Category Archives: Scripture

Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Magisterium on the anniversary of THE Counter-Reformation Statement: Sacrosancta (8 April 1546)

Image (c) 2007 George David Byers -- all international rights reserved -- all publishing by any means whatsoever forbidden

Image (c) 2007 George David Byers — all international rights reserved — all publishing by any means whatsoever forbidden

I have always recommended in my Fundamental Theology and Introduction to Sacred Scripture courses that all the seminarians (who should be studying Latin) translate –without the aid of other translations — the first and dogmatic decree issued by the Council of Trent on 8 April 1546. There are some referents of verbs which one has to search out as the very long first sentence continues with its refined nuances of the relationship of Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Sacred Magisterium. If you do this exercise honestly, without looking at other translations, you will get the gist of what Sacred Tradition is all about, as well as Cardinal Siri in his book Gethsemane, and that’s saying quite a bit. You’ll know more than almost all Catholic theologians today. But do the translation yourself. It will force you to be surrounded by all the fine points. I’ve included the translation below for those who don’t know Latin. But don’t look at that!

Sacrosancta oecumenica et generalis Tridentina synodus, in Spiritu sancto legitime congregata, praesidentibus in ea eisdem tribus apostolicae sedis legatis, hoc sibi perpetuo ante oculos proponens, ut sublatis erroribus puritas ipsa evangelii in ecclesia conservetur quod promissum ante per prophetas in scripturis sanctis dominus noster Iesus Christus Dei Filius proprio ore primum promulgavit, deinde per suos apostolos tamquam fontem omnis et salutaris veritatis et morum disciplinae omni creaturae praedicari iussit; perspiciensque, hanc veritatem et disciplinam contineri in libris scriptis et sine scripto traditionibus, quae ab ipsius Christi ore ab apostolis acceptae, aut ab ipsis apostolis Spiritu sancto dictante quasi per manus traditae ad nos usque pervenerunt orthodoxorum patrum exempla secuta, omnes libros tam veteris quam novi testamenti, cum utriusque unus Deus sit auctor, nec non traditiones ipsas, tum ad fidem, tum ad mores pertinentes, tamquam vel oretenus a Christo, vel a Spiritu sancto dictatas et continua successione in ecclesia catholica conservatas, pari pietatis affectu ac reverentia suscipit et veneratur. Sacrorum vero Librorum indicem huic decreto adscribendum censuit, ne cui dubitatio suboriri possit, quinam sint, qui ab ipsa Synodo suscipiuntur. Sunt vero infrascripti. Testamenti Veteris: Quinque Moysis, id est Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuteronomium; Iosue, Iudicum, Ruth, quattuor Regum, duo Paralipomenon, Esdrae primus et secundus, qui dicitur Nehemias, Tobias, Iudith, Esther, Iob, Psalterium Davidicum centum quinquaginta psalmorum, Parabolae, Ecclesiastes, Canticum Canticorum, Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Ieremias cum Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, duodecim prophetae minores, id est: Osea, Ioel, Amos, Abdias, Ionas, Michaeas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggaeus, Zacharias, Malachias; duo Maccabaeorum, primus et secundus. Testamenti Novi: Quattuor Evangelia, secundum Matthaeum, Marcum, Lucam, Ioannem; Actus Apostolorum a Luca Evangelista conscripti; quattuordecim epistulae Pauli Apostoli: ad Romanos, duae ad Corinthios, ad Galatas, ad Ephesios, ad Philippenses, ad Colossenses, duae ad Thessalonicenses, duae ad Timotheum, ad Titum, ad Philemonem, ad Hebraeos; Petri Apostoli duae; Ioannis Apostoli tres; Iacobi Apostoli una; Iudae Apostoli una et Apocalypsis Ioannis Apostoli. Si quis autem libros ipsos integros cum omnibus suis partibus, prout in ecclesia catholica legi consueverunt et in veteri vulgata latina editione habentur, pro sacris et canonicis non susceperit, et traditiones praedictas sciens et prudens contempserit: anathema sit.

Sacred Tradition is the necessarily univocal revelation of the Most Holy Trinity to our souls by way of the sanctifying grace of the supernatural theological virtue of infused faith. There’s much more to it — what with Christ’s own words and all — but that’s the root of it all. This is misunderstood by almost all. Pay attention to the phrase quasi per manus. Sacred Tradition is not about a mere recitation of certain manifestations of that Tradition, such as can be had with various Ecumenical Council and ex-Cathedra statements. Those are manifestations. Sacred Tradition is certainly not to be defined with mere psychological inculcation or the so-called dynamic world-views of a Lonergan. And yet, that kind of dumbing-down of all that is good and holy is what we have today with so many because of zero understanding of this great decree of the Council of Trent. I have much to say about all this in regard to the Mystical Body of Christ. Another day. There is already enough here to fill one’s thoughts for months!

