In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Three Pillars of Catholic EducationArchbishop Salvatore CordileoneIntroductionOn February 13, 1999, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger visited St. Patrick's Seminary and University in Menlo Park, California. He gave a lecture entitled, "Faith and Culture." Pope St. John Paul II had only back in September of the previous year published his momentous encyclical Fides et Ratio. Purposely placing his own remarks under the umbrella of that encyclical, Cardinal Ratzinger used the opportunity (...) at St. Patrick's Seminary to discuss the growing relativism which was even at that time eroding our culture.He began his lecture by using an example from C. S. Lewis's great work The Screwtape Letters. The future Pope remarked:This book consists of fictional letters from a senior devil who is giving advice on how best to proceed to one beginning in the work of leading men astray. The younger devil has expressed concern to his superior that especially intelligent people, in particular, might read the books of wisdom of the ancients and might thus come upon the track of the truth. Screwtape calms him by pointing out that the "Historical point of View," with which the intellectuals of the Western world have fortunately been inculcated by the devils, means in fact that "when a learned man is presented with any statement in an ancient author, the one question he never asks is whether it [End Page 7] is true. He asks who influenced the ancient writer, and how far the statement is consistent with what he said in other books, and what phase in the writer's development, or in the general history of thought, it illustrates, and how it affected other writers," and so on.1The startling truth is that now, almost twenty-five years later, what Cardinal Ratzinger articulated back in 1999 has only crystallized. In almost every area of our culture, the notion of truth has receded due to the acidic encroachment of relativism. As a culture we have given up on any hope of finding truth and instead consigned reality to something that is determined by the individual. We see the extent to which this relativism has taken hold of our culture in the now-famous words of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy: "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life."2 In this breathtaking statement, Justice Kennedy seemingly makes irrelevant the entire history of Western civilization. The irony, of course, is that it is precisely the course of Western philosophy and thought which has steered the culture in such a direction that it could produce a Supreme Court justice who would articulate such a bewildering statement. For we do not, nor can we, exist in a philosophical vacuum. And such is the great irony of this moment that we occupy—it is on the ash heap of Western civilization that relativists stand attacking the very history which brought them to be there in the first place.Given this sad reality, we can see Cardinal Ratzinger's criticism from 1999 as a clarion call, and as prophetic in describing what has transpired in the decades since. The complete dominance of relativism in all its forms demands that we return to the primacy of truth. But it is not only unfettered relativism that necessitates this return to truth. The return to the splendor of truth becomes all the more important for us as Christians. As the First Letter of St. Peter makes clear, the Christian is to purify his soul by obedience to the truth (1 Pet1:22). And in the Gospel of St. John, we are told that Christ is the true Light who enlightens all, and who gives the power to become children of God to those who receive him (John 1:9–11).In this vein, I would like to present what I believe is the strength of Catholic education and the need to restore a truly Catholic vision. To this end, I believe Cardinal Ratzinger was correct in his forecast of the repercussions of bracketing out truth from our culture. While the broader repercussions of... (shrink)

