THE SITE HAS MOVED. PLEASE CHECK OUT THE NEW SITE AT
http://throughthecrosstolight.wordpress.com/
Peter Fonseca
Saturday, April 5, 2014
Saturday, August 4, 2012
Clerical Celibacy understood throught the Christological, Ecclesiological, Pastoral and Eschatological effects of the priesthood
For
years, people, both inside and outside the Church have called for the Church to
lift Her ancient practice of priestly celibacy. This cry gained support with
the drop in the number of vocations to the priesthood following the Second
Vatican Council and was reenergized by the despicable heterosexual, homosexual
and pedophilia abuses by some of the Church’s priests. The Roman Catholic
Church’s discipline of celibacy for Her priests has been a common practice from
the 4th century and has been solemnly sanctioned since the second
Lateren Council in 1139, which not only forbade priests to marry but also
declared all marriages of priests at the moment null and void.
Priestly celibacy is just that, a
discipline, not a requirement for Holy Orders. While celibacy is not a necessity
to be ordained, this discipline is for the greater good of the Church and Her ministers.
By understanding the Christological, Ecclesiological, Pastoral, and Eschatological
effects of priestly celibacy, the beauty of the Church’s discipline shines through
clearly.
Before one can come to see the
beauty of a celibate priesthood, one must have a clear understanding of what
celibacy is. In his article Celibacy is
the issue, Thomas Lederer defines celibacy as “A freely chosen dynamic
state, visibly vowed, that involves an honest
and sustained attempt to live without direct sexual gratification in order to
serve others productively for a spiritual motive.”[1]
This choice of the priest is a freely chosen life of sacrifice for Christ and
His Church; following the teachings of Christ “No one has greater love than
this, to lay down one's life for one's friends.”[2]
This laying down of his life by the priest is a lifelong lifestyle choice,
which must be assed not only on the human, sexual level, but most of all as a work
of grace in response to the Divine initiative.
It was Christ himself who encouraged
those who could, to take on the celibate state. “Some are incapable of marriage
because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some,
because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.
Whoever can accept this ought to accept it."[3]
The priest should desire an intimate relationship with Christ, an intimacy he
wishes to share only with Christ for the sake of the kingdom of heaven and with
no one else.
The vow of celibacy unites the priest
more closely to Christ. It calls for a complete abandonment of one’s life to
Him. Just as the married man signifies a love without reservation to his
spouse, so too does celibacy signify a love of Christ without reservation. This
love of Christ and his Church is so great that the priest is actually betrothed
to Her in an exclusive bond.
The priest is called to model his life
after Christ who is the Great High Priest. No priest has a priesthood of his own;
rather he shares in the priesthood of Jesus Christ. Christ did not act as a
priest simply at certain functions, but rather His whole life was dedicated to
His Father as a priest. Christ himself lived a celibate life, which signified
his total dedication to God and His people. In the same state of celibacy the
priest is called to live a life of complete dedication to God and his people.
By living a celibate life, the priest demonstrates his trust, that Christ alone
is sufficient and he places his entire trust in Him.
This complete love of Christ is a
charity which is open to all people. The priest demonstrates this charity to
his people, to whom he is called to be an Alter Christus, another Christ. His
total offering of himself to Christ gives the priest complete liberty to live
his life as a life of service, to be a man for others. It is the calling of all
priests to live the motto of the late Pope John Paul II, Totus Tuus, totally
yours.
The priest is to be seen as an image of
Christ. Christ Himself loved the Church so much that He offered Himself up for
Her. In a similar way the priest offers himself up completely for the Church.
The role of the priest is to be a mediator
between God and man. His primary role is to offer sacrifice to God for his
people. The priest belongs exclusively to Christ. It is the priest who shares
Christ with us enabling us to share Him with others. The priest gives up his
life and joyfully embraces celibacy out of this sacrificial love. Through the
gift of celibacy the priest becomes a man for others.
St. Paul himself notes the freedom
celibacy brings. “I
should like you to be free of anxieties. An unmarried man is anxious about the
things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord. But a married man is anxious
about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and he is divided.”[4]
The sharing in celibacy frees the minster from the bonds of flesh and blood. He
has no children or famial responsibilities. He renounces the fatherhood proper
to the married life seeking fatherhood, the fatherhood of Christ’s children.
