Телеграм канал «Ecce Verbum»

In the 880s, Pope Stephen V issued some instructions to a papal legation to the Slavs. In the same document, he anticipates the eastern objection to the Filioque regarding addition(s) to the creed. Take a look at the prepared response:

"Likewise: The Holy Spirit is said to be from the Father and the Son, neither unbegotten, lest there be two Fathers, nor begotten, lest there be two Sons, but proceeding. If they say: “It was forbidden by the holy fathers to add anything to the Creed or to subtract anything from it,” say: “The holy Roman Church is the guardian and confirmer of holy dogmas, because in the Catholic faith, by the vicariate of the prince of the apostles, she wavers in nothing, as the Lord himself says: ‘Simon, behold, Satan has desired to have you, that he might sift you as wheat; but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.’ This Church has led all erring churches to the faith and has strengthened those that were wavering, not by changing holy dogmas, but by explaining them to those who did not understand or who thought wrongly.”

Keep in mind that this was written less than a decade after AD 879 Photian Synod.

Source is Epistolae Karolini Aevi, Tom. V; pg. 353

#soteriology #filioque

A historical tidbit:

In the 11th century, the Islamic sultan Nasir ibn Alnas from Algeria wanted Servandus to become the bishop of the Catholic Church in his country. To this end, he wrote to Pope Gregory VII with a request asking whether he could ordain Servandus as a bishop, and the pope agreed.

"Gregory (VII) to Anazir, king of the province of Mauretania-Sitifensis in Africa.

[Without greeting.] Your Highness sent us a request within the past year that we ordain the priest Servandus as a bishop according to Christian order. We have attended to this, since your request seemed to us just and full of good hope. You also sent us gifts, freed some Christian prisoners on account of St. Peter, prince of the Apostles, and out of love for us, and promised to free more."

Source:🔗 THE CORRESPONDENCE OF POPE GREGORY VII SELECTED LETTERS FROM THE REGISTRUM TRANSLATED WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY EPHRAIM EMERTON To Anazir, King of Mauretania, ON THE MAINTENANCE OF FRIENDLY RELATIONS , Book III, 21, p. 287.

Canon Law Both the new law—the Code of Canon Law of 1983—and the older one—the Code of Canon Law of 1917—confirm the right and duty of all the faithful to venerate the Saints and the Most Holy Mary. In point 1255 §1 of the old law (CIC 1917), we find a provision regulating all forms of worship: "The Most Holy Trinity and each of Its Persons, as well as Christ the Lord, also under sacramental forms, are due the worship of latria. The Most Holy Virgin Mary is due the worship of hyperdulia, while the others, reigning with Christ in heaven, are due the worship of dulia."

Literature 1. M. Sieniatycki, Outline of Catholic Dogmatics 2. I. Solano SJ, J.A. de Aldama SJ, Sacrae Theologiae Summa 3. L. Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma

Related:

🔗Veneration of Relics in Scripure

🔗Scripture and Veneration of the Saints and Angels

🔗God sharing some of His glory with his creatures

Christian Worship - Part Two: Dulia and Hyperdulia

As was stated, every religious worship relates to supernatural perfection, and latria is the religious worship directed toward uncreated supernatural perfection, that is, toward God. Dulia Religious worship that is directed toward some created supernatural perfection is called dulia. It is a form of veneration toward the good whose source in creation is God Himself. Therefore, dulia is never detached from the worship of God; it does not bypass God, nor does it deny the supreme veneration due exclusively to God. By rendering dulia, we ultimately render veneration to God Himself, who is the Creator and Giver of every good in creation.

To Whom Is Dulia Due?

A human being, as a rational being, may render dulia exclusively to other persons, and never to objects. Therefore, only angels and other people in whom there is some supernatural perfection—concerning which we have certainty of its existence in that person—may be surrounded by the worship of dulia. We have this certainty, for example, with regard to the Saints canonized by the Church, who, being in heaven, are united with God in love and eternal happiness and are confirmed in grace forever. Through their lives, examined by the Church, they demonstrated numerous supernatural virtues and merits, through His work in their life, God demonstrates His glory to us. It is therefore fitting to acknowledge these goods, which reveal to us the goodness of God, the source of all good in the world.

