St. Timothy & St. Titus
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 26 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Liturgical Feasts
A happy Feast Day to our local shepherd, His Excellency Timothy M. Dolan! He wrote an op-ed in yesterday WSJ.
St. Francis de Sales (1567-1622)
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 24 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Liturgical Feasts
The prior of our convent, Fr. John Langlois, O.P., delivers the homily at the 8 am.
Land of the Free
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 21 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Culture
And if you’re unfortunately tempted to think this is just the opinion of a new guard conservative, consider these words by Cardinal Mahoney and think again:
In probably the most expansive decision on the part of the US Federal government ever, the Department of Health and Human Services has issued an “interim final rule” to require virtually all private health plans to include coverage for all FDA-approved prescription contraceptives, female sterilization procedures, and related “patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity.”
These are listed among “preventive services for women” that all health plans will have to include without co-pays or other cost sharing–even if the insurer, the employer or other plan sponsor, or the woman herself object to such coverage….
And I cannot imagine a more direct and frontal attack on freedom of conscience than this ruling today. This decision must be fought against with all the energies the Catholic Community can muster….
As Bishops we do not recommend candidates for any elected office. My vote on November 6 will be for the candidate for President of the United States and members of Congress who intend to recognize the full spectrum of rights under the many conscience clauses of morality and public policy. If any candidate refuses to acknowledge and to promote those rights, then that candidate will not receive my vote.
St. VF Film Forum
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 20 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Culture, Parish Events
Of Stem Cells
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 18 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Events in the Archdiocese
Emerging Biotechnologies and Human Self-Understanding
Father Thomas Berg, a professor at St Joseph’s Seminary (Dunwoodie, Yonkers) will offer reflections on where we have come in the past 15 years since work on human embryonic stem cells began in earnest and how this is impacting us in our own self-understanding.
Thursday, January 19, 2012 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM
The Church of Saint Catherine of Siena
411 East 68th Street New York, NY
Free – Donations are welcome
Contact: Joseph Sullivan Phone: 212.988.8300
The State’s Acknowledgment of Religion’s Proper Authority
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 12 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Culture
In effect, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously ruled in such wise as to protect religious bodies in the practical exercise of their doctrines regarding official/authoritative representatives. Judge Alito wrote this impressive concurring and further specifying opinion, with Justice Kagan adjoined, and with some highlighting added by me. (To read Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion on SCOTUS’s 9-0 ruling, go here.)
I join the Court’s opinion, but I write separately to clarify my understanding of the significance of formal ordination and designation as a “minister” in determining whether an “employee”1 of a religious group falls within the so-called “ministerial” exception. The term “minister” is commonly used by many Protestant denominations to refer to members of their clergy, but the term is rarely if ever used in this way by Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, or Buddhists. In addition, the concept of ordination as understood by most Christian churches and by Judaism has no clear counterpart in some Christian denominations and some other religions. Because virtually every religion in the world is represented in the population of the United States, it would be a mistake if the term “minister” or the concept of ordination were viewed as central to the important issue of religious autonomy that is presented in cases like this one. Instead, courts should focus on the function performed by persons who work for religious bodies.
The First Amendment protects the freedom of religious groups to engage in certain key religious activities, including the conducting of worship services and other religious ceremonies and rituals, as well as the critical process of communicating the faith. Accordingly, religious groups must be free to choose the personnel who are essential to the performance of these functions.
The “ministerial” exception should be tailored to this purpose. It should apply to any “employee” who leads a religious organization, conducts worship services or important religious ceremonies or rituals, or serves as a messenger or teacher of its faith. If a religious group believes that the ability of such an employee to perform these key functions has been compromised, then the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom protects the group’s right to remove the employee from his or her position.
I
Throughout our Nation’s history, religious bodies have been the preeminent example of private associations that have “act[ed] as critical buffers between the individual and the power of the State.” Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U. S. 609, 619 (1984). In a case like the one now before us—where the goal of the civil law in question, the elimination of discrimination against persons with disabilities, is so worthy—it is easy to forget that the autonomy abroad, has often served as a shield against oppressive civil laws. To safeguard this crucial autonomy, we havelong recognized that the Religion Clauses protect a private sphere within which religious bodies are free to governthemselves in accordance with their own beliefs. The Constitution guarantees religious bodies “independence from secular control or manipulation—in short, power to decide for themselves, free from state interference, mat¬ters of church government as well as those of faith and doctrine.” Kedroff v. Saint Nicholas Cathedral of Russian Orthodox Church in North America, 344 U. S. 94, 116 (1952).
Religious autonomy means that religious authorities must be free to determine who is qualified to serve in positions of substantial religious importance. Different religions will have different views on exactly what qualifies as an important religious position, but it is none the less possible to identify a general category of “employees”whose functions are essential to the independence of practically all religious groups. These include those who serve in positions of leadership, those who perform important functions in worship services and in the performance ofreligious ceremonies and rituals, and those who are entrusted with teaching and conveying the tenets of the faithto the next generation.
