Holy and Great Lent 2007

The goal of spiritual struggle is not the acquisition of virtues, or of any other strange abilities solemnly through human powers, as it is believed by those who belong to various humanistic circles. On the contrary, it is the expression of our desire to meet the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, in whom everything is recapitulated, and though whom everything is derived. The Word of God, the Logos, preaches most clearly that without Him we cannot do anything, and the Hymnographer reminds us that unless the Lord constructs the house of virtues of the soul, we struggle in vain. Therefore, we Christians devote ourselves to the love of Christ, and we give up voluntarily many other kinds of love and devotion that are of secondary importance, so that we will become worthy of His presence in the house of our souls. When this is achieved, with the grace and blessing of God, then peace, joy, and perfect love will have settled permanently in our very existence.

The spiritual struggle should be practiced with joy and its main goal should be to introduce our heart into the love and joy of God, though which every sorrow and vindictiveness, and every complaint and protestation against our fellow men and women is expelled from us. In its place we will then have the unshakable and great peace of God that will radiate all around us.

May we all pass through the arena of Great Lent with spiritual struggles, so that we will be able to enjoy in all its fullness the joy of the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, Whose Grace and rich Mercy be with all of you.

+ Bartholomew of Constantinople Your fervent intercessor before God

Pope Benedict gave an unsparing account of European cultural collapse in his talk to participants in a Rome conference marking the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome: the pact that led to the establishment of the European Union. The conference was organized by the Commission of European Episcopal Conferences (COMECE), and centered on the theme of "Values and Perspectives for Europe's Future."

The Pope seized upon that theme, demanding that European leaders recognize the crisis that has been created by the failure to embrace the spiritual and cultural heritage of their continent. His speech reflected his dismay that the Rome Declaration, issued to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Rome treaty, did not mention the influence of Christianity.

Pope Benedict stated flatly that "it is unthinkable that we can build an authentic common European house by disregarding the identities of the peoples of this continent of ours. It is an historical, cultural and moral identity even before it is a geographic, economic or political reality. It is an identity built on a set of universal values in which Christianity played a role in molding them, which gives it a role that is not only historical but also foundational vis-à-vis Europe."

It appears, the Holy Father said, "that the European continent is losing confidence in its future." As a result, he said, the European Union "seems to be on a path that might lead to its twilight in history."

Pope Benedict to the Commission of European Episcopal Conferences

The Commission of the Bishops Conferences itself produced a more anodyne statement.

We follow with great interest the dialogue between the heads of State and Government, the President of the European Parliament and the President of the European Commission, seeking a shared solution which will allow us to come through the present period of reflection in Europe. We hope that whatever the institutional solution that is found, it safeguards human dignity and the values which flow from it, such as freedom of religion in all its aspects. It must protect the institutional rights of Churches and of faith communities. It should also explicitly recognise the Christian heritage of our continent. It is through a dialogue on and for the common good of our citizens that we shall best contribute to that strong social cohesion which, today, is so important and so necessary for Europe.

As Christians, in our communities, in our associations and movements, we will contribute with our commitment to promote those initiatives which authentically respect human nature created in the image and likeness of God, as revealed in the person of Jesus Christ, and thus promote authentically reconciliation, freedom, peace, solidarity, subsidiarity and justice. In the process of the continentâ??s integration, as recalled by Pope John Paul II, â??it is of capital importance to remember that the union will lack substance if it is reduced to its merely geographic and economic dimensions; rather, it must consist above all in an agreement about the values which must find expression in its law and in its lifeâ?? (Ecclesia in Europa, 110).

The statement was short on theology and ended by commending Europe to the Virgin Mary, but the Commission of the Bishops Conferences tried and perhaps that is the main thing. Now to get conferences of bishops in the UK, Anglican or Catholic, to produce some sort of statement.

The Society of St. Catherine of Siena will hold its annual Mass in anticipation of the Feast of St. Catherine at 6.15 pm on April 17th 2007, at St. Etheldreda's church, Ely Place, off Holborn Circus, London EC1.

Holy Mass will be celebrated by Fr. Andrew Wadsworth in the presence of the Rt. Rev'd. Malcolm McMahon OP, Bishop of Nottingham and Chairman of the Trustees of the Society. Bishop McMahon will preach and give the final blessing and the music will be provided by the Choir of Ely Place under the direction of Mr. Paul Gillham. Permission has been sought for the Mass to be in the rite of the Roman Missal of 1962. You are warmly invited to attend, and light refreshment will follow in the crypt.

This one might be a bit scary, but I'll go if you go.

In general, I would counsel complete avoidance of litigation â?? in concert with the explicit teaching of the Gospel â?? and instead encourage civil disobedience in cases where Christians choose to oppose the depredations of TEC leadership. But is this even a witness we are called to make? Anglicanism has its own sorry history of intolerance and injustice within its midst â?? we remember the whole-scale driving out of clergy in and after the English Civil War by both sides â?? and these kinds of conflicts among self-styled followers of Christ have long-lasting and scandalizing results. Simply leaving, however, is something that grates, though perhaps primarily against our pride. I recall only several months ago, at the diocesan convention of Colorado, that a diocesan leader (now appointed by the bishop to a Taskforce on our â??common lifeâ??) publicly confronted me and demanded that I â??and my kindâ?? â??leave the church and let [them] get on with ministryâ??; we were nothing but â??dying embersâ?? bringing division and sowing anger within the church. Part of me would like to prove these kinds of affronts simply wrong. Such a motive, however, would be base. There is no point dying with the church, unless one is ready to struggle for the truth. But there is no point struggling for the truth if the struggle leaves one bitter and hostile, aimed against adversaries instead of praying for them in love. If one is not called to the radiancy of joyful sacrifice, it is better to leave. And hope is radiant and ready.