The article considers the history of implementation and evolution of Accusatory theology in the Kyiv Theological Academy. The author shows the place where the controversy with other religions and other Christian denominations took place in the curriculum of the Kyiv Theological Academy after the introduction of the Statute of the religious schools of 1808–1814 in Kyiv. The article deals with the content of the lecture courses of Archbishop Smaragd, Archimandrite Antonin, Bishop Sylvester, Philip Ternovsky, and Bishop Augustine. The (...) author shows that the Accusatory theology was not an independent academic discipline at first, but it was part of the general course of theology. For the first time, lectures on accusatory theology were given in Kyiv in 1823. On the recommendation of the Commission of theological schools, teachers of this discipline were to use the book of the German Lutheran theologian Johann Ernst Schubert «Institutionum Theologiae polemicae» during the preparation of lectures. Comparison of this book with the lectures of hieromonk Smaragd shows that the work of the German theologian was used by the Kyiv teacher quite selectively. Next, the article shows how in the following decades the content of the course of accusatory theology varied, depending on the general situation in theological education in the Russian Empire. In particular, the changes that took place in the curriculum of the Kyiv Theological Academy in the 1840’s were characterized on the initiative of the Chief Procurator of the Holy Synod, Mykola Protasov. The author drew attention to the personal preferences of professors who found a reflection in their curriculum in Accusatory theology. In particular, Bishop Sylvester in his course substantially expanded the controversy with the latest philosophical currents that opposed Christianity. Instead, Philip Ternovsky and Bishop Augustine actively used the historical method, resulting in their courses representing the history of the controversy of the Orthodox Church with its various opponents. In the 1860’s, when a large-scale reform of theological education was being prepared in the Russian Empire, the idea of a radical revision of the accusatory theology teaching concept was heard at the Kyiv Theological Academy. At the same time, some professors even advocated the abolition of accusatory theology as an independent discipline and for joining it to the course of church history. Special attention is paid to the fact that the courses of accusatory theology in the Kyiv Theological Academy in the nineteenth century were based on typical contemporary ecclesiology and soteriology of that time. The purpose of the course was seen not in the equal dialogue with opponents, but in revealing their mistakes and attempts to convert them to the Orthodox Church. Article received 03.07.2019. (shrink)

In 2016 Pope Francis went to Lund in Sweden for a joint service with the Lutherans to begin the events marking the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. Catholics have also been involved in conferences and other events that have been organized as part of this anniversary. The context and background to the Catholic Church's involvement is the Church's commitment to ecumenical dialogue made at the Second Vatican Council. The theological basis for that commitment is to be found in the Second (...) Vatican Council's Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium and its Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio. This paper takes the opportunity of this anniversary to take stock of the progress of the ecumenical movement and notes some of the issues and challenges that have impacted upon it. As well as social and cultural factors these include the increasing importance of interreligious dialogue and its relationship to ecumenical dialogue. Ecumenists also have to take account of the widely varying interpretations of the Reformation offered by church historians. Finally the paper argues that in the Catholic Church perceptions of ecumenism often fail to take account of the many ways in which the Second Vatican Council significantly changed the global role and profile of the Catholic Church as a source and agent of peace and reconciliation on many different levels. Ecumenical engagement is an integral part of that continuing development which is increasingly acknowledged by political and religious leaders throughout the world. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Thomas Merton’s Bangkok Lecture of December 1968Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland, OSBPreparations for the Meeting and its PurposeAfter being elected abbot primate of the Benedictine Confederation in September 1967, I was encouraged by discovering that the Benedictines and the two branches of the Cistercians (those of the Common Observance and those of the Strict Observance, or Trappists) worked together on missionary issues through an office in Paris called Aide à (...) l’Implantation Monastique (AIM).1 After World War II many new monastic foundations were made in the developing countries of Africa, Asia, and South America, commonly referred to as the Third World. These fledgling monasteries needed special care that frequently could not be provided by their founding monasteries in Europe or the United States. AIM sought to fill that gap. There existed an unwritten agreement among the three superiors of the two branches of the Cistercians and the abbot primate that the historical differences in the West among those following the Rule of Saint Benedict would not be emphasized in the new areas of expansion.One of the purposes for establishing AIM was to plan and organize meetings of monks and nuns in those vast areas of the world.2 Thus, AIM and its staff acted as the prime instrument for pulling together all the threads that went into the meeting in Bangkok in December 1968. They ultimately were responsible for selecting inculturation as the main theme to be treated.At that time, I noticed that this theme was frequently being discussed among us Superiors General in Rome, especially among those religious congregations with newer foundations in the developing countries of Asia, Africa, and South America.3 Many came to realize that this theme was important, not only for newer houses, but also for older ones in the Third World, as they too were rethinking how they engaged the cultures in which they had been implanted. We superiors devoted many meetings to this theme, bringing in experts in theology and anthropology to reflect with us on current thinking and to animate our discussions. Because of the positive treatment at Vatican Council II of the other great religions of the world, this theme was “in the air” at that time. In the Far East the question of inculturation for Catholic missionaries was not a new one in itself, as Christians had been posing it since the time of the first missionary efforts in China and Japan centuries before. For monks, however, it was being asked for the first time and with some urgency. Monasticism [End Page 91] posed questions of adaptation and accommodation in cultures already possessing deeply rooted manifestations of a similar way of life that went under the same label. Thus, since there was already a concept of monasticism and the existence of monks in Asian cultures, the Bangkok meeting was an occasion for reexamining the question of inculturation.At that same time there was a heightened sensitivity to any sign of a residual colonialism in many parts of the Third World. When Western groups made no attempt at inculturation, it was interpreted as old European cultural colonialism, or, as some were beginning to say, new American economic imperialism.When some Benedictine and Cistercian superiors in Asia suggested inculturation as the theme for this meeting, they added the suggestion that superiors of the founding monasteries in Europe and the United States should attend the meeting and interact with the superiors of the local houses. These superiors felt it was important for the founding superiors to gain a better understanding of the issues involved in cultural adaptation and that they be willing to give to the local superiors a broader berth for future developments. For this to occur, the presence of experts at the meeting was also imperative. It was then that Merton’s name was suggested. It was rightly felt that he was well informed about both Eastern and Western forms of monasticism and would be a font of insights and a ready guide for the discussions. In addition, his views—everyone agreed—would be well accepted by the Western superiors. Since the two languages of the meeting were to be French and English, Merton could also... (shrink)

