|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 28, 2012 10:56:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 24, 2012 20:44:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Nov 4, 2012 16:36:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 2, 2013 22:57:12 GMT
Here's what seems to be an interesting example of different sensibilities between Orthodox/eastern Rite and Latin Catholics. Is the view (which I had previously associated only with Protestants) that veneration of the Divine Infant is wrong because it undercuts the Divine Majesty, at all common among Eastern-Rite Catholics? It seems to me to seriously weaken understanding of the Incarnation and to tend towards Docetism. Note that the author is not just saying that East and West have different emphases - he is directly saying that the Eastern approach is the only correct one and the Western is erroneous: www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2013/01/a-benedict-xvi-epiphanyEXTRACT Stuart Koehl says: Father Robert Taft, SJ, wrote at some length about the Nativity/Theophany cycle in the West and the East in his essay, "Liturgy in the Life of the Church" (2000). Some of his key points include: 'Contrary to what is always said, liturgical feasts are not celebrations of events in salvation history. They are celebrations of the mysteries of salvation revealed to us in the biblical narrative of those events. In the East, the original feast of the Nativity cycle was January 6. In the West, it was December 25. What both feasts celebrated was not the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, nor his baptism in the Jordan, but the mystery of the manifestation, originally known as “epiphania” (manifestation) or “theophania” (divine manifestation); i.e., the appearance of God’s salvation in the Incarnation of his only-begotten Son. So, originally, each feast included all of the scenarios at the beginning of the Gospels that concern Jesus’ first manifesting this salvation, in some cases including even the Marriage Feast in Cana in Jn 2:1-11. Only later did the several biblical scenarios get redistributed between the two days, as a result of an exchange of feasts between East and West. This, then, is why the same richness of Scripture readings found in the East on January 6 are found in the West on December 25. 'So, if both traditions wish to preserve their identity, the answer is not for them to imitate each other blindly, but for each to return to the roots of its own heritage [THIS SOUNDS SUSPICIOUSLY LIKE DENYING THAT THERE CAN BE LEGITIMATE LATER DEVELOPMENTS, AND TO ASSUME THAT EASTERN PRACTICES MUST BE BETTER BECAUSE THEY ARE EARLIER]. In this case, the West needs to stop thinking that Christmas is centered on a medieval Italian invention, Baby Jesus in the presepio [CRIB - HIBERNICUS - AND SNEERING AT ST FRANCIS OF ASSISI AS A "MEDIEVAL ITALIAN" IS AS ARROGANT AS SNEERING AT ST JOHN CHRYSOSTOM FOR BEING A BYZANTINE GREEK]. For there is no Baby Jesus; there is only the Risen Glorified Lord seated at the right hand of the Father, and He and his saving mysteries is what Christmas and Easter and everything is about. The Western January 6 feast is not a feast of the Magi, but of the manifestation of salvation to the Gentiles, a thematic which the East celebrates on February 2, the feast the West calls the “Presentation of Jesus in the Temple” as recounted in Lk 2:22-38—but which in Greek is called the Hypophante or “Encounter”, the meeting of the Savior with those He has come to save.' END T
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 4, 2013 22:44:33 GMT
Rod Dreher links to an article by an American libertarian (recall libertarians have their own axe to grind and are usually secularist) which argues that much Russian Orthodoxy is merely skin-deep, with many non-believers calling themselves Orthodox because they see it as an expression of Russian nationalism or as the state ideology. One chilling detail (mentioned in the libertarian's article) is the fact that a prominent denouncer of the feminist popster outrage in the rebuilt Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow is also an apologist for Stalin (who demolished the original cathedral). The combox has an interesting debate about how far the libertarian's view of Russia and Orthodoxy is distorted (e.g. by over-reliance on the 'liberal' opposition). A related thought - I have noticed for some time that a significant number of trads seem to admire the Putin regime, and in some instances (I am thinking of a novel published