Category: Church

To the priests and deacons of the Diocese who share with fraternal compassion my concern for the poor;to the religious men and women, whose service to the poor has strengthened Christâ??s presence in Oklahoma for more than its hundred years; to the lay faithful who strive with unwavering dedication to live the Gospel that gives us life through faith in Godâ??s promise, hope in the gift of His Holy Spirit, and love for his people;and finally, with affection and esteem, to all men and women of good will who seek to do the good and follow Godâ??s will for them, to you.

I send my greetings and bless you in the name of the Lord.

By the grace of God and the favor of the Apostolic See, I am the Catholic Bishop of Tulsa.

As a bishop, I speak with the voice of one who has been consecrated to proclaim the truth of the Gospel here in Eastern Oklahoma, and I do so with the authority and in the name of Jesus Christ, King of the Universe.

I do not deem it necessary to enter into a detailing of all that this entails, but I do wish to make it clear that I am writing this pastoral letter in the exercise of my pastoral mission for you, the People of God who have been confided to my care, for you are that community which I must teach, sanctify and govern with the authority and responsibility that I exercise in communion with the whole college of Bishops and under the guidance of His Holiness, Benedict XVI, Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the Universal Church.

Of the office I have received to preach and to teach, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council gathered from every country, nation, people and revealing in their unity Godâ??s plan to restore to us the unity we lost through the sin of Adam, wrote:

Among the principal duties of bishops, the preaching of the gospel occupies an eminent place. For bishops are preachers of the faith who lead new disciples to Christ. They are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ, who preach to the people committed to them the faith they must believe and put into practice. By the light of the Holy Spirit they make that faith clear, bringing forth from the treasury of revelation new things and old (cf. Mt. 13:52) making faith bear fruit and vigilantly warding off any errors which threaten their flock. (cf. 2 Tim. 4:1-4) (Lumen Gentium, §25)

Thus it is, I wish to make known that when I preach the truth of the Gospel – independent of whether or not what I say corresponds with the laws of men and of civil societies – my words are guarded by that same Spirit Who anointed the Lord Jesus in the synagogue of Nazareth and filled Him with the power to â??preach good news to the poor â?¦ to set at liberty those who are oppressed and to proclaim a year of favor from the Lord.â?? (Luke 4:18-19)

Consecrated a bishop in service to the Lord Jesus Christ, I am as well a disciple and missionary of His Gospel. Hence my governance of our community of faith is always in service to Christâ??s Kingdom, that it might be constantly built up and strengthened here in Oklahoma.

Of my responsibility to exercise prudent governance as the Bishop of Tulsa, the Fathers of the Council wrote:

Bishops govern the particular churches entrusted to them as the vicars and ambassadors of Christ. This they do by their counsel, exhortations and example, as indeed, by their authority and sacred power. This power they use only for the
edification of their flock in truth and holinessâ?¦ This power, which they personally exercise in Christâ??s name, is proper, ordinary and immediate â?¦ (Lumen Gentium, §27)

In this way, I wish to make it clear that I do not speak as an elected official, whose service to the public proceeds from the will of those who elected him or her to office. Nor do I speak as a civil servant, appointed to the task and accountable to those by whom he or she has been appointed. Rather, I speak as the Catholic Bishop of this Diocese and I speak with the authority of Jesus Christ, Who in His life here on earth always showed his predilection for the poor and the oppressed.

Encouraged, then, by the certainty that you will listen to me as you would listen to Christ Himself (Luke 10:16), I want to express myself in this letter with the wisdom and the prudence of a man of God, called by the Lord â??to serve and not be servedâ?? (Mark 10:45) and â??to give his life for his sheepâ?? (cf. John 10:15) and I want to present to you who love the Lord, the certainty that in the suffering faces of the poor, we see the suffering face of Christ.

The Suffering Face of Christ

This idea is not my own, nor is it new. The conviction that Christ is present in the poor and reveals in their suffering His wondrous
Passion can be traced in an unbroken line of charity from the Apostles down to our own day, and to my brother bishops who met last May with Pope Benedict XVI at the Marian Shrine of Our Lady of Aparecida in Brazil to reflect upon the various ways in which the Church must respond to this revelation.