Applying the protection of the First Amendment to roles of religious leadership, worship, ritual, and expression focuses on the objective functions that are important forthe autonomy of any religious group, regardless of its beliefs. As we have recognized in a similar context,“[f]orcing a group to accept certain members may impair [its ability] to express those views, and only those views, that it intends to express.” Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U. S. 640, 648 (2000). That principle applies withspecial force with respect to religious groups, whose very andpropagation of shared religious ideals. See Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Ore. v. Smith, 494 U. S. 872, 882 (1990) (noting that the constitutional interest in freedom of association may be “reinforced by Free Exercise Clause concerns”). As the Court notes, the First Amend¬ment “gives special solicitude to the rights of religiousorganizations,” ante, at 14, but our expressive-associationcases are nevertheless useful in pointing out what thoseessential rights are. Religious groups are the archetypeof associations formed for expressive purposes, and their fundamental rights surely include the freedom to choose who is qualified to serve as a voice for their faith.
When it comes to the expression and inculcation of religious doctrine, there can be no doubt that the messen¬ger matters. Religious teachings cover the gamut frommoral conduct to metaphysical truth, and both the contentand credibility of a religion’s message depend vitally on the character and conduct of its teachers. A religion can¬not depend on someone to be an effective advocate for its religious vision if that person’s conduct fails to live up tothe religious precepts that he or she espouses. For this reason, a religious body’s right to self-governance must include the ability to select, and to be selective about,those who will serve as the very “embodiment of its message” and “its voice to the faithful.” Petruska v. Gannon Univ., 462 F. 3d 294, 306 (CA3 2006). A religious body’scontrol over such “employees” is an essential component ofits freedom to speak in its own voice, both to its own members and to the outside world.
The connection between church governance and the freedissemination of religious doctrine has deep roots in our legal tradition:
“The right to organize voluntary religious associations to assist in the expression and dissemination of any religious doctrine, and to create tribunals for the deci¬sion of controverted questions of faith within the asso¬ciation, and for the ecclesiastical government of all the individual members, congregations, and officers with¬in the general association, is unquestioned. All who unite themselves to such a body do so with an implied consent to this government, and are bound to submitto it. But it would be a vain consent and would lead to the total subversion of such religious bodies, if anyone aggrieved by one of their decisions could appeal tothe secular courts and have them reversed.” Watson
v. Jones, 13 Wall. 679, 728–729 (1872).
The “ministerial” exception gives concrete protection to the free “expression and dissemination of any religious doctrine.” The Constitution leaves it to the collective conscience of each religious group to determine for itself who is qualified to serve as a teacher or messenger of its faith.
II
A. The Court’s opinion today holds that the “ministerial” exception applies to Cheryl Perich (hereinafter respond¬ent), who is regarded by the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod as a commissioned minister. But while a ministerial title is undoubtedly relevant in applying the First Amendment rule at issue, such a title is neither necessary nor sufficient. As previously noted, most faiths do not employ the term “minister,” and some eschew the conceptof formal ordination.3 And at the opposite end of the speca very large percentage of their members. Perhaps thisexplains why, although every circuit to consider the issue has recognized the “ministerial” exception, no circuit has made ordination status or formal title determinative of the exception’s applicability.
The Fourth Circuit was the first to use the term “ministerial exception,” but in doing so it took pains to clarify that the label was a mere shorthand. See Rayburn v. General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 772 F. 2d 1164, 1168 (1985) (noting that the exception’s applicability “does not depend upon ordination but upon the function of the position”). The Fourth Circuit traced the exception back to McClure v. Salvation Army, 460 F. 2d 553 (CA51972), which invoked the Religion Clauses to bar a TitleVII sex-discrimination suit brought by a woman who was described by the court as a Salvation Army “minister,” id., at 554, although her actual title was “officer.” See McClure v. Salvation Army, 323 F. Supp. 1100, 1101 (ND Ga. 1971). A decade after McClure, the Fifth Circuit made clear that formal ordination was not necessary for the “ministerial” exception to apply. The court held that the members of the faculty at a Baptist seminary were covered by the exception because of their religious function in conveying church doctrine, even though some of them were not ordained ministers. See EEOC v. Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 651 F. 2d 277 (1981).
The functional consensus has held up over time, withthe D. C. Circuit recognizing that “[t]he ministerial exception has not been limited to members of the clergy.” EEOC v. Catholic Univ., 83 F. 3d 455, 461 (1996). The court in that case rejected a Title VII suit brought by a Catholic nun who claimed that the Catholic University ofAmerica had denied her tenure for a canon-law teaching position because of her gender. The court noted that “members of the Canon Law Faculty perform the vital function of instructing those who will in turn interpret, implement, and teach the law governing the Roman Catholic Church and the administration of its sacraments. Although Sister McDonough is not a priest, she is a member of a religious order who sought a tenured professorship in a field that is of fundamental importance to the spiritual mission of her Church.” Id., at 464. See also Natal v. Christian and Missionary Alliance, 878 F. 2d 1575, 1578 (CA1 1989) (stating that “a religious organization’s fate isinextricably bound up with those whom it entrusts withthe responsibilities of preaching its word and ministering to its adherents,” and noting “the difficulties inherent in separating the message from the messenger”).
The Ninth Circuit too has taken a functional approach, just recently reaffirming that “the ministerial exception encompasses more than a church’s ordained ministers.” Alcazar v. Corp. of Catholic Archbishop of Seattle, 627
F. 3d 1288, 1291 (2010) (en banc); see also Elvig v. Calvin Presbyterian Church, 375 F. 3d 951, 958 (2004). The Court’s opinion today should not be read to upset this consensus.