Celibacy enables the priest to serve, his children, Gods people, with a love
that is undefiled and undistracted. This permits him to spend himself fully for
others, which guarantees him a greater freedom and flexibility in his pastoral
ministry.
This explanation of celibacy leads one
to look towards the eschaton, the end times. In a world today that so often
only looks at the present moment the example of the celibate priest forces
people to consider the eschaton. Society today is fascinated with priestly
celibacy. By foregoing much of this world’s expression of love, he makes a
testimony that love does not cease at the end of our life on this earth, but
rather a greater love is yet to come. Furthermore by consecrating his life to
celibacy for Christ’s sake, the priest makes a very bold statement. He claims
he believes in the Faith of the Catholic Church. By living this counter – cultural
lifestyle the priest is a walking reminder of life after this world.
Priestly celibacy should not be seen as
simply a job requirement to be a priest. Celibacy is in itself a vocation. God
calls both men and women to a celibate life. The call to celibacy does not necessarily
mean God is calling a person to the priesthood, however those whom God calls to
the priesthood he also gives the vocation of celibacy.
Holy Orders is not a right. For those
whom God does not give the vocation to celibacy, they should not present
themselves for Holy Orders. The Church does not impose this charism on any one;
rather She invites those who are called to share in it. A candidate for Holy
Orders makes his commitment to priestly celibacy at his Deaconate Ordination.
The bishop asks the candidate, “In the presence of God and the Church, are you
resolved, as a sign of your interior dedication to Christ to remain celibate
for the sake of the kingdom and in lifelong service to God and mankind?”[5]
The Church does not force men to be priests; She invites them to enter into the
ministerial priesthood of their own free choice.
The beauty of celibacy does not pull a
cloud over the beauty of the married conjugal act. Celibacy is not a denial of
sexuality. Both celibacy and marital sex when moderated by chastity are good
and beautiful lifestyles. Those who argue that there is no beauty or that the
counter – cultural lifestyle of priestly celibacy is out of date, clearly do
not understand the Church’s teaching on celibacy. By understanding the
Christological, Ecclesiogical, Pastoral, and Eschatological effects of priestly
celibacy as pointed out above, those critics of priestly celibacy can come to
see clearly the reason for priestly celibacy and the good it brings about, not
only for the priest, but for Christ’s Church.
[1]
Lederer, Thomas. Celibacy is the Issue.
On line resources, http://www.arthurstreet.com/
25 th May2003
[4]
1Cor 7:32 - 34
[5] Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II. "Rite of
Deaconate Ordination." In The Rites of the Catholic Church, 30 -31.
Collegeville: Pueblo Books, 1991.
Saturday, July 28, 2012
Book Review of Jean Corbon’s Wellspring of Worship
Jean Corbon’s book
entitled The Wellspring of Worship, attempts to demonstrate the unity between
the Liturgy and our Christian lives. He correctly points out that this unity between the
liturgy and life can only be properly understood if we have a proper understanding
of the great gift God gives to us in the liturgy. He achieves this goal by demonstrating to his
audience that the liturgy is the source from which we, like the woman at the
well, draw from the fountain of living water.[1]
Fr. Corbon’s book, The Wellspring of Worship, highlights four
important themes, namely the Trinitarian aspect of the liturgy, the
relationship of our earthly liturgy to the heavenly liturgy, man’s
participation in this eternal Trinitarian liturgy and the situation of the
liturgy in the Church. This short paper intends to address these four
principal themes by expressing their relevance to the liturgy and will conclude
with a short personal analysis of important insights received in reading this
work.
Jean Corbon stresses ad
nauseam, in The Wellspring of Worship, the
Trinitarian dimension of the liturgy. The Trinity, being a community of the Father, Son
and the Holy Spirit is an outpouring of love amongst the three. It is exactly
in this outpouring of love amongst the persons of the Trinity that the work of
salvation is achieved through the passion, death and resurrection of Christ and
through which we are invited to accept Christ and our salvation won by Him for
us.
Since we were created
by God, who desired to create us in his own image, at the heart of every person
is an outpouring of love within the Trinity which leads to a natural desire for
God that we are free to either accept or reject. From the beginning of creation this communion of
love, the Trinity, reveals himself to those created in the image of God. Throughout salvation
history up to today the Trinity has been at work drawing all men back to the
Father.
