Notes: Saturday-Tuesday, May 29-June 1, 2010

On this year's production of the Oberammergau Passion Play

An article posted at AQ contained the following paragraph:

Somewhat more removed from Church control is the Oberammergau Passion Play,the famous Bavarian portrayal of Christ’s Passion which is by now a huge commercial institution. This year, for the first time, the play is designed to emphasize that Jesus was a reform-minded rabbi who was unalterably opposed to institutions and hierarchy. Thus the new play demonstrates once again the dangers of interpreting Revelation without a guiding authority. Suddenly the Meaning of Life is determined by our own (or, more likely, some elitist director’s) vibes.
[http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31858
and that whole article is worth reading for its point about a teaching authority being necessary for the faithful transmission of any body of revealed truth]

There's also more on this silliness here("Jesus was against hierarchy and against institutions") and in the comments here.

Death of Mr. Geoffrey Chapman

From an obituary in Saturday's edition of The Sydney Morning Herald:

Geoffrey Chapman, 1930 - 2010

Sydney seminarians were Geoffrey Chapman's best customers in the Commonwealth when he began publishing Catholic books in the late 1950s.

Their support enabled him to build a small suburban press into the leading English language purveyor of the ideas that led to Vatican II.

When the council concluded, its documents, translated into English, aptly bore the imprint of Geoffrey Chapman. By then, he was the publisher of choice to the Vatican II generation of Catholics.

[...] At university, [Mr. Chapman and his wife] had been part of the vibrant Catholic subculture energising the Newman Society of Victoria. They had resisted B. A. Santamaria's attempts to take over the society. In London they made contact with like-minded Catholics in the church's main youth movement and offered to see through the press two collections of vanguard writings. Thus they discovered a vocation to be publishers.

On borrowed money Chapman travelled to the US, where Fides Publishers took him in and taught him the trade. ''They fed him, lodged him, encouraged and gave help, ideas, information and friendship,'' his wife later said. ...

[...] Soon, however, he and Sue were seeking authors of their own. An outstanding editor, Sue scoured the Catholic world to find writers who could explore the new territories opening up in church life. Many of her authors were French and all of them looked forward to a better church. Among these early books were essays by the Melbourne group gathered around the poet Vincent Buckley and lectures given in Sydney by an English scholar, Alexander Jones.

[...] The opening of the Second Vatican Council, in 1962, took Chapman to Rome, where he got to know and assess bishops and the experts brought to the council. Never overawed by bishops, he yet found lifelong friends in the hierarchy. One was the Archbishop of Durban, Denis Hurley, a courageous opponent of apartheid. Others were the Archbishop of Hobart, Guilford Young, star of the Australian bishops, and Cardinal Augustin Bea, the Vatican's point man on ecumenism.

When the Herald's Rome correspondent Desmond O'Grady alerted Chapman to the publication of a diary kept by the late Pope John XXIII, he rushed to Rome and sealed a deal giving him exclusive world rights to an English translation. Competitors were kept at bay, making its publication, in 1965, a coup for the Chapman firm. By request, first copies went to Buckingham Palace and to Pope Paul VI's personal library.

By then, Geoffrey Chapman publishing was well known throughout the English-reading world. Needing recapitalisation, in 1969, the firm was sold to a US conglomerate. A few years later, both Chapmans joined the William Collins firm as the nucleus of a liturgical publishing enterprise. Their task was to mass produce missals and service books in English in line with the Vatican II reforms of Catholic worship. Later they would do a broad ecumenical hymnbook for Australia and a multilingual prayerbook for South African Anglicans.

[...] His place in history is assured by the fact that no one can tell the story of Vatican II without reading the books he published.

[... Obituary by] Edmund Campion
[http://www.smh.com.au/national/obituaries/reformed-catholics-publisher-of-choice-20100528-wlb4.html?skin=text-only]

See also here and here. His enthusiastic involvement in the diffusion of the Spirit of Vatican II notwithstanding, may he rest in peace.

Prof. Ormerod on Vatican II

An article at CathNews mentioned the following about its author:

Neil Ormerod is Professor of Theology at Australian Catholic University. He contributed to the volume of essays, Vatican II: Did anything happen? He also has an article soon to appear in Theological Studies (Sept 2010), on the debate on continuity and discontinuity at Vatican II.
[http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=21520]

I would be interested to read both works.

More from Joshua on the Carthusian Rite

"The Modern Carthusian Mass":
http://psallitesapienter.blogspot.com/2010/05/modern-carthusian-mass.html

The Sybil on how The Diocese of Wollongong might report to Rome on its post-Summorum-Pontificum experiences

http://wollongongensis.blogspot.com/2010/05/time-to-get-that-report-ready-my-lord.html

The original Sodomites: The first recorded to complain about people being 'judgemental'!