by a Gruner supporter) to argue that if the consecration of Russia requested at Fatima was performed properly (Grunerites believe John Paul II's consecration did not meet the required conditions) we could expect to see Russia ruled by a Catholic Tsar. A disturbing thought comes to mind - these people seem to think that all would be well if the Putinocracy was in communion with Rome, and if that were accomplished, such charming tendencies of the regime as bureaucratic persecution of "non-traditional" religions, rigging elections, controlling broadcast media to slander or shut out opponents, creating a system whereby nobody can attain office except through the governing party, etc would be perfectly admirable. www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/putin-at-church/
|
|
|
Post by humphrey on Jan 6, 2013 21:31:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 6, 2013 22:43:53 GMT
Today when going to St Kevin's I saw the Ethiopian Orthodox priest (who says Mass for his congregation in Synge Street school on Saturday mornings) walking towards Clanbrassil Street in his hat and black-and purple robe. He was accompanied by two of his congregation carrying folded flags. I mentioned this to a friend afterwards and received the suggestion that it was related to their celebration of Christmas on a different date from ours (they are one of those eastern churches who use the Julian calendar or some variant for liturgical purposes, which means they celebrate Christmas in early January). So a happy Christmas to them and to all our Eastern brethren, separated and otherwise, who use the old calendar.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 19, 2013 23:38:56 GMT
The CATHOLIC HERALD website reports that the Ukrainian Exarchy [equivalent to Vicariate-Apostolic} in Britain has been raised to the status of an Eparchy [full diocese] with Bishop Hlib as first Eparch. Since the Dublin Ukrainian congregation is under the jurisdiction of Bishop Hlib, I believe congratulations to them and to him are in order. Let us pray for their good fortune. www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/01/18/pope-raises-ukrainian-exarchate-to-status-of-eparchy/
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Jan 22, 2013 13:28:50 GMT
Bishop Hlib has a double portfolio - as Exarch and now Eparch of the Ukrainian Catholics in Britain; and as Visitor to Ukrainian Catholics in Ireland. He already was Visitor to Ukrainian Catholics in Ireland prior to his appointment as Exarch in Britain. The two functions are separate at present.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 25, 2013 23:27:15 GMT
Your prayers are requested to the well-being of Antonios Cardinal Naguib, who has resigned as Catholic Coptic Patriarch of Alexandria (he had a stroke) and for Patriarch Ibrahim Isaac Sidrak, his successor. Let us remember all our Christian brethren in Egypt, whether or not they are in communion with us, at this difficult time for them.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 14, 2013 19:40:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 23, 2013 21:57:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Beinidict Ó Niaidh on May 24, 2013 11:16:32 GMT
long as St Kevin's in Harrington St is a possibility - unless they have grave reasons for not approaching Fathers Deighan or Williamson or Nevin. But even this is becoming obsolete - there is Father Smith in Newtownmountkennedy and Father Jones in Stamullen and on a monthly basis, Father Leworthy in Newbridge. The Bishops of Cork, Belfast and Newry have moved in a modest direction in their cities, but still fall short of SSPX provision there - and there has been no action in regard to Athlone - but Kerry and Cashel match SSPX provision and there are many other dioceses providing the Mass in the absence of the SSPX. So if the Motu Proprio means anything, it is that as long as there is no rapprochement between the Church and the SSPX, there is less and less justification for going to the SSPX. Mea culpa! When I said Fr Williamson above, of course I meant Fr Richardson, ie Father William Richardson of the Dublin Chaplaincy, whose name is frequently mistaken for something else. (I was reviewing the thread in the light of Hibernicus last quote).
|
|
|
Post by Beinidict Ó Niaidh on May 24, 2013 11:17:45 GMT
Corrected the post now.
|
|
|
Post by Beinidict Ó Niaidh on May 24, 2013 13:38:16 GMT
Fr Zuhlsdorf's treatment is very interesting. One key point to remember is that the Orthodox don't necessarily have the same rules as us.
|
|