Victor of Vita, the council of Carthage (484), the Book of the Catholic Faith, and the Johannine Comma

In 484 A.D. an unusual council of bishops was convened by the Vandal king Huneric (also spelled Huniric and Hunirix) in Carthage North Africa. The Germanic Vandals had conquered most of North Africa west of Alexandria, taking control of the region from the Roman empire, and establishing Carthage as its capital in 439 A.D. The Vandals had converted to Christianity before leaving Hispania (i.e. the Iberian Peninsula) in 429 A.D for North Africa, though the form of Christianity they had embraced was Homoianism, not Catholic Homoousianism.

By 484 A.D. this region of North Africa had been under Homoian Vandal rule for over four decades, but the majority of Christians remained Catholic. As such, of the hundreds of bishops that attended the 484 A.D. council, the vast majority—461 according to Heffle*—were Catholic bishops.

Recently, I was able to obtain John Moorheads’s English translation of an extensive historical document that provides the proceedings of this council, and the events leading up to it—Victor of Vita’s, History of the Vandal Persecution (Google Books; Scribd pdf).

The first book of Victor's tome is a chronicle of the Vandal invasion of North Africa under the leadership of their king Geiseric. 

The second book begins with the death of Geiseric and succession to the throne by his eldest son, Huniric. Concerning Huniric's rule, Victor writes:

First of all the tyrant decreed, in a dreadful command, that no-one could hold an office in his palace or carry out public duties without becoming an Arian. (Victor of Vita: History of the Vandal Persecution, English translation John Moorhead - Liverpool University Press, 1992, Book II, chapter 23, p. 32)

In chapter 26 he relates the following:

But with what floods of tears shall I proceed? He sent bishops, priests, deacons and other members of the church, to the number of 4,966, to exile in the desert Among them were very many who had gout, and others who had lost their worldly sight through age. Among their number was the blessed Felix, bishop of Abbir (Henchir el-Khandaq), who had then been a bishop for 44 years; having been struck with the disease of paralysis he did not feel anything, nor was he capable of speech. (Ibid. p.33)

An edict from Huniric/Hunirix is provided in chapter 39:

"Hunirix, king of the Vandals and Alans, to all the homousian bishops. It is well known that not once but quite often your priests have been forbidden to celebrate any liturgies at all in the territory of the Vandals, in case they seduce Christian souls and destroy them. Many of them have despised this and, contrary to the prohibition, have been discovered to have said mass in the territories of the Vandals, claiming that they hold to the rule of the Christian faith in its fullness. And because we do not wish for scandal in the provinces granted us by God, therefore know that by the providence of God and with the consent of our holy bishops we have decreed this: that on the first of February next you are all to come to Carthage, making no excuse that you are frightened, so that you will be able to debate concerning the principles of faith with our venerable bishops and establish the propriety of the faith of the Homousians, which you defend, from the divine scriptures. From this it will be clear whether you hold the faith in its fullness. We have sent a copy of this edict to all your fellow bishops throughout Africa. Given on 20 May 483 in the seventh year of Hunirix." (Ibid. pp. 37-38)

From the above edict we learn that Hunirix [Huniric] has decreed that “all the homousian bishops” are to meet on February 1, 484 A.D. in Carthage “to debate concerning the principles of faith with our venerable bishops and establish the propriety of the faith of the Homousians, which you defend, from the divine scriptures.”

A few chapters later, Victor penned the following:

52 That day of treachery which the king had appointed, 1 February, was now drawing near. There came together not only the bishops of the whole of Africa, but also those of many of the islands, worn out with suffering and grief. Silence was observed for many days, until he separated every skilled and learned man from among them, so that they could be put to death on the basis of false charges. For he committed to the flames one of that choir of the learned, whose name was Laetus. a vigorous and most learned man, after he had long endured a squalid imprisonment. He thought that making an example of him would strike fear into the others and enable him to wear them down.

53 Finally the debate took place, needless to say at a place their enemies had selected. Our people chose to avoid the disturbances which loud voices would have caused, in case the Arians were later to say that they had been overpowered by weight of numbers, and chose ten of their number who would answer on behalf of them all. Cyrila, with his lackeys, most arrogantly placed a throne for himself in a high place, while our people were standing. And our bishops said: "It is always pleasant to be at a meeting at which the exaltation of power does not proudly hold sway, but general consent is arrived at, so that the truth is recognized from what the judges decree, in accordance with the actions of the parties. But who is to be the judge on this occasion, who will weigh the evidence so that the scales of justice may confirm what has been argued well or show unsound propositions to be false?"

54 While these and other things were being said, the king's notary answered: "The patriarch Cyrila has named some people." Our people, abominating the proud and unlawful title which he had usurped, said: "Read out to us who gave permission for Cyrila to take this title for himself!" At this our enemies made a loud clamour and began to bring false accusations. And because our people had sought that, if the throng of sensible people were not allowed to ask questions, they could at least look on, the order was given that all the children of the catholic church who were present were to be beaten with a hundred blows each. Then blessed Eugenius began to cry out: "May God see the violence we endure, let him know the affliction we suffer from the persecutors!"

55 Our people turned round and said to Cyrila: "Say what you intend to do." Cyrila said: "I do not know Latin." Our bishops said: "We know very well that you have always spoken Latin; you should not excuse yourself now, especially since you have set this fire going." And, seeing that the catholic bishops were better prepared for the debate, he flatly refused to give them a hearing, relying on various quibbles. But our people had foreseen this and written a short work concerning the faith, composed quite fittingly and with the necessary detail. They said: "If you wish to know our faith, this is the truth we hold."

THE BOOK OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH

56 We are enjoined by a royal command to provide an account of the catholic faith which we hold. So we are setting out to indicate briefly the things which we believe and proclaim, aware of our lack of ability but supported by divine assistance. We recognize, then, that the first thing we must do is give an explanation of the unity of the substance of the Father and the Son, which the Greeks call homousion.

Therefore: we acknowledge the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit in the unity of the divine nature in such a way that we can say with a faithful confession that the Father subsists as a distinct person, and the Son equally exists in his own person, and that the Holy Spirit retains the distinctiveness of his own person, not asserting that the Father is the same as the Son, nor confessing that the Son is the same as the Father or the Holy Spirit, nor understanding the Holy Spirit in such a way that he is the Father or the Son; but we believe the unbegotten Father and the Son begotten of the Father and the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father to be of one substance and essence, because the unbegotten Father and the begotten Son and the Holy Spirit who proceeds have one divine nature in common; nevertheless, there are three distinct persons.

