Vocation Talk

What is a vocation?

Who is called to a vocation?

What are the types of vocation?

How is a vocation heard?

Attend the live talk of Noel
at Our Lady of the Assumption Parish
to the Young Adults Group.

Video Testimonials of Priests and Nuns
about when they heard the vocation to
Religious Life.

Bring Catechism and the Bible.

Questions and Answers.

April 22, 2009 Wednesday

Our Lady of the Assumption Parish

Topic: St. Thomas on the Existence of God

Bring Bible and Catechism of the Catholic Church

Facilitator: Seminarian Noel

February 25, 2008

Introduction to Catholic Apologetics by Seminarian Noel

Topic: The Suffering, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ

Where: St. Joseph's Parish Port Moody

When: February 25, 2008 Monday 7:30pm

Bring Your Bible and Catechism of the Catholic Church

Nov. 30, 2007

Kindly place the following advertisement in your Sunday Church Bulletin for the next two Sundays beginning November 18, 2007:

“An introduction to Catholic Apologetics by Seminarian Noel
sponsored by Legion of Mary, Patrician Group

Topic: "How to answer tough questions about the Catholic Faith – on the Divinity and Humanity of Jesus”

Bring Your Catholic Bible and Catechism of the Catholic Church
November 30, 2007, Friday, at 7:30pm
All Saints Parish Portable”

October 29, 2007

“An introduction to Catholic Apologetics by Seminarian Noel
sponsored by Legion of Mary, Patrician Group


Topic: "How to answer tough questions about the Catholic Faith – on the Existence of God”

Bring Your Catholic Bible and Catechism of the Catholic Church
October 29, 2007 Monday 7:30pm
All Saints Parish Portable”

What is the difference between an apologist and a theologian?

By Michelle Arnold
Catholic Answers Apologist


Re: What is the difference between an apologist and a theologian?
As a somewhat rough analogy, the difference between an apologist and a theologian is like the difference between a science teacher and a scientist: Just as a science teacher explains science and a scientist develops our understanding of science, an apologist explains and defends what is known about the faith while a theologian explores the faith and seeks to expand upon what is known about the faith. What that can mean in practical terms is that while a theologian should be prepared to act as an apologist, an apologist need not be a theologian.
__________________
"The future starts today, not tomorrow." -- John Paul II

August 30, 2007

TOPIC: The Priesthood

Discussion: Priesthood of Christ, Ministerial Priesthood, Common Priesthood of the faithful

WHEN: Thursday 7pm-9pm

WHERE: Assumption Parish Library

Aug. 23, 2007

Topic: Sacrament of Confession
Reference: Catechism of the Catholic Church (Look up the Index Subject)
When: Thursday 7pm - 9pm
Where: Our Lady of the Assumption Parish Library

Aug. 09 Topic

Topic: The Trinity - One God in Three Distinct Persons - One Nature, Three Persons
Reference: Catechism of the Catholic Church (Look up the Index Subject)
When: August 09, 2007 Thursday 7pm - 9pm
Where: Our Lady of the Assumption Parish Library

Interview Inside the Vatican

Special Note: The following interview with Monsignor Georg Gaenswein, Personal Secretary to Pope Benedict XVI from even before his election to the papacy on April 19, 2005, done by German writer Peter Seewald, appeared recently in the German newspaper Suddeutsche Zeitung (Munich). It has now been posted in translation, in Italian as well as English, by various Web sites on the Internet. Here is an English translation by Gerald Augustinus, who posted it on his website at The Cafeteria is Closed: -- note from Editor at Inside the Vatican

By Peter Seewald

Interview Translation by Gerald Augustinus

By Translation by Gerald Augustinus - The Cafeteria Is Closed Blog

Father Georg Gaenswein (a monsignor) is Pope Benedict's personal assistant. He gave an interview to the German (Munich) newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung. I have translated it. The interviewer was Peter Seewald, who was a lapsed Catholic, spent a couple of weeks with Pope Benedict (then cardinal) and returned to the Church. I spent all night writing this exclusive English translation - reading, translating and typing at the same time. Still took hours. It is one of the most interesting insider interviews you'll come across.


=============================================


Peter Seewald (PS): Herr Praelat, how is the Pope?

Msgr. Gaenswein (MG): He's well, feels very good, works a lot and is in "high gear."

PS: Does he use the exercise bike that his physician, Dr. Buzzonetti, told him to?

