Review for Religious - Issue 07.6 (November 1948)
Issue 7.6 of the Review for Religious, 1948.
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Online |
| Language: | eng |
| Created: |
Saint Louis University Libraries Digitization Center
1948
|
| Online Access: | http://cdm17321.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/rfr/id/190 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| id |
sluoai_rfr-190 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
ojs |
| institution |
Saint Louis University |
| collection |
OJS |
| language |
eng |
| format |
Online |
| author |
Missouri Province of the Society of Jesus |
| spellingShingle |
Missouri Province of the Society of Jesus Review for Religious - Issue 07.6 (November 1948) |
| author_facet |
Missouri Province of the Society of Jesus |
| author_sort |
Missouri Province of the Society of Jesus |
| title |
Review for Religious - Issue 07.6 (November 1948) |
| title_short |
Review for Religious - Issue 07.6 (November 1948) |
| title_full |
Review for Religious - Issue 07.6 (November 1948) |
| title_fullStr |
Review for Religious - Issue 07.6 (November 1948) |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Review for Religious - Issue 07.6 (November 1948) |
| title_sort |
review for religious - issue 07.6 (november 1948) |
| description |
Issue 7.6 of the Review for Religious, 1948. |
| publisher |
Saint Louis University Libraries Digitization Center |
| publishDate |
1948 |
| url |
http://cdm17321.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/rfr/id/190 |
| _version_ |
1797768339760611328 |
| spelling |
sluoai_rfr-190 Review for Religious - Issue 07.6 (November 1948) Missouri Province of the Society of Jesus Jesuits -- Periodicals; Monasticism and religious orders -- Periodicals. Kelly Issue 7.6 of the Review for Religious, 1948. 1948-11-15 2012-05 PDF RfR.7.6.1948.pdf rfr-1940 BX2400 .R4 Copyright U.S. Central and Southern Province, Society of Jesus. Permission is hereby granted to copy and distribute individual articles for personal, classroom, or workshop use. Please credit Review for Religious and reference the volume, issue, and page number and cite Saint Louis University Libraries as the host of the digital collection. Saint Louis University Libraries Digitization Center text eng Missouri Province of the Society of Jesus Review for ReHgio NOVEMBER 15, 1948 Assisting at Mass ..........’-.. Cla’rence McAul;ffe ~Distractions in Mental Prayer ........ c.A. Herbsf On S÷ayin9 in Love ........... Richard Leo Heppler Loving the Neigi~bor ............ Gera~a. Ke’y Doc÷Hne of. St. John of he Cross" ¯ ..... J.E. Breun;g Book Reviews Communications .... .Questions Answered Annual Index VOLUME VII ~ NUMBER .6 VOLFdMI] VlI NOVEMBER, 19478 NUMBER 6 CONTENTS PAP.AL DIRECTIVES FOR ASSISTING. AT MASS-- Clarence McAuliffe, S.,I ......... 281 DISTRACTIONS IN MENTAL ~RAYER--C. A. Herbst, S.,l. , 290 OUR CONTRIBUTORS ................ 294 ON 8TAYING IN LOVE~Riehard Leo Heppler, O.F.M ...... 29~ ANEW EDITION OF NEWMAN ............. 298 C~N THE DUTY OF LOVING THE NEIGHBOR, ESPECIALLY ENEMIES--Gerald Kelly, S.J, 299 THE DOCTRINE OF ST. JO~-IN OF THE CROSS--J. E. Breunig, S’.3,. 313 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS~ ! 42. Use of Interest from Dowries and Legacies for Community Pur-posea . , ¯ ~ ." ............... 321 43. Common Life and Recreational Travel . . . ~ ...... 321 44. Retirement Age for Superiors~ ......... . ¯ 321 45. Ro~ary~Indulgences, Mysteries, and Literature ..... ".. . . 322 COMMUNICATIONS ................. 327 BOOK REV’IEWS~ Exile Ends in Glory; Souls at Stake ........ , ¯ ¯ 324 Book NOTICES" ¯ .............. 326 A REPRINT ~ERIES---MAYBE! .......... ~ . 331 ANNU.AL INDEX ~ .... ., . . 333 REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, November. 1948~ Vet. VII, No. 6, Published bi-monthly; January, March. Mair, July, September, and November at the College Press, ~606 Harrison Street,-Topeka, Kansas, by St. Mary’s College, St. Marys, Kansas, with ecclesiastical approbation. Entered as sec0rid class matte~ January ~1-5, 1942, at the Post Otiice, Topeka, Kansas, under the act of March 3, 1879. Editoriai Board: Adam C. Ellis, S.J., G. Augustine Ellard, S.d., Gerald Kelly, S.J. Editorial Secretary; Alfred F. Schneider, S.,l. Copyright, 1948/by Adam C. Eliis. Permission is hereby granted for quotations of reasonable length, provided due credit be~ given "this review and the author. Subscriptiott price: 2 dollars .a year. Printed in U. S. A. Before wrlflncj tO us, please consult, notice on lee|de, beck cover. Papal Directives t:or Assisting al: Mass Clarence McAuliffe, S.2. ~| T IS, THEREFORE, Venerable Brethren, proper for all Cath-olics to realize that participation in the Eucharistic Sacrifice is for them an urgent duty and a lofty dignity. This participa-tion is not achieved if their minds are torpid, .unconcerned, distracted and daydreaming. On the contrary, so, fervent and active should be their mental application that they will become, intimately united with their High Priest (Christ). Together with,Him and through Him they should offer the ,Mass, and along.with Him they should consecrate themselves (to God)." Th~se words were penned by our Holy Father, Plus XII, in his memorable dncyclical "Mediator Dei"’ of November, 1947.~ They furnish a compendious sketch 6f the internal spirit which all Cath-olics, and especially religiofis and 15riests," should foster at every Mass. This inteinal spirit is etched";2~ith greater preCision-in ’otl~er sections bf the encyclical. Nor does ~the POntiff rest satisfied with an expla-nation of the internal spirit-’6nly. He also’becomes quite, detailed regard’ing various external ways of as?isting at Mass. It should prove 15fin~ficial~for the spiritual lives of reade?s of ~he i~EVlEW and of those with-whom they deal, to summarize and explain the,papal directives in this important matter. ¯ - ° It" should be ~noted first of all that, just as in all prayer, so at Mass, the internal spirit of those present is~vastly more important than the external manner of participation, The Holy Father ins_ists on’ this principle _in various paragraphs of the encyclical. Indeed,, he . points out, as we ’shall indicate later, that the-external ways of par-ticipation may~ vary ~but that the internal spirit: should re.main con-stant. It is uniform; it applies to. all the particip~ants, t~o~ugh i~o will be realizeffdn°diverse degrees.according to the~graces~,kngw~ledge, _a.nd circumstances, of each individual. The same internal .spirit .s.bou_ld pervade the Low Mass as well as the High Mass: it shou~/~d be, the goal of the sinner as well as of the saint; it should be c.uJtiga~ted regardless of one’s subjective moods. The~ external participation, whatever form it takes, has but one chief purpose-~-to foster_ the 281 CLARENCE MCAULIFFE Reoieto ¢or Religious proper internal dispositions of the participant. But what are these internal dispositions? After answering this .question in a gener~al way, the Holy Father particularizes. As ~egards’ the general" answer, he says that participants in the Mass should endeavor to arouse in themselves the same internal spirit which animated Christ" Himself when He was immolated on Cal-vary. This idea is fundamental: and the Pontiff expressly declares it when he says that ~the’ Mass "demands’ of all Cl~istiahs ~that they imbue their souls with the same affections; insbfar as it lies in human power, that permeated the soul of the Divine Redeeme~ when He made the sacrifice of Himself." It Will not~.be difficult to understand the reason f6r this cardinal dire~tivi if~we recall two dogmatic principles about the Mass. First, the Mass is not-only a" memorial, but an actual unbloody repetition, bf Calvary. SeCond, the Savior, both bn Calvary and at each Mass, does not offer for Himself, but for us. He represents"the entire human family, and especially those who by baptism have become members of His Mystical Body. He acts for each one of.us; He is our substi-tute: and since at every Mass He re-enacts Calvary, He therefore expeits each one of us to strive for those internal dispositions which He Himself has. Just as each member 9f a graduat.lng class, is expected to possess th~ dispositions harbored and publicly expressed by its valedictorian, or as each member of a fraternal organization should,foster the sentiments publicly proclaimed by its pres, ident in the name of all, so should each Catholic at Mass strive to nurture the dispositions of~the~,Savio~r, who in the name,of all renews the offering of Calvary at the Holy Sacrifice. ’Descending to ~details, the~Holy Father .itemizes the basic ele-ments of this intelnal spirit. It should conform to the purposes of both Calvary ancl~ the Mass. Th~se are four in number, but pre-eminent among them is the spirit of adoration. It is of faith that the Ma~s is a genuine sacrifice. Ai such it can be offered to .God alone, and itsprincipal~function:is ~o rendersto God that supreme honor th~it is du~e exclusively td’Him. To q~uote the Holy Father: "From~His birth to His. death 3esus Christ wasqnflamed ,with zezl for the advancement of God’s" glory : and fkom thd cross the immola-tion Of His blood ascended to heaven in an odor of sweetness." This spirit of adoration gripped the Savior’s "human soul With acute poigna.ncy while his life blood slowly ebbed away on the cross. In the same spirit He, as the principal minister, offers Himself in the 282 ASSISTING AT.~LAss tiame of allsat every Mas~.~ It is the spirit ’which all participants in the’Miss shoiild sedulously cultivate. The Mass by its very nature an~l action exi)resses God’s transcendent donlination over~ mankind and’~the utter subjection of mankind .to God. Hdn~e it poitulates from all a spirit of humble adoration2 ....... ~ -~ ¯ Ho~v~ver, three other element_s, to mention only’~the basic .ones. entered into the Savior’s disposition at-the Crucifixion. Although theie three are implicitly contained in the spirit of adoration, it would be well for participants in the Mass to make them explicit, as the Holy F~ther observes in the encyclical. Perhaps the most important Of these is the spirit of thanksgiving. God has given us, ’both as individuals and as social beings, every single thing. Strive as we may,~ w~ can n~ver tl~ank Him ade-- quately. But with theoSon of God Himself repr~seniing ~us and ~icting~ in our name oh0 Calvary and at each Mass,wit isonow ~possible for us to 6fief a worthy thanksgiving. ;That i spirit of gratitude anl-ma~ e~l ourSa¢ior’s~soul on Calvary~ is clear, as the Holy Fatl~er men-tion~ s’; fiom the~fact that ~Holy Scripture:says that He "gave thanks" at the~.prepai~tory sacrifice of ~the Last "Supper. Moreover, "He continuously~ gave thanks as He hung from the crbss/’’ states the Pontiff. Since, therefore, we are expected’at~each ~Mass.to foster the dispositions of Christ Himself, we too should,cultivate a spirit of gratifude .... Secondly, the Mass should evoke in each participant a spirit of expiation; of reparation for 6ne’s own sins and ~for those of the entire human family. ’ We know that our Sa,~ior died to redeem the human race, to ransom it from the bonds of original sin and also of actual sin, so that we cotild again achieve our supern.atural, destiny. According to the Holy Father it was .for,this reason ~that our Savior "wished to be immolated on the cross~ as ’a~ propitiation for our sins, and not only .for burs, but for those of ~he whole world.’ " And the Pontiff continues: "Moreover, on our altars ~He. offers.Himself d~ily for our~ redemption.so that snatched_ from eternal ruin~ we~ may be numbered among the elect." It is evident, therefore, that Our Lord botkon Calvary and in each Muss.possesses a spirit of repara-tion for sin, and the same spirit ~should~ animate us at~the Holy Sacri-fice. We should be sorry for our own shortcomings and make atone-ment for the sins and crimes of humanity., Finally, our Savior on Calvary was permeated with a spirit of impetration. He’saw how mankind, by original sin: particularly, had ,283 CLARENCE I~CAULIFFE Review [or Religious squandered the’bountiful gifts oLGodoand, to. quote the’ encyclical, "had reduced itself to a state of utter poverty and indigence.’,’~ Not only on the cross did He beseech His heavenly Father to relieve this miserable condition, but, to quote again, "He petitions, for.us ’in’the same etficacious way upon our holy altars." Hence it is fitting that we, too, for whom He supplicates, should foster a disposition of impetration at every Mass. Adoration, thanksgiving, .reparation, petition.. We must steep ourselves in these four affections at Mass if we would put 9n ’.’the same affections that permeated the soul of the Divine Redeemer on Calvary." But perhaps it would be well for us to become acquainted with a reason, drawn from the very nature of the Mass itself, why this fourfold disposition should be cultivated. We must remember that the Mass is not merely a social prayer, but a social prayer in action.. Moreover, it is a unique social prayer in action. After all, when the celebrant sprinkles the congregation with holy water before High Mass or when the deacon silently incenses the entire congrega-tion at the offertory of High Mass, we have social prayer, in action. But the MasS,is a-unique prayer in action, because it is a, genuine sacriEce, the only one acceptable to God in the world today. If. we understand the basic notion underlying the concept of sac-rifice, it will be easy for us to see why it. postulates dispositions of adoration, gratitude, expiation, and petition. Every sacrifice is fundamentally the giving of a gift to God. This giving is not enough to constitute a sacrifice, but without it no true sacrifice could come into ,being. Bearing this in .mind, let us ask ourselves the meaning of presents or gifts when they are bestowed among men. We find ,that the giving of a gift to another is an action and that this "action has various but definite meanings, - whether expressed or not. By such gifts we sometimes manifest.our gratitude, as when a man leaves his money t6 a hospital that cared for him when he was indigent. At other times a gift. means "I am sorry,’’~ as when a hus-band, after an unjustifiable outburst of anger, presents his wife with a box of candy. Sometimes a gift’ineans "’I want a favor," ’_’I’m going to ask you for something shortly," as might be the~case when an employer bestows an unexpected bonus on-an’employee. Finally,oa gift may emphasize particularly our honor and affection-,for ~another, as when children buy their mother a new coat for Mother’s Day. Honor, thanksgiving, reparation, impetration--these .meanings or, at least one of them, are the significance of every gift. The gift is a 284 No~emb~ec, 19’48 "ASSISTING AT MASS manner or expressing these, emotions By a deed. , The ~ift~ represent~ th~.persgff°wh’o gives,’’~ By ~i,iihg of’ his shbstahce, the dohor says it/ effect that be’wishes to give h~mself’ to the~ecipient for one of .thd f0~ur ~urpos-es mentioned abd~~ oi for all of’ th’em together. ’~’L~et us° apl~ly, this tb the Mass. -Th~ gift we therd offer.i.t0 God thr0tigh the priest is none other than oui Divi;ae Lord Himself. ~This is an articie of’ faith. Alth6~gh the presentation of:this Gift to God is externalljr and officially made by th’e priest aldne, neverthel~ss the priest~acts both.tin’the name of Christ, the principal Gi~rer, and in°the hame of all the baptized, especially df those who are assisting ,~t the Massl Hence our divin~"Savior ;is ~!the°~ift Of all tb the Eternal Father. Onl~r the priest can make ~fie outwa~’d°’0ffering:which cdnstitutes the saciit~ce ;" but th~ priest mak~es, this ~offering :for ali the people! ~’ai~d each p~i~ticii~hnt af Mas~ Sh0uld,~th~eiefbre, inteinal.ly~ offer ~he~DiVind Gift in ti’~i0n £;ith the’ priest. Arid each participant shOUld also rem~em-bet that ChriSf, trul~resent bn’,the alta~~ at the d6nsecration~ repre-sents himself arid eee~’y membe? of ’th~ Mysticat Body. ~ If, .then/we ~ilize tl-iat~at ex;ery M~ss. each ,baptized member of the congregation pr’e~ii~ti th~0ii~h~th~, priest’ fiis~dwn ~ersoi~a! Gift to G0d~ it easy to understand why each one; "~hiSuld~-~put on~ thee~ affecti~ins ~f adbration,,thanksgivifig, .,rep’aration,o and~petition... ,,~hese are the .pi~rposes:of all I~ifts; and,at Mass all fouk purposes, are~al~w, ays" t6~be at’faified~ ~Gianted, tha~t, .the)~Church p’ros~ides ,’special !- Masses, of thanksgiving, o~p~tition, oor reparation.,, SuCh;, Ma~ses hierely niean that~on some particular occasion we~aie stressifig our~ spirit of~th~nks-giving or. expiatioh, or’ impetration,’ not that: we are, excludihg thi~ bther~ ends:~ ,If, ’,then, ,ode0assists "at Mai~.~.with6ut realizin~o that he personally~thr6~igh~ fhe outward, actioix of, the priest, is truly; presenting his 6wnGift to God;’.,he~mi~ses.~.the~basic significance of the M~ss:,. He ~will ~0rbfit ’from it nevertheless; but,.th~ Mass by.its.~very, action’, pos-tulates oUevery, participant an active, internal giving and,, conse’~ qhen~t[y~- ~the~ dispositions, of.~adoratibn,0, gratitude;~ repafatipn, o and petition whidi.dviiiy~ sincere giver possesses.~. If this Spirit°is missing, .we d6, not,’hear Mass intelligently--; .~We ~re,,like deaf men, attending an oratorical contest. Weisee, but we do, not understahd., But the Mass, since it is a true ,ga(rifice,: is not merely the, offerin~ of ¯a Gift..In every’genuine s~crifice, some~change must be Wr6ught in tht’~gift. " Hence ~th~ gift,~is~ not called Simply~ a ~" gi f,t~ "~but~.~a ".victim.’~’ ¯ In sacrifi~es,!of, theo,Olit’L~aw~ this change or victimization wa§ accomplisheff by. the destruction,of the ~object offered. ’~ .So too’ off 285 CLARENCE MCAULIFFE Calvary. ou.r..Lord, was s.a_crifie,d; by, His,d.ea~h--the~ .separa.tio.n,of His b0dy,,and.human soul. ~. Since ,the Mass~ besides .bei~g-,a,,true,~ s~crifice is also a renewal .of~Calva.ry,:we,.m~st,fi~ad. in it, a death,or,,destrtic-tion of so_me kind .... ~Since., it, is, of faith ;that, Chri~st cannot.die~,or suffer physically~ since His resurrection;~ His death. .at ~Ma.,ss .is, m~rely mystical,,or~ tepresen~atiye. ’T9 under~ga.nd .this, we need only r~fl~ect a moment on the:do.uble, consecrati.on.;~,~the essence ofo the Holy:Sa.cri; rice. Though:,Christ beco_m, es~:wholly, Rresent _undgr. ,, each spe.cies~ at each consecration,, nevertheless the .words uttered by ,the pries~t d~ not give this impression.-" Ou~wa.rdly, but only outwardly,..; they ,siggify a, separation of His,.hody’and blood,, i.e., death,~ since t.he pries.t first icnotne:syeaclr tahteens: tch.oen bsreecaradt _be~sy ,t hsae y,winign e, "o,,Tyh~i Ss iysm Mg~y :b~omdsy i:.’s:.~ t~age,dc haaf~telir~ ac eb"r ioeff My blood.". ,, Since separgtion of body., and blood spells, death for a man, the two .consecrations,. taken, at their face or oral ~va!ue~ provi~l~ us with,an outward appearance of the Savior~s~ death.~ ~ All .theor logians~and, indeed: reason itself teach that such a "picture"-of’ de.ath is painted by:.he"words0 of consecration and,, ~most,~the01ogi.a.n.s ad ~mit thatthis "pjc.ture" of death is the only change or d~estru~ti~on ~equired to .make the. Ma.ss a genuine sacrifice.. -~ . .: ..~_ >,~.0. ,: ~, ~,, , But wh~° do we" introduce such ~a dogmatic-pplnt ifito aw article which~profksses’to explain ho~ ,we,ate 1~o assist at Masig Becauseits correct-, fifiderstanding clarifies "an .additibnal ~ind’ ,vital; internal dis-position which the,Holy ~Fathe~-~wishes ~very Chtholic to,(ultivi~te" ,at th~’;Holy Sitcrifice;o He says that participants, in~;the-:Mass0 ’,’should immolate themselves as, victims." In other? words:~the.~Mass be’its vdry /action demands 6f’~all-f~iesent:~i ,spirit" of" sdlf-ifiamolation,’~of self-surrender to,God:’ Ac~ordifig tb~.the~PontiffLthis :means~.more p~i’rticulaily that. each l~’hrticiplint in the-Mass "should conseCrate~him’- sell to the attainmerit~ of Gbd’~ glory ,an’d ~hould earnestly ~deslfe to imitate closely. :3esus C.’hriSt through-~the~ efidurance, of poignant sufferings:" In shbrt, the Catholic :whb assist.~ ;at Mass’ intelligently should’ realize’ ,tha’t- the’. Holy- Sacrifice" by~ ,its "~acrificial, action means th~it~he is~to go :.’all’Loutv ff6i Godi.~b6th .b~,~ac~ively.~’~ngagifig in apostolic wbrks,and~’by,suffering all evils° ~atiently:.. This is,self~ immdlatidn, ~elf.-surrehd~r td"God." -~ ~ ~ ~! :: ~ : "-. :~o ~. ".~’ ::~ °’ .. L ~And tl~e’reason~ ":Becausez as,explained abgv,e,,Chri~t Our Loid, the:Gift w~ .offer ttirouigh thd priest.,at:’Ma~s, is: not m~etely, ao ~Gift; but a~Gift~wkapped in the cloak of dda~h;b~h~dou151e ’ onsec.ration.. ~He is ~a mystically, oi symbolically, or celareseftatively’~ilain Gift toGod. 286" ~l’o~ember~ ! 9.’I 8 ASSISTING AT MASS He stands for us, represents us, takes our place, not merely ~is a Gift, but as~ a.Gift crucified externally again.’ "Henc~ the ver~; action bf ttie Mass at the Co~nsecration requires that’.,~ve pu, t on that inward spirit which our Substitute’, outwardly slain again in an unblbody manner 15y the "sword" of the consecratory words, exhibits namely; the spirit~of self-oblation, of tofal colasecration ~o God. True enough, this spirit, as~’ the Holy Father observes, should.pervade a Christian thrc~ughout his life. It is symbolized evdn at baptism by" which we . "areburied ~ogether with Christ" so that we are henceforth dead to sinful pleasures. But ’the Mass by its very nature exacts an?active renewal of.this spirit of self-destruction fr6m each participant. W_ith-out such a renewal we are not alert and intelligent participators;: we miss a cardinal point of the significance of the sacrifice. To adoration, thanksgiving, reparation, and petition, therefore, should "be* added this spirit of sel’f-immolation: ~AII five of~ these dispo~sitions .~hould ~be aroused before the~ momdnt of Consecration arrives. Nor ~o01d we thii~k that we are hypocrites because lives do not~ actu’ally cortes/Send with ’the~com~lete consecration God*WhiCh the Mass expre~s~s~ for° u~ .¢vers; day. o The ;road to" "t3er-fection or to’complete ~urrender to God, is a~’.long roadL~ For most peop1~’ itois meandering and rough. By sorh~ it is occasionally for~ sal~en~fo~ detours. But when we express’our totM~ dedication to~ God during MasS, we"are sincere2 We me,in thavunstinted dedication to God is the ideal which we truly yearh foi.~’ We are no more hypo~ ~rites "in, inwardly..dxpressing this~tofal .devotibn ,to God than,_is the sinner who makes a fervent confession mar1~ed by genuine" soriow and a firm" resolve not to sin again, bat who, notwffh~tanding, siiis ahew through~ frailty’riot long after. ’ ’~ ...... " ~ ’ A few more remarks about these five internal,°dispositions which the Pontiff teaches. ’We’sh6uld .remember that they admit of,almost infinit.e :degreds. " Not only wilP these, degrees vary in diffeient indb ¯ viduals, bu~ tl~ey will vary in, the same individual from one Mass to the ’next. ~Circumstances’, both natural and supernatural’; e~plain this diversity. ~ But all five dispositions will-be ~almly, though earnestly and explicitly,~f0stered by ever~ Cathblic who really~under-stands the meafiing of the Mass. °~However, we must rdnfember, as the Holy Father cautions, that many Catholic’S, and some of best, are so circumscribed in their education that they cannot grasp the actual significance of thd Mass, which they nevertheless treasf~re highly. They know that Our Lord becomes truly present’on the 287 CLARENCE MCAULIFFE Review for Religious altar at the Consecration. This is about all that they do know about the Mass. They are pious, and they pray or try to pray during the Holy Sacrifice. Consequently they do possess, at least implicitly, sgme .of those internal dispositions which the Mass postulates, even though they do not connect, them directly with the sacrificial action. They profit, therefore, from the Mass; and if the flaw of not under-standing its true meaning proceeds merely from circumstances and not from any culpability, they may profit more than an erudite theo-logian. Despite this fact, it is most laudable, the Holy Father ~tates, to cultivate in oneself and to propagate to others the real signifi-cance of the Holy Sacrifice. Such. an apostolate will, generally speaking, make our people more alert and prayerful at Mass so that they will draw greater blessings from it. Such an apostolate will do much to banish daydreaming and those voluntary distractions which we have reason to believe lay hold on many of our people during the sacred mysteries. The same apostolate will increase attendance at Mass on week days. It will also prevent some Catholics from missing Mass on days of obligation, or from falling away altogether. We shall now treat briefly what the Holy Father has to say about the outward manner of participating in the Mass. Whatever external form 6ur assistance at Mass assumes, it has but one main function-- to excite the internal dispositions already discussed. The Holy Father expresses this truth several times in his encyclical. He says, for instance, in one passage, that the various ways of externally partici-pating in. the. Mass "have as their principal object to nourish and foster the piety of the faithful and their close ,union with Christ and with His visible minister; also to excite that internal spirit and those dispositions by which our minds should become like to the High Priest of the New Testament." Consequently, no one manner of externally assis.ting at Mass is to be rigidly insisted upon. This point is emphasized by the Holy Father. He .,himself offers several ways, which we shall specify,, in which one may laudably ’assist at Mass. He~ even gives reasons why no one method should be urged too insistently. He mentions, for example, that many Catholics cannot read even the vernacular and cannot, therefore, follow the Mass prayers. He declares tl~at others do not have the ’ability "to comprehend religious rites and liturgical formulas." ’Again, he states that "the temperaments, characters and minds of men are so varied and diverse that not all can be stirred and directed in the sdrne wa~t by prayers, songs and other sacred actions 288 November, 1948 ASSISTING AT MASS enacted in common." Moreover, he says that "different people have different needs for their iouls and different inclinations." In fact, the needs and :inclinatiohs of the :same individual vary from day to day. Hence .no ’one inflexible manner of hearing Mass should be imposed on all. Nevertheless,ceitain, outward ways of assisting at Mass are objectively preferable.to others, It is.noteworthy that the Pontiff m~ntions, in the first place the silent following of the Mass in the Roman Missal. He pralses~ those "who strive to place the Missal in the hands of the people so that, in union with the priest, they may pray in the same words and with the same sentiments of the Church." Secondly, he lauds those who are endeavoring to interest the people in the "Dialogue Mass." By "Dialogue Mass" the Pontiff gives no indication that he approves or even allows such a Mass when it involves the oral recitation of some liturgical prayers, such as the "Gloria" and the "Credo," simultaneously with the celebrant. The "Dialogue Mass" which the Holy Father sanctions is that" in which the people as a body, instead of the server alone, answer the prayers of the priest. As he puts it: "They respond tO the words ot the priest in dueorder"; or "They utter their prayers alternately with the priest." It is safe to say, therefore, that the "Dialogue Mass," so understood, has papal approval and even commendation. Thirdly, the Pontiff praises those who at Low Mass introduce the singing of those hymns "that are fitting for the various parts of the sacrifice." Fourthly, he approves those Low Masses in which the "Dialogue Mass," as explained previously, and the community singing of appropriate hymns are combined. Finally, at High Mass, he com-mends the community singing of the responses and of the liturgical chants, such as the "Credo." Th6se who promote all such practices are commended by the Holy Father.~ But to obviate the danger of rigid uniformity, he ¯ specifies other ways ’of assisting at Mass for the poorly instructed and also for those well-instructed Catholics who by reason of circum- ’stances or natural propensity do not wish or are unable to, follow the Missal or to engage in community prayer or singing. He states that such may during Mass "piously meditate on the mysteries of Jesus Christ." If they do not wish or are unable to do this, he recom-mends that "(hey perform other exercises of piety and say other prayers which, even though they differ from the sacred rites in their outward expression, nevertheless in their internal spirit conform to 289 C. A. HERBST Reoieto for Religious these rites." ’ Such a general expression certalnly seems to. include at ¯ least the private recitation of the rosary during.Mass. ~,, Hence though certain-external .ways of hssisting,at Mass ar~; generally speaking, objectively preferable; nevertheless no one way is to be unflinchingly adhered to. The Mass postulates an internal spirit. ~The outward manner in which’ that spirit is tO be obtained oi manifested is secondary and accidenfal. The Catholic. who at the Holy Sacrifice refines and develops his sentiments of adoration, gratitude, reparation, petition, and total dedkatibn to God is an active participant. The external way .which will help him best to develop those sentimentsis for him, at least on this particular occa-sion, the one that he should adopt. Dis!:rad:ions in Men!:al Prayer C, A. Herbst, S.J. y]HEN one prays vocally, the se,ntences or phrases or-even words W serve as strings by which one s thoughts are drawn along. Or we ,might say that they" are like pegs that hold our thoughts where they ought to be. In mental prayer, however, these aids to attention are wanting, and one’s thoughts ’wander much more easily, So mental prayer may be said not to have as great moral unity as vocal prayer. This makes it more difficult to meditate than to pratt vocally. Distractions are thoughts during prayer which do not belong to prayer. Attention is the opposite: the~centering of,our thoughts during prayer on what belongs, to prayer. Attention’, evidently, is essential to haental prayer. It is its substance. ~ In mental prayer we either think of the subject of meditation or wee do not. One cannot think of a thing andnot think of it at the same time. One thinks prayerfully on something, turns to something else, then after the interruption comes’back again to prayer. So there is a succession of prayerful acts and other acts. There is, of course~ nothing wrong with interrupting mental prayer. That is what we usually do when we say ejaculatory prayers. We pray for an instant and go right back to secular thoughts. This is not only all right but highly recommended by 290 November, 1948 DISTRACTIONS IN MEN’I~AI:, PRAYER h~ost ehlightened spiritual men. we should’.do this very,often, d~y," make a ~iabit, of it, _As Stiarez rather.~beculiarly p’ut’s it, "ifiter-ruption~ s ~ard~’meritorious:’’- ?~The~refore, - unless ~ ther~ :is,~ a -~special oblig~ition Of givifig to-mental prayer some ceitain.,defined, dontinuous time, no sin is cbmmittdd ifi this way, whether the ~urning,of:.the mind from.prayer td other ;thoughts is volunth~y or,.inv~olunthry, unless’~the interiuption~ is made through levity, and so unreas6nably and irreverently.:’ ~’ (Pesch, ’Prablectiones "Doqmaticae~ IX;~ n. 3~48.) Distrac[ions in~ mental prayer~ aie very, very common. One should not "get"discouraked on this accotiAt nor lose patience"with oneself. Evei~ holy men have them. If, ’,’misery loves company," we shall be consoled by what St. Augustine says in his commentary on Psalm 118: "One cries’ out with ofie’s whole heart when~one" thinks of nothing else. Such prayers are,.rare among the majority, frequent only with few. XVhether any are such even in the case of ~one single individual, I know not." Gerson gives many exhmples from among the Ancients to show the great difficulty of a complete ~rictory in ~this matter: Great exceptions like St. Aloysius, whos~ diitra~tions in ~half a year of prayer amounted only~to the Yspace;:of a ~Hail M~ry, ~tre shining examples to,be admired, but the~ arerarely imitable. (Cf. Zimmermann, Aszetik~: 383,’.384.), " ~’~ Involuntary distractions are not ~inful: They are~,rather’some-thing to be "suffered," to be borne with,’ than s~mething we pbsi~ tively~do., ~~"But to wanddr in mind Unintentionally does not deprive prayer of [all] its fruit. Hence Basil says: ’If you are so, truly Weakened by sin that you are unable’:to pray attenti~iely, strive as much as you~can to cu~rb"~yourself; and God. will pardon you~ seeing that you are "unable to-stand in His presence in a becoming manner not~ through negligence but thrbugh frailty.’~" Bht attention is necessary for prayer’that its end be better ~ttained, and in Order that wl~at St. "Fhoma’s Calls, the third fruit, of prayer, the immediate fi:uit attained her~ and now, spiritual refection of mind, be art/tined. (S. Th. 2-2, 83, 13.)- This spiritual iefection of mind is spiritual joy, pea~e of heart, cohsolation, joy in God, satisfaction, arid espe-cially the fostering of virtuous good will¯ Thereford, involuntary distractions ought by all, means ,to,be avoided. The}, should be forestalled, p~0vided against from afar~ sd. t6’ speak.; iA ~firm determination at the beginning of prayer~mot to be distracted, and" perseverance~ in this intention, are both~morally and ps~,~hologicallyn’ecessary’ for’this: morall~i, otherwise~ there may be 291 C. A. HERBST Review for Religious negligence~ or sloth; psychologi~ally, so that-the wilLmay be,buoyed up by the initial determinations. The preparatory ~acts so carefully recommended-by !St." Ignatius :in~ the: Addition~ at xhe end ~of the ,First Week of the Spiritual Exercises are.a great help, in, this matter. Then, where one notices that distractions are in the, mind, one must .turn again, to, prayer. ~ ,Remote prepara~tion is very important, too". m~ch .niore important, I am afraid, than most of, us realize in practice.. This consists espe~cially ’in fostering a spirit of recollectiori during the’ day; avbiding wordliness, and walking in the_presence of~ God., Some valuable~hints along this line are also given in the Additions: ~ ,f ,~ It-isr the common-teaching that deliberate distra’ctions in prayer are venially sinful when there is no go.od reason for them. ~ And this holds even for prayer that is not itself obligatory. The supposition in this case,is, of course, that one wishes, to remain in prayer and at the same time deliberately and without reason does ’not attend to God. Bwdoing this one seems to make light of Goi5 and thus~offendsagainst~ theft.reverence-required ~by the virtue.of religioff.,.~As, Suarez~explains it.:~:~’On the.one hand a man has-the intention, whi~h;he~ has not 1etracted, or did,not have a good reason for retracting, 0f,coritinuifig prayer;,,an.d ~to this end: rehaains’in .the’presence of~God by~;hi§ special intention in such,,a,pl~ice; iffsuch a manner, and,,.f0r, guch or ~o~16n~ a time;;~yet, on the other 15an_d~he: is negligent in aStending, or volun-tarily~ brings in, other,th0ughts foreign to that exercise,’ And this we say,does,,not- happen without, sin, thou gh ~venial:" .: (Suarez;;De ;Or., 1.2; c.- 5,m. 1.8.) -o, ~ .:.." ~ St..Basil’s~explanation is,somewhat, similar: ,He says:2 "Wg must not ask, lazily; our mind,wandering here:and,there. ¯ If~ ao ma_n’ :acts .thus,,~he will not only fail to get what-he asks ,,for but will even ~xasperate the L6rd more: For~ wheh a. man st.ands before a~prince and speaks, he :stands with much fear,,and certainly doesonot~ permit either_ ,the ~externab or ~ the,4nternal eye~ of. his~ :mind -tg~ ow, ander:, but remains attentive, lest perhaps-he come. to grieL :Howxmuch more ought~one to,stand before God with,fear and trembling, with his mind fixed~on Him alo~ne and intent on nothing els_e.". (P.atralo~ia Graeca, 31, 1333.) Holy’~nd learned, men through the ages have thought,,,thus, ~and good people consider as sinful distractions in prayer that are willful "and-unnecessary. ~.Since after mortal sin/the greatest evil-in the world is venial sin, and since willful distractions .are venial sins, we should ,by al! means try to eliminate them. Things like walking up and..down ?r looking 292 November, 1948 DISTRACTIONS IN MENTAL PRAYER out over the fields are not distractions at all. When there is sufficient r~ason for’admltting something distracting, it is not sinful. One may have to say a few words or answer the doorbell or light, the candles for Mass. Doing such things with’decorum is~all right. In general, one may do what is necessary pr very, convenient. In preparing for mental pra}’er one should work carefull~y so as to have ready material for meditation that will really hold the atten-. tion. Such preparation is not very difficult when made in private. One can then simply take a subject that fits, one’s own present state and apply it as one knows. When the points are made in common ,,there is greater difficulty. The subject may not be at all pa~latable.and personal application may be practically impossib!e. _For such occa-sions one may well have stored up some .good meditations that are congenial. Perhaps even one could take a little time afterwards and prepare one. It has,often struck me that we are quite helpless and altogether wanting in resourcefulness in making our way through a period of mental pray~er when the matter on hand seems impossible or atten-tion has flown away, I see no reason why we cannot come to a gen-eral understanding with God for such contingencies. We might take some subject that always attracts us; the Holy Eucharist, for e,x~mp!e. An extended and affective preparation for Holy. Com-munion ought to be in place any morning. Or one might apply the Second Method of Prayer to the Common or Proper of the Mass. This, too, is quit~ in place, and easy. Analogous instances for each individual are almost innumerable. But they must be found and kept in readiness beforehand. A tired mind is helpless even to find them. Distractions in meditation usually come from incidents in daily life. We think of our work, of some problem child, a real or imagined injury rankles within us, we think of some recent joy. When a thing of this kind affects us greatly, it will come back to our attention again and again, although put aside many times. Why put it aside? In meditation we must pray mentally, but I know of no obligation that binds me ’to remain with a subject that simply will not hold my attention. Pray over the thing that is obtruding itself, that is forcing itself on your attention. It must be very out-standing in your life here and now or it would not come back so persistently. Pray over it. Pray over the distraction. Here again an understandifig with God to this effect is in ,place. We~c~ ,~ask Him to bless our work, to help us with the problem child, to bear the 293 C, A. HERBST ~ - injury patiently, with lov.e for Him, perhaps even with joy, and share ofir happiness. Making a virtue of necessity is ~not,alien to the spiritual life. ~’ It sdems t0~ind that much " difficulty arises’in regard to mental prayer because we do no[take nature’s lead. Itmight be a legitimate in~terpre[ation of the term 1supernatural life to say that~it is the life of grace~ built upon the foundation Of nature. There is probably hardly a saint living or .dead who does not or did not capitalize on personal circumstances and natural ’propensities in living his life of love with God. God’s Providence has not ceased, arid the Holy Spirit makes use of a man’s natural ~qualities and inclinations to advance hiin in tl~e ’spiritual life. Some find that thee beauty and vastness 6f ~iature° and the universe lead them upwards. Some cherish the 15resencd of God, others a sweet, gentle sorrow for sin, still others zeal for souls, and so on. Such things as these, too, might be the~ refuge of a ~wandering and tired mind during mental prayer. Ofie last refaark. A meditation on our every-day life might be very profitably made When we find ourselves suffering fr6m con-tinual distractions. A fifi~ novice master, a man of’great e~perience and deep spiritual insight, suggested that this even be deliberately chosen as a subject often: once a week, let us~ say, ’Lovingly and reverently in the prdsence of God we go through the d~y, beginning with the first waking thought, taking each action and exercise in ~;rder. R.eally, one can hardly do better. ’After all, all we’ have-to offer God is bur life, our daily life. The~ chief purpose of’the n~ornifig meditation is to direct this life to God and to sanctify.it. To live ¯ today through with intense love is certainly the finest fruit of mental prayer. OUR "CONTRIBUTORS RICH/kRD LEO HEPPLER is chaplain at the 2uniorate and the Novitiate’of the Franciscan Brothers of Btookl~rn at Saiithtown Branch, New York. C. A. HERBST, GERALD KELLY, and CLARENCE MCAULIFFE are members of the faculty of St. Mary’s College, St. Marys, Kansas: and J. E. BREUNIG is completing his theo-logical studies at the same institution. ~ 294 On St:aying in Love Richard Leo Heppler, O.F.M. ~"~N,..lUST HOW MA.NY points the modern worldly person and V, the Saint disagree it~would be almost impossible to calculate. But-surely~they would be at .variance in regard’ to the meaning of at least one of our popular sayings: Andthe adage which provides the matter for difference of opinion is°the saying, °"Love ma~kes the world go ’round." Truly, it would be hard to find a ~more unscien’- tific little senterlce. It reveals a complete .disrespect: for the laws of nature: for attraction, movement, rotation, and, force. It shows a profound disregard for~ ,the. prindple of cause and effect. The man who coined that phrase might have been a~cavalier: it is imposs~ible to think of him as a devotee of the atom. Leaving this dis~u’ssioh aside for a moment, we would be quick to admit that° both the children of ’this world and. the saints.,agree that love certainly ~makes a human being go ’round. We would be hard put to explain some very strange ~onduct if we could not attribute it to love. When a, young man so far. forgets himself as to swing into the latest dance steps ,in the,pennsylvania. ,Station, the surprised bystanders, will indulgently nod their-heads and agree that he is in Iove. When the, young lady who sits next to you, ,on .the First Avenue"bus insists upon hummlng~-and .humming rather attractively--"Only Make.Believe," you excuse the distraction and gallantly conclude that she’ is in love. When a tough-.looking truck driver gazes long and, ardently at, the, wedding rings in.: Findlay~- S~auss’,, the, p~ss~rs-by diagnose the case immediately..:~And they do the same when they see a pair of very blue and ~¢ery feminine eyes frowningly appraise ~the pipes or belts in. Wanama.kers. But ~hen.~you,;se~ a pretty little high-school girl ?r .a bent.old man kneeling in’ardent prayer before the tabernacle, you can be quite certain that tl~e judgment of worldly ones will be far less indulgent. Instead of sayifig, "She is in love," or, "He. i.s in 10ve"~as indeed they r~ally are the,modern pagan, if such a one were present; wou.ld be more apt to remark, "She’s just a kid. She’ll be all right in a couple of years. We all do crazy things when we’re young.’L Or, "He’s in need of a good rest. Ever since, he lost his wife he’s been acting odd." 295 RICHARD LEO HEPPLER Review for Religious So it starts to become obvious that the modern worldly person disagrees witl~ the saint on’ the meaning of the saying "Love makes the world go ’round" because the former believes only in l~uman love, ahd he is ~interested only in ~t/~is world. Whereas the saint knows that human love is not the only, nor indeed the highest, love; .just as he believes that thi~ is not" the only, .nor indeed’th~ be~t, World, He knbws that there is a love unass~o~iated-With cupids and V’alentines which ~uni~es him not°fo~ human beings but to ’God Himself. He believes that ther~ exists a world where not television butthe ~beatific vision ~is the reward :of the:blessed. Hence the saint really ~ believes that 10ve mhk~s the world go ’round~ because God is love, and aroundHiin all things rotate: Once we understand the deeper spiritual truth behind the saying "Love m~kes ’th~ world’ go ’round," we are well on our way to discovering" one c~f the great ~ecrets of tile ~saints. " Unlike the truly wordly person, the saints fell in love with God;zbut, unlike us, they resolutely insisted upon staying in love with Him. Falling in love is.not difficult for ~most of us, but staying in love calls for a stag-g~ ring amount of generosity arid sacrifice~ To fall in love with’~Jesus Christ is a very flattering experience; to stay in°love with Him is s6metimes’ nothing short of martyrdom. H~ive’.you ever noticed howT, the determination to stay in love ~i~h" Jes~s" Christ is common tb all the s/tints; while calling for differeht reaction~ in each? The determination to stay in love with God mad St~ Paul’el0quenf while it caused St. Joseph to be silent: it impelled St. F~ancis to .preach ~tb the Si~Itan’,of E~ypt and ~t. Peter Claver fo. minister ~o the" slaves; it inspired~St. Augu.~tine to take up hi~ ~en and’ St. Dida~us t0~ take~ u13’ hiss’shovel; it drove St. Fran~is"Xavier’ to Indi~"aia-d it~ drove the Little iFlov>er to~.the cloister. ’. ~ - ~ " .... We religious conside~ OurselVes the .friends, follow_ers, ~and~lover~ ~f 6esus, Christ, and both .~h~ w6°rld and the Church,’ recogniz~e us as such. Our vocation is ,.n~ot~ merely to fall in’love with Jesus Christ; it is to stay in love with Him. Andstaying inlove ~ith Jesus Christ entails much more than _saying, ".Lord, Lord." It ~meansl being faithful to’our pr.omises to :try to °become more and more Christlike; it means exerting a conscious effort to grow in holiness; it means the constant ~¢illingness to force ourselves tb do the will of God no matter how hard it may be. Staying in love with Jesus Christ means trying" to use each day November, 1948 ON STAYING IN LOVE of our spiritual lives’as if we re~illy ~were :in love. ,It includes sudh thinl~s as getting out of bed promptly: trying to make a~good, pdrsonal,"practical meditation: ~putting our hearts,and souls into our Mass and, Holy Cdmmuniofi; trying to banish distractionsfrom our prayeis; carr~;ing"out our appointed tasks well; making an~effort, to preserve thee spirit 6f-recollection by such means as ,ejacu!atory prayer: being cheerful: charitable, and "co~operative at/community recreation: observing the prescribed silence: a’nd ’so on., ,-It means that ,we sincer~l~r try to ,make 2esusrChrist the King and Centei~ of our lives by,livifig"ouk ever~y thohght, word, and deed. for Him. Staying in lo~re with°Jesus~ Christ means tr)~ingo to be ~ satisfied with our l~t whatever it alay be. A cheerful,’morik in. the/days of old used to add privately to his litan)~, "From dissatisfied brethren, deliver us O Lo~d." Only a few Of us might be,willing to spend’ long dull hours studying Sanskrit,, but almost all_of us would prefer that to a half hour each day~ with ~perpetually dissatisfied religious. We expect tragic figures’:t0 su!k~t.hrough our literature just.a.s we expect spoiled children to pout on our city streets, but it is a!ways disap-pbinting to find them in the convent or ~the,monastery. Perhaps~ Lhe dissatisfied religious, was once a lover 9f Jesus ~Christ and gave~ gre.at promise of. advancing in perfection. Maybe°she who now~. complains about the regular weekly appearance_s of~,the same dessert and the cheap material of her-new habit--maybe she as a novic~ once delighted .in giving~up ,her,~cake: and° ~may.be .she ~s~iled upon her mended habit as upon a regal gown.,,It is true thaLdufing.the passage of the years the glamor of the profession ceremony does wear off. The flowers and the music and the incense and the candlelight fade. But-we must not let the similarity between our profession and the Three Hours Agony fade. Of course, it is not always easy to be content with our lot. It is not always,easy to teach French when.we feel more inclined to decorate the chapel or to fill prescriptions’ or to type reports. It ~s n~t easy, to be cohten.ted when ~we are placed under temperamental, suspicious, orodownright unfair;i~up~eriors. It is always easy~ to be contented when you’have to. live with ~a religious who considers himself a necessary and an it/fallible afldition .to ~our conscience. NO, it isn’t always ea’s~ to try ~o be.~atisfied with our lot; but staying in love with Jesus Christ requires that-,w¢ try to be satisfied for His sake. . Staying in love~with J~sus’Christ meam refusing to fall inlove with anyone or anything else.: In modern pagan Aaierica infidelity, 297 RICHARD LEO HEPPLER like co~kfails .Before diniaer~:is taken~ for granted: ,We°might be ihclined ~tb_censure rather ,segerely the~marital ad, vent,ures, of, our Holly.whorl actbrs and adtresses Without realizing that we, too can,be unfaithful.-sand we arL urifaithful-to Jesus,Christ~ to,sbme extent at least,Af we permit 0~r~’affe~tions t6 become,so strongly.-,attache~ to any ~erson or thing as to deprive ~ Him ~ of the fulldove we have promised: ~ We odce vowed that the" 0nly,tfiangles ia our lives would be~in our geometr~ classes." Hehc~:we cannbt afford to bec6me so inter~ite~ in an6~her person or in Chaucer or in the Rh factor or in a new’arrangement of Panis An~elicos or in the recipe: for baked Alaska or Charlie’McCarthy that we lose interest in’ growing i~ holiness. If We seftle for~ h :divided service we are fair-weather- friends of 2esus, not lovers:~ :Then’religious life ~bddo~ds-moaotonous: then it is easy to criticize the c0~munity or the ~uperior; then fickleness and, shal-lowness tak~ theplace of faith a~d humility. Th~ ~esolhte~ religioui Who i~ determined to stay in love with 2esus,Christ,comes tff~arn that 16v~ does make the world go ’round. He Will ~a~ to’ persist in tryin~ ~o live each:day of his spirithal life to thi best 0f his ’ability in’~r~of 0f"~is love for:JeSus",Christ. H~’~ill ha~e t6 try to b~’ sati~fie’d :Gith his lbt sinc~ that i~wh~~’deiu~,~wants. H’e: Will ende~v6r’~6 be;~ffii~hfhl to ~i~ love for 3eshs~:nd ~atter~ what S~dr~e that’ dfit~ils:" Hd will not let routine ~hi11 his qove, riot sick~ ~dss enfdebl~ iL Uor~arthlg ~ttrac~ibn~ devitaliz~ it: nbi time:dimAt: Is~t any wonder t~?t---he-,can Under~tand: the~.rttue meaning :of ;fhe ~h~ih’g; ’~d~ :~’~ke~the ~wbrld ......... Whoever. delights’ ~E,gieat ’hteratu~e ~fll"~welcome" the; ne~ edition wor~; of. Jo~.-He~=tIewm~n, no~. Ieiag:~IuIlished: t~. kongmans }i~r~n, ind Company, ~e~ $otk.,~,Itti~~ the purpose o~ this edmon "to. p~owde,~Ioth for the general reader and ~e stnI¢nt, the latest and Iest texts ,of those works which b~d fai~ t6 s(ind th~ otfe’stt~’me ,’"- as.’.w.e.l.l .a.s. .t.o".p.r.e.s.en.t. .a.n.ew~ ce"r"tain of’hii:W’6rks.which have primarily a,histofic~l interesti,’but which:mus~ be reador cohsu~ted_iLt~e ~ish~ to ~understand the mang~faceted mind of the author." Thiee volumes appeared in 1947 :. APOL~IA PRO VITA SUA (pp. xx~ti + 400), A GRA~R dF’ Ass~’ (pp. xxii’ + "39~) ~ 13). ~ui" fh~ ifi ~ 1:948~ three~ vdlumes ~of’ ESSAYS’ AND ~SKETCHES (pp. x¢iii"+ 382; x~ + 368; xvi + 381) have been published. ~g,it~d~nt~ng ~e~eral . reader will find the introductions helpful to, a,,complete.,understanding of,the~ text. EaCh ¢olnme ~ pr6vlded with "an ifidel i:hd ’gs pri~ gt S~’.5"0. T~ do,plead set is to’~ohlist" of nineteen volumes. 298 ....... On the Du y: [?.ovln9 {:he , ble ghbor Especially [’N’~LA~ING’"t~ gefle~al prffep[ ’of ffatdnal chanty, "thee: [ log~ans ~sually call attentmn to the fact ,that thts duty includes = " ft :nlighb S)ff;"~’eve~ ~nemi~s; n~vertBel~is; ’ b~caus~~" Hi.self saw fit to voxce a sp~c,al precept regarding the love of ene-mies and because this duty has speciai g[~ulties, the m6ral theology usually.include an exphc~t t?eat~eht of ~h~.2dUty.of io¢ifig enemiesi’ "~he~e~tre~fises £ontain much’that~is ~prac~icaF not only for tBe ordinary Cathohc’but also for rehg~ous. ~ge purpose f t~e present~ notes ~s" to outhne’tbe’commo~lg ac~e~ted teacBing on~ the duW of loving ones neighbor;-parucularly-one s~ enemies, and to comment more m detail-on points.that seem~ to .de of espmally prac-tical value to religious. "’~" ~.~ .:~,.. ,:~,, ~ 2, !., THE ,GENE~L PRECEPT.OF CHARI~ : There ar~ many specifictd~ties of fzaternal .tharity:,, for,~example, ¯ al~sgiving,, fraternal correction, ~ the~’avoidance: eL scandal ~ ~nd :0f c0-operation~ini-another~s.sin, and t~e~love~of, enemies~’: But;all these dUties~ar~ derived ,from the general .precept .of. fraternal charity, ~which ma~ be~bNeflF’st~ted as follbws: Bg~ diai~e ~receOt, ~ must 1oo~. all d~~ ffei~hbori wit~ ,’t~e ;/6ve~ of cfiarif~ ; and, tfiis ~dut~, :ext~Ods~ to thougMs;, words; and deeds. 1 A .briefl explanation ofithis, genera[ law maycontain, a -number" of ~helpful, points ~and :will !eag~-;t~g gro¢~d for as,more~detiiled consideration of the-’command to.~love~9~g~ enemies;. :,~: ..~;.. ~ ~. ~,.. : .~ " .., ........ ".~ ~ " ~hari~ i~ a~ spatial kind of love, a supernatural love which is d~)etted primaril7 to clod. BE ’charity we love GOd because, as ~e know H~m through faith, He is infinitely ~ort~y of love. Genuine chanty towards the neighbor is also a love for God because the neighbor, as known through faith, shares in d/sfincfi~l~ divine perfections, fo~ ex~p! , the divi~e-lffN of grace and the divine destiny of seeing God face to face. - .., ,, ,, -- Itfis important to note that fraternal .cha’ri~) rake’s its ~otiv~’from .299 GERALD KELLY Review for Relioious faith; it sees the neighbor through the eyes of faith. Through faith we know ~hat ~the.’neighb0r igarticipates, Or is called to participate, in the divine life of grace; that he is destined for .the beatific vision; that Christ has identified Himsdf with the neighbor: that the exemplar of true fraternal charity is Christ Himself; that Christ has told us to love ou’r neighbor as He has loved us; that we are all united through Christ in God: and so forth. Because of the supernatural bond by which God unites men to Himself, we love one an6ther "~vith the same kind of love with which we lo~ve God--theological dharity. Fraternal ~harity, therefore, is immeasurably superioriv all merely natural love, even the noblest. I might mention here that there is no necessary conflict.between natural~love and charity. A man’s good qualities can be recognized by reason, and he can be r~asonably and nobly loved for these. And such reasonabl.e love can easily be supernaturaliFed and ~ absorbed, so to speak, in the greater love of charity when we see the neighbo.r’s lovable.qualities as reflections of the divin~ goodness .... Who is my Neighbor? In answering the lawyei’s question Witfi the parable of the Good Samaritan; Our Lord did-not wish tb say .that the priest and the levite who scorned th’e afflicted man were not really his.~neigh. bors; rather, He wished to"bring out graphically .the~fact that the orily ;one o who " really, acted:’like~ a neighbor .; was ,;the foreigner, the Samaritan’, who b0i~nd up his,°wound~’ ,and ’supplied his needs. Christiaxt otradi’tioti, v~hich i~" the best interpreter~of. Our.0Lord’s w0ids, has~ ahbays underst6od the,word ’,’neighbor’,’: (in the’precept "Lov~ thy~neighb6r as thyself")’t0 mean’ all~ men:, ~In fact,, the word includes’~ everyone" who has a. common destiny.~-with’ us: ~ men on earth, the soul~ in purgatory, the blessed in heaven, and (in:some sense) even the angels. Among rational and intelligent creatures, only the damned are excluded from the notign of neighbor, because ~heirdamnation ha~~ forever severdd t.h~ fie that bound’ them~ to us. All others are~ bur neighbors a~nd are obje.cts for our charity.’Ho~wever, the commandment is usually:und~rsto0d to refer particularly to men on earth. ’ Tho~t~fit, Word, and Deed The commandment of love includes internal and external acts, that is, "thoughts, words, and deeds. Arid like most commandments 300 November, 1948 ON LOVING THE NEIGHBOR it has its negati~,e and its affirmative ’aspects: that is.’ it,forbids certain things, and ~it. commands certain things. It ~would be impossible to Live here anything approaching a complete enumeration of the~duties of charity, because .charity is a very geneial virtue.,which affects all our attitudes towards and dealings with our neighbor. I can give here,only~ a few general rules which may help individuals in estimating their own duties as regards fraternal charity.- A negatwe rule, that is, a formula expressing what we must not do, is best expid~sed in terms of the golden rule. "S~ich a formul~ would run somewhat as fdllows: Abstain from ~11 deliberate thoughts, worlds, and actions which you think you w~uld reasonabl~r resent if you were in’your, neighbor’s place. -(For a more complete explanation~’ of this rule with regard tb speech, see "Notes on Detrac-tion," in REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, ~V, 380-’92.) -6n the affirmative side, the’kerr word i0r"°charity o’f"i thc~ught is "well-wishing." Charity is a love of benevolence, that is, of unselfish and disinterested well-wishing; hence, an internal act of fr~iternal chari~y i~ aii act of supernfiturfiI ~ell:v)isiai~ag. Such an ac~ can expressed in many g;ays: ~or example, by praying for th~ fieighbor’s sa!vaSion; by rejoicing over his good f6rtun~, ~spec!ally growth.in virtue; by °so[rowing over his misfortune, especiall3i sin, and by making internal acts of reparation for the sins of o[hers; by desiring the true happiness of our neighbor; by being, prepared to relieve his needs for the love "of God; and so forth. Even. the natural compas-sion we are apt to feel for those who suffdi td~pof~l loss and"’mi~: fortune and the spontaneous joy that we feel ovdr the temporal for’turie of a frle.ndlmay bd implicitly inclfided in and supernatural-ized by charity, pr6,~ided the propersubor"d m" "atxon t~6 eternal,galues ~s not set aside. That we are°obliged to make such internal acts o~f’charity as I have just enumerated is the unhesitating teaching of Catholi~c the-ology( The Church l~as condemned the opinion that we can fulfill all our duties of charity by merely external acts. But how often mus~t we make such~ actsh To that question the best theologian cannot, give a definite answer.~ ~.AI1 _that can be said regarding the obligatipn is that such acts must be made occasionatl~l. However, though’~the obligation itself is vague as to frequency, theo-logians generally~ agree that it.is practically impossible for~one_who~is trying to lead a good Catholic life to fail in this duty. As for what 301: GERALD KELLY is advisable, all.theologians wguld surely"agree that frequent acts of o fraterrial chaHt3 should be highly recommended. .As a-matter of fact, ~the prayers that are universally recommended for daily r~cit~l contain at least two acts of fraternal charity: namely, the act of~Iove and the Our Father. Speaking of prayer for the neighbor, the question might be asked: must we pray for individual neighbors? The general la~¢ of Yharity does not. demand" this, although certain special relationships ,such as ties of blood may do so. The general law of ~chari~y is ~l~l!ed if We include all our. neighbors in our acts of love; or, to put the mat-ter in another way, it suffices if we exclude no one from those acts which, as mentioned above, must be made occasionally. Hence, a brief rule for satisfying the general precept to make~ i~nt~ernal~ acts Of fraternal charity is this: occasionally say the act of love and mean it, or say th~ Our F~ther now and then, and~excl~de no one from its petitions. s~rhat about words~and deeds that is, when are we obiiged to manifest our love for our. neighbor by speech and action? "[’lie key word here is "need"; and a brief rule epito.mizing our duties to per-form external acts of charity may be stated thus: I am obliged to help my neighbor (corporally or spiritually) when he’really needs my help and when I can give tl~e help without a proportionate incon-venience to ,myself. It should be noted that this rule expresses only the Christian minimum, namely the duty under pain of sin of performing the works, of mercy. The Christian ideal, which was Christ’s glory and which has ever been the Church’s glory, goes much higher and helps the needy even to the point of utter selflessness and heroism. (Noth: As re~a~rds the external manifesthtion of. charity, theo-logians usually lay great stress on the necessity of showiii~g what they call "the common signs of good will." The explanation’ of this matter is best reserved for the section of these r~otes d~aling with the love of enemies~) ,~, The Diolne Command The jottings contained in, the previous paragraphs explain the meaning and the extent of th~ gei~eral law of fraternal charity. ,To complete them we might ask and answer the question; "Why must we love one another?" ,The ~nswer is derived from both reason and faith. 302" November, 19~ 8 ON LOVING THE NEIGHBOR ’,h’Reason~tells u~s that, even~iiGod’ h~d~n0t ~aihed.man to :~ super.; natur~l’, status, we, shotild have some obligation-to love one~, ari0ther-; for even in the natural order,’men~ would be unitdd by,’a common n~ture ,and. ,a common d~stiny. :,’ Moreover, being, social ~by ,n~ature, they Would’have t6 live, and work, a~nd re’create together." ~Bec~use ~f these ~facts,,° th~~ n~ttiral ihw itself, which, is perceived by reason, calls for some love: an’d~ finion, esp~cially for ~the wellLbein~-of hulnah hature: th~it il, that men may ~livd ~ogether ~ith that degree of hai~= m6ny which is really helpft;1; t-o "the attainment~ of their purpos~ on earth. . - AS a matter of fact, we do not live in a purely natural order: Through faith we know that God has givd~a u,~ ~ Share’in His own life (sanctifying grace) and the destiny of sharing in His’own~ hap-piness (the beatific vision)"~ We enjoy an entirely special union witli God in Christ; and the necessary preservative of this union~is charity. Scriptural texts on fraternal charity can be multiplied .almost without end. (Cf. for example, "The ’New Commandment’ of Love," by Matthew Germing, S.J., in REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, I, 327-37.) -Some of these texts are, it seems, merely counsels, but many of them evidently state a real precept to love the neighbor. Our Lord referred to fraternal Charity as the second grdat command-ment (Mt. 22:39); and St. John said, :’This commandment we have from God, that he who loves God must also love his ne.igh-~ bor" (I John 4:2I). As regards external charity in particular, the clas~sic ~exts are the account of the Last Judgment (cf. Mt. 25:42), in which Our Lord clearly indicates that the attainment of salvation will depend on helping the needy, and the strong words of St. John: "He that hath the substance of this world, and shall see his brother in need, and shall’ s~ut’~up his bowel.s from him: how cloth the charity of God abide in him?" (’I. John 3: 17-18). II.-THE LOVE OF ENEMIES That the love of enemies is included in the precept of chari~y and is in some sense a special sign of the true follower of Christ is indicated by Our Lord’s words: "But I say to you, love your enemies: do good to them that hate you; and pray for them that persecute and calum-niate you: That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon:the just and the unjust. For’~f you lord them that love 303 GERALD KELLY Revle~b for Religious you, what reward, shall you have? Do not even ~he publicans this? And if you salute your brethren only, what do" you more? Do not also the heathens this." (TvIt. 5 : 44-47.) Many other texts of Scripture have a similar.meaning; even the Old Testament has some beautiful passages on the love of enemies and some moving examples of forgiveness. That forgiveness in par-ticular is enjoined on us is apparent from the Our Eather and from Our Lord’s ans@er to Peter, which He illustrated with the story of the unforgiving servant and which He concluded, with the strong words, "So also shall my heavenly Father do to you [namely, deliver over to the torturers], if you forgive not everyone his brother from your hearts" (Mr. 18:35). This divine precept is clearl.y in accord with man’s social nature. We are all prone to offend; and if it were permissible to nourish hatred and a spirit of revenge and to deny pardon, progressive_ social peace would be extremely difficult, even impossible. One needs.only to glance at history to see the disastrous effects that inevitably flow from hatred and revenge. Miscellaneous Observations Who is my enemy? In its primary meaning the term refers to anyone who has offended me, whether by causing me needless sot-row, or by insulting me, or by c~ausing me some harm such a~ a bodily injury, a loss of reputation, or property damage. In a wider sense, my enemy is anyone who dislikes me, or anyone whom I dis-like- or for whom I feel an aversion, "The principles of moral the-ology which will be explained in this section refer mainly to an enemy in the primary sense: but they also apply, and with even greater force, to an enemy in the secondary,meaniong of the ,word. We are not bound to love enemies because they are enemies but in spite of the fact that they are enemies. In Other words," enemies should be loved for the same reason that other neighbors must be loved, namely, because of the common ~ties, -natural and supernatural, that bind ,us together in God. Although thereis a special precept to love enemies, this does not normally oblige us to show them a special love: the precept simpl’ insists that even enemies may not be excluded from the general duty of charity. Obviously, the precept of loving one’s neighbor does no~ refer to a sensible love. Since "this kind of love is not under the free 304 Nouerober, 1948 ON LOVING THE NEIGHBOR: direction of the will, it is not even of obligation with. regard to God, parents, children, and so forth. The love prescribed is the super-natural love of internal and external benevolence. It is of partic.ular importance to keep this in mind when we are speaking of the love of enemies, because in this matter more than in most others the feelings are apt to cause trouble. Another observation of practical value: To love one’s enemy is not the same as approving of his unlovable qualities. If an enemy sins, we may hate his sin and wish for his correction. If he has repulsive habits, we may, within the scope of well-ordered charity, take means to,.have him correct those habits. The precept of loving our enemies imposes upon us the same duties of thought, word, and action that were explained in the. notes dealing with the general precept. However, because of the special difficulties involved, moral treatises on the love of enemies usually lay stress on these three specific duties: (a) to put aside hatred and a desire for private and ill-ordered revenge; (b) to show the common signs of good will; (c~ .and to do what is required to bring about a reconciliation. Hatred and Revenge I have read many treatises on hatred: and my candid impression is that the more lengthy they are the more confusing they become. I- will content myself, ’therefore, with saying that a good practical definition of hatred is to wish one’s neighbor an evil that is not duly subordinated to some good. It is certainly hatred, therefore, to wish an enemy spiritual harm: for example, that he will remain in sin, that he will lose his soul, and so forth; for such harm cannot be. properly subordinated to any good. Theoretically, it is not hatred to wish someone a temporal evil for his own good: for example, to wish him sickness or financial misfortune as a means of reforming him. But theologians wisely caution against fostering such thoughts, as they can readily be a form of self-deception when they concern those we dislike. Revenge. is punishment for an offense committed. Ordinarily speaking, revenge belongs to one in authority, and it is wrong for private individuals to take or to plan to take revenge. However, theologians reasonably consider that this rule admits of exceptions in minor matters: for example, a boy might justly punish another boy for insulting his sister. 305, GERALD KELLY’ Revieu~ for Religious ~ : :Insofar as~,,punishment /nay be justly inflicted for offenses, it is permissible-to wi~h that such punishment be visited upon.an enemy. Btit~ dweiling on" sUChothoughts is dangerous; because it can easily develo15 an, unfgr~giving spirit, and e~en lead tb unreasonable desires of punishment. ,~ ~ ~: After suffering an offense, we usually feel ’(all hot inside,",and our imaginations conjure up many evils that we should like to inflict or to have inflicted on our,offenders. In themselves,~ these thoughts are spontaneous and involuntary~ and are therefore isinless.~ They become sins’ 6f hatred and revenge only when they ~are deliberate and’ when they include the wishing of unjustifiable, evil to our enemy. HoweveL :the protracted’ bro6ding over offenses or over the bad qualities of hn,~enefiay, even when no actual evil is desired; is a danger-. 6u’s pastime. ~At, the very least, it disturbs digestion and of coarse,. it makes it all the more. difficult to fu!fi11 our external duties to our enemies. The Common Signs. A second duty that calls for particular consideration when ene-mies are concerned is that of showing "the common signs of good will." By these common signs are meant the little courtesies that are ordinarily shown toall men, or at~least to all o~ a certain!’ group : for example, to return a greeting, to answer a question, to buy and ’sell’ in a public store; to reply to’letters, to tip the hat to ladies, to show some sign~of respect to superiors, to help one who is in’need, and so ¯ forth. The idea ,here which seems so obvious that it is difficult ,to express in words--is that such courtesies are not normally reserved to one’s intimate fiiends but are extended to our neighbors because they~ are fellow-citizens, fellow-students, fellow.workmen, and ’the like. Ih a word, these common signs are different from the kindnesses and attenti6ns that are nbrmally shown only to one’s friends~: for example, to invit~ them to dinner, to have them as guests over the week’-end, to confide secrets, to carry on an intimate correspondence, to visit them when’i~he~r are ill, and So forth.: Tgese latter ’a~e ~lled’ special °Signs of good will: precisely becaUSe they generally indicate some, relation’ship which i~ especialiy~ int!mate. ...... ’~The’ principle t6 be,kept in mind here is this:’ weare’~0tdinarily" 0blig~d ~to Show’ th~ e6mmish~i~ns of g6od~vcill"e~en’to our enemies;-; th~’speciifl s~gns~may generally be reserved f6r’friends. ~ In stating the rule I designedly used the words: ,"ordinarily’" and 306 November, 1948 ON LOVING THE NEIGHBOR "generally" because exceptional circumstances may demand that even the special signs be shown to one’s enemy or may, 6n the other hand, warrant at least the temporary withholdiiag of the common signs. For example, to invite one to dinner is normally taken as a special sign of benevolence: yet if dohn gives a party for "all the members of his class," ,he is not at liberty tO exclude a classmate who is his enemy. He must, in this case, invite even the enemy, unless one of the excusing causes to be mentioned later is present. And the shme is to be said for Mary if she gives a dinner for "all the,girls at the office": and for a’ religious who is~{n the habit of visiting "all who are in the infirmary." In such cases the special favors (inviting to dinner, visiting the sick) become to some extent common because they are extended to a certain group. If one’s enemy belongs to this group, the common courtesy must be extended to him too unless special reasons, to be indicated later, excuse one from this obligation. On some occasions, therefore, we must extend special favors even to our enemies. This is an exception to the general rule. And the general rule that common signs must be shown the enemy also admits of,exceptions. However, it is one thing to state that this rule admits of exceptions;, it is quite another to formulate a reasonable policy that Will govern the exceptional cases. I will give here some examples of cases in which the denial of these signs is considered reasonable: and after studying these examples we may be able to formulate a general principle that,can be appii~d to all cases. The examples given here are culled from various manuals of moral theology. Everyone has a right, to protect himself against mistreatment by others. Hence, in the event that a fellow-religious is constantly indulging in a disagreeable form of teasing, ridicule, or rudeness, I may certainly defend myself by denying him ordinary courtesies until he mends his ways. ,For example, I might refuse to speak to him, or refuse to do a favor that I would ordinarily do for others, if such refusals were merely to show him that his conduct is painful and disagreeable and that I wish him to desist. Superiors have the power within reasonable limits to punish their subjects. It is generally considered as within their punitive power to temporarily" deny common courtesies to subjects who ,have given offense. ~Some authors tl~ink that in minor matters even equali may resort to this method of reasonably punishing another equal who has offended them., In other words, they consider that the’ hurt feelings that might be induced by temporary coldness and aloofness 307 GERALD KELLY. Ret~ietv for Religious would be a ~just i~unishr~ent.for ’the offender-~and the tyi~e; of 15un-ishm~ nt that Would.be within the,, rights .of :private~individtials. Another reasonthat,"justifi~s a ~temporary exterior, coldness towards an offender"is the, well-founded hope ~that, such treatment will bringhim,to" a better frame of mind. 1 This is different from and in :a .higtier i~rder th~n me’re °Jpunishment ~ven when’ijustl~~ inflicted., , There ~is~ the, problem of embarrassment. ;For a ,short¢,time after ,a qilarreF people ,usuhlly, feel ~e±tremel~i embarrassed,~in, each other’s ,pres.ence. I~Avoidance*0f this mutual embarrassment would be’a sufficie.ni [eason fbr temporarily keeping away from: an en’emy,, even though that:might mean" the omissions, of one of)the,Common signs, of, gobd will. For example, suppose that ifi a (ert’ain conih munity it is c’us’tomary for the "religio.us to take turns visiting the, sick during recreati6n." In this,case,’visiting the sick is a common sign’o~ good v~ill~ in,’that~, community_-~that ’is, ’ a~" kindhess shown iridis.: criminately to, all, the members of.the community who are ill;~,~)But su~pl~ose" that two of the religious have recentl~r qu~reled,,~ and one then’i is n6w in the irifirmary and it is the other’s turn to ~visit him. It might~be.th~t..consideration for the, sick would e~cuse the second religious from, making the visit. "Of course, the ideal thing Would be for both to forget it arid for the visit to take place just"as if there had been no quarrel; ,ne~,~rtheless, if the second religious honestly con, ~idered that the visit would be embarrassing and a source of annoy-° ance to,the sick, person,’he would be justified in o/hitting it. Some people say that;they avoid their, enemy and do not speak to him or show him other ,signs of benevolence because they fear that this,,will-lead’ to afiother"quarrel, or that the enemy will ptit~, a sinister ihterpretation on ’their actions and use these as an occasion for~ offering fukther offensev’~Granted that the fear of these evils is, a well-founded one, this is certainly a sufficient reason for omitting the customary expressions of good:will. Of’course, such fearsare’~often groundless;~ but if one has really attempted to establish amicable relations.with another and has met only with~,coldness or sharpness, theie is tainly ~nb obligation’to continue tl~e fruitless endeavor.,.In shch a’case the ,fault is all, o/~ one side. ¯ . -" Unfortunaiely, even in religion there are sour-minded indi-viduals; who~refuse’to get alohg With others, who cause great pain" too fellow-religioug~who Wish ’to be courteous~ and,,~cho, egpecially in, a small ’house~, are ;veritable thorns in the side of, the community. How they ju~tifysuch conduct is somewhat of a mystery. ~ 308 November, 1948 ON LOVING THE’ NEIgHBoR °" qn the case just considered the obsta~ie to fraternal ,hi~rmony was only one party. What of the case of two religions, members of thee same ;community, who, Stbongl~ dislike" each bther an’d "either impli~itly’fi~xplicitly agree to bav~ nothing to do with ehch oth~er? Are they justified by mutual agreement .in failing to show’ to’~eacl’i other the common~,:courtefies~such as speaking to each other? To answer th~s’ question, I must.sel~arate the points that are clear, fron~whi~t is’uhcl~ar. The following points are cl(ar: First, both beligi6"~s:aie ’~ertai’fily obliged.~o abstain from what has previously be~n d~scribed as internal hatred. Sec~)ndly, each is’obliged~o be wiHin~ t0’~ extei~d f6 the %ther any spiritfial dr temp6ral ~Ip that" might l~e,0f c~blig~itibn according to the rules of well-,orderedcharity. Thirdly " and this is, i~’seems t6 me, all-importan( in community life both a÷e 6bilged to see that the communit~y d6~s no~ suffer because of their mutual e~strarigement policy. If they are members of a:small community it’i~’pr~adtlC~H~~ im’posbible for them to cairy ’out their program without catising~’much embarrassment~ and inconveni-ence to the other members of the community. Finally, both are obliged to see that their mutual coldness "gives no scandal to externs. People naturally and" justifiably expect to see religious live together in harmony and, if they-no~ice a lack of harmony, their esteem of the religious life is considerabl.y lowered. Suppose that all the evils just mentioned ~ould be avoided, would the mutual estrangement policy still’ ~be sinful? The answer is not clear to me. However, even if such a situation is not sinful, it is at most "tolerable" that is, it could be tolerated .as a means of avoiding greater evils that might, result from the mutual association of two ire’mature chabacters. That "the situatioh is not ideal, and that ’it is~ at variance with the spirit of Christ, seems, quite clear. Moreover,~"th~ anomaly of the"situation becomes even more glaring mwohse’ntc ohna.er m~ionngs icdoeurrste hsyo wto othftoesne bwuhsoimne tshse m~ ednis laikned. w’Tohmis esne eemxste.n tdo tbhe~ one case in which the. children of this world are wiser than the chil-dren of light; the former can do for mere worldly gain ~hat the latter will not do for the love of Christ. ~What has bee.n, said about mutual estrangement among religious is equally ,applicable to similar situations among families or among othe_r groups living ,in common. And it should be remembered~that the smaller the group and the more closely the lives touch one 309 GERALD KELLY Review for Religious another, the more dif[icult, it is to justify the mutual es.trangement policy. We are now in a position to sum up the doctrine concerning the duty~ of showing the common signs of benevolence.~ The ordinary rule is that these courtesies must be extended even to enemies because, being common signs, they simply express externally our recognition of a bond which unites the group and all the members of the group. In other words, they are extended to others as fellow-men, fellow-citizens, fellow-religious, and so forth. To omit such courtesies without~good reason is usually a manifestation of ill will, of a lack of forgiveness, and even a sign of contempt; and because of these things, the omission of the courtesies readily wounds the feelings of the enemy and is a source og scandal to others. However, t.hey may (and occasionally should) be omitted at least for a time, for some greater good .(such as the correction of an offender and the safe-guarding of public discipline oro private rights), and also to avoid some greater evil (such as renewed quarreling). Reconciliation The duties thus far considered refer to an enemy even in the wide sense: that is, to one who has given no offense, but who is disliked. The duty of reconciliation supposes that there has been a quarrel; hence the term "enemy" is here used in its strictest sense, namely, as one who has given offense. Each party to a quarrel is obliged to do his part to bring about a ~econciliation. The offender (that is, the one who started the quarrel) mu~t take the first step. As soon as h~ tan reasonably do so, he must in some appropriate way express that he is sorry and that he is willing to make amends. A formal apology is not always neces-sary; in fadt, it is frequently a source of embarrassment to both parties. It is often best to indicate in some indirect way that one i~ sorry. The offended party is obliged to accept the apology or its reasonable equivalent and to show that he has forgiven the offense and that~ he bears no ill will towards the offender. Such are the basic duties of offender and offended. The fol-lowing annotations may help to clarify them. Some people say, "I forgive, but I cannot forget." Perhaps they mean that they have been so deeply wounded that the thoughts of the dffense keep welling up in their mind and bring with them feelings of.rancor. As I have already pointed out, such thoughts are 31.0 November, 1948 ON LOVING THE NEIGHBOR" no indication Of ~in; and therefore the}" do not indicate a"lack Of forgiveness. However, sdr~etim’es this expression "I tannot forget" really m~an~ "I ~vill not forget," and it indicates that there is still some deliberate ill will towards the offender. Others say, "I don’t wish i11. to my offender, but I certainly clri’t wish him wel~?’ ThiL df course, is nonsense; for the well-wishifig of trde~ch~rity is deliberate sup~erna~ural well-wishing, the oobject of’which is the true supernatural good of the neighbor. Such well-wislii’i~g is not"impossible’ for anyone. "And any one who is unwilling to cultivate such good will.has not really forgiven his offender: Foi~giveness of an offense does not mean the waiving of the right to rep~irati0n for harm don~.’ If an o~ffen~h has harmed n~y reputa-tioia° or caused me property loss, I ah~ not ~nforgiving merely because I insist that the harm to reputation or proRerty be repaired. Al~o, forgiveness is compatible withr insistence on a just punishment for an offense; for even God inflicts ’punishments after~ having forgiven an offense. However, when human beings insist on punishment after exiaressing forgiveness, theymust remember that they are not °God and that their motives migh~t be suspect. For instance, if a fellow-religious offends me and then sincerely expresses his sorrow, and I still insist on revealing the matter to, the superior so that my offender may be ~unished, it is quite likely that my forgiveness is not whole-hearted. The foregoing observations indicate, at least in a vague sort oL way, what forgiveness is not. But what is it? Real forgiveness seems, to reduce itself to this: a sincere wil.lingness to restore the bond that existed before the quarrel, insofar as that is reasonably possible. But what if the bond was an ~ntimate friendship? Moralists usually say that there is no strigt obligation for the offended party to re-admit his offender t6 such intimacy. They say that since intimate friend-ship is s.omething to which no one has a claim, the restoration of such friendship can hardly be urged as an obligation. The strittoobliga-, tion, therefore, is usually satisfied when the offender is given those’ marks of charity that have previously been described as common. The statement that forgiveness does not demand the re-establish-ment of an i~itimate friendship can be misleading. It seems to me that each case must be judged according to its own circumstances; and certainly there are occasions when the refusal to re-establish an GERALD KELLY intimate friendship after one quarrel (and perhaps a trifling one) is unreasonable, as’ well as un-Christlike. However, if even a trifling quarrel is sufficient to undermine the confidence of the offended party in his offending friend, perhaps it is just as well that the friendship cease. When should .the first step towards reconciliation be taken? Moralists wisely suggest that it is generally expecting too much of an offended person to ask him to be reconciled immediately after a quarrel. He is entitled to a "cooling off" period. Normally this need riot be long; but the offender is justified in postponing his expression of sorrow until what seems to be an opportune time. In many quarrels it is difficult to determine who was the first offender; both exploded more or less simt~Itaneously. Theologians solve this one by saying that the one who committed the more serious offense has the duty of taking the first step towards recon-ciliation. However, it must be admitted that this rule is also hard to apply~becau~e, at least in the eyes of the participants of thequarrel, the Other party seems generally the more guilty. As a matter of fact, daily experience sliows us that no sit of merely mechanical rules concerning the duties of offender and offended is perfectly s.atisfactory. The only really satisfactory solu-tion to the difficulties that follow upon quarrels is that each party should be willing to take the initiative in reconciliation. After all, most of the difficulty for both parties is embarrassment. Frequently both want to make up, yet each is afraid to take the first step; and unfortunateIy this mutual embarrassment can lead to long and pain-ful estrangements that could have been settled in a moment by a Christlike attitude and a sense of humor. And I believe we can conclude this article on the same note. In the body of the article, I have outlined the duties of loving the neighbor. It is well for everyone to know these and fulfill them. But it is also well to note that the~e state a minimum. The Chris-tian ideal, which is certainly the religious ideal, is to strive each day for perfect fulfilment of Our Lord’s words: "Love one another as I have loved you." 312 The-Docl:rine ot: John oJ: :he Cross J. E. Breunig, S.J. ASHORT TIME after St. Teresa met the two men who .were to found the Order of Discalced Carmelites,,,~he descriptively announced to the nuns during recreation:Ihave found a monk and a half." The half-monk was John of the Cross, just five-feet- two in his sandals. On another occasion she wrote of him in a letter: "’El cbicO is small in stature but he is great in God’s ~yes." The little Carmelite lived in Spain during the last half of the sixteenth century. In spite of his physical limitations he made a success of his life. He was canonized by Benedict XIII in 172’6 ~hd"twb cen~turi~s la~er in 1926 Plus XI declared him a Doctor of the Universal Church. By conferring her doctorate on St. John, all of whose works are on mystical theology, the Church not only shows her esteem for mystical studies and puts her stamp of approval on the saint’s works, but also points to the cultivation of the supernatural as a remedy against excessive naturalism. The recent, doctor’s cap makes John a saint of our own day, while the title, Doctor Of the Universal Church, seems to indicate that his doctrine is not just for his Carmelite breth-ren (and sisters) but for the world. To appreciate the elevation of mystical theology w.e might com-pare it with philosophy and dogmatic theology. With reason alone man can arrived at natural wisdom. With reason and faith he can advance worlds beyond to theological wisdom. With faith and the divine operations of God within the soul, man can attain mystical wisdom, a knowledge different in kind and immeasurably higher in degree. As Aristotle is surpassed by Aquinas, St, Thomas Aquinas in his writings is, in a way, eclipsed by. St. 2ohn 6f the Cross. We might pause here to recall that the mystical life is a super-natural state above the ordinary life of faith and below the beatific vision. Since mystery is inseparable from~’~the supernatural;~ the wonder is not that the mystical life is fraught with mystery. The wonder is rather that~the genius of John of the Cross is able to pene-trate into the deep things of God and trace for us the divine action in the generous soul almost from the time of the infusion of sanctifying 313 ¯ J. E. BREUNIG Reoieto for RUi~lions grace until it reaches~ the highest state possible to man, the trans- ’forming umon,,:a ~half-step from the beattfic umon. Two qualifications-psepared John for his delicate analysis and d~cription of"th~:div’i~e~perai’ions. He was a teacher and he was a m~ ystkc. As a teacher he possessed that mark of genius that Aristotle calls’ thd "~iftg6f metaphor." In other words, he knew how to explain. There is hardly a page in his ~writings that is not illumined by. an~ apt ,dlustrat~on that ~bnngs,out. the heart of the. matter. As a mysti6he practiced and experienced what he taught. Enduring trials and humdlatmns, 2ofin lieed an~,intense life of prayer, self-denial, add hard work. In return, God raised him to higher states of prayer, where after more interior suffering he attained the highest union. ’He climbed every inch of the bare rock of Mt. Carmel before he wrote. He experienced the dark night of the soul and the living flame of love before he described-them. ~t is one thing to have a taste’for great literature, quite another to undhrstand what makes it great, and still a third to write great litera-ture. According to St. Teresa, there is a similar threefold gift in mysticism. To be raised to a higher form of prayeris’~0ne gift. To understand the delicate divine movements is another, while a third and greater gift is the ability to describe these states of soul. Like Teresa, St. :John of ’the "Cross possessed all three gifts in a high de~rde.~ Besides, he was able:to express his thought~ ,in’language tha~ does not blush when placed among the masterpieces of Spgin’s Golden Age. " "John ~6f th~ Cros~ ~trace§~ the "cou~e of the’ divin~-~3i~erations Within the soul, describing the growth of the marvelous friendship between the soul and God. He does this in four books which together equal less than a thousand pages. Briefly, the books treat of the summits of love and of, the’ path that leads there. Two books, The Ascent of Mount Carmel and The Dark Nigl~t oF the Soul; point out the path. The other two, The Spiritual Canticle and The Livin9 Flame o~ Love, describe the summit. In reality, all four bobkd develop a single theme. The books that tell of the via ad, such as The ,Ascent, briefly but explicitly describe the summit, the terminus. On the other hand, The Livin~j Flame, while speaking, primarily of ¯ the~ terminus,-repeats the lessons of the via ad. John has ~/ single theme: complete union with God ,is the fruit of absolute renunciation of self. ~ "He that loses his life shall save it." In his own words: "I(i’s irripossible, if the soul does as much as in it 314 November° 1948 THE DOCTRINE OF ST. JOHN OF THE CROSS . lies, that,God should fail to.perform His o~n part by communicating Himself to the soul. It is more impossible than that’the sun should fail to shine in a serene and uncloudeff sky: for as the sun when it rises in th~ morning will enteroyour house if you open the shutter, even so ;~ill God~ Who sleeps n6vin keeping Islael, still less slumbers, enter the soul that is empty and fill it with Divine blessings. God, like the sun, is above our souls and.ready to dommunicate Himsel~ to thdm." (E. A. Pee~s, The’Works of St. John of, the Cross, III, 185.7 ’Generally; th~ highest point-in a region willq~ive the best view of the’.surroundings. Similarly, perhaps, we can obtain "the best view of the doctrine of St, John.if.we:see the summit of Mount Carmel before w’e look at the rocky road that’ leads there. In other words, we will first look where 2ohn is leading before-0~ve see how he leads~ The final:goal which the Mys[ical Doctor bf the Church ~roposes is nothing less th~an ~ transforming uhion°of,the soul’with~God. As he himself salts:. ’~if the soul. attain to ~he’~last~ ~tegree,"the 16ve of God~ will succeed in wounding the sdul even in its: remotest "and deepest centre that~is, in transfor’ming and enlightening’it as regards all its being and power affd virtue, such as it is capable’ of receiving, until .it be brought into such a state that it appears to be God:" (Works, III, 124.) In a ~passage~ where we seem to catch the heart,beat of God John describes the same union more at length: "As each living crea- , ~ ture lives by its operation, the soul, having its operations ~n God, through the union’it has with God, lives the life of God, and thus ¯ its death has been changed into life. For.the understanding, which bdfore this union°understood in a fiatural way with the stren..gth and vigour of its natural~light, by means of the bodily senses, is now .movedand informed-by another and. a higher principle, that of the supernatu.ral light og God, and, the senses having l~een set aside, it has thus’been changed into the Divine, for through union~its under-standing and that 6f God are now both one. And the will which’ b~fore loved with its natural affection, has now been Changed in~tb "the life of Divine love; for it loves after a lofty manner with~Divihe aff~ction~-~hd is moved b,y ’the powers’and str.ength of the Holy Spirit: in whom it now li~,es the life o~ love, since, through this union, its will and His will ~ire now only one." (Works, III, 1~5.7~8:) In this high state the soul becomes aware of it~’sharing in the divine nature, the shaii~ag that it first received at the infusion of sanctifying grace. -"The flame of love is the Spirit of ’its Spouse--~’ that is; the Holy Spirit. And this flame the souI.feels within it, not only as a fire that has consumed and transformed it in sweet Io,ie, but also as a fire which burns within it and sends out flame, ,:i’nd ,that flame, eacbxime that it breaks into flame, bathes ,the soul: in glory-and refreshes it with tile temper of Divine life.". (Works,~III, 1190 It seems that mystics, in some way, experience, and verify the truths we learn,in dogma, and hold by faith. In the transforming union the soul sees" in God~ all the divine attributes. "WhenHe is united to ,the soul and He is then pleased to reveal knowledge to i~, it is able to see in Him all these’ virtues and grandeurs distinctly---~namely, omnipotence; wisdom and goodness, mercy and soforth.., each of these attributes is a"lamp~,which gives lightxo the soul and gives it also,the heat of 10re." (Ibid., 163.) Fur-ther, 7The soul is able to see how all creatures above and below, have their life and strength and,duration in Him... And this,is, thergreat delight.of xhis awakening: to know: creatures through,Godsend riot° God through creatures.’; (Ibid., 209.) St. John sumsul5 this state: ’~The_unders~tanding of the soul is now: the .understanding~of God: and its will is the will of God; and its memory is the memory of God; and its delight is the delight of God; and the Substance °of the soul, although it is not the Substance of God is nevertheless united ’and "absorbed in Him and is thus God by. participation in God, which cq.m. e,s to, pass in this perfect state of the spiritual life, .although not so perfectly as in the next life." (Ibid., 159.) - , The union in.this sublime state is~ twofol~d:~ moral and, psycho-l? gical. The~oral union is the almost pe.rfect c~onformioty ofthe human will to the divine. The psycholgg!c~al ,Enion means that the ppwers of the soul, the mind and will, ~act.in..a specific.a!ly different, s.uperhuman manner. According to St. John~ they a~ct divinely. In spite of the closeness of the union:, the Carme[ite Doctor. is always, careful to note tha~ the human and, div~ine:art distinct. He tries to s.how this in tl~e following comp, atisp~:; "He.. that.: ~s:" joined" " the Lord is made one spirit with Him;.even~.,asowh’en the light of.the star,or of th~ ~n~dle is joined an.~ united with, that~of:he sun, sootha_t that which shines is not the star or the candle but th_e sun: ~which, has absorbed the other lights in itsel’~" (Work~, .II., 308):~ We would expect the road to such a loftyheight to be steep and rocky. And it i~..We sav~ that in the very highest union there were still two separate principle.s, God and the soul. The same is true for tile journey to the oheigh~s. As on the summit, so in theoascent God’s .. 3~16 November, 1948 THE DOCTRINE OF ST. JOHN OF THE CROSS action predominates; but the soul must co-bperat¢ at every step. Pre-supposing this, we can say that John of the Cro~s proposes two means togrow, inGod: absolute mortification and the contemplation of the dark night of the soul. Doctor o/: Nothing The Carmelite Doctor insists on absolute mortification, a total war on self. "The soul must be stripped of all things created, and of its own actions and abilities namely, of its understariding, liking and feeling so that, when all that is unlike God and unconformed to Him is cast out, the soul may receive the likeness of God: and nothing will then remain in it that is not the will of God and it will be transformed in God" (Works, I, 80). The classic expression of John’s extreme stand is contained in the following maxims from The Ascent of Moun.t Carmel in a passage which has com~ to be called "The Canticle of the Absolute." Strive always to choose, no’~ that which is easiest, but th,at.~hich is:most difficult; ~,~ .... . Not that which gives mo~t pleasure, but rather that which gives least;, .,~ ~ N~t that, which is restful, but that which is wearisome; In "order, to, arrive at having pleasure in everything, Desire to have pleasure in nothing." In,order to arrive ~t possessing everything, Desire to possess nothing. In order to arrive at,knowing ,everything,- , Desire to,knowj nothing .... There are three pages of insttuctiorts s~mil~t to these (Worlts~ I, 60-63). Is it surprising that many of his .fellow Spaniards called him Doctor de, la Nada, Docf0r of Nothing? Doctor o: the Dark Night John of the Cross is also called the Doctor iof the Dar~ Night. Unfqr.tgnat.ely,...this title gives the impression~ that his dQc~tti.ne is negative. Darkness and night are not attractive words.’ On the other hand, the. title, is appropriate if we take it as representing,~is most distinctive contribution to my:stical theology, There have been other doctors of.nothing. In fact, weighty tomes on mortification .are stacked high. On the other side, volumes which relate the glories of the transforming union fill the cases. 317 J. E., BREUNIG . .7 t~eoieuJ, for R~ligious However,, the. shelf devoted to the’bi[ter affd painful, side df.themys-tical life is practically empty... " ’ -~ ,~ :":°.~ ~: " ;~Jbhn Ventured into this ~’~icharted ’sea, this nwman s land: ~(Per~ haps, "No God’s Land" might be a bett&’.description ofothis 15eri6d.) In this particular work are revealed in a .special manner the saint’s rare talents: "the precisi0n’6f hi~ psycho10gical analysis, the revealing ¯ nature" of his" cdmp~irisons, the penetration Whdr’ewi~h Be can" recog-raze t’he, w~rk of ,divine .grace developing beneath, th’( mahtler0f. :th~ m6st ~v~ned experiences ~(Fath~f~Gabri~l’,bf Saint Mary M.agd.afe~’, St~"Jdl~onf. th"e C~ ro"~ss , 4 ",4).- ’" °’ ,~ ’~’ best~ treatment ’6f~-the dar~ nig.h{’is 4i3und"in~hi~ bool{ 6~ th{:s~fne name. Tl% darl~ night" of the s6fil is" a’sta~ o~ irifus&l’ templation, aohn calls it a da~k ’nig.tjt l~’ecause, 7~aiad6xit~lly,?th{’ {~hscer~d~nee’of the’ idfuse~dF light blinds the unde~standi’rig.~" :’The s6"ul is lik an oivl’ ih sunlight.’ ’Further, this state ’is painful’ the understanding ,s msufficlently~&spo{ed to re&ire Such is the general idea. John distinguishes t~6~’:0~i6ds~ ’th~ night ~f" the S~n~es~ followed by a. period of ¢on~ol~tidn’, an~basis;~an~ the night of t~e spirit. According to the Mystical Doctor, the nigh~ of the senses-is commonly reached by most ~souls ~who~ g~Te, themselves generously to a life of-prayer. The n~ght of the which precedes the transforming, union, is reached by fe~.~ ~. ;~ The night of the senses is"primaiily a period ~faridit~’ind~ced, not by any carelessness, but by the direct, a~fion of God.~ ~hd~ the soul gives itself generously, to prayer, it ;frequenfly~experlences sen-sible consolation. Even after this consolation ceases,Athe soul~con-tinues .t6:meditate witfi a certain,success, : Then gradunlly theFsoul ho’ lon(er finds any~sa~isfactionin meditatio~-but,~ on’the contrary, finds it strangely impossible ,t6 meditate, T~e soul iscpu~zled, anxious. Through no fault of its own, it seems abandoned by God. The soul might well ~dhsider ~tself m No G3~’s Land. St. John’s ge~i~~ r&ognized ~hi~ state ’~and~ gave all ~future spiri~ffaP dire&3~ and theol3~iafis three s"~~gn~s b’y which t~eyc"o u’l d r e’c o"gmze~ thd samd: ’" Th~ fir~ sign-isgh (ertaifl ,~istast~, f~f G6d arid’ for’creatures~as wd112: ~The a6ul find~ it~ di$cu1~to~ugyqtself:’~bdfit G~di~t~a~ th( same time .it has ~& t~ste "f6~’&reature~ d6~f6~s~~’ This si~n~d~stin’~ guisbe~ "divihe~ aridity’’~ from aridit~ause~ bf-Unfaithfulhdis~ for the sdul d&S no~ desire to seek itl consolation in ordinary p1~asut~s. This is ~ cl~r sigfi;~for God does not ~rmit the s0ul’he is ieadihg tb 318 Noverabe~o 1948 THE DOCTRINE OF ST. JOHN OF’THE CROSS higher’ prayer fo;be .drawn.-aside’by,any.thing l~ss than~Himself:.. Its. The second sign~,Tthe anxiet~r about servifig God,,di~tin~uishes thi~ state from -liiKewarmness; ffor;, by thd very definition, the 16kewarm are not. particulfirlW concerned about affer¢en t service of God: Inability to meditate, th~ ’third sign, tends to increase; anff, it can be distinguished b~. that fa(t from an~ inability that mighf ~bd caused by ill health and the like. St. 2ohn accounts for this:strange inability, to meditate. ~ In this’~tate og "divine aridity" God no longe/ c6mmunicates Himself through ’the.channels of sense or in consecu-tive reflectiohs but in pure spirit;.ahd pure spirif by its very nature has~ nbthing to~do ~it~ the~c6m~ar~tively gross actiohs’ of "the imagination,ahd r~asdn.~ 2ohn thfis,shows,us fhat God is very mucfi present iff What ~as considered a,]and without Grid. ¢ In his book, The ~pirit~al ~L[~ (6~4),~ Ta~q~erey gives an’~ comments 6n’St[’~J~hn’s’ad~i~e"f6i’~ ~6ul qfi th~ dark hight: .... ~or if a ma~~ while sit’tifnogr~,,’h "~’s "p’o~rt’r"ai t. ...c.a..:n’ n~ot ~be s,till but: mov~ about, ~he [painte~ will.never de~i~ his face; ’and "eveff the. work already doh’e’;wiil’b~spoiled)~ ’Ifi the sam~ way when "the i~(eriorly’fests, ~very actioh and, ~ssion~’~o~ ~.xious c6nsid~ration at .that~time will distract and .~is~u~b it;’~ ~so who,’God ~ntg fO i~p~int H~s li~ness uthpeotrn s o¯u ~ls ;’ a -ffd s~us~p .e..n..d..s. the acnwty of [heir¯ f~ulti~s, tfiey have b~t ¢t6~ ab~de ’.i~d~d,.~nd~ ~thf6d~h’~.~hi~ peat~"the gpifit 0f lo~(~ will flare~,up "arid "burn more brightly ~thm them. :~Tfiis’sf~te~of~ repose ~is by ~a~ m~ns 6he of ina~ti0n: if.is rat~e~’~ different":~kind’,’of..occupanon," ":"" ~.... .W...hi~fi excludes: ’ "sloth"~ ’" l~nguor~" ,T~e~ mus~ therefd~e:~l’;flistractibns, ~hd i~’in’ofder’t~ o so they mffst:r~turn tb cofi~deranofis, let t~em not hemtate; pro~ ~ided~ th~ ~cah acc6~plis~, this "Withofit violeft ffOrts." : ’ .... A~otding, t~ John/6~ ~fi~" Ct6~g.:ihe:~ight o~ th~ ~eh~e~ ~e~e~ail~ lasts’a long’ti~.’" It varies wit~eadH ~dul. ~’St~ T~r~sa i~ Sai~f6 beeh in the d~rk’night, of t~,soM ’e~h~h yiars:St-),Fr~hc~s fff Asiiii/ -two ~yefirs~:T ’ h..~...s. ..num- .b..e..r. .s.eemst ,t..o ,-include fi~tht~e .~ m "g"’ht’of t~e senses’and o~,the s itif~¢ ~"-.’ ~"~; ’ ~ " ’~r~.The ~hi~ht~ of t~ Spirit ’ii a pfir~atory on earth. ~Agam~"there s~emsto b~’n6Gdd fdr th~ a~icted’s0fil. ,Much ~f ~he pain ~esfilts from ~he ver~ li~t bf contemplation. The soul" becomes aware~of how absolutely traHscend~t God" i~. ~ ’:Sdzed by a profouffd zation of qts e~tieme ’~iritual~ b6v~ity, the’ souF is aw~r~ ’0f’ impression of ~nsurmounta~le sadness, or even of a temptation ~to despair. How could’ G6~ lov~ a creature so vile, so abject] Th’~ J. E. BREUNIG " : soul suffers indescribable, torture:-there are moments When its laments become~ real cries of.angu sh. (Gabriel;.op: ¯ - God’~ action ~it~ this time is~compared to fire." ~",Tl~e purgative and loving knowledge or Divine light acts’ upon the soul, in the same way as fire acts upon a log of wood in order to transform° it into itself: for m~ter.iaF fire, first of all begins to dry it, ,by driving out the moisture and causing it to shed th~ whter it co’ntains. Then it 10egins to make it black, dark and-unsightly, and, astir dries it little by little, it brings out and drives aw~r all~the dark and, unsightly accidents~which are c6ntrary to the nature of fire; ’Finall)~, it begins to kiiadle it.externally afido’give~it heat ~ind" at last~transforins it into itself and makes it as beautiful as fire." (~Works, I, 429:) "Ought not Christ to have suffered?" St. 5ohn~explains that this intense suffering results entir.ely from love. God purifies the soul in order tot raise it to the closest union with’ Himself ..... A glo-rious Easter morning follows the dark night of Good Friday., We see St. 2ohn is a ,Doctor of Nothing and a Doctor of. the Dark Night only because he isfundamentally the Doctor,of Divine Love. Again, we are.on the lofty sgmmit~,gf Carmel, for the state c~ the transformi~ng union follows on the dark night. As we .look back, we see that the road has been rugged. In fact, the sheer cliff 9f Car-me1 is humanly unassailable. However, we saw that when the soul strips itself of self, when the soul drags itself up by means 0f ordinary p.ray~er an~ selg-deniaI, the Divine :.Guide~ takes its hand and with. i.nfused prayer leads the~ soul throug.h the arid land of the night’of the senses, then through the pur~i,fying fires of the night 9f the spirit until .together the peaks of pe~rfect~0n and love are reached. We conclude with a passage~.of sunshine from the little Doctor of the Universal Church. "The Father of" Lights, whose arm is not shortene~dl.but stretched out.~idely, without res, pect of persons, where-e~ cer it finds rogm, likd~th,e r~ay of the s,u.n . . . is greatly pleased to share His delights with the children of ~e.n on earth~ - No, ,it is not to be held a thing incredible that in a soul already cleansed, tried in the ,fur~nace of tribulations, of labors, and of divers temptations, and ~ound faithful in love, there will be fulfilled here below those .words wher.eby the Son of God promised that if,any man love Him the Most Hgly Trinity would come and abide in him,: ~that is to say, divinely~.enlightening ~is .understanding in the .wisdom of the Son, ddighting.~his will in the Holy Spirit whilst the Father absorbs him mightil¢ in the abyss of His sweetness." (Gabriel, op. cit, 19.) 320 May a super,oress use fh~ int~rest~ 6f dowries-and-legacies belofig;~ng to the Sisters for commumty purposes o’r for educational projects? After the first profession, the d~wry is to be invested in a man-ner that is safe, lawful, and prqductive according to canon 549. The revenue coming from the invested dowry can be devoted to the sup-pbff of the community or to the education of the Sisters. The.Code does not liinit the use of the revenue. Strictly speaking, the dowry can be invested even before the profession of a Sister, but on!~l°with her consent. In this case the institute could also use the, r~venue for. the good of the community. T’hi~ Subject is treated thor0ughly bs; Schaefer, De Religiosis, n6: 229. F~ther Ellis has also treated the Canons on the dowry in Vol. III, pp, 224 ff. of this REVIEW. Legacies usually ~i~hei" cofistitute a Si, ster’soproperty or are added to it. The disposition of the revenu~ of-l~acies therefore, will be regulatedb~" canon’ 569,~,§ § ,1 aiad 2.- The beneficiary of the revenue is-freely indicated’~by fla~,religious @ho makes the cession of her property, the appointment of an administrator, arid the’~assignment of ,the revenue. If" the’ Sister l~efore her first profession, m~ke~ the institute~the beneficiary of the revenue, then. of course, ~uperiors may use,it for the good of the-institfite. Educational prbjects~would undoubtedly be included. Is the following case ;n conform;h/with common life? Sister J. ;s g;gen permisson to travel for recreational purposes~be~ause her relafive~~ are supplying her the necessary funds. If in a given community lawful custom permits travel as a form of relaxation, permission for such trips should not be contingent upon the economic status of the relfitives of the religious wh6’ ~sks for such a permission. Common life calls for equality in these iiaat-ters. While such a partial way of acting may contributd to the balancing of the budget, it also makes a mockery of common life. The Code ;n canon 504 prescribes the age of forty’for superiors gen- 32[ eral and the age of thirty for other major superiors. Is there an age at which su, per!ors mustretire from office? The Code makes no provision for a retirement age for superiors. The ills attendant upon age come to some sooner, to others later. Infirmity due to age willdoubt]es~ l~ompt~the true religious to resign fron~ airy office w’hicl~: J~e considers l~yond~,~his physic~ or’menta! capacity. Would you kindly enlighten us on the following polnt~s ’concerning ~h~ ~’~cltafibn if fh~ rosary? I.’To" gain the in_dulgences attached to the recitation of .the rosary, i-~ it~necessary to recite the Creed. the Our’lFather, and the fhr~ee Hail Ma~rys before’begignlng the five decades? 2~ Must the mystery be mentioned-before the recitation of each decade? " 3. If the rosary is recited twice (i.e.. I0 decades) 9n agiven day, what mysteries are~to be meditated upon? ¯ . 4. Where can I find some information 9n~he~recitatlon of the rosary? ° 1. Th~ rosary in its strlct~st sense cbnsists of the Our Fatl~er and ten Hail Marys recited fifteen times, or five times if one is reciting only a third part of the rosary. The, Glory be to the Father etc., were added some, time after the rosary,had been in usal~e among the faith-ful. Hence, the recitation.of the Creed, the Our Father, and’the three Hail Mar~s are not necessary to gain the indulgences attached fo the recitation of the rosary. 2. There is no necessity to-. mention the mystery before each decade;" -~:. 3; If, for,,example, on a Sunday after Pentecost, two-thirds 6f the entire rosary (or ten decades) were recited, the sequence of the mysteries should be .followed so that the...glorious mysteries, should be recited last: The other five decades, whether commemorating the jo,yful or the sorrowful mysSeri.es, should precede"the glorious mys-te, rjes~ .... 4. Among other sources of information on’the rosary, we recommend an article by Father Ellis, "Our Lady’s Rosary,~’ REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, V, 324. A Rosary Project, published by the Queen’s Work, .likewise gives much valuable information concerning the recitatioa of~the rosary. 322 ommun ¢a ons Reveren’d Fathers." In the September REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, there is a communica~ t~on~ from "Old-fashioned’i’ ’~hat’ should give us all ’thought ~r meditation. The only’ s~tatement in the communication with which I take issue is the one that states that "worldliness is ’creeping~ .into the religious life." It ib not merely "creeping" in; it is already there, and there with a bang. Are. we goingl to treat it as we do, the weather? Every6ne talking about it; no one doing anything abouf it. Are there no courageous leaders in any of our communities? A good strong ~religious govern-ment could work wonders; one that is not afraid to act according to’ its convictions. What will it profit to have a large progressive com-munity~ to have leaders in every field of activity, if the members are not attaining the purpose for which they ’entered religion--the glory of God, the salvation of their own souls. ’ ~ Would it not be far better, regardless:of the nee~ for Sisters in our schools and hosl~it’~Is~" if we ~had still fewer but bette~r religious? What will it avail to have a’ million worldly nuns, if by their very worldliness they are defeating the purpose for which the rel~igious life was established? ’ If we can do nothing else, let us ~ray to the:Holy Spirit, that He may raise up some modern Teresas of Avila, who will have the courage to say to those who oppose them, as our Divine Lord said long ago to some of His followers, those who found His saying hard, "Will you also go away?" And we know that some did .go away and walked no more with Him. Would it not be better ~o have the faithful few really walking with Chroist, and working and .fighting for Him, than to have a million or more walking on the broad road that leads to dkstruction ?---A PROVINCIAL. Reverend Fathers: From my own ~ad experience, I know something about worldli-ness. It is a spirit opposed to the spirit of Christ. A religious "may become infected in various ways: by too great absorption in external occupations; by wasting time with seculars; by unnecessary corre-spondence; by uncalled for exemptions from Holy Rule; by morbid interest in secular reading and programs; by inordinate attachments 323 BOOK REVIEWS Review [or Religious to persons, places, and things. A worldly religious who loves and uses the world inordinately will find prete*l~S for shortening or missing her prayers and spiritual. exercises, and that without regret. She will find satisfactibn in the .company of seculars, seeking their applause and delighting in their flatteries. She may even sacrifice principles or points of. Holy Rule in order to curry the favor of the rich and influential for purposes of ~mbiti0n or worldly pleasures..She will find little or no time for spiritual reading, but claims she must read secular matter in order to keep abreast of the times. After listening to a conversation of a certain religious, an elderl7 gentleman remarked, "I didn’t think that Sisters were so well-informed on such matters." A worldly religious does not enjoy the peace and contentment of convent life. The warnings of well-meaning companion ~ Sisters are ignored, and the corrections of kind and vigilant superiors are resented. She becomes disgusted and dissatisfied, and blames others for her" unhappiness. Can worldliness be cured? In my case, I was removed from the place to which I was so much attached. At the new mission, a reli-gious priest came to help out for some time. In confession he set me right in prayer. After a short but intensive prayer-fife, I fell in love witl’J God again; and then worldly attractions gave Way to the soul-satisfying joys of the spirit.TEACHING SISTER. Book Revie ,s EXILE ENDS IN ~LORY: The I.~e of ~ Tr~ppisfine. By Thomas Medon. Pp. ’~i~ q-~’31 ~. The Bruce Publ~sh~ncj Company, Milw~aukee,:’ 1948. $3.75. During her lifetime complete obscurity cloaked the activities of Mother Berchmans; and, but for her biographer, she would still be unkflowri save to the few Trappistine nuns~ who visit her grave in Hakodate, Japan, Put in a convent orphanage at three and a half years of age, she lived entirely apart from the world save for a year or two as a young woman after her graduation from. the orphanage school. Even within the convent her life was one without incident. 324 November, 1948 BOOK,REvIEWS Her entrance into the Trappistine convent at Laval, and ~her subse-quent journey to help the~st~ruggling foundation in Japan are_ the s01e "events" in her short life. ’She died"in 19,15 at 38.-years of age.° But lack of outward incident does nov leave her life story de~ioid of interest. From the record of her interior life drawn from her let~ ters and ~oersbnal papers,,and from the testimony of ~her, confessor- and religious acquaintances,~ it is clea~ that hers was~a life Of exalted sanc-tity:~ of sanctity, however, with nothing ~singular about it exter-nally. ,No ektraor’dinary phenomena nor dramatic suffering singled her out from her sisters in the convent. Her cross was her voluntary exile-from,her native Franceand the beloved convent at Laval. "She was to suffer," writes~,her biographer, "the ordinary, obscure, puri-fying trials of work and desolation and sickness which are the, com-mon lot of alFrelig~ous, more or less: but’~she was to suffer them with an extraordinary degree, of trust and loire and abandonment." ~ Thomas Merton, recognized poe~t hnd student of English litera-ture, brin~Os to the writing:of this biography no mean background no~ meager’talents. Himself~a,,~Trappist monk since 1941, he is prepared to "deal understandingly and sympathetically with his .subject.. SOULS AT STAKE: "By Frar~cis J. Ripley and F. S. Mitchell. Pp. xl -k 198. Joseph F. Wagner, Inc., New York, 1948. Though written by a~i~t~fidh, layman whose paramount interest is the Legion of Ma~y, this bpgk~i.s not limited in its scope to that laudable form of the l~iy~postolate. It is a book about Catholic Action in general, ,~and the authors explicjtly:s~ate their, belief .tha.t the success ~ofiCatholic Action depends on a multiplic.ity of lay.organ_iza.~ tions,~ even though.the purposes ofs0me of these m.ay overlap. no space is devoted specifically to an exposition of the Legion of.Mar~y The first chapterqs a vivid portrayal of a 16art o~ the. meditation on the T.wo Standards. The devil~is surrounded by his represerita~- rives fr’om various mOdern~ countries, and he*tells.each °on~ what must be done in his country to further the satanic aims. ’The authors then give ~.a brief account of the political, social, educational, cultural;._and religious collapse of the present age. Part of the blame for these ’lamentable-modern conditions must be placed onthe apath~ of~ lay Th~ basic principl~s for any l~y organizatiofi of Cattiolic.Action 325~ BOOK N~TIeES Revieu3 [or Religious are °presented, and then expanded ,i~ siabsequent parts of the: book. The" ~uthots insist’ 6n~ th( need~Of personal tontac~-to w~n They:issfie,~dive~se cautio~s. ~O~n~of these .has ~tO dd wit~, bver-idsistence ~n knowledge and orbed’purely natural endowments m the Ia¢, apostle.~ Another~ecti~s"themo~etn tendency to overemphasize " the sodaF apostolate. ’~" YeUanotBer~caIis:; attention ~o, the failure~ of out Ca~h01ic schools to p~o’duce zealous,,gtaduates. These ate "presented objectively a~d charitably so that they elicit self-examinati6n, not resentment. The authors believe in ~he direct teligious~appto~.ch to non,Catholics, the ~a~e method that-~as used by the apostles themselves; ahd it is di~cult to.s~e how their argu-ments for such a direct approach can be refuted. In sucha book one wsuld expect marly exaggerations. Yet the 6ook in general is well-balanded. It is most regrettable, however, that the" ~titers ma~e t~e following assertion: "The universities founded by the Religious of the Catholic Church and supposed to be the centers of culture, are soaked t~roug~ a~d through with the false ~rindples of the new materialism .... " The authors would be hard put to substantiate that statemenk. Aside from this and a few other exaggerations of lesser importance, the book stays on an even keel. Priests, Brothers, Sisters, and laymen will~pro~t from it. C. R. ~CA~L~S, S.3. BOOK NOTICES RELIGIbUS,’LIFE IN. CHRIST, by. Father° Theodosius Fdley, O.F.M.Cap.~ former provincial of his order and p~sent-~uperior Of the" Mt. Alverno Retreat House in Appleton, Wisconsin, contaifis thirteen coffferences for religious. These deal with some’of the funda-mentals of religious life, such as humility, worldliness,’ suffering, tepidity, spiritual-childhood, simplicity,-and~ the obligatiori of striving for i~erfection. A chapter on self-deceit reveals the author’s penetrating insight into the various ways that religious can fool them-selves. ~The 150ok is pradtical rather than inspirational. It makes frequent appeals t6Our Lord’s own v~0rds and example. Itsstyle is simple, clear,-concise. Few ~ords are wasted. It is a book that can be used profitably "by? religious both ~for spiritual reading and.for points for meditation. (Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Com-pahy/. 1948. Pp. vii.+ 163. $2.50:)~ " ¯’326 November, 1948 BOOK NOTI¢~ ~Margaret, princess of Hungary, THE KING’S HOSTAGE, is offered to God before her birth-] She remains true to her dedication, though her parents, the king and queen, try to change her mind. The sweet enchantment of GOd’s calling St. Margaret to His service is told for children by E. Virginia Newell in simple storybook fashion with I~he winning interest of a fairy tale. The illustrations are by Pauline Eppink. (St, Meinrad, Indiana: The Grail, 1948. Pp. 68. $1.50.) ABOUT JESUS, a child’s life of Our. Lord by C, J. Woolen, relates the story of Christ’s life and .gives explanations of Catholic doctrine and moral lessons as well.. Though the style is simple enough for a child to understand, the book appears repelling to read --only six black and white illustrations help brighten up the solid print. (Westminster, Maryland: The Newman Bookshop, 1947. Pp. 221. $2.25.) O’Brien Atkinson, in WHAT DO You TELL THEM? develops a sixty-four-word answer to the’ questi0n: Whji are 9ou a Catholic? He also treats such timely and isolasteudbj e c "ts ’as the existence of God, mixed marriages, religious tolerance, good will, ~he school question. The talks, used in actual street preaching, show how non-Catholics can be answered respectfully, briefly, and somewhat satisfact.orily. (New York: Joseph F. Wagner, Inc., 1948." Pp. 168.) THE WAY TO GOD, by Father Winfrid Herbst, S,D,S., is intended to serve for practical meditations during retreat, for daily. meditations, or for spiritua! reading. In a general way the first half of the book follows the "first’ week" of the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius; the remainder treats of various subjects, for example, The Holy Eucharist, the Passion, Our Lady. The s, tyle is designedly simple, even colloquial~ There is often a lack of orderly development of the individual chapters, but each contains good material for reflec~ tion and meditation. The author makes liberal, use of stories to drive home his point, (St. Nazianz, Wisconsin: Salvatorian Seminar% Publishing Department, 1947. Pp. iv + 299. $2.75.) ART AND FAITH contains an exchange of letters between J~cques Maritain and Jean Cocteau. The letters deal with the nattire and meaning of poetry arid with the sociological and politic~il, significance of art itself. The book contains brilliant thoughts on poetry, friend-ship, and philosophy, and shrewd estimates of contemporary French artists and writers.to interest the student of modern French litefa- ,327 BOOK NOTICES ture. (New York: The~ Philosophical Library, $2.75.) Ret~ieto /’or Religious 1948. Pp. 138., A revised and corrected edition of the well-known book, IN CHRIST JESUS, by Raoul Plus, S.$., is now available. The book explains .,the doctrine of our incorporation in Christ and its practical bearing on everyday life. (Westminster, Maryland: The Newman Bookshop, 1948. Pp. xiii -k 207. $2.50.) Father William L. Doty in CATECHETICAL STORIES FOR CHIL-DREN follows the characteristic division of the Catechism into creed, code, and cult. Through the medium of the story, of dialogue, and of daily down-to-earth incidents he breathes life into the dry skele-ton of the Catechism. Certainly here is a book that will appeal to the mind and heart of a child. Religion like a soul is put into the body of a child’s day, naturally, as if it belonged there. Guides of the young t~achers, parents, preachers will find this sprightly book the magic key to the wonder-world of a child. (New York: ,loseph F. Wagner, Inc., 1948. Pp. xii q- 176.) T6 the average Catholic, David is the boy who slew the giant Goliath with his sling. Of David, shepherd and ruler, poet and musician, warrior and statesman, sinner and man of God, he knows very little. Mary Fabyan Windeatt in DAVID AND HIS SONGS high- . lights for us the f~scinating story of this second king of the Jews and ancestor of Christ. Cleverly she shows how the Psalms were born of incidents that arose in David’s colorful life. They were the spon-taneous cry of his soul touched by life’s sweetest joys and sharpest tragedies. In these lyrical songs, evoked by God’s hand from the noblest chords of David’s soul, we find reflected thedifferent moods that play upon the human soul. That is why the Psalms are such favorites in the Church’s liturgy. For the uninitiated, youngsters particularly, ~he book will prove an open sesame to a rich new won-derland of personal, prayerful song. (St. Meinrad, Indiana: The Grail, 1948. Pp. 153. $2.00.) A hundred years ago a small group, pledged to the Thibd Order of St. Fr~incis, accompanied their pastor from Germany to Milwau-kee for the purpose of helping Bishop Martin J. Henni in his new diocese of Wisconsin. They located on land south of Milwaukee where the St. Francis seminary now stands. From this humble 328 November, i948 BOOK NOTICES beginning the Sisters of St. Francis of Assisl of Milwaukee devel-oped. A NEW AssIsI, by Sister M. Eunice Hanousek, is the story of a century’s labors by these Sisters, and of their expansion into an important order of religious. Highly commendable is the fact that the author has incorporated the citation of her sources in her work, thus making it more valuable than the run of the mill jubilee publi-cations. ’If the good example set J is followed by other sisterhoods when they write similar histories, another step toward compiling an adequate Catholic history of the United States will have been accomplished. (Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1948. Pp. xiv + 231. $5.00.) WITH DYED GARMENTS, by a Sister of the Precious Blood, sketches the life of Mother Catherine Aurelie (Caouette). The book is a translation from the French A Canadian Mystic. The first part gives the story of the life of the~ Mother Foundress: the second part, an account of her virtues and of her reputation for sanctity. (Brook-lyn: The Sisters Adorers of the Most Precious’Blood, 1945. Pp. xif + 190. $2.50.) LIGHT OVER FATIMA, by Charles C. O’Connell, ’is a fictionalized account of the apparitions of Our Lady to the three children in 1917. A simple narrative of the events is itself so absorbing, that one won-ders why any fiction should be added. However, the book may help to introduce the message of Fatima to those people who never read anything more serious than..a novel, (Cork: The Mercier :Pres.s, 1947; and Westminster, Maryland: The Newman Press, 1948. Pp. 163. $2.50.) BROTHER TO BROTHER, by Henry Brenner, O.S.B., is an exhor-tation to fraternal charity. The book is directed especially to the laity and contains practical applications to everyday life~ (St. Mein-rad,. Indiana: The Grail, 1947. Pp. 92. $1.25.) THE COMMON PRIESTHOOD OF THE MEMBERS OF THE MYS~ TICAL BODY, by James Edward Rea, explains the Catholic doctrine of the common priesthood of the faithful. The book is divided into two parts: the first describes heretical concepts of the doctrine; the second traces the development of the true doctrine. As the author explains, he does not intend to throw new light on the ~ubject but hopes"to 329 BOOK NOTICES p’rep~re tile w~i’y for a mor~ frutiful cc~ntemplation of’ the nature hnd ~ignificancd of the p~riestly dignity" of ali the’ inert/bets ~6f the’one Priest:" The book was~originally published as a, docto/al dissertation by’~the Catholic University of Ain~ric~. ’~ (Westminster, Maryland: The:NewmawBooksh0p, 1947. Pp. ~iii ~,~ The biography of ANNE DU RouSIER~translated from the French by L. Ke~ppe!,,,gives ftbrief but full vie~v of fhe ~_work accomplished and the successes achieved by one of the ear City of Saint Louis (Mo.), http://www.geonames.org/4407084 http://cdm17321.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/rfr/id/190 |