Kathleen Richardville, TOC (Florida)

Recently retired, I drop off my granddaughter at my parish's Catholic school. Morning mass in my own parish church conflicts with the school start time, so, finding another church with a mass schedule that fits the time constraints, I drive across town and join the obvious “regulars” who know each other and are a small community within this parish. Because the newly built church is so large, daily mass is held in a central space created in the original church—now a combination of offices, a side chapel dedicated to Eucharistic adoration, a small kitchen and this central space with chairs and altar. It is very simple and intimate... like a small series of “cells.” To my heart, very Carmelite.

Comfortable, cozy... a family around the table to welcome Him in wonder and awe, to ponder the mystery of the Three in One present in a mystical union of Love, to accept the immersion of that Love into our own self and soul. The cell of the host, the cell of the soul, the cell of the mystical body of Christ. From the table, the priest places the hosts into the pyx of each parishioner sent forth to shut-ins... the cell expanding, opening wide to the world hungry for Love poured into and through us to the waiting world outside.

A final blessing and song. I join several attendees, silent as shadows, who disappear into the side chapel where the tabernacle awaits, where the candle glows, where the noise of affectionate farewells interspersed with small talk begins to fade, where the door shuts. Silence. Stillness. The veil of time and space disappears and the silence yields what He wills it to be: His breath breathing through mine; His music sung by my soul; His quiet filling my darkness with Light; His gaze penetrating mine; His “All” encompassing my nothingness until this nothing becomes All. I have longed for daily mass and this time alone with Him throughout my entire professional career.

For 43 years of my teaching career, the 30 minute car ride to school and back home in the late afternoon was a cell of silence, a profound awareness that, even if I could not attend morning mass, my heart was a tabernacle of desire where the Beloved manifested Himself to me... a tabernacle alive with His presence at every moment of the day ahead...

There is a silence of wonder and awe and praise in this beyond the telling!

And now, with the luxury of retirement, I attend morning mass and am gifted with the grace of time to return to Him in adoration and “being in Presence”... Such a gift! He gives me Himself in Eucharist; He gives me the gift of time and the cell of this small, silent side chapel to be with Him.. .and then He sends me forth to fulfill His plans for this day.. .And I am aware that now, even as “then” when I saw my cell as a 30 minute period of travel back and forth, the cell of my soul is always Him, entirely Him, forever Him, timelessly and eternally Him.

Our “cell” is not a place or a time. It is our soul within us and at every moment we are in His presence to love, adore, worship, listen, receive and serve.®

“In repentance ana rest is your salvation, in quietness ana trust is your strength."(Isaiah 30:15)

On the 2nd of April, the date of Mary Magdalen’s birth in 1566, the solemn opening of the anniversary celebrations took place at the monastery of Careggi (Forence, Italy), where her body is venerated. The Cardinal Archbishop of Florence, Giuseppe Betori, led the celebration of the Eucharist that was concelebrated by several priests. The concelebrants included, the Prior General, Fr. Fernando Millán Romeral, along with other members of the General Curia, the Vice-Prior General, Fr. Christian Körner, the Councilor General for Europe, Fr. John Keating, the Procurator General, Fr. Michael Farrugia, the Bursar General, Fr. Carl Markelz, and the Delegate General for the Nuns, Fr. Mario Alfarano. The Carmelite Family was present in great numbers, with friars from the different houses in Florence and Castellina, the sisters of the Istituto di Nostra Signora del Monte Carmelo, and very many lay Carmelites. 

In his homily the Cardinal pointed to the example of the saint in her cultivation of the transforming knowledge of the Risen Lord, just as the readings in the liturgy suggested. He read a telegram from the Pope, signed by the Secretary of State, Card. Pietro Parolin, in which he  “joined in thanksgiving to the Lord for giving to the Church such a significant disciple of the Gospel and master of spirituality”.  He ended by imparting an Apostolic Blessing and granting the corresponding plenary indulgence.

At the end of the celebration the Prior General thanked all those who were present and in particular the nuns, who, although they are just a small community, continue to keep alive the spirit and teaching of St. Mary Magdalen de’Pazzi.

C. O’Donnell, O.Carm.

A phrase like “Marian Spirituality” is enough to make some people uneasy. Is there not just one spirituality, namely Christian? The issue is naot only extremely important but also somewhat complex.