MG: The bike is in our Appartamento Privato.

PS: What does that mean?

MG: It's being a good bike, ready to be used.

PS: When he was a cardinal, Joseph Ratzinger wanted to retire, stating he was exhausted.

MG: With his election as Pope something happened that he neither strived for nor wanted. But I am convinced that, as he by and by surrendered to God's will, the grace of the office in his person and his actions has shown effect and still is.

PS: How did he react to the election results?

MG: I entered as the cardinals were kneeling before the Pope in the Sistine Chapel, swearing him fidelity and obedience. His face was almost as white as his soutane (cassock). He looked pretty stirred.

PS: What was going through your head at that time?

MG: It was like a hurricane, coming up with a clear thought was entirely impossible. The days afterward were still like a tsunami.

PS: When did you know that your life was about to fundamentally change?

MG: It happened like this: When I came to pledge my loyalty after the cardinals, I said, "Holy Father, I promise you my obedience, my fidelity, my effort in all that you demand of me. I am at your disposal with all my powers, without reservation."

PS: The reply?

MG: He looked at me, nodded and thanked me.

PS: Has your salary changed?

MG: I don't make more or less than before. The only thing that's changed is the address on the salary slip.

PS: The son of a blacksmith from a 450 people village in the Black Forest who now travels with the Holy Father in a helicopter and shares the concerns of the global Church (Weltkirche) - does one ask oneself: Why me? What does God want from me?

MG: I asked myself this very question, and not just once. It is a task that you cannot plan. In promising the Holy Father fidelity and obedience, I tried to answer that question. In that, I see a message from God, to face this task without reservations.

PS: You're probably the first Papal secretary in history that's also in the spotlight next to the Pontifex: People Magazine swoons over the "Sunnyboy in the cassock," the Swiss Weltwoche calls you the "most handsome man in a soutane." Donatella Versace dedicated a fashion line to you. Does this image as a "ladykiller" (i.e., someone who looks like one) bother you?

MG: It didn't make me blush, but it irritated me a bit. It doesn't hurt and it was flattering, and it's no sin. I'd never been confronted like this with my "shell." Then I noticed that it was largely an expression of sympathy - a bonus, not a malus; I can handle that well. But, I don't want that people don't just look at me but also acknowledge the substance.

PS: Do you get love letters?

MG: Yes, once in a while.

PS: You once mentioned "clerical envy."

MG: I said that in connection with statements that people were talking badly about me -- "He wants to gain power, he wants to be in the foreground" and so forth. There was, there is, stupid talk, in part people simply lie. But I don't care about that anymore.

PS: Even from inside the Vatican?

MG: The Vatican is after all a courtly state. And there's court chatter. But there are also "arrows" that are aimed on purpose and directly. I had to learn how to handle that.

PS: It's said that you are available as bishop for the vacancy in Munich.

MG: Those are "unlaid eggs." Completely made up.

PS: Nobody thought that after a "millennium Pope" like Karol Wojtyla a successor could be successful this quickly. Now, everything has changed. Not only that Benedict XVI draws twice as many people. That his books are printed by the millions. Pope Ratzinger is viewed as one of the most important thinkers of our time. And, as opposed to his predecessor, he's rarely criticized. What does he have that others don't?

MG: With being Pope there comes a greater accessibility, a greater sphere of influence and a greater power of assertion. Someone very familiar with the goings-on in Rome said during the Bavaria trip last fall, "John Paul II opened the hearts of the people. Benedict XVI fills them." There is a lot of truth in that. The Pope reaches the hearts of the people, he speaks to them, but he doesn't speak of himself, he speaks of Jesus Christ, of God, and that in a descriptive, understandable and convincing manner. That is what people are looking for. Benedict XVI gives them spiritual nourishment.

PS:Did John Paul II want Cardinal Ratzinger to become his successor?

MG: There's been a lot of speculation about that. I don't know.

PS: After all, despite Ratzinger's asking several times to be dismissed as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he did not let him go. Do you view that as an argumentum e silentio, as a conclusion out of silence?

MG: That may be. Pope John Paul II said to his close aides many times: I want to keep Cardinal Ratzinger. I need him as the head of theology. You can deduce some things from that.

PS: It has become quieter in the Palazzo Apostolico. Benedict XVI has reduced the number of audiences considerably and rarely has guests at his table. Of all things, there's less work under a German?

