Adoremus Bulletin - May 2019 Issue

Adoremus Bulletin For the Renewal of the Sacred Liturgy

MAY 2019

News & Views

Vol. XXIV, No. 7

Cultus, Culture, and Counterculture: An Enlightened Monastic Response to Our Secular Dark Age

Pope Francis to Young People: Holiness Takes Effort

By Hannah Brockhaus

Adoremus PO Box 385 La Crosse, WI 54602-0385

Non- Profit Organization U.S. Postage PAID Madelia, MN Permit No. 4

Please see EFFORT on next page

AB/MONASTERY OF SAN BENEDETTO IN MONTE

V

atican City (CNA)—In his follow-up document to October’s youth synod, Pope Francis urged young people to approach holiness not only with the joy and boldness of youth, but with seriousness.

Published April 2, Christus vivit (Christ lives) is Pope Francis’s apostolic exhortation on the Synod of Bishops on young people, faith, and vocational discernment, which took place October 3-28, 2018. It was signed March 25, the Solemnity of the Annunciation, in the Holy House of Mary in Loreto, Italy.

Francis explained that “becoming an adult does not mean you have to abandon what is best about this stage of your lives.”

“Growing older means preserving and cherishing the most precious things about our youth, but it also involves having to purify those things that are not good and receiving new gifts from God so we can develop the things that really matter.”

The 50-page letter is addressed to “all Christian young people” in particular and to the “entire People of God.” Francis stated that while the document was inspired by what emerged from synod discussions it is not exhaustive, but a summary of the proposals he considers most important.

He warned against isolation and lack of community, which modern technology can contribute to, saying, “when we live apart from others, it is

“Does worship animate monastic culture?" asks Benedictine monk, Father Cassian Folsom. “Yes, indeed, in a profound way. In fact, this countercultural stance, this going against the stream, is perhaps one of the most important contributions that monks can make to the Church today.”

Father Cassian Folsom, O.S.B. Editor’s note: On July 23, 2018 Father Cassian Folsom spoke at the Avila Summit sponsored by the Avila Institute in Hanceville, AL. An edited version of Father Cassian’s presentation follows.

T

he conference theme at this year’s Avila Summit is both interesting and provocative: “Worship animating culture.” In my talk, I will offer a monastic response to this conference theme. I will begin by asking a question: Does worship, in fact, animate culture? More particularly, does worship animate our culture?

Certainly not, and the fact that it doesn’t, explains why our culture is so completely in disarray.

Now let me ask the same question in a particularly different way: Does worship animate monastic culture? Yes, indeed, in a profound way, and I would like to describe that cultural world for you. In fact, I’d like to suggest that the monastic experience can serve as a corrective to a culture gone seriously astray.

AB

“ Does worship animate

our culture? Certainly not, and the fact that it doesn’t, explains why our culture is so completely in disarray.”

I will guide you on a tour of this monastic culture by exploring three topics.

The meaning of cultus, in general; the meaning of culture from a monastic point of view; and, finally, the meaning of counterculture, again from a monastic point of view.

Part I: Cultus The word cultus in Latin comes from the verb colere (colo, colere, colui, cultum), which in its root sense means “to care for, guard, protect.” From this root grow two branches of meaning: first, to care for a field or a garden, and hence, to cultivate; second, to care for the gods, to protect the places where they A Culture of God Does today’s culture have you feeling empty inside? Father Cassian Folsom and his brother Benedictines in Norcia have the perfect counter to such nothingness: God!..........................1

Adoremus Bulletin

Two Score and Eight For 48 years, Jesuit Father John M. McDermott has fought the good fight, run the good race—and now reflects on the power of the priestly promise as he continues apace……..6

MAY 2019

Third Person Singular We know the role that Father and Son play in

are venerated, to guard their temples, and hence, to worship. The connection between cultus and culture is present already in the etymology of the word.

(As we continue on this exploration, it would be good if we could use the expression “cult and culture.” There would be a nice ring to it. But since “cult” in English has come to have the very limited meaning of “deviant worship,” I prefer to retain the Latin word cultus.)

The great modern philosopher, Josef Pieper, explored the relationship between cultus and culture in his famous book Leisure the Basis of Culture, published in 1947.1 He argues that “the central element, the heart of leisure (otium), is a festive stance, the attitude of those who are celebrating a feast.”2 But the feast receives the very possibility of its existence and legitimization from worship. “There is no feast without the divinity; there is no feast that is not born from worship,” Pieper writes.

“A feast only preserves its festal character because it continues to receive life from worship.”3 The same thing applies Please see COUNTERCULTURE, page 4 providing mankind with the Eucharist, but as Michael Gama notes, the Holy Spirit also has a part to play in this greatest of all gifts..........8 Eucharist by the Book Roland Millare explains why Lewis Feingold’s new book The Eucharist will prove a permanent fixture in parish libraries and on college bookshelves for years to come....................... 12 News & Views ....................................................2 The Rite Questions.......................................... 10 Donors & Memorials...................................... 11

2 Continued from EFFORT, page 1 very difficult to fight against concupiscence, the snares and temptations of the devil, and the selfishness of the world. Bombarded as we are by so many enticements, we can grow too isolated, lose our sense of reality and inner clarity, and easily succumb.”

But whenever young people are united, they have a “marvelous strength,” he continued. “Whenever you are enthused about life in common, you are capable of great sacrifices for others and for the community. Isolation, on the other hand, saps our strength and exposes us to the worst evils of our time.”

Speaking about vocation, the pope said that, while a gift, it will “undoubtedly also be demanding.”

“In the end, [vocation] is a recognition of why I was made, why I am here on earth, and what the Lord’s plan is for my life,” he stated. Though God will not show a person every detail of his vocation, and one must prudently make one’s own decisions, “like clay in the hands of a potter, I can let myself be shaped and guided by him.”

Pope Francis’s Exhortation to Young People Values Liturgy The apostolic exhortation Christus vivit (Christ lives), which Pope Francis offered to the young people of the Church on April 2, includes a particular focus on the liturgy as a vehicle by which young people can discover God’s will in their lives.

Signed on March 25 by Pope Francis, the letter serves as an afterword to the October 3-28, 2018, Synod of Bishops on young people, faith, and vocational discernment.

In the letter, Pope Francis noted the value that young people place on silence in building a relationship with God. “Many young people have come to appreciate silence and closeness to God,” he said. “Groups that gather to adore the Blessed Sacrament or to pray with the word of God have also increased. We should never underestimate the ability of young people to be open to contemplative prayer. We need only find the right ways and means to help them embark on this precious experience.”

There is also an enthusiasm for the liturgy, Pope Francis noted in the letter, that cannot be denied young people.

“When it comes to worship and prayer,” he writes, quoting from the final report of the October synod, “‘in many settings, young Catholics are asking for prayer opportunities and sacramental celebrations capable of speaking to their daily lives through a fresh, authentic and joyful liturgy.’ It is important to make the most of the great moments of the liturgical year, particularly Holy Week, Pentecost and Christmas. But other festive occasions can provide a welcome break in their routine and help them experience the joy of faith.”

In the letter, Pope Francis singled out the importance of song and music in the liturgy as an ever-ancient ever-new entrée for young people into the prayer of the Church.

“Music is particularly important,” the pope writes, quoting the Synod’s final report, “representing as it does a real environment in which the young are constantly immersed, as well as a culture and a language capable of arousing emotion and shaping identity. The language of music also represents a pastoral resource with a particular bearing on the liturgy and its renewal.”

Vatican: Eucharistic Yuca not on the Table at Amazon Synod Vatican City (CNA)—Vatican officials have said there are no plans to discuss changing the matter of the Eucharist during an upcoming synod for the pan-Amazonian region of South America.

The possibility of changing the kind of bread allowed to be used in the celebration of the Eucharist does “not appear in the Preparatory Document for the Special Assembly next October and therefore is not a subject of the next Synod,” Bishop Fabio Fabene, Undersecretary of the General Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops, told CNA. The clarification comes after a Brazilian Jesuit theologian said last month that the October synod on the Amazon could consider the substitution of wheat bread in the eucharistic species with a host made from yuca— a root plant common in the Amazon.

Father Francisco Taborda, SJ, said that a fundamental shift in the matter of the Eucharist was a likely topic to be addressed during the special session of the Synod of Bishops for the Pan-Amazonian region in October.

Speaking to Crux, Father Taborda suggested that be-

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019

NEWS & VIEWS

cause of the humidity in the Amazon at different times of the year, wheat bread sometimes becomes overly moist—something he suggested could justify a radical departure in sacramental teaching and disciple.

If bread turns too moist, “it’s not bread, and if it’s not bread, it’s not the Eucharist,” he said.

The teaching of the Church on the essential matter for the consecration of the Eucharist is closely regulated.

Canon 924 §2 of the Code of Canon Law states that the bread “must be only wheat.” Similarly, the wine used must be natural and made from grapes and mixed only with water.

Father Mark Morozowich is the Dean of the School of Theology and Religious Studies at the Catholic University of America, an ecclesiastical faculty with special authority from the Vatican to teach theology.

Father Morozowich explained to CNA the principles that govern “enculturation,” or deference to local circumstances, within the Mass.

“The Church has always enculturated the liturgy,” he said. “This is something we’ve done through the centuries in every single place from the very beginning.”

Starting with the first ministry of the apostles, he said, “the Church lived Jesus Christ, proclaimed his cross, death, and resurrection. The Church proclaimed Jesus Christ being present body and soul in the elements of the Eucharist.”

He said that there have been, and continue to be, some regional differences in the matter used in the celebration of the Eucharist, but those differences are limited by the Church’s doctrinal teaching.

“Classically, we can look at the very clear acceptance of the Byzantine rite having a leavened bread for its Eucharist, whereas the Roman Church has an unleavened bread for its Eucharist.”

“Both are different but yet both are valid matter according to their own ritual tradition,” Morozowich said.

“This is something that has been going on for two thousand years.”

“Some people talk about the use of something else besides wheat flour or the use of something besides wine in the Eucharist; one important part of this is certainly about [remembering] what we are expressing in this prayer, but there’s a continuity to the sacrifice of Christ when he was on this Earth. That basic principle needs to be reflected in all these discussions.”

Pope Francis: Sacramental Confession is the Way of Sanctification

By Courtney Grogan Vatican City (CNA)—Pope Francis told priests and seminarians that the sacrament of penance is “the way of sanctification” in which miraculous conversions occur.

“Every single confession is always a new and definitive step towards a more perfect sanctification; a tender embrace, full of mercy, which helps to expand the Kingdom of God, the Kingdom of love, truth and peace,” Pope Francis said March 29, 2019 at the Vatican’s Paul VI Hall.

He was addressing participants in a course on the internal forum organized by the Apostolic Penitentiary.

“Sacramental confession is the way of sanctification for both the penitent and the confessor. And you, dear young confessors, you will soon experience it,” he said.

“As confessors, we have the privilege of constantly contemplating miracle conversions,” Francis said.

“Grace operates within the secrecy of the confessional miracles of which only and the angels will be witnesses,” he added.

Before turning to his prepared text, Pope Francis emphasized the gravity of the internal forum: “This is not a nonsense expression: it is said seriously. The internal forum is an internal forum, and cannot come out into the open.”

“I say this because I have realized that some groups in the Church, appointees, superiors, let us say—mix the two things and take decisions made in the internal fo-

Adoremus Bulletin

Society for the Renewal of the Sacred Liturgy

Adoremus Bulletin (ISSN 1088-8233) is published seven times a year by Adoremus—Society for the Renewal of the Sacred Liturgy, in La Crosse, Wisconsin. Adoremus is a registered 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation of the State of California. Non-profit periodicals postage paid at various US mailing offices.

Change service requested.

Adoremus—Society for the Renewal of the Sacred Liturgy was established in June 1995 to promote authentic reform of the Liturgy of the Roman Rite in accordance with the Second Vatican Council’s decree on the Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium. Adoremus Bulletin is sent on request to members of Adoremus. Suggested donation: $40 per year, US; $45 foreign.

rum for those taken in the external one, and vice versa.