57 A heresy arose and brought forth something new against this catholic and apostolic faith. It maintained that the Son was not born of the substance of the Father but came into being from no existing things, that is, out of nothing. To refute and completely destroy this wicked profession which had come forth against the faith, a Greek word, homousion, was coined. This means 'of one substance and essence,' and signifies that the Son was not born from no existing things nor from any substance, but of the Father. Therefore, whoever thinks that the word homousion is to be laid aside wishes to assert that the Son came to exist out of nothing. But if the Son is not 'of nothing,' he is without doubt of the Father, and rightly homousion, that is, of one substance with the Father.

58 That he is of the Father, that is, of one substance with the Father, is demonstrated by these testimonies. The apostle says: 'who, while he is the brightness of his glory and the figure of his substance, also upholds all things by the word of his power.' (Heb 1:3) [Ibid. pp. 43-45]

This apologia for the Catholic Faith continues for another 43 chapters (pp. 45-63). It contains dozens of supporting Scriptural quotes, including the Johannine Comma of 1 John 5:7,8. Note the following:

82 And so, no occasion for uncertainty is left. It is clear that the Holy Spirit is also God and the author of his own will, he who is most clearly shown to be at work in all things and to bestow the gifts of the divine dispensation according to the judgment of his own will, because where it is proclaimed that he distributes graces where he wills, servile condition cannot exist, for setvitude is to be understood in what is created, but power and freedom in the Trinity. And so that we may teach the Holy Spirit to be of one divinity with the Father and the Son still more clearly than the light, here is proof from the testimony of John the evangelist. For he says: 'There are three who bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.' Surely he does he not say 'three separated by a difference in quality' or 'divided by grades which differentiate, so that there is a great distance between them?' No, he says that the 'three are one.' (Ibid. p. 56)

THE BOOK OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH ends with:

101 This is our faith, confirmed by evangelical and apostolic traditions and authority, and founded on the association of all the catholic churches which are in this world; in which faith we trust and hope we shall remain, by the grace of almighty God, until the end of this life. Amen.

This is the end of the book sent on 20 April by Januarius of Zattara (Kef Benzioune) and Villaticus of Casae Medianae, bishops of Numidia, and Boniface of Foratiana and Boniface of Gratiana, bishops of Byzacena. (Ibid. p. 63)

 

And with the ending the Catholic defense, I shall end this post…

 

Grace and peace,

David 

*Charles Joseph Heffle, History of the Councils - Vol. IV, A.D. 451 to  A.D. 680, 1895, p. 36.

The Parliament of the World’s Religions (2023)

Today is the first day of the five-day event known as The Parliament of the World Religions [link]. The following is from their ‘Our History’ page [link]:

The organization was founded on a mission to cultivate harmony among the world’s religious and spiritual communities and to foster their engagement with the world and its guiding institutions to address the critical issues of our time. The Parliament was incorporated in 1988 to carry out a tradition and legacy that dates back to the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago, where the historic first convening of the World’s Parliament of Religions created a global platform for engagement of religions of the east and west.

Since the historic 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions in Chicago, modern Parliament Convenings have attracted participants from more than 200 diverse religious, indigenous, and secular beliefs and more than 80 nations to its international gatherings in Chicago (1993), Cape Town (1999), Barcelona (2004), Melbourne (2009), Salt Lake City (2015), Toronto (2018) and virtually (2021). These Parliament Convenings are the world’s oldest, largest, and most inclusive gatherings of the global interfaith movement. Nearly 60,000 people across the world have convened in an enduring commitment to justice, peace, and sustainability through the lens of interfaith dialogue and cooperation.

Global leaders such as His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama, His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, UN Messenger of Peace Jane Goodall, Nobel Peace Laureates Desmond Tutu and Shirin Ebadi, and President Jimmy Carter have addressed the Parliament Convenings throughout their history.

I would now like to point out that two of the religious traditions I have been studying and writing on for over three decades now had representatives attending the first PWR event, and will also be participating the one convening this week.

The Catholic Church was represented by Cardinal Gibbons in 1893, and he opened the event [link]; Cardinal Blase Joseph Cupich will be attending in 2023 [link].

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints sent B, H. Roberts and the Mormon Tabernacle Choir in 1893 [link]; in 2023, they are one of the events sponsors  [link], and one of the exhibitors [link].

Interestingly enough, representatives of the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society (i.e. Jehovah’s Witnesses) have never attended any of the PWR events. I suspect that their stance reflects the position that members of the church Jesus Christ and His apostles founded actually practiced.

Grace and peace,

David

Some insightful thoughts on the Word of God

The following quotation is from an address delivered by Benedict XVI back on October 6, 2008 that I found to be quite insightful and inspiring:

At the beginning of our Synod the Liturgy of the Hours presents a passage from Psalm 118 on the Word of God: a praise of his Word, an expression of the joy of Israel in learning it and, in it, to recognize his will and his Face. I would like to meditate on some verses of this Psalm with you.

It begins like this: "In aeternum, Domine, verbum tuum constitutum est in caelo... firmasti terram, et permanet". This refers to the solidity of the Word. It is solid, it is the true reality on which one must base one's life. Let us remember the words of Jesus who continues the words of this Psalm: "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away". Humanly speaking, the word, my human word, is almost nothing in reality, a breath. As soon as it is pronounced it disappears. It seems to be nothing. But already the human word has incredible power. Words create history, words form thoughts, the thoughts that create the word. It is the word that forms history, reality.

Furthermore, the Word of God is the foundation of everything, it is the true reality. And to be realistic, we must rely upon this reality. We must change our idea that matter, solid things, things we can touch, are the more solid, the more certain reality. At the end of the Sermon on the Mount the Lord speaks to us about the two possible foundations for building the house of one's life: sand and rock. The one who builds on sand builds only on visible and tangible things, on success, on career, on money. Apparently these are the true realities. But all this one day will pass away. We can see this now with the fall of large banks: this money disappears, it is nothing. And thus all things, which seem to be the true realities we can count on, are only realities of a secondary order. The one who builds his life on these realities, on matter, on success, on appearances, builds upon sand. Only the Word of God is the foundation of all reality, it is as stable as the heavens and more than the heavens, it is reality. Therefore, we must change our concept of realism. The realist is the one who recognizes the Word of God, in this apparently weak reality, as the foundation of all things. Realist is the one who builds his life on this foundation, which is permanent. Thus the first verses of the Psalm invite us to discover what reality is and how to find the foundation of our life, how to build life.