Continue reading

4 Comments

Filed under Catholic, ecumenism, Scripture

If you want a Scriptural analysis of the washing of feet mandatum, here it is

Jesus crucified feet h-t 60 seconds with God

I’ve been on retreat since Tuesday of Holy Week, but I thought I would take a look how Pope Francis is faring. It seems people are in a huff over his washing the feet of young prisoners at Casal del Marmo during the Mass of the Lord’s Supper on Holy Thursday evening. In my lightning quick survey, I may have missed it, but it really looks like there’s not even one comment about what’s going on in Scripture other than that the Apostles were the receivers of the mandatum, the mandate, to wash feet.

I fully realize that the Liturgy is its own source, as it were, so to speak, but just as Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Sacred Magisterium form a kind of tripod which will not correctly manifest for us weak men what it is that the Lord provides for us if any leg of that tripod is kicked away, just so will the Liturgy, as a living expression of the entirety of that tripod, as a kind of burning lamp on top of that tripod, be unable to enliven and enlighten without the threefold support of that tripod.

We’ve seen emotional commentary, legal commentary, liturgical commentary and so on. Perhaps a Scriptural comment would help us to understand a bit more. The Most Holy Bible is often dismissed by those in the ditch on the right or the left as irrelevant, but we should be loath to say that what the Lord of History has provided and permitted and what the Holy Spirit has inspired is useless for our lives and the very Liturgy which is to have us worship the Most High God.

Recall the following:

  • lourdes serpent satan-In the Garden of Eden, the serpent was cursed to eat the dust of the cursed ground into which the dead body of Adam and the rest of us would return. Note well that the dust of the ground is cursed and is the home of Satan.
  • There was a time when a very particular patch of dirt was un-cursed, made holy, because of the presence of He-Who-Is in the burning bush. Moses was ordered to take off his sandals, which had raised him up above the cursed dust, because right there, right then, that dust was not cursed. It had been taken out of the realm of Satan.
  • Jesus commanded his disciples to kick the dust off their feet when their preaching had been rejected by any village, because in doing this, the Divine Son of God Himself explained, a sign would be provided against that village, indeed, a curse. That dust is the home of Satan, just as they are for rejecting the Kingdom of the Heavens. The curse is so ferocious that our Lord says that their lot will be worse than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. Pretty bad, that.
  • At the Last Supper, when Jesus washed the dust off the feet of the disciples and said that his Apostles were to imitate this humble service, our Lord was referring to being charitable, humbly, in all service.

Sure. But there is more. Our Lord refers to this “more” Himself, so we ought best pay attention to this.

