French troops deployed in the framework of #NATO eFP multinational bataillon continue to train in #Lithuania. Exercices, interoperability, cooperation : France committed with its NATO Allies. pic.twitter.com/yUT2if8Cns— La France à l'OTAN (@FranceOTAN) February 13, 2018
Tuesday, 20 February 2018
Monday, 19 February 2018
O Almighty God, who willest to be glorified in thy Saints and didst raise up thy servants Saint Francisco and Saint Jacinta Marto to shine as lights in the world: Shine, we pray thee, in our hearts, that we also in our generation may shew forth thy praises, who hast called us out of darkness into thy marvellous light; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
O Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, I adore Thee profoundly. I offer Thee the most precious Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ present in all the tabernacles of the world, in reparation for the outrages, sacrileges and indifferences by which He is offended. By the infinite merits of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary I beg the conversion of poor sinners.
Saint Francisco and Saint Jacinta, pray for us and for Portugal.
Theresa May’s former second-in-command has taken a swipe at Brexit MPs who “won’t accept evidence” in his first interview since being sacked over a porn scandal.
Damian Green, who was axed as First Secretary of State just before Christmas, warned the country was in danger of being run on “faith-based policies” as many MPs dismiss forecasts and reports which don’t sit with their views.
Government reports leaked to BuzzFeed News in January which showed a hit to the economy under various Brexit scenarios were dismissed by Leave campaigners – with Brexit Minister Steve Baker saying civil service forecasts are “always wrong”.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4 in an interview due to be broadcast on Monday evening, Green said: “There’s a great problem of politicians who won’t accept evidence.
“We can all argue about economic forecasts and none of them are 100% accurate but you have to rely on them and if you reject evidence you don’t like then you will end up with faith-based policies.”
Damian Green proves he is still one of us Europhile Tories at heart.
Sunday, 18 February 2018
by Eloise Todd
"This research shows something stark – that regardless of region, age, class or the type of constituency, the number of Labour voters who supported Remain vastly outstrips Labour voters who supported Leave. It shows that Labour is the party of Remain in every age group, class and every region of the country, including in the north and among working-class voters. In this respect, the difference between the northern and southern Labour electorate is only a whisker.
However, it is the demographic breakdown that delivers one of the most important insights. We know that middle-class and skilled workers traditionally supported Remain and working classes were more likely to support Leave nationally. But the Labour frontbench should be aware that the majority of Labour-voting working-class voters supported staying in the EU.
Even more crucially, this research suggests strong Leave voters are only a tiny proportion of Labour’s support. According to the British Election Study, just 9% of Labour’s total vote in 2017 is likely to have been Leave supporters, for whom Brexit was the issue they were most concerned about. By comparison, 30% of Labour’s vote in the BES seems to have been those who voted in favour of EU membership and labelled Brexit as their most important issue."
The idea that there is a large constituency of Labour voters who strongly support Brexit is a myth that has been spun by the pro-Brexit media (which sadly includes the 'neutral' BBC).
Mike Licona got into some hot water with his huge historical tome defending the Resurrection of our Lord. He suggested that the appearance of resurrected saints in the Resurrection narratives was not a factual account, but a fictional element intended to male a theological point. This led to him getting attacked by Evangelical heavy-weight Al Mohler and being put on Norman Geisler's hit list of Evangelical scholars getting wobbly on Biblical Inerrancy. It illustrated the difficulties Evangelicals have in offering reasoned and up to date Biblical scholarship. Undeterred, Licona pursues the theme of the historicity of the Gospels in this book by examining how ancient biography worked. He challenges the assumption that the Gospel writers should be expected to write with the level of forensic accuracy in historical or journalistic writing today. He places the Gospel accounts firmly within the genre of ancient Greco-Roman biography and explores the literary implications of this.