The following verse says: "Omnia serviunt tibi". All things come from the Word, they are products of the Word. "In the beginning was the Word". In the beginning the heavens spoke. And thus reality was born of the Word, it is "creatura Verbi". All is created from the Word and all is called to serve the Word. This means that all of creation, in the end, is conceived of to create the place of encounter between God and his creature, a place where the history of love between God and his creature can develop. "Omnia serviunt tibi". The history of salvation is not a small event, on a poor planet, in the immensity of the universe. It is not a minimal thing which happens by chance on a lost planet. It is the motive for everything, the motive for creation. Everything is created so that this story can exist, the encounter between God and his creature. In this sense, salvation history, the Covenant, precedes creation. During the Hellenistic period, Judaism developed the idea that the Torah would have preceded the creation of the material world. This material world seems to have been created solely to make room for the Torah, for this Word of God that creates the answer and becomes the history of love. The mystery of Christ already is mysteriously revealed here. This is what we are told in the Letter to the Ephesians and to the Colossians: Christ is the protòtypos, the first-born of creation, the idea for which the universe was conceived. He welcomes all. We enter in the movement of the universe by uniting with Christ. One can say that, while material creation is the condition for the history of salvation, the history of the Covenant is the true cause of the cosmos. We reach the roots of being by reaching the mystery of Christ, his living word that is the aim of all creation.

"Omnia serviunt tibi". In serving the Lord we achieve the purpose of being, the purpose of our own existence. Let us take a leap forward: "Mandata tua exquisivi". We are always searching for the Word of God. It is not merely present in us. Just reading it does not mean necessarily that we have truly understood the Word of God. The danger is that we only see the human words and do not find the true actor within, the Holy Spirit. We do not find the Word in the words. [Bold emphasis mine - entire address HERE]

 

Grace and peace,

David

Supernatural visions: Catholic, Protestant and Mormon

Whilst reading Trevan Hatch’s When the Lights Came On, I felt compelled to reflect on the very nature of supernatural visions. In the first chapter of the book, Hatch provides twenty examples of claimed supernatural visions by individuals in America between 1741-1827. All twenty individuals related two common elements concerning their claimed visionary experiences: first, they saw God the Father and Jesus Christ together at the same time; and second, both of them appeared as men.

Now, all twenty of the individuals were of a Protestant background—no visionary experiences from Catholics were provided. I suspect that Hatch did not reference any Catholic examples because he could not find any Catholic visionary experiences that shared the two common elements of the twenty individuals he referenced—they saw both God the Father and Jesus Christ together and as men. Personally speaking, I am not aware any visionary experiences reported by individuals within the Catholic tradition that had God the Father and Jesus Christ appearing together in a vision as men.

Catholics have claimed visions of Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, Michael the Archangel, Satan and demons; but to my knowledge, no Catholic has reported that they have seen God the Father in a vision. [For an excellent treatment on Catholic visionary experiences, see THIS LINK.]

With that said, many Catholic—and Eastern Orthodox—mystics have claimed to had some sort of supernatural interaction with God. Such reported mystical experiences seem to be of a different order/nature than those experiences that have historically been termed ‘visions'. 

In ending, I would like to know what folk of differing Christian traditions think about the claimed visions of those who are not within their own tradition.

Grace and peace,

David

P.S. I cannot help but think that the issue of ‘visions’ is somehow connected the doctrine of the ‘beatific vision’—see THIS POST for some reflections on Visio Dei.

A History of the Catholic Church (8 volumes) by Fernand Mourett, translated by Newton Thompson

Over 30 years ago, I was able to purchase the first 5 volumes of Fernand Mourett’s A History of the Catholic Church, translated into English by Newton Thompson.

Mourett’s Histoire générale de l'Église was originally published in France between 1914-1927 in 9 volumes.  Thompson subsequently translated the first 8 volumes into English, which were published by the B. Herder Book Co. between 1931-1957. This English set is over 5,500 pages in length, beginning with the birth of Jesus Christ to the Virgin Mary, and taking one through nearly 1900 years of the history of the Church that He established.

Earlier today, I discovered that Thompson’s English translation is now available online to read and/or download (all 8 volumes) via the following link:

https://archive.org/details/AHistoryOfTheCatholicChurch/AHistoryOfTheCatholicChurchComplete/

Though it has been quite a number of years since I last read the first 5 volumes that are on my shelves, I recall them as being quite solid, and a valuable supplement to Philip Schaff’s 8 volume set. I am looking forward to reading volumes 6-8.

Folk who are interested in the history of the Christian Church should consider adding this set to their hard-drive.

 

Grace and peace,

David

Vincent of Lerins - quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est

The Latin quoted in the title of this post—known as the ‘Vincentian Canon’ and/or 'Vincent's Rule'—was translated into English by Heurtley as: “which [faith] has been believed everywhere, always, and by all” (A Commonitory, NPNF - XI.132). This canon/rule was first expressed in the Commonitorium written by Vincent of Lerins, and was essentially a threefold test for identifying true doctrines from heretical ones. 

Vincent discerned that heretical doctrines/teachers tended be geographically localized, rather than dispersed throughout all the Christian regions; as such, ‘everywhere' (ubiquity) was one of the tests. Another test was ‘always', which meant for Vincent that true doctrines originated in antiquity (apostolic times), and do not emerge at a later date—e.g. the Montanists, Arians, Donatists, Apollinarians, Nestorians. And finally, concerning the ‘by all' test, Vincent primarily had the bishops convened at the Ecumenical Councils in mind (though not exclusively so).