Please, this is a sin!”

Francis then explained that the wisdom of the Church has always safeguarded the sacramental seal with all its moral and juridical strength: “Reconciliation itself is a good that the wisdom of the Church has always safeguarded with all her moral and legal force with the sacramental seal.

“Although not always understood by the modern mentality, it is indispensable for the sanctity of the sacrament and for the freedom of conscience of the penitent; who must be certain, at any time, that the sacramental conversation will remain in the secrecy of the confessional, between one’s conscience that opens to grace, and God, with the necessary mediation of the priest.”

“The sacramental seal is indispensable and no human power has, nor may it claim, jurisdiction over it,” he emphasized.

Pope Francis said that many perceive the sacrament of penance—and with it a sense of sin—to be in crisis in the contemporary world. To this he said that formation of priests is necessary to overcome the crisis to “offer an ever more qualified service capable of really manifesting the beauty of the Divine Mercy.”

“Sacramental absolution, validly celebrated, gives us baptismal innocence, full communion with God,” he explained.

He said the importance of the “ministry of mercy” necessitates adequate formation of confessors, so that each encounter in the confessional is “always a real meeting of salvation, in which the embrace of the Lord is perceived in all its power.”

Liturgical Institute Announces 2019 Young Adult Conference Summertime will be in full-swing by July—and that means time to head back to school—at least as far as the Liturgical Institute at the University of St. Mary of the Lake is concerned. The Institute welcomes students to its 3rd annual Transfiguration Young Adult Liturgy Conference, held this year on July 12-14. Organizers of the three-day event provide students “a first-hand look at what it’s like to attend The Liturgical Institute on our beautiful 1,000-acre campus in Mundelein, Illinois.”

As each conference day will include a sung Mass and chanted Liturgy of the Hours, and a full schedule of classes taught by Institute faculty, the main course of this feast for mind and heart focuses on all things liturgical—but there will also be room enough for some postprandial treats—as a special evening presentation “From Deserts to Desserts” provides participants with a special “liturgical” dessert tasting.

The cost of the conference ($250-$375) covers room and meals. For more information or to register, visit the conference website: www.betransfigured.com.

Martyred Seminarians Provide Witness for Priests, Bishops

By Courtney Grogan Vatican City (CNA)—Pope Francis said that the nine Spanish seminarian martyrs beatified on March 9 provide a witness to priests and bishops to remain pure and generous.

Blessed Ángel Cuartas Cristóbal and eight of his seminary classmates [Mariano, Jesus, Cesar Gonzalo, Jose Maria, Juan Jose, Manuel, Sixto, and Luis] were martyred amid the “Red Terror” persecution of the Church during the Spanish Civil War in the 1930s in which more than 6,800 clergy or religious were killed.

“These young aspirants to the priesthood loved the Lord so much as to follow him on the way of the Cross.

Their heroic witness helps seminarians, priests, and bishops to remain pure and generous, faithfully serving the Lord and the holy people of God,” Pope Francis said Please see NEWS & VIEWS page 10 EDITOR - PUBLISHER: Christopher Carstens MANAGING EDITOR: Joseph O’Brien CONTENT MANAGER: Jeremy Priest GRAPHIC DESIGNER: Danelle Bjornson OFFICE MANAGER: Elizabeth Gallagher PHONE: 608.521.0385 WEBSITE: www.adoremus.org MEMBERSHIP REQUESTS & CHANGE OF ADDRESS: info@adoremus.org LETTERS TO THE EDITOR P.O. Box 385 La Crosse, WI 54602-0385 editor@adoremus.org

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE The Rev. Jerry Pokorsky = Helen Hull Hitchcock The Rev. Joseph Fessio, SJ

Contents copyright © 2019 by ADOREMUS. All rights reserved.

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019

Quasimodo out of the Ashes

3

By Christopher Carstens, Editor

AB/WIKIMEDIA

M

any faithful are familiar with Laetare Sunday, so named for the Entrance Antiphon, or Introit, at Mass for the Fourth Sunday of Lent: Lætare Jerusalem: et conventum facite omnes qui diligitis eam…, “Rejoice, Jerusalem, and all who love her….”

Advent has the similarly well-known Guadete Sunday from its proper Entrance Antiphon, Gaudete in Domino semper, “Rejoice in the Lord always” sung (sic!) at the beginning of the Third Sunday of Advent.

But fewer Catholics may be aware that the Second Sunday of Easter also bears a proper name from its Introit: “Like newborn infants, you must long for the pure, spiritual milk, that in him you may grow to salvation, alleluia,” Quasi modo geniti infantes….

It was on this Second Sunday of Easter, Quasimodo Sunday, that Notre Dame’s most famous—and tragic— child of French fiction first made his appearance at the cathedral’s doorstep as the main character of Victor Hugo’s early 19th century masterpiece The Hunchback of Notre Dame. In the novel, the luckless Quasimodo, deformed at birth, is despised by the people of Paris; and yet the archdeacon who discovers the hideous child on the morning of that Second Sunday of Easter provides this foundling a new name – and a new life – as the bell ringer at the heart of Our Lady’s Cathedral where he demonstrates that honor and nobility can reside within even the most disturbing appearances.

Hugo’s grotesque yet noble Quasimodo seems an especially fitting figure to consider after the April 15 fire at Notre Dame Cathedral. Catholics, Parisians, Frenchmen, and anyone appreciative of Western civilization are rightly saddened by how extensively the fire had damaged this marvelous building. Notre Dame Cathedral signifies beauty, culture, history, identity, and for Catholics everywhere, it symbolizes Jesus, perhaps like no other Catholic church in Europe. Its history of faithfulness and inspiring architecture epitomize in many ways the True Temple of which you and I and all the baptized are living stones.

By God’s grace there was no loss of life resulting from this accident; nonetheless, much of the Western world is heartsore to see how Notre Dame Cathedral’s actual stones, timbers, and windows have suffered by this ordeal. For, like the hunchback, whose name is ever associated with this majestic structure, today, Notre Dame lies in smoking ruins, disfigured—though (like Quasimodo) perhaps not beyond repair.

May Notre Dame Cathedral rise to new life out of the ashes “like a newborn infant” in all its purity and vigor!

Quasimodo and his Mother Church also rightly rep-

Quasimodo and his Mother Church rightly represent Catholics (deformed in our sinfulness yet capable of redemption) and our Mother Church. May all the baptized and their clergy “like newborn infants” raise a new Temple out of our razed ruins!

resent Catholics and our Mother Church. Even while she is immaculate in her holiness, the Church often seems deformed by the soot and blot of her sinful sons and daughters (as too many news stories over this past year have shown). The walls of Christ’s Church (likened to a vine) have been “broken down,” “ravaged,” and “burnt with fire” as the psalmist sings in Psalm 80. The radiantly beautiful Heavenly City to come—which is itself a Temple—is, in the words of Pope Benedict XVI, “still under construction.” While the Chief Architect (Hebrews 11:10) builds the Church on the foundations of apostles and saints, and caps it with Christ himself (Ephesians 2:20), it remains for the baptized to be chis-

eled, shaped, and fit into the body of the Church.

May all the baptized and their clergy “like newborn infants” raise a new Temple out of our razed ruins!

When Lent began so many weeks ago, we humans were marked with ashes and reminded that we are dust, and unto dust we shall return. So be it. But our end isn’t simply a return to our earthly beginnings. For “from the dust he lifts up the lowly, from the ash heap he raises the poor, to set them in the company of princes, yes, with the princes of his people” (Psalm 113:7-8). Let us pray that Notre Dame—our Mother, and Mother of the Church—bring up newborn infants worthy of her Son’s Church.

Mary, Mother of the Church tions between Mary and the Church, since she is the mother of Him Who, right from the time of His Incarnation in her virginal bosom, joined to Himself as head of His Mystical Body which is the Church.

Mary, then, as Mother of Christ, is mother also of all the faithful and of all the Pastors.

It is therefore with a soul full of trust and filial love that We raise Our glance to her, despite Our unworthiness and weakness. She, who has given Us in Jesus the fountainhead of grace, will not fail to succor the Church, now flourishing through the abundance of the gifts of the Holy Ghost and setting herself with new zeal to the fulfillment of its mission of salvation.

By Pope Paul VI

“Mother Of The Church” Therefore, for the glory of the Virgin Mary and for Our own consolation, We proclaim the Most Blessed Mary Mother of the Church, that is to say of all the people of God, of the faithful as well as of the Pastors, who call her the most loving Mother. And We wish that the Mother of God should be still more honored and invoked by the entire Christian people by this most sweet title.

This is a title, Venerable Brothers, not new to Christian piety; it is precisely by this title, in preference to all others, that the faithful and the Church address Mary.

It truly is part of the genuine substance of devotion to Mary, finding its justification in the very dignity of the Mother of the Word Incarnate.

AB/WIKIMEDIA

Editor’s note: Pope Francis announced in March 2018 his decision to add “Mary, Mother of the Church” as an optional memorial to the Monday after Pentecost (June 10 in 2019). Cardinal Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, said upon the announcement of the new observance that Pope Francis wishes to “encourage the growth of the maternal sense of the Church in the pastors, religious and faithful, as well as a growth of genuine Marian piety.’”

In the Divine Office, proper texts for this liturgical observance will be translated and included in the second edition of the Liturgy of the Hours. An unofficial translation of the second reading from the Office of Readings, taken from Pope Paul VI’s address at the close of the Second Vatican Council’s Third Session on November 21, 1964, is provided here courtesy of EWTN website.

Mater Ecclesia: Mary, Mother of the Church, from St. Peter’s Basilica, Rome.

Basis: Divine Maternity Just as, in fact, the Divine Maternity is the basis for her special relationship with Christ, and for her presence in the economy of salvation brought about by Jesus Christ, thus it also constitutes the principal basis for the rela-

Yet Close To Us And Our trust is even more lively and fully corroborated if We consider the very close links between this heavenly Mother of Ours and mankind. Although adorned by God with the riches of admirable prerogatives, to make her a worthy Mother of the Word Incarnate, she is nevertheless very close to us.

Daughter of Adam, like ourselves, and therefore our sister through ties of nature, she is, however, the creature who was preserved from Original Sin in view of the merits of the Savior, and who possesses, besides the privileges obtained, the personal virtue of a total and exemplary faith, thus deserving the evangelical praise beata quae credidisti (blessed art thou who believe). In her earthly life, she realized the perfect image of the disciple of Christ, reflected every virtue, and incarnated the evangelical beatitudes proclaimed by Christ. Therefore in her, the entire Church, in its incomparable variety of life and of work, attains the most authentic form of the perfect imitation of Christ.

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019 and in this way the learning of it is to be undertaken.”12 Note that the learning of the entire psalter by heart was the expected norm.

Would that our memories today were as retentive and agile as those of our forefathers!

AB/MONASTERY OF SAN BENEDETTO IN MONTE

4

“Our society is anthropocentric,” says Father Cassian Folsom, “with the focus on the individual. This contrast is often experienced in the liturgy. When young people (with no nostalgic baggage of any kind) experience the traditional Mass in the Extraordinary Form, they see at once that this action, in the first place, is about God.” Here, at the Ecce, Agnus Dei (“Behold, the Lamb of God”), monks prepare to receive Holy Communion at the Palm Sunday Mass.

Cont. from COUNTERCULTURE, page 1 to leisure, or otium: its ultimate possibility and legitimacy has its origin and root in the festive repose of the cultus. In other words, otium requires sacred time reserved for the gods, and sacred space reserved for the gods. This space cannot be used for other purposes on principle, Pieper explains. It cannot be part of the totalitarian world of work—because in that world there can be no unproductive piece of ground, nor a period of time that is not used profitably.

