I regard Hans Küng as the leading Vatican II theologian.  He endorses Vatican II without “reforming the reform” reservations.  In the National Catholic Reporter, Küng sets out the contemporary liturgical hope for the Roman Catholic Church this Sunday.[1]  The Responsorial Antiphon for this Sunday is If today you hear his voice [in Vatican II], harden not your hearts.[2]  In this context, Küng offers the following observation.

 

Poverty:  The church in the spirit of Innocent III [1198-1216] meant a church of wealth, pomp and circumstance, acquisitiveness and financial scandal.  In contrast, a church in the spirit of [Saint] Francis [1181-1182—1226][3] means a church of transparent financial policies and modest frugality.  A church that concerns itself above all with the poor, the weak and the marginalized.  A church that does not pile up wealth and capital but instead actively fights poverty and offers its staff exemplary conditions of employment.

 

A church concerned “above all with the poor, the weak, and the marginalized” would be more sympathetic and less arrogant about its opinions on capitalism, birth control, abortion, and hospital care.  On the capitalism topic, the conservative Acton Institute has “gone mostly radio silent on the pope’s recent remarks about `savage capitalism.’”[4] 

 

The Acton Institute is linked to an article by Phil Lawler who wrote, “the teaching magisterium has been critical of the excesses of capitalism,” although Pope Francis did not mention anything about excesses.  The President of the Acton Institute, Father Robert Sirico appears regularly on EWTN with Raymond Arroyo.[5]  I find Arroyo disgusting for giving Sirico such a national platform, in line with the Tea Party platform reducing government regulations that “have a moral responsibility to regulate market forces for the common good.”  The quote is from Stephen Schneck of The Catholic University of America.  I regard it as a good thing that Sirico has not been on the Arroyo show since December 13, 2012.

 

In a vein similar to the Acton Institute, on May 29, 2013, the United States Catholic Bishops Conference (USCCB) demonstrated hard heartedness toward the needy as it  announced that Peter Ryan, S.J. would become executive director for the secretariat of doctrine and canonical affairs.  This is the same Father Ryan who could not meet the peer-review standards of the Jesuit published quarterly, Theological Studies, indexed for Personal Notes. 

 

The Papacy forced Theological Studies to publish a 2011 non-academic diatribe by Ryan against a 2004 article, “The Indissolubility of Marriage:  Reasons to Reconsider,” with which the Papacy disagreed.  The original 2004 article argued in favor of permitting those who divorced and remarried to receive the sacraments.  Ryan will be the one in charge of advising the USCCB which theologians to attack.  The USCCB has attacked five such theologians in the recent past.  Saint Joseph Sister Elizabeth Johnson, Quest for the Living God:  Mapping Frontiers in the Theology of God is the most prominent of those attacked.[6]

 

In the prayer at Sunday Mass immediately following the forgiveness of sins, the Faithful using the 2011 Roman Missal can listen for “restore what you have created.”[7]  With Nehemiah 8:17, and some Baptists this Sunday, the Faithful can remember And all the congregation of them that were come again out of the captivity [of the 2011 Missal] made booths, and sat under the booths; for since the days of Jeshua the son of Nun unto that day had not the children of Israel done so.  And there was very great gladness.[8]  Personal Notes prays that very great gladness is what Pope Francis means for the whole contemporary Christian Church.

 

 

Readings

First Reading                     Ecclesiastes 1:2; 2:21-23

Responsorial Psalm:          Psalm 90:3-4, 5-6, 12-13 (8)

Second Reading:               Colossians 3:1-5, 9-11

Alleluia:                             Matthew 5:3 (See Reading 70A)

Gospel:                             Luke 12:13-21

 

Annotated Bibliography

Musings above the solid line draw from material below.  Those uninterested in scholarly and tangential details should stop reading here.  If they do, however, they may miss some interesting details.

 

Ecclesiastes 1:2; 2:21-23

Ecclesiastes 1:1-11, 2:22[9]

Kyle R. Greenwood, “Debating Wisdom:  The Role of Voice in Ecclesiastes”

Greenwood argues,

 

From the perspective of Qs, when the empirical evidence has been gathered and evaluated, there is nothing of value beyond the temporal sphere and there is nothing new to give hope that something with such value may ever arise. . . .the conversations Qs has about God are not theistic but deistic, in which God exists but is uninterested and incapable of interacting with humanity in any meaningful way.

