Recently within certain circles a debate has arisen as to whether the Second Vatican Council is actually in continuity with sacred Tradition.  The debate stems from an address given by Pope Benedict to the Roman Curia on December 22, 2005, in which he spoke famously of the “hermeneutic of continuity.”  It is contended by some that at that time the Holy Father actually invited the debate.

In that address the Holy Father rejected the modernist idea that the Council was a kind of constitutional convention that changed the nature of the Church, and that the actual texts of the Council were compromises between conservatives and liberals, which had to be interpreted according to their innovative spirit.  (This is the origin of the amorphous “spirit of Vatican II”.)  This notion constitutes the “hermeneutic of rupture,” and is corrected by the “hermeneutic of continuity,” which simply means that the Second Vatican Council is not a break from Tradition, but a pastoral adaptation of the perennial principles of Apostolic Tradition according to the circumstances of our times.  The starting point is that the Council must be interpreted in continuity with the Church’s perennial dogmatic teaching.  It should be noted that traditionalists accept the modernist interpretation of the Council, that is, both modernists and traditionalists hold that the Council is a break with Tradition.  Modernists do so because they do not believe in objective revelation; traditionalists because they believe that the Council betrayed objective revelation.

In this post I am following up on my “White Propaganda” contribution that generated a few comments about this debate.  It seems that the work of the Holy See to regularize the Society of St. Pius X has had the effect of lending a certain amount of credibility to anticonciliar intuitions, and that given the Holy See’s openness to the return of the SSPX, the Holy Father himself must share some of these sympathies.  I will address these contentions more directly in my next post.  In this one I merely wish to refute the contention that back in 2005 Pope Benedict invited this debate.

This exercise in the art of illusion consists in a cunning interpretation of the pope’s exhortation in his December 22, 2005, address to the Roman Curia:

There is no doubt that the wearing dispute between modern reason and the Christian faith, which had begun negatively with the Galileo case, went through many phases, but with the Second Vatican Council the time came when broad new thinking was required.

Its content was certainly only roughly traced in the conciliar texts, but this determined its essential direction, so that the dialogue between reason and faith, particularly important today, found its bearings on the basis of the Second Vatican Council.

This dialogue must now be developed with great openmindedness but also with that clear discernment that the world rightly expects of us in this very moment. Thus, today we can look with gratitude at the Second Vatican Council:  if we interpret and implement it guided by a right hermeneutic, it can be and can become increasingly powerful for the ever necessary renewal of the Church.

If one reads this plainly but carefully he will see that the Holy Father is stating something very simple and very pro-Vatcian II:  The modern conflict between faith and reason culminated at the time of the Council in the need for “broad new thinking.”  The conciliar texts went a long way to accomplish this, but the development of this thinking continues as a “dialogue between reason and faith,” established on the basis of the Council.  This dialogue between faith and reason, roughly outlined by the Council, must continue and be “developed” with “openmindedness,” but also with clear discernment.  But it is certainly the Second Vatican Council, interpreted and implemented, “guided by the right hermeneutic,” (the hermeneutic of continuity) that is at the heart of the “ever necessary renewal of the Church.”

So how does this observation that that the dialogue between faith and reason must continue on the basis of the Council, rightly interpreted according the hermeneutic of continuity, become an “invitation to debate” the very possibility of interpreting the Council according to a hermeneutic of continuity?  It is academic sleight of hand, fast-talking lawyering.  See, for example, Roberto De Mattei, “A Council Can Also Make Mistakes”:

The speech to the Roman curia by Benedict XVI on December 22, 2005, opened a debate on Vatican Council II as exemplified recently by the books of Msgr. Brunero Gherardini and the important conference of the Franciscans of the Immaculate, held in Rome between December 16 and 18, 2010, in addition to my study “Il Concilio Vaticano II. Una storia mai scritta [Vatican Council II. A history never written]” (Lindau, Torino 2010).