Licona goes into great detail in examining the methods used by ancient biographers such as Plutarch. He finds that such methods include compressing or conflating stories, simplifying accounts, inverting the order of events and simplifying or paraphrasing speeches or sayings. He then compares these biographical accounts to the Gospels and finds evidence of the same techniques being used. In the conclusion he makes his case that these narrative adaptations are in harmony with the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy. He points out that modern speaker and preachers will often adapt the details when re-telling personal stories for the purposes of brevity. These are not generally regarded as falsehoods. He offers the analogy of photographers editing a photo. When taking a photo of a couple, a photographer may edit the photo by adding a haze to suggest the romantic effect of a sunset or make the sky appear blue, when actually it had been a dull white-grey. These would not be considered to be falsehoods. He point out that not only Christians read the Scriptures anachronistically by expecting a forensic accuracy of detail, but also skeptics do the same when they see every difference in detail as a sign that the Gospel accounts are a lie or tall tale.
It must be said that Catholic Biblical scholarship is in a very different place to Evangelical Biblical studies. These days Catholic Biblical scholars will often adopt very liberal positions regarding the critical study of the Gospels. Catholic books, even those intended for a popular readership, often assume the most liberal positions regarding the historical accuracy of the Gospel narratives. This is at a disjunction from the Magisterial teaching of the Church, which holds to the inerrancy of the Bible. There seems little attempt to adjust the conclusions of critical research to the belief in Biblical inspiration and infallibility. I think Catholics can learn from Evangelical Biblical scholars like Licona, who apply the careful use of reasoned research into the Biblical documents while placing their conclusions within a framework that acknowledges the inspired and authoritative nature of those texts.
#PartnershipSunday: 🇵🇱 Polish snipers working with @DaggerBDE Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division completes a situational training exercise in Poland. (Photo by Spc. Marcus Floyd, 13th Public Affairs Detachment) #NATO #StrongEurope pic.twitter.com/FX181kbELB— US Army Europe (@USArmyEurope) February 18, 2018
Saturday, 17 February 2018
This exposition of Sophiology, the doctrine of the Wisdom of God revealed in creation is written by a Byzantine Catholic theologian. The first couple of chapters were a bit perplexing, but once it got going, I found this to be a very informative and useful book that provides a very coherent and articulate presentation of Sophia. Cselenyi presents Sophia as the World Soul, a created being that reflects and mediates God's wisdom and goodness within the cosmos.
As might be expected, Cselenyi devotes a chapter to providing an exposition of the Wisdom literature of the Old Testament, arguing that it shows Sophia to be a genuine personality in her own right. He makes comparisons between this Old Testament sources and the use of Sophia in Philo of Alexandria and the literature of the Kabbalah. Coming to the New Testament, he argues that Saint Paul makes a clear distinction between Wisdom and the Logos. He moves on to the Church Fathers, showing how the early Church Fathers St. Theophilus of Antioch and St. Irenaeus identified Sophia with the Holy Spirit, despite the strong identification by the later Church Fathers of Sophia with the Logos. He points out the difficulties the Church Fathers had in responding to the Arians when they pointed out that Sophia in the Old Testament is a created being. Our author shows how St. Augustine was an early western exponent of Sophiology in that he identified a created Wisdom distinct from the Logos, to whom he ascribed maternal features and identiied with the heavenly Jerusalem. Cselenyi argues that it is clear that St. Augustine viewed this cosmic Sophia as an intelligent being and the soul of the world. After showing the importance of Sophia in Eastern Orthodox liturgy, he explains the Sophianic aspects of the Mariology of St. Gregory Palamas. On the western side of the Christian tradition, our author beautifully demonstrates how St. Hildegard of Bingen saw Sophia as the World Soul within her mystical cosmology. In the western liturgy, the Litany of Loretto highlights the Sophianic status of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Prior to reading this book, I was not familiar with Jakob Boehme, a Lutheran who advocated a mystical theology of Sophia in the 17th century. Boehme had a more developed Mariology than most Protestants and Cselenyi sees in his thought much ecumenical potential. He seems to have been an important influence for Vladimir Soloviev and Sergius Bulgakov. One of those who came under Boehme's influence was a 17th century Englishwoman, Jane Leade. She received visions of Sophia that were similar to those of Vladimir Soloviev. As might be expected, our author devotes a chapter to both Soloviev and Bulgakov. He also looks at Carl Jung's reflections on the concept of Sophia, comparing it to the Christian vision articulated by theologians.