Spirituality

There is a growing literature on the theme of Mary and spirituality.^[1] But we need to be alert to several approaches and aspects of the theme. Spirituality is a word that has become quite chameleon:it takes on a different hue when used about various schools or movements identified by a period, place, or institution (e.g. desert, medieval, Dominican, French spiritualities). It is applied to the appropriate response of various stats of life (e.g. single, married,a clerical, religious spiritualities); it can mean a focus on some aspect or revelation of the Church’s life or it can draw attention to the life of some of its members (e.g. Eucharistic, liturgical, liberation, feminist spiritualities). There is also what one might tem “secular” and New Age usages: many people will claim that they are not religious but they do have spirituality.

We would need to look at some modem writers to clarify for ourselves the concept of spirituality and thus be in a position to see what a Marian spirituality might involve. Sandra Schneiders who is a strong proponent of spirituality as an academic discipline with its own identity^[2] notes:

Spirituality as a lived experience can be defined as a conscious involvement in the project of life integration through self-transcendence towards the ultimate value one perceives.., when the horizon of ultimate value is the triune God revealed in Jesus Christ and communicated through the Holy Spirit, and the project of self-transcendence, is the living of the paschal mystery within the context of the Christian community, the spirituality is specifically Christian and involves the person with God, others and all reality according to the understanding of these realities that is characteristic of Christian faith.^[3]

Basic to Christian spirituality is the response to God’s prior call. Spirituality is experiential and naturally tends to flower in relationships.

There are some preliminary notions that we can clear up immediately. We need to distinguish Marian devotion and Marian spirituality. More than thirty years ago Wolfgang Beinert warned that the crucial issue is to go to the gospel so as to go to Christ and through him to the Father:

Marian devotion has pastoral and existential worth when it reflects this end and is capable of achieving it, we can thus pose the problem of Marian spirituality in this way, which may not please everybody. The formula is this: Marian piety is not identical with devotion to the Virgin; renewal of the later will not automatically renew the former. Marian piety does not in the first place consist of pilgrimages, images, litanies, Marian hymns ... the essence of Marian spirituality is truly found not in the fact that a person prays to Mary, but rather that person prays like Mary. Mary is never the goal but only the model of Christian existence; in that she cannot be replaced.[4]

Here Beinert privileges piety over devotion, and suggests at best that Marian spirituality belongs to pietas as he describes it, rather than to devotion.

The Spiritualities of Mary

We need to make a distinction by the spirituality of Mary and Marian spirituality. With Jesus Castellano Cervera we can speak of a descending Mariology which illuminates her predestination and mission; an ascending Mariology as she moves towards the consummation of God’s plan for her.^[5] We examine both the spirituality of Mary and Marian spirituality with the modern lenses of scripture, theology, ecclesiology, liturgy, anthropology; we should also take into account of new directions of John Paul II in Redemptoris Mater, directing us toward the evangelical figure of Mary, her presence in the Church, and her maternal mediation.^[6]

When we look at the spirituality of Mary, we see the great themes of election and grace, freedom and response, she is the woman of faith and servant of the Lord; she embarks on a journey that involves light and darkness; she is the contemplative united to the Sprit and to her Son; she is one of the anawtm in solidarity with all peoples, she is indeed la mujer para los demas (a woman for others) in the felicitous phrase of Father Jesus.^[7] These themes can be further developed and enriched by contemporary Trinitarian insights.

The idea of the images of Mary^[8] can be developed to show how Mary responded to God. We can see her, firstly as God’s servant following the great lines given by Isaiah (42; 49; 50; 53). Like the Servant of Yahweh she was ‘chosen and called by God’; she remains faithful despite distress. If we are invited to see ourselves conformed to the image of the Servant of Yahweh, we can surely see Mary mirrored in this prophetic figure. Her loyalty has led to the enrichment and salvation of all God’s children. Mary is the servant. Service is not a univocal concept today; it is not appreciated our culture. Some kinds of service are acceptable, but the word “servant” is not. One can see parallels between the Christological slavery/service in Philippians 2 and the Annunciation in which Mary declares herself to be God’s slave. (Luke 1:38 reflects Philippians 2:7). One can also compare the use of the word doulos (slave). In Matthew 20:26-28 and Philippians 2:7-8 with Luke 1:38 - doule (female slave); service is thus an important feature of her spirituality.