The pope’s call to interpret the documents of Vatican II according to a “hermeneutic of continuity” has in fact offered a decisive stimulus to developing the debate on the Council in a manner different from that of the “school of Bologna,” which has presented it in terms of fracture and discontinuity with the bimillennial tradition of the Church.

At first glance, De Mattei seems to be supporting the hermeneutic of continuity against “the School of Bologna.” But a careful reading indicates otherwise.  He says that the pope’s call for interpretation of the Council according to a hermeneutic of continuity “has in fact offered a decisive stimulus to developing the debate on the Council in a manner different from the “school of Bologna” (emphasis mine).  He actually says nothing in support of the hermeneutic of continuity.  The “school of Bologna” is the Italian theological school of the progressive “spirit of Vatican II,” and De Mattei says that papal assertion of the hermeneutic of continuity is invitation to oppose the progressivists of that school (as though it was not something acceptable to do before hand).  Is he suggesting that there is no middle way between the school of Bologna and the school of De Mattei?  The pope does not appear to be supporting either the progressivist or the traditionalist school.

What is clear is that De Mattei further uses the observation of the Holy Father, that the dialogue of reason and faith guided by the right interpretation of the Council should continue, as a pretext to challenge the “hermeneutic of continuity” itself.  De Mattei’s reference to Monsignor Brunero Gherardini as being at the forefront of the debate “opened” by the papal address of December 22, 2005, makes his intentions clear, as Gherardini expressly and repeatedly challenges the possibility of the hermeneutic of continuity.  In fact, Basil Valuet in “Perché non sono d’accordo con Gherardini, De Mattei, Rhonheimer” charges Gherardini with rejecting “some formal teachings of Vatican II (“Lumen Gentium” [LG], “Nostra Aetate”, “Gaudium et Spes” [GS] and “Dignitatis Humanae” [DH]).”  At the same time, Valuet sees that De Mattei is not simply countering the position of the School of Bologna, but uses a faulty historical analysis to support Gherardini’s thesis that one must follow Tradition before the magisterium.

Indeed, later on in “A Council Can Also Make Mistakes” De Mattei states the following:

The criticism of Marchetto and Introvigne seems to have a single purpose: to close off preemptively that debate which Benedict XVI has opened with an invitation to develop it. […]

Marchetto and Introvigne criticize De Mattei for challenging the hermeneutic of continuity itself.  De Mattei thinks the pope welcomes a challenge to his interpretation of the Council and De Mattei does so on the basis of a specious interpretation of the pope’s statement.

Unfortunately, it now is just generally assumed by the anticonciliar enthusiasts that the pope really did invite theologians, historians, bloggers and armchair prognosticators to challenge him on the very existence and possibility of interpreting the Second Vatican Council according to a hermeneutic of continuity.

Note that the question answered here is not whether the traditionalists are right in challenging the hermeneutic of continuity.  That will be answered in the next post. The question here is simply whether the Holy Father has really invited or encouraged the debate over the possibility of an interpretation of the Council based on a hermeneutic of continuity.  He has not.

Filed under: Church, Religion Tagged: Hermeneutic of Continuity, Monsignor Brunero Gherardini, Pope Benedict, Roberto De Mattei, Second Vatican Council
Go to Source

The post Traditionalist Sleight of Hand first appeared on AirMaria.com.

Conferences #189 – Fr. Elias Mills F.I. ( 35min) >>> Play

Ave Maria!

We received this gift of faith in baptism, a supernatural dogmatic faith.

Vatican II is the greatest grace given to the 20th century.

Misinterpretation is the problem not Vatican II.

The faith has not changed with Vatican II.

Faith is needed for a faithful marriage.

To have a strong society we must have strong marriages.

Families need to study there faith in this year of faith.

With the great loss of faith in the west maybe we’ll see the conversion of the muslims to the true faith.

Mary’s faith was tried like no other.

Resist satan solid in your faith.

Ave Maria!