MG: There isn't less work being done, work is done in a more concentrated manner. The Pope is an effective and quick worker. For this he needs time - to read, to study, to pray, to think, to write. That's only possible, if you tighten a lot of things, modify some or eliminate them, for the sake of what's more important.

PS: Does this mean that his predecessor was by design overwhelmed?

MG: Not at all. With John Paul II, everything became superlative compared to prior pontificates. Just think of the number of audiences, the travels, the documents, the liturgies, or the early morning Masses in the private Papal chapel to which people were always being invited. That costs time, day after day, that has to be taken from somewhere else. For Benedict XVI, such a rhythm would be unthinkable. And, after all, John Paul II became Pope not at 78 but at 58.

PS: Towards the end of the "Wojtyla era," a lot of things remained unfinished...

MG: It's an open secret that Pope John Paul II didn't look much after the Roman Curia. That's not a criticism but simply a fact. The current Pope worked in the most important position of the Curia for 23 years. He knows it like no one else. That's an unparalleled experience and a huge advantage.

PS: A Pope can have trouble with the Curia?

MG: A look at history says yes, that can happen. A weak spot in this context is certainly indiscretion. There are always "porous" spots when it comes to appointments, work on documents, disciplinary measures, etc. That's not only irritating, it also means the danger that it is done on purpose, to a certain purpose which can cause troubles. Another point: wherever there is, like in the Curia, an international staff, there are different mentalities, styles of work, views, tempos and personalities that meet. Sometimes that can create friction.

PS: Is the Pope in charge of the procedures?

MG: Do you doubt that? The Pope receives his most important aides/colleagues in his audiences on a regular basis. Day after day, week after week. In addition, the heads of the congregations come to the audiences in regular intervals. This doesn't just guarantee the necessary personal contact and flow of information, but also an exchange that is invaluable for both sides. The Pope listens, gets counsel, thinks it through and decides.

PS: Joseph Ratzinger studies documents quickly.

MG: At lightning speed, and he has the memory of an elephant.

PS: Some criticize that he is in a kind of splendid isolation, a golden cage, that it's impossible to get near him.

MG: That's nonsense. Every morning there are private audiences, in the afternoon the work meetings with his closest aides - and that six days a week. In addition, there are many meetings within and without the walls of the Vatican. Golden cage? Hah! I guess it might be criticism of me, that I shield the Pope too much. Entirely exaggerated.

PS: He is basically a shy man. But at the same time he's always had something "inconvenient" about him, a resistance against everything that's too common, against stupidity.

MG: That the Holy Father isn't an impetuous but a more reserved person is plain to see for everyone.

PS: The Pope writes all important texts himself, including the speech in Regensburg with the controversial quote from a historical book on a dispute with Muslims. Why did nobody edit the text?

MG: I find the Regensburg speech, as it was given, to be prophetic.

PS: Was the shock great when the angry attacks from the Islamic world became known?

MG: We only heard of the crude reactions after we'd gotten back to Rome from Bavaria. It was a big surprise, to the Pope as well. The mighty trouble had started due to newspaper reports which had taken one quote out of context and presented it as the Pope's personal opinion.

PS: In Islam, where it is in charge of state and society, human rights are being constantly violated ("kicked with feet"). The persecution of Christians has increased drastically. The President of Iran announced again that the countdown to the destruction of Israel had begun. Is the concept of a real dialog with Islam not a bit too naive?

MG: The attempts at Islamization of the West cannot be put aside. The danger for the identity of Europe that is connected to it must not be ignored for reasons of a wrongly understood respect. The Catholic sides sees it very clearly and talks about it. Especially the Regensburg speech should counter a certain naivete ("blue-eyedness"). One thing has to be pointed out - there is no Islam as such, no voice that ties all Muslims together and leads them. There are many different currents, often at war with each other, up to extremists that claim the Koran for their actions and go to work with guns. On an institutional level, the Holy See tries to make contacts and lead dialogs via the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialog.

PS: The Papal "family" in the Palazzo Apostolico is the most famous and influential "commune" of the world: four women that belong to the "memores" of Communio e Liberazione, two secretaries and the Pope. They pray together, eat together and in the evening they watch tv together in the Papal living room. How is Pope Benedict XVI as a roommate?

