A couple of days ago, Ed Cook wrote a blog entry entitled Pope Benedict and Ecumenism. This got me thinking: what changes would I need to see in the Catholic Church for me to feel comfortable in communion with it?
Here's my working ideas that are hardly comprehensive:
(1) The principle of papal infallibility ex cathedra would have to be rescinded or, perhaps as a compromise position, papal infallibility ex cathedra would be subject to the prayerful consideration and unanimous assent of a council of the Church.
(2) The Roman Catholic Church could create a Protestant Catholic Rite, perhaps with a better name (Reformed Catholic Rite?), and thus join with Protestants in a new communion without requiring a change in the rites of worship that presently divide us, i.e. views on clerical marriage, the Lord's Supper, baptism, veneration of saints and so on. At present, the Roman Catholic Church accepts within its body many churches of different rites that have such different views. Of course, it would be left to negotiate the bounds of the degree of difference that is compatible within a unified Catholic Church; a common statement of values and doctrines must exist but serious and prayerful consideration must be given on which are matters essential to the Faith and which are not.
(3) I personally believe that the multiple expressions of faith in the Christian Church are a testament to the diversity possible within the Body of Christ. Each faith tradition approaches doctrinal matters from different angles and none have a monopoly on interpretation and divinity. We are called to unity not uniformity and I am prepared to work in communion with my Catholic brothers and sisters, though I may not, in the grace afforded me, entirely agree with them.
Through Michael Pahl's blog, I reached an article in Christianity Today that reviews one of the new Pope's books, Salt of the Earth: The Church at the End of the Millennium. On reading this review and the information it contains about Pope Benedict's views, he definitely leaves an impression as a critical thinker.
The first statements in the article that really caught me were these:
[Benedict (then Ratzinger)] refers, for instance, to "the canon of criticism"—women's ordination, contraception, celibacy, and the remarriage of divorced persons. On these issues, liberal reformers insist, the Catholic church must change if it is to reach the people of our time effectively. Here the cardinal becomes the skeptic. He notes an obvious factor that is often overlooked: "On these points Protestantism has taken the other path, and it is quite plain that it hasn't thereby solved the problem of being a Christian in today's world and that the problem of Christianity, the effort of being a Christian, remains just as dramatic as before." He sympathetically cites another theologian, Johannes Metz, who says that it was actually a good thing the Protestant experiment was made. Ratzinger observes, "It shows that being a Christian today does not stand or fall on these questions."
There is no denying that this is an astute observation and he has rightly driven at the heart of the matter: would a doctrinal shift edify the body of Christ and bring greater glory to God? I think it also bears on the question Ed Cook raises in his blog entry: Pope Benedict and Ecumenism.
I would like you to read the article so I will only draw out one more point that caught my eye -- the Pope's assessment of the future of Christianity in the new millennium:
When the cardinal turns his attention to the next millennium, now only months away, the tone is sober, even somber. He envisions a largely post-Christian world in which the church will be on the defensive, smaller in numbers, but, he hopes, more coherent and committed in its faith.
While I wonder if the Cardinal would have used the word the reviewer here chose, "defensive," apart from this, I find the assessment both accurate and also positive. If the Church becomes more coherent and more committed in its faith (and in so doing loses membership), it is because the Spirit is separating wheat from chaff. Shorn of its "part-time" Christians, the Church can stop force feeding those who don't want to eat and so move from a childish institution that shifts on the winds of popular culture to a more mature institution that grows rooted in our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Indeed, this is what I have always admired about the Catholic Church, ie. its rootedness in tradition. The Catholic church deliberates change over millennia it seems and it patiently endures its own weaknesses and imperfections, all the while proclaiming the glory of God and preaching Christ crucified and resurrected without shame or dilution.
Check out more books by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger; this Pope is very well published! I may have to start ordering some of these books. Many of them look really interesting.
Well, as everyone should know by now, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger has been chosen as the Pope to lead the Roman Catholic Church. As an academic, theologian, and German, I can respect the decision of the cardinals to elect an academic, theologian, and German. I am eager to see what direction this newest Pontiff will take the Catholic church and hopefully I will be able to watch his inaugural mass this week to hear the agenda he is likely to set in his homily.