In the end, however, I would urge our continued hope that the larger Communion â?? and not simply this or that individual leader or group, whose own discernment is often rather limited â?? will offer the kind of encouraging and supportive direction we seek, indeed that they shall in fact come forward with a Pastoral Council capable of meeting the needs of Anglican witness within the United States such as the Communiqué recommended. This would require the kind of corporate vision and courage (not Don Quixote individualism) on the part of â??Camp Allen Principledâ?? bishops that is necessary for them to step forward, offer their own readiness to work with such a Council, and suffer the consequences of their witness and leadership. We are now in the fullness of time for such a demonstration of hope! And we shall all need to hold steady in seeking this direction and support, and come together with a common sense of its need and usefulness.

Ephraim Radner What Way Ahead?

Leander Harding - An Open Letter to Bishops and Deputies who Participated in General Convention 2006 Below are some conclusions I have developed as a result of my observation both by following the official deliberations and through more informal conversations. I wonder if I have heard correctly, and I welcome remarks from bishops and deputies about whether I have an accurate take on the center of opinion in the national leadership of the Episcopal Church. What follows are statements that I believe reflect the consensus of opinion in the national leadership of the Episcopal Church, particularly as reflected in the General Convention that just met in Columbus, Ohio. Do I understand correctly?

As I hear it, you are saying that:

5. The recognition of the source of same-sex desire in the original intention of God for the creation and humanity is a revelation of the Holy Spirit in our time.

6. The General Conventions of 2003 and 2006 are witnesses to this new revelation of the Holy Spirit.

8. Certainty in moral or theological judgments which is based on an authoritative reading of a text, whether that is the text of the Bible or any other part of the dogmatic tradition of the church, is inherently an example of over-reaching.

9. Contemporary reports of personal spiritual experience by same-sex attracted people and their supporters affirming the spiritual blessedness of same-sex relationships provide a basis for moral and theological certainty on this question which the scriptures and the traditional teaching of the church cannot by virtue of the nature of the documents provide.

10. Christians who feel bound by the scriptures should understand that the fact that there are different interpretations of the scriptures which touch on same-sex attraction means that no single interpretation can possibly be authoritative.

11. Since the scriptures cannot possibly be authoritative on this issue and since self-reported spiritual experience provides the only reliable certainty on the subject, any objections to same-sex blessings on the basis of scripture are irrelevant a priori.

16. It is wrong for any other province of the Anglican Communion to interfere with the leading of the Holy Spirit in this province. What the Holy Spirit demands at any particular time must be determined locally.

19. A variety of interpretations of scripture can be tolerated in the church. But the canons of the church, especially with regard to the territorial integrity of Episcopal jurisdiction, allow for no variation in interpretation.

20. The proposal of the Archbishop of Canterbury for a new Anglican covenant, and for churches to choose constituent or associate status in the communion, represents a dire threat to the capacity of the church to respond to the leading of the Holy Spirit. It represents the prospect of a quenching of the Spirit.

21. The General Convention of the Episcopal Church has been uniquely privileged to hear from the Holy Spirit in a way that has been denied to the rest of worldwide Anglicanism, the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox churches and Protestant Evangelicalism. The Episcopal Church must at all costs maintain its witness to the unique agency of the Holy Spirit in its midst. Those who oppose the new teaching are enemies of the Holy Spirit who are making an idol of the past at the expense of the future to which God is calling us.

These numbered observations above are my take on what the dominant party in the leadership of the Episcopal Church is saying.

Leander Harding Do I understand what you are saying?

The relationship between Eucharist and communio had already been pointed out by the Servant of God John Paul II in his Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia. He spoke of the memorial of Christ as "the supreme sacramental manifestation of communion in the Church". The unity of ecclesial communion is concretely manifested in the Christian communities and is renewed at the celebration of the Eucharist, which unites them and differentiates them in the particular Churches, "in quibus et ex quibus una et unica Ecclesia catholica exsistit". The fact that the one Eucharist is celebrated in each Diocese around its own Bishop helps us to see how those particular Churches subsist in and ex Ecclesia. Indeed, "the oneness and indivisibility of the eucharistic body of the Lord implies the oneness of his mystical body, which is the one and indivisible Church. From the eucharistic centre arises the necessary openness of every celebrating community, of every particular Church. By allowing itself to be drawn into the open arms of the Lord, it achieves insertion into his one and undivided body." Consequently, in the celebration of the Eucharist, the individual members of the faithful find themselves in their Church, that is, in the Church of Christ. From this eucharistic perspective, adequately understood, ecclesial communion is seen to be catholic by its very nature. An emphasis on this eucharistic basis of ecclesial communion can also contribute greatly to the ecumenical dialogue with the Churches and Ecclesial Communities which are not in full communion with the See of Peter. The Eucharist objectively creates a powerful bond of unity between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches, which have preserved the authentic and integral nature of the eucharistic mystery. At the same time, emphasis on the ecclesial character of the Eucharist can become an important element of the dialogue with the Communities of the Reformed tradition.

SACRAMENTUM CARITATIS

Communities, rather than churches, of the Reformed tradition, eh? Still, the emphasis on bishop and diocese is there. Surely it is not too much to ask for an academic forum in the UK in which we can discuss documents such as these?

THE vote by 168 to 122 in the House of Lord's tonight (21 March) in favour of the Government's Equality Act (Sexual Orientation Regulations) 2007 marks the imposition of a new morality.

It is a clear sign that despite saying they were going to consult and listen the Government has failed to respect the consciences of citizens whose values are formed and shaped by their deeply held religious beliefs, be they Christian, Muslim or Jewish. This could have been easily resolved by a simple conscience clause.

