The Progressive Dynamic: Tradition Part II

I have written the following in response to the questions raised by John Roop's comment on a previous post, found here: In short, John asks: ""Where do you draw the boundaries of Orthodoxy?" and related to this, "So, you draw the boundaries of Orthodoxy with the ACCA inside; they draw the borders with the ACCA on the outside. Who is correct, and on what basis do we judge?"

John, I am pretty sure that others have wondered about these things as well, so I thank you for giving me the opportunity for further clarification and explanation as to our stance on these matters.

APOSTOLIC vs. ORTHODOX

To begin, and as background, let me draw a distinction between "Orthodox" and "Apostolic". In speaking of the four communions, I am speaking primarily of the quality of apostolicity, as manifested in the presence of the apostolic succession of their bishops which, in each of these communions, comes down directly from the Apostles. Further, in speaking of the very high level of consensus that exists between them (even higher when one takes Rome out of the discussion), I was not thereby defining the Tradition. I was countering the argument that there is no intrinsic organic continuity, especially in belief and practice, between the Church of the Apostles and any community which exists today and that whatever traditions any such communion may hold are not necessarily helpful in understanding the Scripture, especially the New Testament. I was also showing that these four communions pretty much always agree with each other over against Protestantism. Obviously, a large segment of Anglicanism could be included in this consensus, but the problem there is that Anglicanism is so heterogeneous. So, no, I do not think this gives us a useful definition of "tradition" in this context.

In any case, "Orthodoxy" would be a sub-category. It is characterized in relation to Roman Catholicism and/or the Church of the East by adherence to either three or seven "ecumenical" councils; by an insistence that the Filioque, if not heretical, distorts the doctrine of God and was, in any case, added to the Creed improperly, only by papal fiat; by an ecclesiology that is counciliar from top to bottom; by an existential, non-legalistic, therapeutic approach to salvation which focuses on restoring communion with God and the healing of human nature damaged by sin and death: this process of salvation, of restoration, healing, and re-entering communion with God is summed up by the word "theosis" and is made possible, in the first instance, by the Incarnation. If this list is not exhaustive, it covers the main points of difference, particularly between the two types of Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. So then, the question of the ordination of women aside, it should be clear that the ACCA is, indeed, "Orthodox." In what follows, I shall argue that far from compromising our Orthodoxy, the fact that we ordain women in fact enhances and confirms it.

TRADITION AND DEVELOPMENT

But back to the question of tradition: the word itself is defined as "that which is passed on, handed over". But, when we come to the central question of this discussion, the possibility of women being ordained and functioning as priests and bishops, one must address the question of what COULD have been passed down and why it was not. We therefore also have to address the matter of "development".

The Orthodox, especially among the Byzantines, are often quite allergic to that word, and understandably so, in that it is usually associated with changes in Roman Catholic dogma and practice, especially in terms of things that the Orthodox find inherently unacceptable, even heretical. These issues include the addition of the Filioque to the Creed; the growth of papal authority and power, culminating in the decrees of the First Vatican Council; and "ex cathedra" statements made by Popes, statements which, according to Vatican I, are in and of themselves "irreformable" and thus, infallible. The one which the Orthodox find most problematic is the statement which defines that Mary was conceived without original sin, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.

However, as the late J. Pelikan points out, if one considers Church history, one must acknowledge the presence of development, but development of an organic sort. He compares the development of the Church to the development that occurs when an acorn becomes an oak. In contrast, I would speak of the development that has happened within the Roman Catholic Church, especially with regard to the Filioque and the Papal claims, as not being organic, but rather, as being "mutations" meaning that they at best distort that which has been handed down and, at worst, depart from it.

So then, if we admit the notion of development, we can look at the development that occurs in the early Church, say from the beginning to perhaps 200 CE. We will immediately notice much direct continuity: in comparing the New Testament with the writings of the early Fathers, we find nothing that is, in the final analysis, contradictory, either in terms of belief or in terms of behavior, either moral behavior or liturgical behavior. The question of Church order is more complex, but the bottom line is that the Bishops succeed the Apostles, first, while the Apostles remain on earth, as a college in each local Church, a presbyteral body under an Apostle and assisted by deacons; however, already in Acts, we find James the Brother of the Lord acting alone in overseeing the Church in Jerusalem, assisted by presbyters and then, served by deacons as well. As the Apostles depart this life, the model of "one bishop in one city" prevails, and we see that concept already firmly in place in the writings of Ignatius of Antioch. In a sense, this is not necessarily developmental, in that, along with the Apostles, Jesus had also appointed the Seventy to assist them.

But what of discontinuity? Well, it seems that the practice of communal living, found in Acts, was short-lived, perhaps never leaving Jerusalem. It is significant, I think, that in the Fourth Century, St. John Chrysostom deplored this fact, even maintaining that the Church of his time saw few signs and wonders precisely on this account. There is the also the matter of the status of Jews vs. Gentiles. In the earliest Church, Gentile male converts were first circumcised, converted to Judaism, before being baptized. However, according to Acts, this was changed at the "Council" of Jerusalem, as described in Acts 15, after Peter receives a vision from God telling him to preach to a group of Gentiles and, in the aftermath, he witnesses them receiving the Holy Spirit. Paul, also, is already routinely preaching to and baptizing Gentiles without requiring they be circumcised. While it occurs very early in the life of the Church, it nevertheless represents development, even as the Church's creation of the diaconate does, as recounted in Acts 6:1-6.

The Role of Women in the Earliest Churches

And the role of women? It is clear that women served the early Church in leadership roles, roles that would have included presiding at the Eucharist. There is Prisca, the "fellow-worker" of St. Paul, along with her husband, Aquila (interestingly, the Byzantine Church lists Aquila among "the Seventy" but not Prisca (diminutive: Priscilla). However, from the NT, it seems that she had the more prominent role in the Church. There is a growing body of literature dealing with this, but for now, I will mention only Ben Witherington's Women in the Earliest Churches which clearly demonstrates that women had leadership roles, and therefore sacerdotal functions, in the earliest Christian communities.

I don't think that Witherington deals with this example, but it is clear that there were female prophets in the earliest Churches. (See Acts 21:9) Indeed, according to the words of the Prophet Joel, which Peter quotes in his sermon at Pentecost, in the "last days," beginning at Pentecost, "God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; yea, and on my menservants and my maidservants in those days I will pour out my Spirit; and they shall prophesy." (Acts 2:17-18) The equality of women in ministry is a sign of the last days, both in general and in particular.