B. The ministerial exception applies to respondent because,as the Court notes, she played a substantial role in “conveying the Church’s message and carrying out its mis¬sion.” Ante, at 17. She taught religion to her students four days a week and took them to chapel on the fifth day. She led them in daily devotional exercises, and led them in prayer three times a day. She also alternated with the other teachers in planning and leading worship services at the school chapel, choosing liturgies, hymns, and read¬ings, and composing and delivering a message based onScripture.
It makes no difference that respondent also taught secular subjects. While a purely secular teacher would not qualify for the “ministerial” exception, the constitutional protection of religious teachers is not somehow diminished when they take on secular functions in addition to their religious ones. What matters is that respondent played animportant role as an instrument of her church’s religious message and as a leader of its worship activities. Because of these important religious functions, Hosanna-Tabor had the right to decide for itself whether respondent was reli-giously qualified to remain in her office.
Hosanna-Tabor discharged respondent because she threatened to file suit against the church in a civil court.This threat contravened the Lutheran doctrine that dis¬putes among Christians should be resolved internally without resort to the civil court system and all the legalwrangling it entails.5 In Hosanna-Tabor’s view, respondent’s disregard for this doctrine compromised her religious function, disqualifying her from serving effectively as a voice for the church’s faith. Respondent does not disputethat the Lutheran Church subscribes to a doctrine of internal dispute resolution, but she argues that this was a mere pretext for her firing, which was really done for nonreligious reasons.
For civil courts to engage in the pretext inquiry that respondent and the Solicitor General urge us to sanction would dangerously undermine the religious autonomy thatlower court case law has now protected for nearly fourdecades. In order to probe the real reason for respondent’sfiring, a civil court—and perhaps a jury—would be required to make a judgment about church doctrine. The credibility of Hosanna-Tabor’s asserted reason for terminating respondent’s employment could not be assessed without taking into account both the importance that theLutheran Church attaches to the doctrine of internal dispute resolution and the degree to which that tenetcompromised respondent’s religious function. If it could be shown that this belief is an obscure and minor part of Lutheran doctrine, it would be much more plausible forrespondent to argue that this doctrine was not the real reason for her firing. If, on the other hand, the doctrine is a central and universally known tenet of Lutheranism,then the church’s asserted reason for her discharge wouldseem much more likely to be non pretextual. But whatever the truth of the matter might be, the mere adjudication of such questions would pose grave problems for religious autonomy: It would require calling witnesses to testify about the importance and priority of the religious doctrinein question, with a civil factfinder sitting in ultimate judgment of what the accused church really believes, and how important that belief is to the church’s overall mission.
At oral argument, both respondent and the United States acknowledged that a pretext inquiry would sometimes be prohibited by principles of religious autonomy, and both conceded that a Roman Catholic priest who is dismissed for getting married could not sue the church and claim that his dismissal was actually based on a ground forbidden by the federal antidiscrimination laws. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 38–39, 50. But there is no principled basis for proscribing a pretext inquiry in such a case while permitting it in a case like the one now before us. The Roman Catholic Church’s insistence on clerical celibacy may be much better known than the Lutheran Church’s doctrine of internal dispute resolution, but popular familiarity with a religious doctrine cannot be the determinative factor.
What matters in the present case is that Hosanna-Tabor believes that the religious function that respondent performed made it essential that she abide by the doctrine of internal dispute resolution; and the civil courts are in noposition to second-guess that assessment. This conclusion rests not on respondent’s ordination status or her formal title, but rather on her functional status as the type of employee that a church must be free to appoint or dismissin order to exercise the religious liberty that the First Amendment guarantees.
Bresson Film Festival
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 11 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Culture
This Festival began last Friday at the Film Forum, and is going on until the 19th. Writing for the WSJ, Kristin Jones says, “How can the invisible be portrayed onscreen? Through a mysterious alchemy of sound and image, the rigorous and elliptical films of the French director Robert Bresson (1901–1999), which often address sin and redemption in a fallen world, manage to do just that.” Some of us may know Bresson only from his Diary of a Country Priest, an amazing film adaptation of Bernanos’s modern masterpiece of trial and faith, hope, and love.
Googling Glory
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 11 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Culture
Forwarded by a parishioner:
In the late 1980s, he was beatified by Pope John Paul II. He had converted from Lutheranism to the Catholic faith in 1675. The Google doodle pays tribute to his work by presenting the letters of the search engine’s name as geological representations featuring colored layers embedded with fossils. [UPDATE: Yes, Google fails to note that Nicolas was a Catholic Priest, and beatified as stated above.]
Today, Google is celebrating the 374th birthday of the founder of modern geology, Nicolas Steno with a special logo.
As you can see, the logo looks like exploration of the ocean to the earth and it’s inhabitants. It is a great symbolism of Nicolas Steno work. Nicolas Steno was born on January 11, 1638 in Denmark and died on December 5, 1686 in Schwerin, Duchy of Mecklenburg-Schwerin.
Shepherd in Red
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 09 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Events in the Archdiocese
Cardinals wear red, which is a sign of their intimate connection with the vicar of Christ as the pope’s closest advisers. The red not only symbolizes the Holy Spirit, but moreover martyrdom–the proper form of Christian witness. So, there is also the long-standing custom that the pope wears red shoes. Consider Our Savior’s words to St. Peter at the close of John 21:18-19, “You will stretch out your hands and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.” This path is in the footsteps of the Crucified One: “[Jesus] said this signifying by what kind of death [Peter] would glorify God. And when he had said this, he said to him, ‘Follow me.’”