The world of the “worker” is irremediably poor and shabby, he goes on to say, even when it wallows in the superabundance of material goods. On the basis of the economic principle alone, such a world cannot give any real richness or prosperity. For wherever there is something left over, even that which is over-and-above is re-absorbed into the system, reused on the principle of rational utility. “Work doesn’t make you rich, but hunchbacked,” says an old Russian proverb.4 On the contrary, it is natural for worship to produce—even in the midst of extreme want—a portion that is super-abundant and rich, because at the center of worship is sacrifice. And what is the true meaning of sacrifice? According to Pieper, it is a spontaneous, gratuitous offering.5 Pieper then makes an observation that is extremely obvious, but quite politically incorrect. In our Western Christian culture, he says, that sacrifice is above all the sacrifice of Christ, celebrated and realized in the Mass.6 Pieper’s conclusion logically follows: “Thus in the liturgical celebration, and only there, do we find the reserve of energy that the world of work cannot ever consume. An oasis of peace is formed, where the exhausting vortex of activity cannot penetrate: an area of true richness, of profusion, of extravagance detached from any functionalism—that is, the area of festive time.

It is only in this space of festive time that leisure can realize itself and reach its full development.”7 But in our own culture, we have not set aside this time, either sufficiently or at all. There follows, Pieper notes, the inevitable consequence: detached from the world of worship, driven away from its sphere of influence, leisure (and the feast) remain paralyzed.

Separated from worship, leisure becomes idleness, and work becomes inhuman.8 We might push Pieper’s conclusion a bit further. Culture always comes from the worship of something, the veneration of what we care most deeply about.

In Western civilization, a glorious culture of extraordinary beauty developed from the worship of God in the Catholic liturgy, in particular in the sacrifice of the Mass. Since that culture has gradually and progressively separated itself from its origins in the Catholic cultus, it is no longer sustainable. In many places in Europe, splendid cathedrals which once throbbed with life are now reduced to museums: empty shells of a past no longer understood, no longer loved—indeed, a past that is sometimes hated.

Yet, for what it’s worth, our present age still has a culture—which leads us to a question: If culture is always based on worship, and our culture is no longer based on the liturgical worship of the sacrifice of the Mass, on what is it now based? The culture has simply chosen new gods: they are worshipped in shopping malls, banks, and centers of political power. Every family has an altar—or several altars—in the home, where the divinities can be worshipped on flickering screens. In the last decade or so,

two to three hours given to lectio divina.

Compare this to the modern eight-hour work day, and the huge importance given to the cultus is clearly seen.

But divine worship in the monastery doesn’t happen automatically. In addition to brick and mortar and an open calendar, it requires three areas of preparation: the formation of the mens (mind), the exercise of the artes (arts), and the program of conversatio (the monastic way of life).

Mens at Work When describing the chanting of the Divine Office, St. Benedict urges that the mind (mens) be in harmony with the voice. To form the mind for the central act of worship, the Opus Dei, it was necessary to memorize the psalter. Other reading material consisted of “the inspired books of the Old and New Testaments” and “explanations of Scripture by reputable and orthodox catholic Fathers.”10 It is clear that the humus (ground) of monastic culture was made

“ If culture is always based on worship, and our secular culture is no longer based on the liturgical worship of the sacrifice of the Mass, on what is it now based?” devotion to these divinities has so increased that everyone, even the youngest child, has a hand-held worshipping device, so as to be connected to the new divinities at all times.

Given such a remarkable state of affairs, the monastic culture, in contrast, is truly a shock to the system.

Part II: Culture In the monastery, the cultus is the heart of everything. For St. Benedict, this means the Opus Dei, the Work of God, or the Divine Office. The Opus Dei is the heart of the matter, and this is demonstrated clearly by the space and the time dedicated to it. The oratory is the sacred space, and “nothing else is to be done or stored there.”9 In time, the modest oratory of St. Benedict developed into splendid churches, to the extent that the monastic church of Cluny III was the largest church in Christendom, surpassing even the old St. Peter’s in Rome. As these church-building efforts indicate, the cultus requires sacred time as well as sacred space, and in St. Benedict’s schema about five hours a day are dedicated to the Opus Dei (including Mass) and

up of the liturgy, the Bible, and the Fathers. During Lent, each monk was to receive a book from the library (probably a volume containing a part of the Scriptures) and read it straight through.11 St. Benedict’s primary source, the Rule of the Master, describes in practical terms just how the formation of the mind was to take place. During the afternoon period before Vespers, “the various deaneries having been separated from one another in different places, some as directed by their deans are to read, others listen, others learn and teach letters, others study psalms which they have transcribed.

When they have mastered and memorized them perfectly, let their deans take them to the abbot to recite by heart the psalm or canticle or lesson of any kind.

And as soon as he has recited it in its entirety, let him ask prayers for himself.

Then when those present have prayed for him, the abbot concludes and the one who has done the reciting kisses the abbot’s knees. Either the abbot or the deans immediately order something new to be transcribed, and after anything has been transcribed, before he studies it, let him again ask those present to pray for him;

State of the Artes But intellectual formation of the individual monk for the act of worship is not enough. The full range of the arts and professional skills (artes) are also necessary. When speaking of the artisans of the monastery, St. Benedict clearly expresses the goal of all such activity: so that in all things God may be glorified.13 These artes are numerous: architecture, the fine arts, stone, glass, textiles, precious metals, candles, book production, copying, agriculture, and so on. The monuments to the beauty of monastic architecture are too many to be counted. Most of these churches and monastic buildings are of stone. In northern Europe, stained glass beautified many churches. Work in cloth and fabric is necessary for liturgical vestments. Gold and silver are used for the chalice and other vessels of the altar. Beekeeping is necessary for the production of candles, animal husbandry for raising the many sheep needed for parchment. The monastic economy was usually based on agriculture, and monasteries always strove to be self-sufficient. All of these artes are united in their primary objective: the glorification of God in the Opus Dei. Join the Conversatio Both intellectual formation and training in the arts presuppose the monastic subject and his entire way of life. This complex of spirituality, customs, practices, and relationships is called conversatio in Latin, or politeia in Greek. It includes the primary interior work of the monk, that is, the eradication of vices and the acquiring of virtues. This life of discipline and asceticism takes place in community, where the monk strives for obedience, mutual service, and charity. The monk’s offering of himself in this way of life, this conversatio, is best expressed by the profession ritual, in which the monk places his vow chart on the altar at the moment of the Offertory, to symbolize the offering of his life to God.14 In the monastic culture, intellectual formation (the mens), training in the arts (artes), and the whole complex of usages and practices (conversatio) are clearly ordered to the cultus, the worship of God. Part III: Counterculture In the Middle Ages, the monastic culture was perhaps the highest expression of what the Catholic culture in general aspired to be: a holy order with God as the center. In the Renaissance period, on the other hand (from the 14th to the 17th centuries), there was a gradual shift: the boast now was that man was the center of a new order. This fundamental shift was given philosophical backing in the Enlightenment, with the relegation of God to the periphery of things, excluded from the public square if not denied completely.

There are a number of recent studies which trace this progressive decline.15 For a long time, the Church fought against these cultural shifts, especially in the 19th- and 20th-century battles against Modernism. But in the Vatican II period and the succeeding decades, the Church decided to embrace society, and ended up being absorbed by it. The result is the death of Christian culture, as John Senior so eloquently put it.16 Of course, this state of affairs differs considerably from one place to another, but the process of secularization continues apace and the institutional structures of the Church, willy-nilly, tend to aid and abet this secularization. So the young Catholic who, courageously searching for

5

life’s meaning, stumbles upon a classical monastery and experiences a serious cultural shock. Because our society is so aggressively secularized, the monastic way cannot be other than countercultural. In fact, this countercultural stance, this going against the stream, is perhaps one of the most important contributions that monks can make to the Church today.

What would this young man experience? After many conversations with such seekers, I would like to present a synthesis of their experience in a series of contrasts. I have drawn them sharply, in order to make the point, although in real life, things are usually not quite so black and white.

Monastic life is God-centered, theocentric. Our society is anthropocentric, with the focus on the individual. This contrast is often experienced in the liturgy. As I have argued elsewhere, many of the postconciliar liturgical reforms were based on an Enlightenment anthropology,17 and when young people (with no nostalgic baggage of any kind) experience the traditional Mass in the Extraordinary Form, they see at once that this action, in the first place, is about God. Since monks spend so much time engaged in the Divine Office, they even tell time by the canonical hours. “When shall we meet?” the young man might ask. “Right after None,” might be the response. The cultus is at the core.

In the monastery, the emphasis is on brotherhood, not on individualism. If a monk is using a book, he might write (in

“ The young Catholic, courageously searching for life’s meaning, stumbles upon a classical monastery and experiences a serious cultural shock.” pencil) on the cover page only a collective claim to ownership: ad usum fratris Benedicti (“for the use of a Benedictine brother”). This book is not his, but for his use. We do things together. St. Benedict insists that everyone be at the common meals, and on time. In our fragmented society, rarely does a family sit down for a meal together—let alone find their identity in the family unit. The question a monk asks himself is not “What is best for me?” but “What is best for the common good?”

Our young friend would experience silence. The monk lives in silence the way a fish lives in water. He thrives in it. Our world, in contrast, is a place of constant noise, and our liturgies tend to be nothing but a barrage of words. Read Cardinal Sarah’s wonderful book called The Power of Silence.18 Sometimes when guests come to the monastery, the silence frightens them, because with all distractions removed, they are forced to listen to their own interior noise. Silence makes you face yourself.

A corollary of silence is the deliberate reduction of stimuli. We don’t listen to the radio, we don’t watch television, we don’t read the newspaper. Internet use is strictly regulated—and we don’t have iPhones. This is not an oppressive imposition, but a free choice in order to reduce images, because images make an impression on the memory and cannot be easily erased. Our society is over-stimulated, at every moment, from morning to night. The young man who comes to the monastery experiences a period of detoxification.

There is a corollary to the labor of reducing external stimuli. That is, the monk tries to purify his memory bank and fill it with good images by accepting beneficial stimuli. In other words, the

AB/MONASTERY OF SAN BENEDETTO IN MONTE

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019

What do monks do all day, when they’re not in church? They work. Our society both hates work and is addicted to work. The very construct of a 40-hour work week and the SaturdaySunday weekend is a modern notion, completely unknown to the ancients and unheard of in monastic culture. Even when monks grow older, they don’t stop working, but are given an assignment that is less strenuous. As one abbot was fond of saying: “Monks don’t retire; they just die.”

monk remakes his symbolic imagination. In earlier centuries before electronic images existed, the human imagination was filled with scenes of daily life. In monastic culture, the stimuli came especially from the Bible and the liturgy.

St. Benedict knew that not all images, even from the Bible, were positive, and so for the common reading before bedtime, he excludes “the Heptateuch (the first seven books of the Bible) and the Books of Kings, because it will not be good for those of weak understanding to hear these writings at that hour; they should be read at other times.”19 Images of sex and violence (even in scripture) are not helpful before going to sleep.

What would St. Benedict say today, when children are exposed to these things on TV from the tenderest age? On the one hand, stimuli must be controlled and reduced. On the other hand, the human imagination, which is the seat of so much creativity, must feast upon good things.

In some of my past conversations with some of our monks, it soon became apparent that their symbolic imaginations were formed by the TV shows and movies they watched during their youth.

What do monks do all day, when they’re not in church? They work. There is a wonderful word from the patristic tradition called philergia, which Pope Benedict XVI used in one of his Wednesday catecheses when describing the life of St. Theodore the Studite.20 Philergia means “the love of work.” Monks love to work. In fact, the monastic tradition has a rather refined theology of work, making distinctions between negotium (excessive work), otium (the paradox of busy leisure), and otiositas (idleness). Our society both hates work and is addicted to work. The very construct of a 40-hour work week and the Saturday-Sunday weekend is a modern notion, completely unknown to the ancients and unheard of in monastic culture. Even when we grow older, we don’t stop working, but are given an assignment that is less strenuous.

One of the abbots of my early monastic life was fond of saying: “Monks don’t retire; they just die.”