Now, we turn to the Didache, written before 100 CE. In it, we see Church order in transition. On the one hand, we note that the old ministries of Apostle (presumably in the broad sense) and Prophet are still around, and are still held superior to that of "bishops". However, all of these are Christian "High Priests" and all are, as one therefore might expect, authorized to preside at the Eucharist, the sacrifice mentioned in Malachi 1:11. But wait: we have just noted, have we not, that the early Church recognized the ministry of female "Prophets"!

This is but one indication of a relative equality in ministry in the earliest Christian Communities. Witherington discusses Prisca, and he notes that she is not the only woman that St. Paul refers to "fellow-worker," a term he uses for men like Timothy and Titus. Also, there is the matter of the unquestionably female Apostle Junia, and the fact that St. Paul, even while requiring that women have their heads covered in the Assembly, acknowledges that they "pray and prophesy" during worship, as he writes in I Corinthians 11:5.

So what has happened? Well, first, women continued to be called and ordained as Deacons until relatively late in the First Millennium, and the Greek and Coptic Churches have indeed revived that practice, although their ministry tends to be restricted. Also, in the First Millennium, there are sporadic denunciations of a bishop here, a bishop there, who is ordaining women as presbyters. What is noteworthy, however, is that it is not until the work of Roman Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas, early in the Second Millennium of the Christian Era, that anyone suggests that it is impossible to ordain women; rather, the denunciations say that women SHOULD not be ordained. Aquinas, for his part, says that women cannot be ordained because they are "defective males"; they are not, in effect, fully human. Of course, aside from any other consideration, this position is easily refuted by the most cursory glance at the first chapters of Genesis, which clearly indicate that both male and female are created in the image and likeness of God and that both together as well as distinctly, are called "Adam," meaning "human" (Genesis 5:1-2) Therefore, even though Aquinas is clearly basing his argument on a false ontology, Rome has uncritically followed him in this at least insofar as the RCC maintains that it is impossible to validly ordain a woman, to confer upon her the sacrament of ordination. We also note that none of the other sacraments are gender specific with the exception of marriage, and marriage requires one member of each gender.

Therefore, the question is not, "Can women be ordained to the presbyterate or episcopate?" but "Should women be so ordained?" Perhaps, between c. 100 CE and c. 1940, the answer was always "no", and today, it may be the case that in one place, one situation, a female priest is needed, while in another, one is neither needed or desirable. Along with the Byzantine theological writer Elisabeth Behr-Sigel, I advocate pluralism in this matter even as, after the Council of Jerusalem, the Messianic Jews continued to live according to Torah while recognizing that the Gentiles who were converting to Christ were not so bound.

There is also one other alleged basis for denying ordination to women, the "argument from ikonography". This refers to the biblical image of Christ as the bridegroom of the Church, his bride. The argument states that since the priest is alter Christus, he is, in a sense, married to the Church he serves. However, using this image in this way ignores the contrasting image, also found in Scripture, which is that of the Church as the "Body of Christ" and therefore, "the extension of the Incarnation". Obviously, neither image can be taken to the extent of excluding the other. To do so would be akin to arguing that since the Church is the ikon of the Trinity, it must have Three and only Three members!

Then, there is a consideration that has yet to be mentioned, the role of the Theotokos, the Blessed Virgin Mary. Beginning with the Annunciation, she shares in all aspects of her Son's ministry. She is Prophet, she is Queen, and yes, she is Priest. Together with her Divine Son, she offers Him in sacrifice to the Father as she stands at the foot of the Cross. She receives her ordination to the priesthood at the Incarnation even as she shows herself to be prophet in her utterance of the Magnificat (Luke 1:46-55).

We have seen that the earliest Churches included women at all levels of ministry but that this did not become part of the Tradition, that which is passed on, except with regard to women deacons, or deaconesses, but that it could have. But why was it not passed on? And, since it did not, can we justify the practice today? I believe we can.

PROGRESSIVE ORTHODOXY

As noted above, there is indeed progress, development within the life of the Church. This begins with the decision of Acts 15 (or even, with the creation of the order of Deacons). With this decision, one matter of division and domination, that of "Jew and Greek" in the words of St. Paul, is overcome. Over the next centuries, the Church and Christendom progressively address the matter of "slave and free". Until it raises its ugly head again in the early modern period with the European enslavement of sub-Saharan Africans, slavery all but disappears from Christendom. However, of these three divisions within humanity, all the result of the fall, it is clear that "male and female" is most basic. Humanity is created male and female but is not created, in the first instance, "Jew and Greek" and certainly not "slave and free" However, as a result of the fall, according to Genesis 3, patriarchy becomes the normal relationship between men and women. But, according to St. Paul, these three basic fault lines of humanity, along which not only division, but also oppression and domination arise, are overcome in Christ. And, the result, in the end, is the perfect freedom and equality of the Kingdom of God "which is to come" wherein God will be "all-in-all" and "everything to everyone". Thus, following Bishop Zizioulas, the life of the Church is not only grounded in that which is instituted by Christ in the past, but is also constituted, being pulled into the future by the Holy Spirit.

Now, as it happens, the first purpose of the Church is the salvation, the making whole, of distinct human persons. However, in the process, the Church also cannot help but affect the culture, and its associated institutions, in which she finds herself in any given historical period. Thus, the question becomes, in effect, "How does this question, or that issue, affect the possibility of bringing human persons into communion with God?" St. Paul, for example, does not take on slavery directly, but his mission and ministry begins a process which subverts, and eventually virtually eliminates, slavery among Christians. It is this same impulse that empowers the Christian abolitionists of the early modern period even as they confront this evil more assertively. In the case of the question of Jews and Gentiles, God intervenes directly, demonstrating that Gentiles, too, were called to Christ and that apart from circumcision. In the case of women, both apply. At least in the West, it has become increasingly the case that more and more people are concerned with moving beyond patriarchy, and if the Church is to be engaged, it must address this question in one way or another. Also, Christian women increasingly testify to having a call to ordained ministry, including at least one RC Saint, Terese Martin, "the Little Flower". And, in those places where women are ordained to Christian ministry, including to the priesthood, as in Anglicanism and in certain of the Independent Orthodox/Catholic Churches, including the ACCA, the testimony of those receiving the ministry of these women is almost always positive. "By their fruits you shall know them." And, once again, we can place this in the context of the words of Joel, quoted by Peter at Pentecost: "In the last days, your sons and your daughters shall prophesy."

