|
MARY AND CARMEL A Study of the Marian Heritage of the Order |
|
by Christopher O'Donnell, O.Carm. 1 Introduction 2 From The Beginnings To 1324 3 Evolution of the Order's Marian Consciousness
4 Core Marian Themes 5 Marian Spirituality? 6 Liturgy 7 Order Documents 1968-1995 8 Our Marian Charism in the Church Today
AAS = Acta apostolicae sedis (Rome).
Mary and Carmel belong together. The Carmelite Order has had a rich Marian heritage for many centuries. But it cannot be studied in a vacuum. The Order's Marian charism is only fully understood when seen against both the ongoing history of the Order, and of the Church's Marian developments and insights over the centuries. A short account of this essential background will be outlined, with indications as to where the themes are more fully expounded. We are on sure ground when we assert that a group of hermits gathered on Mount Carmel in the latter part of the twelfth century, and that they requested a rule of life from Albert of Jerusalem which he gave between 1206 and 1214.[1] Sometime around 1235, forced by Saracen hostilities, these hermits began to leave the Holy Land to settle in Europe. There they sought to live their previous eremetical life, but this proved impossible. They obtained some changes in the Albertine Rule from Innocent IV in 1247. The early decades, indeed the first centuries, of the Order's existence in Europe proved extremely difficult for a number of reasons. Firstly, its members were an unknown group from the East with little support from secular or ecclesiastical authorities. Secondly, they had a strange religious habit: a striped cloak which was the object of derision by others. This was changed to a white cloak at the general chapter of Montpelier in 1287.[2] Thirdly, and more importantly, they appeared to be a recent Order and thus in contravention of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) which had prohibited the foundation of new orders.[3] The Carmelites appealed to the Albertine Rule which predated the Lateran interdiction. In time they would seek to establish much earlier origins, going back in fact to the prophet Elijah. Even in 1274 the Second Council of Lyons left their situation uncertain: We grant that the order of Carmelites and that of the Hermits of Saint Augustine, the institution of which preceded the said general council, may remain as they are, until other regulations are made for them.[4] It would be only in 1298 that Boniface VIII removed the threat to the Order.[5] But they had to wait until 1326 for John XXII to extend to them the bull Super cathredram by which Boniface VIII had given privileges and exemptions to the Franciscans and Dominicans. The Order would be subject to periodic attacks. One such was the noted debate at the University Cambridge on 23 February 1374 at which John Hornby defeated the Dominican John Stokes who impugned the Order's Elijan origins, its Marian appellation and its canonical approval.[6] It is no surprise then that much of the early writing of the Order until that time was apologetic, and that the Elijan origin of the Order was defended in the context of attacks on the Order's very existence. 1.2 Carmelite Mariology - A word of caution In Carmelite studies one must always take care about precisely what is asserted under the word “Carmelite”. Since the Order has no founder in the accepted sense, there has always been a problem of identity. In such circumstances it is natural that Carmelites should seek to stress what is theirs; the mistake, however, would be to assume that what is truly Carmelite might not also be shared by other religious families. One way of seeking a Carmelite identity would be to eliminate from consideration what is found in other religious orders, and identify the remainder as being “Carmelite”. Thus one might seek what is exclusive to Carmelites in the area of spirituality and devotion. One result would be to ignore the scriptures, sacraments, dogmas, vows, since these are common to the whole Church. Even granted that there might be some specific Carmelite insight into any of these, for example the vows, it will remain true that what is shared with the Church about obedience, poverty and chastity will be more important for the life of Carmelites than what might belong solely to the Order. If one were to seek what is specifically Carmelite, that which is not found in other religious orders, one might end up with a few hymns or spiritual texts like the Flos carmeli, and a vision of Elijah and Mary—one indeed which is not historical in any modern sense. Instead our purpose will be to examine the whole Marian life of the Order, without being unduly concerned with what may be shared with others. An analogy may be helpful. Three builders might be supplied with identical materials and be asked to build a single-story house. The same materials can be used to build one house with abundant living space, another with spacious sleeping area, the third with a more generous kitchen sector. Using the same materials, even more or less the same quantities of material, one could get three very different houses. What is different is the focus of the builders and their ordering of the same materials. The same main elements are to be found in the Mariology of the medieval orders. Our attempt will be to see the Carmelite experience of Mary. The whole will be genuinely Carmelite, even though the various constituents are shared. It is important to obtain some idea of the culture of our early Mariology, and as this material is not readily accessible we begin with a brief outline of medieval Mariology. 1.3 Medieval Mariology We begin by noting the times in which the Order migrated to Europe, the thirteenth century. It was the century which saw the great scholastics, the completion of many cathedrals, enormous intellectual ferment, new forms of religious life, remarkable mystical writings, and huge cultural and social change. Medieval Mariology both reflected this exciting time and made its own contribution to the developments. We have already noted the great medieval cathedrals. Each of those had their own splendours of Marian art. The great windows of Chartres and other churches spelled out the history of salvation in the Old and New Testament with an important place for Mary who was seen as prefigured in the Old and central in the New Testament story of salvation. 1.3.1 Doctrine The main truths about Mary were generally held by the thirteenth century. The dogma of her Divine Maternity had been constant since the Council of Ephesus (AD 431). The fact of her Assumption had been celebrated in liturgy from about the sixth century and its liturgical feast had an octave from the time of Leo IV (d. 855). The perpetual Virginity of Mary was in peaceful possession since about the time of the non-ecumenical Lateran Council of AD 649. The Fourth Lateran Council used the phrase “Mary ever Virgin” in its credal formula for the Albigensians and Cathars. The Immaculate Conception was generally believed in some form, but many theologians had serious reservations, most notably the followers of Thomas Aquinas. It was widely celebrated liturgically from the twelfth century. The Syro-Sicilian Pope Sergius (d. 701) had earlier laid down a solemn procession in Rome for four feasts with a Marian character: the Birthday of Mary (8 September), the Presentation (2 February), the Annunciation (25 March) and the Assumption (15 August). In addition to these solemn truths there was widespread belief in other truths about Mary. In some form or other we find significant statements about Mary’s union with her Son at the Redemption. Already in Saint Bernard and later in Saints Albert the Great and Bonaventure, we find some doctrine of Mary’s mediation. The Memorare attributed to Saint Bernard, has some phrases from him, though in its present form it is fifteenth century, or even later. The spiritual maternity of Mary, that she is our Mother and Mother of the Church was taught with ever greater clarity from the eleventh century, when theologians like Anselm of Lucca (d. 1086) and Rupert of Deutz (d. 1130) began to see the truth latent in the scene at the foot of the Cross related by John (19:25-28a). The notion of Mary as Queen had already been found with increasing frequency in sermons and hymns from the sixth century; it had long been found in the liturgies both East and West and became very marked in the thirteenth century. 