Friday, March 23, 2018

Priest and sacrifice, God and temple

Ultimate source undetermined
"Christ is therefore the one who in himself alone embodied all that he knew to be necessary to achieve our redemption. He is at once priest and sacrifice, God and temple. He is the priest through whom we have been reconciled, the sacrifice by which we have been reconciled, the temple in which we have been reconciled, the God with whom we have been reconciled. He alone is priest, sacrifice and temple because he is all these things as God in the form of a servant; but he is not alone as God, for he is this with the Father and the Holy Spirit in the form of God."

     St. Fulgentius of Ruspe, To Peter on the faith 22, trans. Liturgy of the hours.  FC 95, trans. Robert B. Eno (1997), 74:

Therefore, this is the one who in himself alone provided everything he knew to be necessary for the effecting of our redemption, for he was both priest and sacrifice, both God and temple; the priest, through whom we are reconciled; the sacrifice, by means of which we are reconciled; the temple, in which we are reconciled; God to whom we are reconciled.  By himself he is the priest, sacrifice, and temple, because God according to the form of a servant is all these things; not, however, God alone, because he together with the Father and the Holy Spirit is God according to the form of God.
=CCSL 91A, 726 =PL 65, col. 682:
Iste igitur est qui in se uno totum exhibuit quod esse necessarium ad redemptionis nostrae sciebat effectum, idem scilicet sacerdos et sacrificium, idem Deus et templum:  sacerdos, per quem sumus reconciliati; sacrificium, quo reconciliati; templum, in quo reconciliati; Deus, cui reconciliati.  Solus tamen sacerdos, sacrificium et templum, quia haec omnia Deus secundum formam servi; non autem solus Deus, quia hoc est cum Patre et Spiritu sancto secundum formam Dei.

A prayer for deliverance from the coils of sin

2010- :
"Pardon the offenses of your peoples, we pray, O Lord, and in your goodness set us free from the bonds of the sins we have committed in our weakness.  Through our Lord."

"Lord, grant us your forgiveness, and set us free from our enslavement to sin.  We ask this through our Lord."

"Absolve, quaesumus, Domine, tuorum delicta populorum, ut a peccatorum nexibus, quae pro nostra fragilitate contraximus, tua benignitate liberemur. Per Dominum."

Dismiss, we pray, O Lord, the fallings-short of your peoples, that, from the entanglements of the sins that, on account of our frailty, we have committed, we may by your benignity be set free.

     Opening prayer/Concluding prayer, Friday, Fifth Week of Lent, Roman missal/Liturgy of the hours.  Bruylants no. 7 (vol. 2, p. 10) attributes this to the 8th/9th-century Gelasian sacramentary of Angoul√™me.  I don't think it was used in the post-Tridentine missal, the 1979 BCP, or the Church of England's Common worship.

1549 BCP, 24th Sunday after Trinity:
Lord, we beseche thee, assoyle thy people from their offences, that through thy bountiful goodnes we maye bee delyuered from the bandes of all those synnes, whiche by our frayltye we haue committed:  Graunt this, &c.
1662 BCP:
O Lord, we beseech thee, absolve thy people from their offences; that through thy bountiful goodness we may all be delivered from the bands of those sins, which by our frailty we have committed:  Grant this, O heavenly Father, for Jesus Christ's sake, our blessed Lord and Saviour.  Amen.
1928 BCP:
. . . for the sake of Jesus Christ, . . .

Thursday, March 15, 2018

Slave mentality

Ultimate source unknown
"Who would not recognize that Christ's eating and sleeping, his sadness and his shedding of tears of love are marks of the nature of a slave?" (trans. Liturgy of the hours)

"Who does not see that his taking of food, his rest in 'sleep,' his anxiety in 'sorrow,' and his 'tears' of compassion made his 'form' that 'of a servant'?" (trans. Freeland & Conway, FC 93 (1996), 289)

"Quis perceptionem cibi, requietionem somni, sollicitudinem maestitudinis, lacrimas pietas, non uideat formae fuisse servilis?"

