" that folks have come up with in the history of the Church.

The Universal Soul
Aristotle as interpreted by the Muslim philosopher Averroes said that there was but one intellectual soul in the universe and that we all participated and shared this soul. Muslims were not keen on this and neither were Christians. Saint Thomas Aquinas put the smack down on this. This view also rears its head in the likes of Scotus Eriugena.

Tripartite Soul
There is the Gnostic doctrine that the soul is tripartite: earthly (fleshly), soulish, and spiritual. This view is for a large part taken from misunderstandings of Saint Paul's writings--especially 1 Corinthians. Gnostics later classified people according to this tripartite characteristics: the spiritual were beyond ethical norms. The soulish were your run of the mill Christians of the pew. And the fleshly were the unconverted.

Pre-Existent Soul
Then there is the error that the soul is pre-existent (even eternal) and is placed into the body. (Some Gnostics taught this with respect to the privileged souls of the spiritual ones.) Origen seemed to teach that all souls pre-existed creation and this doctrine is certainly found in the canonical book of the Wisdom of Solomon:

"As a child I was by nature well endowed, and a good soul fell to my lot; or rather, being good, I entered an undefiled body. But I perceived that I would not possess wisdom unless God gave her to me."

Wisdom 8:19-21

Quasi-Material Soul and Traducianism
Then there is the Traducianism of Tertullian, who taught that the soul was a quasi-material substance that was transmitted form parents to child. It was like "soul DNA". A part of mommy's soul blended with a part of daddy's soul and made a blended "baby soul" that formed along with the "baby body" that also derived from the two parents. Saint Augustine is alleged to have taught this, but others have made a case that he subscribed to Creationism (see below). You can see how it would explain the transmission of original sin from soul to soul. Incidentally, Saint Jerome, who was aware of the Eastern tendency to posit the pre-existence of souls, stated that Traducianism was the common theory in the West.

Saint Thomas Aquinas and the Scholastics on the Soul
Thomas Aquinas taught that intellectual soul (which included the sensitive and vegetative principles) is the form of the body. The problem with Saint Thomas is they way in which he understands the soul as it relates to human conception. At conception, the embryo develops the principles of life merely by vegetative powers. Next, the sensitive soul emerges. Finally, the intellectual soul quickens the embryonic body and completes the baby so that it becomes a human person. Obviously, this doctrine doesn't square with modern science - though I can see some crafty pro-choice folks picking it up and running with it.

Creationism and the Soul
The Catholic Church teaches "creationism" with regard to the soul. The soul is created ex nihilo at the moment of natural conception. The soul does not pre-exist, nor does it derive from the souls of the parents.

It would appear that God creates the soul immediately at conception. We know this because Mary is the Immaculate Conception (she was conceived without original sin) and so she was morally immaculate at her conception. Consequently, she must have been a moral agent at conception and thus she possessed her soul at the moment of conception.

In summary, the soul is created at conception. At death it continues to have consciousness. At the Last Judgment the soul reunites with the body. It is everlasting, but it is not eternal, in the strictest sense of the words.

Books of the Bible where God is not mentioned

Perhaps someone can correct me on this. It appears that the word "God" does not appear 1 Maccabees, Esther, and Song of Solomon.

Do not lie to yourself - Dostoevsky

We are currently reading Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov at the University of Dallas. Here is a great morsel of wisdom from the novel:

"Above all, do not lie to yourself. A man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point where he does not discern any truth either in himself or anywhere around him."

Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

Happy Veterans' Day

O Almighty Lord God, who neither slumberest nor sleepest; Protect and assist, we beseech thee, all those who at home or abroad, by land, by sea, or in the air, are serving this country, that they, being armed with thy defence, may be preserved evermore in all perils; and being filled with wisdom and girded with strength, may do their duty to thy honour and glory; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

American Book of Common Prayer (1928, Military Edition) "Prayer for all in the service of our country"

Rosaries for Obama! Calling all Catholics

What if we joined together anonymously to pray for Barack Obama without judging or condemning him? What if together we prayed one hundred thousand Rosaries for the spiritual benefit of Barack Obama? Would not innumerable graces be poured out upon for our nation and our elected leader?

In order to encourage others Rosaries for Obama! is keeping an anonymous tally of the number of Rosaries prayed for Barack Obama. Keep in mind that this is not a venue for judgment, but a place to earnestly ask God to bless our President-Elect.