 

Ecclesiastes 1:1-11

Camilla Burns, review of Peter Enns, Ecclesiastes[10]

Burns concludes,

 

Interpreting the whole Bible with a redemptive-historical theme puts the author [Enns] in the difficult position of making a case for this theme in all of the Writings.  Since E. recognizes the polyphony of the Bible, perhaps one could also embrace multiple themes as do recent theologies of the OT. 

 

Ecclesiastes 1:12—2:26

Alexander A. Di Lella, O.F.M., review of Jesús Asurmendi, Du non-sens l’Ecclésiaste[11]

Di Lella reports that Asurmendi explains,

 

Regarding the key word hebel (***), A. outlines the various scholarly interpretations:  “Vanity” (the traditional English translation,) “smoke,” “mist,” and “breath of wind.”  He approves the translation of Michael V. Fox (A Time to Tear Down and a Time to Build up . . . who argues that Qoheleth  8:10-15 constitutes an important literary unity:  hebel appears twice in V. 14, which Fox considers a key verse.  Fox translates the word as “nonsense,” “absurdity.”  The translation accounts for the title of A.’s study.

 

Qoheleth 1:18-26

Matthew S. Rindge, “Mortality and Enjoyment:  The Interplay of death and Possessions in Qoheleth”[12]

Rindge develops a four-column chart, headed with View of Death, Issues Related to Death, View/Role of God, and Possessions.  Ecclesiastes 12:18-19, 22-23, under the Issues Related to Death heading, are identified as meaningless of toil.  According to Ecclesiastes, possessions as divine gifts are meant to be enjoyed, because death makes toil meaningless and inheritance uncertain.

 

Psalm 90:3-4, 5-6, 12-13 (8)

Pastoral Care of the Sick includes this Psalm.[13]

 

Psalm 90:4

Andrew Willet (1562-1621), “Commentary on Genesis 5:5”[14]

 

Willet writes,

 

Yet while they [the patriarchs] enjoyed this long term [of life], the Lord would not allow any of them to attain unto a thousand years:  not for the reason the Hebrews suppose, that God granted seventy of Adam’s thousand years to David; nor for the reason Irenaeus mentions (which seems too curious), namely to make good on what he said to Adam, “in whatever day you eat of it, you shall die,” and because a thousand years with God is as yesterday (Ps. 90:4), Adam died during that first “day,” before he came to a thousand.  Rather, God thereby wished to put the fathers in mind of their mortality, [sic] that although they lived many hundred years, yet none of them filled up a thousand, lest they have flattered themselves for their long lives.  Seeing that a thousand is a number of perfection, God would let none of them attain to a thousand so that we might know that nothing is perfect here.

 

For context, the Council of Trent lasted 1545-1563; Saint Vincent de Paul lived 1580-1660).

 


 

Psalm 90:4

Richard Rohr, Falling Upward: A Spirituality for the Two Halves of Life[15]

Rohr argues,

 

 . . . we are both driven and called forward by a kind of deep homesickness, it seems.  There is an inherent and desirous dissatisfaction that both sends and draws us forward, and it comes from our original and radical union with God.  What appears to be past and future is in fact the same home, the same call, and the same God, for whom “a thousand years are like a single day” (Psalm 90:4) and a single day like a thousand years.

 

Colossians 3:1-5, 9-11

Col 3:1-14

William F. Murphy Jr., “Revisiting Contraception:  An Integrated Approach in Light of the Renewal of Thomistic Virtue Ethics”[16]

Murphy argues,

 

In this Pauline understanding, Christ is the perfect image of God, and the human person is meant to be redeemed from the fallen image “in Adam,” and transformed and sanctified according to this christological exemplar.  This transformation is expressed in a variety of ways in the broader Pauline corpus and is expressed especially in terms of renewal of the mind (Rom 12:2; Col 3:10 [used here]; Eph 4:23), but also through the language of “putting off” the “old nature” (Eph 4:24) and “putting on” Christ (Rom 13:14; Eph 4:24).  Significantly for the purpose of treating the morality of contraceptive acts in terms of virtue, this transformation is expressed in terms of “putting off” vices and growing in virtues (Col 3:1-14) [used here]).