1.3.2 Devotion When we look at Marian prayers and devotion in the thirteenth century we find exuberance. Already, there are many Marian shrines and places of pilgrimage. For example in England two shrines were long established: Walsingham (1061) and Glastonbury (from seventh century, rebuilt 1186). Einsiedeln in Switzerland dates from tenth century. Vernacular lyrics are found especially from the middle of the twelfth century. There were many devotions to Mary at that time. Collection of prayers of various kinds had begun in the Carolingian period. One of the better known was the Book of Holy Prayers (Libellus sacrarum precum) dating from the end of the ninth century; it contains several Marian prayers. Later we find the Books of Hours, the core of which was the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin. Its origins were additional devotions (cursus) added to the canonical Office as well as votive offices of the Blessed Virgin, which arose from Carolingian times. It was reorganised by Saint Peter Damian (d. 1072) and commended by him for daily usage. There were many Marian hymns and prayers circulating in the thirteenth century, which were incorporated into Carmelite liturgy and community prayers. The first part of the Hail Mary was in existence from about the seventh century. It was an element of the Little Office, and was recommended by Peter Damian for frequent recitation. The addition of the name “Jesus” may come from the time of Urban IV (d. 1264), but the second part of the prayer (“Holy Mary…”) was fifteenth century. Hymns common during this period included Ave maris stella which dates from the ninth century. The four great Marian antiphons were already known: Alma redemptoris mater (twelfth century); Salve regina (perhaps eleventh century), Ave regina caelorum (twelfth century) and the Regina caeli (probably thirteenth century). Other more popular prayer forms are found in the period. Marian litanies appeared from about the eleventh century with one of the Litany of Loreto type dating from the end of the twelfth century with seventy-three invocations. An Irish litany with seventy-six invocations can be dated from the twelfth century. Similarly, greetings to Mary, often repeated 150 times corresponding to the Psalter (Grusspsalter), came into use from about 1130. These last would in time give rise to the Rosary, which took its modern form in the early fifteenth century. Collections of the Joys (five) and of the Sorrows (seven) of Mary (Marienklagen) are also from the twelfth century. The great sequence Stabat Mater is probably late thirteenth century, perhaps from the Franciscan Jacopone da Todi (d. 1306). The custom of saying three Hail Marys in the evening may date from the eleventh century; Gregory IX (d. 1241) commanded bells to be rung so that people might offer them for the crusades. The first collection of legends of Mary appeared in the eleventh century, the Liber de miraculis santae Dei geneticis Mariae. Lives of Mary, often loosely based on the apocrypha, become popular in the twelfth century. Marian confraternities are found from the first quarter of the thirteenth century, especially in France and Italy. A further significant area of interest for early Carmelite Mariology has been highlighted by E. Boaga, namely the number of shrines and holy places in Palestine which were associated with Mary in the scriptures, apocrypha and oral traditions.[7] These will help us later to grasp more fully the significance of the choice of Mary as Patroness of the oratory on Mount Carmel. 1.3.3 Slavery of Mary Finally, we may note the emergence in the eleventh century of what would later be called “the slavery of Mary”. Saint Bernard, for example, calls himself Mary’s page (servuli). This may be significant for the common Carmelite idea of patronage, which we will find later. 1.3.4 Not only Carmelites As we shall see Carmelites coming to Europe took up many of these existing practices and beliefs. If we restrict ourselves to studying only what is Carmelite, we run the risk of underestimating and even neglecting a substantial amount of our Marian heritage. We must rather try to see the whole Marian life of the early Carmelite friars, only some of which will be specific to themselves. There are numerous parallels with other orders such as the Cistercians,[8] Premonstratensian Canons[9] and of course the Dominicans.[10] We must first take up the question of Carmelite identity, seen particularly in the early Constitutions and titles of the Order. 1.4 Twentieth Century In the twentieth century we had what has been called the “Marian Movement”, a time of great enthusiasm, congresses, writings, devotional developments.[11] It culminated in the definition of the Assumption (1950) and the Marian Year (1954). After this there was a decline, despite the significant teaching of Vatican II. With the important papal documents of Paul VI, Marialis cultus (1974) and of John Paul II, Redemptoris Mater (1987) there has been a gradual recovery. From the mid 1970s there was a flood of substantive scholarly works on all aspects of Mariology.[12] In the Order 1950 was also a twentieth century climax with the warm endorsement of the Scapular by Pius XII in the letter Neminem profecto latet.[13] But the succeeding years witnessed to some decline and failure of nerve on the part of the Order. The historicity of the Scapular vision came in for serious scrutiny. Though the evidence for the vision was deemed unsatisfactory by the stringent scholars, Jean de Launoy (d. 1678) and Herbert Thurston (d. 1939), their views had not greatly influenced the Order's appreciation of the Scapular. But the valiant efforts of B.M. Xiberta to defend the authenticity of the Scapular vision[14] were gradually deemed less than convincing. More nuanced statements were made, which did not console those whose previously calm certainty about the Scapular vision had been disturbed.[15] The Sabbatine Privilege, based on a supposed vision to John XXII was shown to be a medieval forgery.[16] In the Carmelite Proper for the Mass of 1972 there was no feast or memorial for Simon Stock. The initial revision of the Calendar for the universal Church had previously dropped the feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. But there was also a somewhat uneven recovery of Carmelite Marian consciousness dating from the extraordinary general chapter of 1968 which presented Mary largely in Vatican II terms and defended the Scapular's significance.[17] These issues lie behind the 1971 general chapter and are to an extent found in some only of the meetings of the council of provinces, general congregations and chapters. The revision of the Roman Missal in 1969 restored the celebration of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. For the Carmelite Order the Mass and Office of Saint Simon Stock were reinstated by the Holy See in 1979. Along with these developments one can see in the annual bibliography in Carmelus that there has been ever increasing interest in Carmelite Mariology and extensive writings by members of the Order on the Virgin Mary. In 1989 there were three Marian congresses in the Order: Saint Albert's Centre Rome; Sassone outside Rome, and New York. A conference in Reno (1998) was celebrated by the wider Carmelite family in the United States It is thus an appropriate time to consider again the Order's Marian charism and to present it in terms appropriate to the contemporary Church. This short work will examine the origins and development of the Carmelite Marian charism. It will then present the reflection on Mary in official documents of the Order since Vatican II, before outlining some of the contemporary Mariological perspectives within which we will have to express our charism. |
2
From the Beginnings to 1324