Which brings us to the topic of suffering and death. In the monastic culture, suffering is expected and death is a door to the next life. In the Rule, St. Benedict

describes in one brief sentence what the monk can hope for in his monastic life: “Never swerving from his instructions, then, but faithfully observing his teaching in the monastery until death, we shall through patience share in the sufferings of Christ that we may deserve also to share in his kingdom.”21 He also says: “Keep death daily before your eyes.”22 This calm acceptance of suffering and death is in marked contrast to our contemporary society, where the slightest suffering is to be avoided if at all possible, and the reality of death is simply denied.

In our throw-away culture, material things are so abundant as to have little value. In the Rule of St. Benedict, on the other hand, even the tools of the monastery are to be treated as if they were the sacred vessels of the altar.23 In other words, material things have a sacramental value, in that they point to a spiritual reality. Put very simply, creation points to the Creator. The monk is careful, however, to put his hope in God, not in the creation which God has made. God is the primary good, and all other goods are secondary. That allows the monk to make use of created things with a spirit of detachment. For example, in the recent earthquakes in Norcia, we lost everything: church, monastery, books, artwork—but we escaped with our lives.

It was hard, but I think the monks dealt with this tragedy more easily than the townspeople, because we know that all is fleeting: sic transit gloria mundi. This detachment gives us a certain freedom. In this regard, we find in the writings of St. Augustine a very useful distinction that entered into the orations of the Church’s liturgy: I mean the distinction between utor (to make use of) and fruor (to enjoy for its own sake). We make use of the material things of this world and we take care of them lovingly. If we try to enjoy them as if they were a primary good, we will inevitably be disappointed. Only God can be enjoyed in that way. All this our young vocation visitor finds different and intriguing.

In order to detach himself from material things, the monk needs a strong dose of asceticism. Askesis is the Greek word for the strenuous training of an athlete, and the monks are athletes of God. The classic forms of asceticism—prayer, fast-

ing, and vigils—are woven into the fabric of monastic life. Self-discipline and self-denial are the daily tools of our craft, and they produce an interior freedom that is gloriously liberating. Our Western society, on the other hand, is pampered, soft, flabby. The great ideals are comfort and wellness. Advertisement blatantly promotes self-indulgence. Many young people today have no sense of sacrifice.

Let me give another earthquake example.

Those who suffered most because of the earthquake were the people in their 40’s and 50’s, who were raised with plenty of everything. The older generation, on the other hand, those who had lived lives of great sacrifice and often material poverty, handled the earthquake with greater fortitude.

The monk strives to strip away illusion and live in reality. Even when that reality is difficult or harsh or ugly, it’s better to face it than to live in a dream world.

Only if we are honest with ourselves can we learn humility, a virtue that St. Benedict prizes over all others. The young man who comes to the monastery from our secular society comes from a world of virtual reality, where hours and hours are spent on Facebook or the iPhone or whatever device has been most recently invented. I have sat at table with Italian friends—who place a high value on table fellowship—and waited in vain to start a conversation, because the person across from me spent 20 minutes on his iPhone, trying to find a photo to send to someone else in the same room. The absurdity of the situation is extreme. The person across from me is real; the photo in the iPhone is not real. How many people have come to the monastery for spiritual direction, suffering greatly because of the difficult situations of their lives! Often the monk can patiently show them how to accept the reality of things, and they feel that a weight has been lifted from their shoulders. Reality is wonderful therapy, but not everyone can take it.

One last element of monastic culture is stability. Monks make a vow of stability: to live and die with this particular group of people in this specific place.

Stability brings with it love of the place, so monks tend to beautify their surroundings and make their monastery an oasis of peace. But even more important, stability forges lasting fraternal bonds.

Stability means you can’t run away when things get tough, when situations of conflict develop, when real or perceived offenses weigh heavily upon you. Often, by persevering through difficult times, the monk grows stronger—he has been tried in the furnace of affliction like silver seven-times refined. When life becomes monotonous, he learns how to go deeper.

When relationships become difficult, he learns what real charity means. He puts down roots like an oak tree. All this is in marked contrast to our contemporary society, where everything is in flux, permanent commitments are avoided like the plague, marriages are broken and families are scattered. If our young man should go away and come back twenty years from now, by the grace of God he would find the same monks there, greyer perhaps, but flourishing like a cedar, planted in the house of God. The monastic counterculture tends to produce this remarkable result: it makes the monks joyful. In addition, they acquire that quality which belongs properly to Christ, who in the Byzantine tradition is called Philanthropos, the Lover of Men. The monk, as a result of his formation in this way of life, likewise becomes a lover of men. He knows his own frailty and so can accept the frailty of others. He knows human nature, and so experiences a special unity with all men, to whom he is united in that same human nature. In short, he can say Yes to all that is authentic and good, because he has said No to falsehood and evil—within himself, in Please see COUNTERCULTURE, page 10

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019

How I Answered When the Office Called: A Priest of 48 Years Reflects on the Priestly Promises of the Rite of Ordination

AB/COPYRIGHT DIOCESE OF LA CROSSE, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

6

As illustrated in this picture of Juan Pedro Roblez Baltazar pledging himself to Bishop William P. Callahan at the Cathedral of St. Joseph the Workman, La Crosse, WI, during his June 2017 ordination, the priest to be newly ordained places his hands in those of the ordaining bishop and promises obedience to his bishop or religious superior. “That is where the shoe rubs,” writes Father John McDermott, S.J. But Christ came to do his Father’s will, not his own. A priest has to trust that the will of God will be worked through ecclesial appointments. His promise of obedience summons him to take the risk of crucified love.

By John M. McDermott, S.J.

T

he time has flown quickly since the day 48 years ago when I stood before the ordaining bishop and made promises “to exercise the ministry of the word worthily and wisely, preaching the Gospel and teaching the Catholic faith” and “to celebrate faithfully and reverently…the mysteries of Christ, especially the Sacrifice of the Eucharist and the Sacrament of reconciliation, for the glory of God and the sanctification of the Christian people.” I did not realize at the time all that would be demanded by those promises. Since I was educated in Germany by orthodox professors, the post-conciliar confusion engulfing the Church in the United States had barely touched me. That would change in the years ahead as I witnessed strange liturgical excesses, the near-demise of the practice of confession, and explanations of faith and morals more in accord with subjective wishes than with the traditional mind of the Church.

Confession, Thanksgiving, Sacrifice The barque of Peter had to sail through heavy weather and many sailors were ready to jettison whatever they found burdensome. As a consequence, the jettisoning of traditional ballast rendered the barque lighter and more susceptible to raging swells. The new emphases of Vatican II were pushed beyond measure by many theologians and priests. Admittedly, most did not intend to undermine the Church’s witness to Christ’s truth; they rather thought that they were adapting the message to the modern world: aggionamento. Yet many also cultivated a

sense of disillusion or even anger insofar as the Council’s alleged novelties seemed to put into question what they had previously accepted on authority in the seminary. The continuity with Christ seemed to be broken and each theologian seemed intent on rethinking all of reality.

Fortunately, many sane, intelligent, and holy priests remained faithful to their calling and strengthened youngsters like myself. I also recognized that, despite the modern tendency to see all men as equally oriented to God through various

“ I knew that I needed forgiveness, and if I had to go frequently to confession, most other people probably did too.” religions, a lot of sin existed in the world, and not only out there in others, but also in me. Despite the theological post-conciliar prating by others about “mankind come of age,” my experience of the world strengthened my conviction that original sin touches us all. We live in a fallen world. Concupiscence did not disappear because Americans were urged to believe in themselves and were persuaded that everyone was basically good and needed only the proper education to be convinced where their true happiness lay, i.e., as defined by a society constantly changing. I knew that I needed forgiveness, and if I had to go frequently to confession, most other people probably did too. So I was always willing to hear confessions

“ I knew that I should bring Christ to others and not invent new liturgies for myself. When such important realities as the Eucharist become subject to arbitrary manipulation, the sense of mystery vanishes.” and urged others to go to confession.

Most salutary, however, was the blessed Eucharist. If Jesus is really present in the Eucharist, not all religions can be considered equally valid; those denying his presence have to be erroneous. Moreover, if Jesus is really present in the Eucharist, nothing more important can be found on this earth. He is an infinite gift to me and everyone else through the Church’s ministry. For that reason, I knew that I should bring Christ to others and not invent new liturgies for myself. When such important realities as the Eucharist become subject to arbitrary manipulation, the sense of mystery vanishes, and without mystery religion is reduced to the confines of a finite mind and soon proves ridiculous. While the Mass is a celebration as well as a sacrifice, to emphasize the former to the neglect of the latter diminishes its importance in a society always anxious to celebrate and have fun.

The sacrificial aspect of the Mass reminds us that we do not save ourselves.

We have to receive salvation bought at the price of the unjust murder of God’s only Son. Ultimately love is not what fulfills me, but what causes me to sacrifice myself for God and others. Paradoxically, self-sacrificial love will be rewarded precisely because it is gratuitous and does not seek a reward. The basic mystery of

Christianity announces that only in losing oneself does one find oneself. So serious is the challenge with which the Mass confronts us that we too have to sacrifice ourselves if we are to be joined to Christ.

If the Mass does not attract interest and going to Church on Sundays or any other day is boring, one might respond, “Well, whoever claimed to be charmed and exhilarated by a sacrifice?” Yet that sacrifice alone is capable of saving me and everyone else from sin and death. Only when I can admit that I too am responsible for Christ’s death do I have a chance of being saved. I cannot detach myself from sinful humanity without losing the chance of being liberated from sin; if I thought myself sinless I would not need Christ.

True liberation involves uniting myself to the new Adam and disciplining myself so that base passions are overcome and my entire self is put at the service of God and others. That is the task of a lifetime, and at the end mercy still must be sought.

Preach the Paradox Preaching the gospel in accord with the Catholic faith is incumbent upon every priest since the gospel is the liberating truth about God and man. If Jesus is the Son of God who became incarnate with a message to every human being on the face of the earth, it is most unlikely

7

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019

Prayer for Priests Gracious and loving God, we thank your for the gift of our priests.

Through them, we experience your presence in the sacraments.

Help our priests to be strong in their vocation.

Set their souls on fire with love for your people.

AB/COPYRIGHT DIOCESE OF LA CROSSE, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Grant them the wisdom, understanding, and strength they need to follow in the footsteps of Jesus.

At the ordination of priests, the candidates prostrate themselves while the entire congregation prays the Litany of the Saints. Father John McDermott, S.J., reflects that “Only by placing his life before his crucified Lord every day and by referring all joys and sorrows to his Sacred Heart will the priest find the strength to remain faithful to his vocation. Love will hollow him out in order that he may grow in holiness, but he must subordinate all else to his relation to Jesus to appreciate what wondrous graces have been bestowed upon him.”

that his Father would let that message lapse from human awareness for any period from the resurrection until today. That Martin Luther or John Calvin rediscovered the gospel truth previously neglected for centuries seems, if not terribly careless of God, incredible. Even more ludicrous is the assertion that some genius in the 20th century finally discovered what Christ was all about. Certainly, the gospel proclaims a mystery that challenges human minds, but it is a mystery of love which remains a mystery—even while being proclaimed and understood.

Why should God have created us and redeemed us from our misery? No human can understand why he or she is loved.

Neither can any human comprehend the mystery of evil, much less overcome it by intelligence and good will. In dealing with various facets of the mystery, the Church always maintained the sane balance that characterizes self-giving love: material creation is good, even while limiting the spirit; despite creation’s goodness, which points to God, men are mired in sin and need a Savior; Jesus is God as the Father is God, although there is only one God; though God, Jesus is fully man; God alone works man’s salvation, yet man has to exert all his efforts to attain salvation; Scripture is God’s word, though written by men; the sacraments cause grace, even though God alone bestows grace. To deny or neglect one of these paradoxes ultimately makes Christian revelation incomprehensible, yet the polar tension involved in balancing seemingly contrary truths invites hasty men and minor minds (compared to God, we are all idiots) to simplify the mystery, lose their balance, and fall into heresy. Love effects the greatest unity even while preserving the greatest diversity. It involves unconditioned yet concrete commitment to a limited historical being mediating God’s presence. Love has to be manifested in deeds as well as

words to convince people living in a selfish world that love is a reality stronger than death and sin.