Audio (MP3)

+++

The post Video – Conferences #189: A Year of Faith in Mary Part 1 first appeared on AirMaria.com.

Conferences #190 – Fr. Elias Mills F.I. ( 78min) >>> Play

Ave Maria!

We received this gift of faith in baptism, a supernatural dogmatic faith.

Vatican II is the greatest grace given to the 20th century.

Misinterpretation is the problem not Vatican II.

The faith has not changed with Vatican II.

Faith is needed for a faithful marriage.

To have a strong society we must have strong marriages.

Families need to study there faith in this year of faith.

With the great loss of faith in the west maybe we’ll see the conversion of the muslims to the true faith.

Mary’s faith was tried like no other.

Resist satan solid in your faith.

Ave Maria!

Audio (MP3)

+++

The post Video – Conferences #190: A Year of Faith in Mary Part 2 first appeared on AirMaria.com.

Conferences #191 – Fr. Elias Mills F.I. ( 48min) >>> Play

Ave Maria!

We received this gift of faith in baptism, a supernatural dogmatic faith.

Vatican II is the greatest grace given to the 20th century.

Misinterpretation is the problem not Vatican II.

The faith has not changed with Vatican II.

Faith is needed for a faithful marriage.

To have a strong society we must have strong marriages.

Families need to study there faith in this year of faith.

With the great loss of faith in the west maybe we’ll see the conversion of the muslims to the true faith.

Mary’s faith was tried like no other.

Resist satan solid in your faith.

Ave Maria!

Audio (MP3)

+++

The post Video – Conferences #191: A Year of Faith in Mary Part 3 first appeared on AirMaria.com.

Interview with the new secretary general Father Alfonso Bruno, accused of “treason” by some traditionalist groups

Vatican Insider

Andrea Tornielli
Rome

Controversy is yet to subside after the appointment of a Commissioner for the Franciscans of the Immaculate. In this interview, the new secretary general explains why.

Father Alfonso Bruno, is your appointment as Secretary-General by the Commissioner a choice in favor of friars critical of the founder?

“The Secretary-General, in accordance with the Constitutions of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, art. 100, ‘assists the Common Father in his personal contacts and correspondence with those outside the Institute; he redacts the acts of the Council; he takes care of the General Archives; he keeps up-to-date the records and statistics on the friars, houses and projects.’ It is a technical role and one of service for the benefit of the whole community, far removed therefore from any factionalism or partisanship. During the first weeks of his mandate, the Apostolic Commissioner spoke first personally, and then on August 30, 2013 in a recorded meeting, with all members of the former government of which I also was a part. After this meeting he insisted that I accept the appointment. His judgment was made after having prayed and thought about it, although I cannot enter into his ‘mens’. Aware of the ongoing tensions and conscious of my apostolic commitments, I did not want to assume this burden, which is challenging as regards both the time and energy required to carry it. Fr. Fidenzio Volpi, who took over the authority of the institute, told me: ‘It is the will of God, you have to help the Church … it is for the good of your religious family.’ I am a religious priest and as such in the Rule of St. Francis have professed obedience to and reverence for the Pope. I embraced my cross with the courage of faith, certain that the grace of God will support me in carrying out the mission entrusted to me.”

Can you explain how and why a Commissioner was appointed? It is true that this was the initiative of a small minority of “rebels”?

“The decree of the Commissioner, dated 11 July, 2013 indicates the purpose of the measure taken which is: ‘the goal of preserving and promoting the internal unity of the Institute as well as the fraternal communion, adequate formation to religious and consecrated life, the organization of apostolic activities, and the correct management of temporal goods.’ Five brothers who in the past had occupied positions of high responsibility in the Institute, at the beginning of 2012 sought out dialogue with the Founder and his Council in order to express what in their view were irregularities, beginning with liturgical choices that did not however, exhaust the list of their concerns. Unsatisfied, they then approached the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and the Doctrine of the Faith. Those who manifest their conscience to an authority, which in this case is the Church headed by the Pope, by this very action itself, prove that they recognize this authority as such, and which therefore excludes any attitude of ‘rebellion’ on their part towards those in power. The Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life recognized extremes and therefore an apostolic visitation began in the second half of that year. Each friar in perpetual vows, as agreed by the General Council then in office, was provided with a questionnaire protected under the secret of one’s conscience.”