The first decades of the Carmelite Order’s existence as hermits on Mount Carmel and the first century of its existence in Europe does not have very extensive documentation. There are as a consequence few references to Mary to be gleaned from the beginnings of the Order; those we do find will therefore be all the more precious. But we must keep in mind that the Carmelites came into a medieval Church and society scene which had a very highly developed awareness of Mary. The Carmelites’ Marian life took up much of what existed around them. In this period we can however note the foundations of the Patronage theme and the name of Mary in the title of the Order. 2.1 The Oratory on Mount Carmel In the Rule of Life given by Albert of Jerusalem (ca. 1206–1214) there was no mention of the Blessed Virgin. The Rule did specify that there was to be an oratory in the middle of the cells where daily Mass was to be attended (RA 14). From the accounts of pilgrims it is known that from about 1231, or perhaps somewhat later, this oratory was dedicated to Our Lady. Testimonies about this church dedicated to Mary on Mount Carmel were still found as late as the fifteenth century. At that time there were many churches dedicated to Mary in places associated with her life, with legends about her or with the liturgy.[18] The hermits' choice of Mary, given the mentality of the times, could not have been coincidental or casual. It was in some sense to have Mary present to the community, to have her as patroness. In the following centuries the implications of this oratory will be drawn out by our authors, sometimes in very fanciful ways indeed. 2.2 The Brothers and Sisters The names given to religious institutes are always significant. In the case of the Carmelites, given their problems of identity and origin, it was doubly so. We consider the titles of the Order, including the Sisters, even though they belong to a later century. 2.2.1 The brothers In the Albertine Rule the members are referred to as hermits (ermitis),[19] but much more frequently as “brothers” (fratres).[20] When they came to Europe they were known by different names. The first pontifical document Ut vivendi formam of Honorius III (1226) is addressed to the “prior and hermit brothers of Mount Carmel.”[21] The first papal ascription of a Marian title to the Order may have been in 1247 in the constitution Devotionis vestrae precibus of Innocent IV, but is certain in the case of his bull Ex parte dilectorum (1252) which was addressed to archbishops and bishops “in favour of the hermits of Saint Mary of Mount Carmel”. However, the use of a Marian title for moral entities such as religious congregations, churches, monasteries and hospitals was not uncommon at the time.[22] During the remainder of the thirteenth century titles such as “the Order of Saint Mary of Mount Carmel”, “the Hermit Brothers of the Order of Blessed Mary of Mount Carmel” are frequently found in pontifical documents.[23] However, throughout this time, within the Order and in legal and other civil documents, the title, “Order of Saint Mary of Mount Carmel” or a variant, was quite common.[24] A most significant passing reference in a rescript of Urban IV in 1263 stated that Mary was Patron of Carmel.[25] The first Order document we have asserting her to be patron is the 1294 Constitutions.[26] This notion would be the subject of much reflection in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries papal documents speak of the Order being “distinguished” (insignitus) by the name of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel.[27] As well as the Marian title, the name “Carmelites” came into use from the time of Gregory X in 1274.[28] In time the brief title would be amplified by the addition of the words “Genitrix” (Mother of God) and “Virgin” or “Ever Virgin”, so that in the late fourteenth and fifteenth century the title was found, “Order of the Brothers of the Holy Mother of God Mary of Mount Carmel”,[29] and from Sixtus IV, “Order (or Brothers) of the Most Glorious Mother of God the Ever Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel”.[30] 2.2.2 The nuns & sisters In the complex evolution of the women's branches of the Order from confraternity to religious life properly so called, we find similar language. In the Rule for the Sisters of 1488 it is stated that the non-professed sisters are admitted “to the Confraternity of the Order of the Brothers of Blessed Mary of Mount Carmel” by being given the cloak with the words: “Receive the sign of the holy Order (sanctae religionis) of the Mother of God and of the Virgin Mary for the remission of your sins”.[31] The women of Florence associated with the Order in 1450, that is before the foundation of the convent of Saint Mary of the Angels, were said “to live in their own homes, leading a very exemplary and holy life, having themselves called the Sisters of the Virgin Mary”,[32] and were said to have the white mantle of the Glorious Virgin Mary.[33] The various constitutions of the nuns and sisters have different titles: Parma to be dated not later than 1481 were entitled “Statutes of the Religious Sisters of the Order of the Most Blessed Mother of God of Mount Carmel”;[34] Bologna in 1594 were entitled “Constitution and Rule of the Carmelite Sisters”.[35] In a papal motu proprio in 1476 we have reference to the “nuns of the same Order of the Most Glorious Mother of God, the Ever Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel”.[36] 2.2.3 Carmelites Throughout the whole Order, however, the accurate and more convenient name “Carmelites” grew in popularity until the general chapter at Traspontina in 1680 ordained that in writings and printed works the title “Brother of the Order of the Most Blessed Ever Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel” was to be used instead of “Carmelite”. This norm was retained in the 1930 Constitutions where instead of “Carmelites” the members of the Order were to call themselves in official documents “Brothers of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel”.[37] In time reflection on the name of the Order would lead to an understanding of Mary as Sister of Carmelites. 2.3 Strange Silences Though there is impressive evidence for the Marian character of the Order in the thirteenth century, there are a few surprising gaps. We have earlier noted that the Rule does not mention Mary. The ex-prior general, Nicholas the Frenchman, in his passionate appeal to the Order to return to its eremitical life, The Fiery Arrow, has only a passing reference to Mary speaking of her as in solitude at the Annunciation.[38] More surprising still is the foundational text, the Rubrica prima (first article) of the 1281 Constitutions. It was a reply that was to be given by the younger members of the Order to those who questioned them about its origin. It points to an Elijan origin of the Order, but is silent on Mary.[39] It was not until the 1324 Constitutions that there is reference to her in the Rubrica prima. By then the purpose is not any longer merely to answer “how did our Order originate?”, but there is added “and why we are called Brothers of the Order of Blessed Mary of Mount Carmel”. This 1324 version of the Rubric gives the Elijan origin, but inserts a highly significant paragraph: After the Incarnation their successors built a church there (on Mount Carmel) in honour of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and chose her title; therefore from that time they were by apostolic privilege called the Brothers of Blessed Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel. This insertion shows already in a developed form the Marian and Elijan legend that we shall study in the next chapter. Also absent from thirteenth century documentation is any reference to the Scapular or to a vision to Saint Simon Stock. 2.4 Observances As we look to the Marian life of the Order in its early and formative centuries we need to look out not only for texts and formal statements, but we need to appreciate the life of the Brothers at this time. What did they do in community, and especially at liturgy, that indicated a relationship with Mary? There are two most important sources for study. These are the three earliest extant Constitutions: London (1281), Bordeaux (1294) and Barcelona (1324). The second source is our early Ordinals which specified how liturgy was to be celebrated. The earliest Ordinal we possess dates from about 1263, and contains many Marian elements, most of them common to other religious orders of the time. The general chapter of Bordeaux in 1294 committed to the prior general a revision of the Order's Ordinal. The revised Ordinal of Sibert de Beka (d. 1332) dating from about 1312 did not make any substantial change but added a few further signs of devotion.[40] 2.4.1 Liturgy The celebration of feasts is a major source of information about the Marian dimension of the Order. We find such elements from the very beginning. There is reference to a daily commemoration of Blessed Mary; when there is no feast there is to be a sung Mass in her honour. An antiphon for peace and protection, not however addressed to Mary, is to be added to all the hours of the Virgin.[41] By 1324 there were four main Marian feasts: Purification, Annunciation, Assumption and Birthday of Mary.[42] Except for the Annunciation, which fell close to Holy Thursday and Easter, all these feasts were days on which Holy Communion was received. On Saturdays there was normally a Mass and office of the Blessed Virgin. The 1324 Constitutions laid down that in every convent of the Order Mass of the Blessed Virgin is to be sung before Prime.