Our author describes Sophia as a created person standing next to God like an angel, since they share a throne. Like the angels, Sophia is a cosmic, rational, spiritual being. She provides a number of powerful argument against the common view that Wisdom in Scripture is purely an allegorical or an impersonal being. He speaks of the 'many-faced Sophia' and accordingly distinguishes several different manifestations of Sophia. Firstly, there is the cosmic Sophia, the World Soul, reflecting the divinely-infused goodness of creation. Secondly, there is the Sophia of salvation that is formed in the people of Israel and the spiritual Jerusalem. Thirdly, Sophia becomes incarnated and embodied in the person of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Fourthly, Sophia is reveled in Christ taking on human nature from His Sophianic Mother. Fifthly, Sophia is manifested in the Church, the Bride of Christ. Sixthly, Sophia is revealed eschatologically in the whole of creation, when God is all in all (1 Cor 15:42). Sophia is also seen in the mysterious relations of the persons of the Trinity. Cselenyi explains the relationship between Sophia and Mary. Following another Sophiological writer, Schipflinger, he argues that while the Logos has two natures, divine and human, Mary and Sophia share one created nature. Sophia is the aeonian or spiritual essence, while Mary is the embodied form of Sophia. He argues that the hypostatic union of Mary and Sophia is closer to the relationship between body and soul than to the hypostatic union of the natures of Christ. Mary's Assumption into heaven entailed her returning to the aeonian existence as created Sophia and in her mediatrix, she takes on the function of Sophia as the World Soul.
While Cselenyi is willing to apply feminine language to the Holy Spirit, following in the tradition of the Syriac Fathers and some Syrian liturgical texts, he is not willing to speak of Spirit-Mary-Sophia, only Mary-Sophia. He rejects the position that Mary is in some sense the incarnation of the Holy Spirit, a position argued for by Leonardo Boff, in a book also titled The Maternal Face of God. Cselenyi is concerned that we do not confuse Sophia with the Holy Spirit and to see Mary in hypostatic union with the Spirit would subsume Sophia's independent personality. I do think that the notion of Boff and St. Maximilian Kolbe that Mary is in some sense an incarnation of the Holy Spirit can be defended. I appreciate Cselenyi's concern not to confuse Sophia and the Spirit, but an high doctrine of deification would accept Sophia returning to the Spirit in eschatological glorification. We might thus suppose two stages of Mary's Sophianic existence; her early life as incarnation of Sophia and her existence after the Annunciation, at which she becomes overshadowed and deified by the Holy Spirit, Sophia and Spirit entering perichoretic unity. It is important to understand that this is a perichoretic union and distinct from the vital hypostatic union of Christ's human and divine natures.
I would have liked Cselenyi to have said something about the Primacy of Christ and how the predestination of Mary makes her the center and locus of creation, though I understand issues of the order of salvation have not occupied those within the Byzantine tradition as those in the west. Some interaction with the thought of Teilhard de Chardin might also have been helpful. Otherwise I think this is a brilliant articulation of Sophiology.
Friday, 16 February 2018
The government should give £10,000 to every citizen under 55, a report suggests.
The Royal Society for the encouragement of the Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (RSA) said it could pave the way to everyone getting a basic state wage.
The idea sees two payments of £5,000 paid over two years, but certain state benefits and tax reliefs would be removed at the same time.
The RSA said it would compensate workers for the way jobs are changing.
The money would help to steer UK citizens through the 2020s, "as automation replaces many jobs, climate change hits and more people face balancing employment with social care", the report said.