Secondly, we should also point to her service of the Word. Luke presents her as receiving God’s word, pondering and proclaiming it (see Like 1:28-55, 2:1-20) she is the disciple, even thought the title is not scriptural and Mary can been seen as more than a believer in the gospel texts. Vatican Ii notes: “In the course of her Son’s preaching she received the words whereby, in extolling a kingdom beyond the concerns and ties of flesh and blood, she declared blessed those who heard and kept the word of God.” (Mark 3:35 - Luke 11:27-28 - Lumen Gentium 58). There is too the famous statement of St. Augustine: “it counted more for Mary to be the disciple of Christ and to be the mother of Christ.”

Thirdly, she is a woman of faith who believed against odds; we see her faith at Cana and on Calvary (see John 2:5; 19:25-28a), Mary is surely an example of those praised by Jesus: Blessed are those who have not seen yet believe. John 20:29. When we compare the words of Elizabeth and those of the woman in the crowd in Luke we see Mary as a model of faith:

Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb... blessed is she

who believed, (Luke 1: 42, 45),

and

Blessed is the womb that bore you and the breasts that nursed you. Jesus said: blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it (Luke 11: 27-2 8).

As Vatican II so beautifully says Mary embarked at the Annunciation on a “pilgrimage of faith” (Lumen Gentium: 58) from the Annunciation to Calvary, Easter and Pentecost. Her faith moreover was mediated (through Joseph, shepherds, Simeon and Anna, Jesus at the age of 12 and later in his public ministry - see Mark 3:31-34) she learns God’s plan for the infant Church through Peter (Acts 1:12-20) she does not understand, but ponders (see Luke 1:29, 2:23; 2:50; with 2:19, 51).

Fourthly, with many contemporary exegetes we can see in Luke 1-12 the spirituality of the anawim^[9] the privileged little ones (see Luke 9:48, with 1:48 and Matt 11:25) Finally we can see her as a woman of the Spirit (see Luke 1:35) overshadowed (see Luke 1:28, 30) and awaiting the Spirit at Pentecost (see Acts 1:14, 2:104).

These images point to the way in which Mary was blessed by God and to her response, namely to her spirituality.

Marian Spirituality

We have seen Mary’s spirituality: now we look at what a Marian spirituality might be. But firstly we need to look a bit more carefully at the notion. Recently Tina Beattie in a short, compressed dictionary article dealt explicitly with Marian spirituality:

Marian spirituality can only be understood as authentically Christian when it is an integral part of the life of faith, it invites the believer to deepen his or her relationship to Christ, to become incorporated into the community of the Church, and to seek a harmonious balance between the active and contemplative dimensions of a faith expressed in prayer and social action.^[10]

She notes the difference between East and West

Marian spirituality developed along different lines in the Eastern and Western Churches. While the Orthodox Church still draws on the early tradition to represent Mary as an iconic maternal figure who communicates awe and compassion, humility and glory, Western spirituality has reflected cultural and historical influences so that devotion to Mary bears the marks of evolving and sometimes contested beliefs and practices.^[11]

The difference between East and West is even more significant. The East does not evidence

the split between theology and spirituality so frequently deplored by Karl Rahner and Hans

Urs von Balthasar.

In general one can say that Eastern theology is characterized by a tight union (stretta unione) between spirituality and dogma, so that spirituality is the vision from within the dogma, whilst dogma is the normative expression of spirituality: dogma without spirituality would be ideology and spirituality without dogma would be pietism.^[12]

The recent ARCIC statement concurs:

In the late Middle Ages scholastic theology grew increasingly apart from spirituality. Less and less rooted in scriptural exegesis, theologians relied on logical probability to establish their positions and Nominalists speculated on what could be done by the absolute power and will of God. Spirituality, no longer in creative tension with theology emphasized affectivity and personal experience, in popular religion, Mary came widely to be viewed as an intermediary between God and humanity, and even a worker of miracles with powers that verged on the divine, this popular piety in due course influenced the theological opinions of those who had grown up with it, and who subsequently elaborated a theological rational for the florid Marian piety of the Late Middle Ages.^[13]

We can look more closely at Marian spirituality beginning with contemporary liturgy. In the

1986 collection of votive Masses in honor of our Lady there is available General Introduction with draws on Marialis Cultus and liturgical texts to speak of the union of the worshipper with Mary.^[14] One of the Masses “Mary, Mother and Teacher in the Spirit,” is based on the Carmelite feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel.[15] Here there are two main ideas: Mary is model for Christian holiness and she is Mother who draws us on that way.

