Hugo Rahner’s words, although written several years before the revision of the liturgy, neatly summarize the theology behind the Consilium’s revision: “What we witness here [in the candle immersion] is a symbol of Christ crucified giving to the water the illuminating power of the Spirit[,] and those who insist on seeing a phallic symbol in the candle appear to be completely oblivious to what not only the Roman, but all other liturgies have to declare on this particular point, of what, in point of fact, they declare with considerable emphasis. It is that the baptismal font is immaculatus uterus, and that, like Mary, the Church bears her children solely by the power of the Spirit."
Prime Example of Disunity: The Sodomy Issue
We ought to assume good intentions on both sides. However, there cannot possibly be two versions of any one truth. North cannot be south, and up cannot be down. Truth isn't dynamic and moving about over time, but static and timeless. It can take time to arrive at truth, and some end up on detours along the way. For example, I am perplexed at what seems like different understandings of what theologians and professors feel constitutes sodomy in this debate . I would like to raise a basic question: At what point does foreplay end, if not when the man is adequately prepared for coitus? Similarly, I find that not all theologians seem to agree on whether ejaculation is required to make it an act of sodomy or not.
This issue is one primary reason I think it would be merciful for the Holy See to get involved. All sides seem to be citing various Church documents, and St. Thomas Aquinas to make their argument. The "theology of the body" debate has exposed issues like this which can, and out to be, clarified and taught with consistency by all theologians, confessors, apologists, catechists and chastity speakers around the world. Right now, the one consistent thing I've seen is inconsistency on the matter, and by a good many well respected people.
Now, I leave you with the latest set of public exchanges. The comboxes are lively as we would expect.
Dr. Janet E. Smith critiques Dawn Eden's thesis;
and, Dawn Eden critiques Dr. Smith's critique
The comboxes in these linked articles are lively as we would expect. There are interesting debates there and more may be learned there.
Catholic News Agency hosted the master's thesis of Dawn Eden which was a critique (here is the lead-in article, with the thesis at the bottom in PDF form).
On September 30, 2010, Dr. Janet E. Smith published a critique of the thesis at Catholic Exchange.
There is further commentary on Dr. Smith's piece at Catholic News Agency...
On October 1, 2010, Dawn Eden's response was published at Catholic News Agency.
Note: It is very late, and I had intended to put a number of links in this post for reference. I will try to come back and edit these in when I have time.
I am also continuing my temporary shut down of the combox so that I am not tied to the computer looking to moderate them.
Te Deum Laudamus! Home
The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!Note: The recommended links below are automatically generated by the tool, so they are not necessarily related content.