Wednesday, 14 February 2018
"The language is all about reconciliation, recognising the “noble sentiments” of the 16 million people who voted to remain in the EU. The substance, however, is all about the hardest of exits from our current economic arrangements with our neighbours.
The Foreign Secretary rejects any alignment with European rules as “intolerable and undemocratic”.
He says it’s “not good enough” to say to 48 per cent of the country: “You lost, get over it” — but the underlying policy proposed in the speech appears to be exactly that.
He wants to be loved by both Remainers and Brexiteers, supported by both Jacob Rees-Mogg and Anna Soubry, healer of the wounds he himself inflicts.
Indeed, it was Johnson himself who best summed up his own position: he wants to have his cake and eat it."
Since we launched Automatic Enrolment in 2012, 9 million employees have been able to save for a financially secure future with a workplace pension. pic.twitter.com/ssSGROiqjO— Conservatives (@Conservatives) February 14, 2018
In all fairness, it was a policy initiated by the previous Labour government.
Tuesday, 13 February 2018
"Jesus Christ is the Last Adam, and we are the family of that Last Adam. It is inconceivable to me that the Church would fail again. Daniel 7 speaks of Christ receiving “dominion” just as Adam received “dominion.” Jesus Christ is spoken of as the New Joshua, and the “dominion mandate” includes all of culture, as is demonstrated by Joshua 18:1, where the “whole land lay subdued” before Israel. From Jericho to Hazor, the whole land is conquered. Revelation reveals Jerusalem-Babylon to be the New Jericho. Jesus Christ rides His chariots and, as the seven trumpets blow, torch Jerusalem. The city of Revelation 20 is the New Hazor- after the millennium, Jesus torches the holy city. The first fire is unto judgment, the last fire is unto salvation. This means that the whole world will be successfully conquered.
But not just evangelized and discipled. It will be gradually transfigured, as life flows more and more into the world. Isaiah spoke of Zion being raised high above the mountains and all nations coming to receive the law. This has begun, but it clearly has some way to go. At the end of the book, Isaiah speaks of a time when a person who dies a hundred years old will be thought of as a young man- death is still in the world, but its power is decreasing. This means that it is before the Second Coming. The world will be gardenified. We will make this world beautiful- all of culture will come under the glorious Christocracy as He subjects all things to Himself."
Unusual to find somebody from Eastern Orthodoxy advocating Postmillennialism, but it's encouraging to read.
Monday, 12 February 2018
It seems an odd title for a book debunking Creationism.
The author of this work is a Seventh-Day Adventist. The Scientific Creationist movement in the Twentieth Century has generally been traced back to the Seventh-Day Adventists, who strongly emphasised a six day creation. They were not the first advocates of Flood Geology; it had its advocates in the 19th century, including some High Church Anglican scholars, however, in the scientific debates of the 19th century, it was defeated and only resurfaced via the Seventh Day Adventists in the Twentieth Century, developing into the Creation Science movement of Evangelicalism. Nevertheless, there are Seventh-Day Adventists who are uneasy about Young Earth Creationism, including the author of this book.
Coffen raises a number of scientific problems with Young Earth Creationism. He makes the important point that geologists involved in the commercial enterprise base their work on the models of conventional geology and not those of Flood Geologists, and they get successful results. He also deals with issues relating to the genre of Genesis 1. He makes a good case that there are two distinct narratives of creation in Genesis, that of chapter one and that of chapter two.
This is worth reading for a critical perspective on Young Earth Creationism.
Sunday, 11 February 2018
Vern S. Poythress, Redeeming Science: A God-Centered Approach, 2006 Crossway Books
This book explores the relationship between science and the Christian faith from a Reformed and Calvinistic perspective. As might be expected, a good deal of the book is taken up with the issues of the age of the Earth and the theory of Evolution. Poythress presents the evidence that the universe is billions of years old and why this creates a tension with Genesis' apparent claim that the universe was made in six days. He surveys the various interpretive strategies that theologians and commentators have used to resolve this tension. This book was written prior to John Walton's groundbreaking 'The Lost World of Genesis,' so Poythress is unfortunately not able to engage with Walton's Cosmic Temple view of creation.