Many Spiritualities

We have mentioned earlier the multiplicity of spiritualities. Where then does Marian spirituality fit in? But first we need a word about how spiritualities differ. All Christian spiritualities will have common elements: sacraments, especially Baptism and Eucharist; the word of God, prayer, faith, hope, and love, both of God and neighbor. The difference lies not in that one spirituality will have faith and another substitutes hope. The one mystery of Christ, which is a sharing in the life of the Trinity through grace in faith, hope, and charity, is found in a variety of spiritualities, all of them based on the one New Testament revelation. All genuine spiritualities must have the whole of Christian doctrine in an ordered and holy life. But the emphasis will differ, Carmelite spirituality emphasizes prayer, Mary, and the word of God, more perhaps than other spiritualities. Franciscan spirituality has a major focus on poverty and on the humble humanity of Jesus.

To understand how spiritualities are all the same and all different, the best analogy may be from life. We will recognize as being “American” three citizens of the United States who are of different ethnicity. Each will have the same limbs, the same bodily functions, and so forth, but they can be identified both as Americans and as members of their different ethnic groups. The elements are all the same, but the order, the balance, the emphasis will be subtly different. Another example might be yard full of building materials: hundreds of cubic feet of similar blocks, hundreds of square feet of timber, and hundreds of feet of wire, pipes, etc., three builders could take the same materials, even perhaps the same amount of materials, and build very different single story bungalows, each having living space, kitchen plumbing, and two bedrooms, one might have two bedrooms the same size, another might have one large bedroom and a smaller one; the same for the living space related to the kitchen. We would not identify the different houses seeking what extra materials were used in one rather than another. The structure and order would be different.^[16]

But such considerations about the various spiritualities do not fully apply when we look at Marian and other spiritualities. There is a significant, but often overlooked essay written in 1960 by Hans Urs von Balthasar where he argued that Marian spirituality underlies all others.

A spirituality centered on the attitude exemplified by Mary, is... not just one spirituality among others. For this reason, although Mary is an individual believer and, as such, the prototype and model of all response in faith, she resolves all particular spiritualities into the one spirituality of the bride of Christ, the Church. What we learn from Mary, a lesson valid for all times, is that the response of the Handmaid of the Lord to the Word working in her all his will in such a special an unique manner—is not just one particular theme in theology. What is special in Mary’s spirituality is the radical renunciation of any special spirituality other than the overshadowing of the Most High and the indwelling of the divine Word... The idea of making Marian spirituality one among other is, therefore, a distortion.^[17]

The paradigm of all response to God is thus a Marian one. Balthasar is asserting that any authentic spirituality will therefore be Marian, even if this is not explicated. To be Marian or not is scarcely an option for a genuinely Christian spirituality. If we look at what would commonly be called particular spiritualities, we see that though each has a focus, the whole of any spirituality is really an articulation of Mary’s total “yes,” patterned on her expression of life of the Trinitarian and the practical implications of this foundational response to God’s Word. These are indications in contemporary thought which suggest that authentic spirituality must be Marian. To grasp fully Balthazar’s meaning here we should remember that in the 1960’s he saw the Church as having a Marian and a Petrine dimension. Later he moved to seeing the Church constituted by four founding figures: Peter (institutional), Paul (missionary), John (contemplative/mystical) and James (law and tradition). Mary was not on the same level, but above these, giving each of them their meaning and vitality.