Given that connection, our Archbishop’s words to us are uniquely significant:
Yes, I am honored, humbled, and grateful, …but, let’s be frank: this is not about Timothy Dolan; this is an honor from the Holy Father to the Archdiocese of New York, and to all our cherished friends and neighbors who call this great community home.
It’s as if Pope Benedict is putting the red hat on top of the Empire State Building, or the Statue of Liberty, or on home plate at Yankee Stadium; or on the spires of Saint Patrick’s Cathedral or any of our other parish churches; this is the successor of Saint Peter saying to the clergy, sisters, brothers, lay faithful of this archdiocese, and to all of our friends and neighbors of New York…
Our frank Archbishop adds, “I sure need your prayers.”
Let us pray for him and for each other in this great City, whose significance calls us in a special way to a crimson commitment–which is indeed, a very unique and Christian kind of honor.
Word to Life – Epiphany (B)
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 07 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Word to Life
Fr. Aquinas Guilbeau, OP was back in town for a couple of days! Just long enough to get him on the air…
Biblical Poetics
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 02 Jan 2012 | Tagged as: Parish Events
Tonight, we’ll be discussing elements of a biblical poetics, i.e., central ways the Bible presents language (rather speech!) as intentionally made and making, as intentionally crafted and creative, as something that is performed and something that is performing. Of course, we’ll make sure to show the way in which these elements lay groundwork for apocalyptic beauty!
As always, this conference is at 7 PM in the Church Hall and is open and free to everyone.
Biblical Influence
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 29 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Culture
A piece by Marilynne Robinson recently appeared in the New York Times Sunday Book Review. A Calvinist, her books are as gentle as they are somber; (I haven’t read Home, but Gilead and Housekeeping are worth the time it would take to read them). She certainly isn’t the only prominent writer to note the literary significance of the Bible (as if it needed noting) (cf. Robert Alter, Northrop Frye, and George Steiner). But it is agreeable to see it in print. (And it’s something of an enticing advance for next Monday’s lecture on Biblical Poetics). Anyway, here’s a snippet of the full article:
In our strange cultural moment it is necessary to make a distinction between religious propaganda and religious thought, the second of these being an attempt to do some sort of justice to the rich difficulties present in the tradition. The great problem for Christianity is always the humility of the figure in whom God is said to have been incarnate, and the insistence of the tradition that God is present in the persons of the despised and rejected.
Christmas Homilies
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 26 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Homilies
It’s never been clear to me how much yield there is wrought from the investment of time to edit and post our homilies–which is why there haven’t been any for a couple of months. As a Christmas present to you, here are the Pastor’s homilies from Christmas, both for the Vigil and the Day. Joyous Noel!
Urbi et Orbi
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 25 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Liturgical Feasts
Our Holy Father’s worldwide Christmas message:
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Rome and throughout the world! Christ is born for us! Glory to God in the highest and peace on earth to the men and women whom he loves. May all people hear an echo of the message of Bethlehem which the Catholic Church repeats in every continent, beyond the confines of every nation, language and culture. The Son of the Virgin Mary is born for everyone; he is the Saviour of all.
This is how Christ is invoked in an ancient liturgical antiphon: “O Emmanuel, our king and lawgiver, hope and salvation of the peoples: come to save us, O Lord our God”. Veni ad salvandum nos! Come to save us! This is the cry raised by men and women in every age, who sense that by themselves they cannot prevail over difficulties and dangers. They need to put their hands in a greater and stronger hand, a hand which reaches out to them from on high. Dear brothers and sisters, this hand is Christ, born in Bethlehem of the Virgin Mary. He is the hand that God extends to humanity, to draw us out of the mire of sin and to set us firmly on rock, the secure rock of his Truth and his Love (cf. Ps 40:2).
This is the meaning of the Child’s name, the name which, by God’s will, Mary and Joseph gave him: he is named Jesus, which means “Saviour” (cf. Mt 1:21; Lk 1:31). He was sent by God the Father to save us above all from the evil deeply rooted in man and in history: the evil of separation from God, the prideful presumption of being self-sufficient, of trying to compete with God and to take his place, to decide what is good and evil, to be the master of life and death (cf. Gen 3:1-7). This is the great evil, the great sin, from which we human beings cannot save ourselves unless we rely on God’s help, unless we cry out to him: “Veni ad salvandum nos! – Come to save us!”
The very fact that we cry to heaven in this way already sets us aright; it makes us true to ourselves: we are in fact those who cried out to God and were saved (cf. Esth [LXX] 10:3ff.). God is the Saviour; we are those who are in peril. He is the physician; we are the infirm. To realize this is the first step towards salvation, towards emerging from the maze in which we have been locked by our pride. To lift our eyes to heaven, to stretch out our hands and call for help is our means of escape, provided that there is Someone who hears us and can come to our assistance.