My brother-in-law, Paul, who pontificates at Attitude Central on a wide range of popular culture, political, and occasionally religious issues called my attention to the Prophecies of Saint Malachy. Apparently, this saint of the Catholic Church prophesied epithets concerning 112 popes from his own day to the destruction of Rome or "the End." Since the days of this prophetic speech, there have been 111 popes, including the newly elected Pope Benedict XVI. We are, therefore, now only one Pope away from "the End," assuming that the 111th and 112th popes follow in sequence and are not separated by unprophesied popes.
Not surprisingly, eager eschatologists have found reason to identify each of the 111 popes to date with the epithets prophesied by St. Malachy. With respect to the 111th, St. Malachy named him "Gloria olivae": the Glory of the Olive. The olive is the emblem of the Benedictine Order, and though as far as I can tell Ratzinger is not member of that order, he did take the name of its patron: Saint Benedict. For more theories and coincidences, see also Wikipedia's Prophecy of the Popes.
The next pope according to St. Malachy: Petrus Romanus. He will lead the flock in the day of tribulations. Considering that Pope Benedict XVI is 78 years old, I guess the end will arrive, God willing, in my lifetime.
Interesting and provocative? Certainly. Believable? Hmmm... Malachy and malarky look and sound very similar to me. Of course, if the next pope takes the name Peter the Roman, I'm repenting of my lack of faith and joining the Catholic Church.
UPDATE: According to a wonderfully sensational website, the "problem with the prophecies as listed in The Prophecies of St. Malachy, published by the Thomas A. Nelson, a Catholic Publishing House, is that Malachy's original works listed only 111 Popes, not 112, as given in the TAN version of the prophecies." The prophecy concerning Peter the Roman is a subsequent addition to the work. Hmmm... no end times yet? Or, maybe, the Gloria olivae is the last Pope?
I have a question for those Hebrew scholars who might happen by my page, related to the Elephantine Papyri (Porten A20/A21; Cowley 30/31) and Ezra 2:2//Neh 7:7. Are בגוהי and בגוי forms of the same name? This is often assumed by many interpreters but I've never found a good explanation for why this is so. Cowley anglicizes בגוהי as Bigvai, though I'm thinking he is doing so with reference to בגוי. Porten transliterates בגוהי as Bagavahya while I've also frequently seen it written as Bagohi. The Septuagint transliterates בגוי as Bagoua/goie. The prefix בג appears to be a shortened form of the Persian word for god, בגתן or בגתא, so בגוהי could mean "his god", though only if it is read Bagohi. I have no idea what it would mean if it is read Bagavahya and I'm also not sure what בגוי would mean. I don't recall a וי suffix. Is only the י a suffix? But then I don't know the purpose of the ו. Anyways, any help or insight you could provide would be greatly appreciated...
An answered prayer: On April 11, 2005, I officially received primary residential care of my daughter, Delaney.
For those of you who have prayed for me, supported my website, read my articles... whatever you've done... I appreciate it. I hope you'll continue to support me as I start a new chapter in my life and calling as a parent.
I realized the other day as I was updating my site that this year marks my 10th anniversary with a continuous web presence. Yikes! I hardly realized it had been so long. The first incarnation of my website went online in 1995 when I was working for Alberta SuperNet, the first Internet Services company in Alberta. At the time, the site featured some basic bible information and some pages devoted to Chinese music and movie stars, such as Jackie Cheung, Andy Lau, and Carman Lee. From there, the site morphed many times, becoming increasingly more devoted to the biblical studies and movies. I've been at my own domain, anduril.ca, for almost two years now and the site continues to grow. I wonder if anyone has followed me for ten years. I doubt it; I can't possibly be that interesting. Anyways, it's been a good ten years and I hope that my visitors are enjoying my website. I look forward to the next ten years!
Catholic - Protestant Ecumenism
; this Pope is very well published! I may have to start ordering some of these books. Many of them look really interesting.![[Valid Atom]](http://anduril.ca/blog/themes/valid-atom.png "Validate my Atom Feed"){kind=small}