Some sites and blogs, have polemicised the questions contained on the questionnaire …

“The questions were read out by the Apostolic Visitor to Fr. Alessandro Apollonio, who at that point was Procurator General. In addition to his tacit approval, it was the same confrere Fr. Apollonio who suggested that the Visitor include four multiple-choice questions on possible resolutions that the friars may envisage. The last question regarded the appointment of a Commissioner. The questionnaire was promulgated and distributed without any objection or reservation. The measure of appointing a Commissioner was made after receiving the results of the questionnaire. Only from that moment were the formulations of the questionnaire brought into dispute and criticized. I can imagine that if it were not for the fact of the Holy See being vacant at that time, already by late February or early March we would have seen this measure now taken already in place. I would also like to add that any investigation is a search for truth to which one cannot apply the rule of the majority; what counts is adherence of the narrative to the truth, even in the case of only one subject denouncing an abuse. I believe, however, that a high percentage of friars have experienced hardships and, through my official role, have learned recently of written reports and testimonies, proven and tried, by religious, priests and lay people connected to our Institute.”

Why did the Holy See restrict the use of the old Mass?

“I don’t know the reasons for the restriction. I celebrated it almost every day in the parish, in private and at the Headquarters of our sisters in Frattocchie, which is about 30 km away from my Friary in Rome-Casalotti. The decree appointing a Commissioner shows that the decision was made by the Holy Father in person. I would not like to enumerate those who abusively interpret the ‘mens of the Pontiff’ with an ‘I think’ or a ‘it seems that …’. I imagine that the only concern of the Supreme Shepherd has been to create an atmosphere of communion with a return to the time of ‘pre- division’, i.e. of that unity and fraternal harmony that reigned in our religious family until 2008 and which was found in liturgical prayer, moments of encounter and not of confrontation.”

What is the situation of the Tridentine Mass in churches run by the Franciscans of the Immaculate? Where is it being celebrated?

“At present I know that the so-called Tridentine Mass has been allowed in the church of La Crosse, Wisconsin (USA), where there is a large group of Lefebvrites who are likely to attract Catholics who love the extraordinary form to their own churches. I know that the Vetus Ordo has been restored in Florence, in the church of Ognissanti, where Archbishop Monsignor Ennio Antonelli requested it for a group of faithful, and also at the shrine of Campocavallo in Osimo (AN), where stable groups of the faithful have requested it. In most other parishes and shrines entrusted to our care, the same conditions were not met. In fact in some cases there were complaints made by the faithful who found themselves at masses, both weekdays and Sundays, attending a liturgical form to them unknown. In at least two of the sister’s convents with churches open to the public, Holy Mass in the Extraordinary Form has also been restored. In all these cases there was a preliminary investigation made by the Apostolic Commissioner with the help of the local Ordinary to verify that the canonical conditions regarding their feasibility, referred to in Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae, were satisfied .”

You have been portrayed as the “main accuser” of the founder Fr. Manelli and also as a “traitor.” How do you respond?