In a week where the whole country celebrates the 200th anniversary off the Abolition of Slavery, brought about, by and large, through the determined efforts of William Wilberforce, we would do well to remember his driving force and motivation stemmed from his Christian conviction. History will record that today's vote marked the increased secularisation of Britain confining faith to private thought, rather than public manifestation in works of service for the whole community.

The consequences and implications of the SORs will unfold month by month. The result of the vote will mean that rather than balancing rights, the right to live a homosexual lifestyle will trump the right to live a Christian lifestyle. Many Christians will be affected by this new law.

Andrea Williams Christian Concern for Our Nation

Here is CARE's statement of two weeks ago

SECULARISATION MASQUERADING AS EQUALITIES SAYS CARE Christian charity CARE has reacted with concern to the Joint Committee on Human Rights’ attempt to redefine what is meant by religious liberty in its highly controversial report published yesterday.

‘The committee is effectively making the case that religious freedom, as per Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, is about belief in one’s head and the freedom to worship in religious buildings. Thereafter, if ever there is a conflict between manifestation of religious belief and any other right like sexual orientation, there is a first principle assumption that religious freedom is the category that must be compromised.

Daniel Boucher director of parliamentary affairs continued, ‘The truth is that the heart of the Christian faith and freedom to practice that faith has never been restricted to beliefs in one’s head or prayer meetings in religious buildings. It has always been about action. The work of Christians in welfare service provision has always constituted an absolutely central part of the outworking their faith. Indeed, as the book of James makes clear, ‘faith without works is dead.’ On this basis reducing the heart of religious freedom down to beliefs in one’s head and prayer meetings in religious buildings does not even constitute the erosion of religious freedom but in a very real sense its negation.

Although the report is ostensibly about sexual orientation rights, it reads rather more as a secularists bid to reduce religious freedom masquerading as support for gay rights. The truth is that any credible definition of religious freedom must embrace a respect for practice which whilst not absolute (See Article 9 (2)), is not overruled as a matter of course whenever there is a conflict with another right.’

Theology of the Body Explored St. Patrickâ??s, Soho Square, London.

March 23 Jane Deegan: â??Love is Victorious in the Struggle between Good and Evilâ?? (GA June 27th 1984)

IV. Reflections on Humanae Vitae

April 27 Edmund Adamus: â?? The Churchâ??s Position on the Transmission of Lifeâ?? (GA August 22nd 1984)

May 11 Dan & Anne Hill: â??A Discipline that Ennobles Human Love.â?? (GA Aug 28th 1984)

May 25 Alison Gray â??The dignity and vocation of woman and her role in the Churchâ??

Conclusion: Review of course and Discussion on ways of establishing your own Theology of the Body Group â??

June 8 Love and Responsibility â?? Theology of the Body

Previous post on theology of the Body in London and other events in London

Benedict XVI and the Sacred Liturgy The Pontifical College Josephinum, Columbus, Ohio 20-23 September 2007

Sing praises to the Lord, O you his faithful ones, and give thanks to his holy name. Weeping may linger for the night, but joy comes with the morning. It is good to be in time, and to celebrate these ends and beginnings in our morning and evening prayer. These boundaries of day and night mark out our time for us, allow us to work and to stop working, and to look back and forward.

We are preparing for Easter. At Easter God completes his act of creation by raising one of us. The one he raises has attached himself to all the rest of us, so the raising of the first is the beginning of the raising of the whole lot, all humanity, each of us joined to every other. This human being is complete continuity with us but is now no longer constrained by our biological limits, so his life is not given its form by death, as ours is. He is now able to pass his life on to us without limit. Easter is a preview of the consequences of this for us: Christ’s resurrection is a preview of our resurrection, which is the moment when our boundaries between us and him, and between us and one another, cease to be an end, like death, and instead become just markers, like day and night.

Raised from the dead, Christ is the whole colossal future of humankind. He is our future, present here for us to get used to. In every Church service Christ is the one doing the work. He is praying to the Father, and it is our privilege to listen and join in. He takes away from us what we cannot manage, all those half-truths and misdirected worship, and sends it all to God for its redemption and renewal.

Christ is the universal person. He calls and names, hears and waits for all, he works for all and draws all to make them human, together. The work he is engaged in here is to make us compatible with one another, holy, catholic persons, his communion of saints. He makes himself present to us by making all these other persons, who will together make up our future, present to us.

The Son stands at the front of every Church service, and presents us to God. So when you look up the Church you are seeing Christ holding out to us all the elements of our future selves. We see first the book of Scripture, and then the bread and cup, the Word of God which is also the sacrament, the power of God to make us holy. All the good things that are coming to us are made visible and tangible to us here in these small tokens. There are many ways of spelling this out; the bread is our humanity as it is, tattered and ragged, made of the created earth as we find it, and the wine is humanity as it is with Christ, in complete relation with the Father and thereby fully human. But bread and wine are just the visible front end of the whole created order that serves us and brings us first into existence and then into the communion of God.

You see of course the figure who holds out the bread and cup to us, the priest. Christ makes himself present to us in the strange form of one of us, dressed in the dark cassock of Christ’s poverty and humiliation, and the bright white surplice of humanity made radiant: in that combination we are hologram of ourselves as we are, poor, and as we will be, radiant.

So Christ makes himself present as these elements, and this priest. It wouldn’t be right if we left it like that, for the priest is no priest without the people. That figure up at the front represents all of us with Christ. What Christ chiefly gives us is people, along with the means to receive them, not simply as they presently are, but as they will be. He is the whole human, and the universal human-to-human mediator, who is now opening us up so we can receive one another as gifts of God, and together become members of the vast company that he presents to the Father. He does the work here and we are his passengers. Christ makes himself present in the words that fill our mouths. When we sing Christ’s words we are possessed by the future, in his person.