Our author argues that the Flood Geology theories associated with Creation Science and Ken Ham are unsatisfactory. He feels that they do not make a strong enough case against the scientific evidence for the antiquity of the universe. I think he could have provided more detail in providing the evidence against Flood Geology. The case against Flood Geology is simply devastating. I suspect a lot of people reading the book who are inclined to Creationism will not be convinced by the arguments Poythress raises against it here. Poythress quickly dismisses what he calls the 'Religious Only' view of Genesis 1, which holds that the text does not make scientific claims and rather provides a theological polemic against polytheism. He does not mention any advocates of it, but Michael Heiser has argued for this view. To deal with this view adequately, Poythress ought to have spent more time discussing questions of the genre of Genesis 1 and it's Ancient Near East literary context, issues that he does not really explore. The question in my mind is what kind of genre does a creation myth fit into? Did ancient peoples regard the creation myths they told as being 'factual' in the same way we regard claims about scientific facts today? I could be a bit uncharitable and question whether a mathematician like Poythress is the best person to explore such literary issues. He also rejects what he calls the 'Local Creation' view, which holds that the creation account concerns a region of the Earth, centered on the Garden of Eden. He argues that Genesis 1 is clearly cosmic in scope, though he acknowledges the idea has some merits. This view sounds an awful lot like John Sailhammer's Promised Land interpretation, a view that ought to be considered carefully, even if it is not ultimately conclusive.
Like most writers on the topic of Genesis and creation, Poythress does not spend long critiquing the Gap Theory. He rejects it on the basis that the Hebrew in Genesis 1:2 means 'was without form and void' and not 'became without form and void.' This may be correct, but the presence of water over the Earth (which clearly existed prior to the first day of Genesis) surely calls for explanation. Waters in the Old Testament generally represent chaos and evil, which seems to point to some primordial conflict. I am not sure that the classic Gap Theory as presented by Scofield, Chafer and co works, but there is something in the idea that I can't quite shake. There are similarities between the Gap Theory and John Walton's Cosmic Temple view and Sailhammer's Promised Land theory. Catholic philosopher Stephen Webb also used a modified version of the Gap Theory in Dome of Eden.
Poythress presents two views as the best interpretations of Genesis 1, the Mature Creation view and the Analogical Day Theory. He makes the best case for the Mature Creation view that I have seen so far. This view holds that God created the universe in six literal days, giving the an appearance of maturity. The advantage I see in this view, based on his case is that it actually takes account of the scientific data for an ancient universe; it simply bypasses them by positing an instant creation with an hypothetical but nonexistent history. Regarding the fossils that appear in the geological strata, these nonexistent creatures would provide a kind of fictional natural history. Answering the charge from some Young Earth Creationists that this would include death (or rather the appearance of death), Poythress offers the same arguments as Old Earth advocates, that predation in Scripture is seen as demonstrating the glory of God and animal death cannot be traced back to the results of sin. What fascinates me about this view is that it leads to a kind of hypothetical theistic evolutionism. The fossil record shows evidence of evolution, so the Mature Creationist ought to have no problem in saying that hypothetically, animals evoloved from a common ancestor, but in reality, they were miraculously brought into existence in six days. This also means that the fossils of early hominids are part of the fictional natural history created in the six days. Mature Creationists ought to have no problem in affirming that humans appear to have evolved from apes, yet in reality were created on the sixth day miraculously. This would be an interesting theological response to the theory of evolution, but does it really make sense? It's difficult to conceive why God might create evidence to fool us into believing in evolution. Our author talks about how Adam would have been created with an appearance of age. However, we might not be surprised that Adam had 25 or 30 years of maturity and aging, but would we really expect him to have dental fillings, piercings in his ears or scars? Those would indicate events that never happened. Likewise, it is not just the geological strata that reveal an history of events, the stars also show such events as supernovas and galaxies colliding. If the Mature Creation view is correct, these are just optical illusions. This surely damages the whole project of science. How can we trust our senses if God has caused us to see things that never happen? If I look into the night sky, do I really see stars that don't exist and never existed? I find that just too problematic.
