Two articles in the New York Times today will be of interest to Catholics. The first, on the front page, by Laurie Goodstein, focuses on the new Mass translations, and provides a concise summary of the events leading up to Rome's approval of the changes. Her article includes commentary from two priests who will be familiar to America readers: The Rev. Michael Ryan, pastor of St. James Cathedral in Seattle, who first wrote about his "What If We Said Wait?" initiative (and petition) in America; and Anthony Ruff, OSB, professor of liturgy at St. John's in Collegeville, who published his open letter on the Mass changes, addressed to the U.S. bishops, on our site. The other article, by Paul Vitello, is a close look at the USCCB's recent critique of Quest for the Living God, Elizabeth Johnson, CSJ., with some strong words from both sides of the issue.
The Times: The Mass and Elizabeth Johnson
The latest from america
The influence of the Synod on Synodality for the conclave—and what the result of the conclave might mean for the future of synodality
The role of the pope is in a process of conversion from worldly monarch to world’s priest.
At the Synod on Synodality, the cardinals were ‘converted’ to working together in a new way. As they join their brothers in the conclave, they face a referendum on—and resistance to—their work.
“In a time when the globalized economic and political order is crumbling—especially exposed during the Trump era—the church may well be one of the last stubborn institutions that still holds a truly global character.”
You're telling me it was difficult...
Corporate Catholic Googlers are what they must and should be. Intellectual integrity and rigor is for their Betters.
http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2010/10-165.shtml
http://www.usccb.org/doctrine/Sexual_Person_2010-09-15.pdf
Theologians Salzman and Lawler had won a prize and praise for their book. The bishops declared in their conclusion: ''The efforts of theologians, however, can only bear fruit if they are in fact carried on within a hermeneutic of continuity and in the framework provided by the Catholic theological tradition and the teaching of the Church.'' (Immediately before that, the bishops had written: ''The issues treated in The Sexual Person are indeed vital matters for the life of the Church in our time. They should be thoroughly studied and discussed by theologians as part of their service to the Church and to society.'')
The constraints of the hermeneutic of continuity and the framework as understood by today's Committee bishops evidently establish the boundaries beyond which theologians are forbidden to stray if they are to serve the Church and society. It sounds as if there isn't much work left for them to do.