  • John 13,1 — We read that Jesus knew that His Hour had arrived. Indeed, that is the time that all hell would break loose.
  • John 13,2 — We read that Judas had already been diabolically smacked down that he might betray Jesus. Judas is unclean in every sense of the term.
  • John 13,3 — We read that Jesus knows that the Father has provided that Jesus is omnipotent, that all things are in His power and that, despite what Judas and Satan were up to, He, Jesus, was from God and was returning to God.
  • John 13,4 — We read in the very same sentence of all that precedes, including the bit about Judas being smacked down by Satan, that Jesus got up, shed His outer garments, and girt Himself with a towel in view of the foot-washing to come.
  • John 13,5 — We read that He began to wash the feet of the disciples, who, in this case, are, in fact, the Apostles.
  • John 13,6 — We read of Simon Peter questioning Jesus about his feet being washed.
  • John 13,7 — We read, mysteriously, that Jesus says to him, that he does not now understand what He, Jesus, is doing, but that, in the future, he will. If this were merely about a nice symbol of service, that would be simple to understand, but there is more.
  • John 13, 8 — We read that Peter, obviously dismissing the observation of Jesus and thinking that he completely understands, remonstrates with Jesus, saying that He will never have his feet washed by Jesus. But Jesus’ reprimand for this is extremely severe, warning Peter that he will be cut off altogether if he does not allow this. Our Lord indicated that there was more. It is best to listen to Jesus.
  • John 13,9 — We read that Peter still dismisses the observation of Jesus that he, Peter, does not now understand, and Peter charges ahead to say that he offers not only his feet, but his head and hands as well. But it is best to listen to Jesus.
  • John 13,10 — We read that Jesus says that the one who has been cleansed (a perfect passive participle calling baptism to mind) has no need to be cleansed except for the feet (where that cursed dust is), for Jesus says, he is already entirely clean. But then Jesus adds, “but not all,” that is, not all among ye all.
  • John 13,11 — We read John’s own comment: “For He knew who would betray him. For this reason, He said, “Not all of you are clean.” This is a direct reference to Judas, who is smacked down by Satan. The connection to the cursed dust on the feet could not be clearer. It is Judas who will raise his heel with its cursed dust, the home of Satan, against Jesus, a horrific reversal of the Son of the Mother of the Redeemer in Genesis 3,15, raising His heel to crush Satan on the head. But it is in getting crushed Himself that Jesus will defeat Satan, having gained the right in all justice, in this way, to have mercy on us.
  • John 13,12 — Having finished, we read that Jesus asks the Apostles if they understand what He has done for them, although this is a rhetorical question, for He already said that they do not now understand this. It simply looks like a nice service of foot-washing.
  • John 13,13-17 — We read that Jesus immediately explains that if He, Lord and teacher, has done this for them, they likewise ought to do this for one another, for they, slaves and messengers, are not above their Lord and the One who is providing a mandate. If they only understand the nice service aspect of this, that’s nice, but truly blessed are they who understand what this is really all about and then go about doing it. This is about more than just a nice service. This has to do with establishing the Kingdom of the Heavens by simultaneously exorcising the earthly kingdom of Satan.
  • John 13,18 — We read that Jesus immediately explains more about this: He singles out him whom He has chosen, His betrayer, Judas, possessed by Satan, speaking of the fulfillment of Scriptural prophesy (Scripture is important), namely, “He who eats my bread has lifted his heel against me,” that heel with the dust of Satan upon it.
  • John 13,19 — And for those who doubt the connection that I have made to He-Who-IS in the Garden of Eden and at the Burning Bush, we read here that Jesus says that He is telling us these things before they happen so that when they do happen, that will believe that He is the One who is I AM.
  • John 13,20-26 — We read about the discovery of the betrayer, Judas, to whom Christ Jesus gives the morsel of bread.
  • John 13,27 — We read of the full possession of Judas by Satan, and that Jesus commands him (Judas? Satan?) to do quickly what he is going to do.
  • John 13,28-30 — We read of the non-perception of the Apostles and then of the departure of Judas, after having taken the morsel. We read that, “It was night.”
  • John 13,31ff — We read of Jesus speaking of the great glory of what is now happening with the betrayal, that is, Jesus and the Father being glorified with the great love which Jesus is manifesting, and which He commands the remaining Apostles to show to each other. It is a love that will bring Him to His death, and this is what He expects of His Apostles in their ministry of establishing the Kingdom of the heavens while simultaneously exorcising the kingdom of Satan, namely, that they will also provide witness to Him with that love that loves even in the face of death. We read of our promises to be faithful, but that our Lord knows that we can deny Him nonetheless.

Cardinal Bergoglio Pope Francis googled image

Now then, is Pope Francis wrong in choosing to emphasize the service aspect of this foot-washing? No, he can choose to do that, and with great benefit for the Church.

In seeming not to emphasize the other particular aspect of the foot-washing, which has to do with the Satan’s kingdom being washed away, it is not as if Pope Francis is saying that he does think that Satan does not exist. He has mentioned Satan more often in a brief space of time perhaps more than any other Pontiff on record, and to great effect.

In washing the feet of the youth, it is not as if Pope Francis is participating in some sort of antidisestablishmentarianisticalness on behalf of Satan. No, no. He’s just showing us what his idea of the new evangelization is all about: Have people of whatever sex, religion, culture, social status or condition draw close to God so that Satan will run away.

Just because Jesus washed the feet of the Apostles does not mean that only those who are symbolic of the Apostles, for instance, viri, men, are alone to have their feet washed in this way.

When the Apostles then wash the feet of others in this way, it does not mean that the others have to be ordainable, that is, men. This is not an ordination rite.

So, think about it. What does this say about the Holy Father’s idea about interreligious dialogue? Heh heh heh.

He has already mentioned reason for dialogue with Muslims in his fantastic Regensburg-like address to the diplomats. Heh heh heh.

The Holy Father has not at all ignored the other aspect of being washed from the evil influence of Satan. Not at all. Heh heh heh.

None of this is antithetical to the Mass of the Lord’s Supper. It has everything to do with the ones for whom Christ allowed Himself to be crushed. Beautiful.

I am very thankful to Almighty God for Pope Francis!

30 Comments

Filed under Catholic, liturgy, Mass, Scripture

Ad orientem on 25 March at Holy Souls Hermitage

ad orientem 25 march 2013

The ad orientem scene at Holy Souls Hermitage on 25 March 2013.