For instance, the mystery of marriage “for better and for worse” until death seeks to incorporate such love, yet it needs support. It can too easily be understood as the mere satisfaction of desire and hence allow dissolution. Christ’s death and resurrection alone can assure us that sacrifice is inherent in marriage and can produce great fruit. Marriage also witnesses how both spouses wish to be fully united, body and soul; yet, neither spouse wishes the beloved to be dissolved into himself or herself. In this it weakly intimates the greater unity in diversity of the Trinity, of the Incarnation, of God’s presence in the sacraments, of God’s unity with man’s freedom in redemption.

Tradition’s Hand in Things The Church’s millennial-long witness to a gospel truth surpassing human intelligence persuaded me that ecclesial tradition should supply the norm of my faith rather than any modern theologian’s new

Church’s biblical and traditional moral code. Dissent from the Church’s moral teachings goes back to the post-conciliar confusion, when people were allegedly being liberated from sexual inhibitions and authoritarian impositions. Too many

“ The priestly life is not designed for repose and comfort, and no one who desires such ease should apply for the priesthood.” theologians were also “liberating” themselves from solemn commitments to the truth.

Yet it was clear to me that the moralists proclaiming such “liberation” were merely putting into question anyone’s ability to promulgate a binding moral norm for all cases—despite Jesus’ proclamation of such absolute moral norms. That

“ Preaching the gospel in accord with the Catholic faith is incumbent upon every priest since the gospel is the liberating truth about God and man.” synthesis, much less my desires to change the world into my image. In a time when all institutions were being put into question and all human theories were denounced as mere means of manipulating the unwary, there was need of adhering to the perennial truth of the gospel and seeking to clarify that truth for others.

Even in the face of clerical malfeasance and the appalling sexual abuse of minors—today’s uncovered sins go back decades—there is need of upholding the

moral confusion has only increased over subsequent decades, and none of the dissenters has produced a coherent system of thought. Actually, the Church’s moral positions do not devolve from any human system, even though many theologians have rightly sought to ground them in such systems to make them more intelligible to people. The Church lives and thinks primarily from Christ’s revelation.

Our Lord revealed a self-giving, indeed a self-sacrificing, love at the basis of reality,

Inspire them with the vision of your Kingdom.

Give them the words they need to spread the Gospel.

Allow them to experience joy in their ministry.

Help them to become instruments of your divine grace.

We ask this through Jesus Christ, who lives and reigns as our Eternal Priest.

Amen.

(From the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) and all morality should call men to conform themselves to Christ, not to devise a moral code for themselves nor to look for satisfaction, fulfillment, and the avoidance of all sufferings on earth. As a consequence, I have sought to explain in my preaching and teaching how the Church’s doctrine is true, intelligible, liberating, salvific—and practicable.

Obedience to the Cross The priest to be newly ordained also has to promise obedience to his bishop or religious superior. That is where the shoe rubs. But Christ came to do his Father’s will, not his own. A priest has to trust that the will of God will be worked through all the political machinations of ecclesial appointments. The Church was not established to produce a wonderful human society in which all feel themselves appreciated, esteemed, and coddled. The Church exists as the place of concrete commitment in time; she came into existence from Christ’s pierced side and she remains on Calvary in offering his life in the Eucharistic sacrifice. She makes the saving cross present in history, calling sinful humans to conversion. Her task is to conform all men to Christ by challenging them to go out of themselves and love others, even the humanly repulsive ones whom Christ loves. Mother Theresa saw that as her special vocation, and since her vision reflects Christ’s, her vision should be shared to one degree or another by every Christian.

So the priest can love and obey even a bishop who is a burden to him, provided that no sin is involved and no serious harm is caused to God’s people. His promise of obedience summons him to take the risk of crucified love. For, however much he might respect and appreciate his ordaining bishop, he does not know the successor whom God has in store for Please see PROMISES on page 11

8

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019

Hidden Everywhere in Plain Sight: The Holy Spirit’s Dynamic Role in the Mystery of the Eucharist

By Dr. Michael Gama

In St. Ephrem’s spirituality, the mystery of graces such as the Eucharist “affects all historical time and all historical space.” It would not be too much here to describe this intersection of eternal with historical time as the implosion of eternal time into the linearity of historical time.

“ This rehabilitation of the experience, language, and tradition of the mystical within Christian orthodoxy is welcomed, and most appropriate, particularly as we seek to consider the work of the Holy Spirit in the sacrament of the Eucharist.” and God the Father figures prominently enough in scriptures to provide a clear picture of his character if not his person. Except for such cameos as the descending dove at Jesus’ baptism and his outpouring at Pentecost, we have few such tangible markers by which to understand the Holy Spirit in scripture. That said, speaking both pastorally and theologically, Pope John Paul II, in Dominum Et Vivificantem, discerned an acute desire in people’s hearts today for “a fresh discovery of God in his transcendent reality as the infinite Spirit.”5 Of course, this equating of the Holy Spirit with God, and as God, is not confined to theological treatises, but is also underscored in the Catechism of the Catholic Church

AB/WIKIMEDIA

Actor, Person, and God When we consider the third Person of the Trinity, we must admit that for many Catholics, the Holy Spirit is the least known and understood member of the Holy Trinity. After all, Jesus, who came to us in the flesh, presents a wholly concrete understanding to our minds,

AB/WIKIMEDIA

W

e in the Catholic Church have much to be grateful for. Our embarrassment of riches is perhaps most obvious as we seek greater understanding of divine mysteries, such as the work of the Holy Spirit in the liturgy, and particularly of his work in the Eucharist. Being in the Church—ever ancient yet ever new—we are not forced to “build the bridge as we cross it,” or worse, “make it up as we go along.” Instead, as members of the Ancient Church, we have the consolations of the Holy Scriptures, the teachings and Tradition of the Church, along with the teachings of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, augmented by the examples and inspiration of the lives of the saints.

Plus, with the exhortation of St. John Paul II to “breathe with both lungs” of the Church, East and West, we have a timeless treasure trove of catholic (that is, universal) Christian wisdom and understanding. Thus armed, we approach with confidence the question of the work and efficacy of the Holy Spirit in the Holy Mysteries, particularly in the mystery of the Eucharist.

We may proceed, however, with caution, for two reasons. First, while a case might be made for the place of “pure scholarship” in our understanding of these mysteries, there is much to be said for a mystagogical approach to encountering both the economy of God and also the mysteries of the Holy Trinity. The need for this mystagogical “initiation into the mysteries” has, maintains Stratford Caldecott, “been noted in church circles for years.”1 This heart-mind approach might be described as a “kneeling theology,” designed to provide spiritual life to the initiates, even while not alien to intellectual rigor.

Second, our approach cannot afford to be “scared off ” from the benefits of being informed by a mysticism seated in Christian orthodoxy. The French Catholic theologian, Louis Bouyer, is helpful here as he works to salvage both the term and legitimate efficacy of “mysticism.” He situates the term firmly within the tradition of the orthodox Ancients, including 5th-century Church father St. Nilus, who described the Eucharistic host as “not mere bread” but, rather, as “mystical bread,” and also 4th-century father St. Gregory Nazianzus who described the altar as not simply “the table,” but “the mystical table.”2 Finally, Bouyer notes that these early fathers “use ‘mystical’ as designating the ultimate meaning of the Scriptures in relation to Christ and His work.”3 This rehabilitation of the experience, language, and tradition of the mystical within Christian orthodoxy is welcomed, and most appropriate, particularly as we seek to consider the work of the Holy Spirit in the sacrament of the Eucharist. Indeed, we might even suggest that stripped of the mystical dimension and awareness, a meaningful and productive discussion of the sacrament of the Eucharist might not even be possible.

For those who might protest the employment of the mystical sense on epistemological grounds (claiming that it is easier to “know” God through intellectual study than through a search of the impenetrable mysteries of God), it may be helpful to consider that “knowing Christ” such as St. Paul prayed to “know him” (Philippians 3:10), might not fit into a neat, post-Enlightenment category of “knowing.” Instead, perhaps only if we add “grace” or, even better, “charity” as an epistemological category, does this Pauline ideal of “knowing Christ” even make sense. His is a “knowing,” seated in faith, formed in hope, and lived in love. Interestingly, support for this idea comes from the East. Vladimir Lossky, a Russian Orthodox theologian, flatly states that there is “no Christian mysticism without theology; but, above all, there is no theology without mysticism.”4 Finally, it will be helpful to acknowledge that exploring the mystery of the Holy Spirit’s work in the Eucharist should not be an exercise in either “creativity” or speculation, per se. Attempting to create something wholly new in relation to either the Holy Spirit or the Eucharist could be hazardous and a denial of that ancient and catholic treasure trove mentioned above. Instead, our “creativity” is best found in a wise application of the truths once delivered to the saints, an application that can only benefit the vagaries of our own era and the current cultural milieu.

and in the biblical text itself, along with being found in the Patristic witness. This collective witness attests to the truth that the Holy Spirit is God. He is not a force, nor a feeling, but God. The Catechism states, “The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three Persons, the ‘consubstantial Trinity.’”6 Likewise, scripture describes the Holy Spirit as omniscient, clearly a quality of the Divine (John 16:13). And pity poor Ananias and Sapphira of the Acts account who, Luke reports, paid with their lives for lying “to the Holy Spirit.” In clarification, St. Luke then has Peter summing up their infraction by concluding that they had lied, “not to man but to God” (Acts 5:3-4), obviously identifying the Holy Spirit as God. Finally, in a patristic witness, St. Augustine attests to the full divinity and personhood of the Holy Spirit: “I sought for a Trinity among his holy utterances. And there was your spirit poised above the waters! Here, then, is the Trinity who is my God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, creator of the whole created universe.”7 As helpful as these testimonies are in buttressing our belief in the divinity and personhood of the Holy Spirit, the Church fathers provide yet another intriguing theological apologetic for this truth. Bouyer is again helpful here. He explains that near the genesis of our Ancient Church, even while the status of the Holy Spirit was yet a matter of debate, a foundational tenet of the Christian theological understanding of salvation understanding was not absent. In short, St. Athanasius described this tenet in speaking of Our Lord: “He became human that we might become divine.”8 St. Ephrem the Syrian, the 4th-century monk, poet, and doctor of the Church, penned a similar notion in a couplet that has made its way into the Divine Liturgy of the Maronite Catholic Church: “You have united, O Lord, your divinity with our humanity, and our humanity with your divinity….

You have assumed what is ours and you have given us what is yours.”9 As Norman Russell explains, this mysterious equation—identifying our divinization by grace, as being the telos of our spiritual pilgrimage—was simply assumed in the early Church and came to be known as the “exchange formula.”10 Regarding such divinization of man, what in Greek is called theosis, Dionysius the Areopagite, the 6th-century Syrian writer, described it as “the attaining of likeness to God and union with Him so far as possible.”11 And from the West, while not specifically employing the term theosis, the great spiritual director and mystic, St. John of the Cross, arguably describes the reality of this same spiritual phenomenon: “When God grants this supernatural favor to the soul, so great a union is caused that all the things of both God and the soul become one in participant transformation and the soul appears to be God more than a soul. Indeed, it is God by participation.”12 It is here where our story of the personhood, divinity, and work of the Holy Spirit becomes particularly intriguing. As Bouyer points out, St. Athanasius held this

“It is by the [Holy] Spirit,” says St. Athanasius, “that we are all said to participate in God, [to be] participants in the divine nature.”