In this letter, I wish to make my own the statements they expressed concerning the fundamental stance which the Church must take in the world, a stance of hope in Christâ??s victory over sin and death. This hope which we have in Christ expresses itself in solidarity with the poor and as advocacy for those who suffer injustice.

It is to Christâ??s Suffering Face, seen in the faces of Oklahomaâ??s immigrant population, that I would draw the gaze of all those who – in whatever manner – find themselves responsible for the passing, the enforcement, or in support of Oklahomaâ??s House Bill 1804.
The basic intention of this law is to deny those who have entered our country illegally the right to work in Oklahoma and the right to find shelter for their families in our communities. Thus they are forced to flee our state. I believe that the right to earn oneâ??s living and the right to shelter oneâ??s family securely are basic human rights, the fundamental building blocks of a just society, and to deny these rights is immoral and unjust. I also believe that since the intention of HB 1804 is immoral, when it is implemented, the effects will be an intolerable increase in the suffering endured by the families of illegal immigrants, plus the spiritual suffering of those who must enforce it.

Bishop Slattery of Tulsa Pastoral Letter

There are no liturgical materials available in the parish. The vessels are glass or pottery, everything else having been tossed out. So there is no monstrance, no patens, and the tabernacle is buried somewhere where it can’t be seen. The available vestments are unworthy.

Then there is the belief infrastructure of the parish. People are out of the habit of confession, daily Mass, and spiritual reading. For the most part, people cannot defend the faith and are largely clueless about what the liturgy is intended beyond the need to gather Christians together for fellowship.

It is easy for priests to despair under these conditions. It is hard to know where to begin. You can just replace people because there is no one to take their place. You can’t just say that from now on, we will sing chant because no one knows what to sing or how. There is also the very important reality that it is unwise to enact a liturgical reconstruction insofar as people have no idea what is taking place or why.

There is where singing the Mass comes in. This is an improvement that celebrant can make on his own. He doesn’t have to ask the liturgy committee. He doesn’t need accompaniment. It requires no line in the budget. In fact, it will not upset anyone; in fact, it is a way that Father demonstrate that he truly cares about the liturgy, which has a way of flattering everyone.

It is a simple matter: what he once spoke, he now sings.

It has a dramatic impact. People listen to the words more intensely. It contributes a nobility to the liturgy. It is necessarily chant, and thereby acculturates people to the sound and feel of authentic liturgical music. It creates an expectation that that contemporary Christian music cannot satisfy and thereby lays the groundwork for developments later on.

Jeffrey Tucker Making a Liturgical Desert Bloom

1) The direction of the service should be removed entirely from the hands of the worship leaders, and solidly and unequivocally returned to, and made the whole responsibility of, the pastoral authority of the church. If a worship leader is retained, he must understand that he is wholly subordinate to that authority, having no standing whatever as such to determine the form or content of the service. (I would also add that giving this person pastoral status and title does not fix the problem. If that is done, one must say explicitly that the responsibility is that of the teaching authority of the church, normally vested in the Senior Pastor.)

2) The attraction of inquirers to the principal service of worshipâ??which, after all, should culminate in a communion in which they cannot yet participateâ??is to be subordinated to the theological and doxological integrity of the service itself.

3) Words to all music sung in the service must be studied and approved by pastoral authority as theologically sound, and unapologetically rejected when not, no matter how beautiful the music to which they are set, or how beloved by the congregation.

4) The service of worship is not to be conducted as if it were a show in which some of the worshippers are performing for others, but rather all present should be worshipping God in every aspect of the proceedings. Musicians should be placed and used so as to give glory to God rather than themselves, and should present themselves accordingly both in dress and demeanor. Prayers should not, for example, be used as an opportunity to move about or change settings.

5) It must be understood and attended to by the pastoral authority that the service does not take place in a vacuum where it is free to innovate as it will, but participates in the worship of the whole church in heaven and earth, to which it is called not only to add its own unique voice, but to conform that voice to a pattern that lies outside itself. This conformance should be a matter of constant study and meditation on the part of the pastor and elders of the church. To leave it to the tastes of the congregation or to a professional worship leader is a dereliction of pastoral duty.