Unfortunately, Vincent’s canon/rule has historically been misused and misunderstood. An excellent antidote to such abuses is Thomas G. Guarino’s above pictured book, Vincent of Lérins and the Development of Doctrine (2013 – Google preview). One of the most important points made by Guarino is that Vincent has a ‘second rule’, and that one must correctly identify this ‘second rule’ in order to properly interpret Vincent’s ‘first rule’; note the following:

A second essential element in interpreting the Vincentian canon is that his first rule must always be taken in conjunction with the Lérinian’s “second rule”: over time growth undoubtedly occurs in Christian doctrine. (Page 6)

I shall turn to the pen of Vincent himself to expound on what he meant concerning the development/growth of Christian doctrine. From his A Commonitory we read:

But some one will say perhaps, Shall there, then, be no progress in Christ's Church? Certainly; all possible progress. For what being is there, so envious of men, so full of hatred to God, who would seek to forbid it? Yet on condition that it be real progress, not alteration of the faith. For progress requires that the subject be enlarged in itself, alteration, that it be transformed into something else. The intelligence, then, the knowledge, the wisdom, as well of individuals as of all, as well of one man as of the whole Church, ought, in the course of ages and centuries, to increase and make much and vigorous progress; but yet only in its own kind ; that is to say, in the same doctrine, in the same sense, and in the same meaning. (NPNF  - XI.147, 148)

And:

From doctrine which was sown as wheat, we should reap, in the increase, doctrine of the same kind — wheat also; so that when in process of time any of the original seed is developed, and now flourishes under cultivation, no change may ensue in the character of the plant. There may supervene shape, form, variation in outward appearance, but the nature of each kind must remain the same. God forbid that those rose-beds of Catholic interpretation should be converted into thorns and thistles. God forbid that in that spiritual paradise from plants 'of cinnamon and balsam darnel and wolfsbane should of a sudden shoot forth.

Therefore, whatever has been sown by the fidelity of the Fathers in this husbandry of God's Church, the same ought to be cultivated and taken care of by the industry of their children, the same ought to flourish and ripen, the same ought to advance and go forward to perfection. For it is right that those ancient doctrines of heavenly philosophy should, as time goes on, be cared for, smoothed, polished; but not that they should be changed, not that they should be maimed, not that they should be mutilated. They may receive proof, illustration, definiteness; but they must retain withal their completeness, their integrity, their characteristic properties. (NPNF  - XI.147, 148)

Another important part of Guarino’s book is his analysis of Newman’s theory of development as it relates to Vincent’s. More on this at a later date, the Lord willing…

Grace and peace,

David

Peter Damian’s, The Book of Gomorrah

In the combox of the previous thread, I posted the following:

In my last comment I mentioned that I was “rereading four books on Catholic Church history that are germane to our topics at hand”—those four books are: Malachi Martin’s, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church; Peter De Rosa’s, Vicars of Christ; Philip Hughes, A History of the Church – Volume 2; and, John Rao’s, Black Legends. (I have also included germane sections from Philip Schaff’s multi-volume, History of the Christian Church and Warren Carroll’s, A History of Christendom - Volume 2.)

I am currently up to Pope Gregory VII (Hildebrand)—who died on March 25, 1085—in my readings. (link)

Both Martin and Rao mentioned Peter Damian’s Liber Gomorrhianus (The Book of Gomorrah); from Martin’s The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church, we read:

We still have documents of Byzantine ambassadors reporting on the four questions ritually put to every priest about to be consecrated as a bishop of the Roman Church: "Have you sodomized a boy? Have you fornicated with a nun? Have you sodomized any four legged animal? Have you committed adultery?" These questions accurately reflected the standard required of would be bishops. St. Peter Damian wrote a famous book, the Liber Gomorrhianus (Book of Gomorrha), graphically describing the venality, lechery, bestiality, and homicidal fecklessness of his fellow Roman clerics. (Page 131)

And John Rao:

These Tusculani, as they are generally styled, had enjoyed such a domineering position once before, and had sometimes even exercised it with more respectability than their debased predecessor. Unfortunately, they were soon to provide one of the worst of the possessors of the papal dignity, Benedict IX. Probably only twenty years old at his accession, Benedict sat three distinct times on the throne of St. Peter (1032-1044, 1045, and 1047-1048). This was due not only to political pressures but also to a corruption so great as to permit him literally to sell his own position and then try to steal it back after pocketing the dough. Vividly attacked as a demon from hell in the disguise of a priest by St. Peter Damian (1007-1072) in his aptly named Liber Gomorrhianus, Benedict was dismissed much more off-handedly by a future successor, Blessed Victor III (1086-1087), as being simply utterly unspeakable. (Page 272)

Peter Damian lived towards the end of the most corrupt and immoral period of Church history—the tenth and eleventh centuries. Accounts of simony, murder, fornication, homosexuality, and even bestiality engaged in by popes, bishops, clerics and monks were chronicled. Peter Damian’s The Book of Gomorrah, was an opusculum (little work) sent to Pope Leo IX circa A.D. 1051. It provides one of the most detailed accounts of the deviant sexual behavior being practiced by clerics and monks in his day.

Until this last week, I had not read Peter Damian’s The Book of Gomorrah. It was not available in English until 1982 (Pierre J. Payer); another English translation was published in 1990 (Owen J. Blum); and a third in 2015 (Matthew C. Hoffman). I have now read Payer’s and Hoffman's contributions. Google Books provides the following synopsis of the latter work:

"Alas, it is shameful to speak of it! It is shameful to relate such a disgusting scandal to sacred ears! But if the doctor fears the virus of the plague, who will apply the cauterization? If he is nauseated by those whom he is to cure, who will lead sick souls back to the state of health?"

With these words, St. Peter Damian introduces the Book of Gomorrah, undoubtedly the most stirringly eloquent and impassioned denunciation of sexual perversion ever penned by a Catholic saint. Although it was written almost a thousand years ago, the Book of Gomorrah in many ways seems addressed to our own times, associating the phenomena of clerical homosexual behavior and pederasty, and endorsing the imprisonment of clergy who are a danger to youth.

The Book of Gomorrah offers a scathing analysis of the evil of sodomy, while also expressing compassion for those who have fallen into such vice and the possibility of their redemption by the aid of divine grace. It explains the devastating effects of the vice both spiritually and psychologically, and warns that such behavior, particularly among the clergy, will bring down the wrath of God. It also urges the permanent defrocking of clerics who are habituated to homosexual behavior and endorses the permanent confinement those guilty of child sex abuse.

This new translation by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman is the most accurate and faithful available in English, and carries a foreword by Cardinal Juan Sandoval Iñiguez, Archbishop Emeritus of Guadalajara. It also includes a 10,000-word biographical introduction recounting Damian's struggle against corruption in the Catholic Church, and a translator's preface that breaks new scholarly ground and resolves old controversies about the text. (link)

I found Hoffman’s book to be significantly superior to Payer's. In addition to his excellent translation (pp. 77-158), the “Introduction” (pp. 5-43) and "Translator’s Preface" (pp. 45-75) are quite informative. I especially appreciated his critique of the attempts by a number of Catholic authors to discredit The Book of Gomorrah (pp. 56-67).