The late J. Pelikan has famously said that "tradition is the living faith of the dead while traditionalism is the dead faith of the living." Because the Church moves toward the kingdom, because salvation entails the healing of humanity, both in terms of individual persons and humanity as a whole, fidelity to the Tradition must be dynamic or it, in fact, ceases to be fidelity and becomes something else. Patriarchy, ethnic differentiation and conflict, and socioeconomic stratification and oppression are all results of the fall, but in Christ, they are conquered and will eventually be completely overcome. The Church is called to witness to this, not only verbally, but also in the way in which it lives its life.

Therefore, the ACCA claims to be Orthodox in terms of a dynamic adherence to the Tradition that, I think, will eventually be found as well in the mainstream jurisdictions of the two forms of Orthodoxy, in Roman Catholicism, and in the Assyrian Church of the East. Who judges? In the end, God. Until then, however, history will judge. "By their fruits you shall know them."

Two Feasts in Mid-August

Today, August 14, and tomorrow, August 15, mark two Christian celebrations, the first being primarily Roman Catholic (but commemorating a martyr who could well be celebrated by the universal Church) and the second being indeed a celebration of the Church throughout the whole world.

Today is the anniversary of the martyrdom, the heavenly birthday, of a Polish Franciscan friar who sacrificed his life by way of the Nazi yoke in 1941. His name is Maximilian Kolbe. Briefly, after the Nazis divided Poland with the Soviets in September, 1940, Fr. Kolbe took up resistance activities, including sheltering refugees, Jews and others, from the Nazis. In February 1941, he was arrested by the Gestapo and transferred to Auschwitz in late May of that same year. A little later, a prisoner disappeared and the Commandant, thinking that he had escaped, decreed that 10 prisoners would be starved to death in retaliation. One of these men cried out in distress for his wife and children and Fr. Kolbe, having not been initially chosen, volunteered to take this man's place.

Father and the other men were confined together in one cell. He celebrated Mass for them as long as he could, using unleavened bread and wine smuggled in by sympathetic guards, andvhe comforted the men with his words and presence, leading them in songs and prayers. He told them that they would soon be with the Blessed Virgin Mary in heaven. Fr. Kolbe had a deep devotion to the Blessed Mother, "the Immaculata" or "sinless one". Finally, he alone survived, and was then killed outright with an injection of carbolic acid. The full story, from Wikipedia, is found here. According to Jesus, "Greater love no one has than this, that one lays down their life for their friends."

August 15, of course, marks the dormition, the "falling asleep" and the assumption of the Blessed Virgin, body and soul, into heaven. This is indeed a celebration of the universal apostolic Church. The blessed Mother of our Lord, "the first of the redeemed," is first in all things after her Divine Son and completely shares in both his suffering and his glory. Thus, she is the first to experience the resurrection after him in that her soul and glorified body are reunited in heaven. A fuller account, from Orthodoxwiki, is found here.

From the Byzantine Rite, here is the Kontakian (Tone 2) for the Dormition of the Theotokos, the Mother of God:


"Neither the tomb, nor death could hold the Theotokos,
Who is constant in prayer and our firm hope in her intercessions.
For being the Mother of Life,
She was translated to life by the One who dwelt in her virginal womb."


"Through the prayers of the Theotokos, Oh Savior, save us!"

Nativity 2009 (Part 3)

First, a Christmas hymn in Syriac:

(P/T Priest Theodosius Walker)



Note that an English translation is given in the video.

Second, an annual Christmas post from Fr. Stephen, quoting St. Ephrem the Syrian and emphasizing the smallness and humility of God as manifested in the Christ child. Pope Benedict XVI spoke in similar terms last night during his homily at Midnight Mass.

"The Smallness of God"

And finally:

"Sharon's Christmas Prayer" by John Shea, apparently published originally by Argus Communications, back in 1977. Argus Communications also brought us a book called The Last Western by Thomas Klise. Hard to get these days, but well worth the effort.

(P/T Abu Daoud)

She was five,
sure of the facts,
and recited them
with slow solemnity
convinced every word
was revelation.
She said

they were so poor
they had only peanut butter and jelly sandwiches
to eat
and they went a long way from home
without getting lost. The lady rode
a donkey, the man walked, and the baby
was inside the lady.
They had to stay in a stable
with an ox and an ass (hee-hee)
but the Three Rich Men found them
because a star lited the roof
Shepherds came and you could
pet the sheep but not feed them.
Then the baby was borned.
And do you know who he was?

Her quarter eyes inflated
to silver dollars,
The baby was God.

And she jumped in the air
whirled round, dove into the sofa
and buried her head under the cushion
which is the only proper response
to the Good News of the Incarnation.


"The baby was God."

My Exchange with Don Warrington

Don Warrington is a lay leader in the Church of God, a classical Pentecostal Holiness denomination. He was raised in the Episcopal Church and was, for a time, Roman Catholic. Thus, his journey is almost exactly the opposite of mine. In any event, a while ago he posted a piece called "Why I don't agree with the Concept of the Sacrifice of the Mass". I posted a comment in reply, found at the bottom of the post. Don then posted the following: "Priesthood, Analogical and Formal: A Reply to Fr. Greg on the Sacrifice of the Mass" and I again replied, by way of a comment to this post. Don then posted "More on the Eucharist, Churches, and Priests". Primarily for convenience sake, I had hoped to confine this discussion to Don's blog, but I am concerned that my latest reply is too long for the comments section. Thus, I am posting it here.

Don, what you have written concerning the end of sacrifice assumes that the foundational purpose of sacrifice is dealing with sin. This is not the case: sacrifice, being grounded in the Intra-Trinitarian Divine Life itself, in the kenotic relationships between the Divine Persons, and, by extension, in the relationship between humanity and God, as creature and creator, precedes the Fall and its primary purpose is communion between God and humanity. (See A. Schmemann, For the Life of the World.) The shedding of blood, the slaughter of biological creatures, only becomes part of sacrifice with the Fall: “without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.” This is true, in short, because sin kills. Further, not even all of the sacrifices in the Jewish system involved the shedding of blood. There were offerings of incense, grain, wine, and then, there was the “Bread of the Presence” all of which point to the Eucharist (Incense is a separate issue, but is closely associated with the celebration of the Eucharist.) So, the Eucharist is a real sacrifice, offered by real priests, not so much for the expiation of sin (In this context, baptism and the Mystery/Sacrament of Reconciliation are for the appropriation of that), but for the worship of, and communion with, the Divine Persons of the Most Blessed Trinity.

Regarding Participation/Koinonia: That would work if this participation in the Divine Life were only individual, interior, and psychological. However, it is not. Human participation in the Divine Life is interpersonal and communal, both interior and exterior, and both psychological and sociological, just as is human life itself, created in the image and likeness of the Divine Trinitarian life. Again, one cannot be reconciled with God and at the same time be alienated from his kindred who are also “members of Christ” and are thus, “members one of another” as St. Paul writes.