6) It must be understood and accepted that what results from this, while it should be of firm integrity and deep beauty, may not be a â??popularâ?? product for that very reason. No proportion is to be expected between faithfulness in these matters and congregational size.

S.M. Hutchens One Foundational Observation, and Six Rules

What is Hutchenâ??s one foundational observation? That the Church devote itself to the apostlesâ?? teaching and fellowship, the breaking of bread, and the prayers (Acts 2:42). There’s lots more on worship at Touchstone

Over at Mere Comments, S.M. Hutchens has responded to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s Questions on the Doctrine of the Church which recently reaffirmed the teaching of Dominus Iesus (2000).

In Hutchens’ summary, in his Notes on Questions on the Doctrine of the Church, this

directed Catholic bishops not to use the term â??sister churchesâ?? in referring to Protestant denominations. This document, in continuity with Lumen Gentium, the Second Vatican Councilâ??s dogmatic constitution of the Church, made it clear that according to Catholic doctrine these churches lack a valid episcopate, hence the integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery, and are therefore not churches in the true sense of the term. Rather, they are â??ecclesial communitiesâ?? ambiguously related to the Church of Rome.

Touchstone (of which Hutchens is an editor) took the position that it had

no desire for Rome to surrender the integrity of its beliefs on the terms required by mainline ecumenism, for we cannot imagine it could, in that frame of mind, stand against the â??progressiveâ?? Catholics who are trying with all their might to baptize their church in the same wallow of confusion, heresy, and immorality into which their Protestant counterparts have already introduced their own.

Hutchen’s piece attracted some impressive comments. Here is one from DGUS

Mr. Hutchens’s post is quite correct in asserting (1) that real ecumenism–indeed, any meaningful religious dialogue whatsoever–must proceed from candor and clarity, even where that may be painful, and (2) that, by authentic RC lights, this recent statement (like “Dominus Iesus” and “Lumen Gentium” before it) is probably as generous and open as real RC doctrine will permit. As an evangelical non-Catholic, I thank the RCC for its clarity, and take no offense.

However, Mr. Hutchens’s following comment is also correct in emphasizing the result that seems “intolerable”: Even the extremely liberal RC parish (open to same-sex unions, tolerant of abortion, universalistic, indifferent to Christological error, etc.) is deemed a “proper church” and its dissident priest is deemed authentically Christian because they are believed to possess apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, while the non-Catholic minister and congregation that affirm the Nicene Creed without reservation, acknowledge the authority of the Scriptures, confess the Lord Jesus as fully God and fully Man, crucified, risen, and coming again, and preach a Gospel of salvation by faith in Jesus Christ–these are mere honorary “Christians” in a non-church “ecclesial community.”

So my first question in the ensuing dialogue is this: Does the RC Christian acknowledge any dissonance in this disparity? Is he comfortable that mere apostolic pedigree seems to count for so much, and that believing and preaching the apostolic message seems to count for so little?

From Stuart Koehl

Talk of Orthodox “defectiveness” begs the question of whether communion with Rome is a prerequisite for the fullness of the Church, particularly in light of the “ecclesiology of communion” adopted by the Catholic Church in Vatican II. It is the Eucharist that imparts the fullness (katholikon) of the Church, not communion with any one particular bishop. One might just as well say that Rome is defective because it is not in formal communion with Constantinople, Moscow, Antioch or Alexandria. Among the true Churches, whatever “defects” exist are mutual and derive from the unnatural separation that perdures as the result not of real differencs in faith but simply the sinfulness of men.

Society and the people of our time are thirsting and seeking. They have values and principles, traditions and customs that were formed in the light of the Gospel and under the wise guidance of the Fathers of the Church and of other ecclesiastical personalities, but are unable to recognize Christ’s presence and the power of his soteriological message. They refuse to admit the fundamental importance of Europe’s Christian roots: it is the hour of the Church and the new evangelization, the hour of the mission ad intra!

