Happy Feast Day of St. Cyril of Jerusalem

St. Cyril was a major player in the fight against the Arian heresy. He lived from 315-386 A.D.

Here's a great quote from him, regarding the Holy Eucharist:

"Since He Himself has declared and said of the bread: This is My Body, who shall dare to doubt any more? And when He asserts and says: This is My Blood, who shall ever hesitate and say it is not His Blood? Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that, for they are, according to the Master's declaration, the Body and Blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm."

Great Lent-Week 3

Jesus is Crowned with Thorns-A Meditation by Luigi Giussani

That little head which Mary, like every mother with her newborn child, would have enfolded close to her without squeezing it, and caressed delicately as every mother does, and looked at in wonder and admiration, would one day have to wear a crown of thorns. Salve caput cruentatum. How the Virgin felt echoing inside her this evil of the world, without details and without accusations, but as an already boundless grief that would culminate in watching her Son die!

The English Accident-Part 2

In 1547, Henry VIII died. He was succeeded by his young, sickly son Edward VI. Since he was only nine years old this was Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer's chance to de-Catholicize England.

In 1548, the first edition of the Book of Common Prayer was published. Of course, the book is entirely Protestant as he was. He sends a copy of it to both Luther and Calvin and they criticize it highly for still being "too Catholic." In 1552, his second edition is published. All references to the mass are now called "the Lord's Supper."

When Edward VI died at the age of 16, the populace was in favor of Mary Tudor (Catherine of Aragon's daughter) ascending to the throne. The people were Catholic and wanted a Catholic queen. They did not consider Ann Boleyn's marriage to Henry legitimate and so neither was her daughter Elizabeth. Parliament, however, was in favor of Lady Jane Grey. The populace revolted and Mary Tudor became queen in 1553. She felt it her mission to restore the Faith in England. Her first step was to send Cranmer to the Tower. In his place, Cardinal Reginald Pole, equally faithful to the Pope, was elected.

"Bloody Mary"

Thanks to anti-Catholic history textbooks, Mary Tudor is remembered in this unfair way. During her entire reign, she was very popular with her subjects. Without them, she would not have been able to take the throne. She did make the mistake of burning 300 heretics; however, her successor, Elizabeth I, burned over 700 Catholics and perhaps even more. Elizabeth, of course, is remembered as "Good Queen Bess."

Another mistake Mary made was to marry Phillip II. He was a very good man and loyal to the Church but he was a Spaniard and this did not sit well with the English people during a time of the increasing use of the vernacular languages and the rise of nationalism.

When both Mary and Archbishop Pole died in 1558 (on the same day!), so did any chance for Catholicism to survive in England.

Her legitimate successor was Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots, who was Henry VIII's great-niece. However, through the political shenanigans of Parliament, Elizabeth I took the throne and reigned for 45 years. Raised thoroughly Protestant, she refused to attend mass on her first Christmas or receive the Eucharist at her own coronation mass. This "greatest English monarch" however, was merely a figurehead and was controlled by a man named William Cecil. He is known as the "architect of Protestant England." He wanted to protect his wealth and did so quite cleverly. He supported the Protestant movement in Scotland and in the Netherlands. In 1559, he was the impetus behind the Elizabethan Act of Supremacy and Oath of Loyalty. He was also behind the Act of Uniformity which abolished the mass, mandated Anglican services and reinstated Cranmer's Book of Common Prayer. He made it a capital crime to be a Catholic. In 1563, the Anglican 39 Articles was released. It was also a crime to associate with the Jesuits.

Those who did, like St. Margaret Clitherow, were killed. She was hiding priests and was killed by suffocating from rocks and planks.

In 1570, Pope St. Pius V wrote Regnans in Excelsis. against Elizabeth and ex-communicated her in 1571.

Cecil used the ex-communication to his great political advantage. He called the Pope a "Roman prince" and suggested to the English people that one can not truly be English and Catholic. This idea begins to stick with the populace.

In 1603, Elizabeth died. The mass and the Catholic way of life is deteriorating and some do not know or remember what it was like. James I became King (He is famous for the King James Version of the Bible) in 1603. Although his mother, Mary Queen of Scots, was a Catholic and was imprisoned for 20 years and executed because of it, he has been raised as a Protestant and under his reign is the complete eradication of the Faith in England.

Great Lent-Week 2

The Scourging of Jesus at the Pillar-Meditation by Luigi Giussani

The companionship of the God-Man in our life has become inconceivable, unimaginable tragedy, one that defies anyone’s imagination. In all the centuries of history there cannot be imagined–not even in play, like a fairy tale–a tragedy greater than this: the companionship of God-made-flesh was forgotten, outraged by man; a tragedy that arises from the cynicism of our pursuit of our instincts. Around this “wood” coagulate the evil of man who fails the call of the Infinite and the disasters caused by this crime, so that the death of the God-Man is the sum and symbol of all these disasters. And, at the same time, here too is met the irresistible power of God, because just that supreme disaster and that evil become the instrument for its conquest and redemption. This is the enigma that God maintains in life, because this great plan of goodness, wisdom, knowledge, and love must be a trial, must put into action the idea of trial. Why a trial? Because the world is in evil, the world lies in the Evil One.