Here's a comment which was posted at Fr. Zuhlsdorf's blog:

The first people in Scripture to cry “judgmental” were the Sodomites, who

surrounded the house; 5 and they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.” 6 Lot went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, 7 and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 Behold, I have two daughters who have not known man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.” 9 But they said, “Stand back!” And they said, “This fellow came to sojourn, and he would play the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them” (Gen. 19:4-9 RSV-CE).

Plus ça change...

Comment by Hieronymus Illinensis — 30 May 2010 @ 2:44 am
[bold and italics in the original,
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/05/being-judgmental-fr-finigan-hits-for-six/#comment-207277]

Vynette on Tradition

Here's a comment by Vynette, whom you might recall from her visit to Mr. Schütz's blog last year, in a thread at Catholica:

Roch,

You are assuming that the late "oral transmission" theory championed by so many biblical scholars is the correct one.

In fact, the New Testament is so full of Semitic syntax, vocabulary, idioms, and thought patterns that these intricacies and peculiarities could not possibly have survived years of oral transmission, particularly in a foreign environment and language [Greek], and then been written down in a foreign [Greek] language.

Some of the New Testament's apparently difficult passages can only be understood by studying the underlying Hebrew text.

In reality, the gospels we have now were written originally in Hebrew, or compiled from Hebrew notes, before the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.
["by vynette, Brisbane, Australia, Friday, May 28, 2010, 08:37 (4 days ago)",
http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=48884]

But if the New Testament "can only be understood by studying the underlying Hebrew text" (which Hebrew text we don't even have), then what good is it to those who aren't experts in Classical Hebrew and its literature and culture? We can't all be expected to attain that kind of expertise, so wouldn't some kind of teaching authority be necessary? With a Divine promise of indefectibility, such a teaching authority would be secure against the pitfalls from which oral Tradition would otherwise suffer.

An index fund aimed at Catholics

Here's a story from page 2 of yesterday's Sydney Daily Telegraph's Your Money supplement:

Many of us look for divine intervention when it comes to investing, so the answer may be upon us.

The Stoxx Europe Christian Index has been launched and the index fund has been Vatican-approved.

The fund is a compilation of 533 European companies that adhere to Catholic values, which means no profits from porn, gambling, weapons, tobacco or birth control.

Faith funds have been around for a long time. In fact, back in the 18th century the Quakers refused to invest in tobacco and the slave trade.

There are kosher funds in Israel and Sharia compliant funds operate through the Muslim world.

In Australia, we have ethically and socially responsible investment funds. Returns from these types of funds have been around the average.

H.H. The Pope on freedom of religion and its relation to democracy and development

BENIN: JUSTICE ALWAYS ACCOMPANIES FRATERNITY

VATICAN CITY, 28 MAY 2010 (VIS) - ...

[...] "I also wish to express my appreciation", [His Holiness] concluded, "for the efforts being made by everyone, especially the authorities, to strengthen relations of respect and esteem among the country's religious groups. Freedom of religion helps to enrich democracy and promote development".
CD/ VIS 20100528 (540)

Disappointing to see that kind of unqualified endorsement of 'freedom of religion', which, understood as a civil liberty, is evil in itself and is only conducive to the common good when it is the lesser of the two evils of, on the one hand, offences against the Catholic religion and, on the other hand, the disruptions which would result from repression of offences against the Catholic religion when there are many such offenders.

Blog/DB comments by me

At AQ:

"We were troubled with equating a living Catholic prayer for the conversion of Jews, newly endorsed by the Pope, with several obscure references from the Talmud that have no practical role in Jewish life today."

Really, "no practical role in Jewish life today"? Not according to Prof. Shahak:

"Of particular note, however, is the fact that the daily "blessings" of Judaism contain a curse against Christians. As Professor Israel Shahak of Hebrew University tells us, "in the most important section of the weekday prayer--the 'eighteen blessings'--there is a special curse, originally directed against Christians, Jewish converts to Christianity and other Jewish heretics: 'And may the apostates have no hope, and all the Christians perish instantly.' (20)" "
[http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/talmudic-touch-real-story-of-offertorys.html]

Furthermore, if someone says to you 'I will give you something which you would value greatly if you give me something which you value little' then you'd accept the offer, wouldn't you? So if a Catholic prelate says to Mr. Foxman 'We will given you something which you would value greatly--namely, the removal of liturgical references to the conversion of the Jews--if you give us something which you value little--namely, "several obscure references from the Talmud that have no practical role in Jewish life today"', then he should eagerly accept the offer, shouldn't he? Or is the Talmud more valuable to him than he is letting on?
[http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31844]

At Terra's blog:

Your comment has been saved and will be visible after blog owner approval.
[http://australiaincognita.blogspot.com/2010/05/church-and-mission-2-importance-of.html]

Cardinal Pole said...

