No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 February 2009
The following pages were prompted by what would appear to be a theologically faulty but none the less common line of reasoning. I have heard clergy and laity alike justifying a wide variety of theories by appealing to the example of Christ: Christ did or did not do so-and-so, and it is therefore incumbent on us to do or not do likewise. For example, we hear that because Christ the High Priest was a man, all the Church's ministers must be male, or that because Christ the High Priest was celibate, all priests today must be celibate. Now it may well be, for solid and unimpeachable theological reasons, that priests should be both male and celibate—that is not in discussion here. But what is perfectly clear (or I hope will be) is that imitation of Christ cannot, without further theological qualification, be adduced as a reason. Again, a particular concept of prayer as a personal and intimate dialogue with an unseen but ever-present God is sometimes justified by the statement that it is verified in Christ's own life of prayer. There are, however, serious difficulties in the way of this argument, not usually adverted to. Again, the concept of ‘Nazareth’ as used by religious families stemming from Charles de Foucauld is not always applied with obvious theological clarity. It is used to justify a spectrum of virtues said to be appropriate to the Christian who wishes to imitate Christ particularly closely, from adoration of the exposed Blessed Sacrament and retreat silence in seclusion from the world to ‘humble manual work’ and ‘quiet acceptance of ill-treatment’.
page 201 note 1 I use ‘dogmatic’ here only in the sense that the following reflections belong more properly to doctrinal or speculative than to spiritual theology.
page 201 note 2 It is not to the purpose here to develop this particular point any more fully. On general motives for clerical celibacy see Kottje, R., ‘Zur Geschichte des Zölibatsgesetzes’, in Ehelosigkeit des Priesters (Symposium) (Regensburg: Verlag Pustet, 1970), 19–24Google Scholar; Manaranche, A., Prêtres à la manière des apôtres (Paris: Ed. du Centurion, 1967), 137–149Google Scholar. On imitation of Christ as a reason for clerical celibacy, it suffices here to mention Pius XII, Menti Nostrae (1950), 21 and Sacra Virginitas (1954), 17; John XXIII, Sacerdotii Nostri Primordia (1959), 16; Paul VI, Sacerdotalis Coelibatus (1967), 26.
page 201 note 3 This is treated more fully in ‘The Prayer of Petition’, The Way 16 (1976), 66–75Google Scholar.
page 202 note 1 Without space to discuss this further, it must be enough here to refer the reader to A Little Brother, Silent Pilgrimage to God. The Spirituality of Charles de Foucauld (London: Darton Longman & Todd, 1974), 77–78Google Scholar.
page 202 note 2 The historical background and the content of Plato's concept of participation are treated by Fabro, C., La nozione mtafiska di partecipazione (Turin: Società Editrice Internazionale, 1949, 19633), 46–54Google Scholar.
page 203 note 1 Ibid., 42.
page 203 note 2 Ibid., 54–70, 146–50, 345–56. Cf. F. Copleston, A History of Philosophy, I/2, chaps. 29, 34.
page 203 note 3 Topics 121a, 27–30 and 37–39, quoted in Fabro, loc. cit., 147.
page 203 note 4 Fabro, loc. cit., 107–13.
page 203 note 5 Ibid., 113–17. Cf. Gilson, E., History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages (London: Sheed & Ward, 1955), 208–210Google Scholar.
page 203 note 6 Bernard, R., L'Image de Dieu d'apris saint Athanase (Paris: Aubier, 1952), 32–38Google Scholar. Athanasius seems to have drawn largely on Origen.
page 203 note 7 Fabro, loc. cit., 79–86.
page 203 note 8 Ibid., 86–98.
page 203 note 9 Ibid., 98–107.
page 203 note 10 Periphyseon 3, 3, PL 22, 630–2.
page 203 note 11 Jeauneau, E., critical edition of Eriugena's Homily on the Prologue of St. John, Sources Chrètiennes 151 (Paris: Cerf, 1969), 264–265Google Scholar, note 1. Jeauneau also mentions Bede and Alcuin in this connexion. For the consequences in Eriugena's trinitology, see Scheffczyk, L., ‘Die Grundzuge der Trinitatslehre des Johannes Scotus Eriugena’, in Theologie in Geschichte und Gegenwart (Festschrift M. Schmaus), ed. Auer-Volk, (Munich: Zink Verlag, 1957), 497–518Google Scholar.