Those who haven’t read this bit about the Immaculate Conception in Genesis 3,15 in context with 2,4–3,24 won’t regret spending part of their coffee/lunch break doing so. It goes to the heart of the thesis proving original sin and the promise of redemption to be wrought by the Son of the Immaculate Woman.

This has never been done before, not even upon requests to exegetes from Pius IX and Pius XII before the declaration of the recent Marian dogmas. I really must see about publishing this somehow. Here’s the pdf and the audio:

Immaculate Conception Conference 2-7-13

Update Required To Play MediaUpdate your browser to a recent version or update your Flash plugin.

The ad orientem side-altar of the first mystery of the Rosary in the Rosary Basilica in Lourdes, France, a picture I took when I was chaplain there for some years.

Just as the donkey which had the great privilege of carrying Jesus into Jerusalem had this, his hour, fierce and sweet, with shouts about his ears for his Burden, and with palms beneath his feet, just so does this donkey of Holy Souls Hermitage think that carrying this truth about original sin and the Immaculate Conception in Genesis is his hour, fierce and sweet, a gift from the Holy Family to this most utterly mangey, flea-ridden, spider-bitten and otherwise altogether foundered and useless donkey.

I mean, I’m sure you all have Chesterton’s poem on a certain donkey memorized. If you don’t, you’ll want to…

This is the donkey that can be seen on lower Holy Souls Mountain, a Palestinian donkey, of course, what with the cross over his shoulders…

Continue reading

8 Comments

Filed under Catholic, Genesis, Immaculate Conception, Scripture, Spiritual Life

In preparation for talking about Genesis 2,4–3,24 in D.C., I read this… [and now I'm petrified]

For a summary of the thesis, scoll to the end of this page.

Click on the picture of the thesis in order to download the *.PDF of the original technical version. Yikes!

Preliminary disclaimers:

(1) I would like to get the thesis out there a bit more, and not only downloaded, but printed out, examined, and put forward for a much wider publishing. Thus, with a few edits, I’m republishing this post from my now defunct blog I had when a chaplain in Lourdes. This post is my advertisement for the project of my life, not just the thesis, but the popular version of the thesis. For many reasons, on so many levels, some of which I mention below, this is a battle in our Church Militant that needs to be fought and won. Other things have always gotten in the way. You decide.

(2) I would ask those who get nervous with any “controversy” whatsoever, who crawl out of their skin at the least indication that the status quo of the lowest common denominator is being challenged, who think any controversy is a dismissable controversy merely among scholars, and would never, as a controversy, have anything seriously to do with defending the established doctrine and morality of the Church, and therefore shouldn’t be aired in public… I would ask them to calm down and be deadly careful about what is put into such a dismissable category as “mere controversy among scholars.” Are doctrines of faith and morals dismissable controversies of scholars just because some scholars reject the teaching of Holy Mother Church? Really? One should think long and hard about that.

Now there is, I admit, in this post and in the future posts about Genesis that I hope to write, some good amount of “controversy”.

In fact, I hope to cite some of the most in-your-face statements of Continue reading

5 Comments

Filed under Catholic, Genesis, Immaculate Conception, interreligious dialogue, Scripture

O.K. So. Now I am afraid. I am indeed very afraid. I fear the fear. I cannot be consoled. I refuse to be consoled.

IVE Biblical Conference

Click to enlarge. What a fright. Father Stock was the moderator of my tesina at the Pontifical Biblical Institute when he was the rector. He is the current Secretary of the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

If you are in the D.C. area at this time, you are warmly invited by the wonderfully Catholic Institute of the Incarnate Word to listen in. The presentations are only 45 minutes followed by a Question and Answer period.

Ye who are in the D.C. area, spread the word about this two-day event.

Saint Jerome: Pray for us!

4 Comments

Filed under Genesis, Scripture

More from Father Byers’ Jackass Trilogy: Some snippets in honor of Saint Robert Bellarmine

[[N.B. In these paragraphs, you'll meet Carpe Diem, that is, Polycarp, a severly autistic nephew of Cardinal Fidele. We enter a scene in which Father Alexamenos' friend, don Hash, is getting himself into deep trouble with some Cardinals of the Roman Curia. He's realizing that he needs to save the life of Father Alexamenos. These paragraphs should spike the interest of some of the more academic biblical scholars among the readership. Yikes!]]

Carpe Diem walked into the room, his clothes inside out and back to front, shoes untied, and wearing a helmet. He rarely banged his head against walls until he was too dazed to continue, but wearing a helmet was part of him. He offered the last of a box of chocolate to any takers, though he gave the chocolate to don Hash, who had taken the time to answer his questions. Don Hash was horrified to see that the nails of Carpe Diem’s fingers had been chewed down to their roots.