There are plenty of good resources on these issues of eucharist, church and ministry. Recent crises have brought out some clear statements from the Anglican Communion about the sending and receiving apostles from the worldwide church and learning from them to become a single, holy, catholic and apostolic people. Here are three tiny sound-bites from the Anglican Communion website. One: The bishop serves the communion of the gospel into which the baptised are incorporated by God the Holy Spirit; Two: The bishop’s evangelical office of proclamation and witness is a fundamental means by which those who hear the call of God become one in Christ; Three: The bishop is a teacher and defender of the apostolic faith that binds believers into one body.

The Anglican Communion is teaching us here that the whole Church sends each part of the Church a gift – and that gift is an actual living apostle, whom we call the bishop, from episcope, meaning oversight, because he represents the oversight of the whole Church on us. He is the communion of saints conveniently made available to us as one person. Because he is well versed in the whole gift of Christ given to the historical church from the earliest time until now, he can open the Scriptures with the experience of the whole church, and so he brings the whole Christ to each congregation.

It is the bishop’s job to make sure that what we hear and see here is also explained to us. This service, which is Christ’s service first and our service second, is a reasonable sacrifice, an articulate rational public event. What Christ and we are explaining – and inviting people to – is their own real identity. The mission to explain what is going on here does not begin after the service: but must be part of what is going on in the service. The service extends itself into everyday ordinary time, because we do not leave the service so much as take the service with us wherever we go. Each of us is this church service in person, the presence of the company of God, made visible in one person, for the world.

Our life here is the holy life. If we are holy the world will see it. This is the work of the Holy Spirit, who makes the Church holy, and only the holiness of the Christian people can hold out to the world what it does not yet have. If we do not feast on the whole Word and power of God we let down our society, and are too weak and confused to be able to help them for whom we have been put here. But if we tune out the noises of the world for a bit, we will hear heaven, which is all the earth wants to hear.

What is it we repent of in Lent? We repent of being an untaught church, that substitutes activism for worship, that assumes that it is more inclusive than those who came before us. This cup we drink sometimes is bitter, because there is confession, repentance, even penance in the mix. We must dump at the altar our belief that we know better than the historic Church and let it go. What is it we give up in Lent? We turn down the volume on the world, and in particular on its media, and for these few weeks opt out of their celebration so we can prepare for our celebration – so that at Easter, we can be together in good array, in this place, stopping the traffic with our Palm Sunday songs – so our society can see a holy people and be glad.

So, in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and in view of his return I urge you: proclaim the message; be persistent whether the time is favourable or unfavourable; convince, rebuke, and encourage, with the utmost patience in teaching.

You, Israel, "You are my servant, I have chosen you"; do not fear, for I am with you, do not be afraid, for I am your God. To him be the glory forever and ever. Amen.

This was the week that the leadership of the Catholic Church in England and Wales disgraced itself. Pope Benedict XVI issued one of the most significant documents written by a pontiff for many years â?? and the English bishopsâ?? â??communications networkâ?? effectively killed the story.

Real anger is building up in the parishes over the bishopsâ?? behaviour, which led to the document â?? Sacramentum Caritatis - a historic, 60-page statement on the Eucharist and the Liturgy â?? receiving minimal coverage in most secular newspapers.

Why did the Bishops of England and Wales keep silent? Inevitably, conspiracy theories are already forming, suggesting that they didnâ??t like the contents of the document. And Iâ??m sure that some of them didnâ??t. Pope Benedict calls for all new priests to be trained to say the new rite of Mass in Latin â?? he has yet to pronounce on the future of the Old Rite â?? and for a return to Gregorian chant. He also seems to shut the door on the prospect of married priests. Not the sort of thing that the English Churchâ??s right-on employees like to promulgate.

But those are side issues. The real point of Sacramentum Caritatis (Sacrament of Love) was its fabulously lucid and intellectually daring synthesis of Catholic teaching on the centre of the Churchâ??s life â?? the Eucharist, or Holy Communion. Reading the exhortation, I was awestruck by the quality of Benedictâ??s thinking: this is the most intellectually gifted pope for centuries.

Damian Thompson Shameful silencing of the Pope

We are near the end of term at last. We have all had some virus which has slowed things right down.

I was about to give up on Wednesday’s paper for Heythrop, but in the last twenty-four hours managed to write something on Williams and O'Donovan on secularism which seemed to go all right. A reasonably-sized group, most in their fifties, their questions expressing the apparently unchanged English Catholic assumption that the ‘Church’ is a vast oppressive institution. I forget how surprised people are when you talk about the Church as the act of God and act of love, or indeed about society as created by love. I have not managed to write anything on Benedict on secularity, secularism and reason, which was what I first intended that paper to be.

I got the ‘Theology of John Zizioulas’ proofs back to Ashgate with index and Liviu’s bibliography; its cover uses the one reasonable photo of the man I got last year and all in all it looks OK.

So, this weekend, intercessions, evensong and sermon. My cough is going to make us all wish we had changed the rota. Then a short paper on Zizioulas on bishop and ecumenism for the STT, then the Spaemann review and we have another go at setting this Deep Church seminar on its feet. Then the Eschatology paper. Then Easter and new baby. Then the Dogmatics lectures. Those are the edited highlights from me. I am catching up on email now, I promise.