This book assesses how Vatican II opened up the Catholic Church to encounter, dialogue, and engagement with other world religions. Opening with a contribution from the President of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, it next explores the impact, relevance, and promise of the Declaration Nostra Aetate before turning to consider how Vatican II in general has influenced interfaith dialogue and the intellectual and comparative study of world religions in the postconciliar decades, as well as the contribution (...) of particular past and present thinkers to the formation of current interreligious and comparative theological methods. Additionally, chapters consider interreligious dialogue vis-à-vis theological anthropology in conciliar documents; openness to the spiritual practices of other faith traditions as a way of encouraging positive interreligious encounter; the role of lay and new ecclesial movements in interreligious dialogue; and the development of Monastic Interreligious Dialogue. Finally, it includes a range of perspectives on the fruits and future of Vatican’s II’s opening to particular faiths such as Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism. (shrink)

An eminent scholar of Carolingian history, Rosamond McKitterick, recently remarked that for specialists in Carolingian art it is currently “unfashionable to link manuscript images with anything the artist has seen in real life.” Clearly, there have been important exceptions to this observation, but it has some ring of truth; indeed, it could be expanded into the contention that art historians are reluctant not only to associate imagery of the period with what its artists might have seen but even to connect (...) it with what the artists might otherwise have known of situations or events in contemporary society. (shrink)