Jesus Christ is the proof that God has heard our cry. And not only this! God’s love for us is so strong that he cannot remain aloof; he comes out of himself to enter into our midst and to share fully in our human condition (cf. Ex 3:7-12). The answer to our cry which God gave in Jesus infinitely transcends our expectations, achieving a solidarity which cannot be human alone, but divine. Only the God who is love, and the love which is God, could choose to save us in this way, which is certainly the lengthiest way, yet the way which respects the truth about him and about us: the way of reconciliation, dialogue and cooperation.
Dear brothers and sisters in Rome and throughout the world, on this Christmas 2011, let us then turn to the Child of Bethlehem, to the Son of the Virgin Mary, and say: “Come to save us!” Let us repeat these words in spiritual union with the many people who experience particularly difficult situations; let us speak out for those who have no voice.
Together let us ask God’s help for the peoples of the Horn of Africa, who suffer from hunger and food shortages, aggravated at times by a persistent state of insecurity. May the international community not fail to offer assistance to the many displaced persons coming from that region and whose dignity has been sorely tried.
May the Lord grant comfort to the peoples of South-East Asia, particularly Thailand and the Philippines, who are still enduring grave hardships as a result of the recent floods.
May the Lord come to the aid of our world torn by so many conflicts which even today stain the earth with blood. May the Prince of Peace grant peace and stability to that Land where he chose to come into the world, and encourage the resumption of dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians. May he bring an end to the violence in Syria, where so much blood has already been shed. May he foster full reconciliation and stability in Iraq and Afghanistan. May he grant renewed vigour to all elements of society in the countries of North Africa and the Middle East as they strive to advance the common good.
May the birth of the Saviour support the prospects of dialogue and cooperation in Myanmar, in the pursuit of shared solutions. May the Nativity of the Redeemer ensure political stability to the countries of the Great Lakes Region of Africa, and assist the people of South Sudan in their commitment to safeguarding the rights of all citizens.
Dear Brothers and Sisters, let us turn our gaze anew to the grotto of Bethlehem. The Child whom we contemplate is our salvation! He has brought to the world a universal message of reconciliation and peace. Let us open our hearts to him; let us receive him into our lives. Once more let us say to him, with joy and confidence: “Veni ad salvandum nos!”
Chanukah
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 22 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Culture
Jon D. Levenson teaches at Harvard Divinity School, and is the author of the very widely appreciated book by scholars and laity, by Jews and Christians, Sinai and Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible. He wrote a piece for the WSJ on the significance of the feast and its Christian influence.
(SHALOM)
The eight-day festival of Hanukkah, which Jews world-wide will [began] celebrating Tuesday night [20 December], is one of the better known of the Jewish holidays but also one of the less important. [Keep Reading...]
Word to Life – 4th Sunday Advent (B)
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 18 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Word to Life
O Come Emmanuel!
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 16 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Dominicans
From our brothers at eh Dominican House of Studies in Washington, DC.
This Sunday: More Carols!
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 14 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Music
Lessons and Carols Today, 3 pm
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 11 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Parish Events
And With Your Spirit
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 10 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Liturgical Feasts
- The Prophet Elijah, Marc Chagall
It’s a bit odd that, having descended the mountain of Transfiguration with our Lord, the disciples ask about Elijah and not Moses (today’s Gospel). After all, it was Moses to whom the Law was given, Moses who led the people out of captivity, and Moses who built the Tabernacle after the heavenly pattern. Indeed, the infidelity that the prophets excoriate is an infidelity in terms of Moses’ covenantal patrimony.
Two differences between the way these men of God manifest divine power can be considered, and which point to the prominence of Elijah for our Gospel.
Moses is able to divide the sea, to conquer the Amalekites, and to draw water from a rock. But he does this largely by way of mere gestures–stretching forth of the hands and striking with the staff. No words accompany these actions. To be sure, Moses received unique commands and inspirations from God to do such and such, but his instrumentality remains–as it were–dumb. Hence, the people witness and experience this power as if from the outside, which is the second point. Moses brings down the tablets of law that God Himself inscribed: but the people do not ascend the mountain, and Moses merely gives what he has received.
Differently, our first lesson points out, Elijah’s amazing deeds are connected with his “words,” which are as “a flaming furnace.” It is by “the Lord’s word that he shut the heavens and three times brought down fire.” It is his words that communicate his “wondrous deeds.” Indeed, the parity between God’s word and the prophet’s words is such that Sirach asks–with reference to Elijah! (i.e., not God as such)–”whose glory is equal to yours?!”
Elijah’s glory is greater than that of Moses. He does equally great deeds, for example splitting the Jordan river (2 Kings 2.8) as Moses did the Red Sea. But moreover, like Christ, Elijah raises the dead (1 Kings 17.23).
Because these works, as emphasized by Sirach, are effected by Elijah’s words, the people are privy to the will and presence of God in a way that they did not have with Moses. As a result, all who have “seen” Elijah are blessed.
Consequently, the prophetic tradition to which the wisdom author, Sirach, witnesses, recognizes that the Messianic age is one where words communicate power. Indeed, the Messiah is the very Word made flesh. The ultimate gesture of God is that His selfsame Word is made manifest in the Nativity of His Son! God wants us to hear the words of His works!
Coming down from the mount of Transfiguration, then, the disciples ask a somewhat academic question about why “scribes” say that Elijah has to come first. Jesus simply responds by saying that Elijah has come! Our Lord emphasizes the fact that the words of the Bible (specifically, Malachi 4.1-5) and the words of God’s preachers (specifically, John the Baptist) manifest what needs be seen. People do not “recognize” what they ought because they have not heeded aright the words that have been preached to them.
