Review for Religious - Issue 27.1 (January 1968)
Issue 27.1 of the Review for Religious, 1968.
Wedi'i Gadw mewn:
| Prif Awdur: | |
|---|---|
| Fformat: | Online |
| Iaith: | eng |
| Cyhoeddwyd: |
Saint Louis University Libraries Digitization Center
1968
|
| Mynediad Ar-lein: | http://cdm17321.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/rfr/id/492 |
| Tagiau: |
Ychwanegu Tag
Dim Tagiau, Byddwch y cyntaf i dagio'r cofnod hwn!
|
| id |
sluoai_rfr-492 |
|---|---|
| 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 27.1 (January 1968) |
| author_facet |
Missouri Province of the Society of Jesus |
| author_sort |
Missouri Province of the Society of Jesus |
| title |
Review for Religious - Issue 27.1 (January 1968) |
| title_short |
Review for Religious - Issue 27.1 (January 1968) |
| title_full |
Review for Religious - Issue 27.1 (January 1968) |
| title_fullStr |
Review for Religious - Issue 27.1 (January 1968) |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Review for Religious - Issue 27.1 (January 1968) |
| title_sort |
review for religious - issue 27.1 (january 1968) |
| description |
Issue 27.1 of the Review for Religious, 1968. |
| publisher |
Saint Louis University Libraries Digitization Center |
| publishDate |
1968 |
| url |
http://cdm17321.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/rfr/id/492 |
| _version_ |
1798403629298745344 |
| spelling |
sluoai_rfr-492 Review for Religious - Issue 27.1 (January 1968) Missouri Province of the Society of Jesus Jesuits -- Periodicals; Monasticism and religious orders -- Periodicals. Issue 27.1 of the Review for Religious, 1968. 1968-01 2012-05 PDF RfR.27.1.1968.pdf rfr-1960 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 21, CHASTITY AND LOVE Joseph J, Sikora, S.J. VIRGINAL TEMPLES Thomas Dubay, S.M. ALIENATION OF MANUSCRIPTS James I. O’Connor, S.J. COMPREHENSIVE MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMMING John F. Muldoor~ 66 INDIVIDUAL FORMATION PERIODS William F. Hogan. C.S.C~ GROUP METHODS IN SPIRITUAL DIRECTION Quentin Hakenewerth, S.M. AUTHORITY AND RELIGIOUS LIFE J. M. R. Tillard, O.P. 104 LOVE HAS ITS PROPRIETIES Sister Mary Sheila, S.N.J.M. COMMUNITY AND MYSTERY AT MASS Robert A. Bagnato, S.J. THE JESUIT NOVITIATE Nicholas A. Predovich. S.J. 137 THE TERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE Sister Teresa Margaret, O,C.D 143 THE PIETY VOID Kevin O’Shea, C.Ss.R. 163 SURVEY OF R~)MAN DOCUMENTS 170 VIEWS. NEWS, PREVIEWS 174 ’QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 186 BOOK REVIEWS 1;12 121 EDITOR R. F. Smith, S.J. ASSOCIATE EDITORS Everett A. Diederich, S.J. Augustine G. Ellavd, S.J. ASSISTANT EDITORS Ralph F. Taylor, S.J. John C. Treloar, S.J. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS EDITOR Joseph F. Gallen, S.J. Correspondence with the editor, the associate editors, and the assistant editor, as wei| as books for review, should be sent to I~EVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS; 612 Humboldt Building; 539 North Grand Boulevard; Saint Louis, Missouri 63~o3. Questions for answering should be sent to Joseph F. Gallen, S.J.; St. Joseph’s Church; 32x Willlngs Alley; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania tgxo6. + + + REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS Edited with ecclesiastical approval by faculty members of the School of Divinity of Saint Louis University, the editorial offices being located at 612 Humboldt Building; 539 North Grand Boulevard; Saint Lores, Missouri 63103. Owned by the Missouri Province Edu-cational Institute. Published bimonthly and copyright © 1967 by REVIEW YOU RI~LIGIOUS at 428 East Preston Street; Baltimore, Mary-land 21202. Printed in U.S.A. Second class postage paid at Baltimore, Maryland. Single copies: $1.00. Subscription U.S.A. a~d Canada: $5.00 a year, $9.00 for two years; other countries: $5.50 a year, $10.00 for two Orders should indicate whether they are for new or renewal subscriptions and should be accompanied by check or money order paya-ble to REvmw ~,oa RELIGIOUS in U.S.A. currency only. Pay no money to persons claiming to represent REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS. Change of address requests should include former address. Renewals and new subscriptions, where accom, panied by a remittante, should be sent to REVIEW VOR R~LmIOUS; P. O. Box 671; Baltimore, Maryland 2120~. Changes of address, business correspondence, and orders not accompanied by a remittance should be sent to R~vl~w RELIGIOUS; 428 East Preston Street; Baltimore, Maryland 21202. Manuscripts, editorial cor-respondence, and books for review should be sent to REVIEW FOR I~[~ELIGIOUS; 612 Humboldt Building; 539 North Grand Boulevard; Saint Louis, Missouri 63103. Questions for answering should be sent to the address of the Questions and Answers editor. JANUARY 1968 VOLUME 27 NUMBER x REVIEW FOR RELI(~IOUS Volume 27 1968 . EDITORIAL OFFICE 539 North Grand Boulevard St. Louis, Missouri 63103 BUSINESS OFFICE 428 East Preston Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 EDITOR R. F. Smith, S.J. ASSOCIATE EDITORS Everett A. Diederich, S.J. Augustine G. Ellard, S.J. ASSISTANT EDITORS Ralph F. Taylor, S.J. John L. Treloar, S.J. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS EDITOR Joseph F. Gallen, S.J. Published in January, March, May, July, September, Novem-ber on the fifteenth of the month. REVIEW FOR RELI-GIOUS is indexed in the Catholic Periodical Index and in Book Review Index. Micro-film edition of Review for Re-ligious is available from Uni-versity Microfilms; Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106. NOTICE TO SUBSCRIBERS On February i, 1968, R~vaEw FOR P~ELI~IOUS will publish clothbound reprints of volumes 2I to 25 (1962-I966) incluslve of the REv-mw. These clothbound reprints will cost $7.5o each per volume or’ $37.5o for all five volumes. However, until January 3I, x968, these volumes will be sold at a special prepublication price of $6.oo per volume or $3o.oo for the entire set of five volumes. However, to take advantage of this special prepublication price, orders mhst be accompanied by full payment in U.S.A. funds and must be postmarked on or before January S~, 1968" The first twenty volumes (1942-I96I) inclusive of the R~vmw have already been reprinted in twenty clothbound volumes. These normally sell at $6.5o per volume or $I3o.oo for the set of twenty. However, from November ~ 5, 1967, to January 3 I, 1968, inclu-sive, they will be sold at the special price of $5.o0 per volume or $1oo.oo for the set of twenty. On February I, I968, and thereafter the price of these first twenty volumes of the REvmw will return to their normal price of $6.5o per. volume. Postage is included in all the above prices. Orders for all the above should be sent to: R~vmw Foa REL~C~OUS; 6x2 Humboldt Building; 539 North Grand Boulevard; St. Louis, Missouri 63103. JOSEPH J. SIKORA, s.J. Chastity and Love Recent* decades have seen a gradual change in theo-logical emphasis and perspective regarding various as-pects of human sexual love in the state of marriage. Four such aspects might be distinguished: pleasure, procreation, mutual help, and personal love and com-munion. While all four of these have in fact always been present in this sexual relation, though not necessarily in every case, until only recently the first three were most strongly emphasized. And of these three, procreation has been traditionally regarded as the "primary end" of marriage. But in recent years the fourth, with the help of modern psychological and philosophical studies, has come into much greater prominence, so much so that some have wished to treat it as in fact the really pri-mary end of marriage. In the light of the past teaching o{ the Church this seems quite impossible, but it is at least recognized now that this personal love and com-munion is not just something subordinate to the bio-logically procreative aspect of sexual life. Interpersonal communion among us is one of the pri-mary values of human life, and human sexual love is ordinarily the primary and fullest mode of this inter-personal communion. Sexual intercourse in marriage is the full incarnation of this sexual love in the manner connatural to the human person; it is at once a sign and expression of this love and communion, ~nd also a means of intensifying it still more. When intercourse reaches its natural term in procreation, the child himself is a yet further expression and sign of the mutual love of the parents and at the same time a new bond that joins them still more firmly in this love, now not only mutual but for .the child as well. Thus marriage and family life are most fully human, not at the level of mere biological activity, but at the level of human love and interpersonal * Since the writing o{ this article Father Joseph J. Sikora, S.J., has died; may he rest in peace. This article will appear in a posthumous book by Father Sikora on the theology of religious life to be published in 1968 by Herder and Herder. ÷ ÷ ÷ Chastity and Love VOLUME 27, 1968 4" 4" 4" .loseph .I. Sikora, S.1. REVIEW F~R RELIGIOUS 6 communion. The whole biological structure finally exists only in order to support such a life of persons in mutual knowledge, love, communion, and communication. From a purely biological point of view we might speak of the primary end of marriage and sexual intercourse as b~ing that of the biological species rather than that of the individual, and consequently of its being found in pro-creation rather than in the pleasure and good of the biological individual. Still, this could hardly be said in such a simple way of the domain of personal and inter-personal values that are found ;here. (But this is not meant to suggest any hasty conclu’sions about the thorny problem of contraception.) But if marriage is now understood primarily in its significance in the personal and interpersonal sphere (though without ever setting aside its biological as-pects), this must mean that religions chastity also has an altered significance. Religious chastity, of course, still entails the denial of the pleasures of sex, of the possi-bility of procreation, and of the various joys of married life. But this chastity must also mean that a primary natural mode of human interpersonal communion in love is also excluded. Metaphysical and theological reflection in this light reveals a .most serious problem with the ideal of religious chastity. We do not relate ourselves to God in the same direct manner in which we can relate to our fellow hu-man beings. In fact we come to know God through the analogical resemblance of His creatures to Him; and we understand the meaning of interpersonal love and com-munion with God through our understanding of human love and communion. But if we are, through chastity, to exclude from our lives the primary mode of such hu-man love, then how can we come to the most profound affective relationship to God? And yet the very purpose of religious chastity is to enable us, with the help of grace, to come to just such a deeper relationship of love, not only to God but even to our fellow men. It would seem, then, that religious chastity really defeats its own purpose. This problem has also another aspect. The two sexes are mutually complementary in many ways, and really need each other in order to achieve full human growth to maturity. Either one by itself lacks a certain complete-ness in the line of nature, in some manner is not yet a full person. Especially is this so in regard to the very dimension of interpersonal communion itself. But with-out this interpersonal communion one must remain to some extent closed in upon himself, and, so it would seem, thereby less capable of opening outward in the love of God. Still more, religious chastity tends, in the con-crete, frequently to close off even other modes of mutual human interpersonal affective relation, in the interest of avoiding possible dangers of undue attachment to another person and even of eventual sexui~l difficulty. But all this only appears to weaken the ability of the person to enter into any affective relation at all, even to God. There is in fact a fundamental openness to God---even in the natural order and .the structure of our finite being, but also in the supernatural order through infused faith, hope, and charity--that already exists prior to any hu-man interpersonal relation at. all. It is true that our su-pernatural life is thus intrinsically prior to and inde-pendent of any particular human relationships at all. But still, this supernatural life must make use of our natural knowledge, natural love, natural affective com-munion, in order to come to .some analogical understand-ing of the meaning of the love of God, and to those particular acts of prayer and action that fill out our super-natural life under faith, hope, and charity. "If anyone does not love his neighbor, whom he sees, how can he love God, whom he does not see?" Full human life, and even full human life with God, seems to suppose pro-found affective relation to other persons, and perhaps even complete sexual communion with another in mar-riage. Such considerations as the above have led some to consider seriously whether we ought to reverse the ideas of many centuries concerning the value of religious chas-tity as a means of entering into a more intense life of loving communion with God. They point out that hu-man persons are both spiritual and fleshly, that it is simply wrong for us to try to escape this fact about our being, that we must work out with the help of God our salvation in and through the world and in and through our bodies as part of this world and even of our being. And these latter points are, to be sure, valid enough so far as they go. And yet there is in fact an ideal of religious chastity; it remains one of the three evangelical counsels. It has had a long history in the Church, in pre-Christian times, and in non-Christian religions. Quite apart from the position taken by the Church in its regard, religious chastity could not but be regarded with a degree of respect because of this long tradition in its favor in widely varying cultures and religions. It would be some-what naive for us to think that the difficulties cited above are of themselves conclusive and that religious chastity has become an outmoded cultural and religious form. Chastity has some resemblance to religious poverty. Chastity and Love VOLUME 27, 1968 7 REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS Again, there is a renunciation of the use and possession of some creatures in the .interest of a greater freedom of spirit in their regard. This ddtachment from creatures is thought to make attachment to God in love easier than it would otherwise be. At the same time, chastity like. poverty, tends to enable the one who embraces it to achieve a greater degree of order in his love, now his love of p~.rsons and not just of material things, and indeed also ,a greater degree of perfection in this love. Chastity by no means intends to deny the need of grace-elevated human love and communion, as well as of love’ and communion with God through grace. But through the renunciation of sexual love, chastity prepares for a "mystical" love of God :and of all other persons in God. The meafiing of this "mystical" love will be explained in more detail.below. For the moment let it stand for a certain excess in intensity of" love that is so focused on God that everything else, is loved only in relation to Him. The dangers of .religious chastity for many persons have long been known in at least a general way. This way of chastity is not for everybody, nor even for most. "Let him take it who can." An already neurotic person-ality might look tO religious chastity as a way out of some of his problems, but in fact 0nly fall into further en-tanglements as a result of embracing’ it. (And yet it is also possible for some neurotics finally to grow to ma-ture persons in a religious life of poverty, chastity, and obedienceS--but under enlightened direction.) It would be possible for one who embraces religious chastity to pervert its intention by so turning in upon himself as, to be completely unable to relate affectively with other peisons: Chastity here has been twisted into narcissicism. Or one could go not quite so far down this path, by mis-taking the renunciation of sexual love for a renuncia-tion of any intense human love of friendship at all. Such a person would be at least a stunted "personality, some-what’hollow, perhaps al~n’ost mechanical in his life and work. All these are serious .dangers to be avoided by careful direction of those who would enter upon the way of Chasiity. Theyare fhrther reasons, besides the strength of the basic human sexual-impulse, that chastity is not [or anyone and everyone--not even for" everyone wh6’ might think he wants it. But with all this,, the theory of religious chastity is fundamentalIy Osound. It should lead, and most important it has led, to a higher degree of detachment and freedom of spirit in regard to material things and the desires of the flesh. It should provide, and has provided for many, the opportunity for a new height of affective supernat-ural communion with God, and also with all men in God. It.should offer, and has offered in fact, to many a greater freedom for their apostolic work for the kingdom of God. The Church has already taught in an irreformable manner the great value of chastity as a means in the love and service of~ God; in itself the state of virginity or chastity is superior to that of matrimony for this reason. We have the example of Christ Himself, of His Mother, and of many of the canonized saints. In the face of ob-jections concerning the "natdralness" of sexual union and of matrimony, we must first insist that the natural order is not all that is to be considered. In general, however, we must agree that successful human love-rela-tionships (that are also desirable and licit) do tend to favor supernatural life with God and with our fellow men at the level of the reflex articulation of prayer and at that of particular action. They are even dispositions in favor of a good basic moral option of charity under-lying all these particular thoughts and actions (merely negative dispositions if these relationships are not in-spired by grace, even positive dispositions if they are. in fact inspired by grace). But in order to understand fully the actual role of religious chastity in regard :to super-natural love it is necessary to adopt a quite different point of view. There is a love that is of’its nature a unique love, without the possibility of any simultaneous analogues in the same person. Of itself it is a once-and-once=only affair (though it is possible for one such love to give way to another in the course of life, or in the entrance to eternity). Jacques Maritain has distinguished, in his recent Carnet de Notes (Paris, 1965), between an amour d’amitid and an amour de 7olie, to bring out this point. It is possible for us to take advantage of his elaboration of this distinction a propos of chastity in order to better understand several aspects of chastity and its relation to our supernatural life of grace. But not everything in the presentation here is necessarily to be attributed to Maritain. Amour d’amitid, or ordinary love of friendship, is opposed to amour de [olie. Both of these would certainly have to be called love of friendship in a broad sense, since the amour de folie is a yet more intense form of love that goes still farther, beyond ordinary friendship. But we shall set aside for the moment all consideration of this amour de folie, and concentrate our attention upon various aspects of the ordinary love of friendship (amour d’amiti~)--such as ~is found to exist between hu-man friends and also between a person with sanctifying grace and God Himself. When such a love of friendship comes to its perfection + + + Chastity and Love VOLUME 27, 1968 9 4" 4" 4" .loseph I. Sikora, S..l. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 10 (speaking only relatively, since such a.love could go on increasing without limit), there is profound affective communion between the friends. This communion also includes, both as a support and as a result, the mutual sharing of all their goods in communication and in other forms of mutual giving. All that belongs to one also belongs to the other. And yet it could not be said that each has given his whole self to the other, except by a metaphor. It would be quite possible for each to have other friendships similar to this and simultaneous .with it, at the same or even greater degrees of intensity of love and communion. Each shares all he has, but not all of his very self. There is a love of friendship similar to this between the human person with sanctifying grace and God. This friendship between man and God means that the man has a personal affective regard for, communion with, and commitment to God that does in fact go beyond what he might have for any human friends. This is only to say that he loves God above all things and would prefer to lose any creature rather than God and His friendship. Such a friendship with God already exists at the level of the basic moral option of charity; thus it might be found even in anonymous Christians who would not be able to articulate in their thought or ex-press so well in their particular acts (at least not in such a full and conscious manner) their actual profound love of God. Such anonymous Christians do not have the fully articulated faith of Christians in the Church but only an inarticulate faith-adherence to the saving good who is God. But those Christians who live in the light of articulated faith can cultivate relations with God even at the level of reflex articulation of thought and through the various particular acts that every concrete situation calls for. Such a fuller life with God, at the level and under the direction of reflex consciousness, wouldneces-sarily be understood and lived by analogy with one’s experience of ordinary human interpersonal relations further illumined by the light of faith. Clearly, every licit form of experience of human love and interpersonal communion could aid in enriching one’s life with God at this level. But if there, is analogy between friendship between men and that between man and God, there is also notable difference, It is true that such a friendship between man and God is simply compatible with profound supernat-ural human affection and friendship for other human beings. But at the same time supernatural friendship with God, in its roots in the basic moral option of char-ity, calls for ever greater entry by man into participation in the very life of God Himself. There must be gradual growth of the divine life’ in man, a gradual assertion of its dominion over every aspect of the human life in man. And although natural human tendencies ~ontinne to assert themselves throughout human life until death, these tendencies must themselves be elevated ever more completely by grace--integrated ever more completely into the supernatural life in man--so that God may have an ever more complete dominion in the human spirit in supernatural faith, hope, and charity. Concrete human love continues in this life to have both elements, supernatural grace and natural tendencies that are not thoroughly and completely subjected to supernatural grace. But the fundamental tendency of supernaturally graced man is toward an immediate union and total communion with God that could not exist simply side-by- side with another such communion but rather must really come to dominate exclusively and in utmost inti-macy- so that God really does become the form in some manner of the human soul. This kind of communion with God will be communion with God as one’s All, simply one’s All. This communion is already realized in an incipient manner through sanctifying grace and the indwelling of the Trinity in the human spirit; but it will be realized more fully, and more clearly, in the light of the immediate vision of God in eternity. But if such a height of friendship with and total im-mersion into God in af[ective communion is not part of the ordinary course of human supernatural life until eternity, nevertheless the mystical writers testify that this tendency of the life of grace can be in fact more fully actualized even at present. God does become more completely All for and in the spirit of man in the "mys-tical life" and through "mystical love." (But these terms are used here simply as designating a special mode of interpersonal relation to God, without carrying the weight of any special ontological account of "infused contemplation" that would make a radical break between ordinary Christian spiritual life and the entire mystical life.) This leads to a consideration of the second mode of love noted above, the amour de folie, or, we may say, "love unto folly," We shall examine the general charac-ter of such a love and then note the two modes in which it can come to realization here below. This analysis will enable us to understand much better the precise role of chastity as a religious means toward fullness of life with God here below, and indeed also the role of the whole life of the counsels in this regard. "Love unto folly" goes beyond ordinary friendship. In it there is not only a complete sharing of goods but even ¯ a complete, unreserved, mutual self-giving. Such an + ÷ ÷ Chastity and Love VOLUME 27, 1968 11 ÷ ÷ ÷ Joseph ~. Sik~ra, S4. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 12 abandon in the giving of one’s whole self to another is only folly to mere reason. For reason sees the natural reference of every human love somehow to the self (in the natural sphere, and without consideration of the fundamental tendency of supernatural life). To mere reason, love must always be the love of a good that is good-for, a good that is good in itself but also a good for the one who loves. But in this love unto folly, this seems to be almost ignored by the one who loves; this is a love that goes beyond such categories of formulating and discursive reason, following a higher light of intuitive reason. And what is it that intuitive reason "sees"? It all depends on which of two directions this "love unto folly" takes. But for the moment we must confine our-selves to remarks about this love that are quite general. In this love there is fully exclusive affective commun-ion, not excluding other loves of friendship but com-pletely excluding any other love like this. This is love of the other as one’s All. But we can have only one All, in whom we are totally absorbed and to whom we are totally given in all that we are and have. Such a love means complete communion Of spirit and complete open-ness to communication and all mutual giving. Needless to say, there would be no possibility of an analogical relation between two such loves in the same person simultaneously--there can be only one All for a person at a time, unless this person be the infinite God who gives Himself totally in all that He is to all men who will receive Him. But such a perfection of love as this could be found by man in either of two orders. There is a natural per-fection (capable also of elevation by supernatural grace) of such love. This is to be found in the complete mutual giving of man and woman in sexual love in marriage. This sexual love is finally and fully incarnated, sym-bolized, and at its peak of intensity, in its physical as-pect, in the act of sexual intercourse. But such sexual love is much more than this in the spiritual domain of affective communion and all that follows from this. In sexual love of this kind, in which one person gives him-self completely to the other in h~is whole being, there is the greatest other-centeredness that could be found in natural human love for another human being. It is to the other as to his All that he gives himself. We are of course speaking of the most successful human marriage relations and not of the failures; these latter remain all too possible, especially for lack of the ability to love in such a manner. This other-centered love is not without the radical reference to self that is the mark of every natural hu-man love to the extent that it is not elevated by and brought under the complete, and perfect dominion of grace. If one finds his All in another, this is still in the other as another self (and therefore finally as somehow good-for the sel~). This follows from the very meta-physical structure of natural human love. But at the same time the metaphysical structure of this natural sexual love, focusing on the other as fully another self--even as a part of one’s integral being--also makes it to be the most fully other-centered mode of natural human love. Sexual intercourse is of itself expr.essive of this complete other.centeredness, of total personal giving in mutual communion. Such a love as this could clearly be only for one other at once. When such a perfect sexual love is elevated by supernatural grace, it retains the same basic characteris-tic, that each person is All to the other. But supernat-ural charity, as we have seen, gives a new further orien-tation and drive toward God and toward a fullness of communion with God. Some day the "love unto folly" of married persons must end, at least in eternity; for charity must fructify into complete loving communion with God now present in vision. Then He will truly become the All for everyone who is with Him. Rejoicing together in their supernatural friendship of charity, they will all see and love the Three who are much more than friends to them, who are their All, whatever else they may have besides. But even in this present life here below it is possible for men to arrive at a perfection of supernatural love o[ God that is in some ways parallel to the perfection of natural (and supernaturally elevated by grace) love in most successful marriage. This would be a "mystical love," as has already been noted above. As a mode of "love unto folly" it would be simply incompatible with the simultaneous presence of another such love as this. Only one other could be one’s All at one time. Yet this love inspired by supernatural grace would not be a love for God only as "another self" (such as would be any mere natural love, with its radical reference to the self), but even for God as the transcendent and infi-nite Self, good-for Himself and also to and for His shared life of supernatural grace. The focal point of grace-inspired love is altogether outside oneself, even in the most radical sense. Such a love is never found iso-lated in the pure state in our present mode of being; there is also a (in itself neither sinful nor disorderly) natural element--a natural love--with it that retains an independent and radical reference to oneself in focusing upon what is good-for oneself. This element will, of course, remain even in eternal life with God; but there it will be completely integrated under the dominion of ÷ + ÷ Chastity and Lo~e VOLUME 27, + ÷ ÷ 1oseph J. Sikora, S.]. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 14 supernatural life¯ Our progress in supernatural life here below consists in large part of the growth of this do-minion of supernatural grace even at present. In "mys-tical’love" for God, the supernatural aspect clearly be-comes more and more dominant; it is even possible for complete integration of everything else under the super-natural life to be achieved in the state of transforming union and the mystical hght. But such an intricate and refined analysis need not be carried any further here. What is of interest here is a more descriptive account of this supernatural mode of "love nnto folly." In and through such a love of man for God, God shows Himself more openly and enters into a more profound intimacy with the human spirit. In this love the real finality of supernatural grace in us emerges more into the light (though still in the obscurity of faith)--its tendency toward the complete dominion of God in the soul, as the center of every activity, through supernatural faith, hope, and charity. This supernatural mode of "love unto folly" is ultimately incompatible with another such simultaneous love in the order of human sexual relation, and indeed utterly transcendent in relation to such a sexual love in any event. There is therefore no possibility of analogiz-ing from such a sexual, human love in order to achieve an adequate reflex articulation of "mystical love" in thought or in particular day-to-day action. Passive con-templation, without the possibility of adequate active articulation must begin here; this is a way of renuncia-tion of means and a way of darkness for the spirit--in which it must be led by th~ Spirit rather than find its own way. Every articulation in terms of earlier experi-ence is now simply insufficient to express what is now felt, and no acts are in any way adequate to testify to the actnal intensity of this love. Only silence, and per-haps also the most intense apostolic activity, come any-where near expressing this personal devotion and intensity of affective communion with God and with Christ; and yet finally everything falls short. There are no patterns in human love available here, except those we find ’in the revelation of God--especially in Scripture--in the life of Christ, and in the lives of the saints. But each one who follows this way must follow it in his own unique manner, under the guidance of God. Still, it is not true to say that the earlier modes of expressing friendship with God in articulated thought and action simply disappear. Far from it. Common mo-rality always remains to be lived as perfectly as possible. Frequent articulated prayer goes right along with mys-tical prayer--articulation first in the liturgy of the Church but also in personal prayer outside the liturgical events. And as we have said, the modes of apostolic ac-tion still remain, perhaps now expanded both in variety and in scope. So also, it remains true always that many human interpersonal relations of the most profound affective nature will help to deepen awareness and understanding, aid in greater reflex articulation, and also contribute to inventiveness in our apostolic action among our fellows --as well as enabling us to carry out better the simple exigencies of that fundamental love of neighbor that goes along with any friendship, and afortiori such a friendship, with God and with Christ. Only one such human interpersonal relation is ex-cluded as incompatible with such a full love-relation to God; .this is the "love unto folly" that ordinarily should mark successful marriage. And yet marriage itself is not excluded here. Neither is sexual intercourse within mar-riage (though it is deprived of its full symbolism of com-plete mutual giving of self--how could one give himself wholly to two Alls?). Perhaps the true "love unto folly" that is "mystical love" is not ordinarily found in such cases; but who could collect and offer statistics in this matter? In any event this kind of supernatural "love unto folly" for God does’mean that a union in marriage be-tween "mystics" would have to be something less in itself than it would be if it were itself a "love unto folly" for these same persons. Of itself and apart from the con-sideration of special circumstances, perfect chastity would ordinarily be the "easier" way, more free of tension, for those who would wish to give themselves in such a manner to God. In this sense, chastity and the whole way of the counsels could be called the "ordinary way" of pursuing such a path of love of God. In the light of these considerations, the supernaturally motivated renunciation of marriage, of sexual inter-course, of sexual pleasure, is of itself a preparation (negative, or even positive) in the supernatural order for such a higher mode of love of God. This renunciation is such a preparation precisely in so far as it excludes the other mode of "love unto folly" that could only exist among married Persons and that would incarnate and symbolize itself in sexual intercourse. This renunciation is not of itself already the actual "achievement" (if we may so speak of what can only be a gift of God) of .a "mystical" love of God; but it cannot help but point toward and even call for such a relation to God. The whole life of the evangelical counsels tends toward this exclusive love of God that goes beyond mere friendship; and this kind of love of God does not seem really possible without something at least equivalent to what is ordinarily understood as the life of the counsels. 4. 4- 4. Chastity and Love VOLUME 27, 3.968 4. .]oseph .1. Sila~ra, Sd. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS ]6 The renunciation of sexual love that is called for by the life of: the counsels, and by ,evangelical chastity in particular, is of necessity more than just a renunciation of marriage and sexual intercourse. It requires also the renunciation~ of a large number of other intersexual rela-tions that ultimately tend toward the full relation of marriage and intercourse, and that would consequently endanger this ideal of chastity. But at the same time, many other modes of human interpersonal relation through affective regard and communion are not only open to but even very necessary for anyone who would preserve and grow in such an intense loving relation to God Himself. Our love for family, friends, brothers or sisters in a religious community, or in some instances perhaps for a wife, contributes in several important ways toward ~the full expansion and development of that love -"unto folly" of God. that still transcends them all. It would be well briefl~ to dwell upon these ways. As has already been pointed out before, such well-ordered relations of love: toward and communion with other human beings are analogues of human love for God. Even when ttiere is question of "mystical love" for God, these analogues still help to deepen and to support our partial and inadequate understanding of this relation to God and aid the ever inadequate articulation of our attitude in prayer. Such a "climate of human love," also elevated by supernatural grace, greatly facilitates those particular acts in relation to our neighbors toward which charity impels us. Even a natural love of others, com-paratively uninfluenced by the life of grace in us, could be a basis ~on which charity could buildbthough it could also be an obstacle to real supernatural charity by tena-cious resistance to the dominion of charity. ¯ Also, human love of the kind we are describing can remove very serious psychological obstacles that might otherwise be present, obstacles to the full appreciation arid. articulation, so far as possible, of our own love for God and for our neighbor, and also obstacles to the full appreciation, so far as possible, of God’s own tender love and care,for us. If we had no feeling of ~being loved by anyone, how could we really appreciate in our human way, however inadequate, God’s love for us? How could we really articulate a love for God, whom we do not see, if we cannot feel profound affective regard for other hu-man beings, whom we can see, or if we cannot articulate such a love for other human beings and express it in our various actions in their regard? We need both ,.the ex-perience of being loved by other human beings and that of loving them if we ale to be able to live any kind of articulated supernatural life that is expressed in partic-ular acts of love and care for:both God and man. It would, of course, be imprudent and even naive not to take account of the very real dangers to supernatural life that human love of this kind can create. It would be quite possible for one to grow in attachment to friends so much’that such friends come to stand alongside or even above God in the affections. It would be possible for one to fall gradually even into serious sexual diffi-culties. The great variety of human temperament makes it altogether necessary that no one simple standard of behavior should be required of or imposed upon all in regard to human friendships. But we must always keep a sense of perspective, ~an awareness that a certain amount of possible and remote danger should be tolerated in view of the greater good of full human development and fuller relation with God. In fact, our life of human love is very important indeed in Our religious life--and or-dinarily all the more so in those who follow the way of religious chastity. It would be altogether disastrous for the persohality if some distorted ideal of religious de-tachment were to succeed in crippling or killing our capacity for human love of other human beings. There is a certain amount of conventional nonsense regarding the saints. It is possible that some of them had no real human friendships; but the lives of the saints in general are full of examples of warm friendships, of saints surrounded even by a multitude of friends. Always they look toward a transcending of all such relations in their intense communion with God, but the richness and effectiveness of their human personalities in great part depend upon their capacity for human love. A chastity ¯ that would destroy this would make one much less than he was and would recall the words of Piers Plowman: "Chastity without charity will be chained in hell." But it must finally be understood that religious chas-tity does fundamentally orient the human person toward a love of God that goes beyond all other loves and is a true "love unto folly." Chastity, of all the counsels, points out most vividly the radically mystical purpose of these counsels. And yet if we have in most of this treat-ment emphasized the role of religious chastity as a prep-aration and disposition for a greater fullness of our af-fective love for God and man, this same chastity also has a very great value as regards the effective apostolate that should spring from such love, in all who are not living in a purely contemplative state. It would be well here briefly to note some aspects of this apostolic significance of religious chastity. Religious chastity is of itself a sign of the eschatolog-ical kingdom already here present through grace. It bears witness to the day when we shall come to the full-ness of supernatural life with God in which there will ÷ ÷ ÷ Chastity and Love VOLUME 27, 1968 ]7 REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 18 be no marriage or giving in marriage. It also bears wit-ness to the power of grace even here below. Such a wit-ness to the reality and primacy of the spiritual and supernatural life of love of God has its powerful impact in the world. In excluding the bond of married love, religious chastity frees one for the concerns of God, for a really universal apostolate in the love and service of all men. It gives a much dearer vision of both material and spiritual reality by freeing one from total absorption in and centering on the pleasures and partnership of sexual love. The human energy that would otherwise have been expended in such a love is now available for yet higher purposes. If chastity has been insufficiently appreciated in very recent years for its apostolic power as well as for its role in communion with God, it nevertheless lacks nothing of its perennial value. It is only necessary that we come to an adequate appreciation of the more profound under-standing of chastity and of the requirements for success-ful living of such an ideal, that has become possible in the light of the metaphysical and psychological real-ities already discussed above. Such a more adequate ap-preciation will not lead to the abandonment of the ideal of religious chastity but to an even greater perfection in its practice today. It is now possible to make a few sug-gestions concerning the concrete practice of chastity to-day in religious communities. There are many safeguards to religious chastity that are dictated in large part by common sense. Clearly these must still be learned and preserved, today as much as ever, not only in the course of education of new members of religious communities but later as well. It is unneces-sary here to enter into the details of such a program. Only naivete could question the reasons for segregation of sexes and restrictions surrounding this. The same is to be said as regards a somewhat larger area in which Chris-tian modesty would have to be exercised, larger than that for those in or tending toward the married state. But there must be adequate education for recognition of the real complementarity and mutually enriching role of the sexes in human life, for understanding their fundamental equality as well as their differing psychol-ogies. It is simply impossible today to carry on with modern youth and young religious a successful program of sex education that would not meet their more sophis-ticated desire for fuller understanding of themselves precisely as masculine or feminine and therefore as naturally related to their complement. This is no matter of simple education to the simple physical sexual struc-tures and functions. What is needed is much more, a real understanding of the proper psychological mystery of the other sex as well as of one’s own. If such an under-standing is absent, there is a felt ignorance of life that can only cause many more and serious problems. With-out such an understanding, one is less a man or less a woman. Such a more elaborate "sex education" of novices and young religious must of course be conducted only in the context of a presentation of the real meaning of the sacrifice entailed by religious chastity. This sacrifice must be seen not simply as a privation endured for the sake of an ascetical "test"--to prove one’s strength of char-acter but in its direction toward fuller union and com-munion with God in "love unto folly" and toward total dedication to apostolic concern. But once the meaning of chastity as directed toward greater love is seen, then the role here even of human love and friendship must be pointed out. The values of human friendship~for fuller spiritual life, for fuller human maturity, for better meeting of human problems --must be opposed sharply to the concept of an "isola-tion with God" that would perhaps more commonly tend toward a rather narcissistic preoccupation with one-self and one’s subjective states. We must beware of pseudo-idealizations of the saints and of the rhetorical exaggerations of ascetical writers. The saints too were human like us and had the same need of friendship as we do. Human love enriched their lives just as it does ours. If we are to grow in our human capacity for love and the expression of love--the ca-pacity that is supposed for the actual articulation and day-to-day manifestation of our supernatural love for God and for our neighbor, then we must have the ex-perience of this love. Nor would it be enough to have this only as a past recollection from earlier life in the family circle and in the world. It is not difficult to dry up, to forget how to love in a human way, unless this capacity is renewed, stirred to new growth, by the con-tinuing interpersonal involvement of human friendship. In this regard it is well to approach with a somewhat lighter touch the problem of the so-called "particular friendship" that has so much preoccupied many spiritual directors of the past. There is a genuine problem here. There is question of an immature affective relationship that is far too much under the domination of an emotion that goes beyond all bounds. Such relations must finally be controlled or cut off. But at the same time, we must not allow ourselves to be stampeded through fear or excessive caution into looking for the simple removal of emotion and warmth from human friendship. This would be to aim at the ideal of a rather mechanical man ÷ + ÷ Chastity and Love VOLUME 27, 1968 19 ÷ ÷ ÷ Joseph J. Silurra, SJ. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS ~0 or woman, perhaps really incapable of any profound human love. Such a person would be "immature" in the sense that he or she was not allowed ever to grow to the full capacity for human affective relation to other human beings. Such a person would perhaps have some serious deficiency in dealing with other persons in the work of the apostolate and might find a relative impoverish-ment in his life of prayer and communion with God. Yet human love does have different characteristics in persons of different temperaments. Some are much more affective than others; some put much more emphasis upon practical and effective love that really does do, more than feel, good for other persons. Again, it is im-possible to set down any kind of uniform norms for such things. But the general implications of all that has been said are clear enough, it seems. Finally, it seems well to add a few words concerning the chastity of Christ, that chastity which always remains the model for every form of Christian religious chastity. Christ had, of course, the highest degree of "love unto folly" for His heavenly Father, and consequently for His Father’s will. It is in this light that we should look upon His frequent resort to prayer in solitude. Hig Father was His All, here on earth just as in eternity. The chastity of Christ was therefore most congruous with His inner communion with God in the depth of His human heart. But in this union and communion with His Father, and flowing out of this very union and communion, He showed the most complete and tender love for all men, and especially for His very. own. A reading of John 13-17 would far surpass any words that could be added here to demonstrate this. Again we see this tender love when we look at Him, just a few days earlier, weeping over the death of Lazarus, or again, weeping over the city of Jerusalem. He was not the kind of mystic so totally absorbed in the One, or in the "divine darkness," or even in the "divine light," that He had no love to give and to manifest openly to His fellow men. Far from this, He radiated this love to all around Him, and especially to His very own. This lc;ve of Christ must be our own exemplar that guides our effort (aided by grace) just as it guides His own hand in drawing us to Himself and making us true instruments of His peace. THOMAS DUBAY, S.M. Virginal Temples "Wherever# a virgin of God is, there is a temple of God." z "Never has a golden or silver vessel been so dear to God as is the temple of a virginal body." ~ If consecrated virgins are the choicest portion of the Lord’s flock,s and if they are the "marvelous sign" of the Church’s sanctity,4 and if this Church is the temple of the indwelling Spirit-Sanctifier,~ we may not fail to devote some extended attention to the relationships found between the divine inhabitation and dedicated purity. The Church herself offers us her hand to guide us through this discussion, for if we may judge by her liturgical texts, she especially loves to contemplate her God resting in the virginal bosom. She prays, for example, on the feast of St. Gertrude to "God who has prepared in the heart of blessed Gertrude, virgin, a dwelling delightful for Yourself," ~ and on the feast of St. Cecilia she re-joices that "this glorious virgin always bore the gospel.of Christ in her breast nor did she cease day or night from divine converse and prayer.., and her heart burned with a heavenly fire." r # Previous articles in this series were published in REVIEW FOR RE~AG~OUS, V. 26 (1967), pp. 20~-B0 ("Indwelling God: Old Testament Preparation"); pp. 441-60 ("Interindwelling: New Testament Com-pletion"); pp. 652-50 ("Indwelling Dynamism"); pp. 910-58 ("Eu-charist, Indwelling, Mystical Body"); and pp. 1001-25 ("Indwelling Summit"). z St. Ambrose, De virginibus, bk. 2, c. 4; P.L. 16:214. ~ St. Jerome, Letter 22 to Eustochium, n. 2~; P.L. 22:409. z St. Cyprian, De habitu virginum, c. 5; P.L. 4:445; Pius XII, Sacra virginitas, Acta Apostolicae Sedis, v. 46 (1954), p. 174. *Pius XII, Sacra virginitas, pp. 175--4. ~ Cor 5:16-7. ~ Roman Missal, Collect of November 16. ~ Roman Breviary, Responsory of Lesson 2 of Matins of Novem-ber ~2. Thomas Dubay, S.M., teaches at MaD, crest College; Davenport, Iowa; address: Box 782; BettendorL Iowa 52722. VOLUME 27, 1968 21 4. 4. Thomas Dubay, S.M. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS Aim oI Virginity: Indwelling God Establishing relationships between consecrated chastity and the divine inhabitation requires no straining of one’s theological imagination. On the contrary, Sacred Scripture is quite replete with them. Basic to all of these relationships is the virginityqove orientation: a virgin is a virgin because of the great commandment. Throughout the pages of Sacred Scripture God-and-man intimacy is prominent, and central to this intimacy is love. Even in the old dispensation the love command-ment is clothed with a majestic solemnity and insisted upon with an impressive series of reminders to protect it from oblivion and neglect: Hear, O Israeli The lord is our God, the Lord alonel There- [ore, you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength. Take to heart these words which I enjoin on you today. Drill them into your children. Speak of them at home and abroad, whether you are busy or at rest. Bind them at your wrist as a sign and let them be as a pendant on your forehead. Write them on the doorposts of your houses and on your gates,s One day some centuries later a pharisee strolled up to this God become incarnate with a knotty problem. "Master," he wanted to know, "which is the great com-mandment in the Law?" 0f the many possible precepts scattered through the Law the Master unhesitatingly came up with the crucial one: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind." 9 This is man’s main occupa-tion. It is also the reason a virgin is a virgin. The purpose of renunciation cannot be negative. Nothingness cannot motivate the will. Nor can it serve as a basis for a state in life. Dedicated chastity is not an escape from the burdens of marriage. It is not a flight from something tainted. According to Paul it is a total, efficient, unimpeded, liberating Self-donation to God. One remains virginal to give an undivided attention and love to the Trinity: "I would have you free from care. He who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please God. Whereas he who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife; and he is divided. And the unmarried woman, and the virgin, thinks about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body and in spirit." 10 The virgin is a virgin that she may love undividedly. In pa-tristic thought the virgin is a person apart, a glory of the Church. Her love is supernatural, superhuman, unspeakably beautiful, immortal: s Dt 6:4-9. ~ Mt 22:36-7. xo 1 Cot 7:~2--4. In this marriage [to Christ] there is no tinge of passionate desire because the fervor of this holy love is nourished by a spiritual refreshment. O angelic and superhuman virtue found in menl O inexpressible splendor of a heavenly and eternal servicel Those who receive it contemplate in the flesh what they shall enjoy in immortality, for they choose the better par,t which will not be taken from them but rather will be perfectea in them. What they now preserve by deed inviolate, shall be rendered to them in an increased reward of a glorious immor-tality, u Such, too, is the thought of Pope Plus XlI: This then is the primary purpose, this the principal aim of Christian virginity: to strive solely after divine realities and to turn one’s mind and soul to them, to seek to please God in everything, to think of Him eagerly, to consecrate body and soul entirely to Him... It is nothing but love that sweedy impels the virgin to consecrate entirely, her body and soul to the Di-vine Redeemer. With this idea in mind St. Methodius, Bishop of Olympus, places on her lips these charming words: "You Yourself are all things to me, O Christ. For You I preserve myself unta,!nted; to You I run, my Spouse, holding my shining lamp aloft.’ It is love for Christ, surely, which prompts the virgin to flee into the shelter of her monastery and to remain there for life to contemplate and love her heavenly Spouse more easily and without hindrance.~ When she makes her dedication the object of a vow the virgin places herself in a particularly holy relationship to the Trinity she bears in her heart. This holy situation is brought about, first of all, by her more complete self-surrender. She gives to her God not only the acts by which she is pure but also her very being and faculties that are pure. Just as a man does well who gives the fruit of his orchard to a friend, but does even more if he gives the orchard together with its fruit, so a man does well to give the Trinity acts of purity, but if he gives his very being and powers together with his acts he does even more.~a The virgin’s self-donation is complete. The virgin’s relationship to God is enhanced by vow, secondly, because through her solemn promises she fixes herself permanently in the holy condition of being bound to the fountain of goodness.14 Being bound is not neces-sarily unfortunate. It depends on that to which or to whom one is fastened. Genuine lovers reckon themselves fortunate to be bound to each other in matrimony. When the virgin binds herself to Beauty by vow, she is in an enviable condition indeed. We may note by contrast that just as a mortal sin is tragic, but to be obstinate or fixed in ~1 St. Fulgentius, Letter 3 to Proba, n. 17; P.L. 65:331. = Plus XII, Sacra virginitas, pp. 165-7; see also Vatican II, Decree on Religious Li[e, n. 12; Decree on the Ministry and the Life of Priests, n. 16; Constitution on the Church, tan. 42, 44, 46. ~ St. Thomas gives this teaching and example in refcrence to vows in general, 2-2, q.88, a.6 c. It Ibid. + 4- + Virginal Temples VOLUME 27, 1968 23 ÷ ÷ ÷ Thomas Dubay, $.M. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS it is far more tragic, so also to be pure is angelic, but to be fixed in a pure union with the Trinity is far more angelic.1~ Spiritual Marriage ¯ So intimate is the love relationship between the virgin and God within that the Church has from the firs~ centu-ries seen a supernatural marriage in consecrated virginity. The doctor of virginity, St. Ambrose, fifteen centuries ~go put this relationship in as brief and lucid a gtatement as one could ask: "Virgo est, quae Deo nubit--she is a virgin who is married to God." x0 In the East St. Gregory of Nyssa, himself a married man but a great admirer of virginity, several times uses the expression, spiritual marriage, to refer to the celibate’s union with God. Of it he says: "The soul who joins himself to the immaculate Spouse is bound by love to the true wisdom which is God." aT For St. Fulgentius Christ is the one Spouse and crown of all sacred virgins: This is the only-begotten Son of God, only-begotten Son of the Virgin also, the one Spouse of all sacred virgins, the joy, the beauty, the gift of holy virginity. He it is whom holy vir-ginity corporally brought forth, whom holy virginity spiritually marries, by whom holy virginity is made fruitful in order to persevere, by whom it is graced that it may remain beautiful, by whom it is crowned that it may reign gloriously forever.~ This same saint speaks of God "chastifying" or purify-ing the virgin into being His spouse: "Harken to the love of your Spouse in you; reflect on the loveliness of the Lord. The Lord is good in making you His handle/alden. This Spouse is beautiful who has purified you into being His spouse." 19 So truly did the.fathers consider the con-secrated virgin as wedded to God that they bluntly spoke of an unfaithful virgin as an adultress. Said Ambrose: "She who has espoused herself to Christ and has received the holy veil has already ma.rried, she has already, been joined to an immortal Man. Then if she should wish to enter a common marriage, she commits adultery." s0 Augustine’s judgment was the same: "If a virgin marries [that is, one only physically a virgin], she does not sin, but if a nun (sanctimonialis) marries, she Will be con-sidered an adultress of Christ." 21 Pope Pius XII pointed ~ Mt 22:30. ~ le De virginibus, bk. 1, c. 8; P2,. 16:203. See also c. 5. 1~ De virginitate, c. 20; P.G. 25:301. rs Letter 3 to Proba, n. 6; P.L, 65:326. l~Ibid., n. 30 his; P.L. 65:336: "Attende igitur in te sponsi tui amorem, considera Domini pietatem. Plus est Dominus, qui te sibi fecit ancillam; speciosus sponsus, quite castificavit in sponsam;" ¯ o De lapsu virginis, c. 5; P.L, 16:373. ~Enarratio in Ps. 83, n. 4; P.L. 37:1058. out that already from the fourth century the Church’s rite fdr the consecration of virgins was closely similar to her rit~ for blegsing earthly marriages.22 Even in today’s liturgy the sainted virgin is called the spouse of Christ,2a and’ the newly composed Mass for the profession cere-mony of religious women has the marriage theme running through it. If the law of praying is the law of believing, it is s!gnificant indeed that the Church has chosen to weave a supernatural wedding thread throughout the virgin’s consecration to God.~4 In this most pure and heavenly marriage the virgin fi~ho has left all things for her spouse bears Him in her breast. This union is not only intimate, not only indis-soluble, not only personality-completing; it is a union that cannot be interrupted by death or clouded by the spectre of death. Divine revelation, speaks of God’s rela-tiohship to any faithful soul as a wedded relationship, but in an additional way can these statements be understood of the consecrated virgin who will have no lover in her life but’Him.2~ Although Catholic Scripture scholars commonly understand the Song of Songs as expressing the intimate and incomparably beau’tiful love between God and man, it may be applied even more pointedly to this relationship between God and the virgin:2~ My lover is for me a sachet of myrrh to rest in my bosom ...As an apple tree among the trees of the woods, so is my lover among men... My lover speaks; he says to me "Arise, my beloved, my beautiful one, and come!"... "Let me see you, let me hear your voice, for your voice is sweet, and you are lovely." .... Set me as a seal bn your heart, as a seal on your arm; for stern as death is: love, relentless as the nether world is devotion; its flames are a blazing fire... (Cant. 1:1~; £:8, 10, 14!, 8:6). Indwelling Spiritualizes the Temple Divine m~ste~es are all secret, wondrously hidden. Solne of them, ,.however, "we see (or think we see) more clearly than others. One of the most secret of the divine works is the manner in which the abiding Spirit conse-crates and even somehow spiritualizes the flesh bf His human temple. That He does is a fact of His own telling: ~ Plus XlI, Sa~ra virginitas, p. 166. ~* Vespers of a virgin. a Those who now deny a bridal relationship of the consecrated virgin to Christ should reckon with the fact that they are running counter to the plain’mind of tile Church. ~ Is 54:5,7-8; Song of S, passim; Eph fi:21-3~. We may distinguish in traditional Catholic thought four types of brideship with Christ: the Church, each Christian soul, the advanced soul enjoying the transforming union, the consecrated virgin. It is only the last who can share in all four, ~ The Church herself in using the Song of Songs for the profes-sion of religious women herself suggests that we so use it. + 4- 4- Virginal Temples VOLUME 2~, 1~,9 2~ ÷ ÷ Thomas Dubay, S.M. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS "They who are according to the flesh mind the things of the flesh, but they who are according to the spirit mind the things of the spirit... You, however, are not carnal but gpiritual, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you ¯.. Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? It anyone destroys the temple of God, him will God destroy; for holy is the temple of God, and this temple you are." 27 Because the virgin particularly lives according to the spirit and minds the things of the spirit, she especially is spiritual and not carnal. And if she especially is spirit-ualized, it is indeed because the Spirit of God dwells in her. All men are holy and consecrated by this inabiding Fire, but especially is she who by her integral dedication "thinks about the things of the Lord that she may be holy in body and in spirit." ~s In an eminent manner may we apply to her the remarkable praise the Lord God bestowed on His people: "You were exceedingly beauti-ful, with the dignity of a queen. You were renowned among the nations for your beauty, perfect as it was, because of my splendor which I. had bestowed on you, says the Lord God." 29 Indwelling: Motive for Crystal Chastity If the very flesh of the human temple is sanctified, con-secrated by the presence of the Spirit, we can easily grasp the converse conclusion that this very presence is most fittingly honored by a crystal purity in the temple. When St. Paul comes to convincing the Corinthians of their great need for chastity, he lines up several doctrinal truths and caps them with the divine indwelling. First, the Christian’s flesh is not a thing for itself; it is the Lord’s: "The body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body." so Second, this body is to rise gIoriously one day as did the Lord on the first Easter: "God has raised up the Lord and will also raise us up by his power." 3XThird, this body is a mem-ber of the mystical Christ and is therefore to cling to no sinful partner but to the Lord Himself: "Do you not know that your bodies’ are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? By no means[ Or do you not know that he who cleaves to a harlot, becomes one body with her? ’For the two,’ it says, ’shall be one flesh.’ But he who cleaves to the Lord is one spirit with him. Flee immorality." a~ ~ Rom 8:5,9; 1 Cor 3:16--7. = 1 Cot 7:34. ~ Ez 16:1~-4. ~ 1 Cor 6:13. m 1 Cor 6:14. ~ 1 Cot 6:15-8. Lastly, this body is the very temple of the Holy Spirit bought at the price of the Lamb and thus precious in its value: "Or do you not know that your members are the temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have from God, and "that you are not your own? For you have been bought at a great price. Glorify God and bear him in your body." as The conclusion is clear: rejoice this abiding God by your prayer and your purity. This, indeed, does glorify Him in your body. Indwelling Converse and Virginity It consecrated virginity occupies so singular a place in the supernatural economy that its representatives are the choicest portion of the Lord’s flock and are wedded to their God, we should expect that it would be somehow bound up in a unique intimacy with this God. We should expect that the virgin possesses some advantage in con-versing with her Spouse that the non-virgin does not pos-sess. The data of divine revelation bear out our expecta-tion, for St. Paul tells us that together with the undivided heart the reason a virgin is a virgin is that she might pray unimpededly to her Lord: "The unmarried woman, and the virgin, thinks about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body andin spirit... Now this I say for your benefit, not to hold you in check, but to promote what is proper, and to make it possible for you to pray to the Lord without distraction." 34 Catholic tradition traces a long history in its apprecia-tion of the relationship between virginity and contempla-tion. Gazing upon the loveliness of the Lord is the virgin’s one occupation: When you begin to seek Him, 0 virgin, I-Ie is present, for ¯ it is impossible that He should be absent from those who de-sire Him...Pursue Christ, 0 virgin, in your light, in your holy meditations, in your good works that shine before your Father who is in heaven. Seek Him at night, seek Him in your cell because He comes at night and knocks at your door. lie wishes you to be watching at all times and to find the door of your heart open... See to it, 0 virgin, that you diligently de-vote yourseff to prayer.= Being a life of knowing and loving, consecrated chastity renders the human person more like the divine: The pursuit of virginity, it seems to me, eemarked St. Gregory of Nyssa [himseff a married man], is an art and a power to lead a more divine life and it teaches how we who are bound by the bonds of the body may become similar to spiritual beings. The intent and purpose of this life is wholly = 1 Cor 6:19-20. u 1 Cor 7:34-5. =.St. Ambrose, Exhortatio virginitatis, cc. 9 and 10; P.L. 16:353, 357. Virginal Temples VOLUME 27, 1968 4" 4" Thomas Dubay, $.M. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS to preserve the loftiness of the soul from being lowered by the onslaught of pleasures and to keep us who should be contem-plating and gazing upon divine and heavenly truth from lapsing into the mere inclinations of the body.8~ Hence, the virginal life is a living for the soul alone and that i~ why it may be termed angelic: the virgin contemplates the Father of perfect integrity and by gaz-ing upon His beauty becomes herself more beautiful: This is to live for the soul alone, namely, that one insofar as he can should imitate the manner of life of those powers who have no bodies, for these neither marry nor are given in marriage. But this is their intent, purpose, and perfect duty: to contemplate the Father of immaculate integrity and as far as imitation is possible to ~nhance their own beauty by gazing on the exemplar of beauty itself,~ From the negative point of view perfect purity makes indwelling converse easy in that it frees a man from the absorbing distractions of bodily pleasures. "If the human mind," writes St. Cyril of Alexandria, "is burdened and immersed in the pleasures of the flesh, it cannot look up to God, nor can it with a fixed gaze contemplate His deeds." as It follows, then, that the virgin’s dominating occupa-tion according to the pure stream of Catholic tradition is contemplating the beauty of her Lover. "If therefore you have declined the nuptials of the sons of men from which you would have begotten sons of men," Augustine admonishes her, "love Him with your whole heart who is beautiful beyond the sons of men. You are free, your hearts are untied by the bonds of marriage. Contemplate the beauty of your Lover. Reflect on Him who is equal to His Father and subject to His Mother, ruling in heaven and serving on earth, creating all things, created [that is, human nature] among all things." a~ It is in this finality that we find the root cause for the sublime dignity of the virginal consecration: "That which more effec-tively disposes one for the most noble act is itself the more praiseworthy. But that which most effectively fits one for the act of contemplation--in which the highest purity is needed---is virginity." ,0 St. Thomas writes in the same thought pattern: "For this reason does holy virginity abstain from all venereal pleasure that it may be more freely at leisure for divine contemplation." 41 St. Gregory of Nyssa, De vlrginitate, c. 5; P.G. 25:273. Ibid., c. 4; P.G. 25:273. In lsaiam, 1, orat. 3; P.G. 37:78. De sancta virginitate, c. 54; P.L. 40:427-8. ~°St. Bonaventure, De perlectione evangelica, q.3, a.3: "Quod magis disponit ad actum nobilissimum est laudabilius; sed ad actum contemplationis, in quo requirit~r maxima puritas, magis disponit virginitas." 2-2, q.152, a.2 c: "Ad hoc autem pia virginitas ab omni delec-tatlone venerea abstinet, ut liberius divinae contemplationi vacet." In this light we can appreciate more fully St. Ambrose’s charming axiom that "wherever a virgin of God is, there is a temple of God," and St. Jerome’s judgment that "never has a golden or silver vessel been so dear to God as is the temple of a virginal body." If the whole raison d’etre of the virginal dedication is a loving contemplation of the Trinity, surely the chaste virgin is both a sign of the indwelling mystery and the person best disposed by state to live it, Sacramentality oI Virginity To appreciate the sign or witness value of virginity we must first touch briefly on the sacramentality of our supernatural economy. In a broad sense of the term, sacrament may be referred to any visible reality that in one way or another proclaims the divine reality. It implies a kind of wedding between the visible and the invisible whereby the latter is declared by the former. In this sense the whole universe is a gigantic sacrament of God for "the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament proclaims his handiwork." 42 But the term can have stricter meanings; and it bears the most rich of them when it is applied to the incarnate Word, the sacrament of God. This Sign is the God He proclaims: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God: and the Word was God... And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us. And we saw his glory--glory as of the only-begotten of the Father4z ... In him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bod-ily." 44 As the Church sings in her Christmas Preface, "while we know this God visibly we are by Him rapt up to a love of invisible goods." The Church, too, is herself a sacrament of Christ for she is mystically identified with .Him and proclaims Him to the world: "As the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, many as they are, form one body, so also is it with Christ4n...He who hears you, hears me.’’46 Sacred Scripture likewise possesses a sacramentality, since as the Word assumed human flesh in Mary’s womb, so does He assume human speech in the womb of the hagiographers’ minds. Through these human words the Word can make us burn with love for God: "And they said to each other, ’Was not our heart burning within us while he was speaking on the road and explaining to us the Ps 18:2. ISJn 1:1,14. Col 2:9. 1 Cot 12:12. Lk 10:16. ÷ ÷ ÷ Virginal Temples VOLUME 27, 1968 29 4. 4. Thomas Dubay, $.M. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOus Scriptures?’ " 47 The sacramentals, too, are obviously sacramental because they consist in a visible rite that somehow influences a supernatural effect. But most com-monly do we apply the term, sacrament, to our seven sacred signs that themselves produce the grace they sig-nify. In this whole orchestra of the sacramental universe the divine wisdom and goodness and power shine through. Because man is a composed being, he goes to his God by composed means. Man is an invisible-visible unit and so he rises to the fountain of all by invisible-visible sacra-nlents. In this extended sense of the word a virgin is a sacra-ment in her very dedicated person: St. Ambrose recorded sixteen centuries ago that on the occasion of receiving the veil of virginal consecration Marcellina heard the words, "[your Spouse] bestowed on you the pure sacra-ment of virginity." 48 We. think that Ambrose’s thought was either that the veil is a sign of virginity or that as Marcellina was being dedicated to perfect purity she became a sign to the world of divine realities, and espe-cially that she became a virgin-sign, that is, a person representing total surrender to the Trinity. St. Gregory of Nyssa likewise saw a kind of sacramental meaning to virginity: "The virginal life.s~ems to be a certain image of that future immortality of beatitude... The virgin enjoys in this life the goods that shall be our supreme good at the resurrection." 49 Though he does not use the word, sacrament, Pope Plus XII c/early taught the sacramentality of virginity when he assigned the terms "image" and "sign" to de-scribe the virgin’s witnessing function before the world: It surely, redounds without doubt to the highest glory of virgins that they are living images o[ that perfect integrity by Which the Church is joined to her divine Spouse. For this So-ciety founded by Jesus Christ it is a supreme joy that these same women are a marvelous sign of that flourtshing sanctity and spiritual fecundity for which she is eminent. Cyprian wrote well of this when he said: "They are the flower of that ec-clesial bud, the beauty and adornment of spiritual grace, a reason for our joy, a fresh and untainted work of praise and honor, an image of God corresponding to the holiness of the *~ Lk 24:32. At the turn of the first century St. Ignatius of Antioch already recognizes a special power in biblical words when he speaks of himself as "confugiens ad evangelium tamquam ad corporaliter praesentem Christum"--"fleeing to the gospel as to the bodily presence of Christ" (Ad Phila., 5, 1; P.G. 3:681). ~De virgin(bus, bk. 3, c. l; P.L. 16:219-20: "In te quoque sin-cerum sacramentum conferet [Sponsus] virginitatis." Ambrose was probably here using the term "sacrament" as Augustine defined it: Signa, "cure ad res divinas pertinent, sacramenta appellantur" (Letter 138, c. 1, n. 7; P.L. 35:527). ~° De virginitate, c. 13; P.G. 25:290. Lord, the more illustrious portion of the Lord’s flock. The Church rejoices in them and the glorious fruitfulness of this Mother abundantly flourishes in them. The more the number of virgins grows, the more does the joy of this Mother increaseY In what ways is the virgin a witness-sign to the world? Sign o[ God-centeredness The doctrine of the divine indwelling in the souls of the just is undoubtedly a doctrine of God-centeredness. The whole aim of its preparation in the Old Testament and its revelation in the New is to impel men to an intimacy with the triune God. By being so close, so deli-cately close that He is within, he is asking each man to develop the kind of spiritual life that will prompt him sincerely to shout all his days: One thing I ,ask of the Lord; this I seek: to dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, that I may gaze on the loveliness of the Lord...As the hind longs for the running waters, so my soul longs for you, 0 God. Athirst is my soul for God, the living God. When shall I go and behold the face of God?~a The consecrated virgin is a sign that man must seek God as his all. Her whole being proclaims that human life must be orientated to the divine alone, for she is what she is precisely that she may gaze on the loveliness of the Lord, that she may unimpededly thirst for Him and be-hold His face. There are two elements involved in a dedicated vir-ginity. The first is a bodily integrity by which one has never committed .a complete and voluntary act against the virtue of purity nor has contracted and used marriage. The virginal body is whole, integral. The second element is the firm and pious will to abstain forever from any voluntary venereal pleasure. The will is firm by its vow and it is pious by its supernatural motive for the vow. Thus an adolescent who has never sinned seriously against chastity is integral in body but does not thereby enjoy the state of consecrated virginity, for even though the material element (b, odily incorruption) is present, the ~o Pius XII, Sacra virginitas, pp. 173-4. St. lsidore of Seville long ago saw the virgin as a sign of the Church: "Since the Church her-self is a virgin espoused to one Man, as the Apostle says, how much greater is the dignity of her members who preserve in the flesh what the whole Church preserves in her purpose?" (De ecclesiastids ol~iciis, bk. 2, c. 18; P.L. 83:804-5). Even earlier St. Augustine had said that "the whole Church is called a virgin" Enarratio in Ps. 147, n. 10; P.L. 37:1920. Vatican II, of course, frequently recalls the wit-nessing value of the evangelical counsels. ~1 Ps 26:4; 41:2-3. 4- 4- 4- Virginal Temples VOLUME 27, ~.968 31 ÷ ÷ ÷ Thomas Dubay, S.M. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS formal.element (the intention of dedicating this integrity forever to God)is absent.5~ ~ The virgin is a sign of God, centeredness as regards both elements in her consecration. Her bodily integrity is’a peaceful and pure self-preservation for Him alone. Her intimate being is a garden enclosed. Her body ’that knows no voluntary disturbance of passion itself declares that God alone can have her, that the indwelling Trinity can abide in the tranquil garden that she, is. Such. is the thought of Paul when he says that "the virgin thinks about the things of the Lord, that she may be hol~ in body and in spirit." Her chaste flesh is itself a. sign,: of concern with the Lord. Especially is she the sacred temple of the Trinity: "Holy is the temple of God, and :this temple you are." 5s The spiritual or formal element in th~ virgi.nal con.s.e-cration is likewise a sign to flae world of God-centered-ness. By her firm and pious will to give her heart to no other lover the virgin proclaims to all who will .hear that God alone is the objec.t of her concern and attention. This perpetual resolve declares in a per.fect~ manner the cruciality of God in the Christian life: "Ofie t~hing I ask of the Lord... that I may gaze on the loveliness of the’ Lord." 54 It declares that the virgin is a. sign to men that all must love Him with a whole heart; a whole soul, a whole mind. She is a sacrament illustrative of Psalm 118:10: "With all my heart I seek you." To her especially does this God say: "You are precious in my eyes and glorious... I love you." ~ ~ Sign of Indwelling Mystery The divine inhabitation is an interpersonal intimacy between God and man effected by supernatural love and consummated by supematu[al joy: "If you love me, keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father and he will give you another Advocate to dwell with you for-ever, the Spirit of truth whom the world cannot re~’e.ive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. BUt you shall know him, because he will dw.ell with you, and be in you... If anyone love me~ he will k~ep .my word, and my Father will love hin~, and we will come’ to. him and make our abode with him. 2. Abidd ifi my love’.’.. These things I have spoken to you that.my ]oy. may be in. you, and that your joy may be made lull... God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God .in him r~ Because the religious vow’ of chastity is not a vow of gi~ginit~, a non-Virgin~ can become a religious and can even share by her com-plete selLdonation in the sign character of the ~irgin. ~ 1 Cor 3:17. ~ u Ps 26:4. .. M Is 43:4. ¯.. The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who has been given to us... Look to him that you may be radiant with joy... Taste and see how good the Lord is." 56 Yes, our mystery is a love-delight mystery. And such precisely is the virgin’s forte. She is a virgin in order to love with an undivided heart, and she receives a hundredfold of love and delight by giving up all for her Spouse: ’,Everyone who has left house, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or Wife, or children, or lands for my name’s sake, shall receive a hundredfold and shall possess life everlasting. Because she can love unimpededly she can also more easily attain the ofuilness of joy that stems from love: "Eye has not seen nor ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man, what things God has prepared for those who love him." ~s Hence, our basic argument is simple: love. for God is closely interwoven with the indwelling mystery; the virgin is a virgin precisely to love; therefore, the virgin as a virgin is somehow woven into the indwelling mystery. She is a sign of it. This same truth stands out from another point of view¯ The divine inhabitation consecrates a persgn, puri-fies and spiritualizes the body: "Holy is the temple of God, and this temple you are... They who are adcording to the flesh mind the things of the flesh, but they who are according to the spirit mind the things of the spirit ... You, however, are not carnal but spiritual, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you." ~9 When Paul comes to admonish the Corinthians to live chastely he caps a list of reasons (the resurrection of the body, membership in the Body of Christ, union with the Lord) with an appeal to the divine inabiding: "Do you not know that your members are the temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have fxom God?" 50 Purity and the divine presence are intimately related. Virginity, therefore, as the loftiest type of purity is par excellence related to the indwelling mystery. We may say that the consecrated virgin is the visible sacrament of the indwelling: "Wher-ever a virgin of God is, there is a temple of God." It follows, then, that the virginal temple enjoys a singular splendor, shines with a’ particular beauty be-cause of the Trinity abiding within. Especially true of her is the encomium of Yahweh: "You were exceedingly beautiful, with the dignity of a queen¯ You Were re-nowned among the nations for. your beauty," perfect as it was, because of my splendor which I had bestowed on ~U7J nM 1t 41:91:259-7. ,28; 15:9,11; 1 Jn 4:16; Rom 5:5; Ps $$:6,9. ~1 Cor 2:9. ~ 1 Cot 8:17; Rom 8:5,9. ~ ! Cor 6:19. ÷ ÷ ÷ Virginal Temples VOLUME 27, 1968" ÷ ÷ Thomas Dubay, S.M. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS you, says the Lord God." 01 When she is a religious, her habit likewise shares in the sign character of her consecra-tion, since it proclaims that she is the set-aside property of the Trinity, that the habit encloses a temple beautiful by its tranquil purity. Sign o[ God’s Cosmic Primacy The incarnation has wedded the uncreated to the created. It has raised the entire universe to a new level, a new sacredness, a new unity with its Author. All things are restored in the Christ, the Sacrament of God. Yet God still does enjoy a primacy in this new and sacred unity, a primacy by which He infinitely transcends the cosmos, a primacy by which the latter must not inter-fore with His glory, a primacy by which all else is orien-tated to His praise. One of the most radical (in both senses of "root" and "drastic") doctrinal themes in the gospels is the idea of voluntary poverty. It permeates the whole like an atmos-phere and it is so uncompromising that it must come as a shock to anyone who takes it seriously: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven... The care of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it is made fruitless... Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where rust and moth con-sume, and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither rust nor moth consume, nor thieves break in and steal. For where thy treasure is, there also will thy heart be ... The foxes have dens, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head... If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me ... Amen I say to you, with difficulty will a rich man enter the kingdom of heaven. And further I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven... Woe to you richl for you are now having your comfort. Woe to you who are filledl for you shall hunger... Carry neither purse, nor wallet, nor sandals... Take heed and guard yourselves from all covetousness, for a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions... Every one of you who does not renounce all’that he possesses cannot be my disciple... You cannot serve God and mammon." 82 Whatever else these thunderbolts may be, they are not platitudes. Evangelical poverty is mani-festly an exchange of the cosmos for God. = Ez 16:13-4. ~ Mt 5:3; 13:22; 6:19-21; 8:20; 19:21,23-:4~ ;,Lk 6:24-5i 10:4; 12:15; 14:33; 16:13. The virgin is a poverty-~ign. She is a sacrament of the divine primacy in creation. Bodily integrity, of .course, has in itself no obvious connection with poverty, but consecrated integrity in the special supernatural economy in which we live does possess a relationship. This tieup is visible not only in the life of the virginal Holy Family and in the actual structure of the religious life of .the Church but also in the traditional thought of her teach-ers. St. Gregory of Nyssa writes of the fourth-century vir-gins together with his sister, Macrina, that "such was their life that every human v?nity was foreign to them and hence their life closely resembled that of the angels... They found their delight in temperance; they reckoned as their glory to be known by no one and their riches to possess nothing." 6z Pope Plus XII writes in the same vein when he say that a virginity consecrated to Christ is witness to a faith in the kingdom of heaven,~* and when he asks the rhetorical question: Are not sacred virgins who dedicate their lives to the service ¯ of the poor and the sick with no distinction as to race, social position, or religion, are not these virgins intimately united to their miseries and hardships and are they not most warmly attached to the poor as tho .ugh they were their actual mothers? ~ This same truth that dedicated chastity is a poverty-sign of God’s primacy is borne out by a consideration of the nature of the dedication. If a virgin gives up a greater good, marriage, for the sake of serving God more effec-tiyely, it is only logical that she will give up lesser goods, material, possessions, for the same reason. She is, there-fore, a sign to the world that God comes first in the uni-verse, that He transcends not only human love but also non-human things. She is a living sign in the flesh pro-claiming to each man by her being: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind." ~ Her poverty declares by fact if not by word that "God is my riches." By it she may ask: "Whom else have I in heaven? And when I am wit.l~ you, the earth delights me not. Though my flesh and my heart waste away, God is the rock of m~] heart and my portion forever... For me to be near God is my good." ~ -How is the virgin’s poverty made a visible sign of the Trinity’s primacy in the cosmos? How does her inner love of the indwelling God and her detachment from things not God appear to the world? Life of St. Macrina, P.G. 25:596. Plus XlI, Sacra virginitas, p. 172. Ibid., p. 178. Mt 22:~7. Ps 75:25-6,28. 4. + 4. Virginal Temples VOLUME 27, ].9~B ÷ ÷ REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS. 36 First of all, she loves the poor and the downtrodden. She favors them, prefers to serve them because her Master was one of them. The world can see through her involve-ment with the havenots that God, not things are her concern. Sheknows that "he sins who despises the hungry; but happy is he who is kind to the poorl" She is aware that "he who oppresses the poor blasphemes his Maker, but he who is kind to the needy glorifies him." 6s Secondly, in her personal life she is as factually poor as her vocation permits. Simplicity shines out in her manner of life, in her convent, its furnishings, her habit. Her food is plain and she takes it in moderation and detachment. She has gladly deprived herself of superfluities and is a picture of a godly contentment. She has subscribed to Paul’s thought: "Godliness with contentment is indeed great gain. For we brought nothing into the world, and certainly .we can take nothing out; but having food and sufficient clothing, with these let us be content." 69 She welcomes the sufferings of deprivations when they occur and she is happily satisfied with them according to. the doctrine and practice of the Apostles: "Beloved, do not be startled at the trial by fire that is taking place among you to prove you, as if something strange were happening to you; but rejoice, insofar as you are partakers of the sufferings of Christ, that you may also rejoice with exul-tation in the revelation of his glory... Calling in the apostles and having thdm scourged, they charged them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and then let them go. So they departed from the presence of the Sanhedrin, rejoicing that they had been counted worthy to suffer disgrace for the name of Jesus." T0 She avoids worldly amusements: "Do not love the world," she says to her-self, "or the things that are in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father isnot in him." 71 She is a sacrament that declares to those who will listen: "Eye has not seen or ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man, what things God has prepared for those who love him." ~z Sign oI Feminine Dignity Since the fall it has been difficult for mankind to allot to woman her proper place in the divine scheme. Even she herself often does not see itand even more often does not live according to it. The virginal temple of the Ho!y Spirit is an existential sermon declaring to the world the Prov 14:21,31. Tim 6:6-8. Pt 4:12-3; Acts 5:40-1. Jn 2:15. Cot 2:9. personal worth of woman before God even aside from her natural maternal function in society. The virgin proclaims in her being woman’s great nat-ural and supernatural intellectual value. Historically and aside from the influence of revelation woman has been looked upon largely as a means to man’s welfare and pleasure. A naturalistic world lays great stock by her physical beauty when and while she has it and seems to feel that it is her main contribution to society. When after a decade or two her visible attractiveness has waned, interest in one is replaced by interest in another. On the other hand, by her charming modesty and evangelical poverty the Christian virgin is a living witness to woman’s worth as an end. She deem.phasizes physical beauty to make the world realize~that it is secondary; that a woman is valuable especially because of her in-tellect and will; that she is a person, not a tool; that she has much to contribute to the good of mankind by her spiritual qualities tinted as they are with feminine traits; that she, too, no less than her male counterpart is es-pecially to spend herself in pursuing God: O God, you are my God whom I seek; for you my flesh pines and my soul thirsts like the earth, parched, lifeless and without water. Thus have I gazed toward you in the sanctuary to see your power and your glory, for your kindness is a greater good than life; my lips shall glorify youY The virgin underlines likewise the fresh beauty of womanly integrity and purity. She asserts in her person the blessedness of the pure of heart, the happiness of those who live an untainted life. She silently proclaims the angelic lot of the elect: "At the resurrection they will neither marry nor be given in marriage,’ but will be as angels of God in heaven." 74 Even if the virginal temple of the Trinity were never to enter a classroom, never to make an apostolic visit to the poor, never to walk a hos-pital corridor, she nevertheless is a witness to the charm of a pure womanhood and the dignity of unsullied in-tegrity. The virgin is a sign of supernatural motherhood. She has declined a natural fecundity only to embrace a loftier, more universaI fruitfuIness. Like her Spouse, she has come that men "may have life, and have it more abun-dantly." ~ There are, of course, two kinds of birth and therefore two kinds of life to be conceived and nourished: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he. cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the ~ Ps 62:2-4. ¢~ Mt 22:30. ~ Jn 10:10. ÷ ÷ ÷ Virginal Temples VOLUME 27, 1968 37 ÷ 4. 4. Thomas Dubay, S.M. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS Spirit is spirit." r8 Somehow God has deigned to .share this supernatural parenthood with ~man, for the latter can say: "My dear children, with whom I am in labor again, unti! Christ is formed in you." 7r The dedicated virgin is a mother; she is a sign of a superior feminine fecundity because her maternity surpasses a natural ma-ternity. 7s The Church implies this superiqrity when she sings on Holy Saturday night: "It would have profited us nothing to be born unless we had also been redeemed." The virgin, then, is a witness to the fact that the ecclesial apostolate can be feminine, that the woman’s motherly traits and desires are fulfilled in the supernatural order as well as in the natural. She is once again a sign of feminine dignity. Sign of Love lor M’en To the casual observer the religious is a woman who seems devoid of anything, one might call a living love for men; and yet if she is anything at all to the world, she is a lover of it. We may go so far as to say she is so much a lover of men that she is a sign set up among the nations of how we should love our fellows. Three revealed premises lead us to this conclusion. The first is that the mark that sets the supernatural man apart from his natural counterpart is the Christlike love he has for his neighbor: "By this will all men know [it is a sign] that you are my disciples, if you have love for one an-other." 79 The second is that one is essentially a super-natural man by a double love, for God and for neighbor: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God.with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the sec-ond is like it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," s0 The third is that the virgin is of all people the undivided lover of God, and ,hence of neighbor also: "He who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife; and he is divided. And the un-married woman, and the virgin, thinks about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body and in spirit." sl If the love of God and neighbor are inseparable,s2 and if the consecrated x;irgin is wholly devoted to love of .God, she cannot avoid being devoted by profession to love of ~ Jn 3:5-6. ~7 Gal 4:19. ~S,,Truly and solidly does the virgin mother rejoice, for she by her spiritual work gives birth to immortal children" (St. Gregory of Nyssa, De virginitate, e. 13; P.G. 25:289). r~ Jn 13:35. *~ Mt 22:37-9. ~ 1 Cor 7:33-4. ~ 1 Jn 4:20-1. neighbor. And furthermore, if this latter love is the sign of a disciple, she is especially a sign. The history of consecrated virginity confirms our rea-soning process. The pages of the Church’s apostolic jour-nal are replete with the extraordinary loves of extraordi-nary women. If actions clamor more loudly than words, we must reckon these consecrated women among the greatest lovers of men the world has seen. Any list must be incomplete, but we need think only of Eustochium, Macrina, Catherine of Alexandria, Clare, Catherine of Siena, Angela Merici, Margaret Marie, Teresa of Avila. The world needs the lofty love these dedicated persons exemplify. Parents easily love their’children on a natural plane, but not so easily on the supernatural. Often na-tions react toward one another on the basis of deception and intrigue, very often on that of a cold diplomacy more or less mingled with justice, seldom with a supernatural love. The world desperately needs the love-sign of the consecrated virgin. She is a fresh flower in a sandy desert. Sacrament of Contemplation "For this reason does a holy virginity abstain from every venereal pleasure, that it may be more freely at leisure for divine contempIation." sn In such manner does St. Thomas summarize Catholic thought on the finality of perfect purity. In the Christian economy one does not embrace chastity to avoid something evil, to shirk re-sponsibility, to attain a natural peace and security. These reasons are either inadequate or plainly wrong. Complete chastity is aimed at peaceful prayer: "The unmarried woman, and the virgin, thinks about the things of the Lord." Just as the virgin is a sign of the primacy of God and of the indwelling mystery itself, so is she a sign that converse with the Trinity is man’s primary occupation. The virgin is a sacrament of contemplation for several reasons. Her contemplative love is reserved for God alone: "God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him." s~ She has given her heart to no other lover. The virgin rests in God only. Though all men should be able to join the Psalmist in saying, "Only in God be at rest, mysoul," s5 the virgin is most likely to say it and to live according to it. She has given up the comforts of marriage and family. God is her rest and comfort, for indeed He is "the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort." s~ s~ 2-2, q.152, a.2. ~ 1 Jn 4:16. ~ Ps 61:6. sa2 (;or 1:3. Vlrginat Temples ÷ ÷ ÷ Thom~ Dubay, $.M~ REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS The virgin delights in God. In her particularly and in ~/lofty manner are fulfilled the sentiments of the Psalmist when he declares: "Whom else have I in heaven? And when I am with you, the earth delights me not. Though my flesh and my heart waste away, God is the rock of my heart and my portion forever... For me to be near God is my good." s7 She especially o£ all men can say: "Whom else have I and whom else could I want who have All?" She especially can say: "The earth delights me not, and I have proven it by giving up the earth, for You only have I chosen, You only are the rock of my heart and my por-tion forever." She especially is likely to assert: "But for me, to be near God is my good; to make the Lord God my refuge--I have chosen no other good, no other refuge." ¯ The virgin calmly contemplates her virginal God. St. Gregory Nazianzen back in the fourth century reflected the eastern persuasion of an absolute value in virginity (aside from .its benefits after the fall), when he remarked that "the first virgin is the holy Trinity." ss It is perfectly true that the divine processions are completely without passion or loss of integrity, for the divine nature is the purest spirit. The family joy of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is most pure, most tranquil, most integral, most supreme. The virgin’s contemplation is a reflection of it. She gazes on the virginal loveliness of the Trinity purely, calmly, integrally, supremely: "One thing I ask of the Lord; this I seek: to dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, that I may gaze on the loveliness of the Lord." S9 She is the sacrament of divine contemplation. Sign of Final Victory The culmination and summation of the sign character of a holy virginity is the body-soul triumph of eternity. Virginity is eschatological. It points not to earth but to heaven, not to time but to eternity, not to the place of struggle .but to that of victory. Of the relatively few men-tions of virginity in the New Testament it is significant that at least three of them refer to the Ultimate triumph. Jesus describes the life of perfegt purity as angelic and heavenly: "At the resurrection they will neither marry nor be given in marriage, but will be as angels of God in heaven." a0 St. Paul explicitly ties up detachment with the parousia--or at least with each man’s individual death---’ and the parousia with the motivation behind a dedicated purity: s~ Ps 72:25-6,28. ss Poema 1; P.G. 21:287-8. s~ Ps 26:4. ~e Mt 22:$0. But this I say, brethren, the time is short; ifremains that those who have wives b~ as if they had none; and thos~ who weep, as though not weeping; and those who rejoice, as though not rejoicing; and those who buy, as though not possessing; and those who use this world, as though not using it, for this world as we see it is passing away. I would have you free from care. He who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please God. Whereas he who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife; and he is divided. And the unmarried woman, and the virgin, thinks about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body and in spirit.~ St. John assigns to virgins a select place in the celestial life with the risen Lamb of God: "These follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These were purchased from among men, first-fruits unto God and unto the Lamb, and in their mouth there was found no lie; they are without blemish." 02 What is the final victory and how is the virgin an image ~f it? Essentially the triumph is the beatific vision in a risen body, the face-to-face, supremely delightful sight of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one God: "We see now through a mirror in an obscure manner, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know even as I have been known... Beloved, now we are the children of God, and it has not yet appeared what we shall be. We know that, when he appears, we shall be like to him, for we shall see him just as he is... Eye has not seen or ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man, what things God has prepared for those who love him." 93 This is the victory of all victories: to attain the ineffable joy of clasping unending Loveableness, Beauty in an unending embrace. The virgin is the sign of this embrace. The vir-gin is the sign of this embrace because even on earth she has begun the embrace in her undivided heart and in the most effective way open to her. ’She is a virgin precisely to contemplate the Trinity. "One thing," she proclaims by profession, "I ask of the Lord; this I seek: to dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, that I may gaze on the loveliness of the Lord." ~4 Her earthly con-templation is imperfect to be sure; it is not intuitive; but it is the beginning of the end. She is a sign of this essential beatitude because her virgina! joys in God are a prelude and sketch of the joys all the children of men shall even-tually have in God when they are neither married nor given in marriage. The otherworldiness of her life of ~1 1 Cur %29-34. ~ Apoc 14:4-5. It is not clear whether virginity is meant here strictly or metaphorically. ~ 1 Cur 13:12; 1 Jn 3:2; 1 Cur 2:9. This last text refers to super-natural wisdom through faith and/or the beatific glory through vision. ~ Ps 26:4. 4. 4. 4. Virginal Temples VOLUME 27, 1968 41 ÷ ÷ ÷ Thomas Dubay, S.M. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS poverty and purity shouts to men that we have not here a lasting city, that we are a pilgrim people. As we shall note in a later article, one of the accidental triumphs of eternity due to the indwelling Trinity is the victory of the risen body over our passible body: There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another of the stars; for star differs from star in glory. So also. with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown in corrup-tion rises in incorruption; what is sown in dishonor rises in glory; what is sown in weakness rises in power; what is sown a natural body rises a spiritual body... For this corruptible body must put on incorrupdon, and this mortal body must. put on immortality. But when this mortal body puts on immortal-ity, then shall come to pass the word that is written, "Death is swallowed up in victoryl" ~ This splendid victory, this glorious resurrection of the human frame is due to the indwelling presence of the vivifying Spirit: "If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, then he who raised Jesus Christ from the dead will also bring to life your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who dwells in you." 06 Though the virgin’s body does not yet enjoy supernatural agility, nor immortality, nor brilliance, it does begin to share in the victory to come and it is surely a sign of it. By her consecrated purity she has freed herself from the unruly disturbances attendant on even the good use of marriage and so she is an image of the bodily calm that shall be the lot of all men in the heavenly city. Further-more, the being of all temples of the indwelling Trinity is somehow spiritualized even while they are on earth: "You, however, are not carnal but spiritual, if indeed the Spirit of God dwelIs in you." 0r This burning Fire of love elevates in some mysterious manner the being of fallen men by abiding within. Because of her eschatologi-cal orientation the virgin temple is an apt sign of this incipient purification, elevation, spiritualization effected by the Spirit on earth as a preparation for the complete purification, elevation, spiritualization of heaven. Because she is a sacrament of things to come the con-secrated virgin should be an example to men of the in-carnational detachment so beautifully formulated by St. Paul. She looks and lives for eternity: "We look not at the things that are seen, but at the things that are not seen. For the things that are seen are temporal, but the things that are not seen are eternal." 0s Because she is living for the risen body and the intuitive vision of the Trinity, she has a taste for heavenly things, not worldly ones: "If you have risen with Christ, seek the things that are above," ~1 Cor 15:41-4,58-~. ~Rom 8:11. ~ ,Rom 8:9. ~1 Cor 4:18. she says by her life, "where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Mind the things that are above, not the things that are on earth." ~ When we see her religious garb we are reminded that because the time is short, "those who rejoice [are to :be] as though not rejoicing; and those who buy, as though not possessing; and those who use this world, as though not using it, for this world as .we see it is passing away." 100 She teaches us by her set-aside position in the world that our all-absorbing yearning must be finally to. see the face of God: "As the hind longs, for the running waters, so my soul longs for you, 0 God. Athirst is my soul for God, the living God. When shall I go and behold the face of God?" 101 The virgin, then, is a temple of the Trinity, at once in the world but not of it, crucified but refreshed, a lover of men but first a lover of God,~ beautifully plain without but even more beautifully charming within, busy at work but intent on contemplation, occupied on earth but orientated to heaven. For she bears heaven in her breast. (to be continued) ~ Col 3:1-2. ~o 1 Cor 7:30.-I. lox Ps 41:2-3. .4" + + Virginal Temples VOLUME 27, 1968 JAMES I. O’CONNOR, S.J. Alienation of Manuscripts and Works of Art James I. O’Con-nor, $.J., is professor. of canon law at Bel-larmine $chool of Theology; 230 South Lincoln Way; North Aurora, Illi-nois 60542. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS Teilhard de Chardin’s writings have been receiving considerable attention and study in recent years. Very naturally, this interest in his works has spread to the man himsel[ and his life. Among the events reported about his life is that he consulted two canonists as to whether or not he as a professed religious could lawfully appoint a literary executor to whom he would bequeath his manuscripts and whom he would leave free to dis-pose of them as he saw fit. The report never indicates who the canonists were. Neither is any reason or justifi-cation given for their alleged affirmative reply to Teil-hard’s question. Whether or not this story about Teilhard de Chardin has been the occasion, if not the cause, of other re-ligious raising the same or a related question, the fact remains that the issue of the’right of a professed re-ligious to alienate manuscripts he has written is being asked frequently. From this question it is an easy step to another question: May a professed religious alienate works of art created by the religious? Alienation is any act whereby the right of ownership, in whole or in part, is transferred to another person. Thus, alienation is had, for example, by selling the property in question, or by giving it away, or by ex-changing it for another piece of property of like or dif-ferent nature. In all tl~ese instances, the owner has com-pletely surrendered his title or ownership of the original property, whether or not he received anything in re-turn. The basic issue in the question of alienation of manu- \ scripts or works of art produced by a professed religious is whether such an act falls under his vow of poverty or, on the contrary, is it outside the scope of the vow of poverty. Before attempting to answer this question, yet an-other question must be posed: Do the manuscripts or works of art have a money value? For the present, only manuscripts will be considered; works of art will be discussed aRerwards. Manuscripts To the final question above, the Salamanca theolo-gians equivalently gave a very definite negative reply and very strongly defended complete ownership by a religious of his manuscripts. They expressed themselves in this fashion: You will ask whether a professed religious has real control over his manuscripts to such an extent that he can carry them with him wherever he goes, give them away, burn them, or exercise in their regard any other act which are functions characteristic of a proprietor? The reply is in the affirmative, whether the manuscripts are his own or given him by some-body else, whether the result of his own work or that of some-body else. Further, without permission of his prelate, he may dispose of them in view. of.his own death. This is true because manuscripts, inasmuch as they are the ideas of his mind, are something spiritual. Moreover, since the accessory partakes of the nature of the primary, and since manuscripts are acces-sories to knowledge as flowing from it and begotten by it, hnd are an aid to it, therefore, lust as knowledge does not fall under the vow of poverty, neither do manuscripts. As a result, a re-ligious can become their owner. Furthermore and finally, this is true because this is the [~ractice, common usage, and custom even of reformed religious institutes.1 St. Alphonsus Liguori also gave a negative reply to that final question above. He defended his opinion because manuscripts are something spiritual since they are products of one’s genius, ,e, ven though elaborated by outside endeavor; and because the3 pertain to the field of knowledge, which does not come under the vow of poverty; and because this is the common practice.--This explains the brief of Benedict XIII that religious who have been promoted to the episcopacy must turn over to their superiors all their prop.ert.y except their manuscripts. Moreover, in Sporer’s work, it is stated that Clement VIII expressly declared that religious may, of their own volition, alienate their manuscripts, even without permission. [Contin.] Tournely believes the same thing pro-vided that--in this he agrees with others--other provision is not set down in the constitutions of the order."~ Sporer was a Franciscan Recollect who wrote a work a Collegii Salmanticensis Cursus theologiae moralis (Venice: Pez-zana, 1764), tract. XII, cap. II, punct. XII, n. 195. Note: All translations in this article are those of the author ex-cept translations of canons; these are taken from the authorized English version (Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1919). = Theologia moralis (Rome: Typographia Vaticana, 1907), ed. Gaud~, tom. 2, lib. IV, cap. 1, n. 14. Alienation VOLUME 27, ~.968 ÷ ÷ ÷ lames I. O’Connor, $.1. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS also entitled Theologia moralis. To Sporer’s writings a supplement to his treatment of the matter of the Ten Commandments was added by Kilian Kazenberger, also a Franciscan Recollect. It is in this supplement that is found the reference made by St: Alphonsus and it reads as follows: It is a highly probable opinion that a religious is master of his manuscripts and that he can dispose of them at will. Writ-ings are, as it were, part of his knowledge and acquired learn-ing. Therefore, just as the religious can take along with him his knowledge and learning or can communicate it to another, so also can he do it with his own writings. These are nothing more than the ideas of a man philosoph!z!ng. As a result, the religious has direct control over his wnungs themselves but only indirect control over the paper, because control over the writings cannot be exercised without paper. And this is why, on the word of Corolianus, Tract. de Casious Resets., p. 2, casu 16, num. 19, Clement VIII declared that religious can alienate their manuscripts without p~rmission, notwithstanding his own bulla on Bestowal oI Properties? The bulla or constitution of Clement VIII referred to is that beginning with the words Religiosae congrega-tiones, 4 dated 19 June, 1594. In it the pope had pro-hibited donations of any kind by reiigious to any per-son outside the religious order and no exception was anywhere made in it for manuscripts written by a re-ligious. While a number of writers state that Clement VIII said that religious retain full ownership over their man-uscripts even to the extent that they also possess the right to alienate them,-nobody, as many later com-mentators point out, offers any proof that Clement VIII ever said what is ascribed to him. One author just re-fers to another author, for example, St. Alphonsus re-fers to the Sporer supplement, which, in turn, refers to Corolianus, but no one gives any data to prove Cle-ment VIII said or wrote anything other than what he set forth in his constitution Religiosae congregationes. The reference to Benedict XIII in St. Alphonsus’ commentary cited above does not prove that the manu-scripts of a religious do not fall under the vow of poverty. So far from proving St. Alphonsus’ poin..t is the document of Benedict XIII that it proves the con-trary, namely, that manuscripts per se do fall under the vow of poverty. In § 5 of the document, Postulat humili-tati nostrae,5 the pope prohibits any religious promoted ~Patritius Sporer, Theologia moralis: Supplementum theologiae moralis decalogalis (Venice: Pezzana, 1731), cap. II, .sect. III, n. 149. 4 Bullarium Romanum, ed. Taurinensis, tom. 10, pp. 146-50; ed. Mainardi, tom. 5, pars 2, pp. ~I-3. ~St. Alphonsus identifies the document of Benedict XIiI in the place cited in Iootnote 2 in n. 15 in the paragraph beginning "Praefatam autem." The document itself, dated 7 March, 1725, is to the episcopacy or other ecclesiastical dignity from taking with him "books, money, goods entrusted to them or deposited with them, and any kind whatever of movable or immovable goods, except his writings, clothing, and breviary." e The writings or manuscripts of the religious are excepted from all the previous items, all of which certainly pertain to the vow of poverty as do also the other two exceptions, namely, his clothing and his breviary. Furthermore, no authorization is given by Benedict XIII to a religious to alienate his manu-scripts. While, according to the Salamanca theologians and St. Alphonsus, it was the common opinion of the time that manuscripts did not come within the scope of the vow of poverty, there were prominent authors defending the opposite side of the question. Thus Peter M. Pas-serinus de Sextula, O.P., writing in 1663, holds that a religious has no ownership over his manuscripts as far as alienation of them is concerned, although the re-ligious does have the right to use his own manuscripts and to carry them away with him. There were also some commentators who distin-guished between manuscripts which had a money value and those which had no money value but simply served as aids to memory for their authorY The latter type of manuscripts would not form matter of the vow of pov-erty. The dispute as to whether the manuscripts of a re-ligious come under his vow of poverty, especially as regards alienation of them, remained, until the present century, practically as it was at the time of St. A1phon-sus. s In 1911, an indication of the Holy See’s viewpoint in the matter appeared in the reply to a question proposed to the Sacred Congregation for Religious: "II, If superiors have forbidden the publication of some manuscript, or if the imprimatur has been denied, may religious turn over the said manuscript to some publisher who will publish it with the imprimatur of his [the publisher’s] local ordinary and suppress the author’s name?" The re-ply given on 15 June, 1911 was: "In the negative." 9 found in Bullarium Romanum, ed. Taurinensis, tom. 22, pp. 129-33; ed. Mainardi, tom. 11, pp. 377-80. ~ Italics are in the original document. 7 De hominum statibus el ol~iciis, q. 186, a. 7, n. 412, referred to in Franciscus X. Wernz, S.J., and Petrus Vidal, S.J., lus canonicum (Rome: Gregorian University, 1933), tom. III, n, 349, b). s A. Vermeersch, S.J., De religiosis institutis et personis (Bruges: Beyaert, 1907), tom. 1, n. 254. ~Acta Apostolicae Sedis, v. 3 (1911), pp. 270-1; also in Fontes Codicis iuris canonici, n. 4410. Question I of this inquiry had asked if religious in simple vows needed an imprimatur to publish their 4, 4, 4, Al~natlon VOLUME 27, 1968 47 ÷ ÷ lames I. O’Co~nor~ S.I. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS Slightly over two years later, another question was submitted to the Sacred Congregation for Religious: "Do religious, whether in solemn vows or in simple vows, who have produced a manuscript during the dme of their vows, have ownership of it to such an extent that they can give it away or alienate it by any title whatever?" The full assembly of the cardinals of the Sacred Congregation discussed the question and finally decided: "In the negative." This decision was reported to and confirmed by Pope Pius X on 13 July, 1913.l° Thereafter all commentators maintained that no re-ligious, whether he has solemn vows or simple vows, may perform any act of alienation of his manuscripts if those manuscripts have a money value. On the other hand, the common opinion was that all religious, even those in solemn vows, may retain their own manuscripts for their own intellectual or spiritual life.ix That 1913 decision was embodied in canon 580, § 2 of the Code of Canon Law in the following terms: "What-ever the religious acquires by his own industry.., be-longs to the institute." Moreover, the sources of that section of that canon explicitly cite the 1913 decision. As a result, the ownership of manuscripts produced by professed religious and having a money value belong to his community. Consequently, he may not dispose of them without authorization from a superior competent to grant such authorization. A few authors raise some related issues. Thus Coro-nata12 observes and cites a number of other authors as also noting that a religious has no form of ownership over manuscripts which he produced by order of his su-perior and for whose production the community sus-tained special expenses. Another allied question treats of the religious who, when he is near death, pel~onally or through others burns or otherwise destroys his manuscripts. He may be moti-vated to such action by a sense of humility lest his memory be held in honor. Nevertheless, in the objective order, works just as religious in solemn vows. An affirmative answer was returned. l°/lcta ,,lpostolicae Sedis, v. 5 (1913), p. $66; Fontes Codicis itzris canonici, n. 4417. 11Jules Besson, ~’Les religieux et la propri~t~ des manuscrits," Nouvelle revue thdologique, v. 45 (1913), pp. 709-15; Matthaeus Conte a Coronata, O.F.M.Cap., Imtitutiones iuris canonici, 2d ed., v. I (Turin: Marietti, 19~9), p. 764, note 5; Dominicus M. PrOmmer, O.P., Manuale iuri~ canonici (Freiburg: Herder, 1933), 6th ed., p. 297, q. 223.1; I. Salsmans, S.J., "Annotationes in dubium circa manu-scripta religiosorum," Periodica, v. 7 (1913), pp. 165-8, especially n. 4; Timotheus Schaefer, O.F.M.Cap., De ,,eligiosis (Rome: Vatican Press, 1947), 4th ed., nn. 1114-5; Wernz-Vidai, Ius canonicum, n. ~50. ~ In the place noted in footnote 11. commentatorsl~ accuse him of acting badly and of sin-ning. They a/so point out that he shows himself quite un-grateful to his community which provided him with the opportunity and the means to carry on his studies. There also arises the question about manuscripts which were produced by a person before he pro-nounced his religious vows and which have a money value. In the case of solemnly professed religious, these, like other properties, would have to be provided for in his renunciation before his solemn profession (c. 581, § I). Religious with simple vows would retain the sim-ple owners.hip or title to them (c. 580, § 1). Furthermore, if they derive royalties or other form of monetary re-turn from their manuscripts, such monies would belong to the religious and not to the community. This solution follows that given by the Sacred Congregation for Re-ligious in the case of persons who are now professed religious in simple vows but who become beneficiaries of monetary compensations for military service rendered before their religious profession,x4 As for the disposal of such monies, the norms set down in canon 569 would obtain,~5 that is: § I. Before the profession of simple vows, whether temporary or perpetual, the novice must cede, for the whole period during which he will be bound by simple vows, the administration of his property to whomsoever he wishes, and dispose freely of its use and usufruct, except the constitutions determine otherwise. § 2. If the novice, because he possessed no property, omitted to make this cession, and if subsequently property come into his possession, or if, after making the provision, he becomes under whatever title the possessor of other property, he must make provision, according to the regulations of § 1, for the newly acquired property, even if he has already made simple pro-fession. A final question regarding manuscripts by professed religious and the 1913 decision is: Did that decision defin-itively settle the initial question as to whether manu-scripts with a monetary value may not be alienated without due authorization by superiors, because such action would violate the vow of poverty, or, rather, would it violate simply the vow of obedience as being placed against an ecclesiastical law? Some authors point out that the scope of the vow of poverty at times varies somewhat from community to community. Consequently, while manuscripts with a XaF. Plat, O.F.M.Cap., Praelectiones iuris regularis (Tournai: Casterman, 1888), 2d ed., v. 1, p. 242,2; Priimmer, Manuale, p. 297, q.223.1. 2, T. Lincoln Bouscaren, S.J., and James I. O’Connor, S.J., Canon Law Digest ]or Religious (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1964), v. 1, pp. 311-2, questions V and VL 26 Schaefer, De religiosis, n. 1115. Alienation VOLUME 27, 1968 d9 + lames I. O’Connor, Sdo REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS money value may be included under the vow of poverty in one community because of the wording of the con-stitutions, they may not in another community. As a result, these authors believe that the 1913 reply did not definitely decide whether such manuscripts are included under the vow of poverty. Nevertheless, all such com-mentators maintain that the authors of such manu-scripts may not alienate them, whether the root of the prohibition is found in the vow of poverty or in the vow of obedience.1~; As a last word about religious authors and their manuscripts, it may be worth noting that, while this study has been primarily concerned with the surrender of ownership of manuscripts to persons outside the re-ligious institute to which the author belongs, a much milder form of alienation may also be prohibited by constitutions, customs, or superiors even between mem-bers of the same religious body. Consequently, it is not unheard of that between religious of the same institute or even of the same house, general or particular per-mission is required for the donation, loan; or exchange of certain items among which manuscripts may be in-cluded. If there is such a restriction in a given institute, that restriction continues in force until and unless it is duly changed or modified. Works ot Art Under this heading is included everthing which is usually classi City of Saint Louis (Mo.), http://www.geonames.org/4407084 http://cdm17321.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/rfr/id/492 |