apenitentialprayer

[apenitentialprayer]

Okay, Ted Lasso is a pretty great show

[apenitentialprayer]

Benedictine vs. Celtic Monasticism

As early as the late 5th century, monasticism was the primary vehicle through which Christianity was lived in Ireland; religious communities reflecting a distinct Celtic spirituality were centers of society, in which laypeople and consecrated religious came together to pray and live out their faith. Yet, by the beginning of the 10th century, Benedictine monasticism (a ‘sister’ spirituality, also developed from the writings of John Cassian) had begun to make inroads into Ireland. And by the time of the introduction of the Augustinian and Cistercian orders in the 1150s, Celtic monasticism was drawing its last breaths. So the question is, why had such a vibrant movement been so thoroughly supplanted by its continental counterparts? The first and most obvious answer is simple; as the Roman Church consolidated its power in the West, it sought to bring uniformity in structure and liturgical practice within its sphere of influence - a sphere which included Ireland by way of the Church of England, which had disputed many elements of the Irish Church from 664 until the Church-justified invasion of Ireland in 1169. But beyond that, Benedictine scholar of Celtic Christianity Fr. Timothy Joyce suggests three other reasons why Roman-Benedictine monasticism may have won out over Celtic monasticism. First, and perhaps primarily, is the fact that The Rule of Saint Benedict proved to be an immensely popular and widespread rule for monastic life; from the start, the Rule of Benedict was intended to be the guide for multiple monasteries, written in a universal language while still remaining flexible enough to be modified to fit the day-to-day circumstances of particular monasteries. This standardization of a monastic rule was very different from the Celtic Christian situation; there was no single Celtic rule that dictated the activities and regulations of Celtic monastery settlements. Saint Columban is known to have established three monasteries which in turn would produce 53 other monasteries; but Saint Columban wrote at least two separate rules. Between 774 and 900, meanwhile, a number of other Rules were written drawing inspiration from the Célí Dé movement, a pietist and reformist movement that sought to eliminate corruption among Irish monastics. Second, in what is especially the case of the Célí Dé rules, the Celtic rules for monastic life were not nearly as comprehensive as Benedict’s 72-chapter work. Joyce calls these rules “sketchy, both in detail and program,” being much shorter and more vague than the Benedictine rule. This was in part because of the nature of these two different kinds of community; Celtic Christianity placed a lot of emphasis on individual heroism, centering its power base more on charismatic leaders who were the center of the community and made the decisions and filled in the blanks of the monastic rule that way. This was different from the Benedictine way of life, which had recourse to a standardized document that proved guidelines for how the community was to come to decisions as a community. The Benedictine emphasis on community as a source of tradition and authority proved to be more stable in the long run. Third, Celtic monasticism proved to be a life of extremes and religious intensity; the feelings of love and devotion produced in such an environment could be exceedingly tender and tinged with a natural mysticism, but at the same time the lifestyles could be incredibly austere and the penances performed incredibly severe; penance proved to be a central part of Celtic monastic spirituality, but as later penitential handbooks show, penances assigned and performed in these communities must have been grueling. When Benedict wrote his rule, on the other hand, he was writing under the impression that a Christian age of heroism had already ended, and that the average monk could not live up to the standards of the Desert Fathers. As such, he sought to create a ‘medium way,’ a rule that was mild even as it encouraged sanctification in its practitioners. Although Joyce sees value in the tradition of Celtic monasticism, and thinks that its traditions and insights could further enrich the monastic practices of the modern Church, it might be understandable that such an extremist, idiosyncratic set of traditions might have lost ground to a standardized, streamlined one.

[apenitentialprayer]

Okay, I get this, I think. Not to say that Celtic Christianity wasn't a real thing, but I have seen it used in the same way that Celtic paganism is used - that is to say, as a blank canvas to criticize modern mainstream Christianity, actual historical detail not being very important. They splice together the elements of the historical tradition that they like, ignore the elements they don't, and deploy this mental construct as a "what could have been" alternative to the Christianity that we have. I have seen this done by one group of Episcopalians who were reading about the "freer," "less legalistic and dogmatic," "more humane" indigenous Christianity of the British Isles, a Christianity developed by genius theologians like Pelagius, until the Roman Church imposed its own worldview onto it and stamped out what made it unique. The implication being that much of Western Christianity might be worth disavowing as a foreign influence on the Anglican Communion. (The fact that the Roman Church started imposing its reforms on British Isles at the prompting of the English Church is an irony not lost on me). I also notice that people deploying this ideological tactic always focus on the stuff that is most resonant with modern values (a close connection to nature, a less centralized hierarchy, etc), while ignoring the Celtic Church's less palatable qualities. Like, I never see people's hippy-dippy imaginary Celtic Church fantasies where Pelagius is awesome and Original Sin is some theological aberration also involve hours of grueling penance and intense fasting regiments.

ok, so i'll copy/paste it :) the take (from a roman catholic) was as follows:

"“celtic christianity” is an invention of early modern anti-catholic propagandists and new age wackos"

honestly not sure what they meant by that lmao @irishironclad any ideas?