 

Here, Murphy seems to argue that Colossians justifies the difficulty with the central teaching of Humanae Vitae that contraceptive acts are intrinsically evil.  I, for one, am not convinced.

 


 

Colossians 3:1

Sacred Scripture in the Missal[17]

So far, I have not identified just where the 2011 Missal uses these verses.

 

12 “Who will condemn? It is Christ (Jesus) who died, rather, was raised, who also is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us” (Rom 8:34); “…in accord with the exercise of his great might, which he worked in Christ, raising him from the dead and seating him at his right hand in the heavens” (Eph 1:19-20); “If then you were raised with Christ, seek what is above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1); “When he had accomplished purification from sins, he took his seat at the right hand of the Majesty on high” (Heb 1:3); “Therefore, he is always able to save those who approach God through him, since he lives forever to make intercession for them” (Heb 7:25).

 

Colossians 3:3

Richard Rohr, Falling Upward: A Spirituality for the Two Halves of Life[18]

Rohr argues,

 

The movement to second-half-of-life wisdom has much to do with necessary shadow work and the emergence of healthy self-critical thinking, which alone allows you to see beyond your own shadow and disguise and to find who you are “hidden (with Christ) in God,” as Paul puts it (Colossians 3:3).  The Zen masters call it “the face you had before you were born.”  This self cannot die and always lives, and is your True Self.

 

Colossians 3:10[19]

Peter Martyr Vermigli (1599-1562), “Commentary on Genesis 1:26-27”

Vermigli explains, “Christ is the fulness of God’s image according to his divine nature, and in his human nature one finds as much of the divine likeness as is possible.  . . . We have been made so that we might be like him, for we have the capacity for understanding and divine perfections.”

 

Vermigli lived almost a century after Saint Ignatius (1491-1556).  Saint Vincent de Paul is closer (1580-1660).

 

Andrew Willet (1562-1621), “Commentary on Genesis 1:26-27”

 

But to put all out of doubt, the apostle shows how we are to understand the image of God in. . . Colossians 3:10 (“Put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge, after the image of him that created him”).  This image then consists not so much in the substance of the soul or in the natural faculties thereof, as of understanding, free will, memory, but in the knowledge and illumination, holiness and justice of the soul, which are now wrought in us by grace, (but) then were given by creation.

 

In his “Commentary on Genesis 2:19,” Willet also speculates, “Adam also had knowledge of supernatural things, for he was not ignorant of the mystery of the Trinity, according to whose image he was made part of which entails knowledge (Col 3:10).”

 

John Calvin (1509-1564), “Commentary on Genesis 1:26”

Calvin argues,

 

Since the image of God has been destroyed in us by Adam’s fall, what it was originally like must be deduced from its restoration.  Paul says that we are transformed into the image of God by the gospel.  And according to him, spiritual regeneration is nothing else than the restoration of the same image (Col 3:10; Eph 4:24).

 

Calvin lived during the Council of Trent (1545-1563) and before Saint Vincent de Paul (1580-1660).

 

Col 3:11

William R. G. Loader, review of Bruce Hassen, “All of You Are One”:  The Social Vision of Galatians 3:28, 1 Corinthians 12:13 and Colossians 3:11[20]

Loader reports that Hassen comments on the baptismal context and on the implied tension between unity and diversity, while focusing on social effects.  Put on the New self (Colossians 3:10) must be the baptismal context for Colossians 3:11.  Hassan argues that Paul is not seeking conformity in unity.

 

Matthew 5:3

 

Luke 12:13-21

Luke 12:13-21

David J. Downs, review of Christopher L. Carter, The Great Sermon Tradition as a Fiscal Framework in 1 Corinthians:  Towards a Pauline Theology of Material Possessions[21]

Downs reports that Carter does not treat passages like Luke 13:21, rest, eat, drink, be merry, that express hostility toward wealth.  Carter does identify “several possible points of contact between one slice of the Jesus tradition and one Pauline epistle regarding the issue of material possessions.”