Katelis Viglas’ book: Jeremiah II Tranos. Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch (1536-1595) is a historical-theological description and analysis of the most important data and facts concerning the life and works of Jeremiah II Tranos, Patriarch of Constantinople in the 16th century. The book consists of a Prologue, which refers to the aim of the treatise and the method followed. In the Introduction there is a general outline of the era of Jeremiah II and its origins, as (...) well as a brief presentation of his contribution to the Greek Genus. The First Chapter is divided into three subchapters. The first subchapter provides a brief overview of the history of the birthplace of Jeremiah II, Anchialos, a city on the shores of the Black Sea, and describes patriarch’s character and education, along with an extensive reference to his teachers. In this subchapter information is included relative to Jeremiah’s life until his ordination as Metropolitan of Larissa. The second subchapter briefly narrates the glorious ordination of Jeremiah II to Patriarch of Constantinople. In the third subchapter of the First Chapter, the three breaks during Jeremiah II’ patriarchate –caused by the selfish ambitions of his competitors, who coveted the patriarchal throne– are recounted. The Second Chapter consists of four subchapters. In the first subchapter there are a brief reference to the life and religious beliefs of the founder of the Reformation, Martin Luther, and the interest and curiosity of the Lutherans in the situation of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The second subchapter of the Second Chapter contains biographical details of the Protestant scholar and philhellene Philip Melanchthon, and a reference to the first contact attempt of Lutherans with the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The third subchapter of the Second Chapter is divided into six other subsections. The first section of the third subchapter describes the way the relationships of the Lutheran theologians of Tubingen with Patriarch Jeremiah II developed and to the starting point of their correspondence. Yet, the Philhellenism of the German Hellenist Martin Crusius and the role he played in the correspondence are highlighted. The second section outlines Jeremiah II’ responses to each article of the Augsburg Confession send to him by the Tubingen theologians. The third section highlights the key points of the reply of the Tubingen theologians to the First Answer from Jeremiah II. The third section refers to the Second Answer from Jeremiah II. In the short fifth section there is a reference to the reply of the Tubingen theologians to the Second and the Third Answer from Jeremiah II. The sixth section provides information related to the publication of that correspondence. In the fourth subchapter of the Second Chapter there are general and evaluative judgments on the correspondence between Jeremiah II and the Tubingen theologians. The Third Chapter is divided into five subchapters. The first subchapter explains the ancient Roman calendars of Numa and Julius Caesar and their shortcomings. The second subchapter presents the findings of these imperfections by various scholars. The third subchapter describes the Gregorian Reform of the calendar. The fourth subchapter analyses the social situation within the Orthodox Church during the Gregorian Reform. The fifth subchapter aims to show the orthodox reaction of Jeremiah II to the Gregorian calendar and its causes. The Fourth Chapter is divided into two subchapters, of which the first is related to Jeremiah’s travels in Poland and the regulation by him of Church life in this country, while the second gives an overview of the circumstances, under which the foundation of the Russian Patriarchate took place. The Fifth Chapter is divided into three subchapters. The first subchapter examines Jeremiah II’s concern on various issues. The second subchapter deals with Jeremiah II’ concern on the education of the Greek Genus. The third subchapter explains the attitude of Jeremiah II towards the Pontifical Greek College in Rome. At the end of the treatise there is an Epilogue, with concluding remarks on the evaluation of the historical figure of Jeremiah II, his spiritual identity and the status of the Orthodox East under his leadership. An extensive Bibliography, a Chronology, an Index of Names, 21 Illustrations and 2 Maps, complete the book. (shrink)

Brendan Larvor finds that the Archbishop of Canterbury's recent arguments about religious education are a curate's egg.

A concise chronicle of the remarkable life and career of William Temple, Archbishop of York and later of Canterbury, which attempts to focus more sharply and clearly on Temple the man, viewing him as prelate, thinker, prophet-evangelist, and as the example of a modern Saint.

The Nicholas Wolterstorff-Robert Audi debate surrounding the role of religious reasons in public debate remains unresolved in the United States. Alternatively, but relatedly, when politicians and Archbishops in the UK mention God the media react with force. This article seeks a more balanced reaction to the faith of politicians and Archbishops and a solution to the Wolterstorff-Audi debate. First, this article teases out the extent to which John Macmurray's philosophy of community is or is not evident in New Labour politics; (...) secondly, it expounds Macmurray's alternative ‘communitarianism’ by examining his account of church-state relations; thirdly, it introduces the philosophical notion of supervenience to provide a proper account of the relation between religious reasons and secular reasons in public debate and, finally, it provides an example of a ‘community’ that satisfies the essential criteria of Macmurray's definition. Thus, in addition to revealing the contemporary relevance of Macmurray's work and the misunderstandings surrounding the notion of community, this article engages with an ongoing international conversation on the ethics of religious voices in public places and proposes a solution to the Wolterstorff-Audi debate. (shrink)