9

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019

Dynamic Spirit It is important to remember that this divine indwelling is no static affair. Indeed, this indwelling underscores the Holy Spirit’s primary ministry toward us—his work in bringing us to participation in God. Again, as St. Athanasius taught, “…it is by the Spirit that we are all said to participate in God…, (to be) participants in the divine nature.”14 Accordingly, the Catechism teaches that the Holy Spirit does his work in and to us through the Sacraments, which are themselves “actions of the Holy Spirit at work in his Body, the Church.”15 Also, “This gift of grace through the action of the Holy Spirit implies a participation in the very life of God—the life of the Trinity.”16 Likewise, Russell also reasons, “Through baptism and the Eucharist (we) participate in the Body of Christ, the new humanity which Christ created and as a result of his Passion, exalted to the highest heaven.”17 Russell then cites the patristic witness in the person of St. Cyril of Alexandria, who maintained that through the Incarnation, human flesh was exalted, and “The Word became human that humanity might become divine.”18 Thus, continues Russell, “Through the Eucharist the Son dwells within us in the corporeal sense, while the Spirit renews us and transforms us spiritually.”19 But St. Cyril is not alone in his understanding of the Holy Spirit’s divinizing work in us through the Eucharist. Russell amplifies the thought of the Cappadocian Father, St. Gregory of Nazianzus, by asserting, “Together with the Son, the Spirit deifies human beings through baptism.

The Eucharist is also said to lead them to deification.”20 Finally, the contemporary Western thinker, Andrew Hofer, points out that in the Ordinary of the Mass in the West, “When the deacon, or, in his absence, the priest pours wine and a little water into the chalice, he says quietly: By the mystery of this water and wine may we come to share in the divinity of Christ who humbled himself to share in our humanity.”21 Hofer continues to draw the connection between the Eucharist and our divinization by grace, quoting from the Prayer after Communion on the Twenty-Seventh Sunday in Ordinary Time:

Grant us, almighty God, that we may be refreshed and nourished by the Sacrament that we have received, so as to be transformed into what we consume.

Through Christ our Lord.22

Along with the Holy Spirit’s work of divinizing us through the mystery of the Eucharist, we should here cite one added task with which the Holy Spirit is charged. The Augustinian scholar, Father David Meconi, draws our attention to this divine task in his notes to the Ignatius Critical Edition of The Confessions. Commenting on Augustine’s treatment of the Holy Spirit in Book XIII, Meconi notes, “As the Father imparts existence and as the Son communicates form and beauty, the Spirit’s role is to order all things in the cosmos into a harmonious and structured whole.”23 It is highly significant that these divine tasks executed by the Holy Spirit—our divinization accomplished at least in part via the Eucharist, and the work in the ordering of all things in the cosmos—are directly related and integral to the ultimate telos of humanity, God’s crown of creation. Again, that telos is divinization and “participation in the very life of God—the life of the Trinity;”24 thus we assume our place in the divinely appointed order of all things.

Time and Place But perhaps as important as the recognition of these

“ Together with the Son, the Spirit deifies human beings through baptism. The Eucharist is also said to lead them to deification.”

AB/PIXABAY

exchange formula of humanity and divinity as an established truth; he also saw its spiritual corollary as a given: “For it is by the Spirit that we are all said to participate in God.”13 Athanasius’s point here was twofold: first, our divinization by grace was our God-appointed telos—our end, our goal. Second, it is the Holy Spirit who is primarily charged with shepherding us to this end. Thus, the Holy Spirit as God is God leading us to God. Together, these witnesses buttress the truth of the divinity of the Holy Spirit, while also underscoring that this same Holy Spirit is tasked with unique and special roles. We become most aware of these pneumatic ministries as they are described by Our Lord through the testimony of St. John. This “other Counselor…, even the Spirit of truth,” says Jesus, “dwells with you, and will be in you” (John 14:17). And in so dwelling with and in us, this same Holy Spirit, attests Our Lord, “will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you” (John 14:26).

The Eucharist, through the efficacy of the Holy Spirit, is the heavenly medicine which immediately initiates the repair and reordering of both individual believers and also the catholic body of believers which is the Church. Hence, as we as individuals partake in this truly cosmic sacrament of the Eucharist, we are being progressively divinized and “re-ordered,” as the Spirit works to re-order all things.

twin tasks of the Holy Spirit, is the understanding of when and where these tasks are to be executed. A hint toward our understanding as to the when and where these tasks are to be accomplished can be found in the Eastern Churches’ description of the Eucharist as the “Holy Mysteries.” Simply, the mysterious sacrament of the Eucharist is never merely an individualistic nor localized phenomenon. We should recognize, instead, the Eucharist is an event that also occurs outside of time and therefore does not occur exclusively in a punctiliar manner. St. Ephrem and his concept of the “two times” can help us here.

The Syrian Saint drew a distinction between ordinary, or linear time, and what he termed sacred time. For Ephrem, sacred time “knows no ‘before’ or ‘after’, only the ‘eternal now’: what is important for sacred time is its content, not a particular place in the sequence of linear time.”25 Thus, in St. Ephrem’s understanding, an event such as the Eucharist, while certainly occurring within historical time, also exists in the eternal now. As such, for St. Ephrem, the Eucharist is a premier example of the Incarnate Lord’s literal entry (along with the Eternal Now) into historical time. In Ephrem’s spirituality, the mystery of graces such as the Eucharist “affects all historical time and all historical space.”26 It would not be too much here to describe this intersection of eternal with historical time as the implosion of eternal time into the linearity of historical time. Using more biblical language, we might better describe this “implosion” as the entrée of God’s grace into human time, life, and experience.

But Ephrem’s perspective on time and eternity is neither anomalous nor peculiar to the Christian East.

Cardinal Ratzinger, in the second volume of his Jesus of Nazareth, reflects on eternal life being not simply life that occurs beyond the reach of the historical timeline.

“Eternal life,” writes Ratzinger, “is life itself, real life which can also be lived in the present age.”27 Eternal life then, for Ratzinger, is, as in the case of St. Ephrem’s sacred time, an implosion of grace into the timeline of human existence.

Summary A summation of the Holy Spirit’s divine work in and through the Eucharist will be most fruitful, I suspect, as we, like the Fathers cited above, “work backwards” from the acknowledged telos of human persons. This telos is divinization, or theosis—becoming partakers of the divine nature—and thus entering, by grace, into the life of the Holy Trinity. We next observe that it is the person of the Holy Spirit, living in us, who is commissioned with the awesome task of aiding us in our divinization. In concert with this, it is this same Holy Spirit who is responsible, on both an individual and cosmic level, for the proper ordering of all things. Following these points, we must recognize—as St. Ephrem suggests—that in the Eucharist we are now truly exposed to a grace-filled reality that exists both in the Eternal Now, and also within the linearity of our temporal understanding and experience.

We can thus draw key conclusions. First, as God, the Holy Spirit affects our divinization while he concurrently also directs the true re-ordering of all things under the headship of Our Lord Jesus. As such, the reordering of humanity into the fellowship of the Holy Trinity is a key component of this overall cosmic re-

ordering. Indeed, the cosmic recapitulation of all things under Our Lord will not be complete until believing humanity—the crown of his creation—is also rightly re-ordered. St. Paul more than hints at this in Romans 8 where he writes that the creation, long subjected to futility, “waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God,” when it shall finally be “set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (Romans 8:19, 21). Next, as the Eucharist plays a key, catalytic role in our divinization, or entrée into the Trinitarian fellowship, it occurs as a phenomenon existing within the human time frame, while also existing in the Eternal Now of sacred time.

Thus, the Eucharist, through the efficacy of the Holy Spirit, is the heavenly medicine which immediately initiates the repair and re-ordering of both individual believers and also the catholic body of believers which is the Church. Likewise, as the sacrament affects its mystical work on the local and the cosmic level, it does so simultaneously in both historical and sacred time.

Hence, as we as individuals partake in this truly cosmic sacrament of the Eucharist, we are being progressively divinized and “re-ordered,” as the Spirit works to reorder all things. This gracious partaking beckons us into presence of the Holy in the Eternal Now, even as we, in our local parishes, shuffle silently forward toward the altar as if along the tracks of human temporality.

Michael Gama is an instructor at the Avila Institute, Helena, AL, and lives with his wife Carol in Oregon. He has a degree in theology with a special focus on Eastern Christian spirituality, and is the author of Theosis: Patristic Remedy for Evangelical Yearning at the Close of the Modern Age (2017, Wipf & Stock).

1. Stratford Caldecott, The Seven Sacraments (New York: A Crossroad Book, 2011), 125.

2. Louis Bouyer, A History of Christian Spirituality, vol. 1 (New York: The Seabury Press, 1960), 409.

3. Ibid.

4. Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (Crestwood: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1991), 9.

5. John Paul II, Dominum Et Vivificantem, Introduction, 2.

6. Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), 253.

7. St. Augustine of Hippo, The Confessions (San Francisco: St. Ignatius Press, 2012), 13.5.6.

8. Norman Russell, Fellow Workers with God (Crestwood: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2009), 23, 24.

9. Book of Offering, Rite of the Syrian Maronite Church.

10. Russell, 24.

11. Ibid., 21, 22.

12. The Complete Works of St. John of the Cross, trans. Kiernan Kavanaugh (Washington, D.C.: ICS Publications, 1991), 165.

13. Bouyer, 418.

14. Ibid.

15. CCC, 1116.

16. Caldecott, 9.

17. Russell, 24.

18. Norman Russell, The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 191.

19. Ibid.

20. Ibid., 222.

21. Andrew Hofer, Divinization; Becoming Icons of Christ Through the Liturgy (Chicago: Hillenbrand Books, 2015), 9.

22. Ibid., 10.

23. St. Augustine of Hippo, The Confessions, 413.

24. Caldecott, 9.

25. Sebastian Brock, The Luminous Eye: The Spiritual World Vision of Saint Ephrem the Syrian (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1992), 29.

26. Ibid., 30.

27. Ratzinger, Jesus of Nazareth, vol. 2 (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2011), 82, 83.

10

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019

THE RITE QUESTIONS

hat are the guidelines for the composition Q : W of liturgical candles?

A

LETTERS Untimely Lessons?

After reading the “Gallup Diocese Restores Sacraments” in the March 2019 edition of Adoremus, I must disagree with the change in age of the children for the Sacraments. Our parish went through those changes some twenty years ago and now that they are adults, they still do not understand the Sacrament they received. If they did understand, then why aren't they in the pews?

It’s a different world from yesterday when a child couldn’t receive the Sacraments unless they knew their prayers and were scolded if they committed a sin and didn’t confess. Now they aren’t even expected to know the Act of Contrition.

So what makes you think, in combining this knowledge in time, from birth to age eight, that children in this time period will be mature enough to grasp...a deeper communion with the Lord and to His Church?

Being taught two Gifts at the same time, it is difficult to grasp the deep meaning of the Eucharist and of Confirmation before the age of eight, and I firmly believe that catechesis needs more time, like four years between Sacraments to try to explain such notions as “…confirming and strengthening the supernatural life we received in Baptism,” to a child of eight—and even some adults still don’t get it.

I hear, over and over again, parents say, “My job is done. I got them confirmed.”

So now the child will have a secondgrade education of the Mass, the Sacraments, and the Church into their adulthood. How will they know how to use and strengthen their gifts if they’re not given time to learn and put these gifts into action?

I’ve been told by theologians that God doesn’t ask for education in order to grace a recipient with a gift. So why then, when a young man has a calling to the Priesthood, is he required to know “something” before he is gifted with the grace of Holy Orders? Just saying!

Janet Gabonay Irwin, PA Cont. from NEWS & VIEWS on pg 2 March 10.

In the martyrs’ beatification Mass in Oviedo, Spain the day prior, Cardinal Angelo Becciu, prefect of the Vatican Congregation of Saints, expressed a similar sentiment.

“With the sanctity of their lives, the newly beatified speak above all to the Church of today. With their blood, they have made the Church great and have given splendor to the priesthood,” Becciu said.

“We are all troubled by the scandals that seem to have no end and that disfigure the face of the Bride of Christ. We need seminarians, priests, consecrated persons, generous pastors like these martyrs of Oviedo,” the cardinal continued.

“We need honest and irreproachable priests who bring souls to God and do not cause suffering to the Church and disturb the people of God,” he said.