page 203 note 12 Fabro, loc. cit., 54–74, 273–337.
page 203 note 13 Fabro, C., Breve introduzione al tomismo (Rome, Paris, Tournai, New York: Desclèe, 1960), 40–41Google Scholar.
page 204 note 1 Fabro, La nozione metafisica, 338–62.
page 204 note 2 Ibid., loc. cit. Cf. Garrigou-Lagrange, R., De Deo Trim et Creatore (Turin: Marietti, 1943), 1951, 235–237Google Scholar.
page 204 note 3 Chenu, M.-D., Introduction à l'étude de saint Thomas d'Aquin (Paris: Vrin, 1954), 266–273Google Scholar.
page 204 note 4 All mentioned in Fabro, loc. cit., 361.
page 204 note 5 Alszeghy, Z., ‘L'immagine di Dio’, in La chiesa e il mondo contemporaneo nel Vaticano II (Symposium) (Turin: Elle Di Ci, 1966), 425–452Google Scholar; de Geradon, B., ‘L'Homme à l'image de Dieu’, NRT 80 (1958), 683–695Google Scholar. Further bibliography in Alszeghy, M. Flick-Z., Il Creatore (Florence: Libreria Editrice Fiorentina, 1958, 19643), 187, 203–204, 239–40Google Scholar.
page 204 note 6 Camelot, P., ‘La Théologie de l'image de Dieu’, RSPT 40 (1956), 443–471Google Scholar. See also Jenkinson, W. R., ‘The image and the likeness of God in man in the 18 Lectures on the Credo of Cyril of Jerusalem’, ETL 40 (1964), 48–71Google Scholar.
page 205 note 1 See also Giardini, F., ‘Similitudine e principio di assimilazione’, Angelicum 35 (1958), 300–324Google Scholar; Id., ‘Gradi di causalità e di similitudine’, Angelicum 36 (1959), 26–50Google Scholar.
page 205 note 2 Latour, J.-J., ‘Imago Dei invisibilis’, in Probèmes actuels de christologie, ed. Bouëssé-Latour, (Desclée de Brouwer, 1965), 227–264Google Scholar.
page 205 note 3 Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes on the Church in the Modern World 17 (trans, as in The Documents of Vatican II, ed. Abbott (London, Dublin: Chapman, 1966), 214; cf. F. Pierini, Catechism of Vatican II (Athlone, Slough: St. Paul Publications, 1967), par. 461, p. 181). Cf. Decree Apostolicam Actuositatem on the Apostolate of the Laity 8 (Abbott 499, Pierini 458).
page 205 note 4 Gaudium et Spes, 24 (Abbott 223).
page 205 note 5 Cf. Declaration Nostra Aetate on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions 5 (Abbott 667).
page 205 note 6 E.g. Plato, Theaetetus 176, and Aristotle: both in Hirschberger, J., A Short History of Western Philosophy (London: Lutterworth Press, 1976), 21 and 39Google Scholar.
page 206 note 1 Fletcher, B., The Aramaic Sayings of Jesus (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1967), 82Google Scholar.
page 206 note 2 On the Beatitudes I, PG 44, 1200.
page 206 note 3 On the Christian profession, PG 46, 244.
page 206 note 4 Questions to Thalassios 64, PG 90, 724–8, trans, as in de Lubac, H., Catholicism (London: Burns Oates, 1962), 240Google Scholar.
page 206 note 5 Zarri, A., ‘II mistero trinitario nella nostra vita’, in Il credo del popolo di Dio (Symposium) (Milan: Ares, 1968), 33–39Google Scholar.
page 206 note 6 For which see Gharue, A. M., ‘Le Saint-Esprit dans Lumen Gentium’, in Ecclesia a Spiritu Sancto edocta (Mélanges Philips) (Gembloux: Duculot, 1970), 19–21Google Scholar; O'Connor, E. D., ‘The Spirit in Catholic Thought’, in God Jesus Spirit, ed. Callahan, (New York: Herder & Herder, 1969), 243–244, 258Google Scholar.
page 206 note 7 ‘The Trinity and the Doctrine of Love’, The Times, 23.5.70, 10.
page 206 note 8 Quoted by Kenneth Slack in his biography (London: S.C.M. Press, 1970), 87.