Yet, without the collaboration of the European Churches and our common Christian witness, it is certain that very little will have a positive outcome and that the many isolated efforts of the various Churches and Christian denominations will unfortunately be doomed to failure.

Instead of exercising a positive influence on the convinced European Christian, our globalized epoch seems to reject the historical ecumenicity of the Christian message and to marginalize its dynamic and effectiveness. Secularization, eudaemonism, the deification of technology and atheistic science confuse our neighbour and lead him inevitably to existential desperation. His anguished cry is heard: “Lord, to whom shall we go?” (Jn 6:68).

What, then, is our responsibility as spiritual fathers? What is our approach to spiritual care for our young people? Shall we succeed at last in protecting the sacred institution of the family? The sacredness of the human person, now defenceless in the face of medical research, abortion, euthanasia? And the oneness of God’s creation which surrounds us and risks being destroyed irreparably by us?

The Orthodox path passes through spirituality, ascesis, fasting, the study of the texts of the Church Fathers who were inspired by God, the sense of the sacred and first and foremost the Divine Eucharist: these are our spiritual weapons and we wish to fight side by side with the Sister Church of Rome to transform European society, which is anthropocentric, into a Christocentric society with respect for our brethren of other religions, for immigrants, the poor, refugees and the weak of this earth.

CHRYSOSTOMOS II ARCHBISHOP OF NEA JUSTINIANA AND ALL CYPRUS TO HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI

7.3.2 The singing of the psalms and of the authorized and commended canticles provided in the Book of Common Prayer and in Common Worship has declined rapidly and in many parish churches is unknown, a hymn or song being preferred as a more accessible alternative. There is a considerable challenge to assist congregations to re-engage with these core texts which have been a central part of Christian worship since earliest times and particularly distinctive to worship within the reformed tradition and to Anglican worship since the sixteenth century.

GS 1651 Transforming Worship: Report of the Liturgical Commission

Leander Harding. Unbeatable.

I am going to take it as established that the historic episcopacy is a continuation of the apostolic ministry which has evolved in the church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and that therefore an episcopacy which has integrity and authenticity will be self-consciously seeking an ever greater conformity with the ministry of the first Apostles. One way of speaking about godliness in the episcopacy would to enumerate all the virtues that would go into a truly consecrated character. So we would speak of prayerfulness, learning, humility, the spirit of service, zeal for souls and so on. But how might a bishop find a way into these virtues? How can the motivation to grow in real godliness be sustained? I think by dwelling on the originating encounter with the crucified and risen Lord which propels the Apostles into their ministry. Essential to the ministry of the first Apostles is that they are witnesses to the resurrection and it is in the resurrection encounters that we should expect to find the distinctive shape and power of the apostolic ministry

Godly Bishops

The great book about all of this is Michael Ramsey’s The Gospel and the Catholic Church. Ramsey’s argument fits perhaps best into the category of plene esse (fullness of being). Churches without bishops are certainly valid members of the body of Christ, but there is something about the fullness of the apostolic witness and unity that is lacking and toward which the churches should press with full vigor for the sake of a fuller and more adequate witness to the crucified and risen Lord. Ramsey’s book convinced the Reformed pastor and missionary in India, Lesslie Newbigin, of the significance of the catholic order of the church for the sake of Gospel mission, and made it possible for Newbigin to embrace a call to be one of the first bishops of the Church of South India. Ramsey’s book remains a classic and breaks open stale arguments by arguing for the evangelical and missionary significance of the catholic order of the church. It is a travesty that the book is out of print.

The Esse of Episcopacy

Hallo Wipf & Stock?

Amongst the papers prepared for the Church of England General Synod in July (220&) is the very considerable GS 1651 Transforming Worship: Report of the Liturgical Commission (large Word doc), made available online by Thinking Anglicans.

The Liturgical Commission reviews the vast range of initiatives and says something cautiously encouraging about almost everything. But is this what we want the Liturgical Commission to do? Don’t we want it to give us some direction, and so to be prescriptive?

It description of the situation as our worship book ‘Common Worship’ is met by the profusion of ‘emergent’, ‘liquid church’ and ‘fresh expressions’ is a marvel of understatement.