There's a good comment at Fr. Zuhlsdorf's post on the topic--unsurprisingly, it turns out that the Sodomites (note the capital s) are the first people recorded as complaining about people being 'judgemental'!

June 1, 2010 4:26 AM
Your comment has been saved and will be visible after blog owner approval.
[http://australiaincognita.blogspot.com/2010/05/on-judging.html]

At Mr. Schütz's blog:

Cardinal Pole
June 1, 2010 at 5:30 am

In other words, it forbids the Social Reign of Christ and imposes the Social Reign of Pilate.
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/simon-shama-on-the-snares-of-history-for-the-secular-humanist/#comment-15040]

Cardinal Pole
June 1, 2010 at 5:32 am

I’ve been interested in the Australian experience of Vatican II for some time now, and so I checked out this programme’s website last week (the Compass website didn’t have a transcript). I suspected that the website’s “Talent profiles” page told me all I needed to know about its agenda: Not one of the priests interviewed could be bothered wearing conspicuously clerical attire, and the rest of the interviewees seemed pretty ‘Spirit of Vatican II’. If I understand correctly, did they not interview anyone who opposed the illicit marriage of Revelation and Revolution and the bastard rites which issued therefrom? Didn’t the producers think to visit an S.S.P.X. chapel and interview one of the older members of the congregation? They had a token Aborigine (despite the fact that, by the look of her, she wasn’t even old enough to remember the early post-Vatican-II period, though corrrect me if I’m wrong), but they couldn’t find a token Traditionalist? I suppose that that wouldn’t have ‘woven seamlessly’ into their ‘narrative’.
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/challenge-change-faith-catholic-australia-and-the-second-vatican-council/#comment-15041]

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Angela of Merici, Virgin, A.D. 2010

Notes: Friday, May 28, 2010

Unrest among the Nationals over Mr. Abbott's paid parental leave policy

http://www.smh.com.au/national/nats-keeping-mum-on-parental-leave-20100527-whuo.html?skin=text-only

Here're some excerpts from the article in today's Herald:

The policy is unpopular throughout the junior Coalition party for a variety of reasons but nobody wants to cause a split so close to an election.

One Nationals MP, Darren Chester, has gone public, telling Parliament yesterday that providing paid parental leave with nothing for stay-at-home mothers was discriminatory.

''It sends a message to the community that the government places more value on the offspring of working mothers than on the offspring of stay-at-home mothers,'' he said.

Mr Chester advocated a scheme in which mothers would be paid to stay at home until the child was ready for school. ''Returning to work and putting children into childcare often creates a giant money-go-round where no one is happy,'' he said.

[...] Several sources told the Herald the Nationals do not like the concept because it breaches the pledge to not increase taxes as well as offering nothing for stay-at-home mothers. There are a lot more stay-at-home mothers in the country where more families get by on single incomes.

''It's not the flavour of the month with us,'' said a senior National yesterday. Another said the party disliked the concept but considered the Rudd government a greater problem. To split publicly over the policy would hinder its goal of defeating the government, he said.

Views on paid parental leave are being vented internally as Parliament debates the Rudd government's $263 million taxpayer funded scheme. It will pay carers the minium wage of $453 a week for 18 weeks.

[...] Two National Party MPs, Kay Hull and Mr Chester, complained about the Coalition policy during Tuesday's party-room meeting, prompting Mr Abbott to declare the party had to move on from the Howard government view that mothers should stay at home with their children.

At the same meeting, Mr Abbott stressed the need for unity. In addition, the Nationals have already threatened a split on amendments to renewable energy target legislation.

In Parliament yesterday, Mr Abbott said women should not be forced to choose between career and family.

Mr Abbott had wanted to announce payments for stay-at-home mothers as part of his budget address-in-reply but was overruled by the shadow cabinet.

Discussion at CathPews on the increased frequency of late-term abortions in Victoria

http://members7.boardhost.com/CathPews/thread/1274929592.html

National Observer: Article on John F. Kennedy

The National Observer ("Australia's leading current affairs quarterly specialising in domestic and international politics, security-related challenges and issues of national cohesion") has been brought to my attention, and I thought I'd bring it to your attention too. It looks like a good publication. The latest issue has a review by Mr. R. J. Stove (an Australian Traditional Catholic and occasional commenter at this blog) of the book The Making of a Catholic President: Kennedy vs. Nixon 1960. Here's an excerpt:

At least Ku Kluxers avoided the responsibilities of cognitive stature. More subtle and equally obstreperous was the Protestant intellectual establishment of 1960, for which Kennedy’s presidential hopes meant a flagrant attack on the so-called "separation of church and state". Never mind that the US Constitution’s First Amendment, ostensibly guaranteeing this separation, guarantees no such thing. Never mind that outside America, Protestantism usually scorned church-state rifts (as the histories of Edinburgh, Geneva and Pretoria show). Never mind that Jefferson — usually credited with demanding "a wall of [church-state] separation" — was no Christian at all, but a crypto-Jacobin, Bible-doctoring Deist. Jefferson’s views have no more relevance to any Christian nation’s beliefs than do those of the nearest imam, bonze or lama (who, unlike Jefferson, does not claim Christological expertise). These uncomfortable data mattered nought. JFK called himself a Catholic; Catholics owed their first allegiance to a foreign power; ergo, JFK owed his first allegiance to a foreign power. On this syllogistic theme, America’s Protestant press devised seemingly inexhaustible variations, many of which displayed an obsessive terror that Kennedy, if elected, would prohibit contraceptives. (The press either did not know or did not care that every Protestant church in the world prohibited contraceptives until 1930.)
[italics in the original]

See also Mr. Michael Baker's recent website posts "ARCHBISHOP CHAPUT ON THE AMERICAN BISHOPS, JOHN F. KENNEDY & RELIGIOUS LIBERTY" and "MORE ON ARCHBISHOP CHAPUT, JOHN F KENNEDY & THE AMERICAN BISHOPS" for related comment.

"WA Premier against pre-abortion ultrasound"

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=21573

From yesterday's issue of the daily CathNews e-mail bulletin:

West Australian Premier Colin Barnett does not support a Liberal backbencher's call to make women seeking abortions first undergo 3-D colour ultrasound imaging and view the foetus.

Mr Peter Abetz, who made the proposal at an anti-abortion rally at Parliament House in Perth on Tuesday, said a study in the US had shown that 89 percent of women committed to having abortions had not gone ahead with the procedure when shown 3-D colour ultrasounds of the foetuses they were carrying, according to an AAP report in the Sydney Morning Herald.

Mr Abetz also would like to see a 48-hour 'cooling off period' after women have applied for an abortion, the report said.

But Mr Barnett told Fairfax Radio on Wednesday that he did not support mandatory ultrasounds.

"I understand what Peter is saying, but I think that would put a huge amount of personal pressure on someone who is already going through somewhat of a personal crisis, so I don't support that." [...]

On the Novus Ordo Missæ and one of the anathematisms of the Council of Trent

The following comment was made at Fr. Zuhlsdorf's blog:

@MichaelJ: I would certainly say that the translation is defective and expresses a falsehood.

I did not say that the translation was free of defects of accuracy but meant that the resultant text is free of intrinsic defects, meaning defects of faith, and that anyone who says otherwise is anathematized by decree of the 7th Session of the Council of Trent:

CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be contemned…let him be anathema.

Comment by C. — 27 May 2010 @ 6:06 am
[italics in the original,
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/05/uk-bishop-with-priests-using-new-translation-wordy-but-a-huge-improvement/#comment-206816]

Note the wording, though: Not just "approved", but "received and approved", which was also the teaching of an earlier Council (I can't remember which one). A recent issue of The Fatima Crusader dealt with this in one of its articles. The N.O.M. might have been approved (though even on that point doubts have been raised--see the S.S.P.X.'s American District website and Iota Unum, especially the translator's footnote in the Sarto House English translation), but its staunchest defenders could not say that it is a received rite--as everyone knows, it was cobbled together by a committee. Hence that anathematism does not apply to the N.O.M.

Joshua on the Carthusian Rite

http://psallitesapienter.blogspot.com/2010/05/placeat-sancta-trinitas.html

This post of his contains some interesting information about that Rite. Joshua mentions parenthetically that

It is a little-known fact that the wise Carthusians retain their own proper form of the Roman Rite, having reformed it in 1981, to produce a new edition of the Missale Cartusiense. Amongst many other appealing features, it contains:

•no penitential rite other than the Carthusian Confiteor;
•substantially the traditional one-year lectionary (with Epistle, Gradual, Alleluia or Tract, and Gospel);
•no modern Offertory prayers;
•none of those modern Memorial Acclamations;
•a rubric specifying that the Eucharistic Prayer is normally said secretly, others ordering it be said with hands extended in the form of the cross;
•no response "For the kingdom..." after the Embolism;
•and finally the Placeat.

and the whole post is worth reading.

Here's a comment I've left there:

Cardinal Pole said...

Thank you for this information about the Carthusian Rite, about which I have wondered.

"Well may we pray that this fine prayer is re-inserted into the Ordinary Form of the Mass!"

Indeed.

Friday, 28 May, 2010
Your comment has been saved and will be visible after blog owner approval.

Reginaldvs Cantvar

Friday in the Octave of Pentecost, A.D. 2010