Hoffman’s book is a must read for Catholics who have been appalled and scandalized by the numerous accounts of the practice of homosexuality/sodomy by a significant number of priests in the America's and Europe since Vatican II.

Grace and peace,

David

Holy Year(s), Holy Door(s), and some musings concerning 1933

I had no recollection of the phrase “holy year” when I came across it yesterday in the pages of a most unlikely source—J. F. Rutherford’s book, Jehovah.

During the last couple of days, I have been researching the use of the nomina sacra found in the early New Testament manuscripts, attempting to understand why early second century Christian scribes adopted their use—not only in the NT manuscripts, but also their Greek copies of the OT—whilst Jewish scribes did not employ them at all. Related to this issue was the use of the Tetragrammaton by Jewish scribes as a substitute for kurios in some copies of the Greek OT they created circa  2nd century B.C. through the 3rd century A.D. (Christian scribes never made use of the Tetragrammaton in any of their copies of the OT).

In this process of trying to understand the differing scribal methods utilized by Christian and Jewish scribes when copying the OT, I began reading a book that I had not read for over four decades—Rutherford’s aforementioned book, Jehovah. Note the following:

The so-called “holy year” has failed to bring the promised peace and prosperity, and that failure should of itself convince the people of good will that God did not authorize the year 1933 to be called a holy year, nor will he hear the prayers of men who try to make it a holy year. Upon earth there is now no peace, and poverty continues to stalk hideously through the land. Jehovah’s witnesses have no controversy with men. Their only purpose is to be obedient to God's commandment to tell the message of truth. (J. F. Rutherford, Jehovah, p. 23 – 1934.)

As mentioned above, I had no recollection of what this 1933 “holy year” entailed. Some online research revealed that the official Vatican website has a page titled, “WHAT IS A HOLY YEAR?” (link). From that contribution we read:

In the Roman Catholic tradition, a Holy Year, or Jubilee is a great religious event. It is a year of forgiveness of sins and also the punishment due to sin, it is a year of reconciliation between adversaries, of conversion and receiving the Sacrament of Reconciliation, and consequently of solidarity, hope, justice, commitment to serve God with joy and in peace with our brothers and sisters. A Jubilee year is above all the year of Christ, who brings life and grace to humanity…

A Jubilee can be "ordinary" if it falls after the set period of years, and "extraordinary" when it is proclaimed for some outstanding event. There have been twenty-five "ordinary" Holy Years so far: the Year 2000 will be the 26th. The custom of calling "extraordinary" Jubilees began in the 16th century and they can vary in length from a few days to a year. There have been two extraordinary jubilees in this century: 1933 proclaimed by Pope Pius XI to mark the 1900th anniversary of Redemption and 1983 proclaimed by Pope John Paul II to mark 1950 years since the Redemption carried out by Christ through his Death and Resurrection in the year 33. In 1987 Pope John Paul II also proclaimed a Marian year.

The mystery of the “Holy Year” was now solved. However, in the same Vatican contribution, I came upon yet another phrase I had no recollection of—“Holy Door”. Note the following:

In 1500 Pope Alexander VI announced that the Doors in the four major basilicas would be opened contemporaneously, and that he himself would open the Holy Door of Saint Peter's.

So, what are these “Doors”; and specifically, “the Holy Door”? The following is from a Wikipedia article:

A Holy Door (Latin: Porta Sancta) is traditionally an entrance portal located within the Papal major basilicas in Rome. The doors are normally sealed by mortar and cement from the inside so that they cannot be opened. They are ceremoniously opened during Jubilee years designated by the Pope, for pilgrims who enter through those doors may piously gain the plenary indulgences attached with the Jubilee year celebrations. (link)

Armed with this new knowledge, two important events during the 1933 “Holy Year” came to mind. The first important event is quite personal, for it was the birth of my father. As for the second event, I can think of no better term to describe it than ‘insidious’, for that was the year Adolf Hitler rose to power, becoming the Chancellor of Germany. I suspect the latter event may have been one of the factors Rutherford had in mind when he penned his assessment of the 1933 “holy year”.

Back to my studies…

Grace and peace,

David

Vatican I and Vatican II – antecedents and “unfinished business”

The genesis of this post took place back on Sept. 2, 2019 when THIS COMMENT was published by Rory. Since then, explorations into the issues of apostasy, doctrinal development—corruption vs. legitimate— the validity of certain councils, and the possibility that we may be living in the generation that will experience the second coming of our Lord, have been discussed in the subsequent threads:

Development of doctrine, Dignitatis Humanae, and the Christianizing of paganism vs. the paganizing of Christianity 

John Henry Newman’s "acceptance of non-Christian religions” 

Accommodation for “the Gospel's sake”—the risk of paganizing Christianity  

The Great Apostasy - A provocative, book length contribution, from a Catholic perspective

Vatican I: a ‘rupture’ in Catholic tradition, or legitimate development of doctrine?

As my personal research into the aforementioned issues continues, I would like to bring to the attention of AF readers some germane, and valuable, contributions that I have recently read:

 First, three books that significantly informed my understanding of the conservative, Catholic viewpoint concerning the issue of infallibility—especially the Papal and Vatican I:

Anti-Janus: an historico-theological criticism of the work entitled "The Pope and the Council" 

The Vatican Council and its Definitions 

The True Story of the Vatican Council 

I would also like to recommend a 2018 dissertation that I read over the last couple days:

Eighteenth-Century Forerunners of Vatican II: Early Modern Catholic Reform and the Synod of Pistoia 

This work is so much more than title suggests, and is a must read (IMO). I hope the following selections provide enough impetus to at least take a look the contribution:

This dissertation sheds further light on the nature of church reform and the roots of the Second Vatican Council (1962–65) through a study of eighteenth-century Catholic reformers who anticipated Vatican II. The most striking of these examples is the Synod of Pistoia (1786), the high-water mark of “late Jansenism.” Most of the reforms of the Synod were harshly condemned by Pope Pius VI in the Bull Auctorem fidei (1794), and late Jansenism was totally discredited in the increasingly ultramontane nineteenth-century Catholic Church. Nevertheless, many of the reforms implicit or explicit in the Pistoian agenda – such as an exaltation of the role of bishops, an emphasis on infallibility as a gift to the entire church, religious liberty, a simpler and more comprehensible liturgy that incorporates the vernacular, and the encouragement of lay Bible reading and Christocentric devotions – were officially promulgated at Vatican II. (From the Abstract, n.p.)

