23 July. St Bridget of Sweden, Patron of Europe
1st Reading: Galatians 2:19-20
It is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me
For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
Resp. Psalm: Ps 34
R.: Taste and see the goodness of the Lord
I will bless the Lord at all times;
his praise shall be always in my mouth.
Let my soul glory in the Lord;
the lowly will hear me and be glad. (R./)
Glorify the Lord with me,
let us together praise his name.
I sought the Lord, and he answered me
and delivered me from all my fears. (R./)
Look to him that you may be radiant with joy,
and your faces may not blush with shame.
When the afflicted man called out, the Lord heard,
and from all his distress he saved him. (R./)
Taste and see the goodness of the Lord. (R./)
The angel of the Lord is encamped
around those who fear him, to deliver them.
Taste and see the goodness of the Lord;
blessed are they who take refuge in him. (R./)
Gospel: John 15:1-8
Christ is the vine; we are the branches
Jesus said, “I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinegrower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit. You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me as I abide in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples.”
Bridget of Sweden, a woman to admire
Bridget of Sweden was admired for her active compassion towards people in need. Born as Birgitta Birgersdotter, in Uppland, Sweden, in 1303, she lived as a wife and mother, then later as a nun and a mystic. She went on pilgrimage to Rome in the Jubilee Year of 1350, to seek papal approval for the new Order she had founded, and remained there until her Rule was confirmed in 1370. She died in Rome in 1373.
After the death (1344) of her husband, Gudmarsson, to whom she had borne eight children, Bridget founded the Bridgettines nuns, with whom she devoted herself to prayer and works of charity. She is one of the six patron saints of Europe, along with Benedict of Nursia, Cyril and Methodius, Catherine of Siena and Edith Stein. In a homily on her feast, Benedict XVI told how Bridget exercised a very positive influence on her own family which, thanks to her presence, became a veritable “domestic church.” Together with her husband, she adopted the Rule of the Franciscan Tertiaries. She practiced works of charity towards the indigent with generosity; she also founded a hospital. Together with his wife, Ulf learned to improve his character and to advance in the Christian life. On returning from a long pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela, taken in 1341 with other members of the family, the spouses matured the plan to live in continence, but shortly after, in the peace of a monastery to which he had retired, Ulf concluded his earthly life.
The first phase of Bridget’s adult life was as a wife and mother. She showed how a wife, with her religious sensibility, delicacy and gentleness, can help the husband follow a path of faith. As pope Benedict said, “May the Spirit of the Lord fuel the sanctity of Christian couples, showing the world the beauty of a marriage lived by the values of the Gospel: love, tenderness, mutual help, fecundity in generating and educating children, openness and solidarity to the world, participation in the life of the Church.
The second phase of Bridget’s life began after she was widowed, when she renounced any desire to remarry, in order to focus more fully on prayer and works of charity. On the death of her husband, after distributing her goods to the poor, though without formally consecrating herself by vows, Bridget went to live in the Cistercian monastery of Alvastra. Here is where the divine revelations began, which were with her for the rest of her life. They were dictated by her to her confessor-secretaries, who translated them from Swedish into Latin and gathered them in an edition of eight books entitled “Revelations.”
In 1349, Bridget went on pilgrimage to Rome for the Jubilee Year of 1350 and to get papal approval for the religious order she hoped to found, where monks and nuns would be led by an abbess. Our Catholic tradition recognizes the dignity proper to women, without, as yet at least, admitting them to the ordained priesthood. Coming from Scandinavia, Bridget attests how Christianity had permeated profoundly to the far north of Europe. Declaring her co-patroness of Europe, Pope John Paul hoped that she, who lived in the 14th century before Western Christianity was divided by the Reformation, can be a powerful intercessor for the reunion of all Christians. “May Europe will be nourished from its own Christian roots, invoking the powerful intercession of St Bridget, faithful disciple of God, co-patroness of Europe.”
You would do well to leave your personal opinions out – “Our Catholic tradition recognizes the dignity proper to women, without, as yet at least, admitting them to the ordained priesthood.” Saint Pope John Paul II has clearly defined the Church’s teaching on the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Why do so many desire to lead the faithful into continuous error? By the way, Our Catholic Tradition, as in official teaching, recognizes the dignity proper to women.
Fr. Paul, could I humbly recommend to you, “The Quiet Revolution of Pope Francis” the most recent work of one of our most eminent Irish theologians and scholar priests, Fr. Gerry O’Hanlon SJ, a former Provincial of the Irish Jesuits.
And could I especially commend to you Chapter 8 ” The Role of laity, including Women, in Authority” and the account on Page 131 where Fr. Gerry refers to the Report of the Pontifical Biblical Commission in April 1976. We learn of the voting patterns on the 3 major questions –which is the first time I have become aware of the actual majorities involved — and that such eminent scripture scholars as Raymond Brown and Carlo Martini were, in fact, part of that Commission.