So you Londoners, I hope you will come to the next Deep Church session, and that you will book your place at the big theology-in-London event of the year, the Colin Gunton day conference in September

36. The "subject" of the liturgy's intrinsic beauty is Christ himself, risen and glorified in the Holy Spirit, who includes the Church in his work. Here we can recall an evocative phrase of Saint Augustine which strikingly describes this dynamic of faith proper to the Eucharist. The great Bishop of Hippo, speaking specifically of the eucharistic mystery, stresses the fact that Christ assimilates us to himself: "The bread you see on the altar, sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what the chalice contains, sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ. In these signs, Christ the Lord willed to entrust to us his body and the blood which he shed for the forgiveness of our sins. If you have received them properly, you yourselves are what you have received." Consequently, "not only have we become Christians, we have become Christ himself." We can thus contemplate God's mysterious work, which brings about a profound unity between ourselves and the Lord Jesus: "one should not believe that Christ is in the head but not in the body; rather he is complete in the head and in the body."

Apostolic Exhortation SACRAMENTUM CARITATIS on the Eucharist as the source and summit of the church's life and mission

Is that it? One quote from Augustine, offered without further development? I want to be taught, not tantalised.

Ah well, you can't re-state the basics too often, so I am grateful.

St Andrew's Institute for Theology, Imagination & the Arts is holding a conference on

THE OFFENCE OF BEAUTY - What can a theological perspective on beauty offer to the arts today? 3-5 September, 2007

Speakers include:

Bernard Beatty (Liverpool) Professor Jeremy Begbie (St Andrews) Dr Carol Harrison (Durham) Professor Trevor Hart (St Andrews) Professor Robert Jenson (Princeton) Professor Nicholas Wolterstorff (Yale)

The colloquium takes place at a time of considerable and growing interest in the intersections of theology, beauty and the arts. Its particular concern is with the concept of beauty, and what a Christian theological perspective on beauty might have to offer to the arts today.

In recent decades, among those who practise, think and write about the arts, the notion of beauty has often come under deep suspicion. For many who have not dismissed it as irrelevant, it has even become a matter of offence.

For some, beauty is an offence against truth, a lie in the midst of a world that is so obviously not beautiful. The quest for beauty in the arts is the quest for an illusory consolation, signalling a primal human urge for order in a world we cannot bear to admit is destined for futility.

The pursuit of beauty has also been seen as an offence against goodness. In the hands of the comfortable and powerful, the love of beauty – in the arts as much as anywhere else – is a luxury that can easily muffle the howl of those who know little or no beauty, distracting us from our obligations to those in need. Or, from the other side, beauty dulls the oppressed to the injustice of their predicament.

Beauty is also distrusted insofar as it is assumed to ‘harmonise away’ the evilness of evil. In particular, there has been a distrust of theories of beauty in which the notions of balance, symmetry and equivalence predominate, where evil’s irrational, intrusive quality is suppressed, where it is subsumed into a harmonious metaphysics of necessity and seen as part of the necessary balance of things. Art, it is said, must never collude with such schemes.

Undoubtedly, the Church and Christian theologians have been as responsible as any others for generating and encouraging these suspicions. The question arises, however: can there be a theological perspective on beauty that takes these suspicions seriously, while at the same time refusing to set aside the notion of beauty altogether? More particularly: in what ways can attending to the triune God of Jesus Christ, and this God’s gracious, reconciling, self-revealing activity in and for the world, inform and transform our conceptions of beauty? In this light, are there ways in which it might be quite legitimate to speak of the ‘offence’ of beauty – especially in relation to the ‘scandal’ at the heart of the Christian faith, the vindication of the crucified Jesus? And – the focused concern of this colloquium – what might such theological construals of beauty imply about the way we practise, interpret and enjoy the arts in the twenty-first century?

The Church lives from the Eucharist. (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Ecclesia de Eucharistia, §1 â??the Church lives from the Eucharistâ??) The Holy Fatherâ??s announcement that the Synod of Bishops to be held in October 2005 will reflect on the Eucharist follows from his recent Encyclical Letter Ecclesia de Eucharistia. Already the Society has organised an international colloquium on this Encyclical, held at Heythrop College in early February 2004, with participants from many European institutions and from North America. This in turn builds upon the fidelity to the Eucharist which the Society has always sought to promote, beginning with the Conference in Cambridge in 2002 Ite Missa Est: Transubstantiation and Living Eucharist.

As part of our mission to promote the intellectual apostolate, and of supportive cooperation with the Hierarchy, we propose a three- year research project on the Holy Eucharist, the fruits of which will be made available to the Bishops of England and Wales as a gift, and as a sign of the vitality of theological life in these countries.

We propose a two-stepped research project, arising out of our initial colloquium. The first step will be an examination of the Eucharist with special reference to England and Wales, the fruits of which will be compiled into a research report and presented to the Bishops of English and Welsh dioceses who will attend the Synod. The second step will be the development of that report in response to the Apostolic Exhortation which the Holy Father will publish after the Synod, with final versions of the various contributions, and made available for publication, we would hope, by a reputable theological press. In addition it is hoped that the extension of the colloquium until 2007 will result in a variety of further studies on various aspects of the Eucharist and the Sacred Liturgy of the Church: theological, philosophical, historical, æsthetic, musicological, pastoral, and ecumenical.

The colloquium will take as its point of departure the statement of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium, §10 â??at one and the same, the Liturgy is the pinnacle towards which the activity of the Church is directed, and the source from which all its strength emanatesâ??.

It will seek to examine by study in whatever appropriate areas, how and to what extent this is true with particular reference to the situation in England and Wales. It will also attend to how the desire of the Council has been carried out, that this truth be effected Sacrosanctum Concilium, §1 â??better to accommodate the requirements of our timesâ?? under the various disciplinary headings above.