In the Old Testament the
Holy Spirit prepared for the Word, the only Son of the Father, Jesus Christ,
and the fullness of truth by gathering a community that learned how to accept
and enter into covenants. In the fullness of time the Father sent His only
Son to be born of a woman and the Word became flesh born of the Virgin Mary who
freely accepted the invitation of the Father to be the Godbearer. It is from the
Fiat of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the power of the Holy Spirit that Christ
entered into the world and the union of the Divine and the Human springs forth. In the
incarnation the two worlds the Divine and the Human are united making our
salvation possible. In the Kenosis, the self-emptying of Christ, we
find the unity between the Annunciation and the horrors of the Passion, through
which the gates of heaven are reopened to humanity.
It is in Christ’s
resurrection that we find the first revelation of the wellspring of the liturgy. “On the day of
Easter the river of life becomes liturgy as it spreads out from the tomb to the
Body of Christ.”[2] On Easter, the day that
Jesus conquers His death and thereby bestows His life on mankind, the economy
of salvation takes the form of liturgy. The Resurrection of Jesus is not an event of the
past that happened in one moment of history from which the world has moved on but
rather a death that will never pass away because Jesus did not rise from the
dead only to die again but rather, in rising from the dead, passed through
death.
Through uniting ourselves to the Father in Christ through the Holy Spirit we to
will pass through death to eternal life.
The manifestation of the Resurrection is made
present at the moment of the Ascension. When Jesus ascends to the Father, humanity and
Christ become one, united in the Body of Christ. This union, however will not be completed until all
the members of the Body of Christ are drawn back to the Father.
It is exactly in this return to the Father that the
liturgy finds its essence.
Since Christ’s life is the act of love through which all things return to life,
all men are drawn back to the Father we find at the heart of the liturgy the
Father. Christ is united to the Father and reflects the
glory of God, who is the wellspring which gives life.
The descent of the Holy
Spirit at Pentecost marked a new beginning. The Holy Spirit brought with him the Body of
Christ, the Church, and the eternal liturgy becomes manifest in the world. In the new
community of believers the Holy Spirit, promised by Christ before his Ascension
and sent by the Father comes to draw all people to the Father. Because the
Holy Spirit gives life by drawing all people to communion the liturgy finds its
proper embodiment in the Church. The Church thus truly becomes “the manifestation of
the Spirit of Christ in a new community of men and women who have entered into
life because the Spirit has brought them into communion with the living body of
the Son of God.”[3]
It is exactly in this
manifestation that the liturgy finds its proper place. Understanding
this one realizes that the liturgy is not a creation of the Church but rather
that the Church is the liturgy as it exists in our mortal humanity. The Church is
the instrument through which the heavenly liturgy is brought to humanity. Truly “the
Church is as it were the human face of the heavenly liturgy, the radiant and transforming
presence of the ehavenly liturgy in our present time.”[4]
Fr. Corbon’s
frequent insistence on the Trinitarian nature of the liturgy in his book Wellspring of Worship is useful for
gaining a deeper understanding of who is at work in the liturgy. By
understanding the Trinitarian dimension of the liturgy I have come to a deeper
understanding of my current role in the liturgy as well as the role of the
priest. By understanding the trinity as a communion of love
and my participation in that communion through Christ, the truth of the title The Wellspring of Worship is
demonstrated. By understanding the liturgy being rooted in the
communion of love that is the Trinity I see clearly that the connection between
the liturgy and my life rests in the fact that the liturgy is the wellspring,
the source from which my entire existence springs and is refreshed. It becomes
clear that “when cut off from the source a liturgical celebration becomes
self-contained, as it were without any vital link to before and after.”[5]
While
Corbon’s book Wellspring of Worship is
useful for understanding the liturgy on a contemplative level it is often very
difficult to follow because Fr. Corbon writes in a way that is uncommon to a
western reader. His writing at times appears vague and utilizes
unfamiliar vocabulary. He provides a short dictionary of terms in the
first chapter and frequently footnotes to assist the reader in understanding.