You write: “In Roman Catholicism at least the idea is stronger than that: through the withholding of the sacraments (excommunication,) the church is capable of denying eternal life.”

Actually, the concept is the exactly the opposite. Church discipline is exercised in order to bring someone to repentance and thereby, to eternal life, never to deprive anyone of eternal life. Remember that if the Eucharist is received unworthily, such reception, far from bringing the receiver closer to God, does just the opposite, subjects the one who so receives to Divine Judgement, and endangers their participation in eternal life (I Cor. 11:27-32). Also, in all the Apostolic Churches, all Church discipline ends at the time of death; the person in question is released into the hands of the ultimate judge, Jesus Christ himself. As further evidence of this, all priests are duty bound, in the case of danger of death, to administer the last sacraments to anyone, regardless of standing with the Church, at the least sign of repentance (construed in the most general of terms): all disciplinary bets are off (or, if the person is unconscious, the priest is to presume repentance and so to administer anointing and absolution). Further, the question of infallibility doesn’t real enter into questions of discipline per se. Thus, your numbered points are at best a caricature.

With that in mind, let me address this question of discipline with regard to the issues you raise. I will return to the question of Church unity afterward. First, I am not defending Rome against the other Apostolic Churches. It has distortions which are unique to it, specifically with regard to the Filioque, Papal infallibility, and an ecclesiology which, in reality, denies the laity any role in the governance of the Church. The other Apostolic Churches, modeling their governance and the teaching role of the clergy on Acts 15, do not do this (at least not in theory, and when the bishops get out of line, this aspect of ecclesiology can always be invoked, as it often has been).

Now, having said that, and without in any way minimizing the pain inflicted on the victims, such as the martyred Archpriest, I have to ask: would you also abrogate or abolish the authority of parents over their children? Would you deny that such authority is of Divine origin? After all, many parents neglect or abuse their offspring and in so doing, inflict untold damage. (I myself am a victim of such parenting.) However, according to the Bible, both the authority of parents over their children and the authority of bishops in the Church is of Divine origin; and to abolish the latter because it has been abused would be highly analogous to abolishing parental authority: chaos results.

Just look at the world of Protestantism today: the baby has been thrown out with the bathwater. At best, leaving aside such debacles as have occurred in many of the mainline Protestant groups and focussing only on Evangelicalism, the sacraments have become optional and often disparaged and Christians have lost touch with the great spiritual tradition of the Saints which is bound up with the 2,000 year history of the Apostolic Churches. They are “blown about by every wind of doctrine, being treated to “the prosperity gospel”, “the purpose driven life” and other such aberrations.

The great principle of the Reformation, “sola Scriptura” is contradicted, meaning that, in the name of sola Scriptura, much of the Bible is in fact ignored or explained away and the interpretation of the rest of is impoverished. Why? Because, “sola Scriptura” contradicts the Bible and thus, is self-contradictory: it is an oxymoron. The Bible points beyond itself, not only to Christ, but to the Church, and the Tradition of said Church is the only nexus in which the Bible itself can be fully and accurately understood. Further, while the Churches are always in need of practical reformation (not dogmatic reformation) to one extent or another, our primary task, as individual Christians, is not to reform the Churches, but to cooperate with the Holy Spirit, through the ministry of the Church, in the transformation of each of us as persons so that we conform to the image and likeness of Christ. The fundamental rule of thumb here is Matthew 23: “do what they say but not what they do.” The Christian path has long been laid down: it is simple, but no, it is not easy. So many would seek an easier softer way, and it is so much easier, and more gratifying to remove the speck from your eye than to remove the plank from my own. (Yes, I’m aware of the irony here.)

Now, regarding the Churches proper, those communities which, all else being equal, have maintained Apostolic Succession: actually, there are four communions which can trace their history directly back to the Apostles. These four are: the Roman Church, the Byzantine Orthodox Churches (Greeks, Russians, etc.), the Oriental Orthodox Churches (Coptic Church, Syriac Church, etc.), and the “Nestorian” Assyrian Church of the East, the East Syrian Church. (I have not included Anglicanism here because it is not clear to me that Anglicanism as a whole has in fact maintained valid Apostolic Succession. In any event, it is an off-shoot of Rome and would therefore be included in the next category.) Beyond these four, there are various off-shoots: for example, the Old Believers, the Old Calendarists, the RC Traditionalists, and the Old and Independent Catholics and the Independent Orthodox (not all of these successions stem from the aftermath of Vatican I), the latter having given rise, in one way or another, to virtually all of the Independent Churches of which you speak. (Many of these jurisdictions have fallen away into their own forms of craziness. Others have remained orthodox. In what follows, I am considering only the latter. While valid apostolic succession is necessary for a community to be fully a Church, it is not sufficient.) All of this, of course, begs the question of the “Oneness” of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

IMHO, the one Church is so divided, in the providence of God, for several reasons. The first is that when it comes to the really essential and basic questions, the “fundamentals,” these Churches speak with one voice (and yes, they all say that the Christian priesthood is real and that the Eucharist is a real sacrifice). Thus, even while separated and divided, they give a unanimous witness to the core content of the Apostolic Tradition. Second, it is MHO that these divisions came about to accommodate human weakness. This is especially manifest in contemporary America, where all of these major Churches are present and we have a full slate of Independents to boot. As a nation, we are a rebellious lot. Our country was forged in the fires of a revolution and reforged in the furnace of a civil war. We take no less kindly to overbearing ecclesiastical authority than we do to such political authority (although we are generally all too ready to tolerate overbearing, presumptuous, and arrogant leadership and authority figures in the business sector, but that is another story).

Can’t deal with Rome? You got the Byzantines (who are also divided, if not separated, in this country). Can’t deal with any of the big boys? You got the Independents. There is no need to tolerate a situation in which the sacraments are downplayed or dispensed with and the Faith is mutilated, abrogated, or both. There are options!

As you may be aware, I am a priest of one of these Independent Churches. While we are not overtly charismatic (being grounded in the Oriental Orthodox West Syriac Tradition), many of these Churches are, and I think that these lines of Apostolic Succession provide a viable alternative for the re-catholicization of Evangelical/Charismatic/Holiness congregations, even denominations, that have come to realize they have hit a dead end. Personally, given that I grew up in an eclectic Evangelical/Pentecostal/Holiness environment (Christian and Missionary Alliance, Assemblies of God, Church of the Nazarene), I would love to personally lead such a congregation (or denomination!) back to the fullness of the Faith once delivered; however, that opportunity has yet to come my way.