[43] The canonical hours of the Blessed Virgin were to be said daily. The Marian office which began with the Hail Mary (still in a short form) was the first office of the day, and the Marian Compline ending with the Salve regina was the concluding office. In the main office there was a commemoration of the Virgin Mary at Lauds and Vespers. At Compline the name of Mary figured in the Confiteor, and, in the Marian Compline, the Sub tuum paesidium (“We fly to thy patronage...”) was said. There were also some interesting rubrics: a small bow at every mention of the name of Mary; a profound bow at the “Let us pray” in her offices; a prostration or genuflection at the invitatory Hail Mary, at the beginning of the hymn Ave maris stella and at the Salve regina. Sibert’s Ordinal prescribed a candle to be lit in her honour at the liturgical hours and Masses in her honour and at the singing of the Salve regina.[44] The various Masses to be said in honour of the Blessed Virgin also shows something of the Marian dimension of the Order. The 1294 Constitutions specified fifty Masses for benefactors and deceased Brothers: ten were to be the Mass for the Holy Spirit, ten the Mass of the Blessed Virgin, and thirty the Mass for the Dead.[45] 2.4.2 Prayers and hymns Already in the thirteenth century we find our two most ancient Marian prayers. The prayer Concede was used at profession ceremonies from 1281: Grant to your servants we beseech thee O Lord, unfailing health of mind and body, and through the intercession of the glorious and blessed ever Virgin Mary may we be saved from present sorrow and partake of future joy. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.[46] This prayer common in the Latin rite was used up to modern times in the Order after the Litany of Loreto. It does not figure in Constitutions after 1294. A similar prayer, Protege, quickly supersedes it, being found from the 1324 Constitutions: Protect, O Lord, your servants with the support of peace, and they being confident of the patronage of the Blessed Virgin Mary, secure them from all enemies. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.[47] In this latter prayer, Mary is seen more clearly as Patron than in the prayer Concede. It is often prescribed to be said several times in the one celebration. Afterwards it would be used in a variety of contexts in our Constitutions such as the reception of novices and their profession, chapters, jubilees, reception of Prior General, visitation, elections, the admission of people to share in the spiritual benefits of the Order. In the 1294 Constitutions we find for the first time the versicle “Pray for us O holy Mother of God” (Ora pro nobis sancta Dei Genitrix),[48] as well as Concede to be used at the end of a provincial chapter. In subsequent Constitutions it will feature in the same contexts as the two prayers above. The 1324 Constitutions approve again the Ordinal of Sibert de Beka, and adds that before the Fidelium, the Salve and the prayer Protege is to be appended to each hour.[49] This prescription was soon extended to Masses also.[50] We have already alluded to the Marian addition to the Confiteor. The General Chapter of 1342 which added several Marian elements also laid down that when possible after grace the following were to be added: Ave regina coelorum (“Hail Queen of Heaven”), Ora pro nobis (“Pray for us”), Protege.[51] 2.4.3 Practices In addition to prayers and offices there were a number of practices imposed by various Constitutions. These were all constitutive of a profound Marian awareness, if not indeed spirituality. We find frequent references to inclination of the head and penalties for omitting to do so. In the first Constitutions we find that there is an inclination during solemn Mass whenever the names of Jesus and Mary are mentioned in prayers.[52] This is further extended to all prayers in the 1294 Constitutions.[53] The inclination was done bare-headed, and in such a way that one could touch the knee with the hand. Beginning with the 1324 Constitutions these inclinations bound under medium penalty, which was quite harsh to modern sensibilities.[54] From the beginning there were penalties also for any dishonouring of the names of Jesus or Mary.[55] There was a genuflection at the opening words of the hymn, Ave maris stella, and at the Salve regina sung at Compline.[56] We find important references to Mary in the ceremonies for the reception of novices and for profession. Already in the 1281 Constitutions we find that profession is made to God, Mary and the Prior General, a practice that continues to our day. I, Brother N., make my profession and I promise obedience to God and to Blessed Mary and to you Brother T, prior General of the Hermit Brothers of the Order of Our Lady of Mount Carmel.....[57] It would not, however, seem to have been peculiar to the Order as it is found in other Medieval orders,[58] though at an early time the Dominicans claimed it was unique to them.[59] Prayers for the reception of novices from 1324 state that the Order was founded in honour of Mary and that she was given to the Order by God as its principal Patron.[60] The versicle, “Ora pro eo sancta Dei Genitrix”, as well as the prayer, Protege, are also found.[61] 2.5 Conclusion In the first century after obtaining its Rule of Life, despite the paucity of documents, there is ample evidence of several kinds of a close association between Mary and the Carmelite Order. It is perhaps best summed up as an incipient sense of the presence of the Order to Mary and one of its belonging to her. The following century would reflect on these initial intuitions. In the context of controversy it drew out various implications and developed an historical myth about a relationship between Elijah, Mary of Nazareth and the sons of the prophet who were all asserted to be in a continuous history. This study of the Marian charism of the Order will test the traditional assumption that the Order exists for Mary and that her service – a reflection of the service of Christ – was and still is, the main reason for the Order's existence,[62] or the aphorism which became traditional especially after A. Bostius (d. 1499): Totus marianus est Carmelus (Carmel is totally Marian).[63] 2.6 Lectio Divina We can take for a lectio divina a hymn which was used by Carmelites in the thirteenth century and still features in modern liturgy and hymn books. It is the Ave maris stella. It is found in a ninth century manuscript, but may belong to the previous century.[64] As we reflect on it we are in continuity with the early medieval Church and with our Carmelite forebears. The modern translation by Ralph Wright is used in the English Liturgy of the Hours. For a Carmelite ear it has many echoes of our tradition. Another older translation is given below. In the lectio we might ask ourselves: AVE MARIS STELLA Star of sea and
ocean Welcoming the
Ave Loose the bonds
that bind us Show yourself
our mother Gentlest of all virgins, Guard us through
life's dangers Sing to God our
Father (Trans. R. Wright, OSB, Ampleforth)
Ave star of ocean, Taking that sweet
Ave Break the sinner’s fetters, Show thyself a
Mother Maid all maids
excelling As we onward journey Father, Son and Spirit, (Trans. A. Riley, 1891) |