In an era where
Catholics have stopped attending the Church’s liturgies and an era where others
have attempted to the defy the Church by making unauthorized changes to the
liturgy because they fail to see a correlation between their life and the
liturgy this book is a timely reflection for all Catholics. While this work is
difficult to understand at times if the reader is willing to struggle through
the work and overcome his western prejudices Fr. Corbon’s book has much to offer Roman Catholics.
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Luke 9:23-24 An Exegesis
In
Luke 9:23-24 the author writes, “Then he [Jesus] said to all, ‘If anyone wishes
to come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For
whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my
sake will save it.’” (Lk 9:23-24 NAB) This passage is at the heart of Jesus’
teaching on discipleship and prefigures Christ’s passion while giving a sure
way to reach eternal life. This short paper will explain the true meaning of
this passage through a brief study of the historical and literary background,
what the Church Fathers, Doctors and modern exegetes have understood from the
passage, a study of the word “deny”, a comparison with other relevant passages from
Sacred Scripture to the text, and how the text is used in the Church’s liturgy
and teaching.
Scholars are unable to attribute an
exact date for Luke’s gospel but most attribute its composition to sometime
around 70-80 A.D. Scholars debate who the real author may be but there is a
strong consensus that the author of Luke is also the author of Acts of the
Apostles. [1] Unlike other biblical
authors who wrote to specific audiences, it is most likely that the author of
Luke intended his work to be for a general readership.[2] Amongst this general
readership an important audience was any Gentile who did not feel comfortable
entering Christianity because he saw it as a form of Judaism.[3]
The author heavily stresses the
theological truth that Christ came to bring salvation to all peoples. More
specifically this gospel demonstrates that Christ came to seek after and save
those who were lost.[4] The author of Luke,
throughout his gospel, calls all people, Jew and Gentile alike, to discipleship.
He calls all people to follow Christ, and in doing so he calls them to follow
God. More specifically he demonstrates
that Christ calls all people who want to be his disciples to model their lives
after his.[5]
This message conflicted with the contemporary
view of many early Christians that Christ came to save his chosen people, the
Jews. Some members of the early Church saw Christianity as a form of Judaism.
While St. Paul would later refute this claim when he made it clear that a Gentile
did not need to be circumcised to be a member of the Church, many early Gentiles
around the time of the composition of the Gospel of Luke would have struggled
to join a church that resembled in many ways the Jewish religion. [6]
Understanding the author and his
intentions in light of the historical circumstances shines great light upon these
verses of the Gospel of Luke. Understanding that the author intended to call
all, Jews and Gentiles alike, to discipleship after Christ’s own example leads one
to see the exact purpose of the passage. This is emphasized in the authors use
of the word “anyone” to symbolize that all are called, not just the Jews. The
author also uses the demonstration of taking up one’s own cross, in essence
following what Christ will do when He surrenders His will to the Father’s
during His passion and death.
Taking a close look at the literary
composition of this background one quickly sees this passage is a conditional
passage. “If anyone wishes to come after me he must deny himself and take up
his cross and follow me.” (Lk 9:23 NAB) Using the word “if”,
the author makes it clear that the Christ is not commanding anyone to do
anything but is inviting his followers to a way of life, one that will bring
them fulfillment. In making the passage conditional, Christ makes it clear that
anyone who holds up his end of the deal by taking up his cross will be
fulfilled.[7]
Moving beyond historical and
literary analysis one realizes clearly that this brief, two - verse passage
from the Gospel of Luke is loaded with meaning. The Church Fathers and Doctors,
using the literal, allegorical, moral and analogical senses, saw much meaning
in this passage. Modern exegesis, using the advances in the secular sciences, finds
a different yet important meaning. Understanding both the patristic and
medieval exegesis as well as the modern exegesis sheds a bright light on what
Christ was teaching in this passage.
St. Bonaventure, himself a commentator
from the medieval age with a good understanding of what the Church Father’s
said about this passage, points out that Christ did not command but invited
people to follow him. He explains that the cross represents penance and sees
the importance of daily penance, because Christ challenges everyone to take up
there crosses daily. Further, he explains the danger someone puts himself in
when they trust themselves more than God. Often times they love themselves more
than God and lose God and in doing so actually lose themselves. Most
importantly, Bonaventure clearly states that to really live one’s life to the fullest
one must allow Christ to save it and for Christ to save it the person must be
willing to expose his life to worldly loss following after the example of
Christ.[8]
Modern psychology opens this passage up
to a whole new level of meaning. Modern exegetes using psychology realize that
this passage is not calling the disciple to suppress his ego. Man is not called
to suppress himself; he is not called to be a stoic. Rather, he is called to
form his ego after the example of Christ.
This passage calls man to give over control of his destiny and to open
“oneself to true self-knowledge by laying aside their image constructed from
worldly illusions about the meaning of life.” [9] One is called to leave
behind his old self and conform himself totally to Christ. This is important
because the stakes are important. If one takes up their cross daily he will be
rewarded with eternal life, but if he doesn’t he risks losing eternal life.[10]
It seems obvious that the word “deny”
is one of the most important words in the passage. The word, deny appears 52
times in the Revised Standard Bible. It
is used 46 times in the New Testament and only 6 times in the Old Testament. Luke,
like the other two synoptic gospel writers, uses the word only 7 times.[11]It stems from the Greek
word aparneomai which means to
repudiate or to renounce someone or something.[12]
St. Paul, in his second letter to
Timothy, uses “denial” in a very similar manner: “If we endure, we shall also
reign with him, if we deny him, he will also deny us, if we are faithless, he
remains faithful for he cannot deny himself.” (2 Tim 2:12-13 NAB). These words
from St. Paul explain one aspect of Christ’s teaching in the Gospel of Luke. St.
Paul teaches that Christ always remains faithful to his people, but if they do
not pick their cross by denying themselves then it is they who deny Christ. Anyone who wants to be a disciple of Christ
is called to be Christ-like; and since Christ picked up his cross so too his
disciples are called to deny themselves and pick up their crosses.
There are parallel passages in each
of the other two synoptic gospels. The Gospel of Mark phrases the passage in a
slightly different way. “And he called to him the multitude of his disciples
and said to them, If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take
up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it; and
whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospels will save it.” (Mk 8:34-35 NAB) The author of
Mark’s gospel mentions that Christ directed this saying to those who were
already following him. The author shows that it is not simply enough to follow
behind Christ, but rather one must walk in His footsteps by totally
surrendering himself in taking up his cross. The author of Matthew has the same
saying but also in a slightly different way: “He who loves father or mother
more than me is not worthy of me and he who loves son or daughter more than me
is not worthy of me; and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not
worthy of me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for
my sake will find it.” (Mt:10:38-39 NAB) Matthew more than Luke and Mark
stresses the importance of denying everything, even loved ones, to follow
Christ.
While there are multiple parallel
passages in the New Testament there are no direct parallel passages in the Old
Testament. This is to be expected because Christ is calling his disciples to a
radical new form of discipleship. In the Old Testament God formed a covenant
with his people in which the people upheld their end by obeying the law. Christ
has come into this world to fulfill that old law. He has adopted all Christians
as his brothers. Through his passion, death, and resurrection he saves his
people. Following the example of Christ, his disciples, those who desire to
follow him, must likewise take up their cross. It is no longer good enough to
offer animal sacrifice; one must deny himself to truly follow Christ.
This passage from Luke is often
cited by the Catholic Church as the
means to turning towards and following Christ. The Catechism of the Catholic
Church recognizes the importance of this passage and its teaching on conversion.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church
cites this exact passage in its discussion on conversion and calls this passage
the “surest way of penance.”[13]
The passage from Luke is not used in
the current Catholic Liturgy. The parallel passage from the Gospel of Matthew is
used on the 13th Sunday of Ordinary Time during year A. On the 13th
Sunday of Ordinary Time in year A Mt 10:38-39 is paired with 2 Kgs 4:8-11,
14-16a and Rom 6:3-4, 8-11. In the reading from the second book of Kings,
Elisha comes to visit a woman. Upon visiting her he prophesizes that when he
returns to visit her in a year she will be with child. This passage is clearly
a pre-figuration of the Visitation. Read with the other readings it is easy to
see that God desired to send His Son born to a holy woman to save the human
race. This Son is destined to die for the sins of the world. Likewise if anyone
dies to sin he is destined to live with Him forever. The reading of St. Paul’s
Letter to the Romans is a reminder that all who were baptized into Christ were
also baptized into his death. St. Paul exhorts the Romans, “as to His death, He
died to sin once and for all; as to his life, he lives for God. Consequently
you too must think of yourselves as [being] dead to sin and living for God in
Christ Jesus.” (Rom 6:3-4, 8-11 NAB) This exhortation from St. Paul paired with
the Gospel of Matthew reminds the hearer that Christ died for our sins that we
may live with Him forever in heaven. Just as Christ died we too must also die
to sin so that we can live with Him. There is no better way to die to sin that
to surrender oneself over to hime who defeated sin, Christ.
These short two verses from the
Gospel of Luke are packed full of meaning. In these verses Christ lays out a
direct way to achieve salvation through discipleship. Through understanding the
historical and literary background, what the Church Fathers, Doctors and modern
exegetes have understood from the passage, the word “deny”, other relevant
passages to the text, and how the text is used in the Church’s liturgy and
teaching the full weight of this passage begins to shine through. Through this
study one is able to more clearly discern what the path of discipleship really
is.
1. Raymond E. Brown, Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Anchor Bible, 1997),226.
2. Daniel J. Harrington, The Gospel of Luke (Collegeville:The Liturgical Press, 1991),3.
3. D.L. Bock, “Luke, Gospel of,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. Joel B Green, Scot McKnight et al. (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1992), 497.
4. Bock, “Luke, Gospel of,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 500.
5. Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997), 23-24.
6. Green, The Gospel of Luke, 23-24.
7. William F. Arndt, Bible Commentary The Gospel According to Luke (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1956), 259-260.
8. Bonaventure. Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, trans. Robert J. Karris, (New York: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2003), 836-840.
9. Dianne Bergant, and Robert J Karris, (eds), The Collegeville Bible Commentary (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1989), 954.
10. Dianne Bergant, The Collegeville Bible Commentary, 954.
11. Catholic Bible Concordance RSV, Catholic Edition. Emmaus Road Publishing, 2009.
12. Mark D. Given, “Deny,” The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, ed. Katharine D. Sakenfeld et al. (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2007), 100-101.
13. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. (Washington DC: United States Catholic Conference, 2000,) 1435.
1. Raymond E. Brown, Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Anchor Bible, 1997),226.
2. Daniel J. Harrington, The Gospel of Luke (Collegeville:The Liturgical Press, 1991),3.
3. D.L. Bock, “Luke, Gospel of,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. Joel B Green, Scot McKnight et al. (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1992), 497.
4. Bock, “Luke, Gospel of,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 500.
5. Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997), 23-24.
6. Green, The Gospel of Luke, 23-24.
7. William F. Arndt, Bible Commentary The Gospel According to Luke (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1956), 259-260.
8. Bonaventure. Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, trans. Robert J. Karris, (New York: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2003), 836-840.
9. Dianne Bergant, and Robert J Karris, (eds), The Collegeville Bible Commentary (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1989), 954.
10. Dianne Bergant, The Collegeville Bible Commentary, 954.
11. Catholic Bible Concordance RSV, Catholic Edition. Emmaus Road Publishing, 2009.
12. Mark D. Given, “Deny,” The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, ed. Katharine D. Sakenfeld et al. (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2007), 100-101.
13. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. (Washington DC: United States Catholic Conference, 2000,) 1435.
Monday, June 25, 2012
St. Ambrose on Preaching
St. Augustine’s conversion chronicled in his famous work The Confessions has fascinated mankind for almost 1600 years. It is clear to anyone who reads The Confessions that an integral factor in the conversion of St. Augustine was the preaching of St. Ambrose of Milan. Bertand de Margerie S.J., in his 1995 work An Introduction to the History of Exegesis, correctly points out that “the Church and mankind are indebted to the hermeneutic development by Ambrose of Milan for the conversion and Christian writings of St. Augustine of Hippo.”[1]This short paper aims to explore the preaching of St. Ambrose.
St. Ambrose was born in 340 A.D. in Treves to a Christian family at which time his father was administering the Gallic provinces as the prefect.[2] By the time he had grown into a young man he had moved to Rome with his widowed mother.[3] In Rome he undertook a liberal arts education in preparation for a civil career composed of studies in rhetoric, jurisprudence, the works of Aristotle, Plato, Plotinus, and the study of Greek.[4] After studying the liberal arts he began his political career and was assigned to act as governor over the provinces of Ligui and Aemilla. Having successfully administered these provinces he was called to Milan.[5]
It was in Milan that the life of the promising young career of Ambrose changed course forever. After the death of the Arian bishop of Milan, Auxentius, a revolt broke out in the city over who should be the next bishop. Ambrose, himself only a catechumen, was sent by the emperor to put down the revolt. While he was in the process of solving the question of who should be the next bishop, Catholics and Arian onlookers alike both shouted out his name, nominating him for the position of bishop. Ambrose who was sent as a diplomat of the emperor to find a new bishop, not to become the new bishop, considered his sins too great to be named bishop and tried to flee the city twice, only to be captured and returned each time by the citizens. Realizing that he was called to be the bishop he insisted on finding a Catholic bishop, not an Arian bishop, to baptize him and moved through the ecclesiastical grades very quickly, in only eight days after being baptized he was consecrated a bishop. Ambrose quickly came to be known as a holy bishop and a powerful preacher.[6]
At the time that St. Ambrose was elected bishop, he was the most senior magistrate in northern Italy. He was well educated in politics and culture but he was ignorant of ecclesiastical matters, most importantly of Sacred Scripture. While not educated in the ways of churchmen, his liberal arts education, “his knowledge of Greek, -rare at that time- his habit of learning by heart, his exegetical aptitude resulting from the practice of reading and interpreting the literal and allegorical sense of a poetical text, and above all its moral meaning,” left St. Ambrose with the basic skills required for his new ministry as bishop.[7]
Even though St. Ambrose entered his new ministry without a good knowledge of Sacred Scripture, he knew well the importance of Sacred Scripture.[8] Following the example of St. Gregory of Nazianzus, preaching became St. Ambrose’s top priority.[9] Knowing the necessity, in his role as bishop, to preach on the Word of God, St. Ambrose quickly began to study the Word of God.[10]
Ambrose came to know the Scriptures intimately. In his sermons, the saint, frequently quoted Scripture verbatim which demonstrates how familiar he had become with the Word of God. This frequent recourse to the words of Scripture was an important for St. Ambrose because he believed that the “bible’s mode of expression was the most appropriate for pastoral speech.”[11] Ambrose believed that the bible, being the inspired word of God, was the most perfect way to instruct the faithful.
St. Ambrose believed that the effective preacher was one who taught the faithful to participate in Divine Life by teaching them how to live as God’s people. As bishop he instructed his clergy that their primary duty as priests was to educate their people in the virtues of character. While the content of the sermon was important, St. Ambrose knew that if the preacher did not live an exemplary life his preaching would be much less effective, or worse even a potential cause of scandal.
While the preacher’s actions must agree with the way he acts, his use of rhetoric is also important. St. Ambrose believed in taking the middle road of rhetoric. The preacher’s rhetoric should not be too elaborate or too simplistic; rather it should be of a level that is dignified but understandable by everyone. St. Ambrose’s sermons, “while lacking in excitement and superficial charm, were eloquent and perceptive, full of sound learning and solid instruction, and possessing in a marked degree the power of convincing those who heard them.”[12] St. Ambrose strove to appeal his audiences’ practical mind, not to their emotions.
St. Ambrose was greatly indebted to his predecessors, the Church Fathers of the East, for his style and content of delivering homilies. St. Ambrose, following the Eastern Fathers, truly believed that God inspired the texts of the Scriptures.[13] With this trust he drew his sermons from the practice of scriptural meditation known as lectio devina. “The method of lectio devina served to guide all of Ambrose’s preaching and writings, which stemmed precisely from prayerful listening to the Word of God.”[14] Through the practice of lectio devina the preacher opens himself up to what God desires to tell his people and in doing so truly becomes the mouthpiece of God, not his own.
In his meditation he was attuned to the allegorical method of biblical interpretation. In fact “Ambrose the exegete is often dependent on Origen, particularly in his way of allegorizing.”[15] While the allegorical level of interpretation was important for both Origen and St. Ambrose, neither of them ignored the historical or literal levels of interpretation.[16] In the application of the allegorical meaning of a biblical passage to his homily, Ambrose, proclaimed a spiritual sense, which concerned Christ, or his Church.[17] Like the Fathers, the spiritual meaning of the text always related to the profession of Faith and to the communion of the Church.[18]
Beyond the allegorical level of biblical interpretation, St. Ambrose also brought the use of Christian Platonic exegesis of Scripture into the Western Church. St. Ambrose used the allegorical level and harmonized it with the Bible using this Platonic sense. It was precisely in this harmonizing of the Word of God with Platonic thought that drew St. Augustine to listen to St. Ambrose’s sermons and eventually led him to the Church.[19]
Many of St. Ambrose’s homilies are addressed to his local Church in Milan and are often aimed at rooting out the heresies prevalent in Milan. The majority of the saint’s homilies can be categorized as addressing the influence of the world, the truth that the Old Covenant ceaselessly prepares the image of the New Covenant and that following Christian ethics leads to eternal life. Of particular concern to St. Ambrose was the heresy of Marcion, which claimed that the Old Testament was not the inspired Word of God. One common way St. Ambrose addressed the errors of Marcion was by interpreting the Old Testament in light of St. Paul’s theology.[20]
St. Ambrose never envisioned himself as a clergyman, nor did he have any formal training for his role as Bishop, but he became an effective preacher by using the skills he formed during his formal liberal arts training and by listening to what God was saying through the Scriptures. St. Ambrose, in his method of preaching, expressed the belief, held from the earliest days of the Church that “human beings at every level of spiritual development can be enlightened and energized by the power of the word of God.”[21] Preaching, for Ambrose, began with the Sacred Texts in an attempt to live in conformity with the Divine Texts.
1. Bertrand de Margerie S.J., An Introduction to the History of Exegesis Volume II The Latin Fathers, trans. Pierre de Fontnouvelle, (Petersham: St Bede’s Publications, 1995), 76.
2. Pope Benedict XVI., The Fathers (Huntington: Our Sunday Visitor , 2008), 129.
3. Paulinus, The Life of St. Ambrose, trans. John A Lacy, Fathers of the Church 15 (New York: Fathers of the Church, 1957), 34-36.
4. Frend, W.H.C. The Rise of Christianity. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 618.
4. Frend, W.H.C. The Rise of Christianity. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 618.
5. Paulinus, The Life of St. Ambrose, trans. Lacy, 34-36.
6. Paulinus, The Life of St. Ambrose, trans. Lacy, 34 - 43.
6. Paulinus, The Life of St. Ambrose, trans. Lacy, 34 - 43.
7. Margerie S.J. An Introduction to the History of Exegesis Volume II The Latin Fathers, trans Fontnouvelle ,76.
8. Benedict XVI, The Fathers, 130.
9. Craig Alan Satterlee, Ambrose of Milan’s Method of Mystagogical Preacing (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 2002), 93.
10. Benedict XVI, The Fathers, 130.
11. Satterlee, Ambrose of Milan’s Method of Mystagogical Preaching, 92.
12. Satterlee, Ambrose of Milan’s Method of Mystagogical Preaching, 89.
13. Broz, Jarolsav. “From Allegory to the Four Senses of Scripture Hermeneutics of the Church Fathers and of the Christian middle Ages.” In Philosophical Hermeneutics and Biblical Exegesis by Petr Pokorny, & Jan Roskovec, 302 – 309. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002. 302.
14. Benedict XVI, The Fathers, 130.
15. Margerie S.J. An Introduction to the History of Exegesis Volume II The Latin Fathers, trans Fontnouvelle ,77.
16. Margerie S.J. An Introduction to the History of Exegesis Volume II The Latin Fathers, trans Fontnouvelle ,78 - 79.
17. Walter M Werbylo, Integrating Patristic and Modern Exegesis of Scripture (Front Royal: Christendom Press), 2009. 232.
18. Broz, “From Allegory to the Four Senses of Scripture Hermeneutics of the Church Fathers and of the Christian middle Ages.” 303.
19. Freud, The Rise of Christianity, 618 & 664.
20. Margerie, An Introduction to the History of Exegesis Volume II The Latin Fathers, 78 & 89.
21. Broz,“From Allegory to the Four Senses of Scripture Hermeneutics of the Church Fathers and of the Christian Middle Ages.” 306.
21. Broz,“From Allegory to the Four Senses of Scripture Hermeneutics of the Church Fathers and of the Christian Middle Ages.” 306.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)