Maximilian Kolbe, Priest and Martyr

In the Roman Church, today commemorates the victory of Maximilian Kolbe, a Polish Franciscan imprisoned by the Nazis. Fr. Kolbe gave up his life so that another prisoner, a man with a wife and children, could live.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, another martyr of the Nazi yoke, wrote, "When Christ calls a man, he calls him to die."

This theme of the Christian life as necessarily involving self-sacrifice and asketic struggle has come up in several places lately. Here are three:

Second Terrace: "When History Passes You By"

OrthoCuban: "On Wounds Borne For Us"

Anselm's Godblog: "Sacrifice"

and, the struggle on the cosmic level, within the human heart:

Glory to God for all Things: "The Last Battle"

A Life Well Lived...

An elderly Roman Catholic woman dies in Billings, Montana.

She was also African-American. There are few Black people in Montana and even fewer Black Roman Catholics.

Her life should inspire us all.

Frances W. Dixon

A Prayer for Priests

(Phiro tip to Philip Gerard Johnson)

"O Jesus, I pray for Your faithful and fervent priests, for Your unfaithful and tepid priests; for Your priests laboring at home or abroad in distant mission fields; for Your tempted priests; for Your lonely and desolate priests; for Your young priests; for Your dying priests; for the souls of Your priests in purgatory.

"But above all I recommend to You the priests dearest to me: the priest who baptized me; the priest who absolved me from my sins; the priest at whose Masses I assisted and who gave me Your Body and Blood in Holy Communion; the priests who taught and instructed me; all the priests to whom I am indebted in any other way. Jesus, keep them all close to Your heart, and bless them abundantly in time and in eternity. Amen".

"For all the clergy and all the faithful, that their prayers may be a stronghold for us, let us pray to the Lord. Kyrie Eleison" - West Syriac Rite, ACCA use.

Please keep all bishops, priests, and deacons in your prayers, especially me, the most unworthy priest Gregory.

A Mormon College Student converts to Roman Catholicism

Following a link from the blogroll on "StellarCross", the blog of my friend, Fr. Rob Lyons, I first read about Levi Checketts in Robert King’s "Thou Shalt Blog" at the website of the Indianapolis Star.

Checketts, 21, is a Junior at the University of Notre Dame, majoring in Arabic and Theology. Although he grew up in a Mormon family in the small town of Vernal, in northeastern Utah, he was baptized into the Roman Catholic Church at the Easter Vigil, less than two weeks ago, at Notre Dame.

I spoke with Checketts on the phone earlier this evening because I wanted to learn more about his journey from the LDS Church to Roman Catholicism. Checketts says he comes from a deeply devout and committed multi-generational LDS family, one in which the family prays together daily, attends church weekly, and which sent its sons and daughters to both Sunday school and “seminary”, a religious education program for elementary and high school students which takes place during the week, usually before school. He says his two older brothers went on their expected missions. Checketts says he has always been keenly interested in religion, in religious texts, and for that reason chose to study both Theology and Arabic at Notre Dame, even before deciding to become Roman Catholic. He says he always did well in the religious education programs in which he participated while growing up in the LDS Church.

He says he began questioning his Mormon faith largely because no one was willing to pin down a time for what is called the Great Apostacy, the idea that the original, apostolic Church completely abandoned the faith and lost the priesthood, only to have it restored by Joseph Smith. Checketts says he was always taught, growing up, that this apostacy coincided with the death of the Apostles but that now, the LDS Church is teaching that it occurred later, but is not specific on the question. He says that the LDS Church lays great stress on certainty in all matters religious, but that it seemed unable to answer the questions, such as this one, he was beginning to ask. He says he also found it impossible to conceive of a god who would abandon his people, his Church, entirely because some members, even some leaders, were losing fervor.

Finally, Checketts says, he decided to follow the instructions found in the Book of Mormon. He prayed, he says, “The most important prayer of my life.”

Moroni 10:4-5, in the Book of Mormon, reads: “And when ye shall receive these things [the teachings of the LDS Church], I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.”

Checketts says he had been taught that if he did this, and waited, the truth of Mormonism would be confirmed for him by a physical sensation, sometimes called “the burning in the bosom”. Nothing happened; however, he was not yet ready to become Roman Catholic. This did not come until about a year ago, when he says he attended a Roman Catholic silent retreat over Spring Break. Those directing the retreat suggested that the retreatants use the time to pray for discernment over anything that was bothering them, that they felt they needed “to clear up”. So, Checketts says, he prayed about whether or not he should become Roman Catholic, and by the time the retreat had ended, he had a clear answer.

Last September, as a new academic year began, he entered the RCIA program at Notre Dame, and was baptized a little more than a week ago.

One commenter on King’s blog post asserts that Checketts’ conversion was probably a matter of peer pressure, that one could not “party” at Notre Dame while holding to “Mormon values”. Checketts denies he is a partier, says he found the comment "offensive," and he wonders if the commenter himself may be, on some level, questioning his own Mormon faith. He says that other Mormons, not related to him, have responded with "more charity" and have been "more ecumenical" about his conversion, even if his own family is still coming to terms with his decision.

Checketts says he is, for the second year running, President of a group of Notre Dame students that tutors neighborhood children in South Bend, Indiana, where Notre Dame is located. He says he is also involved with various international cultural programs for students. “I am trying to make the most of my educational opportunities,” he says. He also says no one at Notre Dame ever tried to convert him, that everyone he encountered there had been respectful of his previous Mormon faith.

As far as the future is concerned, Checketts says he plans to get a Ph.D. in Theology and then, to teach. When asked about the possibility of the Roman Catholic priesthood, Checketts chuckles. “I don’t think my girlfriend would like that very much,” he says.

Lenten Reading

I have just finished a book by Barbara Tuchman, called A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century. A work of popular history (Tuchman was self-educated but, for all that, still won a couple of Pulitzers), the book largely draws upon primary sources to deal with the Hundred Years’ War between England and France, fought intermittently over a century and more, almost entirely on French soil. However, it also casts a spotlight across Western Europe and beyond during the period, extending into the 15th Century. The book’s focus is the life of one French nobleman, Enguerrand VI, the last sire of Coucy, a large holding in the North of France, near the English Channel, and a distant ancestor of a future French monarch. As the title implies, Tuchman is writing with an eye toward viewing the contemporary world through the reflection cast upon it by an era long past.