…reform occurred at the Council in the form of the development of doctrine. The idea that doctrine could develop was rejected by most early modern Catholic theologians. It was totally antithetical to the Gallican tradition, and the immutability of doctrine was a primary claim wielded in anti-Protestant polemic. Because of the work of Newman and others, the concept of development became the established way of explaining doctrines that were not explicit in scripture or the earliest Christian sources (the Marian dogmas of 1854 and 1950 loom large here). The notion of development itself is embedded in Dei verbum, and defined in §8.

Development, however, is a fundamentally conservative type of reform, like ressourcement and unlike aggiornamento. By its very nature, development brings to light elements implicit in an existing doctrine or idea. The most conservative council fathers at Vatican II recognized at least some form of the development of doctrine. (Pages 32, 33 – bold emphasis mine)

Just as concerns about the “unfinished business” of Vatican I survived long after that Council closed in 1870, so have the concerns described by Routhier endured past the fiftieth anniversary of the closing of Vatican II. There were important moments in this continued debate in the Catholic Church in the postconciliar period, such as the revision of Canon Law in 1983, the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops in 1985, and the promulgation of Ut unum sint (1995) and Apostolos suos (1998) by Pope John Paul II. In the papacy of Francis, however, calls for a re-examination of collegiality, often through appeals to “synodality,” are increasing. In light of the collegial deliberations of the Synod on the Family (4–25 October 2015) and the widely diverging reactions to the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia (19 May 2016), the Catholic Church may again be preparing for a major debate surrounding the exercise of the papal primacy in light of episcopal collegiality. (Page 369)

Looking forward to some in depth discourse…

Grace and peace,

David

Vatican I: a ‘rupture’ in Catholic tradition, or legitimate development of doctrine?

The first to plead his case seems just, Until another comes and examines him—Proverbs 18:17 – NASB.

In the combox of the recent thread, “The Great Apostasy” (link), Tom provided a link to a lengthy essay, “The Vatican Dogma”,  by the Russian Orthodox scholar, Fr. Sergius Bulgakov (Seregei Bulgakov's "The Vatican Dogma").

Fr. Bulgakov is certainly a bright, well-read fellow. My first reading of his essay left an impression that his conclusions concerning the Papacy and Papal infallibility—that both are heretical—were quite solid, and perhaps unassailable. However, subsequent research and reflection has significantly altered my first impression—I now believe that both of Fr. Bulgakov conclusions are flawed. My second reading of his essay revealed a serious misunderstanding of the foundational Catholic dogma concerning the sacrament of Holy Orders. From his essay we read:

If it be said that papacy is not a special order but only an office, since the pope is in bishop’s orders, that will be quite in keeping with the view of the universal church before the schism, but it will be contrary to the Vatican doctrine. According to it, there is a special grace (charisma) given to Peter and his successors—veritatis et fidei nunquam deficientis—which consti­tutes the order of papacy. Roman Catholic theology has gradually raised St. Peter so high above the other Apostles that he is no longer regarded as one of them but as a prince of Apostles. In addition to the general apostolic charisma he has his own, personal one, similar­ly to the way in which episcopacy includes priesthood. A bishop celebrates the liturgy like a priest, and does not differ from him in this respect, but it does not follow that they are of equal rank. The same considerations apply to the Catholic conception of the pope, for whom a fourth and highest degree of holy orders has been created. True, Catholic literature contains no direct expression of the idea that papacy it the highest of holy orders—that of episcopus episcoporum or episcopus universalis, but this is either evasiveness or inconsistency; the special and exceptional place assigned to the “primate” in Catholic canonical writings can have no other meaning.

But if papacy be understood as a special order of St. Peter (Tu es Petrus is sung when the newly elected pope is carried in procession), the difficulties which have already been mentioned stand out all the more clearly. On the one hand, bearers of lower hierarchical orders cannot ordain to higher orders, so that the consecration of a pope by bishops (cardinals) is canonically and sacramentally unmeaning: the pope ought in his life-time to consecrate his successor. On the other hand, if an order is discontinued because there is no bearer of it, there is a break in the apostolic suc­cession as a whole. The permanent miracle of the existence of a vicarius Christi requires his personal immortality. The dogmatic teaching about the pope must certainly be made less presumptuous and confine itself to regarding the pope as simply a patriarch but that, of course, means the fall of the whole Vatican fortress. In any case, as has been said already, the mere fact of the death of a pope has dogmatic implications which have not yet been satisfactorily dealt with by the Roman theologians.

The above is clearly a flawed understanding of the Catholic understanding of Holy Orders. From the apostolic/New Testament period through Vatican II, the Catholic Church has affirmed ONLY THREE Sacramental, Holy Orders: the ordo episcoporum, the ordo presbyterorum, and the ordo diaconorum. The Petrine office is just that, an office not a higher, fourth Holy Order.

Not long after my second reading of Fr. Bulgakov’s essay, I discovered a definitive critique of it. Back on Jan. 1, 2020 a thread on a forum was started which was dedicated to the essay:

SUSIPE DOMINE

On the very next day, a gent posting under the name ‘Xavier’ provided a solid critique of the essay:

Xavier - Reply #5

As of today, I have yet to find any errors in Xavier’s cogent critique. But, I feel compelled to dig even deeper into Fr. Bulgakov’s essay, along with Xavier’s contribution. I hope others will join me in this endeavor, and subsequently share their reflections.

Grace and peace,

David

SSPX in Kansas under investigation

I do not want to take focus away from the informative, on going dialogue currently taking place in the combox of the previous thread, but the following article published yesterday by The Catholic World Report, ‘hits close to home’ for some folk who regularly contribute to this blog:

SSPX accused of intimidating would-be whistleblowers amid abuse investigation

The  following quote from the article seems to indicate that “guilt by association” may be in play:

The SSPX is under investigation in the state of Kansas for alleged sex abuse, along with the four Catholic dioceses.

 Let’s pray that the truth in the matter will come forth soon…

Grace and peace,

David

The Great Apostasy - A provocative, book length contribution, from a Catholic perspective

Whilst recently engaged in online research, I discovered a fascinating contribution on the issue of “the Great Apostasy” from a Catholic perspective. The work is 263 pages in length, and is appropriately titled, The Great Apostasy. A free PDF copy can be downloaded via THIS LINK.