     St. Leo the Great, Sermo 66.4 =Sermo 15.4 De passione Domini.  SC 200 =CCSL 138A, p. 404 =PL 54, col. 367B.  Cf. Grelot on Jesus in the face of death.

Monday, March 12, 2018

"the source of distraction is attention itself"

          Marno, Death be not proud:  the art of holy attention (Chicago:  The University of Chicago Press, 2016), 138, on St. Augustine in the Confessions.

Sunday, March 11, 2018

These public spectacles of the ultimate remedy

Master of the Brussels Initials, 1389/1410 (Getty)
The[se] public exhibitions [(munera)] of the ever-during remedy, O Lord, we offer rejoicing, humbly entreating that you bring to perfection what [(eadem, referring back to munera)] we both faithfully worship and fittingly exhibit [(exhibere)] for the salvation of the world.

"Remedii sempiterni munera, Domine, laetantes offerimus, suppliciter exorantes, ut eadem nos et fideliter venerari, et pro salute mundi congruenter exhibere perficias."

     Prayer over the Offerings, Fourth Sunday of Lent, Roman missal.  The 2010 translation makes no attempt to render "ut . . . .perficias", or to incorporate the (in the light of “exhibere”) spectacularly gladiatorial sense of “munera” (Father Z misses this, too, but the gladiatorial shows were "gifts" (munera) of the magistrates to the people, a sort of municipal expectation, a form of public munificence).  It also butchers the parallel structure set up by the "et fideliter venerari . . . et . . . congruenter exhibere":
We place before you with joy these offerings, which bring eternal remedy, O Lord, praying that we may both faithfully revere them and present them to you, as is fitting, for the salvation of the world.
From the early 8th-century Gelasian sacramentary at least (Bruylants no. 68).  The pre-2010 excuse for a "translation"  was
Lord, we offer you these gifts which bring us peace and joy.  Increase our reverence by this eucharist, and bring salvation to the world.
In the Gelasian sacramentary this came out as
Remedii sempiterni munera, Domine, laetantes offerimus, suppliciter exorantes, ut eadem nos et digne venerari, et pro salvandis congruenter exhibere perficias.
I.e. "worthily" rather than "faithfully", and "for those who are to be saved" rather than "for the salvation of the world". 

Saturday, March 10, 2018

Love what is admirable, but hate the sin

     "How can Dante, for example, so obviously admire his own teacher, Brunetto Latini . . . and nonetheless place him in Hell?  If Brunetto Latini was so admirable in so many ways, as indeed he was, how can he suffer that unqualified condemnation for the sin of sodomy which places him in the Inferno?  The answer is clearly given by Aquinas:  the doing of many good deeds is perfectly compatible with the perverse choosing of something in oneself which is defect and error and affirming it as what one intends unalterably to be.  And it is this choice which is one's own choice of exclusion from the community of the perfected."

     Alasdair MacIntyre, Three rival versions of moral inquiry:  encyclopaedia, genealogy, and tradition, being the Gifford Lectures delivered in the University of Edinburgh in 1988 (Notre Dame, IN:  University of Notre Dame Press, 1990), 144.  "What would it be for the sequences of the Summa . . . to be mirrored in the enacted dramatic narratives of particular human lives lived out in particular communities?  Aquinas himself does not supply an answer to this question [(except insofar as he lived his own life 'with a rare singleness of purpose, with that purity of heart, which as Kierkegaard said, is to will one thing')], but Dante does" (142-143).  On pp. 145-148, MacIntyre then gives the genealogical (or Nietzschean) deconstruction of this account, and the outlines of a tradition-al (or Thomistic) reversal and reestablishment.
     What are the sources of this in Aquinas himself?
  • ST I-II.73.10 ("Whether the excellence of the person sinning aggravates the sin?"), quoting Isidore, "'A sin is deemed so much the more grievous as the sinner is held to be a more excellent person [(tanto maius cognoscitur peccatum esse, quanto maior qui peccat habetur)].'"  But the examples given here (the magistrate who offends against justice, the priest who offends against chastity) seem to indicate that the greater excellence must be in the same respect.  So I'm not sure that this is the passage to which MacIntyre refers.