“The rules are… I can’t believe I’m saying this…” said don Hash, hesitating, thinking of Saint Lawrence while thanking Carpe Diem, who then left, flapping his hands as he so often did. “Saint Robert Bellarmine’s rules might have seemed to him to establish in a textual critical manner the words of Scripture in the way dogmatically insisted upon by the Council of Trent, but which, at the same time, surely seemed to him also to have the benefit of appeasing the so-called Reformers. But Trent was not followed and the Protestants couldn’t have cared less about anything Bellarmine did. His double-edged damage control, if accepted by the Church, would have to become a habit, a virtue, a ‘policy’… almost making of itself revealed Truth, manipulating Sacred Scripture as it did. Such a policy fears the authority of the Holy Father, effectively claiming that the only sources of infallibility are the temporary hypotheses of scientific methodology. For him, only science, artificially cut off from the Faith, could be the basis for the Magisterial discernment of what Sacred Scripture is in its extension, its books, sentences, phrases, words and letters. Bellarmine could not think of any other aid to judge whether one ancient manuscript was correct and another not. He ignored the fact that if a Scripture passage was consistently used in the Liturgy, though in Latin, that is how the Church could find the words of the original language manuscripts. Yet, this was the very discernment desired by the Fathers of Trent. If Bellarmine’s double-edged damage control succeeded, there would have been a new inquisition in which burning truth – as that which is not expedient to ecumenical unity – would be rewarded.”

“What on earth are you talking about?” demanded Cardinal Froben.

“Wake up and smell the smoke!” exclaimed Cardinal Fidèle. “Satan’s smouldering fires come to us even in the bella figura of angels of light. In controversy with Galileo, Bellarmine opened the windows to let in what he thought was the fresh air of Scripture choking science. He would have come close to suffocating the Church and the world – not because Scripture cannot help to purify the desire to breathe in scientific knowledge – but because his politically correct, overly-literal approach to Scripture attacked faith and science.”

“The bitter irony is overwhelming,” said Cardinal Elzevir.

“Dear Lord…” said don Hash into the dead silence of the room, staring into the last flames of the fire. He was certain that Bellarmine could not have been more mistaken. He asked Christ out loud: “Would I so easily be the one to light the fire, burning your saints at the stake?”

It was Cardinal Fidèle who answered: “I do not know the answer to that, yet, but, in this case, you have seen through the devil’s own work. The Holy See is necessarily the devil’s playpen.”

[...]

Don Hash was full of questions, but Cardinal Fidèle slipped the paper from don Hash’s hands, saying, “Explain what Bellarmine wanted to do, Hash.”

Don Hash didn’t know if he was being manipulated into criticizing a saint to the point of burning the truth. He silently asked the Lord for help, and then said aloud, “It seems that Bellarmine treated the Vulgate not as a textual critical measure to be used for the discovery of the original words in the original language manuscripts – as much as this is possible – as Trent had envisioned it, but merely as something ‘precious’, which could be disregarded for little reason.”

“Go on,” said Cardinal Fidèle.

“The Council Fathers of Trent knew that they didn’t have a textually critically established Bible, not for the Latin manuscripts for the Vulgate, nor the original language manuscripts in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic,” continued don Hash, who then repeated: “They knew that God would not abandon His Church, and judged that if one could establish the consistency of the usage of the Latin Vulgate in, for instance, the Liturgy, then one could use that more accessible source as a measure for the original language manuscripts, coming up with an exemplar of the inspired Scriptures: lex orandi lex credendi, the law of praying is the law of believing. The Scriptures were written in a lived Tradition of Faith taking its life in the liturgy.

Cardinal Francisco began to understand that, now for so many years, the abomination was where it should not be. He had thrown the pearls to the swine, who also went by the name Catholic, who were trampling upon the pearls, and turning on the members of the Body of Christ.

Don Hash continued: “Bellarmine was distracted, I suppose, by pastoral problems and administration, becoming embroiled in problems that were extraneous to his expertise. He didn’t have the time to understand the importance of methodology, thinking that it was all a matter of how many manuscripts – though with respect given to those of antiquity – instead of it being a matter of the Vulgate also being of service in the discovery of the textual critical extension of the words of the original language manuscripts. Bellarmine’s was a pseudo-science, for so many of the decisions about which words belonged in Scripture are, in the end, otherwise arbitrary along the lines of Cardinal Froben’s Prinzip der Prinzipienlosigkeit…”

“I’ve got a saint with me,” said Cardinal Froben. “Where did you say Bellarmine’s tomb is?”

Carpe Diem walked into the room and started pacing from one corner to the other, listening intently, though not understanding anything he heard. He wanted to repeat something.