The English Accident-Part I

Catholic thinker Hilaire Belloc posited that the English Reformation (The Reformation in England) was an Accident. He believed this because King Henry VIII and his people were thoroughly Catholic, in both mind and manner, as well as belief. What caused this break was not an attack on the Church-the priesthood, the sacraments, the doctrines-but was a schism in order to obtain a divorce from his wife Catherine of Aragon of Spain. Belloc also posited that had England not fell, Europe would have been saved from the Protestant movement.
It would have died out as all other previous ones had.

This "accidental" circumstance in England is very different than what was going on at the same time in the Empire (the German nation-states-the Lutheran movement) as well as in Geneva where John Calvin was spreading his brand of Protestantism. The difference between the Reformation in England and in Geneva can be understood by noting that during Henry VIII's "series of unfortunate events," the mass and the whole of Catholic life continued to be celebrated and lived as it had been for more than a thousand years. At the same exact time in history (1530s) in Geneva, the Protestants had taken control of the nation-state and by 1535, the mass was banned. The idea of banning the mass in England, however, would have been a horrifying thought to the monarch.

The impetus in denying papal authority for Henry was his selfishness in wanting Anne Boleyn to be his wife. He had wanted her to be his mistress as her older sister had been, but she refused and insisted on being his wife---and Queen. Church historian Warren Carroll argued that the whole argument of Henry's desire to produce a male heir is exaggerated and that it was his obsession with Anne that led to the schism. Henry had already produced an heir, Mary Tudor, with his legitimate wife, Catherine. The Pope had granted Henry the permission to hold a Tribunal to discuss the marriage case but that the final decision would be Rome's. The fact that the Pope allowed such an ecclesiastical court to gather was novelty in itself!

Cardinal Wolsey, the Archbishop, convinced Henry that Pope Clement VII would grant him an annulment from Catherine. When he turned out to be wrong, Wolsey was replaced by St. Thomas More.

However, it was not Henry, but his prime minister Thomas Cromwell (see picture), who is understood to be the true creator and architect of the English reformation. Here's his novel contribution: (it reminds me the serpent whispering in Eve's ear...)

"Henry, why does the Church have to be controlled by the Pope? You could be the head of the Church in England."

Besides this idea, Cromwell also convinced Henry to dissolve ALL the monasteries in England. By 1540, Henry, Cromwell, and the avaricious nobility had run all the religious out and had seized the wealth and the lands for themselves. Interestingly enough, that same year, 1540, Cromwell fell out of favor with Henry and was executed. (What good is it to gain the whole world...) The dissolution of the monasteries is what later made it harder to reunite with the Church--they would have to return the lands and money.

Under Cromwell's influence, Henry passed three religious mandates in order to deal with his marital problems, or rather, satiate his sexual appetite:

1. He is the head of the Church, not the Pope.
2. He has the right to approve, reject, modify ecclesiastical laws and books.
3. He must be submitted to by all the clergy and bishops.

"I want, I want, I want, me, me, me, mine, mine, mine, now, now now"---for any of you fellow Hook lovers out there.

St. Thomas More refused these mandates and resigned as Lord Chancellor.

Another major player in the English Reformation is Thomas Cranmer. He became the Archbishop of Canterbury and is known to be a wavering and spineless man. (He took an oath of loyalty to the Pope, then recanted, around six times...)

Under his "blessing," in 1533, the beloved and popular Queen Catherine of Aragon is replaced with Anne Boleyn. Anne gives birth to Elizabeth shortly after the wedding. (Once she was "engaged" to Henry, she submitted to him.) It's so classy when your new "Queen" is a pregnant bride. But anyway...within the same year...

Henry is excommunicated by Pope Clement VII and his marriage is declared invalid. In reaction to the Pope, in 1534 (the Pope is now Paul III), Henry passed the Act of Succession and all bishops were required to take the Oath of Succession denying papal authority. In 1535, St. Thomas More and St. John Fisher were beheaded at the Tower of London for refusing to take the Oath. Also in 1535, Henry passed the Act of Supremacy, which makes the King of England the Supreme Head of the Church of England. (Where is THAT in the Bible? So much for sola scriptura, aye?) Carthusian monks are martyred for refusing the oath.

Irreconcilable Differences

No, I don't mean the Catholics and Protestants. Remember, England is still Catholic at this time.

Much like a celebrity couple, less than two years later, Henry is less than enchanted with Anne and you know what happens: Off with her head! Easy come, easy go.