3 Evolution of the Order's Marian Consciousness Most of the ideas in the previous chapter are found developed in the following centuries. The Order's Marian consciousness evolved rapidly.[65] If we are to appreciate the development we must not only examine the existing documentation carefully, but we must above all try and have a feeling or empathy for the situation of Carmelites in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Otherwise we run the risk of being totally out of sympathy with a delicate and complex evolution. Moreover, we need to keep a few salient points before our minds as we seek to understand the way in which the Order’s Marian life originated. The Brothers began to come to Europe about 1238.[66] The migration would seem to have been gradual from then to 1291 when the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem was conquered. They brought with them their Rule, a contemplative way of life strongly marked by asceticism. Surely they missed above all their chapel on the holy Mountain, dedicated to Mary. Indeed we see them dedicating a monastery in Europe to Mary as early as 1235.[67] They came to a Europe which as we have seen in the Introduction was very rich in devotion to Mary. The Carmelite Brothers easily inserted themselves into this Marian culture. They began a process of integrating their own heritage with the congenial Marian life of Europe. They seem to have placed great store by their sense of Mary as Patron, symbolised by their Chapel in her honour on Mount Carmel. Already in 1282 the General, Pierre de Millau, in a letter to Edward I of England seeking his support asserted that the Carmelite Order was especially founded in honour of Mary.[68] This was stated again in the general chapter of 1287.[69] Later John Baconthorpe (d. ca. 1348) would say that “God...willed to establish the Brothers of Carmel for the praise of his Mother”.[70] And he looked to the end of the ages when Carmelites will be rewarded for their special role of militant service for the praise of Mary and the honour of Christ.[71] In the time of adjustment and a searching for their identity, a firm ground for the Brothers was their relationship with Mary, their Patron. But there were other elements too: their contemplative ideal and their memory of Elijah. 3.1 Elijan Origin of the Order We have already noted that the Elijan was already strongly asserted in the Rubrica prima of the 1281 Constitutions. It is not difficult to see how the Elijan theme was developed in response to opposition to this new Order, which did not have a clear historical founder such as Saint Dominic or Saint Francis. The Carmelite Bothers knew that they had been on Mount Carmel for a long time. It was a holy mountain, associated with hermits from very ancient times, and indeed with the great prophet Elijah. They saw in him a great prophet and a great contemplative, one who like Moses had met the living God on Mount Horeb (1 Kings 19:11–18). They knew that despite the opposition they encountered in Europe their way of life was ancient and authentic. In the Middle Ages, as in biblical times, truths were often transmitted by myth. With our modern sense of historicity, we are often not comfortable with myth: we ask the wrong question. Instead of asking, “what does the myth mean?” we ask, “did it happen?” And a myth has a truth which is not the explicit assertions of the myth. The truth which lay behind the Elijan myth was the fact that the Carmelites recognised in Elijah an idealized figure whose inspiration they followed when they dwelt as hermits near his historic well. Being contemplatives they sought his spiritual experience of the living God; consecrated to chastity they saw him as the first Old Testament exemplar of their ideal of perpetual continence for the Kingdom; as hermits they saw in him a fellow desert figure who had left all to seek God alone.[72] The form the myth took was an apparent claim by our authors of an historical continuity between the prophet of the eighth century B.C. and the Order as it existed in Europe from the thirteenth century. Many good scholars and theologians of the Order devoted an enormous amount of energy to finding scriptural and patristic links in the chain going back to Elijah. Many biblical figures as well as Palestinian hermits and saints were seen as part of the historical continuity of the Order. As history such work is valueless. But it is not so much a legend as a myth. And it has its own truth as in terms of identity and spirituality. 3.2 Mary and Elijah - Mary and Carmel Mary was gradually inserted into this Elijan myth or hagada. 3.2.1 Early writers The Chronicle De inceptione ordinis (ca. 1324) stated that after the Incarnation the successors of Elijah and Elisha built a church in honour of Blessed Mary near the font of Elijah. It asserted that from the time of the patriarch Aiméric (d. 1196) they were known as the hermit Brothers of Blessed Mary of Mount Carmel.[73] The fourth chapter of the Speculum of Jean de Cheminot (ca. 1337) affirmed that like them the successors of Elijah and Elisha embraced chastity dedicated to the Lord. Two Old Testament texts, which would become traditional in the Order, were applied to Mary: “The glory of Lebanon shall be given to it, the majesty of Carmel and Sharon” (Isa 35:2); “Your head crowns you like Carmel” (Cant 7:5). A legendary note was found in the statement that Mary along with other virgins used to visit the place of the hermits because of their sanctity and the beauty of the place: “It was appropriate that the mother of virtues should honour the place and the sons of such holiness and devotion by her presence”.[74] Jean de Cheminot also recalled the oratory in honour of the Virgin Mary built after the Ascension and that to distinguish the Carmelites from others, they were called “the Brothers of the Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary” – a title later recognised solemnly by the Holy See.[75] 3.2.2 John Baconthorpe Belonging to the same period was the English Carmelite John Baconthorpe (d. ca. 1348). Extremely learned in philosophy, theology and canon law, he had the medieval sobriquet of “Doctor Resolutus”. His writing is at heart polemical, since he is seeking to defend the Order from detractors; it is also spiritual, a reflection on the deepest roots of the Order. He wrote four works that are of interest from an Elijan-Marian viewpoint:[76] Speculum de institutione ordinis pro veneratione Beatae Mariae, the first treatise which deeply unifies the Elijan and Marian traditions of the Order; A Tract on the Rule of the Carmelite Order, which sets out to show that the Rule corresponds in many ways to the life of Mary; Compendium historiarum et iurium, a historical and juridical defense of the Order; Laus religionis carmelitanae, a defence and exaltation of the Order especially in its relation to Mary. In Baconthorpe we see both previous ideas developed and new ones emerging for the first time to our knowledge. Mary is distantly seen by the prophets as venerated on Carmel.[77] It is especially because of her the place of Carmel is honoured;[78] the physical beauty of Carmel is a reason why it should have been given to Mary the most beautiful one.[79] Following an apocryphal legend, he recounts how Mary was brought by an angel to Mount Carmel; it was on the mountain that she, rapt in contemplation, became God's spouse through a vow of virginity.[80] In several places he records the chapel built on Mount Carmel by the contemplative successors of the prophet in honour of the Virgin Mary and the choice of a Marian title.[81] Indeed the whole of Book I of Baconthorpe's Laus religionis carmelitanae is an extended attempt to bring together Carmel and Mary; through sometimes laboured and false etymologies, biblical allusions, legends, and at times profound spiritual insight, he insists that the Order being Carmelite belongs rightly to Mary.[82] Baconthorpe seems to have been the first to view the small cloud seen by Elijah (1 Kings 18:44) as a symbol of Mary: after the drought it restored the fruitfulness of the earth.[83] “The love of God descended on Mary....and through Mary the rains of mercy and grace descended on what was dried up, and thus restored all things.”[84] Future Carmelite authors, following Ribot, would make this a major Old Testament symbol of Mary and draw out from it many implications. Carmelites are rightly called after her, a point acknowledged by the Holy See.[85] Apart from the notion of examplarity developed in our next chapter, Baconthorpe's major contribution was the union of the Marian and Elijan elements of the Order's tradition and his specification of the implications in terms of patronage of the Order's choice of Mary as its titular along with the oratory established in her honour. These too will be examined more in the next chapter. 3.3 A First Elijan - Marian Synthesis: Philip Ribot It is now generally agreed that if the Catalonian Provincial, Philip Ribot (d. 1391), was not the actual author of four major pseudepigraphal works, they were at least from his time.[86] By far the most important of these was the Institute of the First Monks, ascribed to John XLIV, Patriarch of Jerusalem (ca. 412?). It has been suggested that the first chapter on the ascetical and mystical ideal of the Order may be an earlier document, perhaps from the late thirteenth century,[87] but one should await the publication of the critical edition by Paul Chandler before taking such an hypothesis seriously. However, since it is entirely Elijan and does not mention Mary, it need not concern us here. On the Marian teaching of the other books, Ribot depends on previous writers, but can be said to have furthered their ideas developing a new synthesis. The main Marian treatment is to be found in Book Six. Throughout
this book Ribot is concerned with the Order's title, “Brothers of