MG: The Papal family truly is a happy international "commune": two Germans, a Pole and four Italian women, who hadn't known each other too well before. The first important step was to find a modus vivendi. The right word, the right give and take, silence, non-silence. After only a short while, a cordial familial atmosphere had developed. The language is Italian. The Pope is after all Bishop of Rome. A little correction as far as papal tv goes: that's pure fantasy; the Holy Father and the two secretaries watch the evening news at the most. The days are determined by the audience and work rhythm of the Pope, but we try to insert some little personal "highlights" once in a while.

PS: Highlights?

MG: Well, highlights is maybe a little exaggerated -- I simply mean that personal events, name days and other important personal dates are celebrated accordingly.

PS: When you watch tv at night, does the Pope wear private clothes?

MG: No, the Pope wears white. Always.

PS: Does a Pope have to wear Prada shoes?

MG: Not at all. Journalists have a lively fantasy.

PS: Is he wearing them?

MG: I'll have to owe you that answer.

PS: Like the Pope, you grew up in modest circumstances, you both grew up in small villages. What is the heritage of such a background?

MG: Certainly a good portion of a healthy, fresh natural way of being, which is an untouchable filter for everything unhealthy, no matter in what disguise. An instinct that helps to tell genuine from fake.

PS: Growing up, you were five children, the father a blacksmith, the mother a Hausfrau (housewife).

MG: My father ran a smithy in the seventh generation, later he headed a store for agricultural equipment, but it wasn't a whole lot of money. Until I was six, we also had a little farm going. Sometimes we had to make the money last. My father was also very active in local politics, in many clubs and associations. Because of that, he was rarely home at night. Our mother had to do all the more, bear the burden and duty of bringing up the children. Us five had a childhood without worries, but of course we also fought.

PS: Because everything didn't always go the way the firstborn wanted it?

MG: As the oldest, you're supposed to be the wisest and give in -- but giving in isn't exactly my strength.

PS: Born to be wild -- was that you?

MG: At times maybe, between 15 and 18. I listened to Cat Stevens, Pink Floyd and some others, among them the Beatles. I had pretty long curly hair then, which my father didn't like, so there were fights at times about going to the barber. But that phase came to an end pretty unspectacularly.

PS: Where did you stand politically?

MG: I was never very political. My interests outside of school were more sports -- soccer, skiing.

PS: Which is how you earned money for college...

MG: No, not as skiing instructor, I only worked as that for the skiing school of my local ski club. I worked as a mailman. At first on the bike in a little village in the Black Forest, then later by car.

PS: You once said, "I had good senses, and when you have good senses, you use them." Sounds like a lot of experience with girls.

MG: I have two sisters, several cousins, who helped me to have no troubles with the female sex. I grew up completely normal, entirely without hang-ups.

PS: Did you have a steady relationship?

MG: No, there were a few smaller romantic youthful friendships.

PS: You wanted to become a stock broker.

MG: Initially, I was, as the oldest, supposed to take over my father's agricultural appliances business but the happenings at the stock exchange interested me more. My idea was that there was a lot of money being made and that you had to be bright and fast. Later, a bit more mature, when I thought about it more intensively, I thought, ok if I can do all that and have money, what happens then? Suddenly, existential questions took center stage. So I started to search and ended up, completely unplanned, coming across philosophy and theology.

PS: A long process.

MG: And a difficult one. At first, the world of theology drew me close very strongly, the priesthood was added as a second step. Of course celibacy was also a question. At some point I felt that I couldn't drive at half speed, either I'd do it completely or I'd quit. A little theology, that's not possible. So, step by step, I approached the priesthood.

PS: A quote from one of your homilies, on the occasion of some ordinations: "You are granted to know that you have a dignity that distinguishes you from all who aren't priests. You are allowed to have the consciousness that you are doing something great, that you are allowed to do something great." Pretty aloof.

MG: I'd say that again without ifs, ands or buts.

PS: You take it seriously.

MG: Yes, I do.

PS: It also sounds a bit romantic.

MG: I don't think so. They are words that were made true by life, and life wasn't romantic. The sentences quoted by you may sound a bit ceremonious on paper but behind them there is a lot of personal experience and I did not want to keep it from the new priests that there is something grand ahead of him, that it costs something and that he has to be willing to pay that price.

PS: In 1984 you were ordained a priest, then you spent two years in the Black Forest. In 1993, you wrote your dissertation in Munich, about "Ecclesiology according to the Second Vatican Council." Did you have moments of great doubt?