6.2.4 In a climate of considerable liturgical diversity, what is ‘common’ (in Common Worship) needs continually to be nurtured, embraced and celebrated. This need arises from loyalty to the Anglican style of worship, respect for those structures and texts which have been formed with the consent of the whole Church, and a shared sense of identity and fellowship in our common calling to serve the nation

6.5.3 It is also important to note that the relatively informal liturgies associated with Fresh Expressions, or categorized as ‘alternative worship’, require of those who are to lead them a higher degree of liturgical and theological preparation than more ‘traditional’ liturgies that follow a set pattern. This is true in both senses of the word ‘preparation’: they require a better grasp of liturgical issues, and they demand more homework.

Among Catholic bishops, and among religious leaders in all communities, nobody has been more outspoken in this debate than Roger Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles. Last year he received widespread media attention when he declared that he would engage in civil disobedience rather than comply with a law requiring him to report illegal immigrants, and he directed priests and other church workers to follow his lead. Many expressed admiration for his bold, even prophetic, stance, while others charged him with grandstanding, pointing out that nobody was suggesting that IDs should be checked at Mass or food kitchens.

More recently, Cardinal Mahony offered a comprehensive account of the Churchâ??s position on comprehensive immigration reform at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. He very specifically and repeatedly asserted that he was setting forth â??the underpinnings of the position of the Catholic Church on immigration reform legislation.â?? His lecture is sprinkled with expressions such as â??the church leadership argues that . . .â??; â??the Church maintains that . . .â??; and â??the Churchâ??s position is . . .â?? We are clearly given to understand that he is not merely expressing his own views or speaking in his capacity as the archbishop of Los Angeles but is speaking for the Catholic Church.

Richard John Neuhaus Who speaks for the Church?

Jesus, our Great High Priest, lovingly offered his own life on the cross as a holy sacrifice to the Father for our sins. As the spotless â??Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the worldâ?? (John 1:29), Jesus established the everlasting covenantâ??â??the new covenant in my bloodâ?? (Luke 22:20)â??with the Father. In the Eucharist, this one sacrifice of Christ is again made fully present.

By taking part in the liturgy of the Eucharist, we join ourselves to this one holy sacrifice of Christ. The celebration of the Eucharist culminates in the reception of Holy Communion. We are nourished in the Eucharistic banquet by the living bread, and we partake of the cup of our salvation. The Risen Lord Jesus comes to dwell personally within us, and so we share in his life and friendship. He gives himself completely and entirely to us, and we are called to give ourselves completely and entirely to him. We are also lifted up into his heavenly Kingdom, and, in union with him, we are embraced by the Father in the love of the Holy Spirit as his redeemed sons and daughters. Receiving Jesus in Holy Communion, therefore, fortifies us against sin, which damages our relationship with God; heals us of our weaknesses; and empowers us to live holy lives of sacrificial love for one another.

The reception of Holy Communion is an act of the Church as the Body of Christ. While we each personally receive Holy Communion, it is not a private devotion. Rather, the reception of Holy Communion is an integral part of our worship as a community of faith. Likewise, the term â??communionâ?? accentuates the fact that, in receiving Holy Communion, we are united to Jesus and thus to one another. As we become one body with Christ in receiving Holy Communion, so we are also united with one another. â??Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loafâ?? (1 Cor 10:17).

Union with Christ is also union with all those to whom he gives himself. I cannot possess Christ just for myself; I can belong to him only in union with all those who have become, or who will become, his own. Communion draws me out of myself towards him, and thus also towards unity with all Christians. We become â??one body,â?? completely joined in a single existence. Love of God and love of
neighbor are now truly united: God incarnate draws us all to himself. Receiving Jesus in Holy Communion is then the foremost source and expression of our communion with the Blessed Trinity and with one another. Holy Communion is truly a foretaste of heavenâ??where together all of the Fatherâ??s children will become fully one with his Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, in the love of the Spirit.

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Happy Are Those Who Are Called to His Supper: On Preparing to Receive Christ Worthily in the Eucharist