Don Hash asked, “Why entrust Revelation to decisions based on, as you said, what is merely ‘traditional’, pastoral, liturgical, apologetic, sociological, organizational, cultural, political, geographical, psychological, intellectual, attitudinal or even economic? Even the Nestle-Aland Greek edition of the New Testament was produced like this. It’s pseudo-science.”

“So, what is to be done with Bellarmine’s work… in practical terms?” asked Cardinal Fidèle.

“When Monsignor Sens arrives, Bellarmine’s work is to be burned,” said don Hash with intensity. “It is better to burn than to be burned. Why should it destroy people’s Faith?”

“I see you are eager to set fire to a saint. Is Bellarmine not like Saint Lawrence, your patron saint, who was burned to death?” asked Cardinal Fidèle, objecting with false pretense.

“Not in the least,” said don Hash. “I’m certain that Bellarmine was wrong, however great a saint he was. He simply didn’t know what he was doing. It is not Bellarmine himself that I would burn, please God, just his work. I repeat that what he did would do great harm to the Church.”

“So, you wouldn’t burn him?” asked Cardinal Fidèle.

“No, please God,” repeated don Hash.

“What if the Pope commanded you to burn him or be burned yourself?” persisted the Prelate. The other Cardinals thought this was quite humourous, since it all seemed hypothetical. Don Hash did not answer. To don Hash, he said, “The fire is almost out,” handing the paper to him. “Before burning anything substantial, like someone from America, try burning the paper in your hands.”

[...]

Just then, the doorbell rang and Cardinal Fidèle motioned with his eyes for don Hash to open the door of his apartment. Monsignor Sens, who walked in as if he were under a cloud of suspicion, was ushered into the study. Carpe Diem stopped his pacing so that he could stare intently at the new arrival. Cardinal Fidèle said, expectantly, “You’ve gained quite a bit of weight, Sens.”

Monsignor Sens stopped dead at the entrance to the study. His boss, Cardinal Elzevir, was clearly upset at his presence. “Get over it, Elzevir,” said Cardinal Fidèle. “Invite him in.”

“Sens,” said Cardinal Elzevir with severity. “It seems you have divided loyalties.”

“Oh! Isn’t it wonderful Georg! Maria has returned from the Abbey!” exclaimed Carpe Diem on behalf of Cardinals Elzevir and Fidèle, quoting the envious Baroness in The Sound of Music. Carpe Diem’s interruptions were triggered by his brain’s emotional associations.

Monsignor Sens involuntarily stepped back. “Elzevir!” exclaimed Cardinal Fidèle.

After a moment, the Cardinal Secretary of State calmly said, “Very well… Come forward.”

“Maria has returned!” repeated Carpe Diem, now twirling a piece of string above his eyes.

“Give Sens the paper, Hash,” instructed Cardinal Fidèle.

Monsignor Sens walked to don Hash and took it from him. Before he looked at it, Cardinal Fidèle said, “Throw it on the embers, Sens.” He did, and, after some seconds, it burst into flame.

Monsignor Sens removed his winter coat and gave it to don Hash, who immediately dropped it on the floor. The top of Monsignor Sens’ cassock was not buttoned, revealing the cause of his sudden weight gain, a large tome of obvious antiquity. He held it out to his superior, the Cardinal Secretary of State, who took it from him with some force. “Stand back, Sens, and clear these things off the coffee-table.” Cardinal Elzevir then opened the volume. The other Cardinals leaned over while Cardinal Elzevir read the ornate title page dedicated to Popes Damasus, Paul III, Sixtus V, Clement VIII and Paul V. He turned the folios one by one. Following the title page was a list of the same directions which Cardinal Fidèle had just asked Monsignor Sens to burn. The following pages listed the Greek and Latin manuscripts used for his new redaction, only some of which had been consulted through the Vatican’s Apostolic Library. The rest of the volume contained Bellarmine’s own pseudo-revised version of the Latin Vulgate along with the pseudo-revised Greek text on facing pages. Each chapter concluded with textual critical notes as damage control appeasing those worried about the Latin text.

“It could have been the jewel of the Counter-Reformation,” said don Hash.

“Now, Hash,” said Cardinal Fidèle, “turn to John, chapter eight. What do you find there?”