The period in question is characterized by a number of phenomena which are traumatic by any standard: black death (Tuchman takes the conventional view that this was bubonic plague; others have argued, convincingly to me, that the medieval plagues were rather a form of hemorhagic fever, perhaps caused by Ebola or a close viral relative), which reduced population levels by as much as 50 percent over a century; interminable fighting, not only between England and France or between Christendom and Islam, but also in private wars between various nobles, the results of which, through destruction of crops and other disruptions, disproportionately affected the lives of those at the bottom of the socioeconomic pile and therefore least able to cope; openly regressive taxation; popular uprisings; conspicuous consumption by nobles, wealthy merchants, rising bureaucrats, and the upper clergy; widespread sexual profligacy; and so on.

From a Christian point of view, perhaps the most depressing characteristic of this period is the relationship between the Church and the rest of society. While all of society was nominally Christian, few seemed to take the Church's teachings seriously, the only exception perhaps being just prior to death. The Papacy was, for many years, ensconced in the “Babylonian Exile” at Avignon. Since Avignon was in France, and these Popes mostly French, they were largely instruments of French Imperial Policy. On the attempt to return the Papacy to Rome, prompted by St. Catherine of Siena, a longstanding schism was created, resulting in two Popes, one in Avignon, the other in Rome, and all of Western Europe was divided. England and France, of course, were on opposite sides of papal allegiance. From the Pope(s), down to the poorest parish priest, everything the Church had to offer was for sale. This, of course, gave rise to various reform movements, all of them more or less heretical, which prepared the way for Luther, Calvin, Cranmer, and the rest, and, providentially, for the reforms of the Council of Trent, two centuries later.

For all that, however, the era was not without signs of hope, primarily manifested in the careers of Saints. Catherine of Siena was one of them. Joan of Arc was another. Besides these, many man and women, religious and lay, worshiped, celebrated and received the sacraments, prayed, fasted, cared for the sick and helped the poor, motivated by their love for the suffering Christ and His sorrowful Mother, manifested in the sufferings of men and women with whom they lived and worked. Inspired and healed by the Holy Spirit, these men and women, of course, are the hope of the world; they were then, and are now. It is because of their prayers and other activities that societies do not collapse into utter chaos. During Lent, inspired by their examples, let us dedouble our efforts to contribute, in whatever way we can, not only to our own salvation, but to the survival, if not the salvation, of the whole world.

The new Vatican Channel on YouTube

Check it out.

YouTube: Vatican's Channel

New Blog and Call to Prayer

(Phiro tip: De Cura Animarum)

I am adding a link to another blog on the right: "In Caritate Non Ficta", written by Philip Gerard Johnson. A graduate of the United States Naval Academy, Johnson was serving as an officer in the Navy until he was diagnosed with a brain tumor which is apparently inoperable. He has also been discerning a call to the Roman Catholic priesthood, of which he speaks here and he is scheduled for a needle biopsy on January 7, 2009.

Please keep Philip in your prayers and have him remembered at the altar. Visit his blog and leave a comment, letting him know that you are praying for him.

"Yes, but is it bread?"

A post by Mollie Ziegler Hemingway, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod writer at Getreligion, discusses an article (with video) in the Boston Globe, featuring The Cavanagh Company, a Rhode Island-based firm that makes unleavened hosts for the Eucharist, as used in Latin Rite Roman Catholic Churches as well as Anglican and Lutheran congregations. Cavanagh, “the Microsoft of altar breads,” apparently has an 80% market share.

First, let me make clear that neither I nor the ACCA are inherently opposed to the use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist. We take the view that bread, any bread, whether leavened or unleavened, is valid matter for the central celebration of the Christian faith, while also noting that for our Armenian brethren, both Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic, unleavened bread is normally used to celebrate the Divine Liturgy. Pluralism is proper here, at least between Rites, in that the use of leavened bread is rooted in one sort of symbolism, unleavened in another, and both are informed by the Gospel: Christ is free of “the leaven of the Pharisees” while at the same time, He is the new leaven which causes “the whole lump to rise”. I also have to say that I am impressed with the Cavanagh family’s development of technology which allows them to mass produce a product that is edible, reasonably bread-like, and largely crumb-free, which is always a concern with altar bread. It is not easy to make such unleavened bread. Believe me, I’ve tried, and the results have not been edible. Futher, unleavened bread is a great deal easier to work with once it is consecrated, especially when it comes to the reservation of the sacrament.

One bit of irony, however, has to do with the idea that Cavanagh communion bread is “untouched by human hands” prior to its being used to celebrate the Eucharist. Consider the prayer with which the bread is offered, in the contemporary Roman Rite, during the “Preparation of the Gifts”:

“Blessed are you Lord, God of all creation, through your goodness we have this bread to offer which earth has given and HUMAN HANDS HAVE MADE. It will become for us the bread of life.” (Emphasis added)

The bread and wine are means by which, in the Eucharist, we Christians offer ourselves, our world, and our work to God. This is why, in Eastern Christian circles, it is normal for the Eucharistic bread (leavened in most Eastern Christian traditions) to be made by a priest or by a member of the congregation. I myself make leavened eucharistic bread for use on special occasions. Further, there are still Western Rite convents and monasteries which make unleavened altar breads. For these monks and nuns, this work is both ministry and means of support, and it certainly involves "the work of human hands". Another institution which makes these breads is St. Michael's Bakery, in the Netherlands. Started as a school for the deaf in early 19th Century, it now provides occupational therapy to those in need. St. Michael's altar breads are available in the United States here (from a company which also sells Cavanagh breads).

Another bit of irony in this article has to do with the attitude apparently taken by members of the Cavanagh family to their product: “no reverence”. “Until it’s consecrated by the priest, it’s just bread,” they say. The problem here is that bread, any bread, is potentially the Body of Christ. Therefore, it, and by extension, all food, is to be treated with a certain amount of deference, especially bread which is being made specifically for the Eucharist. Contrast this attitude to that of a Russian immigrant women, once employed in a fine restaurant. She left this job shortly after starting because she was required to dispose of bread left uneaten by the patrons. “I have to throw away the Body of Christ!” All bread is potentially the Body of Christ, all wine His precious blood. This is directly related to the Christian giving of thanks, not just in the Eucharist, but before consuming any food or drink.

Dorothy Day's 111th Birthday

...is today. Deacon Greg Kandra has a tribute, including an interesting story about Day and the Eucharist. (The anniversary of her repose is Nov. 29.)

"Happy Birthday, Dorothy Day"

Back in 2000, Day, who fell asleep in the Lord in 1980, was found to have been a "Servant of God". In the Roman Church, such a finding is the first step on the path to being declared a Saint.