 

Luke 12:15

Luke Timothy Johnson, “Hebrews 10:32-39 and the Agony of the Translator”[22]

At one’s life does not consist of possessions, possessions “can refer to any sort of possession.”

 

Luke 12:16-21

John P. Meier, “Is Luke’s Version of the Parable of the Rich Fool Reflected in the Coptic Gospel of Thomas?”[23]

Meier argues that Thomas reflects Luke, rather than the other way around.  Meier elaborates,

 

The most common view among scholars is that Luke’s Gospel is the last of the Synoptics to be written.  Many would place its composition in the period 80-100 C.E., while some would locate its composition instead in the early second century C.E.  If, therefore, the influence of Luke can be detected in CGT 72 + 73, one should, at a minimum, be weary of claiming that CGT represents an early tradition independent of the Synoptics—and indeed, even more historically reliable than the Synoptics. 

 


 

Luke 12:20

Daniel B. Wallace, With Scripture, Subject, and Greek Word Indexes: Greek Grammar:  Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament[24]

After offering a literal translation of the Greek, in this night, they will require your soul from you, Wallace explains.  “Here, `they’ seems to refer to God.  It is not legitimate, however, to infer from this that the Trinity is in view (as some have done), for this same usage was found in classical Greek with reference to one person.”

Wallace points out that this night is a general reference, meaning sometime during the night.  Wallace also points out that God said is in the active voice and that the so-called divine passive or theological passive is not an attempt to avoid using the name of God, but simply a rhetorical device to avoid repetition.  “That God is behind the scenes is self-evidently part of the worldview of the NT writers.  The nature of this book demands that we see him even when he is not mentioned.”

 

 

Personal Notes gave up systematically examining the illiterate 2011 Missal November 25, 2012.  On April 7, 2013, with Reading 045C 2nd Sunday of Easter_A Catholic Bible Study 130407, Personal Notes systematically began to incorporate material from A Commentary on the Order of Mass of The Roman Missal:  A New English Translation:  Developed under the Auspices of the Catholic Academy of Liturgy, Edward Foley (ed.) (Collegeville, Minnesota:  Liturgical Press, 2011).  The hope is that this approach will help the Faithful pray with the new Missal, despite itself.

 

Anscar J. Chupungco, “The ICEL2010 Translation”[25]

 

“May almighty God have mercy on us, forgive us our sins, and bring us to everlasting life” is a mistranslation that Chupungco takes four paragraphs to explain.  This is the third of those paragraphs:

 

First, Chupungco explained the Latin grammar involved.  Last Sunday, Chupungco explained, what a more literal translation would be.  This Sunday Chupungco will explain what the current Missal actually says.  Finally, Chupungco will explain that the 2011 Missal gave up the search for a meaningful formal equivalent translation.  In other words, as the translation now stands, the translation is nonsense.

 

If ICEL2008 is [sic] translated back to Latin, the Latin text would read:  cum peccatis nostris dimissis or “in the company of our forgiven sins.”  Cum is a preposition used with the ablative case to express accompaniment.  If cum is used as an adverb, it requires a complete sentence with a subjunctive verb.

 

 

For more on sources see the Appendix file.  A complete set of Personal Notes, dating from the Fifteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time, July 14, 2002 to the present, is on the web site at www.western-civilization.com/CBQ/Personal%20Notes. 

 



[1] Hans Küng, “The paradox of Pope Francis:  Essay,” National Catholic Reporter: The Independent News Source, Vol. 49, No. 16 (May 24-June 6, 2013), pages 18-19.

 

[2] National Conference of Catholic Bishops, The Roman Missal Restored by Decree of the Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican and Promulgated by Authority of Pope Paul VI: Lectionary for Mass:  For Use in the Dioceses of the United States of America:  Second Typical Edition:  Volume I:  Sundays, Solemnities, Feasts of the Lord and the Saints (Collegeville, Minnesota:  The Liturgical Press, 1988) 751.  Personal Notes refers to this book as the Lectionary.

 

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_of_Assisi (accessed May 26, 2013).