Justification of Dulia in Scripture

Holy Scripture, for well-known reasons (the period before Christ's Ascension), does not contain many explicit instances of the worship of Saints, though we can find its justification in it. The Decalogue commands the showing of honor to parents, since the relationship of parents to children images the relationship of God to creation. This is not yet religious worship, as it pertains to natural perfection. However, in numerous places in Scripture, we find veneration rendered to angels (Jos 5:14; Dn 8:17; Tb 12:16), on account of their divine mission and supernatural dignity flowing from their union with God in heaven. Since they are worthy of veneration, the Saints, also united with God in heaven, are likewise worthy of veneration.

Justification of Dulia in Tradition

In the Church, the worship of dulia begins with the veneration of martyrs for the faith. Christians from the very beginning were convinced that persons who, through their lives, confirmed and demonstrated great fruits of divine grace are due veneration. Already in the Martyrdom of Polycarp (2nd century), we find a distinction between the worship of martyrs and the worship of God: "Him [Christ] we worship, because He is the Son of God. But to the martyrs we render the love due to disciples and followers of the Lord, on account of their unmatched devotion to the King and Teacher."

Hyperdulia

The created perfections found in the Saints, which are the object of dulia worship, are repeatable, meaning that the same good is found in many people who are venerated for it. Therefore, hyperdulia is distinguished from dulia; it denotes a special form of worship of a numerically singular created perfection and thus is veneration on account of a good that occurs only in one person and surpasses the goods of other persons. We surround the Most Holy Virgin Mary with the worship of hyperdulia; by divine institution, she possesses special gifts: Divine Motherhood, the Immaculate Conception. These gifts belong to her alone, which causes the Mother of God to stand above all the Saints; she is the most perfect creature, and thus she is surrounded by a special, distinctive form of respect.

Forms of Dulia

The worship of dulia can be shown in many ways, especially through prayers with the Saints intercession, invoking their intercession and finally through appropriate gestures toward images and relics that refer to the person surrounded by dulia.

Continued, sources, related posts 🔗

"And why is the SSPX excommunicated but the liberal clergy is not punished?"

Answer:

Well, they are disciplining all the same:

Fr. Krzysztof Charamsa, suspended in 2015 for announcing that he is gay and living in a stable relationship and for teaching on homosexuality contrary to the Catholic Church.

Fr. Łukasz Kachnowicz - Suspended 2019 for scandal caused by his behavior and statements contrary to the teaching of the Church.

Fr. Pierre Valkering (2019) - Netherlands, suspended for denying the Church's teaching on homosexuality (gay).

Fr. Greg Reynolds (2013) excommunicated for, among other things, supporting the ordination of women and rejecting the teaching of the Church.

Fr. Jerry Zawada (2014) banned from ministry, public speaking as a priest, and administering the sacraments for supporting women's ordination, etc.

Italian priest (name unavailable) 2022 - Suspended for supporting LGBT rights, abortion, and euthanasia.

Fr. Boniecki (2017) banned from speaking out because of his teachings on suicide.

It takes a lot of effort now for the Vatican or the Catholic Church to respond.
Fr. Gerald Murray and Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy criticized Pope Francis harshly, claiming the pope was sowing confusion, destroying doctrine, and causing the faithful to lose trust in the papacy. And nothing, the Vatican agreed to the criticism.

For 17 years, the Lefebvrists have been slandering the pope, the church, the council, the mass, and the papacy has patiently engaged in dialogue, offering to theological discussions over ambiguous points of the council, offering to consecrate one bishop (for the time being). The excommunication only followed the illicit election.

To compare with the situation in Germany, Cardinal Fernández sent a letter to Germany, highlighting that the Fiducia supplicans clearly states that "the Church has always considered only sexual relations within marriage to be morally permissible. She does not have the authority to grant a liturgical blessing when this might in some way constitute a form of moral legitimization of a relationship that has the appearance of marriage or of extramarital sexual activity," even if those requesting it seek to "legitimize their state."

However, the difference lies in the fact that the German Church recognizes the pope's orders and hasn't yet refused discipline. If they appointed bishops without his consent, they'd be treated on the same terms.

Suspensions and other milder disciplinary and corrective measures stem from the fact that many liberal Catholics do not establish their own independent churches with parallel line of succession.

However, there is a list of discipline taken under the last two pontificates towards clerics who openly flout canon law in a liberalizing direction.

2002: the "Danube Seven" was excommunicated for attempting female ordination. Bishop Rómulo Antonio Braschi along with the women were excommunicated, with the entire group of "priests", including its several female "bishops".

2013: One of Francis’s first acts was to excommunicate Father Roberto Francisco Danie, from Brazil who openly taught that homosexual sex is not a sin and advocated for open marriages.

Later that year, Father Greg Reynolds was excommunicated for advocating women’s ordination, gay marriage and then refusing to stop celebrating mass after being suspended from using his faculties.

