As I study for finals, I end up reading notes in my little notebook, where I keep a running commentary on the room during class. I thought I'd share some of it with you:
"Philosophy - April 23
On Being and Essence, St. Thomas
. . . Ooops, I'm having listening problems. What was the opening question again? . . .
'Of the two meanings of being we first examined, which one belongs to God? What's the relation of being to the being of God?'
. . . I'm so not here today . . . *sigh* . . .
God is not in a genus because the whatness is not distinguished according to the nature in an individual.
. . . The water pitchers here will be used for Shema's defense this afternoon . . . that defense will be *such* a scream . . . won't be one of those -yawn- I wish I were being productive defenses . . .
Wait, hold on, here, did anyone figure out the answer to the question we had out on the table besides x and y? I kinda doubt it. The question was 'what does this sentence mean?' I'm going to re-introduce the inquiry. Hey, missy, now don't you take that tone with me, or I'll individuate your matter . . . Oooooo, snap . . . "
"Senior Laboratory
Einstein, Relativity
There's a man, and he's in this box . . .
Wait, whoa, *what* did you just say, student c?
. . . I find the people in this room to be remarkably unnatural beings. How on earth can people be so addicted to algebraic abstractions? They're having a hard time speaking of nature *itself* anymore. I asked a question about a whatness and they're cranking out equations. That is just . . . yeah, you people are freaks of nature . . .
Inertial mass - - the mass which makes a thing retain it's state of motion or rest
Gravitational mass - - the mass which makes things incline towards IT? -or- quality of mass as manifested by attractive power . . .
Uh oh. I think student z is using special, external knowledge again. These people are so lucky I'm really preoccupied with getting married. Due to that I don't have the energy to dis them anywhere but in this notebook . . . any other year I would be having such a fit"
"Do not sleep, do not sleep, do not sleep . . . no sleeping . . . "
"Seminar
Lumen Gentium
My experiences of Vatican II 'effects', or, more properly, the liberal interpretations of Vatican II and it's 'spirit' . . .
1) The hierarchical structure of the Church is out-dated, especially the Papacy, and it will pass away.
Sed Contra,
LC section 14: "They are fully incorportated [into the Church of Christ] . . . who . . accept her entire system and . . . are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops."
LC section 18: "And all this teaching about the institution, the perpetuity, the meaning and reason for the sacred primacy of the Roman Pontiff and of his infallible magesterium, this Sacred Council again proposes to be firmly believed by all the faithful."
LC section 22: "The pope's power of primacy over all, both pastors and faithful, remains whole and intact. In virtue of his office, that is as Vicar of Christ and pastor of the whole Church, the Roman Pontiff has full, supreme, and universal power over the Church."
LC section 27: " . . . In virtue of this power, bishops have the sacred right and duty before the Lord to make laws for their subjects, to pass judgment on them and to moderate everything pertaining to the ordering of worship and the apostolate."
2) The priesthood of the laity is to be exalted as just as dignified or equal to the sacramental priesthood.
Sed Contra,
LC section 10: "Though they differ from one another in essence and not only in degree, the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood are nonetheless interrelated . . . "
So, if these ideas were completely and flatly contradicted by the documents of Vatican II, how on earth were they construed as the spirit of it?'
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Good question. If only it was clear to people from the document what Paul VI really meant by the words "essence" and "interrelated"...
But they don't, and because they don't, they are quite easily led along by those who interpret "essence" as something pertaining to mere practice and "interrelated" as, well, "common" as in..."common priesthood". You wouldn't believe how plausibly statements like this can be made to show that the priesthood is nothing more than a token official position.
Although the part about the Pope was pretty clear, I'd say overall Lumen Gentium fails as a teaching document.
I don't understand why 'plausible' misinterpretation necessarily makes something fail as a teaching document. If that were the case, all the signification of our language would be determined according to others' powers of sophistry, and in my experience I wonder if there is any limit to that talents of some in that area.
Now, just because words like "essence" or "interrelated" are given meanings they do not and were not intended to have does NOT mean that the document is unclear. The words have meanings, you know, and the sentence is obviously geared at making a very clear distinction. The priesthood of the ordained and the priesthood of the people are different in ESSENCE . . . that's a word with hefty meaning. You know, essence, as in, NOT accidental.
Yeah, so, it seems to me that you can hardly base judgments of 'clarity' or 'teaching power', in a papal document no less, off of the ill intentions and/or stupidity of some.
Post a Comment