: Prior to the Second Vatican Council altar candles were to be composed primarily or to a significant extent of pure beeswax, with the exact percentage determined by the diocesan bishop. The candle itself was given a mystical meaning: the beeswax symbolized the pure flesh Christ received from his Virgin Mother, the wick symbolized his soul, and the flame his divinity.

However, the current legislation is less specific. The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) does not address the composition of altar candles.

Conferences of Bishops possess the faculty to determine their make-up, but the

USCCB has never employed this faculty to permit materials other than wax in the production of candles, so candles for use in the Mass and other liturgical rites must be made of wax and provide “‘a living flame without being smoky or noxious.’ To safeguard ‘authenticity and the full symbolism of light,’ electric lights as a substitute for candles are not permitted” (Built of Living Stones, 93). This also applies to the so-called electric vigil lights used for devotional purposes. A bishop would have the authority to make an exception to a living flame in cases of necessity, if, for example, a prison or a hospital had a policy absolutely forbid-

ding open flames.

It should be noted that while an oil lamp may be used to indicate the presence of the Blessed Sacrament in the tabernacle (see GIRM, 316), the U.S. bishops have never given permission for the use of oil lamps at the altar. Candles are symbols of the presence of Christ, the light of the world (John 8:12) and of Baptism by which we share in his light (Colossians 1:12), and are also signs of reverence and festivity.

—From the April 2018 Newsletter of the Committee on Divine Worship

hat should be the posture of the faithful after Q : Wreceiving communion?

A

: The proper postures for both

ministers and faithful are described in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) and and in the Order of Mass. About the faithful’s postures, the GIRM (n.43) summarizes: “The faithful should stand from the beginning of the Entrance Chant, or while the Priest approaches the altar, until the end of the Collect; for the Alleluia Chant before the Gospel; while the Gospel itself is proclaimed; during the Profession of Faith and the Universal Prayer; and from the invitation, Orate, fratres (Pray, brethren), before the Prayer over the Offerings until the end of Mass, except at the places indicated here below.

“The faithful should sit, on the other hand, during the readings before the Gospel and the Responsorial Psalm and for the Homily and during the Preparation of the Gifts at the Offertory; and, if appropriate, they may sit or kneel during the period of sacred silence after Communion.

“In the dioceses of the United States of America, they should kneel begin-

Cont. from COUNTERCULTURE on pg 5 the first place, and then in the crazy world in which we live.

Conclusion Worship animating culture—if it were only so! In the larger scale of things in our modern secularized society, it is most certainly not so. But it can be so— indeed, I know from experience that it is so—in the creative minority of small Christian communities. Don’t be afraid to go against the current. As G.K. Chesterton put it: “A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it.”24 I pray that the monastic counter-culture may be a source of hope for your family counterculture, your parish counterculture, your school counterculture.

Don’t misunderstand me. We can’t simply be against what is bad, but we have to work with all our strength to build what is good, both for ourselves and for future generations.

The key is being God-centered, and that means being focused on our primary act of worship, the sacrifice of Christ as manifested in the Mass and in the Divine Office. The best remedy for a world that is sick from living as though God did not exist is to live passionately in the conviction that God does indeed exist. What is the alternative? To borrow

ning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by ill health, or for reasons of lack of space, of the large number of people present, or for another reasonable cause. However, those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the Priest genuflects after the Consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei (Lamb of God) unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.”

Questions about the faithful’s posture following their return to the pew remained even after the GIRM was promulgated. In 2003, Cardinal Francis George, then-chairman of the Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy (now the Bishops’ Committee on Divine Worship), thus submitted the following dubia or question to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments: “In many places, the faithful are accustomed to kneeling or sitting in personal prayer upon returning to their places after having individually received Holy Communion during Mass. Is it the

“ The best remedy for a world that is sick from living as though God did not exist is to live passionately in the conviction that God does indeed exist.” a word of salvation from Cardinal Sarah, there are only two possibilities: God—or nothing!25 Father Cassian Folsom, O.S.B., is a scholar of sacred music and liturgy, a cancer survivor, and the founder and prior emeritus of the Monks of Norcia.

Born in Lynn, MA, in 1955, Fr. Cassian studied music before joining the monastic community of St. Meinrad in 1974.

He founded his monastic community in Rome in 1998 and transferred it to Norcia in the year 2000. Over the last 15 years, the Monastery di San Benedetto has grown, attracting new vocations and pilgrims from around the world. He recently retired as prior but continues to serve the community and teach liturgy at the Pontifical Atheneum of St. Anselm in Rome.

intention of the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, to forbid this practice?”

Cardinal Francis Arinze, who served as Congregation’s Prefect at that time, responded: “Negative, et ad mensum [No, for this reason]. The mens [reasoning] is that the prescription of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, no. 43, is intended, on the one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free.”

The BCL Newsletter for July 2003, which reprinted the full text and response of the dubia, concluded: “In the implementation of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, therefore, posture should not be regulated so rigidly as to forbid individual communicants from kneeling or sitting when returning from having received Holy Communion” (p. 26).

—Answer compiled by Christopher Carstens, Editor

1. I am using the Italian translation of this book, “Otium” e Culto, Siena, Cantagalli, 2010.

2. Pieper, 77.

3. Ibid.

4. cf. Pieper, 79.

5. Pieper, 79.

6. Ibid.

7. Ibid.

8. Ibid.

9. The Rule of St. Benedict (RB 1980), ed. Timothy Fry (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1981), 52:1.

10. Ibid., 9:8.

11. Ibid., 48:15.

12. The Rule of the Master, trans. Luke Eberle, Cistercian Studies 6 (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1977), 50:62-69.

13. RB 57:9.

14. cf. RB 58:20; 59:2.

15. For example, H.J.A. Sire, Phoenix from the Ashes, (Kettering OH: The Angelico Press, 2015) and Rod Dreher, The Benedict Option, (New York: Sentinel, 2017), chapter 2, 21-47.

16. John Senior, The Death of Christian Culture, Harrison (NY: RC Books, 1978). (cf. also Anthony Esolen, Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture (Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 2017)).

17. Cassian Folsom, “The Great Divorce: The Reason for our Liturgical Malaise,” Antiphon 22/1 (2018) 2-15.

18. Robert Cardinal Sarah, The Power of Silence: Against the Dictatorship of Noise (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2017).

19. RB 42:4.

20. Benedict XVI, “General Audience on St. Theodore the Studite,” L’Osservatore Romano: English edition, Wednesday, 3 June 2009, 15.

21. RB, prologue 50.

22. Ibid., 4:47.

23. Ibid., 31:10.

24. G .K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1993), 256.

25. Robert Cardinal Sarah, God or Nothing (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2015).

11

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019

Adoremus Thanks Benefactor ($5,000 +) Anonymous

Millennium ($1,000+) Mr. and Mrs. George A. Ross Vero Beach, Florida Mr. and Mrs. William M. Schult Edgewood, Kentucky Sustaining ($200+) Mr. and Mrs. James C. Albrecht North Aurora, Illinois Fr. Daniel F. Kassis Show Low, Arizona Mr. James R. Schmidt Livonia, Michigan Mr. and Mrs. Thomas M. Wolf Ft. Worth, Texas 2 Anonymous

our donors for special gifts received in the past months. We are deeply grateful for your financial support of the work of Adoremus.

J. Michael Ermiger Shelby Township, Michigan Helga Grote Camlachie, Ontario Rev. Msgr. George E. Highberger Peoria, Arizona Bernie and Colleen Klein Hermiston, Oregon Elizabeth La Salle Washington, DC Mrs. Cecilia Lodzinski Vale, Oregon Mrs. Susan M. Pritchett Ft. Worth, Texas Patricia and James Schaaf Cupertino, California Elaine M. Schlueter St. Louis, Missouri

Patron ($100+)

Mr. Ray Schwartz Rochelle, Illinois

Dr. and Mrs. Nicholas E. Barreca Midland City, Alabama

Mrs. Charlotte Shuter Aurora, Indiana

Miss Mary M. Cameron Woodside, New York

Mrs. Veronica Jo Smith Hickory, North Carolina

Mrs. Barbara Ann Capizzi Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

MEMORIAL FOR: Jerold M. Brown — Eunice Brown Robert L. Capizzi, M.D. — Wife - Barbara Barbara Carrig — John Carrig Lucy and Anthony Di Paola — Mary Ann Di Paola D’Ann G. Rittie — Bob Rittie TO HONOR Most Reverend Thomas J. Olmsted — Rev. Msgr. George E. Highberger IN THANKSGIVING For Church Organists— Carol Olmstead 40th Wedding Anniversary— Tom and Mary Wolf Our special thanks to our Friends, Members, and to all our faithful monthly donors. May God bless each of you for your generosity. A Mass is said for all our donors each month.

We appreciate your prayers, and we remember you in ours.

Deacon Ray and Fe Vann Lufkin, Texas

Fr. Thomas Woods Scottsboro, Alabama

Mr. Ralph T. Smith Bemidji, Minnesota

Mr. and Mrs. Raymond F. Wacker Carbondale, Illinois

Mr. F. Gregory Walsh Ronkonkoma, New York

Fr. Jacek A. Dada Calumet City, Illinois

Mr. David F. Sullivan Alexandria, Virginia

Fr. David M. Wilke Fairmont City, Illinois

Continued from PROMISES, page 7

wonder, and the priest can be tempted to see himself as the dispenser of grace and the authority to whose will all others should submit. For that reason the priest must have developed his spiritual life in the seminary by daily recourse to meditation and prayer. That daily recourse to prayer represents not a mere boot-camp to be survived, but it should characterize his whole life thereafter.

Only by placing his life before his crucified Lord every day and by referring all joys and sorrows to his Sacred Heart will the priest find the strength to remain faithful to his vocation. Love will hollow him out in order that he may grow in holiness, but he must subordinate all else to his relation to Jesus to appreciate what wondrous graces have been bestowed upon him: to spread the gospel truth to the world, to communicate God’s forgiveness and love to sinners, to share his Eucharistic presence with believers, and to grow thereby in holiness, i.e., to unite himself ever more to the One whom he loves above all, and to receive in return a friendship beyond everything else in this world. Then his whole life will become a hymn of joyous thanksgiving to the God who became man to save him and the whole world. That is why the Church requires of the young candidate to the priesthood the promise to “pray without ceasing.”

Needless to say, this priest has not lived up fully to the challenge of his glorious calling, but he has experienced moments of exaltation even in his struggles with people in the Church and his own weaknesses. No human life is without suffering and frustration, and this priest can even thank God for those trials since he recognizes that through them his Lord was seeking to conform him ever

more to himself. That is a blessing and a joy, and I pray that I may remain faithful to my vocation and discover that the joys of this earth are but the foretaste of the moment when I shall have to look upon the face of my Judge and Redeemer and beseech his pardoning mercy once and for all in eternity. May Mother Mary stand by me in the hour of truth.

him. Just as married couples risk together an unknown future for better and worse, the priest entrusts his future to God, who works his salvation through the concrete Church. Ultimately the priest’s concern should not be his own fulfillment, but the good of God’s people whom he is sent to serve.

Of course, if the Church accomplishes her mission of conforming all her members to Christ, the Church becomes a joyous, loving community of believers willing to help each other through life’s difficulties with all types of material and spiritual support. What one does not expect in heeding Christ’s command to follow him to the cross is bestowed as a great gift: one knows that one is loved not only by God but also by the members of his Body. What one should not and does not expect is granted as a gift.

The priest as leader of a parish must witness to the truth of self-dispossession for the sake of those entrusted to his particular care, and he dispossesses himself by consigning his will into the bishop’s governance as well as in serving the people to whom he is sent.