“Given the climate of confusion that arose in the crisis of appointing a Commissioner and the psychological mechanism of dealing with a problem by sacrificing a scapegoat, I shared the accusation, especially at the beginning of everything, with at least two other brothers. Father Angelo M. Gaeta, ‘guilty’ of working for decades in the Nunciature in Italy and therefore suspected of being the ‘conspirator of the sacred palaces’ and Father Rosario M. Sammarco , former head of our website, ‘guilty’ of having blocked the petition launched by a weekly information service affiliated with the traditionalist world. As far as I’m concerned, I answer this gratuitous slander by way of mentioning my long phone calls (even from abroad) after the appointment of the Commissioner, along with visits to the Father Founder to ‘bring peace’, but especially in reference to my vocational journey of 25 years of service to the Institute and Father Stefano M. Manelli. I have always obeyed and will continue to do so, with the help of God. At the age of 21 I was already a missionary in Brazil, where I stayed four years, and when 26 years old I was in Benin, at the head of the mission there, where I spent twelve years. I found myself in the midst of gunfire, I suffered hunger, and I had malaria almost thirty times. I have risked my life; I have saved lives … and souls, in the exercise of my ministry. I have only done my duty. I returned to Italy in 2007, and after six months Fr. Stefano proposed my nomination in the election to the Council with the vote of the General Chapter of 2008. As delegate of the missions I spent a total of three to four months a year abroad feeling the pulse of the Institute’s situation around the world. I was very busy with academic studies and in the publications and promotional activities of the Communications Office. I was not among the signatories of the appeal to the Holy See, but I soon noticed an ungrateful and destructive approach towards them that made me study in depth the internal dynamics of the events and move in the direction of charity and justice.”

On 29 July, when interviewed by Vatican Insider, you spoke of the occurrence of the appointment of the Commissioner, as “being taken advantage of” by traditionalist groups. What were you referring to?

“I think I touched a sore point that brought to mind another factor that converges very much with our crisis, namely, the exploitation by traditionalist groups, of some of our influential brothers, whom they have in their grasp. It’s sufficient to do a simple search of the blogosphere to discover how, that after the appointment of the Commissioner, the external lobbying took the form of silence, of prayer, of reason and respect for the human person. I think I was the victim of a settling of accounts. I am suspicious of the base accusation of ‘Corrispondenza Romana’ by Roberto De Mattei and the testimony of Francesco Agnoli, who I have never met personally, where one talks about my alleged dissociation with the so-called ‘March for Life’ organized for two years by the these same persons. The criticism or acceptance of such an event is not at all relevant to our Institute having been appointed a Commissioner neither is it an assessment of my morality or even of my fidelity to the founder. Regarding this march, however, I had actually noticed the problem of it beginning with a willingness to challenge those already working in pro-life. Everyone has the right to express themselves freely. By virtue of this principle, they were wrong and these people are wrong if they fear that this discourages the organization of buses of friars, sisters and lay people associated with us, to march in Rome. The success or failure of such events for the defense of life and the fight against abortion, is in a significant but not exhaustive way, dependent on the good judgment of everyone concerned.

“Another reason for the slander has been the attempt to delegitimize my role as official spokesman for the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate in the middle of all this. I state that after the appointment of the Commissioner, up until my nomination, no one had the right to attribute to themselves this role and declare as much also by means of our official channels . The authority of the one who speaks is given such authority and this authority, in our case, is the Church. To be slandered and insulted because of my loyalty to the Pope, the only one who legitimizes any other authority in the Church, is an encouragement for me and an honor. In the words of our Holy Father Francis: ‘So great is the good that I expect, that every pain to me is a delight’. I believe, I hope and I pray that our situation will be resolved quickly and in a good manner. It is a crisis of growth that that many, who considered praiseworthy by the Church, have gone through and go through. The Marian Franciscan charism is relevant and valid for the glory of God and the world today. It is enough for one to simply put into practice the obedience they have professed and are devoted to, in order to dispel any proposed division as having already been defeated before even beginning. I know my brothers, I know of their love for the Church and for souls and that is why I am confident that, through the intercession of Mary, we shall be restored to ‘former glory.'”

The post Vatican Insider Interview of FFI General Secretary first appeared on AirMaria.com.