Don Hash had been on the edge of his chair, straining to see the volume on the low table. He immediately traversed the few paces and went down on his knees. He turned the volume around. It was almost three quarters of a metre wide when opened. He turned to the first pages, and then to the Gospel of John. “It’s what I don’t find there,” replied don Hash. “There’s no mulier adultera. Even Bellarmine had the adulterous woman stoned to death, right out of the text, completely against everything Trent dogmatically indicated. Bellamine should have burned at the stake…”

“My, my… aren’t you easy to agitate?” taunted Cardinal Fidèle. “Would you burn a canonized saint just so easily? I wonder what you would do with someone who wasn’t canonized, at least because he wasn’t dead… yet. Now, Hash, Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under books, Catholic, saints, Scripture

Hackers using stumbleupon to break into — wait for it — Holy Soul’s Hermitage’s ~Aeternus ille caelestium~

A while back, So And So emailed me asking access to the locked post on AEternus ille caelestium. I declined, saying that the post was not yet ready to publish, and needed quite a bit of commentary. Well, someone was impatient today and tried to break in to that locked post about a zillion times by way of the servers at stumbleupon. Whatever. Even if it’s been hacked and copied, it won’t be understood, guaranteed. It needs commentary! But, just to whet your appetite, here’s a random sentence from that non-document, translated and with an initial interlinear fisking, but without the necessary commentary. Remember, there are only two copies in the world. All the rest were burned by Saint Robert Bellarmine and the rest of the Cardinals of Holy Mother Church. It is by far the most important non-document of the Catholic Counter-Reformation.

14 AETERNUS ILLE CAELESTIUM

Verum quia nihil profuisset huius editionis auctoritatem grauissimo sanxisse decreto, si illius quæ germana esset lectio nesciretur, sacerq. textus ita disputantium pateret arbitrio, vt is, qui aduersus perfidum hostem, tamquam validissimus mucro distri- ctus fuerat, idem & clypeus fieri posset, quo debilitati iam, cæsiq. hostis latera tegerentur.

Even so, since nothing had been done to ratify the authority of this edition by a most weighty decree, so if there were anyone who was ignorant of the genuine reading, then the Sacred Text would be open to the judgement of those disputing, so that he, fighting against a faithless enemy, would have lost the strongest edge which would become a shield, for him who is already weakened, to cover his flanks from the blows of the enemy.

In other words:

Even so, since nothing had been done [since 8 April 1546] to ratify the authority of this edition [of the true, textual critical Vulgate as desired by Trent in the first dogmatic decree of the fourth session (Sacrosancta), with Sixtus V thinking that he has that edition in hand, an opinion that would cost him his life] by a most weighty decree [which AEternus ille caelestium sets out to be with multiple threats of excommunications for those who do not accept its contents], so if there were anyone who was ignorant of the genuine reading [of that edition put together according to that decree of Trent (Sacrosancta)], then the Sacred Text [even in the original languages] would be open to the judgement of those disputing [a Catholic with one of the new Protestants], so that he [the Catholic], fighting against a faithless enemy [the new Protestant], would have lost the strongest edge (of the sword) [as would be provided by just such a textually critically sound text, approved by the Supreme Magisterium], which would [have] become a shield for him who is already weakened [because of the unmitigated violence of the "Reformation"], to cover his flanks from the blows of the enemy.

Sixtus V, a hero of mine, for whom I’ve prayed (he’s not even a “Servant of God” as far as I know) and from whom I’ve asked intercession (since, whether in heaven or still in purgatory, he can still pray for all of us), understood the difficulty if not the best solution. I would often find myself before his tomb in the Sistine Chapel of Saint Mary Major’s through my years in Rome. Both Sixtus V and Robert Bellarmine are very significant, influential figures for this hermit of yours.

The commentary just on the significance of this sentence would go about 250 pages. In fact, it has. That was when I had a learned Cardinal as a second reader for yet another thesis… and that was all just chapter one, but I digress. Hacker knuckleheads, if successful, will only find an unfinished product (minus all commentary) which they will not be able to finish or interpret. Any efforts of theirs will only help my cause to publicize — later, please God — a popular and correct interpretation of what is actually going on with this document.

Warning to hackers: Really, what I say is true. The only people who have understood this document to date are Sixtus V, Bellarmine (later), the Pope in the last part of Bellarmine’s life, also Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius X and a not so well known Italian priest. That’s it. Oh… me too. Oh, and the Cardinal who was second reader… But that’s another story altogether.

13 Comments

Filed under Catholic, ecumenism, Scripture

Thank you! Moriae encomium!

Thanks to the super anonymous reader who sent in this volume, very useful for some background information. You never know what author is going to give you exactly what you are looking for even despite themselves! Very cool. Thanks so much!

2 Comments

Filed under Scripture

Thinking about the adulterous woman: John 7,53–8,11. I am she, as are we all.