Today, St. John the Baptist encourages us to recognize the Messiah by heeding the words of his tradition. A great attention to the Word of God as constitutive of any kind of spirituality is necessary…
as it is to the words of the liturgy, which are taken from the Bible and traditional preaching of the Church’s Saints. Our new translation provides precisely this opportunity to make a straight pathway in our hearts for the Lord.
The Church entrusts her ordained ministers with the prophetic task to manifest uniquely the works of God through the celebration of the sacraments. When the people respond “And with your Spirit,” they are making a unique response to God’s ordained ministers because to these latter have been imparted a special share in the Spirit of the Almighty. That special share is what empowers them in a unique and Elijah-like way to say “The Lord be with you”… not only so that they might mean it themselves, but so that they might effect it for others!
Word to Life – 3rd Sunday Advent (A)
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 10 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Word to Life
Our Pastor Tells All
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 09 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Dominicans
The Immaculate Conception
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 08 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Liturgical Feasts
From Pio Nono’s Apostolic Constitution, Ineffabilis Deus, 8 December 1854
… The Fathers and writers of the Church, well versed in the heavenly Scriptures, had nothing more at heart than to vie with one another in preaching and teaching in many wonderful ways the Virgin’s supreme sanctity, dignity, and immunity from all stain of sin, and her renowned victory over the most foul enemy of the human race. This they did in the books they wrote to explain the Scriptures, to vindicate the dogmas, and to instruct the faithful. These ecclesiastical writers in quoting the words by which at the beginning of the world God announced his merciful remedies prepared for the regeneration of mankind—words by which he crushed the audacity of the deceitful serpent and wondrously raised up the hope of our race, saying, “I will put enmities between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed”—taught that by this divine prophecy the merciful Redeemer of mankind, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, was clearly foretold: That his most Blessed Mother, the Virgin Mary, was prophetically indicated; and, at the same time, the very enmity of both against the evil one was significantly expressed. Hence, just as Christ, the Mediator between God and man, assumed human nature, blotted the handwriting of the decree that stood against us, and fastened it triumphantly to the cross, so the most holy Virgin, united with him by a most intimate and indissoluble bond, was, with him and through him, eternally at enmity with the evil serpent, and most completely triumphed over him, and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot.
This sublime and singular privilege of the Blessed Virgin, together with her most excellent innocence, purity, holiness and freedom from every stain of sin, as well as the unspeakable abundance and greatness of all heavenly graces, virtues and privileges—these the Fathers beheld in that ark of Noah, which was built by divine command and escaped entirely safe and sound from the common shipwreck of the whole world; in the ladder which Jacob saw reaching from the earth to heaven, by whose rungs the angels of God ascended and descended, and on whose top the Lord himself leaned in that bush which Moses saw in the holy place burning on all sides, which was not consumed or injured in any way but grew green and blossomed beautifully; in that impregnable tower before the enemy, from which hung a thousand bucklers and all the armor of the strong; in that garden enclosed on all sides, which cannot be violated or corrupted by any deceitful plots; as in that resplendent city of God, which has its foundations on the holy mountains; in that most august temple of God, which, radiant with divine splendors, is full of the glory of God; and in very many other biblical types of this kind. In such allusions the Fathers taught that the exalted dignity of the Mother of God, her spotless innocence and her sanctity unstained by any fault, had been prophesied in a wonderful manner.
In like manner did they use the words of the prophets to describe this wondrous abundance of divine gifts and the original innocence of the Virgin of whom Jesus was born. They celebrated the august Virgin as the spotless dove, as the holy Jerusalem, as the exalted throne of God, as the ark and house of holiness which Eternal Wisdom built, and as that Queen who, abounding in delights and leaning on her Beloved, came forth from the mouth of the Most High, entirely perfect, beautiful, most dear to God and never stained with the least blemish….
Accordingly, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, for the honor of the Holy and undivided Trinity, for the glory and adornment of the Virgin Mother of God, for the exaltation of the Catholic Faith, and for the furtherance of the Catholic religion, by the authority of Jesus Christ our Lord, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own: “We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful.”
Conceive Life Anew
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 07 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Events in the Archdiocese
“God With Us”
On the Vigil of the Immaculate Conception
December 7th (Wednesday)
Join us, the Sisters of Life
and the Dominican Friars,
for an evening of prayer and
conference on issues of
L I F E and L O V E.
When:
7:30 pm : exposition – 9:00 pm night prayer
* Extended adoration till 11pm in celebration of the Feast of the Immaculate Conception
Where:
Saint Vincent Ferrer Church
869 Lexington Avenue (at East 66th Street)
More Information:
St. Ambrose — A Patristic Icon of Ministerium Verbi
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 07 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Liturgical Feasts
From Our Holy Father’s Wednesday catechesis 24 October 2007
Saint Ambrose transferred to the Latin environment the meditation on the Scriptures which Origen had begun, introducing in the West the practice of lectio divina. The method of lectio served to guide all of Ambrose’s preaching and writings, which stemmed precisely from prayerful listening to the Word of God. The famous introduction of an Ambrosian catechesis shows clearly how the holy Bishop applied the Old Testament to Christian life: “Every day, when we were reading about the lives of the Patriarchs and the maxims of the Proverbs, we addressed morality”, the Bishop of Milan said to his catechumens and neophytes, “so that formed and instructed by them you may become accustomed to taking the path of the Fathers and to following the route of obedience to the divine precepts” (On the Mysteries 1, 1). In other words, the neophytes and catechumens, in accordance with the Bishop’s decision, after having learned the art of a well-ordered life, could henceforth consider themselves prepared for Christ’s great mysteries. Thus, Ambrose’s preaching – which constitutes the structural nucleus of his immense literary opus – starts with the reading of the Sacred Books (“the Patriarchs” or the historical Books and “Proverbs”, or in other words, the Wisdom Books) in order to live in conformity with divine Revelation.