The project will keep in view the reflections of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger on the sacred liturgy, that thought be given and a means be found, â??to overcome the boundless superiority of the [philosophical] subject and to recognise once more that a relationship with the Logos, who is from the beginning, saves the subject, that is the person, and at the same time puts us into a true relation of communality which is ultimately grounded in the Trinitarian lifeâ?? (The Spirit of the Liturgy).

Society of St. Catherine of Siena Ecclesia de Eucharistia Vivit Research Project to be Undertaken in the Years 2004â??2007

10. Thus there is an urgent need, even within the framework of current international difficulties and tensions, for a commitment to a human ecology that can favour the growth of the â??tree of peaceâ??. For this to happen, we must be guided by a vision of the person untainted by ideological and cultural prejudices or by political and economic interests which can instil hatred and violence. It is understandable that visions of man will vary from culture to culture. Yet what cannot be admitted is the cultivation of anthropological conceptions that contain the seeds of hostility and violence. Equally unacceptable are conceptions of God that would encourage intolerance and recourse to violence against others. This is a point which must be clearly reaffirmed: war in God's name is never acceptable! When a certain notion of God is at the origin of criminal acts, it is a sign that that notion has already become an ideology.

11. Today, however, peace is not only threatened by the conflict between reductive visions of man, in other words, between ideologies. It is also threatened by indifference as to what constitutes man's true nature. Many of our contemporaries actually deny the existence of a specific human nature and thus open the door to the most extravagant interpretations of what essentially constitutes a human being. Here too clarity is necessary: a â??weakâ?? vision of the person, which would leave room for every conception, even the most bizarre, only apparently favours peace. In reality, it hinders authentic dialogue and opens the way to authoritarian impositions, ultimately leaving the person defenceless and, as a result, easy prey to oppression and violence.

Pope Benedict XVI Message for the World Day of Peace

If you want to know before your friends do what may well be one of the major questions of the 21st century, keep your eye on two new documents. The first is the Berlin Declaration to be released by E.U. President Angela Merkel within the month. The second is the Brussels Declaration, a statement by prominent European academicians, community leaders, and national and European politicians, which disagrees with the tenets included in the Berlin Declaration and which has already been released in response to it.

The Brussels Declaration makes two points: First, that the ideal environment for all religions is not the theocratic state -- the state that defines itself as identified by some single religion -- but the secular state. Secondly, the Brussels Declaration points out that secularism and atheism are not synonyms. The secular state, the document argues, is not anti-religion. It is not atheistic. It is, instead, anti-establishmentarianism. It identifies itself with no particular religion and so it privileges no single religion. As a result, the document declares, it protects the right of all religions to practice without recrimination.

Joan Chittister Christian, Secular or Something Else Entirely and see Secular values for Europe

****Here is a little from the Brussel Declaration:

Freedom of Religion or Belief

For many people, their religion or belief is a profoundly important part of their life and of their personal identity. There can be no laws restricting freedom of belief, but freedom of religion does not extend to practices which could harm the rights of others. Freedom of religion includes the right to change oneâ??s religion or belief, or to reject religion entirely.

Europeans are free to practise their religion in any way they choose provided their practice conforms to the law.

There is no conflict between freedom of expression and freedom of religion or belief. Attempts to outlaw defamation of religion are misplaced. It is the believer not the belief that needs protection. People and property are already protected by law. Religions and beliefs per se need no other protection and all demands for such protection should be rejected. Defamation of religious believers should be treated in the same manner as defamation of anyone else.

No institution should be immune from criticism. The right to question any belief and to freely express oneâ??s views on any matter is a human right. Human beings have human rights, religions, beliefs and ideas do not.

In the words of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, â??Problems arise when authorities try to use religion for their own ends, or when religions try to abuse the state for the purpose of achieving their objectivesâ??.

State Neutrality in Matters of Religion and Belief

No religion or belief should suffer discrimination compared to any other, nor should any religion or belief be especially privileged, for to privilege one is to discriminate against all others.

State neutrality in matters of religion is the only means by which the rights of all, believers and non-believers alike, can be protected. The neutrality of the state therefore needs to be constitutionally guaranteed.

State neutrality does not free religious groups from their obligation to abide by the law. Incitement to violence, for example, cannot be permitted on the grounds of religious freedom.

Those who seek to reintroduce religious privilege into public life frequently but wrongly equate the secular state with an atheist state, but secularism is not atheism. The secular state is neutral in matters of religion and belief, favouring none and discriminating against none. Only the secular state can guarantee the equal treatment of all citizens.

Democrats, of whatever religious persuasion, have fought to defend the secular state. Many religious are among the most stalwart defenders of secularism because they understand the danger of allowing religious privilege and discrimination to enter government and public life.

A Secular Vision for Europe

John Zizioulas believes ecumenism, conciliarity and the Eucharist belong to the very being of the Church. The bishop is intrinsic to ecumenism. Zizioulas’ account of the relation of the particular and universal, one and many, demonstrates that the relationships of the bishop and his congregation, and of the local and the worldwide Church, are essentially Christology.

Only in Christ is the Church one. Unity is not a matter of one writ running through a unified jurisdiction. The unity of the Church is the act of God. Every congregation and Christian participates in Christ’s eucharistic reception of the Church as the gift of God. We participate in his act through reception: ‘churches exist as One Church in and through constantly receiving one another as sister Churches.’ Each congregation participates in the one Church as it reaches out to all other churches: this reaching out is not an extra, for each congregation receives its very being from all others. (Zizioulas ‘The Theological Problem of Reception’, One in Christ, 21, 1985).