MG: After two years as Kaplan (assistant pastor), I was sent back to Munich for more studying -- of something that's not really my preference -- Canon Law. After half a year I was so fed up I said to myself, now I'm going to the archbishop and ask him to take me back into the diocese because I can't stand it anymore.

PS: That bad?

MG: I'd always studied gladly and easily, but studying Canon Law I felt to be as dry as work in a quarry where there's no beer -- you die of dryness. I was saved by my professor, Winfried Ayman, who later made me his assistant. He helped me greatly to get out of this situation by showing me new perspectives. That helped me a lot and kept me from quitting. I am very grateful to him.

PS: Time and again these "verdicts" surface: dutiful, pious, conservative; a man of form and strictness.

MG: In the sense of "mild in form, strict in content." I can't let that stand. When I think something to be right, I stick to it. Admittedly, patience is not my strength. Sometimes I get pretty "in your face" (literally "I drive up pretty close"), which can irritate people.

PS: What abilities does the private secretary of the head of a Church with 1.1 billion members have to have?

MG: In a way, he has to be a jack of all trades ("generalist"), but he also has to acknowledge that he can't do everything, and he shouldn't demand it from himself. He has to do what the Pope tells him to do, and that with all his force, heart and mind.

PS: Was there some kind of introductory training, like a school for Papal etiquette?

MG: Not at all. The only thing there was was a private conversation with my predecessor, Monsignore Stanislaus Dziwisz, the current Cardinal-Archbishop of Krakow. That was about two weeks after the Conclave and the move into the Appartamento. He handed me an envelope containing some papers and a key for a safe. An ancient safe, German precision work. He only said, "You now have a very important, very beautiful but also a very, very difficult task. The only thing I can tell you is that the Pope must be 'suffocated' by nothing and no one. How to go about that, you have to find out for yourself." Period, the end. More he didn't say. That was the entire school for Papal etiquette.

PS: And what was in the envelope?

MG: That I won't tell you. They are things that are given from Papal Secretary to Papal Secretary.

PS: Your initial mistakes?

MG: I realized soon that the speed I demanded of myself was too high. To start in the pole position is one thing, to get through the laps and arrive at the finish line quite another. Starting at full speed, so to speak. So I had to find out the right speed. Another difficult point was the handling of the countless requests for private audiences and other encounters which were all tied to noble motivations. Requests without end -- "just for a minute," "just once, as an exception," "the Pope has known me for a long time, he'd be very happy." Here, the right "filter system" was needed. I had to put in a stronger filter.

PS: What do you keep from the Pope?

MG: Nothing important. All important official letters and documents, everything coming from bishops and cardinals, from the world of politics and diplomacy, I present to the Holy Father in the daily briefing. Apart from that there is a huge pile of letters, pleas, requests, proposals that he doesn't get to see, because he simply doesn't have the time. There, the Pope has given me room for my own judgment.

PS: Do people try to instrumentalize you?

MG: It happens, but I know how to defend myself.

PS: Does one "take off" in your position at times?

MG: The opposite is more the case, that you're being suffocated, pressed down. If there is a danger, it's isolation. At one point friends said that I wasn't around anymore and was withdrawing. That was an alarm signal, and I immediately tried to make free time to better take care of personal relationships and existing friendships. It's important for one's psychological health.

PS: What impact can this pontificate have?

MG: A strengthening of faith and an encouragement of faith - and the consciousness that the Catholic Faith is something great, a gift from God, that's however not forced on people but is supposed to be accepted freely. In that, there are great challenges that the Church has to face.

PS: For example?

MG: The "God question," the engaging of various forms of Relativism, the dialog with Islam, the strengthening of our own identity. The fact that a continent like Europe cannot live when its Christian roots are cut, because that means taking away its soul.

PS: The announcement of a desired "full and visible union" with the Orthodox churches was the first sensation of the "Ratzinger government." Isn't that a rather illusory concept?

MG: That's nothing sensational, that's always been the declared goal. That a Pope who's especially influenced this area theologically over the last years and decades formulates this explicitly should go without saying. Let's not forget that the orthodox churches stand in Apostolic succession and therefore have a valid institution, the Eucharist and also the seven sacraments. What still needs to be clarified is the question of the primacy and the jurisdiction of the Pope. But it is a scandal that Christianity is still fractured. The restoration of the full unity of faith is certainly a great goal of the theologian-Pope.