2015: Vatican had dismissed a member of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), Msgr. Krzysztof Charamsa, after he came out as gay. He was sent to his home diocese where he was then suspended and removed from the priesthood.

2019: Fr. Pierre Valkering, a Dutch priest in the Diocese of Haarlem-Amsterdam, was suspended from his diocese after coming out as gay. He appealed to the Vatican and initially won his appeal as the Vatican stated that some procedural steps had not been properly taken and asked the diocese to provide due process.

🔗continued

"Does the grave state of necessity that the Lefebvrists appeal to actually exist?"

Answer:

To give an example, Thomas Aquinas teaches that in order to make use of this right, two conditions must be met. First condition :Observing the law/regulations may be harmful to the common good:

"Since therefore the lawgiver cannot take into account all particular cases, in making the law he has in view mainly what happens in the majority of cases: always keeping in mind the common benefit. Hence, when a case arises in which observing such a law would be harmful to the common good, it should not be observed. For example, if in some besieged city a law were issued that the gates of the city should be closed, in most cases such an order is beneficial for the common good."

"However, the second condition must be absolutely fulfilled. The danger is immediate, by which we do not have the possibility to ask the lawgiver/superior for an interpretation of the law."

"It should, however, be noted that if keeping to the letter of the law does not threaten immediate danger, which must be prevented on the spot, then it does not belong to just anyone to interpret what is beneficial and what is not beneficial for the city, but this belongs only to the superiors, who in such cases have the power to dispense from the law. But if immediate danger threatened, not tolerating such delay that one could go to the authorities, then necessity itself compels the dispensation, since necessity is not subject to the law."

(Summa Theologica, Law 96,6)

Now, the Lefebvrists do know the opinion of the superior on this matter, and they've known it for the last 40 years, that one cannot break canon law in this case. Therefore, any excuses here are doomed to failure.

They may point here, for example, to Cardinal Wojtyła and Cardinal Slipyj, who broke Rome's regulations and ordained bishops, but this is not true.
The Vatican forbade the underground church from ordaining bishops, not Cardinal Slipyj and Cardinal Wojtyła.
The cardinals could not contact Rome due to communist surveillance; if such information leaked, it could endanger the faithful and the clergy.
Thus, both conditions were met, including asking the superior for interpretation; Rome agreed with Cardinal Wojtyła and recognized their ordinations. (As a side note, there are historians who believe that Wojtyła acted on Rome's will and had permission.)

"SSPX has been treated unfairly, given the situation regarding ordinations in China"

Answer

The Vatican’s agreement with China is not ideal, however, it is a 16th-century solution. Leo X signed a concordat with France under which the King of France appoints bishops, whilst the Pope retains the right of veto. Leo X agreed to this in order to combat Gallicanism, which was supported by the King. The agreement with China is almost identical: the Party appoints the bishops, but the Vatican retains the right of veto. Might be a bad agreement, yet it is in line with pre-conciliar practice.

The Chinese state and the Communist Party of China regard religion as a matter strictly subordinate to political authority, rather than an autonomous spiritual entity. They do not accept any external allegiance that might undermine the Party’s absolute supremacy over society. This stems directly from their Marxist-Leninist philosophy, as modified by Mao, Deng Xiaoping and, in particular, Xi Jinping

Sinicisation of religion has been strongly promoted by Xi Jinping. It refers not only to Sinicisation in cultural terms (e.g. the removal of crosses and Arabic domes, and the adaptation of liturgies), but above all to political assimilation: religions must adapt their doctrine, morality and organisation to ‘indigenous Chinese values’, socialism, etc.

Politics pervades every aspect of their reality; it is a total vision, unlike in the Latin civilization, where there is a clear distinction between the sacred and the profane.

There is no genuine separation of church and state in the Western sense (where the state is neutral and the Church is autonomous in the spiritual sphere). Instead, the state exercises dominance over everything – a totalitarian Leninist logic. Any organisation with a transnational is seen as a potential threat to Chinese sovereignty and as foreign interference (Especially as the Vatican maintains diplomatic relations with Taiwan).

As far as any presence of bishops in China is concerned, unfortunately the situation is such that it is either on their terms or not at all.

The Chinese view Christianity as a religion associated with Western imperialism (19th-century missions, the Opium Wars, etc.). Allowing to freely appoint bishops would be seen as treason/ceding to foreign power. It is hard to imagine the Christianisation of society under such conditions, where there is so little freedom to seek objective truths.