It is obvious that the preacher’s personal testimony and the level of exemplarity of the Christian community condition the effectiveness of the preaching. In this perspective, a passage from St Augustine’s Confessions is relevant. He had come to Milan as a teacher of rhetoric; he was a sceptic and not Christian. He was seeking the Christian truth but was not capable of truly finding it.
What moved the heart of the young African rhetorician, sceptic and downhearted, and what impelled him to definitive conversion was not above all Ambrose’s splendid homilies (although he deeply appreciated them). It was rather the testimony of the Bishop and his Milanese Church that prayed and sang as one intact body. It was a Church that could resist the tyrannical ploys of the Emperor and his mother, who in early 386 again demanded a church building for the Arians’ celebrations. In the building that was to be requisitioned, Augustine relates, “the devout people watched, ready to die with their Bishop”. This testimony of the Confessions is precious because it points out that something was moving in Augustine, who continues: “We too, although spiritually tepid, shared in the excitement of the whole people” (Confessions 9, 7).
Augustine learned from the life and example of Bishop Ambrose to believe and to preach. We can refer to a famous sermon of the African, which centuries later merited citation in the conciliar Constitution on Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum: “Therefore, all clerics, particularly priests of Christ and others who, as deacons or catechists, are officially engaged in the ministry of the Word”, Dei Verbum recommends, “should immerse themselves in the Scriptures by constant sacred reading and diligent study. For it must not happen that anyone becomes” – and this is Augustine’s citation – “”an empty preacher of the Word of God to others, not being a hearer of the Word in his own heart’” (n. 25). Augustine had learned precisely from Ambrose how to “hear in his own heart” this perseverance in reading Sacred Scripture with a prayerful approach, so as truly to absorb and assimilate the Word of God in one’s heart.
Dear brothers and sisters, I would like further to propose to you a sort of “patristic icon”, which, interpreted in the light of what we have said, effectively represents “the heart” of Ambrosian doctrine. In the sixth book of the Confessions, Augustine tells of his meeting with Ambrose, an encounter that was indisputably of great importance in the history of the Church. He writes in his text that whenever he went to see the Bishop of Milan, he would regularly find him taken up with catervae [lots] of people full of problems for whose needs he did his utmost. There was always a long queue waiting to talk to Ambrose, seeking in him consolation and hope. When Ambrose was not with them, with the people (and this happened for the space of the briefest of moments), he was either restoring his body with the necessary food or nourishing his spirit with reading. Here Augustine marvels because Ambrose read the Scriptures with his mouth shut, only with his eyes (cf. Confessions, 6, 3). Indeed, in the early Christian centuries reading was conceived of strictly for proclamation, and reading aloud also facilitated the reader’s understanding. That Ambrose could scan the pages with his eyes alone suggested to the admiring Augustine a rare ability for reading and familiarity with the Scriptures. Well, in that “reading under one’s breath”, where the heart is committed to achieving knowledge of the Word of God – this is the “icon” to which we are referring -, one can glimpse the method of Ambrosian catechesis; it is Scripture itself, intimately assimilated, which suggests the content to proclaim that will lead to the conversion of hearts.
Santa Claus
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 06 Dec 2011 | Tagged as: Culture, Liturgical Feasts
The Pope in Benin, Africa
Posted by Fr. Bruno M. Shah, O.P. on 21 Nov 2011 | Tagged as: Culture
And here is the text of his address, and here is a link to accessing other reports/documents. Enjoy!
Following in the footsteps of my blessed predecessor Pope John Paul II, it is a great joy for me to visit for the second time this dear continent of Africa, coming among you, in Benin, to address to you a message of hope and of peace. I would like first of all to express my cordial gratitude to Archbishop Antoine Ganyé Cotonou, for his words of welcome and to greet the Bishops of Benin, as well as the Cardinals and Bishops from various African countries and from other continents. To all of you, dear brothers and sisters, who have come to this Mass celebrated by the Successor of Peter, I offer my warm greetings. I am thinking certainly of the faithful of Benin, but also of those from other French-speaking countries, such as Togo, Burkina Faso, Niger and others. Our Eucharistic celebration on the Solemnity of Christ the King is an occasion to give thank to God for the one hundred and fifty years that have passed since the beginnings of the evangelization of Benin; it is also an occasion to express our gratitude to him for the Second Special Assembly of the Synod of African Bishops which was held in Rome a few months ago.