Homily #140227n ( 06min) Play – Our Lord asks, “Salt is good, but if salt becomes insipid, with what will you restore its flavor?” Likewise, Christians are good, but only if they maintain their “flavor.” This means the universal Christian apostolate of seeking our salvation as well as our neighbors’, which means we must beware of the corrupting force of the world and actively fighting against it. The Second Vatican Council tells us, “… the member who fails to make his proper contribution to the development of the Church must be said to be useful neither to the Church nor to himself.”
Ave Maria!
Mass: Thursday 7th Week of Ordinary Time – Wkdy – Form: OF
Readings: 
1st: jam 5:1-6
Resp: psa 49:14-15, 15-16, 17-18, 19-20
Gsp: mar 9:41-50

Audio (MP3)

+++

The post Feb 27 – Homily – Fr Matthias: Salt is Good…If It is Salty first appeared on AirMaria.com.

Month of Mary #24 ( 11min) Play – Father Joachim tells us that our final guide, St. John Paul II, is a triple blessing. Not only is he a saint and theologian, he is also a Pope, and as Pope, developed his Marian Teachings from those of the Second Vatican council. So, before we start with St. John Paul II, we look at the teachings of Vatican II, particularly the Eighth Chapter of the Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, as it speaks of Mary’s “Maternal Mediation” which is not a repudiation of Jesus’ sole mediation, but a profound participation in it. Father stresses that Mary’s cooperation with the work of her Son didn’t end after the Nativity, Ministry, Crucifixion, Resurrection, or Ascension, but continues to this very day and with us.

The excerpt from Lumen Gentium may be found here (from paragraphs 61 & 61): http://bit.ly/S4OALj

Today’s Prayer: Come, Holy Spirit, living in Mary. Fill my heart with praise to God for giving me Mary as my spiritual mother.

Ave Maria!

Audio (MP3)

+++

The post Month of Mary 24 – Marian Consecration & Vatican II first appeared on AirMaria.com.

Homily #150430n ( 08min) Play – Father Joachim speaks of the difficulties that Pope St. Pius V underwent to realize the reforms called by the Council of Trent.
Ave Maria!
Mass: St. Pius V – Opt Mem – Form: OF
Readings: Thursday 4th Week of Easter
1st: act 13:13-25
Resp: psa 89:2-3, 21-22, 25, 27
Gsp: joh 13:16-20

Audio (MP3)

+++

The post Apr 30 – Homily – Fr Joachim: Trials of St. Pius V first appeared on AirMaria.com.

Ave Maria!

At the Symposium titled “Sursum Actio” at Notre Dame Univ. from Jun 8-9, 2015, in honor of the life work of Fr. Peter Damian Fehlner, F.I., – Msgr. Arthur B. Calkins, S.T.D., gives the fifth conference which he titles, “The Franciscan Thesis as presented by Peter Damian Fehlner and the Magisterium”. It includes:

1. Franciscan thesis as articulated by Fr. Peter
2. Franciscan Thesis as it has entered into the Magisterium
3. Conclusions

He points out that Fr. Peter’s teaching on Jesus and Mary, that they are both predestined in one and the same decree by God, reflects the Franciscan school of thought and has been explicitly included in the dogmatic proclamation on the Immaculate Conception in 1854 and confirmed 15 times by Vatican II documents and Papal statements from 1950 to 2008. Yet, inexplicably, this teaching has been almost entirely dropped from Mariology by modern scholars, with Fr. Peter Fehlner spearheading the effort to bring it back to wider acceptance in the last two decades.

Fr. Peter’s Teaching:

Fr. Peter’s teaching on the Franciscan Thesis, which is the Absolute Primacy of Christ and Mary being included in the original decree of Christ is based on that of Fr. Carlo Balic who was one of the chief editors of the 8th chapter of Lumen Gentium of Vatican II and on Fr. Juniper Carol.

Franciscan Thesis that Mary was predestined to be Mother of God in one and the same decree with Christ’s Incarnation and the Absolute Primacy of the Incarnation.