 

[4] Michael Sean Winters, June 1, 2013, Washington, “Pope Francis spotlights social teaching with blunt calls for ethical economy,” http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/pope-francis-spotlights-social-teaching-blunt-calls-ethical-economy (accessed June 1, 2013).

 

[5] Fr. Robert Sirico, president of the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty on the latest Catholic and cultural news appeared on “The World Over” with Raymond Arroyo on EWTN television:  7/6/07, 2/27/09, 4/24/09, 5/29/09, 6/26/09, 8/28/09, 9/25/09, 11/20/09, 1/29/10, 3/5/10, 3/26/10, 5/28/10, 2/17/11, 4/14/11, 6/23/11, 8/18/11, 10/13/11, 11/17/11, 2/9/12, 3/15/12, 5/24/12, 7/12/12, 9/13/12, 12/13/12.  http://www.ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/seriessearchprog.asp?seriesID=-6892288&T1= (accessed June 1, 2013).

 

[6] Joshua J. McElwee, May 29, 2013, “Jesuit chosen as US bishops’ new doctrinal watchdog,”  http://ncronline.org/node/52846 (accessed May 29, 2013). 

 

[7] n.a., The Roman Missal:  Renewed by Decree of the Most Holy Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, Promulgated by Authority of Pope Paul VI and Revised at the Direction of Pope John Paul II:  English Translation According to the Third Typical Edition:  For Use in the Dioceses of the United States of America:  Approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and Confirmed by the Apostolic See (Washington, DC, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011) .  Personal Notes refers to this book as the Missal.

 

[8] UMI Annual Commentary 2012-2013:  Precepts for Living: Based on the International Uniform Lessons, Vincent E. Bacote, Ph.D., (ed.) (Chicago, IL  60643: UMI (Urban Ministries, Inc., 2012) 569-570.

 

[9] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 74, No. 3 (July 2012) 480, 485 [first quote], 482, 487 [second quote], 489, 490.

 

[10] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 74, No. 4 (October 2012) 790.

 

[11] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 75, No. 1 (January 2013) 110.

 

[12] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 73, No. 2 (April 2011) 279.

 

[13] The Roman Ritual: Revised by Decree of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and Published by Authority of Pope Paul VI: Pastoral Care of the Sick: Rites of Anointing and Viaticum: Approved for use in the dioceses of the United States of America by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops and Confirmed by the Apostolic See: Prepared by International Commission on English in the Liturgy: a Joint Commission of Catholic Bishops’ Conferences (New York: Catholic Book Publishing Co. 1983) 294.

 

[14] in Reformation Commentary on Scripture:  Old Testament I: Genesis I—II, (ed.) John L. Thompson (Downers Grove, Illinois:  IVP Academic, An Imprint of InterVarsity Press, 2012) 228.

 

[15] San Francisco:  Jossey-Bass:  A Wiley Imprint, 2011, 89.

 

[16] Theological Studies, Vol. 72, No. 4 (December 2011) 827.

 

[17] Unable to locate the original source.

 

[18] San Francisco:  Jossey-Bass:  A Wiley Imprint, 2011, 130.

 

[19] in Reformation Commentary on Scripture:  Old Testament I: Genesis I—II, (ed.) John L. Thompson (Downers Grove, Illinois:  IVP Academic, An Imprint of InterVarsity Press, 2012) 44, 48, 50, 98.

 

[20] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 73, No. 3 (July 2011) 619.

 

[21] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 73, No. 3 (July 2011) 616.

 

[22] in Translating the New Testament:  Text, Translation, Theology, Stanley E. Porter and Mark J. Boda (eds.) (Grand Rapids, Michigan:  William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2009) 176.

 

[23] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 74, No. 3 (July 2012) 528-549.

 

[24] Grand Rapids: Michigan: Zondervan, 1996, 155, 157, 403 [source of the first quotation], 438 [source of the second quotation].

 

[25] in A Commentary on the Order of Mass of The Roman Missal:  A New English Translation:  Developed under the Auspices of the Catholic Academy of Liturgy, Edward Foley (ed.) (Collegeville, Minnesota:  Liturgical Press, 2011) 140.