The Gospel which we have just heard tells us that Jesus, the Son of Man, the ultimate judge of our lives, wished to appear as one who hungers and thirsts, as a stranger, as one of those who are naked, sick or imprisoned, ultimately, of those who suffer or are outcast; how we treat them will be taken as the way we treat Jesus himself. We do not see here a simple literary device, or a simple metaphor. Jesus’s entire existence is an example of it. He, the Son of God, became man, he shared our existence, even down to the smallest details, he became the servant of the least of his brothers and sisters. He who had nowhere to lay his head, was condemned to death on a cross. This is the King we celebrate!
Without a doubt this can appear a little disconcerting to us. Today, like two thousand years ago, accustomed to seeing the signs of royalty in success, power, money and ability, we find it hard to accept such a king, a king who makes himself the servant of the little ones, of the most humble, a king whose throne is a cross. And yet, the Scriptures tell us, in this is the glory of Christ revealed; it is in the humility of his earthly existence that he finds his power to judge the world. For him, to reign is to serve! And what he asks of us is to follow him along the way, to serve, to be attentive to the cry of the poor, the weak, the outcast. The baptized know that the decision to follow Christ can entail great sacrifices, at times even the sacrifice of one’s life. However, as Saint Paul reminds us, Christ has overcome death and he brings us with him in his resurrection. He introduces us to a new world, a world of freedom and joy. Today, so much still binds us to the world of the past, so many fears hold us prisoners and prevent us from living in freedom and happiness. Let us allow Christ to free us from the world of the past! Our faith in him, which frees us from all our fears and miseries, gives us access to a new world, a world where justice and truth are not a byword, a world of interior freedom and of peace with ourselves, with our neighbours and with God. This is the gift God gave us at our baptism!
“Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Mt 25:34). Let us receive this word of blessing which the Son of Man will, on the Day of Judgement, address to those who have recognized his presence in the lowliest of their brethren, with a heart free and full of the love of the Lord! Brothers and sisters, the words of the Gospel are truly words of hope, because the King of the universe has drawn near to us, the servant of the least and lowliest. Here I would like to greet with affection all those persons who are suffering, those who are sick, those affected by AIDS or by other illnesses, to all those forgotten by society. Have courage! The Pope is close to you in his thoughts and prayers. Have courage! Jesus wanted to identify himself with the poor, with the sick; he wanted to share your suffering and to see you as his brothers and sisters, to free you from every affliction, from all suffering. Every sick person, every poor person deserves our respect and our love because, through them, God shows us the way to heaven.
This morning, I invite you once again to rejoice with me. One hundred and fifty years ago the cross of Christ was raised in your country, and the Gospel was proclaimed for the first time. Today, we give thanks to God for the work accomplished by the missionaries, by the “apostolic workers” who first came from among you or from distant lands, bishops, priests, men and women religious, catechists, all those who, both yesterday and today, enabled the growth of the faith in Jesus Christ on the African continent. I honour here the memory of the venerable Cardinal Bernardin Gantin, an example of faith and of wisdom for Benin and for the entire African continent.
Dear brothers and sisters, everyone who has received this marvellous gift of faith, this gift of an encounter with the risen Lord, feels in turn the need to proclaim it to others. The Church exists to proclaim this Good News! And this duty is always urgent! After 150 years, many are those who have not heard the message of salvation in Christ! Many, too, are those who are hesitant to open their hearts to the word of God! Many are those whose faith is weak, whose way of thinking, habits and lifestyle do not know the reality of the Gospel, and who think that seeking selfish satisfaction, easy gain or power is the ultimate goal of human life. With enthusiasm, be ardent witnesses of the faith which you have received! Make the loving face of the Saviour shine in every place, in particular before the young, who search for reasons to live and hope in a difficult world!
The Church in Benin has received much from her missionaries: she must in turn carry this message of hope to people who do not know or who no longer know the Lord Jesus. Dear brothers and sisters, I ask you to be concerned for evangelization in your country, and among the peoples of your continent and the whole world. The recent Synod of Bishops for Africa stated this in no uncertain terms: the man of hope, the Christian, cannot be uninterested in his brothers and sisters. This would be completely opposed to the example of Jesus. The Christian is a tireless builder of communion, peace and solidarity – gifts which Jesus himself has given us. By being faithful to him, we will cooperate in the realization of God’s plan of salvation for humanity.
Dear brothers and sisters, I urge you, therefore, to strengthen your faith in Jesus Christ, to be authentically converted to him. He alone gives us the true life and can liberate us for all our fears and sluggishness, from all our anguish. Rediscover the roots of your existence in the baptism which you received and which makes you children of God! May Jesus Christ give you strength to live as Christians and to find ways to transmit generously to new generations what you have received from your fathers in faith!
On this feast day, we rejoice together in the reign of Christ the King over the whole world. He is the one who removes all that hinders reconciliation, justice and peace. We are reminded that true royalty does not consist in a show of power, but in the humility of service; not in the oppression of the weak, but in the ability to protect them and to lead them to life in abundance (cf. Jn 10:10). Christ reigns from the Cross and, with his arms open wide, he embraces all the peoples of the world and draws them into unity. Through the Cross, he breaks down the walls of division, he reconciles us with each other and with the Father. We pray today for the people of Africa, that all may be able to live in justice, peace and the joy of the Kingdom of God (cf. Rom 14:17). With these sentiments I affectionately greet all the English-speaking faithful who have come from Ghana and Nigeria and neighbouring countries. May God bless all of you!