This book drew me in from the beginning, and apart from checking a number of the sources referenced within its pages for accuracy, I literally could not stop reading it. It has me deeply reflecting on the possibility that I may have misunderstood the very nature of what “the Great Apostasy" entails.

The book is a must read for folk who are of the opinion that we may be living in the eschatology period which immediately precedes the second coming of our Lord. I also suspect it might change the minds of some who are not of that opinion, but take the time to read and reflect on its contents—I am eagerly looking forward to dialogue with those who do so.

Grace and peace,

David

The Last Mass of Padre Pio - The Secret Soul of the Stigmatic Saint: A provocative biography of Francesco Forgione

On January 30th, I received in the mail a book sent to me by my close friend, and brother in Christ, Rory—the same Rory who frequently comments here at AF—much thanks Rory!

A couple of days before the reception of the book, Rory had given me a 'heads-up' that he was sending the tome to me. Prior to my reading of the book, I knew virtually nothing about Padre Pio, apart from the claims that he was a stigmatist and miracle worker (I did not even know that he had been canonized by John Paul II).

I finished the contribution yesterday, reading portions of the book everyday since last Saturday, whilst supplementing those readings with a good deal of online research to provide greater depth to what I was learning.

The book was originally written in Italian by two Italian authors—Alessandro Gnocchi and Mario Palmaro—and translated into English by Marianna Gattozzi. It is divided into two main parts: “Part One – Toward the Lord" (4 chapters - pp. 21-104), and “Part Two – The Abuse of the Enemy and the Caress of Grace" (5 chapters - pp. 107-194).

“The Prologue – In The Devil’s Territory” (pp. 1-18), sets the tone for “Part One”. Under the sub-heading, “The Mass cannot change”, the following is provided from the lips of Padre Pio: “My mission…will end when on Earth the Mass will no longer be celebrated…The World could even exist without sunlight, but not without the Holy Mass” (p. 5).

On page 7, our authors quote the following from the 19^th century liturgical scholar, Dom Prosper Gueranger:

From the terminology used by the Church we understand how much the Holy Mass surpasses personal devotions. Therefore, the Mass must be kept first among all of them, and its intentions must be respected. This is how the Church makes all its members partakers of this great sacrifice; therefore, should the Sacred Sacrifice of the Mass cease, it will not be long before we will fall back into the abyss of depravity where the pagans once were, and this would be the work of the Antichrist. He will all means he can to impede the celebration of the Holy Mass, so that this great counterbalance might be abolished, and thus God will put an end to all things, having no more reason to keep them in existence.

They then write:

During the last years of his life, Padre Pio was weighed down by the realization that the words of Dom Gueranger were becoming more and more manifest in the world. (Ibid.)

And:

If many of Padre’s spiritual sons, because of their fidelity to the Mass of all time, had been rejected by the majority of the churchmen of the 1960’s who had taken the new path, it is easy to suppose the the first stigmatic priest in history would of foreseen the crisis and would suffer the consequence. It was a dramatic event never seen before because, for the first time, the Mystical Body of Christ was lacerated through the attempt to revolutionize the sacrifice offered at the alter. (Page 13)

Immediately following the above assessment, the authors take us way back to the 2^nd century—specifically, to St. Irenaeus—and relate the following:

The words of S. Irenaeus of Lyon, in his treatise Against the Heresies, are hard to forget, even by those in more remote areas, focused on the timelessness of the Mass. The importance of the words lies in their connection with the work of Padre Pio. Such a link reveals itself in all its disquieting evidence. "For this reason," explains St. Irenaeus, talking about the coming of the Antichrist,

Daniel says: "The sanctuary will be desolate: sin has been offered instead of sacrifice, and justice has been thrown to the ground. He did it and he was successful."

St. Irenaeus also writes:

The angel Gabriel [...] then, in order to indicate the length of the tyranny, during which the saints who offer to God a pure sacrifice will be put to flight, declares: "And in the middle of the week the sacrifice and the libation will be suppressed and in the temple the abomination of desolation will take place, and until the end of time the desolation will be accomplished." [...] the things [...] that Daniel prophesied regarding the end of times have been proved by The Lord, when He says: "When you will see the abomination of desolation prophesied by Daniel."

The abomination of desolation prophesied by Daniel, confirmed by Our Lord, and recalled by St. Irenaeus, is, undoubtedly, a world without the Mass. (Page 14)

The authors' provocative interpretation of Daniel's prophecy seems foundational to their understanding of Padre Pio's unique role in the unfolding of the end times. Attention is drawn to the length that Pardre Pio had the stigmata—exactly 50 years to the day—with the stigmata vanishing just prior to his final mass.

Padre Pio's intense devotion to the sacrifice of the Mass via the Traditional Roman Rite Liturgy is detailed in "Part One" of their book, as well as their belief that the Novus Ordo mass is a grave corruption.

The following selection is the authors’ detailed description of the consequences that have followed the institutionalization the Novus Ordo mass:

The results became evident in the decades that followed. We saw emptied convents and monasteries, decimated vocations, and infatuation for the world and its sweetly anti-Christ sirens, a feverish spirit of continuous reforms with inevitable loss of any sense of hierarchy and obedience, parish priests rebelling against their pastors, pastors revolting against their bishops, bishops dissenting with the pope, sacraments considered a minor bureaucracy to be avoided, deserted confessionals, the practice of prayer annihilated, liturgical creativity to the point of parody, a fading faith in the Rea Presence, empty tabernacles and tabernacles removed from the altars, the Blessed Sacrament hidden in the sacristies, altars reduced to workplace cafeteria tables, relics and sacred books sold in flea markets...All of them are bad fruits of the abandonment of the Mass of all time and of the good doctrine which, naturally and supernaturally, goes along with it. (Page 67)

"Part Two" relates of number supernatural events throughout the life of Padre Pio. Chapter 1, "The Devil Exists, I Met Him", deals with Padre Pio's lifelong battles against Satan and his demonic hosts. It also includes three important visions that he had received in 1903 (pp. 120-124). Chapter 2, deals with Padre Pio's interactions with souls in Purgatory. Chapter 3 with the confessional and the conversion of some skeptics.