Unceasing Prayer The priestly life is not designed for repose and comfort, and no one who desires such ease should apply for the priesthood. There will always be frustrations in dealing with ecclesial authorities as well as with recalcitrant members of the parish. But temptations can also come from the other direction. Because most believers respect the Church’s ministers as representatives of God, the priest can more or less fashion his own lifestyle. Indeed, the daily handling of sacred realities can deaden his sense of awe and mystery. Unreflective habit destroys

Father John M. McDermott, SJ, currently teaches theology at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit. He previously

5 anonymous

taught at Fordham University, the Gregorian University (Rome), and the Pontifical College Josephinum. He was also invited professor at St. Joseph’s Seminary (Yonkers) and Seton Hall University. He served on the International Theological Commission, various Roman commissions, and as consultor to the USCCB Doctrine Committee. He has published two books, edited two others, and produced more than 150 articles on philosophy, dogmatic theology, scripture, history, and spirituality.

SIGN UP AT ADOREMUS.ORG FOR AB INSIGHT, THE MONTHLY E-NEWSLETTER OF ADOREMUS

12

Adoremus Bulletin, May 2019

The Gold Standard Textbook on the Holy Eucharist New Book Offers an Extensive Study of Christ’s Real Presence on the Altar

of the faithful think of the Mass as simply a fraternal meal; consequently, it is commendable to renew the practice of celebrating the liturgy versus Dominum or ad orientem because “it is highly expedient that the visual impression of the Eucharistic Prayer sensibly manifest the ascending and eschatological direction of the prayer to God” (446).

By Roland Millare The Eucharist: Mystery of Presence, Sacrifice and Communion by Lawrence Feingold. Steubenville: Emmaus Academic, 2018. 675 pp. ISBN: 978-1945125720. $43.76 Hardcover; $34.95 eBook.

I

n his first encyclical, Redemptor Hominis, Pope St. John Paul II claims that the Holy Eucharist in its “full magnitude and its essential meaning” is “at one and the same time a Sacrifice-Sacrament, a Communion-Sacrament, and a Presence-Sacrament” (20). Lawrence Feingold integrates insights and commentary from Sacred Scripture, the Church Fathers, the perennial wisdom of St. Thomas Aquinas, magisterial writings, and modern theologians to develop a comprehensive textbook on the Holy Eucharist, which addresses the essential ends of the Eucharist: presence, sacrifice, and communion highlighted by Pope St. John Paul II. Feingold describes the structure of his book with a focus on the Eucharist as a sacrament of love revealing the “three aspects of the love of friendship: dwelling with the Beloved, giving oneself in sacrifice for the beloved, and the most intimate gift of self to the beloved” (xxx). The underlying theme is that the Eucharist is the sacrament of Christ the Bridegroom, who offers us the gift of his Real Presence with us, the gift of his perpetual sacrifice for his Bride the Church, which culminates in the Church’s call to communion with him.

Feingold’s masterful tome offers readers a thorough summary of the Church’s theology on the Holy Eucharist.

Instituted in Love Using the analogy of spousal love, Feingold affirms that Christ desires to offer the gift of his real presence because he seeks “to dwell intimately with the beloved” (6). Further within spousal love there must be a “mutual and total selfgiving” of the spouses to one another and hence, in the Eucharist, Christ nourishes his Bride “by giving us His supreme sacrifice of His love to be our sacrifice” (7–8).

Finally, the gift of presence and sacrifice leads to Christ the Bridegroom, who desires to enter into “most intimate union with the beloved,” which is communion (8).

Feingold then addresses Christ’s institution of the Eucharist by arguing the Eucharist “obeys the same divine logic as the Incarnation and the Passion, for it is their sacramental prolongation throughout the life of the Church until Christ comes again in glory” (10). Among the various parallels between the Eucharist and the Incarnation, the primary end which they share is the divinization of the human person: “In the Incarnation Christ became a partaker of our manhood, assuming a human nature to His divine Person. In the Eucharist, Christ gives us His humanity to be our nourishment so that our humanity, receiving His, may be nourished by His divinity” (24). The Eucharist is a logical prolongation of the gift of divinization, which God desires to offer humanity through his Son, Jesus.

Keep It Real Feingold introduces the Church’s teaching on the Real Presence in Part II by offering a masterful summary of the Berengarian Controversy and its consequences for Eucharistic theology. This controversy was named for the 11th-century French theologian Berengarius (c. 999-1088) who explicitly rejected in his own teachings on the Eucharist the Real Presence.

Succinctly, Feingold notes “The errors of Berngarius, which came from a rationalist perspective and a poor philosophy, were met not by a fideist rejection of the use of reason in theology, but by a better use of

reason under the tutelage of faith” (243).

In the aftermath following the Berangarian Controversy, scholastic theologians would adopt and develop the term transubstantiation.

In the subsequent chapters (7 and 8), Feingold presents the doctrine of transubstantiation according to St. Thomas Aquinas and the challenges to transubstantiation particularly from the Reformers and the more recently proposed theory of “transignification,” which was addressed

by Pope St. Paul VI in his encyclical Mysterium Fidei.

Timeless Sacrifice Feingold offers many insights into the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist in Part III of his text beginning with a strong introduction to the nature and purpose of sacrifice: “The fundamental purpose of all sacrifice offered to God is to sensibly return something to God to express the spiritual ordering of our souls to Him so as to enter into fellowship with Him” (325). Building upon this sacramental understanding of sacrifice as a visible sign of an invisible sacrifice, Feingold establishes the necessity of a priesthood to offer the sacrifice, the universality and transcendence of Christ’s sacrifice, and the relationship between the sacrifice of the Mass and the sacrifice of Calvary.

In addition to addressing common objections that develop from the theology of the Protestant Reformers (chapter 10), Feingold deftly engages recent debates in theology such as the understanding of sacrifice in a metaphorical and noncultic sense (David N. Power and Edward Kilmartin), and the notion that the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist is a later development (Paul Bradshaw).

The unique contribution within chapter 11 on the participation of the faithful in offering the sacrifice of the Mass is his discussion of the lay faithful’s common priesthood, which is foundational if we want more of the faithful to understand their need to participate fully in the liturgy. Feingold places much emphasis on greater participation by the laity as a critical aspect of the New Evangelization: “Everyone is called to participate, not in outwardly great and extraordinary things, but above all in the Eucharistic life, by which we bring all our dreams, hopes, and daily efforts, things big and little, to the altar to offer them to the Father with Christ, and so to call down the Father’s blessings on them and on the whole world. If each one of us were to do this more deeply, it would change the world” (432).

Briefly Feingold notes the role of the ars celebrandi in fostering greater active participation and he ends the chapter with a section discussing the symbolic significance of offering the liturgy with the priest and the people offering the sacrifice of the Mass towards the Lord (versus Dominum). In Feingold’s estimation many

Common Cause In part IV, Feingold presents various aspects of the Church’s teaching on the third end of the Eucharist: Communion.

In addressing the varying effects of Holy Communion in chapter 13, he begins by introducing the theme of communion by relating it to the Eucharist as sacrifice because a “key pastoral task” in his view is “to restore the sense of the intimate connection and continuity between” the complementary communion and sacrifice aspects of the Eucharist (489). Throughout the remainder of the chapter he addresses the effect of increased grace, charity, ecclesial unity, the indwelling of the Trinity as fruit of worthy communion, and the neglected topic in recent times of spiritual communion.

Chapter 14 is one of the most important parts of the book because he develops the Church’s teaching that Holy Communion presupposes ecclesial communion (invisible and visible). With great clarity, Feingold tackles the subject of the Church’s teaching on communion for the divorced and civilly remarried. Feingold begins by citing John Paul II’s teaching in Familiaris Consortio and proceeds to outline various pastoral solutions to accompany the divorced and civilly remarried, which leads to the pastoral approach emphasized by Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitita §305. This section has been the subject of debate and controversy because of footnote 351, which notes that the divorced and remarried in certain circumstances may receive the “help of the sacraments.”

Feingold highlights the continuity of the tradition, noting that the phrase “help of the sacraments” in Amoris Laetitita §305 is a reference principally to “the sacrament of Penance and refers only to the case in which there is question of sin that is objectively grave but not gravely culpable because of a lack of full knowledge or deliberation” (553-554; emphasis added). The pastors of souls are being counseled to accompany the faithful, who have been divorced and civilly remarried to a path of prayer, catechesis on the Eucharist and marriage, and a formation of conscience in communion with the Church’s teaching to help them understand their situation. At a time when pastoral guidelines continue to be developed and debated on this topic, this part of Feingold’s book will be helpful for future clergy and laity who offer theological expertise or pastoral counsel on this topic.

Adoremus!

John Paul II affirms the value of Eucharistic adoration and its connection with the celebration of the Mass in his last encyclical, Ecclesia de Eucharistia: “The worship of the Eucharist outside of the Mass is of inestimable value for the life of the Church. This worship is strictly linked to the celebration of the Eucharistic sacrifice” (25). It is fitting that the final chapter (chapter 16) of Feingold’s book focuses on Eucharistic adoration because this practice of the Church affirms the gift of the Real Presence. Additionally, Eucharistic adoration “prolongs and increases the fruits of our communion in the body and blood of the Lord” (Ecclesia de Eucharistia, 25).

Drawing upon the witness of magisterial texts, Feingold highlights the intrinsic relationship between Eucharistic adora-

tion and the Mass, the constant call of recent popes for a renewal in Eucharistic devotion, including the availability of perpetual adoration in parishes, and the great value for the faithful in the regular practice of Eucharistic adoration. Citing the writings of Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis on Eucharistic adoration, Feingold helps readers to see the continuity of the Church in affirming the inestimable value of this form of devotion.

Connected with devotion to the Eucharist, Feingold addresses the placement and prominence of the tabernacle and its relationship to the altar whereby both should be architecturally highlighted and artistically designed as the “heart of the church” and to “reflect the sublime fact of the real presence” (600). This chapter would be greatly improved and amplified if the author provided further discussion of the two different options for the placement of the tabernacle either in the sanctuary or chapel that must be “organically connected to the church and readily noticeable by the Christian faithful” (601, quoting GIRM, 315). The chapter ends abruptly with the acknowledgement that the local ordinary has the final authority of where the tabernacle should be placed.

Feingold cites Pope Benedict XVI’s Sacramentum Caritatis, 69 which seeks to ensure that the tabernacle is located “in a sufficiently elevated place, at the center of the apse area, or in another place where it will be equally conspicuous” when it is placed in the sanctuary of a newly constructed church (601).

To Be Continued The one word which summarizes Feingold’s text is “continuity.” Feingold demonstrates the continuity within the Church’s Eucharistic theology drawing upon patristic, medieval (particularly the thought of St. Thomas), and modern theology to offer a very thorough and contemporary text on the Eucharist.

This approach enables his book to serve as a standard textbook for a seminary or university course focused on the Eucharist. Throughout the text he addresses various doctrinal and pastoral issues related to the Eucharist, which will be invaluable to all those who serve at the altar.

This text should also be a resource found on the shelf of all pastors, catechists, religion teachers, directors of religious education, and any person interested in growing in their understanding and love for the mystery of Christ’s Eucharistic Presence.

In addition to invaluable insights throughout the text of each chapter, Feingold offers additional resources and study questions at the end of each chapter, which only add to the value of the book as a pedagogical tool within a classroom or study group. The major shortcoming of the text, particularly for a classroom setting, is its sheer size—nearly 650 pages!

Nevertheless, the chapters are divided up such that experienced teachers can assign sections of the text as they see fit.

Readers of this text will discover the fruit of serious thorough scholarship and the work of a theologian who takes his vocation to teach seriously and who must do his work in prayer on his knees. This text has the potential to nourish both the minds and the hearts of its readers to a greater love for the greatest present the Bridegroom could leave his Bride as a means of achieving communion with him: the sacrificial gift of himself in the Eucharist.

Roland Millare serves as the chair of the Theology Department at St. John XXIII College Preparatory (Katy, TX), the Program Director of Shepherd’s Heart (a continuing education and formation program for priests and deacons) for the St. John Paul II Foundation (Houston, TX), and an adjunct professor of theology for deacon candidates at the University of St. Thomas School of Theology at St. Mary’s Seminary (Houston, TX). Roland earned a doctorate in sacred theology (STD) at the Liturgical Institute/University of St. Mary of the Lake (Mundelein, IL).