Marian spirituality will always reflect a particular time and culture. Thus in the later Middle Ages, Mary was no longer seen as the majestic maternal presence of the early medieval Church, but as a tender and compassionate mother. In the years following the Black Death, images such as the mater dolorosa and the pieta suggest an association between the suffering of the people and the suffering of the mother of the crucified Christ.^[18]

Marian spirituality means adopting a set of values, attitudes, and activities that help us to respond to God’s plan for us and to insert us into the relationship with Mary that Christ wants for us.^[19] The concretization of the elements of such spirituality will again reflect times and cultures. It will demand contemplation of her, as well as communion and identification. It will involve taking up the characteristic of her life. In the language of Fr. Jesus, it should give rise to an epiphany of Mary in the life of the Church, so that we too bring forth Jesus in the Church.^[20]

Marian Mysticism

We begin with Spain and its golden age of Mary and of mysticism. There are many excellent studies on Mary in the works of St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross. In Mariology as in may other respects, St. Teresa of Avila entered into an existing heritage which she mad her own and developed. After her mother’s death she dedicated herself to Mary (Life 1:7). She constantly refers to her own wearing of Our Lady’s habit. She had mystical experiences in which Mary appeared to her (Life 33:14). She advised imitation of Mary, a theme already abundantly developed in the medieval period. Her notion of prayer as friendship and intimate relationship (Life 8:6) is reflected in her Marian devotion. An important feature of her piety is her very strong and close bond with St. Joseph. She also adopted an older practice of seeing Mary as the true prioress of the community (Relaz. spirit. 25) St. John of the Cross, however does not mention Mary very often in his extant writings, but the references are highly significant: Mary is the supreme contemplative (Ascent 3:2, 10); the Incarnation is pondered through the mind of the eternal Trinity and through the eyes of Mary (Romance on the Incarnation).

There were also many other Carmelites writing on Mary in the period 1550-1650. There were some more original writers as in the Zaragoza Monastery of the Incarnation (after 1588). There we should note in particular Maria Escobar (d. 1634) who proclaimed herself a slave of Mary and received many mystical graces in and through Mary. It is well known that Cardinal Berulle (d. 1629) who brought the discalced nuns to France from Spain in 1604, failed in his attempt to impose the devotion of slavery to Mary on them. This theme in post-Reformation Carmelite Mariology deserves further study; it certainly antedates the “True Devotion” of St. Louis Grignon de Montfort (d. 1716).

In the Low Countries we have the important Marian mystic, Maria de S. Teresa Petijt (d. 1677) and her director the Venerable Michael of St. Augustine (d. 1684) whose mysticism has been described as “contemplative life of God in Mary and of Mary in God.” But there is no confusion of the divine and the human: there is indeed union with Mary, but this has its fruition simultaneously in God. The earlier stages of this life, called “Mariform” by Michael, consists in being always alert to Mary and to God, so that one does only what is pleasing to them. This might be said to belong more to the ascetic life, since one can choose to have Mary in view and, with the aid of grace, cultivate a relationship with her, the union with God through Mary, however, is mystical given by God as a special gift.

In Italy we have extensive Marian writing, the Neapolitan Carmelite foundress, the Venerable Seraphina of God, Prudentia Pisa (d. 1699), is yet another with experiences of Marian Mysticism. The writings of St. Mary Magdalene de Pazzi (d. 1607) speak frequently about the beauty of Mary and of her purity, but they are more reminiscent of visions of the Mother of God common to other mystics like St Teresa than of mystical union with Mary.

The Carmelite Marian mystics have their experiences not only as special and personal gifts from God, but also in order that they might teach the Church. The Mariform mysticism of Mary Petijt is not something eccentric in the history of spirituality; it teaches the whole Church something important about the journey to God. What may not be explicit in other mystics is very clear in Michael of St. Augustine and in Mary Petijt, namely that divine union comes about through a person becoming more closely clothed with the virtues of Mary, and through her continuing presence and accompaniment. Theirs is the most dramatic and the most sublime expression of the truth continually expressed in all Carmelite Marian writings, namely the motherly presence of Mary accompanies the Carmelite always and growth in holiness is found through opening oneself to her presence and motherly care, the fact that a reading from Michael of St, Augustine I proposed for the Solemn Commemoration of Our Lady of Mount Camel is surely an indication to the Order to reflect on the journey to Jesus through Mary.

Conclusion

In cultivating a Marian spirituality we look to the vision of Vatican II:

In celebrating the annual cycle of the mysteries of Christ, Holy Church honors the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, with a special love. She is inseparably linked with her Son’s saving work. In her the Church admires and exalts the most excellent fruit of redemption and joyfully contemplates, as in a faultless image that which she herself desires and hopes wholly to be (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 103).