the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel”; he also allows that “Carmelites” is a legitimate title.[88]
A fundamental idea which he developed was a spiritual, somewhat
arbitrary interpretation of the little cloud seen by Elijah (see
1 Kings 18:44). The key to its Marian symbolism is that the cloud
of pure rain, that is Mary, arose from the bitter, salty sea, which
is the image of sinful humanity. The prophet received by divine
illumination four mysteries about the future redemption of the human
race which he communicated to his followers: In imitation of Elijah who was the first Old Testament virgin, Mary would vow virginity and be the first woman to do so.[90] The successors of Elijah also took such a vow. This established a similitude and a deep empathy between them and Mary so that they called her their sister and themselves Brothers of the Blessed Virgin Mary.[91] The notion of sister does not, however, eliminate the word “mother”, which is delicately insinuated: Before he (the Word) was incarnated there was only a fraternity of paternity, because from the same Father of whom the Son was eternally generated, was also created the human race...before he was incarnated there was not a fraternity of maternity, since the Son was not yet born of his mother.[[92] The implication is that after the Incarnation, there was a new basis of fraternity in the motherhood of Mary. The by now traditional title of “Patron” is allied also with virginity. The Carmelites took care to serve the Virgin with special devotion: They were eager specially to choose this virgin as a patron for themselves, because they knew that she alone was singularly like them in the first-fruits of spontaneous virginity. For just as spontaneous virginity for God was first begun by the ancient followers of this religion and introduced to men, so the same virginity was afterwards first introduced and begun among women by the Mother of God.[93] Thus we see in Ribot a synthesis through virginity of the traditional notions of Mary and the Order – Mother, Patron and Sister. And all of these ultimately stem from the author's contemplation of the spiritual meaning of the little cloud. However, it is not so much that Ribot is adding something new to the Order's Marian consciousness; he reads into the little cloud what was the Order's attitude to Mary, but gave more clearly than previous writers its basis as virginity. Indeed, he uses a false etymology for the word “Carmel” to indicate “knowledge of circumcision” which he then interprets as virginity for God, sought first by Elijah and his followers, and then by Mary.[94] 3.4 Elijan-Marian Synthesis: Arnold Bostius At the end of the fifteenth century we have a mature synthesis of the Order's traditions by the humanist Arnold Bostius (d. 1499).[95] His first work on Mary was the Breviloquium,[96] which was expanded in an unpublished large tract Speculum historiale.[97] His best known work was De Patronatu et patrocinio B. Virg. Mariae in dicatum sibi Carmeli Ordinem from 1479.[98] In this text written in response to a question as to whether Mary had specially favoured the Order, Bostius draws on most of the preceding tradition, on accommodated meanings of scripture, and scriptural symbols and persons understood in a Marian sense. Bostius is interesting in the history of mariology for being a representative of positions commonly held towards the end of the fifteenth century. Thus we have clear teaching on Mary as Mother of God, as Mediatrix, as immaculately conceived, as all holy, as virgin, as assumed into heaven, as Queen, as Spiritual Mother, as Mother of Mercy. These are all truths that the Carmelite Order shares with the whole Church.[99] Though E.R. Carroll is not prepared to assert that Bostius was concerned with a unifying principle of mariology, he does concede that, though the divine motherhood is not a theme of major concern in De patronatu, it has some centrality in his thought.[100] N. Geagea concurs.[101] Our interest in Bostius must be more restricted: it is to see in what way he presents Carmelite mariology in his time, that is, the interrelationship of Mary and the Order. There is, however, one general Mariological theme in Bostius that should be mentioned because of its prominence in the late twentieth century, viz. the beauty of Mary.[102] It is already found in Baconthorpe.[103] Sometimes in Bostius the theme is explicit: “Virgin of incomparable beauty, in whom every gift of nature and grace come together, above all others a person who is gracious, lovely, rose-coloured, serene, most beautiful”.[104] Or again, “Unless one knew the true deity by faith, one would not believe that there was anyone higher than the Virgin”.[105] On other occasions it emerges in different contexts, such as her plenitude of grace: “Mary the most exalted one is a mirror of the Trinity”.[106] She is the most beautiful of all: “by far the most brilliant of all creatures...and the glory of Carmel”;[107] “the honour of all females and the glory of all women”.[108] Bostius, a Latin humanist with an extensive vocabulary and polished rhetoric heaps up expressions in praise of her beauty throughout De patronatu. In a later chapter we shall consider the idea of beauty in contemporary mariology. In treating of the specifically Carmelite associations with Mary one should deal firstly with the duo of Elijah and Mary. In compact paragraphs Bostius shows that Elijah and Mary shared twelve prerogatives through the Spirit which nourished them both: brilliant light, the splendour of virginity, institutors of religious life, exemplarity at various levels, conversation with God, association with angelic spirits, supreme love and zeal for God, prophetic charism, obedience, clemency and mercy, miracles, translation to heaven.[109] But Bostius subtly changes the orientation of the Elijan-Marian tradition. Like some of his predecessors he held that Elijah stood at the origin of religious life. His emphasis is on Elijah the contemplative. But in the case of Carmel, Elijah is father, institutor, patriarch, legislator, teacher, principal patron, founder.[110] However, Bostius assigns to Mary the priority and primacy with regard to Carmel. Elijah's choice of virginity was inspired precisely by the future Virgin Mother whom he had glimpsed in the little cloud which came towards Carmel, whom he wished to honour, and whom he taught his followers to honour also.[111] Bostius therefore concludes that Mary through her exemplarity is a “legislator” with respect to Elijah and the prophet's institute. Hence Mary is the legislator of Elijah, and is rightly said to be legislator and founder of the whole group of Carmel.[112] Through her exemplar causality she is mistress (domina) and institutor.[113] In Bostius, who in this was followed by Lezana (d. 1659), and others,[114] we find Elijah and Mary as a founding couple of the Order.[115] 3.5 Marian Synthesis - Bostius In his Elijan-Marian synthesis Bostius pondered the relationship between the two foundational figures of the Order and arrived at a priority of Mary with regard to Carmelites; it was her example and future destiny that inspired the prophet to found the Order, so that she could be called its true founder. It remains to be seen what are the other bonds which Bostius saw between Mary and the Order. He uses some significant titles, some of which are traditional, others of which he develops: Patron, Teacher, Guide, Friend, Sister, Mother, a Carmelite.[116] Bostius continually calls Mary Patron of Carmel: “She specially is, and is truly called Patron of Carmel and of Carmelites”; “the renowned Mother of God Mary the most admirable Patron of Carmel”.[117] Mary is also Mistress and Teacher of Carmel: the Carmelites of that holy time were recognised as drawing from a living fountain, from the most perfect teacher of religious life, from the shining mirror of all modesty, virtue and nobility.[118] He summarizes her teaching: By one word, like a thorough teacher she embraced all the commands of the Lord when she said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you” (see Jn 2:5).[119] Her teaching is not abstract, for she is the Guide of Carmel. She is joined with Elijah in having a care for the Order; she is Carmel's Protector.[120] Elijah is seen as having neither died nor entered heaven; Mary takes his place. Bostius recounts a vision in which she says: As long as the world lasts, it shall always have a protector. I am the chariot and the charioteer of Carmel, in place of its father. I rule those orphaned of a father; I am mother instead. I store the affairs of Carmel in my heart; I, the mother, copiously nourish those born of Carmel.