[apenitentialprayer]

We cannot take lightly people's suffering and try to console them with convenient phrases and do-goodism. Our hope has a name, Jesus, that God who did not feel disgust at our mud and who, instead of saving us from the mud, became mud for us.

Pope Francis (Address to the Seminarians and Formators of the Spanish Dioceses)

[apenitentialprayer]

The enigmatic term "Son of Man" presents us in concentrated form with all that is most original and distinctive about the figure of Jesus, his mission, and his being. He comes from God and he is God. But that is precisely what makes him —having assumed human nature— the bringer of true humanity. [... And this] new humanity that comes from God is what being a disciple of Jesus Christ is all about.

Pope Benedict XVI (Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration, pages 334, 335), trans. Adrian Walker

[apenitentialprayer]

@db-1986 replied: Maybe God should come down and clear that question up for you.

Well, fortunately, He did, in the Person of Jesus Christ. The level to which we are able to emulate Jesus in our daily lives is the measure of how well we are doing. Bishop Barron's quote isn't exasperation at not knowing how we're supposed to live, but a call to self-examination on how we apply and live out the pattern of Christ's life in our individual circumstances.

That's always the question, that's always the great issue: am I becoming the person that God wants me to be, or am I being tempted in some other direction?

Bishop Robert Barron (Three Questions to Ask Yourself During Lent)

[apenitentialprayer]

Church Tradition: A Co-Remembering

For, on the one hand, the author of the Fourth Gospel gives a very personal accent to his own remembrance, as we see from his observation at the end of the Crucifixion scene (cf, Jn 19:35); on the other hand, it is never merely a private remembering, but a remembering in and with the "we" of the Church: "that which . . . we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands." With John, the subject who remembers is always the "we" — he remembers in and with the community of the disciples, in and with the Church. However much the author stands out as an individual witness, the remembering subject that speaks here is always the "we" of the community of disciples, the "we" of the Church. Because the personal recollection that provides the foundation of the Gospel is purified and deepened by being inserted into the memory of the Church, it does indeed transcend the banal recollection of facts. There are three important passages in his Gospel where John uses the word remember and so gives us the key to understanding what he means by "memory." In John's account of the cleansing of the Temple, we read: "His disciples remembered that it was written, 'Zeal for thy house will consume me'" (Jn 2:17). The event that is taking place calls to mind a passage of Scripture and so the event becomes intelligible at a level beyond the merely factual. Memory sheds light on the sense of the act, which then acquires a deeper meaning. It appears as an act in which the Logos is present, an act that comes from the Logos and leads into it. The link connecting Jesus' acting and suffering with God's word comes into view, and so the mystery of Jesus himself becomes intelligible. In the account of the cleansing of the Temple there then follows Jesus' prophecy that he will raise up the destroyed Temple again in three days. The Evangelist then comments: "When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this; and they believed the scripture and the word Jesus had spoken" (Jn 2:22). The Resurrection evokes remembrance, and remembrance in light of the Resurrection brings out the sense of this hitherto puzzling saying and reconnects it to the overall context of Scripture. The unity of Logos and act is the goal at which the Gospel is aiming. The word remember occurs once again, this time in the description of the events of Palm Sunday. John recounts that Jesus found a young ass and sat down on it: "As it is written, 'Fear not, daughter Zion; behold, your king is coming, sitting on an ass's colt!'" (Jn 12:14-15; cf. Zach 9:9). The Evangelist then observes: "His disciples did not understand this at first; but when Jesus was glorified, they then remembered that this had been written of him and had been done to him" (Jn 12:16). Once again an event is reported that at first seems simply factual. And once again the Evangelist tells us that after the Resurrection the disciples' eyes were opened and they were able to understand what had happened. Now they "remember." A scriptural text that had previously meant nothing to them now becomes intelligible, in the sense foreseen by God, which gives the external action meaning. The Resurrection teaches us a new way of seeing; it uncovers the connection between the words of the Prophets and the destiny of Jesus. It evokes "remembrance," that is, it makes possible to enter into the interiority of the events, into the intrinsic coherence of God's speaking and acting.

