Monday, April 19, 2010
-Blessed Henry Suso, Dominican Life, ch. 50
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Q: St. Justin Martyr, why can’t non-Catholics receive Communion at Mass?
A: “No one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said,
This do in remembrance of Me, this is My body; and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said,
This is My blood; and gave it to them alone.”
-First Apology, Chapter 66
On this same theme, see this post.
Sunday, April 04, 2010
"For Christ, death-however burdened and agonizing and essential-is only a passageway to fulfillment. 'Did not the Christ have to suffer these things before entering in to his glory?' he asks the disciples on the way to Emmaus (Luke 24:26). The Resurrection is the blossoming of the seed he has always borne within him. He who rejects it, rejects everything in Jesus' life and consciousness that is linked with it. What then remains, is not worth faith."
-Romano Guardini, The Lord
Saturday, April 03, 2010
“In the Bible, what we call ‘covenant’ is not a symmetrical relationship between two partners who make a contractual agreement involving reciprocal obligations and penalties: this idea of a partnership among equals cannot be reconciled with the biblical concept of God. According to the latter, man is in no position to create a relationship with God, let alone give him anything and receive something in return; it is quite out of the question that man should bind God to obligations in return for undertakings on his own part. If there is to be a relationship between God and man, it can only come about through God’s free ordinance, in which his sovereignty remains intact. The relationship is therefore completely asymmetrical, because God, for the creature, is and remains the ‘wholly other.’ The ‘covenant’ is not a two-sided contract but a gift, a creative act of God’s love. This last statement, it is true, goes beyond the philological issue. Although the covenant is patterned on Hittite and Assyrian contracts between states, in which the lord imposes his law on his vassal, God’s covenant with Israel is far more: here God, the King, receives nothing from man; but in giving him his law, he gives him the path of life.”
-Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Many Religions—One Covenant: Israel, the Church and the World