PS: Will Pope Benedict rebuild the Papacy in favor of this unity?

MG: The question is asked wrongly. Ecumenism cannot be undertaken at the expense of the truth. A Pope can't just rebuild, reorganize the Papacy to achieve certain goals faster. The important thing is that the Papacy helps to stay true to the demand of truth as regards this unity.

PS: A change in the relationships of the Catholic Church to Moscow, Constantinople and especially Beijing would dramatically alter the religious map of the world.

MG: The ecumenical dialog with the various orthodox churches is in full steam and there has been considerable progress. But ecumenism is a difficult struggle. This has to do also with tensions within the Orthodox world. Constantinople and Moscow are two precarious points. The whole world could observe the meeting of the Pope with the Ecumenical Patriarch in Istanbul last November. A meeting with the Orthodox patriarch of Moscow has still to happen.

PS: Do you already picture the Pope with the Russian Patriarch in Moscow?

MG: I hope that there will be a meeting wherever.

PS: In the West, the Roman Church is in a monumental change. The Viennese Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn spoke, as an alternative of the old "people's Church," of a "Church of confession" (decision), a Church that the faithful truly call their own and to whom they profess allegiance. Is the time of the pseudo-Christianity approaching its end?

MG: "Pseudo-Christianity" sounds unfair and derogatory and doesn't do justice to reality. We can perceive that these people-church (meaning... a Catholic country by tradition) elements are vanishing, being melted off and that "nuclear" communities appear; this process has been underway for years. Cardinal Schoenborn calls this the "confessional/decision Church." A person who is a Christian today wants to be a Christian, has decided to be one, is resolved, maybe more resolved than in past years. And someone who doesn't want to be a Christian, simply isn't one, without suffering any personal, social, political or other disadvantages.

PS: It's plain to see that so many priests of the new generation discover the spiritual, cultural and aesthetical treasures of the handed-down liturgy. With the new Motu proprio "Summorum Pontificum," an Apostolic letter of the Pope it has been stated that every priest may celebrate the Holy Mass also according to the earlier, Tridentine Rite. Will this bring new conflicts?

MG: The opposite is the purpose and goal. Conflicts are supposed to be ended, existing fractions and schisms overcome. With the Motu proprio a spiritual home has been opened to a lot of the faithful. I am convinced that the letter of the Holy Father to the bishops which was released together with the Motu proprio and in which the Pope explains the goals and motivations of the document at length is the right key to its proper understanding.

PS: The French philosopher Rene Girard, member of the Academie francaise, is predicting a decisive Christian Renaissance. According to him, we are at the "eve of a revolution of our culture." This change is supposed to make the Renaissance of the 15th century pale by comparison.

MG: The religious element enjoys an attention it hasn't had in years. After a phase of indifferentism, people once more concern themselves with religion, questions of faith. I see that especially young people who have everything or could have everything, realize: One can do anything, one can even destroy the world - but one can't win the soul, when the essential is missing. The Catholic Church has treasures to offer that no one else can offer. Greater and more enduring than all politicial offers of "salvation." But, that doesn't happen automatically. Faith comes from being heard, as Saint Paul says, it has to be proclaimed.

PS: Just six weeks after its relase the Pope's book Jesus of Nazareth had been printed 1.5 millikon times. One feels that the Pope "puts on" this Jesus from scratch.

MG: The Jesus book is the quintessence of a man who has concerned himself with the person of Jesus of Nazareth his entire life - as priest, theologian, bishop, cardinal and now as Pope. It is his great spiritual testament.

PS: What do you like about this work in particular?

MG: I'm just reading it once more. It is written in a manner that it is as deep as it is understandable. It is the sum of the life of an important person. The book takes its place in the tradition of the great Church Fathers. I am convinced that this book will strengthen many people in their faith and will lead them to faith - and not just a particular group of intellectuals, but people of all backgrounds and education.

PS: The theologian Joseph Ratzinger delivers a forceful logic: This Jesus is the one who has all powers, who is Lord of the Universe, God Himself, who has become man. Jesus of Nazareth would seem bound to start a revolution...

MG: Yes, but without bloodshed.