[121] Bostius also states frequently that Mary is also the Friend of Carmel, thus, Blessed are the sons of Carmel who saw the most blessed Mother of God in the flesh, the ideal fountain of all joy; but also specially adorned are all those who merit that friendship of hers which is joined to Christ's.[122] Bostius goes far beyond the feudal relationships inherent in the notion of patron by emphasizing the notion of Carmel as a family: “the sons of Carmel are especially inmates of Mary's family”.[123] In that family Mary is both Mother and Sister, so that she has Carmelites as both sons and brothers. Indeed Mary, the most worthy Queen of heaven takes singular delight in the people, in the Carmelite gathering, in her own servants by title and patronage. How could she not always hear her sons and brother Carmelites who are singularly committed to her defense and are her champions, who are chosen and specially loved to propagate her flowering vine?[124] The title of Mother needs no illustration from Bostius; it is everywhere; in the opinion of some, it is for Bostius the key attribute of Mary with regard to Carmel.[125] He states for instance: The Queen of heaven, the most exalted Virgin Mary is the universal Mother of all Christians, a common haven and refuge for all men and women, but she is specially Mother and Patron of the Carmelite Brothers.[126] But Bostius develops more clearly than others the idea of Carmelites being sons of both Elijah and Mary, who are joined in a mystical marriage. We have already seen the basis of this idea: it was the vow of virginity that Elijah made when the future Virgin was intimated to him in the little cloud. Carmelites are therefore sons and brothers of their father Elijah and of their mother Mary, their most worthy co-parents.[127] This tradition was summarized two centuries later by Daniel of the Virgin Mary in his dedication of the early Carmelite writings, the Speculum. Elijah was Marian; Elijah burned with love of Mary; Elijah made a vow according to the example of Mary which he foresaw. Elijah is the father of Carmelites, but firstly Mary is their Mother.[128] Finally, for Bostius Mary can truly be said to be a Carmelite: “She showed herself to be spiritually, bodily and literally a Carmelite”.[129] In Bostius we have a synthesis and an elaboration of the previous reflection on Mary. Later writers will not add very much to his central positions. Before leaving this medieval period of maximum development there are two further themes which though present in earlier writers will be unfolded in later writers, viz. the theme of the Most Pure Virgin and the Scapular. 3.6 Most Pure Virgin The purity of Mary emerges in various contexts in the earlier documents. It is implicit at least in the strong attachment of most of the Order's theologians to the Immaculate Conception. It also lies behind the gradual insertion of “Virgin” into the Order's title. It is already emerging in Jean de Cheminot (d. ca. 1350). We have seen above that in his Speculum he ascribes virginity as a common bond between Elijah and Mary. He exhorts the Carmelites to rejoice that they have the name of Mary in their title, “the flower of beauty and the title of virginity”.[130] In the Institutes of the First Monks we have seen the alignment of the virginity of Elijah and that of Mary. But this virginity is only one aspect of Mary's complete sinlessness and utter holiness, even though she had emerged from sinful humanity: As an infant she was in origin clean from all stain of sin, just as that little cloud arose from the bitter sea, without however any bitterness. Even though that little cloud was originally of the same nature as the sea, it had other qualities and other properties. The sea is heavy and bitter, but that cloud was light and sweet. Thus although in all other people human nature is like the sea in its origin, because pressed down by the bitterness of sin and the weight of vice, they are forced to cry out “For my iniquities have gone over my head; they weigh like a burden too heavy for me” (Ps 38:4). The Blessed Virgin Mary arose otherwise from this sea, that is human nature; for in her origin she was not burdened with the bitterness of faults, but like the little cloud she was light through immunity from sin, and sweet by the plenitude of charisms.[131] The teaching is clear in Bostius: “she shone a great purity, such that after God no greater could be imagined”.[132] Or again, Furthermore, Carmelites, the sons of Elijah and Mary are warned and taught fervently to imitate Elijah totally brilliant within and without and Mary, whom under God nothing so pure, nothing so brilliant, can be understood.[133] But it will be the following century before a fully developed ideal of purity and purity of heart will develop.[134] 3.7 Scapular As we mentioned in the Introduction, the question of the Scapular poses particular difficulties for our time, even though for may of the faithful devotion to Our Lady of Mount Carmel is synonymous with the Scapular. The evidence in the whole problematic area needs to be handled with care. There is no reference to the Scapular in the Rule or in The Fiery Arrow of Nicholas the Frenchman. The first reference to it is in the London Constitutions of 1281. There we find the instruction: “The Brothers are to sleep in their tunic and Scapular under pain of severe penalty”.[135] The reason for this stern injunction is that at the time removal of the habit was seen as fleeing from the Order. Thus the Institutions of the First Monks states: This garment, the cowl/capuche and the scapular are worn together by the monk, and show that the monk must always humbly bear on himself the yoke of obedience, and be completely obedient to his superior.[136] And commands that “they be most diligently worn day and night without fail”.[137] The Montpelier Constitutions ordained that the new white cloak was to be open in front so that the Scapular, the habit of the Order could be seen, a regulation repeated in later legislation.[138] Thus for about 150 years the Scapular had a Christological sense of obedience rather than a Marian one. In addition there is a problem about Saint Simon Stock: his name first appears in a list of priors general only with Jean Grossi (ca. 1411) and in a Florentine necrology which may be as early as 1374.[139] In later lists of saints, or Santorale, he is given as fifth or sixth prior general. These lists of saints may be late fourteenth century, but like the necrologies have much earlier sources. Saint Simon Stock's feast was celebrated from 1435 in Bordeaux where he died and in England; it was extended to the whole Order in 1564. The earliest account of a Scapular vision is from the Brussels Sanctorale which can be dated about the end of the fourteenth century, and thus a century and a half after Simon Stock; the Sanctorale may indeed depend on earlier documents, but they have not been found. This, the most primitive and earliest account of the vision, reads: Saint Simon, was an Englishman, a man of great holiness and devotion, who always in his prayers asked the Virgin to favour his Order with some singular privilege. The Virgin appeared to him holding the Scapular in her hand saying, “This is for you and yours a privilege; the one who dies in it will be saved”.[140] It is not possible by critical methods to establish the historicity of the vision; the absence of any reference in the extensive, and polemical, writing during the previous century is perhaps the only argument against authenticity, but it is a weighty one. On the other hand there is no evidence that disproves the vision, though such an argument from silence must be treated with some caution. From a scholarly point of view it should fall on those who wish to assert the genuinity of the vision to furnish proofs. From a pastoral perspective it is perhaps best not to dwell on the details of the vision, but on the meaning of the Scapular as an expression of Mary's care and of consecration to her in line with Pius XII whose teaching we shall examine in a later chapter. The Marian title which best underpins the Scapular is Patron which we will consider along with others in the next chapter. 3.8 Lectio Divina The writings of our medieval authors are of an age and a culture
different from ours. We find expressions about Mary that would not
be used today, e.g. “divine” (but which we can readily use in a
secular context “The music of Mozart is divine”). But it is worth
the effort to try to feel with our medieval forebears. This is best