Since each Christian community is formed and disciplined by Christ, who comes to it from outside, no community can be under its own authority. It must willingly receive its leadership from all other congregations, as it were. Each church must receive its overseer as the gift of the whole Church. Bishops are apostles. Christian communion is the practice of sending apostles, their teaching and discipline, to and from all other parts of the Church. Conciliarity is the practice of communion and the event of love by which we participate in the life Christ, who is in one society with the Father.

Some have asked whether stress on the bishop endangers prospects for ecumenism with churches without a hierarchical tradition. But the churches with explicit (episcopal) oversight may encourage other (non-episcopal) churches to receive this discipline along with every other gift of the Church catholic, and look for some gift or lesson from them in return.

It is only in the act of receiving from, and giving to, other churches that any church is part of the Body. It is not the case that a church first has being, and then enters relationships with other churches. ‘Being is a gift, not a self-subsistent and self-explicable reality. As a gift, being presupposes the Other – there is no gift without a giver’ (Communion and Otherness p.88). This reception is made complete by the public ‘Amen’ of the people.

Christ calls us to receive all whom he calls to his eucharist. We have to take them all from him, refusing none, for only with them do we become members of Christ. In the eucharist we pray for those who are not yet present, and the whole Christ, and our own very being, waits for them.

Yet the Church already participates in the unity and plurality of the whole Christ. The petitions of Christ’s people in the eucharist make each locality present to God. All other communities and cultures fail to sustain the real otherness of their members; because they represent less than the whole truth, they will not last. Without the Church making its offering from every part of the world, the diversity and indeed existence of the world are in doubt. ‘The Church, as sign and image of the eschatological community, continues to portray in history the genuine ethos of otherness… the Church is the place where … the fear of the Other is replaced in the Eucharist… by the acceptance of the Other qua Other… (Zizioulas Communion and Otherness p.88).

The bishop represents the catholicity of the Church in one person. Together with him the congregation is the geographic and historic catholicity of the Church in that place. In the eucharist we already participate in that future complete assembly, yet every eucharist and ecumenical gathering, being only partial, looks ahead to the assembly of the whole Church.

Just as there is no plurality without unity, so there is no communion without order and authority. Primacy enables communion, but equally communion enables and affirms primacy. Zizioulas asks whether the Western Church assumes that, of unity and communion, one must be prior to the other: the Roman Church assumes hierarchy is prior, while Protestant churches assume communion is prior, though these two positions have been represented in the Roman Church by Ratzinger and Kasper.

Zizioulas suggests that Rome does not represent the unity of the many churches by nature, but that Rome may receive its authority from the whole Church. It could only be the free act of every church that appointed one bishop to the chair in the assembly of bishops. His authority makes their council an ordered communion, but he receives his authority from them. If the Amen of the Church affirms this role for Rome, Rome’s priority would be an act of the whole Church.

Ecumenism involves reconciliation through repentance and mutual service. It does not come at the expense of truth, or of those forthright exchanges of view through which real plurality and particularity are established. Zizioulas’ is a thoroughly theological account of ecumenism, but it allows plenty of opportunity for each church to initiate the practicalities of exchanging gifts, personnel and instruction, with churches even of ostensibly incompatible forms of churchmanship. Reaching out to other churches is not an extra, for in the long run we are not Church without them. His discussion of bishop, council and eucharist, make Zizioulas’ a very significant ecumenical proposal.

A quite special place in this long development [longo itinere] belongs to Saint Thomas, not only because of what he taught [ob ea quae in eius doctrina continentur] but also because of the dialogue which he undertook with the Arab and Jewish thought of his time. In an age when Christian thinkers were rediscovering the treasures of ancient philosophy, and more particularly of Aristotle, Thomas had the great merit of giving pride of place to the harmony which exists between faith and reason. Both the light of reason and the light of faith come from God, he argued; hence there can be no contradiction between them.

More radically, Thomas recognized that nature, philosophy's proper concern, could contribute to the understanding of divine Revelation. Faith therefore has no fear of reason, but seeks it out and has trust in it. Just as grace builds on nature and brings it to fulfillment, so faith builds upon and perfects reason. Illumined by faith, reason is set free from the fragility and limitations deriving from the disobedience of sin and finds the strength required to rise to the knowledge of the Triune God. Although he made much of the supernatural character of faith, the Angelic Doctor did not overlook the importance of its reasonableness; indeed he was able to plumb the depths and explain the meaning of this reasonableness. Faith is in a sense an â??exercise of thoughtâ??; and human reason is neither annulled nor debased in assenting to the contents of faith, which are in any case attained by way of free and informed choice.

This is why the Church has been justified in consistently proposing Saint Thomas as a master of thought and a model of the right way to do theology. In this connection, I would recall what my Predecessor, the Servant of God Paul VI, wrote on the occasion of the seventh centenary of the death of the Angelic Doctor: â??Without doubt, Thomas possessed supremely the courage of the truth, a freedom of spirit in confronting new problems, the intellectual honesty of those who allow Christianity to be contaminated neither by secular philosophy nor by a prejudiced rejection of it. He passed therefore into the history of Christian thought as a pioneer of the new path of philosophy and universal culture. The key point and almost the kernel of the solution which, with all the brilliance of his prophetic intuition, he gave to the new encounter of faith and reason was a reconciliation between the secularity of the world and the radicality of the Gospel, thus avoiding the unnatural tendency to negate the world and its values while at the same time keeping faith with the supreme and inexorable demands of the supernatural order.â??

John Paul II Fides et Ratio 43.