August 02 Meeting

Our Topic is the Role of our Blessed Mother Mary

Catechism Reference Article: 484-511

Venue: Parish Library 7pm

July 26 Meeting

Our Lady of the Assumption Parish Library 7pm

Assignment Reading Catechism of the Catholic Church article 522-623

God bless,

Noel

Forgiveness: You are forgiven - Come Home

One day a while back, a man, his heart heavy with grief, was walking in the woods. As he thought about his life this day, he knew many things were not right.

He thought about those who had lied about him.

His thoughts turned to those who had stolen his things and cheated him.

He remembered family that had passed on.
His mind turned to the illness he had that no one could cure.
His very soul was filled with anger, resentment and frustration.

Standing there this day, searching for answers he could not find, knowing all else had failed him, he knelt at the base of an old oak tree to seek the one he knew would always be there. And with tears in his eyes, he prayed:

'Lord- You have done wonderful things for me in this life. You have told me to do many things for you, and I happily obeyed. Today, you have told me to forgive. I am sad, Lord, because I cannot. I don't know how.

It is not fair Lord. I didn't deserve these wrongs that were done against me and I shouldn't have to forgive. As perfect as your way is Lord, this one thing I cannot do, for I don't know how to forgive. My anger is so deep Lord, I fear I may not hear you, but I pray that you teach me to do this one thing I cannot do - Teach me To Forgive.'

As he knelt there in the quiet shade of that old oak tree, he felt something fall onto his shoulder. He opened his eyes. Out of the corner of one eye, he saw something red on his shirt.

He could not turn to see what it was because where the oak tree had been was a large square piece of wood in the ground. He raised his head and saw two feet held to the wood with a large spike through them.

He raised his head more, and tears came to his eyes as he saw Jesus hanging on a cross. He saw spikes in His hands, a gash in His side, a torn and battered body, deep thorns sunk into His head. Finally he saw the suffering and pain on His precious face. As their eyes met, the man's tears turned to sobbing, and Jesus began to speak.

'Have you ever told a lie?' He asked? The man answered - 'yes, Lord.'

'Have you ever been given too much change and kept it?' The man answered - ' yes. Lord.' And the man sobbed more and more.

'Have you ever taken something that wasn't yours?' Jesus asked?

And the man answered - 'yes, Lord.'

'Have you ever sworn, using my name in vain? '

The man, crying now, answered - 'yes, Lord.'

As Jesus asked many more times, 'Have you ever'? The man's crying
became uncontrollable, for he could only answer - 'yes, Lord.'

Then Jesus turned His head from one side to the other, and the man
felt something fall on his other shoulder.

He looked and saw that it was the blood of Jesus. When he looked back up, his eyes met those of Jesus, and there was a look of love the man had never seen or known before.

Jesus said, 'I didn't deserve this either, but I forgive you.'

It may be hard to see how you're going to get through something, but when you look back in life, you realize how true this statement is.

Read the following first line slowly and let it sink in.

If God brings you to it - He will bring you through it.

When Jesus died on the cross, he was thinking of you!

The 5 Ways by St. Thomas Aquinas

I answer that, The existence of God can be proved in five ways.

The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

The second way is from the nature of the efficient cause. In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossible. Now in efficient causes it is not possible to go on to infinity, because in all efficient causes following in order, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether the intermediate cause be several, or only one. Now to take away the cause is to take away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be no ultimate, nor any intermediate cause. But if in efficient causes it is possible to go on to infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate effect, nor any intermediate efficient causes; all of which is plainly false. Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.

The third way is taken from possibility and necessity, and runs thus. We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, since they are found to be generated, and to corrupt, and consequently, they are possible to be and not to be. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which is possible not to be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence — which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God.

The fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like. But "more" and "less" are predicated of different things, according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum, as a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest; so that there is something which is truest, something best, something noblest and, consequently, something which is uttermost being; for those things that are greatest in truth are greatest in being, as it is written in Metaph. ii. Now the maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.

The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.

Vatican Document - Questions and Answers

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS

OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH

Introduction

The Second Vatican Council, with its Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, and its Decrees on Ecumenism (Unitatis redintegratio) and the Oriental Churches (Orientalium Ecclesiarum), has contributed in a decisive way to the renewal of Catholic ecclesiolgy. The Supreme Pontiffs have also contributed to this renewal by offering their own insights and orientations for praxis: Paul VI in his Encyclical Letter Ecclesiam suam (1964) and John Paul II in his Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint (1995).