done through lectio divina of their texts. In this we ask
ourselves The following extract, taken at random from A. Bostius (1479) is a rich expression of our heritage. It is worthwhile to take the time to pray with it and thus to encounter our tradition in a living way. The text is from a long chapter which indicates how the Carmelites should honour Mary. It remains to be seen how the Brothers are to show love, full honour and fraternal reverence to such a Sister, a most excellent Mother and Patron who is of such sublime power, gentle piety, bounteous liberality and wholesome fruitfulness. For from all peoples she chose the Carmelites to be a race that would be special to herself, and particularly took them under the shadow of her wings; as the Loved One adopted by the Brothers, she indeed prays at every moment for them, her people, whom she as it were holds to her breasts and instructs with divine milk. I omit the special cult and devotions which day and night they do not cease to offer to the most divine, all powerful Mother which they so dearly love, most reverently venerate, most devoutly praise, magnify to the highest degree, and admiringly extol. In their hearts and mouths, they rightly proclaim a more special place for her. At least those things must be kept fixed in mind which bind the Carmelite family to the benefits of the divine Mary; they must with others display her most efficacious patronage in the midst of her people. They are to recognise as of right that they must eternally give thanks, for they do not have of themselves the ability to refer benefits to those who bestow them. And since, on the evidence of Pope Gregory, each one carries some title of his or her work, so that it can be easily seen under whose direction it is done, in addition all Churches of a Carmelite community are built in honour of the most glorious Mary and are called by her reverent name. Hence joyfully the whole of Carmel proclaims: I have chosen the abode of the Mother of Christ for a house, there may the holy Virgin come to the aid of her servants.[141]
|
4 Core Marian Themes
In the previous chapter we have seen largely in historical perspective the classical development of the Carmelite Marian heritage. This chapter will seek to analyse its main features, and suggest something of their contemporary relevance. We can begin with the fine summary by C. Catena to be found in his book on the Carmelites nuns and religious women; it applies to both branches of the Order, female and male. From the historical point of view it appears that the first task imposed by the friars on their nuns was the cult of the Madonna... The cult of the Madonna was the finest thing that the Order could offer the nuns.... The white cloak was a sign of the Blessed Virgin Mary... Saint Mary Magdalene of Pazzi simply said “for us Carmelite nuns, our sun is Mary”... the Annunciation, so closely connected with the Incarnation, was their special feast, and the Ave Maria their special prayer... From the 15th century, whilst not forgetting the Immaculate Conception, the friars began to favour the term “the Most Pure Virgin”...The Carmelite nuns found in this idea a ground most suitable for developing a spirituality at once strongly Marian and with genuine feminine attitudes. Purity, which began with virginity, passes by ways of humility, of abnegation, of nothingness in order to arrive at the total adhesion to the divine will; this became the climate of the contemplative soul, and hence of the Carmelite soul.[142] We will treat Carmelite themes as they arose historically and give some initial contemporary reflections, leaving to a later chapter a more extensive treatment of the interrelation of our Marian tradition with present day theology and spirituality. It is important that we continually keep in mind a point that has been made several times earlier: we are not looking for what might be unique to Carmelites, but what was genuinely their Marian experience. 4.1 Patron The earliest Carmelite Marian theme was probably that of Patron. That is not to say that the idea of Mother, part of Christian heritage common to the whole Church, was ignored. But in a feudal age Carmelite reflection on the oratory consecrated to Mary rapidly moved to the idea of Mary as Patron of Carmel, e.g. in Baconthorpe (d. ca.1348).[143] The dominion of the place is given to her.[144] The hermits chose her title.[145] More explicit is the statement by Baconthorpe in his Laus religionis carmelitanae: Just as the prophets on Carmel gave a mystical service to the Virgin, so the brothers afterwards did not undo the mystical response of their predecessors, but fulfilled it for on the same Carmel they bowed their necks in slavery to the Virgin. Hence they are truly called “Brothers of Mary of Mount Carmel”.[146] There are reciprocal bonds, as Baconthorpe notes in the same work: It is therefore most opportune among Carmelites that they invoke Mary their special advocate after each of the canonical hours on bended knees and reciting the antiphon “Salve regina”. Rightly this Order is more greatly venerated for such a great advocate, so that each one can say to it: “thou shalt have praise of the same”.[147] In the medieval feudal culture Mary is thus seen as the Lady of the place, its patron so that it is all in her dominion; the Carmelite is thus a vassal in unconditional service.[148] A. Bostius stated that everything geographically or juridically pertaining to Carmel belongs to Mary: its houses, its churches dedicated to her, its habit.[149] It is the thesis of his main work that nothing of Carmel, no one in Carmel escapes the dominion of Mary: all belongs to her as fief, as hereditament, as her property.[150] In an aside it is perhaps worth noting that close as it may seem to these feudal ideas, the Carmelite tradition never took up the theme of “the slavery of Mary”. In the form proposed by Cardinal de Bérulle it was proposed to the French discalced nuns, but was felt to be alien.[151] Though undoubtedly, individual Carmelites may have felt drawn to the Marian slavery of Saint Grignon de Montfort, it has never been a strong current, or advocated, in the Order. There are, as can be seen below, some parallels in the Marian mysticism of Mary Petyt and Michael of Saint Augustine. The notion of patronage is so deep and so traditional that it would seem to belong to the essence of the Marian charism of the Order. A key to its understanding is that unlike some other ways of considering Mary, patronage implies a two-way relationship. Mary protects her Brothers; they serve her. The dimension of such a double relationship to Mary is characteristic of the Carmelites’ way of life. In the next chapter we shall examine its implications more closely. The feudal expression of the relationship of patronage in the Middle Ages is not any longer appropriate. It is perhaps best presented nowadays in the form of consecration which we shall consider later. 4.2 Model The notion of Mary as model for the Order is first spelled out in detail in John Baconthorpe (d. ca. 1348). His tract on the Rule of the Order of Carmelites sets out similarities between the life of Mary and the Carmelite Rule.[152] In the first printed editions this work was called The Analogical Mystical Exposition of the Rule: it is analogical because it seeks correlations between the Carmelite's life and Mary's; it is mystical in the common sense of being transcendent, spiritual, elevated. The commentary has deductions of unequal value. Some are founded solidly on scripture, and stress above all Mary's faith and obedience; her chastity, poverty, prayer, humility, silence and discretion are also noted. Her Magnificat proclamation is seen as divine preaching. Other deductions are founded on legendary elements or based on the early apocrypha: her communitarian life of prayer in the Temple, and her daily routine of prayer and work until the angel fed her in the evening; her relationships with the layman Joseph and the cleric John the Evangelist. But its conclusion is quite firm: by following the Rule one is embracing a way of life that justifies the title “Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary”.[153] In his Laus religionis carmelitanae Baconthorpe stated that the legislator, Saint Albert, wrote much in the Rule based on the Virgin's conduct.[154] Elsewhere Baconthorpe records that Mary made three vows on Mount Carmel, and Carmelites making their profession choose the title of the Blessed Virgin.[155] But both in the commentary and elsewhere, Baconthorpe stresses Mary's contemplation as an ideal imitat |