In 1549, the still-Catholic Henry had Parliament pass Six Articles Abolishing the Diversity of Opinions:

1. Affirms Transubstantiation
2. Communion of both species not necessary (this was a big Protestant demand)
3. Clerical celibacy must be upheld
4. Vows of chastity must be observed by both sexes
5. Private masses are legitimate (Luther wanted these abolished)
6. Regular confession is good and necessary

He reaffirmed traditional Catholic teaching and dogma.

Henry died--as a Catholic--in 1547 and leaving behind his three kids: Mary, Elizabeth, and Edward.

Coming soon: The English Accident-Part II

Great Lent-Week 1

Jesus's Agony in the Garden-Meditation by Luigi Giussani

“Now my soul is sorrowful; and what must I say, ‘Father, save me from this hour [faced with the thought of sacrifice, the thought of death, of self-denial…]’? But it is for this that I have come to this hour [for this, for this condition have I been chosen, called, lovingly taught by the mystery of the Father, by the charity of the Son, by the warm light of the Spirit. Now my soul is sorrowful and what must I say, ‘Father, save me from this hour’? ‘Take away this condition, Father, take away this condition.’ Must I say this? But it is precisely for this that I have come to this hour!].” Thus I can say at the end, “Father, glorify Your name [glorify Your will, bring about, realize Your plan], which I do not comprehend [because He did not comprehend the great injustice]. Father, glorify Your name in front of which I stand in fear and trembling, in obedience–that is to say, in love. My life is Your plan, it is Your will.”

How many times–praying to the Spirit and the Virgin Mary–will we have to reread this passage in order to identify with the most lucid and fascinating instant in which the consciousness of the Man Christ, Jesus, expressed itself. We can come upon this by surprise, from its deepest recesses to the highest peaks of His example of love for Being, of respect for the objectivity of Being, of love for His origin and His destiny, and for the contents of the plan of time, of history. “Father, if possible, let me not die; however, not my but Your will be done.” This is the supreme application of our acknowledgment of Mystery, adhering to the Man-Christ kneeling and sweating blood from the pores of His skin in His agony in Gethsemane–the condition for being true in a relationship is sacrifice.

Disturbia

Last night, I went to the Faith Discussion Dinner that my friend JP hosts at his house each month. Here's a link to his new web site for details: http://www.faithdiscussion.org/

It's a fun night with lots of food and beer. In between the eating, drinking and general merriment, is the discussion. A topic of faith is chosen and the Protestant and Catholic speakers each have eight minutes to present their positions.

After the presentations, it's time for the (charitable) debate or QA session.

The topic was "Who has the authority to interpret Scripture?" Protestants say each believer does, Catholics say the final authority on Biblical interpretation is the Magesterium of the Church.

During the QA session, a woman on the Protesting-side asked a good question. If the Catholic has the Magesterium to interpret for him, why study the Bible at all?

After the debate ended, I went to go talk to her because she seemed very sincere in her question and since I am a "revert" to the Church I figured why not? We started talking. Our faith is not in a book, but in the person of Christ, who left us His Church with the power to "bind" and "loose," etc. etc. And I also quoted from Scripture, "The Church is the pillar and bulwark of truth." Nowhere in the Bible does it say it is the SOLE and FINAL authority. Even if it did, we don't believe it because it says so (for the Koran also says the same thing, but we don't believe in the Koran) but because the Church says so. The Church through her councils is what decided the Biblical canon in the first place. So here I am explaining all this to her and I finally come to the point that the word "Trinity" isn't in the Bible and yet we believe it. Of course, the Trinitarian believer can "find" it in the Bible, implicitly, but it is certainly not obvious, clear-cut, and it took the Church a long time to hash out. And then finally an authoritative council to make official.

She looks at me and says, "Oh, well, I don't believe in the Trinity."

You can imagine my shock as I thought I was speaking to a "Christian" in the Trinitarian-sense and definition.

But you know what? As disturbed as I was, her position is exactly what happens when you embrace what my friend Joe (a recent convert) calls Protestant personalism.

While the Protestant accepts the Church's orthodox teachings on the Trinity, the hypostatic union, Biblical canonicity, etc. he does not accept (or no longer accepts after the 16th C.) what his chosen denomination has decided not to accept.

By accepting the false and un-Biblical (find it for me...) notion of sola scriptura, you make yourself, not the Bible, the final authority and claim it as the Holy Spirit.

Well, then the Holy Spirit is dividing Christendom in 33, 800+ ways.

Obviously not.

As the Bible says, "The gates of Hades will not prevail against the Church."

Are we to gloss over this verse?

If you throw out the Church, eventually, like this woman, you run the risk of throwing out the most basic, fundamental, orthodox tradition of belief: the Holy Trinity.