This is made clear at three points in Mary’s life:

– Immaculate Conception

– Coredemption, Mediation

– Assumption and Crowning in Heaven as Queen of Heaven and Earth

Introduced into the Papal Magisterium in Ineffabilis Deus in 1854 by Pius IX 5:30
Jesus and Mary one and the same decree of God even though God could have done the Incarnation in any way. He wanted.

Woman of Gen 3:15 is biblical source. Mary and her Son Christ will overcome the Serpent

Mode of Incarnation is inherently Marian.

But it predates Scotus and even Francis and is therefore best described as Catholic

Franciscan thesis merely promoted and clarified it and made it a part of the life of the Church.

A unique Franciscan contribution.

Mary pertains like no other person to the hypostatic union 9:15

Grace of graces and the source of all intelligibility both in salvation and in creation. LG 55ff

In chapter Fr. Peter wrote in Mariology edited by Dr. Miravalle: Despite wide, frequent confirmation of joint predestination by Magisterium during and after Vatican II, this has been almost totally dropped from Mariology.

Scotus: fullness of grace in Mary is in view of Christ’s merits. But the participation in grace for us is in view of mediation of Jesus and Mary for everyone else.

Since Fall of Adam and Eve, Mediation of Christ is Redemptive as well as saving

Preservatively in Mary and the angles who did not sin, but liberatively in everyone else.

Perfectly in Mary Immaculate Conception whereas in us it is dependent on the realization in Mary.

Distinctive personal actions of Mary in cooperation with Christ, are not confused with Jesus nor on a par with Jesus. 11:50

Joint ordained absolutely Jesus for his own sake and Mary for Jesus’ sake and no other

Yet she is ennobled by grace in a most personal way and thus perfects personhood.

Confirmation of Franciscan Thesis in the Magesterium (13:35)

Since Ineffabilis Deus many confirmations by Magisterium, so no longer a thesis. Here are Fifteen:

1 – Pius XII – 1950 Munificentissimus Deus No. 40 – Assumption – One and same decree

next Four are in Vatican II Documents

2 – Lumen Gentium (LG) No. 53 Mary redeemed by merits of Son and united to Him,

3- LG 56 incarnation preceded by acceptance of her who is predestined to be Mother of God,

4 – LG 61 predestined from eternity

5 – Vat II Sacrosanctum Concilium No. 103 inseparable bond in salvation

6 – Paul VI – Professio Fidei – Mary Joined by indissoluble bond to incarnation and redemption.

7 – Paul VI – May 30, 1973 General Audience – Mary’s Human Cooperation predestined but free cooperation with her Son. –

8 – Paul VI – Marialis Cultus No. 25 – one single decree

9 – John Paul II – Redemptoris Mater (RM) – 25 March. no.8 With Son, Father a has Chosen her and thus united to Christ. Making use of wisdom texts referring primarily to Christ but understood early as pertaining to Mary

JPII – RM 9 predestination of Mary, Full of Grace because predestined

Fr. Peter. Christ is redemptive as well as saving, Mary preservative

JPII – RM 10 from first moment belonged to Christ, she got life from Christ but give life to Christ as Mother.

10 – JPII – General Audience Nov 23, 1988 [In the video he says 1998] – In this gift made to John and to all of us. Mary is here center of salvation history entirely one with Him, contemplated, predestined and situated together at the center of salvation history.

11 – JPII – Dies Domini no. 79 1998 – Holy Church venerates Mary in union with Christ, indissoluble bond. Quoted from SC 103

12 – JPII – Dec 8 2004 – Homily for Immaculate Conception – Predestination Mary is linked to Christ’s and ours. Mary is a sign of all our salvation, links to Protoevangelicum Gen 3:15.

JPII – Many other texts on theme of Calvary joint suffering of Mary and Jesus is a major theme of JPII’s pontificate.

13 – Benedict XVI – Dec 8, 2006  Spanish Steps – Full of Grace, predestined to be mother of the Redeemer and associated with salvation. –

37:00

14 – BXVI – Angelus Address 2007 Aug 15 – closely united to divine son triumphing over sin and death one and the same decree.

