The House of Peter

 Icon of St. Peter, Mount Sinai (7th c.)

"If anyone says that the Roman Pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the Churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema" (Vatican I, Session IV, 3.9).

Above all else, the schisms in the Church rest on the view of St. Peter's authority.  As Yves Congar wrote, "Depending upon the dogmatic and canonical reality of non-submission to, or acceptance of, the Head, the schism is made or abolished at a single blow" (90).  Though theological debates play a role in the discussion of schisms, I think the key to schism is the authority of St. Peter.  If one trusts in the authority God gave to St. Peter and his successors, then one must never fear a falsehood regarding faith or morals to ever be decreed by him.

I will not spend time performing exegesis on Mt 16 and the promise of Peter as the Rock: countless more qualified theologians than I have done so.  There seem to be two main interpretations: either Christ decreed that Peter and his successors would be the guarantors of the faith, or Peter just has a "primacy of honor," and the bishops are the guarantors of the faith.  The biggest question I have is this: what happens if the bishops are arguing with each other?  Who has the true faith?

This downfall of a purely episcopal and collegial authority can be seen throughout history.  When the Protestants take this view, that it is the Holy Spirit guiding the entire Church through the people, thousands (I know that's too low) of denominations result.  When the Orthodox take this view, it leads to schisms like the New Calendarists vs. the Old Calendarists, or the Old Believers vs. the Church as reformed by Patriarch Nikon.  When those claiming to be Catholic take this view, it leads to schismatics like Old Catholics and the Society of St. Pius X.  If the man decreed by Christ to have authority is wrong, who do we turn to?

Icon of St. Peter, Urumieh Museum

Demetrios Kydones, a 14th-century Byzantine lay theologian who converted to Catholicism, writes thus in his Apologia for His Conversion:

"Would not every matter of faith have to end with a question mark if there indeed be no final seat of authority in the Church? There can be no certitude anywhere, if no one is worthy of credibility. Then we are no longer talking about the religion which St. Paul described as one; rather there will be as many religions as there are leaders, or better still, none at all! Every believer will suspect everyone else and will proceed to pick and choose whatever beliefs suit him. Then, as in a battle fought in the dark, we will be striking at our friends, and they at us" (39).

 How do we choose who keeps the true faith if Christ does not tell us?  There are countless views on what true Christianity should be (as mentioned, just think of the countless Protestant denominations, many claiming to hold to the one, true Christianity): how terrifying would it be if Christ left us alone to find the truth!  We may search through all the countless brands of Christianity, but if there is none decreed by Christ, how do we know which is the truth?

Christ instituted the Church.  Would He institute an institution that splinters due to countless disagreements, with none of them having a guarantor of truth?  Some Eastern writers seem to imply that the East has more faith than the West, since they trust in the Holy Spirit guiding the entire Church through its members.  But which Church does the Holy Spirit guide?  In the end, there must be one measure of faith, for God is One.  There may be some theologoumena (matters on which differing theological opinions may be held), but there will always be some aspects of the faith that must be true, some that must be held.  This is the whole concept behind the Creed of the first two Ecumenical Councils.  And what is included in that Creed?  "I believe in One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church."

 St. Peter Raises Tabitha from the Dead, San Vitale Church, Ravenna (early 6th c.)

In the East, the view is often held that the Church is connected by the Holy Spirit: it is an invisible connection among the different Churches.  Yet would Christ leave His Church so invisible?  Christ gave us the Sacraments, the Mysteries, visible institutions that give us grace.  Christ Himself became visible for us and continues to be in the Sacred Mysteries of His Body and Blood.  If Christ makes even Himself visible, would He not make the Church visible as well?  As D. Purcell writes regarding Eastern ecclesiology,

"As a result of this tendency to attribute solely to the Soul of the Church what pertains also the visible juridic structure, the aspect of the Church as a theophany, in this teaching, is so excessively stressed, that the visible bonds of unity uniting the members of the Church to her Uncreated Soul through the juridico-social constitution of the Body of Christ, are, in reality, disregarded" (qtd. 85).

 As Ven. Pope Pius XII wrote in his encyclical Mystici Corporis,

"But it is not enough that the body of the Church should be an unbroken unity; it must also be something definite and perceptible to the senses as Our predecessor of happy memory, Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Satis Cognitum asserts: 'the Church is visible because she is a body.' Hence they err in a matter of divine truth, who imagine the Church to be invisible, intangible, a something merely 'pneumatological' as they say, by which many Christian communities, though they differ from each other in their profession of faith, are united by an invisible bond" (§14).

 I know the last quote will quite possibly be rejected by those not in communion with Rome merely for its source being the Pontiff.  The words of the Pope are correct, though: the Church needs both visible and invisible unity.  Just as the Eucharist has a visible element (the bread and wine) and an invisible element (the Body and Blood of Our Lord), so must the Church.

The Church must be one, and it must be led, in the end, by one leader.  A group of bishops, however holy, can disagree deeply.  As Demetrios Kydones wrote, though, "It is simply not possible that a principle of government not immune to schism from within can become the principle of unity for others" (41).