page 207 note 1 Cf. Thomas Aquinas, Super Evangelium S. Ioannis Lectura I, 1 (Marietti 25), who quotes Augustine.
page 207 note 2 On the incarnation of the Word of God 5, PG 27, 101, trans, as in St. Athanasius on the Incarnation, ed. A Religious of C.S.M.V. (London: Mowbray, 1944, 1963), 28. Cf. R. Bernard (p. 203, note 6 above), 32–38.
page 208 note 1 Temple, W., Christus Veritas (London: Macmillan, 1924, 1962), 283Google Scholar.
page 208 note 2 On orthodox faith 1, 8, PG 94, 829.
page 209 note 1 De vera religions 7, PL 34, 128 (italics added).
page 209 note 2 See ‘A Promise of Plenty: the Eucharist as Social Critique’, Downside Review, 91 (1973), 300–305Google Scholar
page 209 note 3 Basil, Homily 3 on Luke 12.16, PG 31, 1752.
page 209 note 4 Luke 3.11. This is taken up by Basil (Homily, 6, 7–8, PG 31, 274–7) and Chrysostom (Homily 14 on Romans, PG 60, 531ff) among many others. See also Shewing, W., Rich and Poor in Christian Tradition (London: Burns Oates, 1948)Google Scholar; and von Nell-Breuning, O., ‘Kirche und soziale Frage’, StZ 98 (1973), 120–126Google Scholar.
page 210 note 1 See, for example, John, XXIII, Journal of a Soul (London: Chapman, 1965), 255Google Scholar; van Zeller, H., Approach to Penance (London, New York: Sheed & Ward, 1958)Google Scholar; cf. the impressive thoughts of A. H. Friedlander, Suffering: 1A Jewish View (London: Jewish Information Service, 1974).
page 210 note 2 de Foucauld, C., Écrits spirituels (Paris: ed. de Gigord, 1923, 194711), 105–107Google Scholar; Illich, I., The Church Change and Development (New York: Herder & Herder, 1970), 112–121Google Scholar; Congar, Y., ‘The Place of Poverty in the Christian Life in an Affluent Society’, Concilium 5/2 (May 1966), 28–39Google Scholar.
page 210 note 3 Irenaeus, Against the Heresies 5, 14, PG 7, 1160–3.
page 210 note 4 J. Ratzinger, ‘Conscience in time’, Internal. Cath. Review 5/72 (Sept.-Oct.1972), 291–7, at p. 293. Cf. Cox, H., God's Revolution and Man's Responsibility (London: S.C.M. Press, 1969), 122Google Scholar; and Metz, J. B., ‘Erlösung und Emanzipation’, StZ 98 (1973), 171–184Google Scholar.
page 212 note 1 A docetist would presumably attribute divine power to each and every particular action of Christ because he would see Christ purely as God; the adoptianist (and fellow travellers) would offer legitimate scope to Christ's actus hominis.
page 212 note 2 Is this what Luther had in mind when he said: ‘We maintain that it is not necessary to do everything that Christ did or to omit everything that he omitted. … Therefore we will not be bound by any example, even by that of Christ, much less by that of the saints, unless there is a word of God present that commands us to do so’ (Against the Heavenly Prophets, WA 18, 114–15, quoted in. Pelikan, J., Obedient Rebels (London: S.C.M. Press, 1964), 82Google Scholar)? Cf. also de Wachter, M., ‘Jesus Christ and Our Moral Life’, in Jesus Christ Our Lord, ed. Freyne, (Dublin: Talbot Press, 1974), 63–73Google Scholar.
page 213 note 1 Thomas Aquinas, Super Evangelium S. Ioannis Lectura, lect. a, V, with a reference to Phil. 2.8. See also Flick, M., ‘Teologia della croce’, Gregorianum 37 (1956), 3–15Google Scholar; Malevez, L., ‘Anthropologie chrétienne et théologie de la Groix’, NRT 92 (1970), 449–467Google Scholar; and van Bavel, T. J., ‘De lijdende God’, Tijdschrift voor Theologie 14 (1974). 131–150Google Scholar.
page 213 note 3 Thomas Aquinas, Super Epistolas S. Pauli Lectura, in 2 Cor. 13.4 (Marietti 522).
page 213 note 2 If we may thus paraphrase Bruno of Würzburg, Expositio in Ps. 115, PL 142, 421–2.