Our Carmelite way has been marked by looking on the Virgin Mary and Mother of God as Mother, Patroness, Most Pure Virgin, and Sister. These are not only aspects of her life that we imitate, they are the ways she comes to us, and we come to her in a relationship of love; in the end, spirituality is about relationships with God who comes to us as Trinity and who has given us Mary as a way. We come to God not just by imitation being like Mary, but with her who is, as the tradition of the Eastern icons constantly shows, the hodigitria, the one who points the way, this same tradition points to a parallel between the East and the Carmelite tradition: Mary’s protecting veil, Pokrov, finds its western counterpart in the Scapular which in its fullest sense sums up the Marian spirituality of the Carmelite Order.

^[1] See S. De Fiores’ heavily foot-noted Maria nella vita secondo lo Spirito, (Casale Monferrato: Edizioni Piemme, 1998) and the useful bibliography attached to Jestis Castellano Cervera, O.C.D. “La espiritualidad manana: Una perspective actual” in B. Coccia ed. In Communion with Mary: Our Heritage and Prospects for the Future. Sassone Seminar June 2001. (Rome: Edizioni Carmelitane, 2003) pp. 105-108.

^[2] See Schneiders’ “The Study of Spirituality: Contours and Dynamics of a Discipline,” Studies in Spirituality 8 (1988) pp. 38-57. See also following note.

^[3] Sandra M. Schneiders, “Christian Spirituality: Definition, Methods, and Types” in P. Sheldrake, ed. The New SCM Dictionary of Christian Spirituality, (London: SCM, 2005) p.1.

[4] Beinert refers to Marian piety as Frommigkeit and distinguishes it from devotion to Mary (Marienverehrung). Maria heute ehren: Eine theologish-pastorale Handreichung (Freiburg: Herder, 1977). pp. 13-15.

^[5] Jesus Castellano Cervera, “La espiritualidad mariana,” p. 77.

^[6] Castellano Cervera, “La espiritualidad mariana,” p. 85.

^[7] Castellano Cervera, “La espiritualidad mariana,” p. 95.

^[8] Christopher O’Donnell, O.Carm. “Images of Mary for Today,” Spirituality 5, pp. 153-156.

^[9] See B. Buby Mary the Faithful Disciple (New York—Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1985) p. 71. Buby notes that Luke is the evangelist of the Holy Spirit and of the anawim. Further, see Vatican Il’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, 55.

^[10] Tina Beattie, “Mary and Spirituality,” New SCM Dictionary of Christian Spirituality, (London: SCM, 2005) p. 424.

^[11] Tina Beattie, “Mary and Spirituality”, p. 425.

^[12] E.G. Farrugia, “Spirito Santo e teologia orientale” in Dizionario dell’Oriente Cristiano (Rome: Pont. Inst. Orientale, 2000), p. 722.

^[13] Mary, Grace and Hope in Christ. The ARCIC Agreed Statement (London—Harrisburg: Morehouse, 2005) n.43, pp. 40-41.

^[14] Collection of Masses on the Blessed Virgin Mary, 2 vols: Sacramentary and Lectionary, (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1992). Vol. 1, “General Introduction,” n. 13.

[15] Collection of Masses on the Blessed Virgin Mary, 2 vols: Sacramentary and Lectionary, (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1992), n. 32. Vol. 1: Mass text 249-25 1, preface n.32, p. 148; Vol. 2: Readings, Pry. 8:17-21, 34-35 or Isa 56:1, 6-7 with Psalm 15 and gospel Matt 12:46-50 or John 19:25-27, or general appendix III, 19- Mark 3:31-35.

^[16] See Christopher O’Donnell, O.Carm., “Core Marian Themes in the Carmelite Order” in Carmel and Mary: Theology and History of a Devotion (Washington: Carmelite Institute, 2002), p. 82.

^[17] Hans Urs von Balthasar, “Spirituality” in Word and Redemption, Essays in Theology 2 (New York: Herder &

Herder, 1965), pp. 97-98.

^[18] Tina Beattie, “Mary and Spirituality” New SCM Dictionary of Christian Spirituality, p. 425.

^[19] Tina Beattie, “Mary and Spirituality”, p. 425.

^[20] A theme developed by Bi. Titus Brandsma, O.Carm., (d. 1942) in various places, e.g. Carmelite Mysticism:

Historical Sketches, Fiftieth Anniversary Edition (Darien IL: Carmelite Press, 1986), pp. 33-34, 59.