I firmly believe that our church’s position on the question of women is indefensible and scandalous. Unless we change, we can never hope to ever again enjoy respect or credibility among thinking people in today’s world.
The Quiet Revolution of Pope Francis is published by Messenger Publications, 37 Lower Lesson Street, Dublin D02 W938
It is an excellent book.
Finally, Fr. Paul I would like to share with you a Leading Article from a recent edition of the Tablet, “Now let an open debate begin”.
Goodnight to you.
Now let an open debate begin
In an article in The Tablet last month, the former Bishop of Middlesbrough, John Crowley, asked for “free and open discussion throughout the Church at every level” regarding the ordination of women. This is apparently in flat contradiction to the directive given 25 years ago by Pope John Paul II in his apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. He declared that “the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, and this judgement is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful”. What John Paul II did not, and could not, forbid is discussion about the content of the apostolic letter itself. For instance, was Pope John Paul II acting within his jurisdiction? What did he mean by “definitively held”? And, could any authority whatsoever overrule opinions held in good conscience?
If those issues can be discussed without defying papal teaching, it has to follow that the substance of the apostolic letter can also be discussed. Are the reasons given for the ruling the best ones or are there better? For instance, John Paul II’s ruling is often defended on the grounds that Jesus’ decision not to include women among the 12 apostles was made in order to defend the proposition that women and men are equal but different – that they are complementary rather than interchangeable. But why Jesus should have felt it necessary 2,000 years ago to make such a point is never explained. It is more likely he merely accepted the relationship between the sexes as it then was. To suppose that he foresaw the gender politics of the early twenty-first century and wished to intervene therein is too far-fetched to be credible.
Other reasons given by the papal edict and the supporting documents it cites have to be open to question. Is it clear from theological tradition and historical memory that women have never received Holy Orders? It appears not. Does the unanimity of the worldwide Catholic episcopacy on this point prove that this papal teaching rests on the consensus of the ordinary magisterium? Given that any priest who had a contrary view would be most unlikely to be made a bishop, that is a weak argument.
Paddy Ferry,
While I have not yet read the book you propose, I note the title of the chapter you highlight – “The Role of laity, including Women, in Authority”, laity is just that, laity, they are not clergy.
I have used such eminent theologians such as Karl Rahner in my own works for he too was a brilliant theologian, but alas, he too fell into error on certain matters.
That Jesus most certainly did not “accept[…] the relationship between the sexes as it then was” is evident in His teaching on adultery, He placed women in full equality with men on that matter, which was not the reality before Him. There is also the woman at the well; Jesus clearly broke from cultural tradition then.
You should know well that the teachings of the Church are authorized by the magisterium, and not by theologians who hold no teaching authority whatsoever. While it is true that the magisterium may consult theologians, the decisions are ultimately made through consulting the Holy Spirit.
Pope Francis on the historical women deacons: “The formulas of female deacon ordination are not the same for the ordination of a male deacon and are more similar to what today would be the abbatial blessing of an abbess.”
As far as discussions of magisterial teaching, they may be held for the purpose of understanding, not disproving or dissenting. Again Pope Saint John Paul II stated that debate on the matter was closed. Truth is truth, and therefore unchanging.
Finally, what is the Sacrament at issue but giving the Church ‘an other Christ’, the Bridegroom? Thus the main sacramental reason for a male only clergy, unless one subscribes to the error of so called same sex marriages.
Blessings on your day.
Far be it from me, a mere woman, to engage in theological argument. I will, however, comment on the subtitle of the document, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. It is generally accepted that we are reluctant to identify that which fills us with terror. It is only when we can name our fear that healing can begin. It seems to me that a lot of verbal gymnastics were employed to avoid using the dreaded word ‘women’ in the subtitle “On the reservation of Holy Orders to men alone.” What are you afraid of guys?
Being brave.
Noticing more and more as the years go by that when I find a reason for not doing something, there is probably a hidden fear lying beneath it.
The circumstances of my life – since early years – mean that I am an outsider, a non-belonger.
Then mid-life I had an experience & was converted to the Catholic faith.
But I belong to no tribe – neither women nor men – & can see the problems associated with tribes. Tribes exclude others. Whoever is perceived as different doesn’t get a place. The men-only tribe in control of the ‘formal’ sharing of the faith which I live by & have since explored in all ways – academic, personal etc , in depth above all, is made up of all kinds of men.
The features of men-only control are well-documented throughout society as being an erroneous basis for any form of social organisation.
The reality is that Catholic churches today are managed & nurtured by women, just as the nurturing happens in families. Women are fully there & without them, there would be no church.