If you knew anything about the Old City of Jerusalem and the Temple precincts, and the ferocity of the present tense in the Greek manuscripts of this incident, you would have to conclude that the whole scene was set up beforehand by those who wanted the death of Jesus. The woman herself was, to them, totally unimportant, disposable after use, even by stoning. What was important was the death of Jesus. I’ve written on that at length elsewhere. Can’t find it. The hermitage is not yet in order. So just a few comments:

If Jesus agreed to have her stoned, He Himself would be put to death that very day by Pontius Pilot, who could not tolerate an individual usurping the right of Rome to judge whether someone was worthy of capital punishment.

If He didn’t agree to have her stoned — which would be thought to be a disagreement with Moses — then He would lose all credibility, and could be stoned along with the woman.

Either way, He was a dead Man that day, no? The answer is yes, He was a dead Man that very day. You can’t infuriate the religious leaders of the day and live, not in yesteryear, nor today. You’ll have your head cut off one way or the other.

Some of the Fathers of the Church (by no means unanimous!) did not like this passage, saying that it let the woman off too easily. My response: No, it didn’t.

In fact, many religious leaders today would throw Jesus out of active ministry for being so “severe” with her, so “pastorally insensitive”. He said: “Do not sin again!” Those words should ring in our ears, given sound by the weakness we know ourselves to suffer. “How dare He not give us a loophole, a rationalization, a way to break the Law of God and please ourselves. How dare He tell us to do the impossible!”

Sometimes people don’t know what they are doing: “Father, forgive them… They know not what they do!” Those making the comments that Jesus let her off too easily ought to see things from her perspective. She could see quite plainly that Jesus, in doing what He did – turning the tables with a word, having those breathing death humiliate themselves – He Himself would pay the price. They would immediately plot His death another way, and be successful in doing this…

… until He rose from the dead.

It was in this moment in which Jesus said, “No more! No more will stoning of adulterers be a viable pedagogical witness to the justice of God in the face of sin. In laying down my life, I, being God and man, will be the only lesson which men will receive from now on about the horrors of sin and the mercy of God. I will take on the consequences of their sin, death, and so have the right in justice to have mercy on them. Father, forgive them…

Though some throw tantrums, wanting to stone this adulterous woman right out of the Scriptures, saying that she is not textually critically viable, the Church says otherwise. I’ve done some rather detailed studies of this. Perhaps one day I’ll be able to find those in the hermitage here, and publish them.

And oh, just to say, this woman does not object, nor throw a tantrum that she is too weak to stay away from sin. She has a sense of the strength and love of Jesus that will keep her on the right Way to heaven. Of course she is too weak. We are all too weak. Jesus doesn’t just command us not to sin. He gives us strength. He has the right to do this. He was, as it were, stoned to death for us.

To go further with this. This adulterous woman, no longer adulterous, but in the good graces of the Most High, is the image of the Immaculate Bride of Christ, the Church. She is transformed in grace. She is one with her Savior. The Sacred Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments, are filled with references to this, no? Everywhere you look.

Any sin is an adultery, departing from the right Way to prostitute ourselves to the ways of the world, the flesh and the devil. With any sin, we are that adulterous woman. Sure, circumstances set me up for a fall into whatever sin, such as arrogance. But I could choose not to sin, depending on the grace of our Lord. But I can also choose to be the adulterer, prostituting myself to political correctness. The Lord will tell me: “Sin no more!” And, with His grace, I, like this woman, will look to Him with humble thanksgiving, knowing that His words are not mockery, but an invitation to trust in Him once again. Jesus, just that good, just that kind.

2 Comments

Filed under religion, Scripture

12 Holy Souls Hermitage Heroes and Heroines — Pope Sixtus V

“Sixtus” is from “Christ”, that is “Xystus” not “six”! I have very often prayed at his tomb in the Sistine Chapel (named after him) of the Basilica of Saint Mary Major. I would go to his tomb just after visiting the tomb on the other side of the chapel, that of Saint Pius V. Sixtus V is not canonized. I know that. There are reasons for that. I know that. Yet, I say a prayer for him and then make bold to ask his intercession about a project that was near and dear to him and brought him to his death, since he made a deadly mistake. Too bad, that. If only… But, the Lord can do all things.

He was right about what he wanted to do, but made a mistake along the way. He understood a central point of Trent on the relationship of Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Sacred Magisterium. The only other ones to understand this would be Saint Robert Bellarmine and Pope Paul V (due to what seems to be a revelation!), then the future Leo XIII, who, I think, had influence on the Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius in Vatican Council I on this point, then Saint Pius X and, of all people, the very much misunderstood and unnecessarily maligned Father Dolindo Ruotolo. The great Father Ignace de la Potterie, S.J., a good friend (R.I.P.), belongs with this crowd. I would like very much to write much about this, and I hope that that will be part of Holy Souls Hermitage for me. A Hail Mary for this intention, please!

Leave a Comment

Filed under saints, Scripture