An Open Letter to Barack Obama

John L. Allen of the National Catholic Reporter, a well-respected writer for a publication that is not well-respected in some circles, has written an open letter to the President-Elect, explaining that, differences notwithstanding, the "Vatican...believes that the United States is its most natural ally in promoting religious freedom and human dignity around the world", even a United States led by someone with whom it differs on abortion and embryonic stem cell research. Allen concludes by saying:

"For what it’s worth, Mr. President-Elect, my advice is to get on the phone if the pope calls. Better yet, initiate the conversation yourself. You might be surprised about where it goes."

Read it all and you can also check out comments from Fr. John "Save the Liturgy Save the World" Zuhlsdorf here.

Too bad none of the Orthodox patriarchs, Byzantine or Oriental, are also heads of state.

Two Interesting RC posts and an excerpt from "The Church is One"

"Are you born again?"

"All sacrifices will cease but one"

and, from Fr. Stephen, the excerpt from Khomiakov:

"From Khomiakov's "The Church is One".

All three are relevant to my next post.

Election '08: What hath Washington to do with Jerusalem (or Constantinople)?

From John Allen (not my brother-in-law) at the National Catholic Reporter:

"Serious Catholics wind up 'politically homeless" in America"

On a purely practical level, Allen may be right about the need to "hijack" one of the major parties, but I have long thought that the U.S. needs a viable "Christian Social Democratic Party" precisely because of this situation. Allen is certainly right when he opines that the various factions in the American RCC need to be talking with each other as well as with others, such as Orthodox Christians.

And from Fr. Jonathan Tobias, a Byzantine Orthodox priest:

"Endorsement, and a Platform, for 2008"

which contains no endorsement, but does contain a great deal of good information as well as Fr. Jonathan's usual incisive and insightful commentary.

And, somewhat relatedly, Fr. Stephen (and the Ecumenical Patriarch) on creation:

"When Creation Speaks"

Underlying any authentic Christian approach to the environment is a recognition of the latter's sacramentality, potential and actual.

Blogging Once Again: A Response to Abu Daoud

Yes, things have been quiet around here lately. But not necessarily in my actual life, and this may have something to do with why the muse has been rather silent. As I mentioned in a comment on the last post before this one, I returned from Chicago to find that, for economic reasons, I no longer had a secular job. However, God was good, and that situation prevailed for only a couple of weeks before I found another such job, a job which, in several ways, is better than my previous one.

And, speaking of Chicago, Junior is doing very well, as are the Cubs. May this be their year! Thanks to all of you, especially Ttony and Alice, for your prayers and expressions of concern and support. Please keep the prayers coming. Alice, you of course have been in my prayers for some time, and I have now begun to remember your sister and her husband and daughter as well.

But that’s not why I called y’all here today…

Several days ago, Evangelical Anglican missionary Abu Daoud, of Islam and Christianity, wrote about attending a Roman Catholic service in which a man was ordained a priest. In the post, "Attending a Catholic ordination: where's the teaching ministry? " AD contends that the preaching, teaching, and evangelizing aspects of the priesthood were not sufficiently stressed in this liturgy. After reviewing the text of the service, I noted that I did not share that perception, and I still don’t, so I thought I’d take a look at that liturgy in this post.

I may be wrong, but I don’t think the liturgy is online (although the old rite is found here). In any event, the ordination takes place during Mass and begins after the gospel reading when the ordinand, already a deacon, is presented to the bishop. After the bishop states his intention to ordain the man a priest, the bishop preaches a homily on the meaning of priesthood. The service itself includes a text for the homily, although the use of this text is optional. In most RC ordinations I have attended, this homily has been pretty much used verbatim, with occasional extemporaneous expansions. It is possible that the bishop veered off the text entirely at the service AD attended. Nevertheless, this homily certainly does not ignore the ministry of the priest in the areas of preaching, teaching, and evangelizing. (In the quotes which follow, emphasis is added.)

In the first paragraph, the homily alludes to St. Clement of Rome, speaking of Christ being sent by the Father, who sent the Apostles, who in turn sent “their successors, the bishops” to continue Christ’s “work as TEACHER, Priest, and Shepherd,” then noting that priests, presbyters, are co-workers with the order of bishops.

In the next paragraph, the homily states, “[The priest] is to serve Christ the TEACHER, Priest, and Shepherd in [Christ’s] ministry, which is to make his own body, the Church, grow into the people of God, a holy temple.”

From the third paragraph: “By consecration [the ordinand] will be made a true priest of the New Testament, to PREACH THE GOSPEL, sustain God’s people, and celebrate the liturgy, above all, the Lord’s sacrifice.”

Then the bishop addresses the ordinand directly (I love this paragraph):

“My son, you are now to be advanced to the order of the presbyterate. You must apply your energies to the duty of TEACHING in the name of Christ, the chief TEACHER. SHARE WITH ALL MANKIND the word of God you have received with joy. Meditate on the law of God, believe what you read, TEACH WHAT YOU BELIEVE, and put into practice what you teach.”

The bishop continues:

“Let the doctrine you TEACH be true nourishment for the people of God. Let the example of your life attract the followers of Christ, so that by word and action you may build up the house which is God’s Church."

The next two paragraphs deal with sacramental ministry, especially the Mass, as well as the priest’s duty to pray for all. Finally, the bishop concludes:

“Always remember the example of the Good Shepherd who came not to be served but to serve, and to SEEK OUT AND RESCUE THOSE WHO WERE LOST.”

Next, in a rubrically mandated dialogue between ordinand and bishop, the latter asks the former to “declare before the people your intention to undertake this priestly office.”

There are four questions, and the ordinand replies “I am” to the first three, “I am, with the help of God” to the fourth. The first and last questions are general: “Are you resolved…to discharge without fail the office of priesthood…?” and “Are you resolved to consecrate your life to God for the salvation of his people…?”. The second question deals with the sacraments. The third question reads as follows: “Are you resolved to exercise the MINISTRY OF THE WORD worthily and wisely, PREACHING THE GOSPEL and explaining the Catholic faith?”

After preliminary prayer, the chanting of the Litany of the Saints, the ordination proper takes place. The ordinand kneels before the bishop, who lays hands upon the former in silence, followed by the same action by all the priests present. The bishop then offers the Prayer of Consecration.

The first two sections of this prayer note that the Christian priesthood of bishops and presbyters is rooted in the ministries of the High Priest and priests of Israel. Then we read, “….you gave companions to your Son’s apostles TO HELP IN TEACHING THE FAITH: they PREACHED THE GOSPEL to the whole world.”

Then follows two paragraphs, the second of which is considered necessary for the validity of the ordination, asking essentially that the ordinand be made a priest.