Pius XII – One and the same decree

15 – BXVI – 7 Sept 2008 Homily at Shrine of Our Lady of Bonaria. Cagliari, Sardinia, Italy – Predestination of Mary is inscribed in the predestination of Jesus. The “here I am” of Mary reflected in that of Jesus, and His disciples.

Conclusions:

1. 1854-2007 or over 150 years so the joint predestination of Jesus and Mary well supported can no longer be opposed

2. Should no longer call it a thesis or hypothesis but a doctrine confirmed by Magisterium and many saints, and fundamental Franciscan contribution to Mariology.

3. Supports Immaculate Conception so well specified in Ineffabilis Deus, Upholds importance of Gen 3:15 in Salvation history and supports the Co-redemption of Mary.

4. After Fr. Balic and Fr. Juniper Carol, Fr. Peter has made the largest contribution and has revived teaching on the joint predestination in our day.

The talk is followed by a commentary by Fr. Peter.

Fr. Peter:

– This list of the Magisterium’s support on this matter is very important and does not exist anywhere else.

– Need to focus on the plan of God first and then the execution of it in order to have correct Theology.

– Biblical texts particularly St. Paul support absolute primacy and joint predestination

– Cannot get past certain limitations of philosophy without having revelation of God and his plan.

– Philosophy ends where theology begins, with the plan of God

This symposium, Sursum Actio (“Lift up your Actions” or more loosely “Lift up your Hearts”), was organized in honor of the life work of Fr. Peter Damian Fehlner after he won the Cardinal John J. Wright Marialogical Award of 2015 from the Mariological Society of America for his outstanding contributions to Mariology.

For a more complete list of all fourteen talks from this symposium:

http://airmaria.com/category/air-maria-shows/conferences/fr-peter-symposium-nd/

+++

The post Video – Msgr. Calkins – Franciscan Thesis, Fehlner and the Magisterium – CONF 306 first appeared on AirMaria.com.

Ave Maria!

At the Symposium titled “Sursum Actio” at Notre Dame Univ. from Jun 8-9, 2015, in honor of the life work of Fr. Peter Damian Fehlner, F.I., David Bentley Hart, Ph.D. , Professor of Theology at St. Louis University, gives the sixth conference which he titles, “Love and Knowledge: On Intellect and Intentionality”. He reflects on the Franciscan-Scotistic School of Philosophy and he points out, as championed Fr. Peter Fehlner, that knowledge always involves the will (intention and desire) of the soul at all the different stages of acquiring knowledge and growing in faith. As such, Bl. John Duns Scotus anticipated many of the questions raised by modern philosophers and gave answers to these that are logically coherent and incorporate the daily experience of our quest for knowledge of this world and of God.

The talk is followed by a commentary by Fr. Peter and then a round table discussion with the other presenters.

Fr. Peter:

Important to stress the relationship between nature and grace and not just their distinctiveness from each other.

Importance of distinction between rational and irrational creatures.

Natural happiness should be completed with supernatural happiness, that is, holiness.

Experience of the mystics is important in this discussion.

Round table:

Scotus as a continuation of St. John Damascene.

Scotus in relation to and distinction from Descartes and Brentano

Thomism more intellectual than Greeks and Scotus, natural desire for God vs supernatural desire. Scotus and de Lubac, rationality includes an absolute desire for God or it is nothing.

This symposium, Sursum Actio (“Lift up your Actions” or more loosely “Lift up your Hearts”), was organized in honor of the life work of Fr. Peter Damian Fehlner after he won the Cardinal John J. Wright Marialogical Award of 2015 from the Mariological Society of America for his outstanding contributions to Mariology.

For a more complete list of all fourteen talks from this symposium:

http://airmaria.com/category/air-maria-shows/conferences/fr-peter-symposium-nd/

Audio (MP3)

+++

The post Video – Dr. Hart: Love and Knowledge in Scotus – CONF 307 first appeared on AirMaria.com.