Please join us in prayer and please email this to your friends or blog about it if you are able.

Let's get on our knees and ask Our Lord and Lady to make our nation a place where the dignity of every human life is respected and honored.

Please visit Rosaries for Obama! and share it with others.

The Sin of Saul: Presumption?

Saul forfeited the crown of Israel for committing two sins. First he did not destroy the Amalekites. Secondly, he presumed to offer blood sacrifice.

The various kings of the Old Testament, it seems, committed far worse crimes (idolatry comes to mind). Why then was Saul divinely deposed?

The sin of Saul was not merely the presumption of priesthood. David would later take on priestly attributes, such as wearing a priestly ephod and modifying the Temple cultus. I'm not entirely sure, but it seems that Saul's chief sin was that of kingly presumption. Perhaps we should look back to Moses' "venial sin" of striking the rock twice and thereby losing access to the Promised Land. Charter leaders of Israel are called to obey perfectly. These kingly leaders are so associated with God that any sort of presumption becomes usurpation of the place of God as "true monarch".

I may be wrong about this, so I'd love for anyone to provide some fresh insight on the matter.

Christians should honor and pray for Barack Obama

It’s no secret that I do not agree with Barack Obama’s policies on abortion and homosexual unions. However, I have been alarmed by some Christians who have resorted to an attitude of disrespect to our President-Elect. Racist remarks and off color comments are completely unacceptable in the mouth of a Christian.

We must honor and pray for Barack Obama and Joe Biden. They are our elected leaders. We may disagree their policies, but we must remember that Sacred Scripture commands us to show honor to them:

“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God” (Rom 13:1).

Despite our disagreements, we must “be subject to the governing authorities”. This is not a suggestion, it a command from the Word of God. It may be hard for us, but “there is no authority except from God”. God granted Barack Obama the presidency. This does not mean that God approves of everything espoused by the President-Elect, but He allowed it to happen for some greater purpose. The purposes of God are unknown to us. Some great good must come out of this. We mustn’t despair.

Saint Peter also taught that Christians should be subject to the governing institutions, even to the emperor as supreme.

“Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right” (1 Pet 1:13-14).

Keep in mind that Saint Peter spoke of Nero, the most vile Roman emperor and fierce persectutor of Christians.

We should also pray for our leaders. They need extra grace and virtue to fulfill their public offices. Maybe God will bring them to see the light about the injustice of abortion. Whether the conversion of Constantine helped or hindered the Church, it certainly extended the cause of Christ in Europe for subsequent centuries. God had a greater plan. And this is why would should continually pray for our leaders.

“First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way” (1 Tim 2:1-2)

Saint Paul, speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit states that we should pray “for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life.” We must pray for our leaders. If you count them as enemies in the culture war, then that’s all the more reason to pray for them. Our divine Lord taught us to love and pray for our enemies. Personally, I need a lot of work in this area.

Let’s pray for Barack Obama and ask God to bless him.

Godspeed,

Taylor Marshall

PS: I still haven’t decompressed after the election and this post was not easy for me to write. However, I know in my heart that this is the right thing to say at this moment.

Today I wear black

Today I wear black. Here is why.

Cranmer was married twice!

Before he was as a Catholic priest, Archbishop Thomas Cranmer (architect of Protestant English Reformation) married, but his wife died in childbirth within a year. I don't know if the child survived or not. After becoming ordained as a priest, Cranmer "married" again (an impossibility in Roman canon law), and he kept the union a secret for his first fourteen years of his archbishopric!

Cranmer was a rotten apple long before Henry VIII tapped him for leadership.

Mosaic Precepts: Moral, Ceremonial, and Judicial

Within the Christian tradition is the recognition that the Mosaic Law contained three kinds of precepts: 1) moral precepts; 2) the ceremonial precepts; 3) the judicial precepts. As a Protestant, I had always assumed that this nice arrangement was an astute observation, rather than a biblical categorization.

However, Thomas Aquinas cites Deuteronomy 6:1 as the authoritative witness of this threefold delineation:

"These are the precepts and ceremonies, and judgments": where "precepts" stands for "moral precepts" antonomastically. Therefore there are judicial precepts besides moral and ceremonial precepts (Deut 6:1, cited in Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae Ia IIa q. 99, a. 4)."