The first of The Scripture and Hermeneutics Seminar consultations took place in Cheltenham in April 1998. The theme for this meeting was the crisis in biblical interpretation and the sort of answers to it being proposed by advocates of speech act theory such as Anthony Thiselton, Nicholas Wolterstorff and Kevin Vanhoozer, all of whom were present. We were not agreed at this consultation whether speech act theory has the resources to take biblical interpretation forward, but it became clear that any attempt to renew biblical interpretation in the academy would require a process with multiple consultations to address the key areas we thought required attention.

Thus was born The Scripture and Hermeneutics Seminar, a ten year project based in Theology and Religious Studies at The University of Gloucestershire, where it is headed up by Craig Bartholomew. The Seminar is a partnership project between British and Foreign Bible Society and The University of Gloucestershire. Its ambitious aim is to facilitate a renewal of biblical interpretation in the academy that will help reopen the Book for our cultures.

The Seminar is thus academic. It recognises the fundamental importance of opening the Book at all levels in our cultures but the Seminar itself is an academic initiative, aimed firstly at biblical interpretation in the academy. The Seminar is interdisciplinary. Meir Sternberg rightly notes that biblical studies is at the intersection of the humanities, and The Seminar is based on the understanding that at this intersection interdisciplinary insight is required if biblical studies is to be saved from some of its isolation and fragmentation, and for new ways forward to be forged. It has been a delight at our consultations to find philosophers rubbing shoulders with educationalists and theologians, and missiologists working with literary scholars to renew biblical interpretation.

The Seminar is Christian. Modernity has marginalised faith in the great public areas of culture but this is a travesty of a Christian perspective in which faith relates to the whole of life. The Seminar is ecumenical and has a wide range of Christian perspectives represented within it. However, it is a rule of The Seminar that faith is not to be excluded from the consultative process that forms the heart of The Seminar. We have been asked about Jewish and other faiths being involved, and we are keen that such dialogue should emerge. However, we have judged it important to keep The Seminar’s Christian character intact at this stage so that the interdisciplinary and faith dynamics have time to be nurtured.

The Seminar is communal. The modern academy is deeply individualistic. But we recognise that a renewal of biblical interpretation will require communal work. And a great aspect of The Seminar is the emerging sense of community amongst Christian scholars of diverse disciplines.

Background: The Ethos of SAHS

Journal of Theological Interpretation

Critical biblical scholarship as developed and defined since the mid-eighteenth century has played a significant and welcome role in pressing us to take biblical texts seriously on their own terms and diverse contexts. With the postmodern turn, additional questions have surfaced—including the theological and ecclesial location of biblical interpretation, the significance of canon and creed for biblical hermeneutics, the historical reception of biblical texts, and other more pointedly theological interests. How might we engage interpretively with the Christian Scriptures so as to hear and attend to God's voice? The Journal of Theological Interpretation aims to serve these agendas.

1.1 (Spring 2007)

Richard B. Hays Can Narrative Criticism Recover the Unity of Scripture?

Murray Rae Texts in Context: Scripture and the Divine Economy

Michael A. Rynkiewich Mission, Hermeneutics, and the Local Church

R.W.L. Moberly Christ in All the Scriptures? The Challenge of Reading the Old Testament as Christian Scripture

Michael J. Gorman "A Seamless Garment": Approach to Biblical Interpretation?

Aquinas is the cornerstone of Catholic thought, not just for his doctrine, but for his fidelity and prayer; for his constant and humble attitude of inclusion instead of exclusionâ??always open both to the truths coming from the faith and to those coming from every other thinker and tradition. He did not create a philosophical or theological systemâ??from which eventually some truth, either natural or supernatural, would have been ruled out; rather, he was always ready to welcome new philosophical insights, and to see the constant need for finding harmony between them and the depositum fidei. Thomism is not just one out of many Christian traditions of thought; it is the only safe home where every sincere Christian intellectual can find comfortable refuge and establish the constructive dialogue with other thinkers which leads to the truth.

Aquinas is the model of Catholic thinkers also because he was an authentic citizen of his time: the Medieval Renaissance. He traveled all around the XIII-century world [Europe] more than most of his contemporaries. He gave refined and remarkable answers to the most difficult political, legal and ethical issues debated in his culture. Due to his exceptional problem-solving capacity, he was asked to accomplish (or give advise for) difficult political missions and legal tasks; he was even executor of a will. Indeed, his knowledge of law and politics matched his knowledge of theology and philosophy. Today, in a culture that has lost unity of knowledge and is far from being universal; in a society that has to face the new challenges of relativism and nihilism, on the one hand, and of globalization, on the other, Aquinasâ??s life and thought set the right direction for a revival of truth in ethics and metaphysics.

After Aquinas, his spirit has lived over the centuries through other exceptional people who not only studied what he wrote, but incarnated his same love for God and for â??the world and its values;â?? people with the same â??courage of the truth,â?? â??freedom of spirit in confronting new problems,â?? and â??the intellectual honesty of those who allow Christianity to be contaminated neither by secular philosophy nor by a prejudiced rejection of it;â?? people who pass as well â??into the history of Christian thoughtâ?? as pioneers of the new paths of â??philosophy and universal cultureâ?? (Fides et Ratio, 43) and who keep Aquinas alive for the generations to come. These people connect the past to the future by leaving behind them, not just their priceless writings, but also many good students and young scholars trained in fidelity to the Church, intellectual freedom, open mindedness, and respect for diversity: â??by their fruits you will know themâ?? (Matthew 7:20). In our recent history, we can think of Cornelio Fabro, Etienne Gilson, Jacques Maritain, and Ralph McInerny. These â??Thomistsâ?? have always had greater love for the tradition than for themselves: they have looked to each other, respected each other, worked with each other. Thomistic tradition cannot do without these authentic Thomists, and should stick to them if it wants to go on steadily through the centuries.

Thomas International