While Poythress thinks the Mature Creation is an adequate Young Earth interpretation, he prefers the idea of an Old Earth creation that is analogous to the six days. He argues that the six days are meant to provide us with a pattern for life of six days of labour and one day of rest. His main argument is that the Sabbath rest of God on the seventh day is ongoing and not concluded. Therefore, if the seventh day was not a 24 hour day, then there is no need to see the other six days as 24 hour periods. He sees little problem in the differences between the creation account in Genesis 1 and that posited by science. I'm fine with his explanation of the creation of the sun and moon, but he does not deal with the creation of birds before land animals. If birds were created in the Silurian period, then everything we know about the fossil record is wrong. That he does not see a problem with this suggests that he does not read many books about paleontology or zoology. Regarding the Genesis flood, he is inclined to think this was local and regional rather than universal. He makes the interesting point that the flood waters were a supernatural event and the water might not have behaved in the ordinary fashion of water. This was a possibility I once considered when I was more inclined to the idea of the classic Gap Theory. Critics of the Gap Theory have charged that there is no evidence of a primordial flood occurring and separating our world from the original pre-week creation. However, if such an event was supernatural, this might not be a problem.
Given the huge theological issues raised by the theory of evolution, I was surprised by how little time Poythress devoted to engaging with evolution in comparison with the question of the age of the Earth. He seems to be willing to allow some element of theistic evolution, though a little hesitant. He does not have an huge amount to say about questions of human origin or early hominids. He seems sympathetic to critics of Intelligent Design, but is unwilling to embrace methodological naturalism. I am a little unsure what the project of science would actually look like if scientists were to move away from methodological naturalism.
At times Poythress writes in a tone that communicates a lot of suspicion towards scientists and their work, a patronizing tone often taken by Reformed theologians. He seems unwilling to speak of the conclusions of science regarding the age of the Earth and evolution as settled facts which are not in question and which Christians ought to accept, even though he is inclined to accept an ancient universe and some form of evolution. I suspect a lot of Creationist readers will read this book and still feel comfortable with their Creationist commitments and Poythress does not go far in discouraging them. On the other hand, I suspect a lot of non-Christians may read this book and despite Poythress' moderation; still pick up a feeling of suspicion and hostility toward science.
Grant us, O merciful God, protection in our weakness, that we, who keep the Memorial of the Immaculate Mother of God, may with the help of her intercession, rise up from our iniquities. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.
The Litany of Our Lady of Lourdes
Lord have mercy; Lord have mercy.
Christ have mercy; Christ have mercy.
Lord have mercy; Lord have mercy.
Christ hear us; Christ graciously hear us.
God the Father of Heaven; Have mercy on us.
God the Son, Redeemer of the world; Have mercy on us.
God the Holy Spirit; Have mercy on us.
Holy Trinity, one God; Have mercy on us.
Holy Mary; Pray for us.
Holy Mother of God; Pray for us.
Mother of Christ; Pray for us.
Mother of our Savior; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, help of Christians; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, source of love; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, mother of the poor; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, mother of the handicapped; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, mother of orphans; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, mother of all children; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, mother of all nations; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, mother of the Church; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, friend of the lonely; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, comforter of those who mourn; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, shelter of the homeless; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, guide of travelers; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, strength of the weak; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, refuge of sinners; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, comforter of the suffering; Pray for us.
Our Lady of Lourdes, help of the dying; Pray for us.
Queen of heaven; Pray for us.
Queen of peace; Pray for us.
Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world; Spare us O Lord.
Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world; Graciously hear us, O Lord.
Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world; Have mercy on us.
Christ hear us; Christ graciously hear us.