Chapter 4, "The Little Flowers of San Giovannia Rototndo", is my personal favorite of the book. It is a concise history of Padre Pio's life, with additional supernatural, historical events related. The chapter begins with the following:

Bilocaton, scents and extraordinary aromas, the ability to “see" the thoughts of people, knowledge of diverse languages without having ever studied them, descents into Hell, visits to Purgatory, healings, prophecies, and conversions: Padre Pio’s case is one of a kind, the case of a man who had experienced an unusual abundance of phenomena definitely inexplicable, at least according to the categories of science and the physical world. (Page 161)

So much more could be included in this 'review' of mine; but I shall end here, hoping that what I have written will encourage many to obtain, and read, this fascinating contribution.

Grace and peace,

David

Development of doctrine, Dignitatis Humanae, and the Christianizing of paganism vs. the paganizing of Christianity

This new post has its genesis via the seeds planted from my reading—and related research—of THIS RECENT COM BOX POST by Rory, and his subsequent posts in the same thread. Rory has brought to my attention—what appears to be—contradictions concerning the issue of Church and State relations as delineated in the Vatican II document Dignitatis Humanae, with contributions from previous Popes, theologians, and Catholic kings—e.g. Pius IX, Pius X, Augustine, and Louis IX. (Though not mentioned by Rory in his posts, one could add Pope Leo XIII’s, Immortale Dei—On The Christian Constitution of States—to his list of previous documents which seem to be contradicted by Dignitatis Humanae.)

Now, after reading Dignitatis Humanae; Augustine’s Letter to Boniface, On the Treatement of the Donatists (#185), and his Letter to Vincent (#93 – also concernng the Donatists); Louis IX's Letter to his son [link]; Leo XIII’s Immortale Dei; Ratzinger’s “EPILOGUE – ON THE STATUS OF CHURCH AND THEOLOGY TODAY” (pages 365-393 in his book, Principles of Catholic Theology); and a number of germane online contributions, I have reached somewhat of an impasse—both sides of the issue have strong arguments for their respective positions. I have become convinced that the side one chooses between the two polarized positions depends on one's understanding of the development of doctrine.

As such, I have once again turned to John Henry Newman’s, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine. This new reading has raised some concerns that went unnoticed in my past readings. I started this new reading using the original 1845 version that I had downloaded to my tablet, and the following caught my eye:

Now there was this cardinal distinction between Christianity and the religions and philosophies by which it was surrounded, nay even the Judaism of the day, that it referred all truth and revelation to one source, and that the Supreme and Only God. Pagan rites which honoured one out of ten thousand deities ; philosophies which scarcely taught any source of revelation at all; Gnostic heresies which were based on Dualism, adored angels, or ascribed the two Testaments to distinct authors, could not regard truth as one, unalterable, consistent, imperative, and saving. But Christianity started with the principle that there was but "one God and one Mediator," and that He, "who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the Prophets, had in these last days spoken unto us by His Son." Hence Christianity, and it alone, revered and protected the Divine word which it had received, as both sacred and as sanctifying. It was grace, and it was truth. (1845 - p. 338)

So far, so good; I fully affirm all the above. But in the paragraph that immediately follows the above, a ‘red-flag’ went up:

In other words, Christianity has from first to last kept fixed principles in view in the course of its developments, and thereby has been able to incorporate doctrine which was external to it without losing its own. Such continuity of principle, and such assimilating power, are each of them incompatible with the idea of a corruption, as was laid down in an early part of the Volume. The two special principles which the foregoing paragraph introduces, may be called the Dogmatic and the Sacramental, and their assimilating power shall now be illustrated. (1845 - pp. 338, 339)

The notion that Christianity, “has been able to incorporate doctrine which was external to it without losing its own”, seemed a bit out of place to me, so I pulled the 1878 edition off of the shelf, and found the above paragraph missing. I also noticed that the first paragraph I cited above was altered, substituting, “Hence Christianity, and it alone, revered and protected the Divine word which it had received, as both sacred and as sanctifying”, with:

He had never left Himself without witness, and now He had come, not to undo the past, but to fulfil and perfect it. His Apostles, and they alone, possessed, venerated, and protected a Divine Message, as both sacred and sanctifying; and, in the collision and conflict of opinions, in ancient times or modern, it was that Message, and not any vague or antagonist teaching, that was to succeed in purifying, assimilating, transmuting, and taking into itself the many-coloured beliefs, forms of worship, codes of duty, schools of thought, through which it was ever moving. (1878 – pp. 356, 357)

The 1878 edition in the above section has expanded the notion that developments had the ability, “to incorporate doctrine which was external to without losing its own”, to include, “purifying, assimilating, transmuting, and taking into itself the many-coloured beliefs, forms of worship, codes of duty, schools of thought, through which it was ever moving.”

Unlike my previous readings, I was now quite focused on identifying those, “many-coloured beliefs, forms of worship, codes of duty, schools of thought”, that Newman had in mind. Just a few pages later we read, “St. Augustine might first be opposed to the employment of force in religion, and then acquiesce in it” (1878 – p. 367). In essence, the Church which had been outlawed and persecuted, had now adopted the “code of duty" of Her persecutor. [Is this a case of the Christianizing of paganism, or the paganizing of Christianity—more as this issue later.]

Newman follows the above with:

Confiding then in the power of Christianity to resist the infection of evil, and to transmute the very instruments and appendages of demon-worship to an evangelical use, and feeling also that these usages had originally come from primitive revelations and from the instinct of nature, though they had been corrupted ; and that they must invent what they needed, if they did not use what they found ; and that they were moreover possessed of the very archetypes, of which paganism attempted the shadows; the rulers of the Church from early times were prepared, should the occasion arise, to adopt, or imitate, or sanction the existing rites and customs of the populace, as well as the philosophy of the educated class. (1878 – pp. 371, 372.)

Newman then goes on to provide a number of actual examples of the above outlined principles:

In the course of the fourth century two movements or developments spread over the face of Christendom, with a rapidity characteristic of the Church ; the one ascetic, the other ritual or ceremonial. We are told in various ways by Eusebius, that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar to most of us. The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness ; holy water ; asylums ; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields ; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church. (1878 – p. 373 – bold emphasis mine.)

I shall now end this post with two questions: first, if all the above pagan elements can be, “sanctified by their adoption into the Church”, why not the secular humanistic elements found in Dignitatis Humanae? And second, is it possible that a number of the pagan elements that have been adopted by the Church are corruptions rather than true developments—i.e a paganizing of Christianity rather than a Christianizing of paganism?

Grace and peace,

David