 Icon of the Liberation of St. Peter

Christ gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom, and Christ declared Peter the Rock of the Church, against whom the powers of hell fall flat.  The Church is the house of Peter, a large house, large enough for all the world, if they desire.  The doors of Peter's house are open.  Those who come to see the truth of the Church may enter freely: those who return to the Church may enter freely.  However, those who do not believe can also walk out, many for disobeying the fundamental rule of Peter's house: Peter is the Vicar of Christ.  We believe in Peter's decisions in faith and morals because they are vouchsafed by Christ: "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.  I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven" (Mt 16:18-19). 

In the end, all of Christian unity revolves around this: accepting the head Christ gave to the Church.  To reject Peter's authority is to reject Christ's authority, for it is Christ Who gave Peter his authority: thus Peter is the Vicar of Christ on earth.  As Humbert of Romans, a Dominican from the time of the Second Council of Lyons, wrote: "Why do we call the Greeks schismatics rather than the Latins?...It is because they are in rebellion against the Head" (qtd. 79).

Let us, on this great solemnity, invite all to enter the House of Peter and live under the care of him who Christ Himself gave us as leader.

St. Peter, pray for us!

 
Nota Bene: The quotes from Demetrios Kydones and D. Purcell come from James Likoudis' Ending the Byzantine Greek Schism.  The quotes from Yves Congar and Humbert of Romans come from Congar's After Nine Hundred Years: The Background of the Schism Between the Eastern and Western Churches.  The quotes from Vatican I and Ven. Pope Pius XII's Mystici Corporis come from the Faith Database.  I don't claim that my arguments will convert anyone, or that they are even well-argued: indeed, my argumentation is probably atrocious.  I just felt that I must attempt to tell the truth, even if I do so poorly, for it is what Christ wishes.

The Education of Children by Desiderius Erasmus

 Portrait of Desiderius Erasmus by Hans Holbein the Younger (1523)

In keeping with my desire to have texts (especially older texts) freely available, I have recently undertaken a modernization of an Early Modern English text found on Project Gutenberg.  This work is The Education of Children by Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466-1536), a Catholic priest, theologian, social critic (and ecclesiastical critic, yet he remained in union with Rome), and humanist: his most famous work is The Praise of Folly (Moriae Encomium).  The Education of Children is not a theological or overtly Catholic work, instead being more of a long essay on Erasmus' personal opinion of the topic.  Erasmus advocates early education of children, even from infancy, decrying those who think children cannot handle much knowledge.  Among his views, he seems to advocate homeschooling or private tutoring over public schooling, and he encourages using play (such as archery) to teach.  He also sharply criticizes overly-harsh discipline and corporal punishment, instead suggesting a teaching style more akin to St. John Bosco: "Get the children to love you, and they'll follow you anywhere."

This version of the text is a modernized form of an English translation of Erasmus' original Latin by Richard Sherry (1506-1555), an English schoolteacher (at Magdalen College, Oxford), author, and translator, whose other translated works include St. Basil the Great's Letter to St. Gregory Nazianzus.  This translation was in Early Modern English, thus it is difficult to read today.  For that reason, I decided to modernize the text to make it more easily accessible (details of my modernization can be found in the "Modernizer's Note" in the file).  As an example of the vast differences in language, here is a sentence from §1, both in Sherry's English and in mine.

"Beside this some thinges be necessary to be knowẽ whẽ we be sũwhat elder, which by a certẽ peculier readines of nature, yͤ  tender age perceiueth both much more quickly, & also more esily thẽ doth yͤ elder, as yͤ first beginnings of letters, yͤ knowledge of tõges, tales & fabels of poetes."  [The e's above the y's are supposed to be superscript e's, but I cannot seem to get the processing to work.]

"Beside this some things be necessary to be known when we be somewhat elder, which by a certain peculiar readiness of nature, the tender age perceiveth both much more quickly, & also more easily than doth the elder, as the first beginnings of letters, the knowledge of tongues, tales & fables of poets."

I realize that my work is probably far from perfect, so if you find any errors, please do not hesitate to contact me (and please include the section number where the error is located).  I thank you in advance for reading this, and God Bless.

The Education of Children

De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii -- Liberi I-II

 A depiction of the marriage of Philology and Mercury from a manuscript at Oxford

 Martianus Minneus Felix Capella (more commonly known as Martianus Capella) was a pagan writer of the fifth century whose book De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii (On the Marriage of Philology and Mercury) was a basis for the creation of a liberal arts education.  This work is encyclopedic, dealing with the seven liberal arts individually in information-packed books within a complex, allegorical frame story.  De Nuptiis is one of the most important texts in the history of education, and, since my goal is to be an educator, I am very interested in it.  The sad thing is, though this work was incredibly popular from the 5th to the 12th centuries, it is little-known now and thus difficult to find.  I am a fan of making knowledge easily and widely available (hence why I volunteer at Project Gutenberg through their Distributed Proofreaders project, helping to digitize out-of-copyright books into free e-books), and, while I would like to make a free English translation of this work, I do not know enough Latin to be able to do so.  What I can do, at the very least, is make the original Latin text easily available.