Let us pray:
Grant us, your servants, we pray you, Lord God, to enjoy perpetual health of mind and body. By the glorious intercession of Blessed Mary ever Virgin, may we be delivered from present sorrows, and enjoy everlasting happiness. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
Our Lady of Lourdes, pray for us, for France and for all who are sick.
Saturday, 10 February 2018
As we celebrate anew the Memorial of the Virgin Saint Scholastica, we pray, O Lord, that, following her example, we may serve you with pure love and happily receive what comes from loving you. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.
The Litany of Saint Scholastica
Lord, have mercy on us.
Christ, have mercy on us.
Lord, have mercy on us.
Christ, hear us, Christ, graciously hear us.
God the Father of Heaven, Have mercy on us.
God the Son, Redeemer of the world, Have mercy on us.
God, the Holy Spirit, Have mercy on us.
Holy Trinity, One God, Have mercy on us.
Holy Mary, pray for us.
Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us.
Holy Virgin of virgins, pray for us.
Saint Scholastica, pray for us. (repeated after each invocation)
St. Scholastica, true sister of St. Benedict,
St. Scholastica, chosen by God from eternity,
St. Scholastica, predisposed to faith by the grace of Christ Our Lord,
St. Scholastica, consecrated to God from thine infancy,
St. Scholastica, always a Virgin incorrupt,
St. Scholastica, espoused to Jesus Christ,
St. Scholastica, scholar of the Holy Ghost,
St. Scholastica, mirror of innocence,
St. Scholastica, model of perfection,
St. Scholastica, pattern of virtues,
St. Scholastica, glory of the monastic life,
St. Scholastica, mother of numberless virgins,
St. Scholastica, imitator of the angelic life,
St. Scholastica, full of faith in God,
St. Scholastica, replenished with hope of the goods of Heaven,
St. Scholastica, ever burning with the love of thy Spouse,
St. Scholastica, resplendent with humility,
St. Scholastica, trusting as a daughter in the Lord,
St. Scholastica, intent on prayer,
St. Scholastica, quickly heard by the Lord,
St. Scholastica, famed for the praise of perseverance,
St. Scholastica, who didst enter the courts of Heaven in the form of a dove,
St. Scholastica, who dost now follow the Lamb whithersoever He goes,
St. Scholastica, who dost rejoice in the delights of thy Spouse forever,
St. Scholastica, adorned with a crown of glory,
St. Scholastica, advocate with God of those who invoke thee,
St. Scholastica, generous patron of those who imitate thee,
St. Scholastica, holy and innocent Virgin,
We sinners, Beseech thee, Saint Scholasica, to hear us.
That you would deign to help us by your most holy and efficacious prayers to God,
we beseech thee, hear us.
That you would deign to cherish and preserve, by your protection, the Benedictine Order
(and this monastery) and all who dwell therein, we beseech thee, hear us.
(That you would admit us into the number of your children,) etc.
That you would deign to raise up, increase, and preserve our devotion toward you,
(That you would deign to preserve in us the perfect observance of the Rule of your blessed
brother, our most holy father Saint Benedict,)
That you would deign, by your supplications, to moisten the dryness of our hearts with the dew
of heavenly grace,
That by your intercession you may eternally unite us to Christ, the Spouse of our souls,
That you may lead us to eternal joys, and to Jesus (our most sweet Spouse),
That you would vouchsafe to hear us,
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world, spare us, O Lord.
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world, graciously hear us, O Lord.
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world, Have mercy on us.
V. Pray for us, O holy Virgin Scholastica,
R. That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.
Let Us Pray.
O God, Who, to show the innocence of her life,
did cause the soul of your blessed Virgin Scholastica
to ascend to Heaven in the form of a dove,
grant, we beseech You,
by her merits and prayers,
that we may live so innocently as to deserve to arrive at eternal joys, through Jesus Christ,
Your only-begotten Son Our Lord,
Who with You and the Holy Spirit lives and reigns,
God, forever and ever. R. Amen.
Saint Scholastica, pray for us, for all Benedictines and for all women consecrated to God.