Fear of the other is not love.
Men of the Catholic church – be brave people and change.
Fr. Paul, your comment which included the words “laity is just that, laity, they are not clergy” was so appallingly unenlightened and backward that I felt I could not –should not –continue this conversation. Contributors to this site who are better informed that I am obviously felt the same. So, why am I wasting my time on a wet Saturday morning in Edinburgh to make one final forlorn attempt to help you see the lack of wisdom and credibility of your position. It is the kind of mindset you exhibit that , I feel, has contributed to our church’s dramatic decline.
That comment takes us back to the days of Vehementer Nos (VN) 1906 ( thank you, Padraig, once again, for bringing VN to our/my attention) and the appalling pontificate of Pius X which was so detrimental to the universal church and to certain individuals, as we well know in Ireland. In that encyclical Pius clearly stated that there are two unequal groups in our church; the clergy who have all the authority and the multitude –the laity -who have a duty to allow themselves to be led “with docility”. The word “docility” was actually used in VN. It was the ultimate “pray, pay and obey” injunction.
Now, lets roll on from 1906 to Vatican II , 1962-65. One of the great documents of VAT II, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium (LG) explains the mystery of the church as the People of God. In particular, the laity, through Baptism, share in the priestly, prophetic and kingly role of Jesus himself. Moreover, it is the People of God as a whole in whom the charism of inerrancy resides. (LG 12). ( Personally, I am not convinced that inerrancy can exist in any individual or group. But that is just my opinion and it is not what LG has to say.) Not only did we, the laity, now have to right to speak out, we had a duty to do so. So, therefore, Fr. Paul when you said “Truth is truth and unchanging”. Well, actually no. The truth of 1906 was no longer the truth in 1964.
We could go on and on in this vein, Fr. Paul. Dignititis Humanae, for example, the Declaration on Religious Liberty and this from a church that had always opposed religious liberty, “error has no rights” and all that, unless, of course, you were a catholic. Unitatis Redentigratio, another example of a complete about-turn on the part of our church at Vat II, our church embracing the ecumenical movement (and recognising the intrinsic goodness of other Christians) after a long history of opposing it. There are so many examples of our church wisely changing its position on fundamental issues and thank God –and the Holy Spirit for its guidance –that we did. I don’t even have to mention slavery and usury.
I wonder where are you based, Fr. Paul, where do you live? I am assuming that you are aware of the vision, theology and ecclesiology of Vatican II. It is so good that you are aware of the ACP site and I hope you continue to be part of it. You may not like a lot of what you will read. But it has been a great source of knowledge for me and some of the great minds who contribute to this site , I feel , have been educators for me personally.
So, may God continue to bless you, Fr. Paul , and do please respect your lay brothers and sisters as your equals, wherever you are.
It is still raining in Edinburgh. But, not to worry, we are soon off to the tranquil Hills and serene strands and beaches of Donegal where the sun will shine and we won’t have a drop of rain at the Mary from Dungloe.
PS. Gerry, thank you for the easily repeatable lines.
Well said, Paddy Ferry. I agree with you and your gentle honest criticism is a lesson in how to argue with another mindset in a firm but courteous way.
Ruth, you state that ‘tribes exclude others.’ Well, not the tribe of the Nazarene. We are poor followers and slow learners but I do hope you find that you are never excluded from the genuine searching, struggling, welcoming followers of the Nazarene’s tribe.
Mind you, there are times, like for example, reading Cardinal Muller’s dogmatic statements and reminders of the punishment of hell for those who die in ‘a state of mortal sin’, when I despair and feel that I do not belong here but it soon passes when I remember the Jesus of the Gospels and the compassion and mercy shown by Him.
Paddy@6. Fr Paul Doucet is a Canadian priest and motocross biker who claims to have a titanium reinforced knee and ankle and Holy Spirit reinforced heart. He makes no mention of his cranium, its reinforcement or its contents. He may well be impermeable to your admirable approach to engaging with him. I wish you good weather in Donegal.
Thanks, Eddie, its always great to hear from you.
Oiche Mhaith.
Eddie,I can assure you that there is no issue with my cranium. If you cannot restrain yourself from resorting to unkind fallacies then please don’t comment at all.
It seems quite clear that Church teaching is widely misunderstood, even by those who consider themselves enlightened. There has never been a “complete about-turn” in Church teaching in the area of faith and morals (the only two areas where She claims inerrancy). While all the baptised participate in the priesthood of Jesus Christ, only those with the Sacrament of Holy Orders do so both with and FOR the Church; there is no such thing as absolute equality, there are many distinctions.
Holding that truth is changeable is relativistic and illogical. Shall you claim next that Jesus is not necessary for salvation?
Prayers for true enlightenment