The Microsoft Word file embedded below is a transcription of the original Latin text (with its occasional Greek words as well) of the first two Books of De Nuptiis.  The edition I used is an 1836 edition with a copious running commentary (which I did not transcribe) edited by Ulricus Fridericus Kopp, found as a scan at The Internet Archive.  I hope someone finds this text of use.  If there is desire for it, I could also work on finding a way to make the text into an e-book as well.  I will post the other books of De Nuptiis in the same fashion once I have transcribed them.  If you find any errors, please let me know so that I can correct the file.  Once again, I hope someone finds this text useful, and thank you for reading.  God Bless.

Martianus Capella -- De Nuptiis -- Liberi I-II

Upgraded Humanity

 [WARNING: There may be spoilers for the Doctor Who Season 2 episodes "Rise of the Cybermen" and "Age of Steel" in this post.]

Humankind does not like to stay the way it is: in general, it wants to improve itself and make progress.  The urge to improve oneself is a healthy one, for it can stop us from becoming slothful and complacent.  However, sometimes this urge can get out of hand.  One of the greatest ways this is done is in trying to "upgrade humanity" to a new level of being.

While this idea is found often in science fiction, the example I've recently encountered is the Cybermen from Doctor Who.  The following video provides a primer on them, although watching only the first minute should provide enough information:



In short, the Cybermen's goal is to "upgrade humanity," to create "Humanity 2.0."  This is done by encasing a living human brain into a cybernetic body of steel that includes an emotional inhibitor.  They think that emotions hold back humanity from becoming its greatest self, and they think that their design will make the human race immortal.  However, emotions are a key component of humanity.  Without emotions, the Cybermen are no longer human but something entirely different.  As the Doctor responds when offered a life without emotions, "You might as well kill me," for he would no longer be human (we'll skip over the fact that the Doctor isn't human to begin with).  The Doctor brilliantly sums up what a world of Cybermen, supposedly immortal creatures devoid of emotion, would be like:

"The Cybermen won't advance.  You'll just stop.  You'll stay like this forever.  A metal Earth with metal men and metal thoughts, lacking the one thing that makes this planet so alive: people.  Ordinary, stupid, brilliant people!"

The Cybermen's response to ordinary people...and all other people

The Cybermen's goal is similar to transhumanistic philosophy, especially that surrounding "the Singularity," when men will become one with machines.  The problem is the "trans-" part: people with this philosophy aren't trying to improve humanity but to move beyond it, to get rid of humanity altogether.  The soul plays no part in it, for it is rejected or suppressed in this view: when the Doctor breaks the emotional inhibitor in the Cybermen, he says he is giving back their souls (I'd say he's more freeing their souls from suppression, since only God has the power to give a soul), and when he does so, they die from sheer horror at their inhuman condition.

Thankfully, God offers us a different way to "upgrade humanity," one that retains our true humanity:  He allows us to be "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Pt 1:4).  This is one of the reasons Christ became Incarnate: as St. Athanasius famously said, "God became man so that man might become God" (cf. CCC #460).  The Eastern Church uses the Greek term θεοσις (usually translated into English as "deification") to describe this mystery.  The Transfiguration is the event that Eastern theologians often focus on in regards to this mystery.  Humanity's final end is to have God dwelling within us and to be dwelling within Him, to be taken up to be with Him: "The final end of creation is its transfiguration," as Leonid Ouspensky wrote (I:156).  Humanity is not destroyed in this, for "grace builds on nature," to use St. Thomas Aquinas' famous dictum.  This will all be fully accomplished in the next life, in Heaven with God.  This θεοσις is "the definitive fulfillment of the human race," where men will participate in "a wholly new state of human life itself," as Pope Bl. John Paul II wrote (TOB 66:2,3).

 The Transfiguration, attributed to Theophanes the Greek (c. 1403)

This is the true "upgraded humanity": θεοσις.  While its fulfillment will come in the afterlife, we can strive for it on earth.  We can strive to live the life of God, and we can pray that He flood our souls with His Spirit and His grace.  This is the greatest thing that we can aim for: as St. Gregory Palamas wrote,

"Nothing surpasses the indwelling and manifestation of God in us, nothing equals it, nothing approaches it" (D.II.iii.17).

Let us thus strive for the true upgraded humanity: not the emotionless metal world of the Cybermen, but the heavenly world flooded with divine light.  Let us strive for θεοσις.

St. Gregory Palamas, pray for us!

Nota Bene: The video is from the YouTube channel Planet Who News TV.  The Doctor Who quotes are from Season 2, Episode 6, "The Age of Steel," as found on tv.com.  The quote from Leonid Ouspensky is from his work Theology of Icon, published by St. Vladimir's Seminary Press in 1992.  The quotes from Pope Bl. John Paul II's Theology of the Body (TOB) are from Michael Waldstein's translation published by Pauline Books & Media.  The quote from St. Gregory Palamas is from the edition of his Triads published in Paulist Press' Classics of Western Spirituality Series.