By means of these texts the Evangelist himself gives us the decisive indications as to how his Gospel is composed and what sort of vision lies behind it. It rests upon the remembering of the disciple, which, however, is co-remembering in the "we" of the Church. This understanding is an understanding under the guidance of the Holy Spirit; by remembering, the believer enters into the depth of the event and sees what could not be seen on an immediate and merely superficial level. But in doing so he does not move away from reality; rather, he comes to know it more deeply and thus sees the truth concealed in the outward act. The remembering of the Church is the context where what the Lord prophesied to his followers at the Last Supper actually happens: "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come" (Jn 16:13). What John says in his Gospel about how remembering becomes understanding and the path "into all the truth" comes very close to what Luke recounts about remembering on the part of Jesus' mother. In three passages of the infancy narrative Luke depicts this process of "remembering" for us. The first passage occurs in the account of the annunciation of Jesus' conception by the Archangel Gabriel. There Luke tells us that Mary took fright at the angel's greeting and entered into an interior "dialogue" about what the greeting might mean. The most important passages figure in the account of the adoration of the shepherds. The Evangelist comments: "Mary kept all these things, pondering them in her heart" (Lk 2:19). At the conclusion of the narrative of the twelve-year-old Jesus we read once again: "His mother kept all these things in her heart" (Lk 2:51). Mary's memory is first of all a retention of the events in remembrance, but it is more than that: It is an interior conversation with all that has happened. Thanks to this conversation, she penetrates into the interior dimension, she sees the events in their inter-connectedness, and she learns to understand them. It is on this sort of "recollection" that the Gospel of John is based, even as the Gospel takes concept of memory to a new depth by conceiving it as the memory of the "we" of the disciples, of the Church. This remembering is no mere psychological or intellectual process; it is a [Spiritual] event. The Church's remembering is not merely a private affair; it transcends the sphere of our own human understanding and knowing. It is a being-led by the Holy Spirit, who shows us the connectedness of Scripture, the connection between word and reality, and, in doing that, leads us "into all the truth." This also has some fundamental implications for the concept of inspiration. The Gospel emerges from human remembering and presupposes the communion of those who remember, in this case very concretely the school of John and, before that, the community of disciples. But because the author thinks and writes with the memory of the Church, the "we" to which he belongs opens beyond the personal and is guided in its depth by the Spirit of God, who is the Spirit of truth. In this sense, the Gospel itself opens up a path of understanding, which always remains bound to the scriptural word, and yet from generation to generation can lead, and is meant to lead, ever anew into the depth of all the truth.

- Pope Benedict XVI (Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration, pages 231-234), trans. Adrian Walker. Italics original, bolded emphases added.

[apenitentialprayer]

Madonna annunciata by Antonello da Messina, circa 1476

[apenitentialprayer]

Vysoké Tatry | borievkyphotogallery

[apenitentialprayer]

Moreover, spouses united in marriage have received the gift of indissolubility, which is not a goal to be achieved by their own efforts, nor even a limitation to their freedom, but a promise from God, whose faithfulness makes that of human beings possible.

Pope Francis (2025 Address to the Tribunal of the Roman Rota)

[apenitentialprayer]

[apenitentialprayer]

anyways, Mary carried God on her back and you should show her some respect

[apenitentialprayer]

Ough, going to have to quote the five-page passage in full, but OOOH, Church tradition as a "co-remembering" of an individual's experience with God, purified through the Holy Spirit dwelling within the community

[apenitentialprayer]

Jesus' claim[s are] an authoritative interpretation of the Law because he himself is God's primordial Word. [...] Jesus places himself on the side of the Lawgiver, God; he is not an interpreter, but the Lord.

Pope Benedict XVI (Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration, pages 325, 331), trans. Adrian Walker

[apenitentialprayer]

You do not know who was on those two planes to El Salvador. The individuals who arranged the deportation claim that the deportees were "foreign alien terrorists," but we have no way of knowing whether this is true. They also claim that they were “monsters,” which is not true. We do not know the names of the human beings who were deported. [...] If members of the executive branch are allowed to issue truth claims that have the consequence that human beings leave the United States, we are in a dictatorship. If we accept that the executive branch can simply deport anyone they call a "foreign alien terrorist," then none of us has any rights.

Individuals associated with the federal government have, in defiance of a court order and without a trial or any form of due process, deported hundreds of people from the territory of the United States to El Salvador, where they will be held indefinitely in a concentration camp.

This deportation was planned as a political spectacle. The deportees were carefully chosen, as was the language used to describe them. The messaging was obviously coordinated in advance. And the entire humiliating procedure was carried out before cameras that were already in place. The videos that are being distributed are not some assemblage of footage caught haphazardly by cell phones. They are the result of fixed cameras, set in place in advance, with camera operators awaiting the action. The result is propaganda film worthy of the 1930s, in which the Leader determines what is true and what is false and who is human and who is not ("monsters") through a procedure of charismatic violence.

[apenitentialprayer]

[T]hose who know you are privileged to share your pain...

Fred Rogers, in a letter to Tim Madigan, dated December 20th, 1997

[apenitentialprayer]

And being a priest is being another Christ, it is making oneself mud in the weeping of the people, and when you see broken people […], people whose lives have been broken to pieces, offer them pieces of yourselves, as Christ does in the Eucharist. Please, give of yourselves freely, because everything you have, you have received freely.

Pope Francis (Address to the Seminarians and Formators of the Spanish Dioceses)

The Suffering of Saint Raymond Nonnatus, by Vincenzo Carducci