[Apologetics] Re: From NewAdvent.org newsletter

[Stephen Korsman]

Hi

This failed the first time, so I've snipped the old conversations, and added a quote from the CCC, and a few extra bits.
  Much of what you have written is contradictory and
  self-refuting.
I don't see it as such.
  To suggest that the Chaldean Catholic Church does not
  use the Words of Institution in their Mass is mind
  boggling.
Yet that is the trend.
  The Catholic Church took a hard look at the liturgy of
  the Assyrian Church of the East because of the lack of
  Words of Institution.  Since there are no Catholic
  rites like that--and never have been
Not after the schism, no.
  --it was necessary
  to determine if the Assyrian liturgy was valid before
  agreeing to allow Chaldeans to seek out an Assyrian
  minister in extraordinary circumstances.  

  (Since both of these Christian denominations are
  centered in Iraq, this is not a hypothetical
  situation.)

  If the Chaldeans did not have the Words of Institution
  in their Mass, there would not have been a problem.
It would have been a problem, but it would have been addressed earlier.
  But the Chaldean Mass and Assyrian liturgy were, and
  are, radically DIFFERENT in regard to the
  Consecration.
In that the Assyrians lack the words of institution in a literal form, as stated by the Vatican.
  Ultimately, the Vatican decided the Words of
  Institution-which it said were INDISPENSABLE-were
  contained in the Assyrian liturgy.  
Agreed.  But not in a coherent literal form, as the document states.
  I think the Assyrians may have privately assured the
  Vatican that they almost always use the Words of
  Institution.
If that had been the case, the Vatican would not have made the statement they made.
  Hence, the statement by the Vatican,
  "When Chaldean faithful are participating in an
  Assyrian celebration of the Holy Eucharist, the
  Assyrian minister is warmly invited to insert the
  words of the Institution in the Anaphora of Addai and
  Mari, as allowed by the Holy Synod of the Assyrian
  Church of the East."

  Of course, that Vatican statement would make no sense
  whatsoever if any Chaldean Catholic Masses lacked the
  Words of Institution.
The statement specifies that the Orthodox form lacks the words in a literal form, and validates that form in spite of that, because the principles are included in various prayers, which I quoted.

Some Catholics have, however, moved back to the original anaphora, because the form lacking the words of instutition in a literal form is equally valid.

The point is that the anaphora lacking the words of institution in a literal coherent form is valid, and that is beyond doubt.
  This is the third time I've provided you a link to the
  Chaldean Mass with the Words of Institution in BOLD
  for special emphasis at
  http://www.faswebdesign.com/ECPA/Worship/ChaldeanMass.html

  You replied that "You also provided a link to the form
  which omits the words of institution."

  Actually, in error I provided a link to a version of
  the "Liturgy of the Blessed Apostles, Composed by St.
  Adoni and St. Mari, Teachers of the Easterners" from
  the library of the University of California at Santa
  Barbara (UCSB).

  I should have provided a link to the actual liturgy of
  the Assyrian Church of the East at
  http://www.cired.org/liturgy/apostles.html

  As you can see, it is different from the Catholic
  Chaldean Mass.  And both appear to be different from
  the version at UCSB.
Yet both of those you quote from the Orthodox side lack the words of institution in a literal coherent form.
  The Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity's
  "Guidelines for Admission to the Eucharist Between the
  Chaldean Church and the Assyrian Church of the East"
  never mentions the Epiclesis.  No claim was made that
  the Assyrian liturgy was valid because of an
  Epiclesis.  
I agree.  I didn't claim that.
  In fact, you cannot produce any Vatican document that
  states that an Epiclesis consecrates the elements.
Diane quoted B16 in what I interpreted as being a more spiritual insight into the matter.  But it seems as if there is more to it.  As you note, the CCC does have a more Eastern influence, and that can be seen in the following statement:

CCC 1333 - At the heart of the Eucharistic celebration are the bread and wine that, by the words of Christ and the invocation of the Holy Spirit, become Christ's Body and Blood.