The consequent duty of theologians to expound with greater clarity the diverse aspects of ecclesiology has resulted in a flowering of writing in this field. In fact it has become evident that this theme is a most fruitful one which, however, has also at times required clarification by way of precise definition and correction, for instance in the declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae (1973), the Letter addressed to the Bishops of the Catholic Church Communionis notio (1992), and the declaration Dominus Iesus (2000), all published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The vastness of the subject matter and the novelty of many of the themes involved continue to provoke theological reflection. Among the many new contributions to the field, some are not immune from erroneous interpretation which in turn give rise to confusion and doubt. A number of these interpretations have been referred to the attention of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Given the universality of Catholic doctrine on the Church, the Congregation wishes to respond to these questions by clarifying the authentic meaning of some ecclesiological expressions used by the magisterium which are open to misunderstanding in the theological debate.

RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS

First Question: Did the Second Vatican Council change the Catholic doctrine on the Church?

Response: The Second Vatican Council neither changed nor intended to change this doctrine, rather it developed, deepened and more fully explained it.

This was exactly what John XXIII said at the beginning of the Council1. Paul VI affirmed it2 and commented in the act of promulgating the Constitution Lumen gentium: "There is no better comment to make than to say that this promulgation really changes nothing of the traditional doctrine. What Christ willed, we also will. What was, still is. What the Church has taught down through the centuries, we also teach. In simple terms that which was assumed, is now explicit; that which was uncertain, is now clarified; that which was meditated upon, discussed and sometimes argued over, is now put together in one clear formulation"3. The Bishops repeatedly expressed and fulfilled this intention4.

Second Question: What is the meaning of the affirmation that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church?

Response: Christ "established here on earth" only one Church and instituted it as a "visible and spiritual community"5, that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted.6 "This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organised in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him"7.

In number 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium ‘subsistence’ means this perduring, historical continuity and the permanence of all the elements instituted by Christ in the Catholic Church8, in which the Church of Christ is concretely found on this earth.

It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them.9 Nevertheless, the word "subsists" can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone precisely because it refers to the mark of unity that we profess in the symbols of the faith (I believe... in the "one" Church); and this "one" Church subsists in the Catholic Church.10

Third Question: Why was the expression "subsists in" adopted instead of the simple word "is"?

Response: The use of this expression, which indicates the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, does not change the doctrine on the Church. Rather, it comes from and brings out more clearly the fact that there are "numerous elements of sanctification and of truth" which are found outside her structure, but which "as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity"11.

"It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church"12.

Fourth Question: Why does the Second Vatican Council use the term "Church" in reference to the oriental Churches separated from full communion with the Catholic Church?

Response: The Council wanted to adopt the traditional use of the term. "Because these Churches, although separated, have true sacraments and above all – because of the apostolic succession – the priesthood and the Eucharist, by means of which they remain linked to us by very close bonds"13, they merit the title of "particular or local Churches"14, and are called sister Churches of the particular Catholic Churches15.

"It is through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord in each of these Churches that the Church of God is built up and grows in stature"16. However, since communion with the Catholic Church, the visible head of which is the Bishop of Rome and the Successor of Peter, is not some external complement to a particular Church but rather one of its internal constitutive principles, these venerable Christian communities lack something in their condition as particular churches17.

On the other hand, because of the division between Christians, the fullness of universality, which is proper to the Church governed by the Successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him, is not fully realised in history18.

Fifth Question: Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of "Church" with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?

Response: According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery19 cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called "Churches" in the proper sense20.

The Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, ratified and confirmed these Responses, adopted in the Plenary Session of the Congregation, and ordered their publication.

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, June 29, 2007, the Solemnity of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul.

William Cardinal Levada
Prefect

July 14 Saturday

Our next meeting is right after the 9am mass at Our Lady of Assumption this Saturday July 14, 2007.

Topic:

Sacred Scripture

Some of the questions to be answered:

- What is the Word of God?
- What is the truth and inspiration of the Bible?
- What is the role of the Holy Spirit?
- What are the different ways of reading the Bible?
- What books belong to the bible?
- What is the Old Testament?
- What is the New Testament?
- How is the Old and New Testament united?
- Where is the Bible found in the life of the Church?

Our homework:

Catechism paragraph 101-141

If we have more time we will try to cover up to paragraph 200.

God bless. Keep your faith alive. Pray for one another.

Noel