The prayer offered by the bishop then concludes:

“May [the ordinand] be faithful in working with the order of bishops, so that the WORDS OF THE GOSPEL MAY REACH THE ENDS OF THE EARTH, and the family of nations, made one in Christ, may become God’s one, holy people.”

The rest of the service, culminating in the newly ordained priest concelebrating Mass with the bishop, is not directly relevant to the question at hand, but it should be clear from the above that the priestly ministry of the word is prominently presented in the contemporary RC service of ordination to the priesthood. What say you, AD (and others)?

Passing the peace: It ain't half-time, folks

British Traditionalist Roman Catholic Ttony, whose blog is called “The Muniment Room”, relates here that a priest is thinking of founding a “Society of Pope Paul VI” in order to perpetuate the current Novus Ordo celebration of the Mass in the face of “the reform of the reform” in Roman Catholic matters liturgical. One of the practices apparently at issue is the celebrant leaving the altar to greet congregants at the exchange of the peace. Reading this inspired me to describe how the peace is exchanged in the Qurbana, the Divine Liturgy or Mass, of the ACCA:

First, just before the beginning of the Anaphora, or Eucharistic Prayer, the celebrant offers a prayer for peace. The following, from the Liturgy of St. James, is typical:

"O LORD and God of all, account us unworthy ones to be worthy of this salvation, that freed from guilt and united in love we may greet one another with a kiss of peace and offer to † Thee glory and thanks and to Thine Only-begotten Son and Thy Living Holy Spirit, One God, in both worlds unto the Aeon of aeons."

The congregation responds: "Amen. Barekhmar!"

“Barekhmar” means, “Master, bless”.

The celebrant then takes “the peace of Christ” from the gifts upon the altar and from the altar itself, making the sign of the cross upon the corporal. This is called “taking power from the Mysteries”. He then turns to the congregation and blesses them, saying

“Peace be † with all of you”

The congregation responds: “And with thy spirit.”

The celebrant then turns to the deacon, taking the deacon’s hands between his, and repeats this exchange with the deacon alone. The deacon then goes to the congregation and “passes the peace,” as above to one member of the congregation, who then does the same with the person next to him, who then repeats the same exchange with the person next to him, and so on. Thus, the peace of Christ is passed, from one member to another, one by one, throughout the congregation. Finally, the deacon receives the peace from the last member of the congregation, and returns it to the celebrant, who returns it to the gifts and altar, thus completing the circuit. The celebrant then begins the anaphora with the three-fold dialogue. All of this is done “decently and in order” and the congregation has expressed its mutual reconciliation, indicating that all are one with the celebrant in offering the Holy Sacrifice. The celebrant, however, does not need to leave the altar and “the passing of the peace” is not turned into “half-time”. (If there is no deacon, a server takes the role of receiving the peace from the celebrant and delivering it to the congregation.)

Beyond words...(Updated)

"A Minnesota professor and science blogger has said he will personally desecrate the Eucharist and publish photos of the desecration on the internet if any of his readers acquire a consecrated Host and mail it to him. “I’ll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare,” he has written.

"Paul Zachary Myers, an associate professor of biology at the University of Minnesota at Morris, made the threat while commenting on a University of Central Florida incident in which a student senator stole and held hostage a consecrated Host from a June 29 Mass."

"Minnesota professor encourages theft and desecration of Eucharist"

I am reminded of the words of Pope Paul VI, of blessed memory: "If you knew what the Mass really is, you would die for it."

Alice's comment, below, is very well taken, and I should have said the same thing initially. Indeed, let us all pray for Myers and all who are like him. Let us also persevere in repentance, as called for in the following from an RC priest:

"A Priest's perspective on desecrating the Eucharist..."

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." II Chronicles 7:14 (KJV)

"...the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God..." I Peter 4:17a (RSV)

New Saints, Beati, and Venerable Servants of God

I love the Saints. Right down to this very day, this very moment, they witness to the fact that God has not given up on us, that the Holy Spirit remains active in the here-and-now, bringing the redemption, forgiveness, and healing of the Divine Son to all who will receive it via the Church, His Mystical Body and Bride. Thus, the Saints of all ages remain signs of hope, and none more so than those who were our contemporaries: "God IS with us" and because of that, because God is manifested in the Saints, they too are with us, praying for us before the Throne of Grace and even, perhaps carrying out missions here on earth. Consider, for example, the various apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Theotokos, or the reported interventions of St. Therese of Lisieux, the Little Flower, who stated, "I will spend my heaven doing good on earth". Further, their diversity, including the various traditions out of which they come, witness to the possibility of the return of the divided Churches and ecclesial communities to full communion with each other. Regardless of tradition, all Christians can embrace the sanctity manifested in people coming from traditions other than their own.

As with so much else, the Roman Church is very organized when it comes to identifying those with the potential to be recognized as Saints. For non-martyrs, the process is three-fold. The first phase investigates whether or not the potential Saint lived a life of "heroic virtue". Generally, this process cannot be initiated until five years after the person has departed this life (and never before his or her repose). A positive determination of this by the Pope results in the person being declared a "Servant of God" and being given the title "Venerable". The second and third phases, resulting in the title "Blessed" and "Saint" respectively, each require that a miracle be attributed to the person's heavenly intercession. These miracles usually take the form of a medical cure from a serious illness which cannot be explained by medical science and for which the intercession of the potential Saint was sought.

Which brings me to the following: According to Zenit, a Rome-based RC news agency, the Pope has accepted the validity of a miracle brought about by the intercession of Blessed Father Damien, a nineteenth century Belgian priest who ministered to lepers in what was then the Kingdom of Hawaii. Thus, Fr. Damien will soon be recognized as a Saint by the universal Roman Church. Another miracle has been attributed to the intercession of the Servants of God Louis Martin and Marie-Zélie Guerin Martin, St. Therese's parents, so they will become known as "Blessed". Here is the Zenit article: "Miracle attributed to St. Therese's Parents: Heroic Virtue Recognized in Italian Youth Who Died in 1990".

It is this last potential Saint that I really want to focus on. Her name is Chiara Luce Badano. She was born in 1971, the only child of a truck driver and his wife, a devout couple who had been unable to conceive during their previous eleven years of marriage. Involved with one of the "new movements" of the RCC, called Focolare, also known as "the Work of Mary," Chiara was diagnosed as a teenager with terminal cancer and died on October 7, 1990, a few weeks before her nineteenth birthday. I urge you to read the article linked to her name above, found on a Focolare website. She is indeed an example for all, young or not-so-young, who aspire to follow the forsaken Christ crucified.

"Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints."