“Vidi un Sene”
Dante’s Divina Commedia is the great Catholic poem of graced mediations.
In the very first canto of the Inferno Virgil appears as a rescuer, sent (as the second canto reveals) by the trinity of heavenly mediators: Beatrice, Lucia, and the Virgin Mary (in ascending order). But the initiator of the salvific rescue is Mary.
The great circle of the Commedia begins to close (or to open to Infinity) in canto 31 of Paradiso with the appearance of yet another heavenly mediator. In place of Beatrice, Dante suddenly says: “Vidi un sene” — “I saw an elder.” He is later identified as Bernard of Clairvaux. And it is he, the great doctor of affectivity, who, in the poem’s final canto will intone the sublime prayer to our Lady: “Vergine madre, figlia del tuo figlio.”
It is Mary’s intercessory mediation, responsive to Bernard’s prayer, which obtains for Dante the final beatifying vision of the Trinity — the climax of the Commedia; as it was Mary’s intercession which inititiated his salvific journey.
On August 20th the Church celebrates the feast of St. Bernard. An important new book by William Harmless, S.J., Mystics (Oxford paperback) contains a fine chapter on Bernard. Here is some of what he says:
for Bernard, no matter how anguished our current plight, the nobility of our nature offers hope … The long, winding road back to God is about recovering our “likeness” to God. In this journey, as the soul turns back to God, it at the same time turns back to itself and back into its true self. This gradual recovery of the original “likeness” is, according to Bernard, what “marries the soul to the Word.” And he adds: “It is like him in nature, but it shows that it wants to be like him by loving as it is loved” (quoting from Bernard’s 83rd sermon on The Canticle of Canticles).
The secret of mystical marriage is the discovery that to be oneself is to be in love with Love.
One can taste in the above why Bernard’s affective mystical theology inspired Dante … and, more than six hundred years after Dante, Thomas Merton.
Seems like this “mystic” was quite busy encouraging soldiers to take up arms.
“But now, O brave knight, now, O warlike hero, here is a battle you may fight without danger, where it is glory to conquer and gain to die. If you are a prudent merchant, if you are a desirer of this world, behold I show you some great bargains; see that you lose them not. Take the sign of the cross and you shall gain pardon for every sin that you confess with a contrite heart. The material itself, being bought, is worth little; but if it be placed on a devout shoulder, it is, without doubt, worth no less than the kingdom of God. Therefore, they have done well who have already taken the heavenly sign; well and wisely also will the rest do, if they hasten to lay upon their shoulders, like the first, the sign of salvation.”
http://www.crusades-encyclopedia.com/psbernardcallforcrusade.html
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/bernard1.html
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/bernard1.html
Blogs being what they are, I knew my post would immediately rouse a measure of Bernard-bashing.
Whatever the final judgement on the Second Crusade (one to be rendered with due regard for “historical consciousness!”), Bernard’s influence upon countless folk, of whom Dante and Merton are the best known, deserves the honor and respect he is accorded in Father Harmless’s chapter.
So, to celebrate the feast, “tolle, lege:” Dante, Merton, Harmless, or, best of all, Bernard — perhaps, De Diligendo Deo.
Not so much bashing as hoping to clarify and plea for some honesty. Not only did Bernard depart from the gospel he wrote an apology later regretting his support of the crusades. Not so much for the violence, but because the West lost.
I am stunned by your review on Chaput’s book. Such a poorly written book from a literary, historical or theological point of view.
I love when he concludes that Constantine was a good man even if he beheaded many, including his own family. What should we conclude from such nonsense? That we should all wait for our death bed to be baptized? Historians laugh at the obsequiousness of Eusebius.
“Historical consciousness” is such an abused term. How does that fit into the holocaust and the two worst wars in the history of the world. In our time. What is different is our laws. Human nature has not changed. Even today an absurd amount of money and resources are poured into the Holy Land and Rome has closed its eyes to the violence. Just as the right to life movement winked at the guy who killed the doctors.
It is to be expected that Mr. Mazzella would attack a book written by a bishop, without attempting to analyze it or give chapter and verse ["the Right to Life winked at the [one] guy who killed [one] doctor”]. That a bishop knows less “from a literary, historical, or theological point of view” than Mr. Mazzella can but leave one trying not to laugh too hard. With friends like these…
Just to be clear, Abp. Chaput does NOT conclude that Constantine was a good man. He does NOT judge. [It is a curiosity that Constantine is considered a saint in the Orthodox Church].
But it is Mr. Mazzella’s stock in trade. I think he’s been reading too much Paul Blanshard.
Fr. Imbelli,
I was talking to my prof about Lucia in the Comedy. He said Lucia means Light –of reason, or of Christ for Dante. I took it quite literally to mean that Dante was devoted to St. Lucy of Syracuse. What do you think?
Gabriel,
Chaput’s actual words are: “”Nevertheless, most evidence suggests that he (Constantine) was sincere in his religious belief.” What evidence? That he murdered his family or saw himself as anointed by God, that he intervened often, or called the first Council? Pg 63. Chapter and verse.
At the same time the book is useful in that it shows that there is much available from the early Ratzinger (Theological Insights 1966) that I thought was not available. It certainly shows the line of reasoning of people like Chaput.
In fact some of it everyone can agree with until the conclusions come. Like what I cited above. Another non-sequitor is his remark that we should not study how the Council documents developed but what they say. That is not true. What some wanted the documents to say and how some blocked certain passages from being part of VII is important also. There was a monumental battle between the bishops and the Curia about the wording of many documents. There are many other chapter and verse references and I will give them upon request.
But I do think Chaput is trying but he is a victim of a priori thinking. That is that despite what one sees, one must conclude with orthodoxy no matter what. That is not “thinking with the Church.” That is succumbing to some dominating leaders.
One of the other positive aspects of the book is that Chaput does acknowledge the mistakes of church leaders in the past. What he will not admit is that they are still making them.
Pseudo-Dionysius Ecclesiastical Hierarchies is a sublime treatise on graced mediation through the grades of ordination.
6. It is the order of Hierarchs [=bishops], that most fully possesses the power of perfecting. In particular, it completes every hierarchic rite of perfecting. It revealingly teaches others to understand, explaining their sacred things, proportionate characteristics, and their holy powers.
Ἔστιν οὖν ἡ ἱεραρχικὴ τάξις ἡ τῆς τελειωτικῆς δυνάμεως ἀναπεπλησμένη τὰ τελεσιουργὰ τῆς ἱεραρχίας ἐκκρίτως τελετουργοῦσα καὶ τὰς ἐπιστήμας τῶν ἱερῶν ἐκφαντορικῶς μυοῦσα καὶ ἐκδιδάσκουσα τὰς ἀναλόγους αὐτῶν καὶ ἱερὰς ἕξεις τε καὶ δυνάμεις.
(b) The light-bearing order of Priests guides the initiates to the divine visions of the sacraments. It does so by the authority of the inspired hierarchs in fellowship with whom it exercises the functions of its own ministry. It makes known the works of God by way of the sacred symbols and it prepares the postulants to contemplate and participate in the holy sacraments. But it sends on to the hierarch those longing for a full understanding of the divine rites which are being contemplated.
Ἡ δὲ τῶν ἱερέων φωταγωγικὴ τάξις ἐπὶ τὰς θείας τῶν τελετῶν ἐποψίας χειραγωγεῖ τοὺς τελουμένους ὑπὸ τῇ τῶν ἐνθέων ἱεραρχῶν τάξει καὶ μετ’ αὐτῆς ἱερουργοῦσα τὰς οἰκείας ἱερουργίας, ἐν οἷς μὲν αὐτὴ δρᾷ τὰς θεουργίας ὑποδεικνῦσα διὰ τῶν ἱερωτάτων συμβόλων καὶ θεωρητικοὺς τοὺς προσιόντας ἀποτελοῦσα καὶ τῶν ὁσίων τελετῶν κοινωνούς, εἰς τὸν ἱεράρχην δὲ ἀναπέμπουσα τοὺς τῆς ἐπιστήμης τῶν θεωρηθεισῶν ἱερουργιῶν ἐφιεμένους.
(c) The order of Deacons purifies and discerns those who do not carry God’s likeness within themselves and it does so before they come to the sacred rites performed by the priests. It purifies all who approach by drawing them away from all dalliance with what is evil. It makes them receptive to the ritual vision and communion.
Η δὲ τῶν λειτουργῶν τάξις ἡ καθαρτικὴ καὶ τῶν ἀνομοίων διακριτικὴ πρὸ τῆς ἐπὶ τὰς τῶν ἱερέων ἱερουργίας προσαγωγῆς ἀποκαθαίρει τοὺς προσιόντας ἀμιγεῖς αὐτοὺς ἀποτελοῦσα τῶν ἐναντίων καὶ πρὸς ἱερουργικὴν ἐποψίαν καὶ
(I’m surprised to see the Greek font copied–hopefully it will not turn into code when I push the submit button!)
Mr. Mazzella,
Until you learn to be a tad more respectful of our priests and bishops, I believe it is not worth discussing things with you. ["People like Chaput"].
According to you they are near all at fault. Newman expressed the same thought about the Anglican clergy that was forever harping on perceived faults of the Church.
By your lights, it is not the finished documents which count at the conclusions of a council, but the endless discussions. Perhaps you should ask Fr. Komonchak who has published four volumes on the Vatican II.
Abp. Chaput’s “most evidence suggests that Constantine was sincere in his beliefs” arouses you to demand what evidence? Are you a lawyer? an historian? a theologian? a bishop? How good is your Greek? I think you should discuss this with someone from the Orthodox Church which has canonized him.
I neglected to give the reference to a useful discussion by Fr. Komonchak on the goings on at Vatican II:
http://www.nplc.org/commonground/lecture/komonchak2003.htm
Gabriel,
Andrew Greeley would characterize your attitude toward the clergy as sacralization which is the cause of many problems. Meanwhile, members of the church who know that it must always be reformed have called, finally, for the resignation of Cardinal George. http://votf.org/Press/pressrelease/081808.html
Canonization is not infallible, along with so many other things.
Chaput barely mentions this great scandal as he ignores the war as well. It is a time for courage, not obsequiousness.
Hope George gets the message this time.