The CCC states that it is the words of institution as well as the epiclesis that effect the Real Presence.  What happens is dogma.  When it happens has not formally been defined.  The West is moving East; scholasticism is not the only way to define truth.
  As
  I indicated in my two previous messages, the Catechism
  of the Catholic Church makes it incontrovertible that
  the Words of Institution are what consecrates.  
Yes, that is the Western understanding, but the Eastern understanding exists side by side with it in the Catholic Church and has not been rejected.
  It is true that the Epiclesis is a nice prayer and has
  long been used in many liturgical functions.  The 1913
  Catholic Encyclopedia states:

  It should be noticed that the Epiclesis for the Holy
  Eucharist is only one of many such forms. In other
  sacraments and blessings similar prayers were used, to
  ask God to send His Holy Spirit to sanctify the
  matter. There was an Epiclesis for the water of
  baptism. Tertullian (De bapt., iv), Optatus of Mileve
  ("De schism. Don., III, ii, VI, iii, in "Corp. Script.
  eccl. Latin.", vol. XXVI, 69, 148, 149), St. Jerome
  (Contra Lucif., vi, vii), St. Augustine (De bapt., V,
  xx, xxvii), in the West; and St. Basil (De Spir.
  Sancto, xv, 35), St. Gregory of Nyssa (Orat. cat.
  magn. xxxiii), and St. Cyril of Jerusalem (Cat. iii,
  3), in the East, refer to it. In Egypt especially,
  Epiclesis were used to bless wine, oil, milk, etc. In
  all these cases (including that of the Holy Eucharist)
  the idea of invoking the Holy Ghost to sanctify is a
  natural one derived from Scripture (Joel 2:32; Acts
  2:21: ho an epikalesetai to onoma kyriou . . .; cf.
  Romans 10:13; 1 Corinthians 1:2).

  You did make reference several times in your message
  to "the PCPCU document," but as far as I can
  determine, you never identified this document.  Please
  provide the exact name, date, and author of it.
I don't understand.  I mentioned the document, and then you actually cited it several times.  It can be found at http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20011025_chiesa-caldea-assira_en.html

The PCPCU document "Admission to the Eucharist in Situations of Pastoral Necessity - Provision between the Chaldean Church and the Assyrian Church of the East" can be found on the same page, and elaborates further.
  Incredibly, you also claim the dogmas of the Catholic
  Church do not apply to Eastern Rite Catholics,
No ... the explanations of Catholic dogmas given by the West do not apply to the East, who have different explanations, but share the same faith.
  because
  "The Treaty of Brest remains in force, which decrees
  unity between Western and Byzantine Catholics without
  concern over the differences regarding purgatory."

  I've never heard of the Treaty of Brest, but I'll look
  into it.  However, treaties are usually between
  governments.  I've never heard of one making a
  theological declaration.  If this one did, then it was
  abrogated many centuries ago.
No, it remains in effect.  http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15130a.htm.  All the Byzantines were dispensed from the Western concept of purgatory; they continue their own understanding today.
  One more time, here's what Pope John Paul II wrote
  about the universal, binding teachings in the
  Catechism on the WHOLE church of ALL rites:

  "Following the renewal of the Liturgy and the new
  codification of the canon law of the Latin Church AND
  that of the Oriental Catholic Churches, this catechism
  will make a very important contribution to that work
  of renewing the WHOLE life of the Church, as desired
  and begun by the Second Vatican Council.

  "It can be said that this Catechism is the result of
  the collaboration of the WHOLE Episcopate of the
  Catholic Church, who generously accepted my invitation
  to share responsibility for an enterprise which
  directly concerns the life of the Church. This
  response elicits in me a deep feeling of joy, because
  the harmony of so many voices truly expresses what
  could be called the "symphony" of the faith. The
  achievement of this Catechism thus reflects the
  collegial nature of the Episcopate; it testifies to
  the Church's CATHOLICITY.

  "The Catechism of the Catholic Church.is a statement
  of the Church's faith and of CATHOLIC doctrine,
  attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the
  Apostolic Tradition, and the Church's Magisterium. 

  "I DECLARE it to be a SURE NORM for teaching the faith
  and thus a valid and legitimate instrument for
  ecclesial COMMUNION.  May it serve the renewal to
  which the Holy Spirit ceaselessly calls the Church of
  God, the Body of Christ, on her pilgrimage to the
  undiminished light of the Kingdom!

  "The approval and publication of the Catechism of the
  Catholic Church represent a service which the
  Successor of Peter wishes to offer to the Holy
  Catholic Church, to ALL the particular Churches in
  peace and COMMUNION with the Apostolic See: the
  service, that is, of supporting and confirming the
  faith of ALL the Lord Jesus' disciples (cf. Lk 22:32),
  as well as of strengthening the bonds of UNITY in the
  SAME apostolic faith. 

  "Therefore, I ask ALL the Church's Pastors and the
  Christian faithful to receive this catechism in a
  spirit of COMMUNION and to use it ASSIDUOUSLY in
  fulfilling their mission of proclaiming the faith and
  calling people to the Gospel life. 

  "This catechism is given to them that it may be a SURE
  and AUTHENTIC reference text for teaching catholic
  DOCTRINE and particularly for preparing local
  catechisms. It is also offered to ALL the faithful who
  wish to deepen their knowledge of the unfathomable
  riches of salvation (cf. Eph 3:8). It is meant to
  support ecumenical efforts that are moved by the holy
  desire for the unity of all Christians, showing
  carefully the content and wondrous harmony of the
  CATHOLIC faith. 

  "The Catechism of the Catholic Church, lastly, is
  offered to every individual who asks us to give an
  account of the hope that is in us (cf. 1 Pt 3:15) and
  who wants to KNOW what the Catholic Church BELIEVES."
I stated before that I do not disagree with that.
  This INCLUDES Purgatory, original sin, the Immaculate
  Conception, transubstantiation, the primacy of the
  Bishop of Rome, and the Words of Institution.
All of the above, with the exception of papal primacy and for some, transubstantiation, are not explained in Eastern terms by the West, and therefore the Eastern Catholics do not use our definitions, but still share the same faith.  For instance, they have no concept of a stain of sin on the soul, and therefore a definition of the Immaculate Conception that includes such a description is meaningless to them.  To them, Mary was free from sin, but not from its effects - like us, she did not share in the guilt of Adam's sin, but she still died, which is the effect of Adam's sin.

The decree is expressed in terms of the absence [negative declaration] of original sin as understood by the West who formulated the definition, whereas the East expresses their view in a positive declaration about purity and sinlessness. But, since both share the same faith, how it is defined is not considered important. Mary was never considered to have the guilt of Adam's sin (i.e. West: she didn't have original sin; East: no such concept), but she did die (West: being human; East: the effect of original sin = death.) (The West considers belief in her death to be optional, the East not.) So Mary never sinned, she never had the guilt of Adam's sin - both sides agree ... but express it differently, and at times in ways that may appear to be contradictory, because the two sides mean two competely different things and talk past each other.

"In fact, the negative formulation of the Marian privilege, which resulted from the earlier controversies about original sin that arose in the West, must always be complemented by the positive expression of Mary's holiness more explicitly stressed in the Eastern tradition." (Pope John Paul II, General Audience June 12, 1996)

Instead of Purgatory, the Byzantines have a teaching of Final Deification not found in the West, but the two exist side by side in the same Church as true expressions of the same faith.

The gap between East and West is a huge one, but if you dig deep enough - as the recent popes have done - you find that they share the same faith, but explain it differently.

"All in the Church must preserve unity in essentials. But let all, according to the gifts they have received enjoy a proper freedom, in their various forms of spiritual life and discipline, in-their different liturgical rites, and even in their theological elaborations of revealed truth," - Unitatis redintegratio 4

"What has just been said about the lawful variety that can exist in the Church must also be taken to apply to the differences in theological expression of doctrine. In the study of revelation East and West have followed different methods, and have developed differently their understanding and confession of God's truth. It is hardly surprising, then, if from time to time one tradition has come nearer to a full appreciation of some aspects of a mystery of revelation than the other, or has expressed it to better advantage. In such cases, these various theological expressions are to be considered often as mutually complementary rather than conflicting. Where the authentic theological traditions of the Eastern Church are concerned, we must recognize the admirable way in which they have their roots in Holy Scripture, and how they are nurtured and given expression in the life of the liturgy. They derive their strength too from the living tradition of the apostles and from the works of the Fathers and spiritual writers of the Eastern Churches. Thus they promote the right ordering of Christian life and, indeed, pave the way to a full vision of Christian truth," - Unitatis redintegratio 17

God bless,
Stephen
--
Stephen Korsman
skorsman at theotokos.co.za
The Theotokos Website
A Rural Virologist  ||  RSS feed
Sabbath Keepers  ||  RSS feed
 
IC | XC
---------
NI | KA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gathman.org/pipermail/apologetics/attachments/20070904/4de3b5b6/attachment.html>