S.F. Nolan, O.Carm

Sermon given by S.F. Nolan, O.Carm., in Chichester Cathedral marking the Opening of the Chichester Festivities. Feast of St Peter and Paul Apostles, 29 June, 2008.

Today is a festival day, a day of celebration, a day set aside for singing the praises of God and rejoicing in the giftedness of humanity. And we have many reasons to celebrate. Today is the Day of the Lord, Sunday, the first day of the week. This is the day made by the Lord. We rejoice and are glad. Today we celebrate the beginning of the Chichester Festivities, seventeen days of exuberance in music and art. And today is a festival of the religious calendar, the Feast of St Peter Apostle. Gathered in this cathedral church we salute this day of festival. As God’s pilgrim people gathered in festival, we echo the Easter song, sung down through the ages: Salve festa dies toto venerabilis aevo – ‘Hail thee, festival day! Blest day that art hallowed forever’. (Venantius Fortunatus, sixth century) These are ancient words which in modern times have gained a renewed spring in their step with the music of Vaughan Williams, whose fiftieth anniversary we mark this year.

So, yes, it is right and proper that we should celebrate today and join in proclaiming a time of festival. But is there not a sense in which those of Christian sensibility can find this a difficult thing to do? Christians so often see themselves as exercising a moderating influence. Excess is to be avoided. Propriety observed. A sense of proportion maintained.

As a Roman Catholic, I belong to a tradition which has placed quite an emphasis on rules of fasting and abstinence. As an Irish man I have in my background the ancient Celtic Christian emphasis on penance. Ireland was known in the past as the land of Saints and Scholars. Irish monks did much to spread Christianity throughout Europe. They had a highly developed aesthetic sense, a sense of light and colour as evidenced in the illuminated manuscripts they produced, in themselves wonders of the medieval world. These Celtic Christians had a deep sense of nature, of the beauty of the world around them. Their spirituality was close to nature. One text from the tradition declares: ‘Our God is the God of all humans. The God of heaven and earth. The God of the sea and the rivers. The God of the sun and moon. The God of all the heavenly bodies. The God of the lofty mountains. The God of the lowly valleys. God is above the heavens; and he is in the heavens; and he is beneath the heavens.’ (Bishop Tírechán, seventh century, Collectanea, 26). But these Irish could be a stern lot, given to extreme acts of penance. But even in their austerity, they had a very strong sense of celebrating the Day of the Lord of saluting this day of festival. There was among them a tradition of what was known as ‘welcoming in’ the Sunday. One such prayer of welcome went as follows: ‘Welcome, O Holy Sunday, At your weekly visit to us, Giving us a day and night for answering Christ’ (Quoted in Vincent Ryan, O.S.B., ‘Every Sunday An Easter Sunday’ in Placid Murray, O.S.B., ed. Studies in Pastoral Liturgy (Dublin: Gill, 1967) 192). And in a strange twist in the tale of those famous sixth-century handbooks for Celtic confessors, the Irish Penitentials, those who refused to celebrate the Lord’s day by insisting on continuing a regime of fasting and penance were to be punished. One Irish penitential declares: ‘Anyone who fasts on or ignores the Sunday through carelessness or austerity does a week’s penance on bread and water!’ (Quoted in Leslie Hardinge, The Celtic Church in Britain (New York: 1995) 85).

So to paraphrase those words from the Book of Ecclesiastes beloved of many a preacher: there is a time for everything (Ecc 3: 1-8). Time for austerity and time for feasting and festival. But today I find myself relying in the first place on the advice of a wise mystic from my own Carmelite tradition, St Teresa of Avila, that great sixteenth-century reformer of the religious life, who was, to borrow the words of Evelyn Underhill, a true ‘pioneer of humanity’ (cf. Evelyn Underhill, Mysticism: A Study in the Nature and Development of Spiritual Consciousness (New York: Dutton, 1930) 133). The story is told of how a friend came to visit Teresa at her convent, bringing with him a brace of partridge. Teresa thanked him and went into the kitchen where she prepared them, and began to eat. One of her fellow sisters came by and asked if it was seemly for a member of an order vowed to poverty and penance to enjoy her food so much. Teresa said, ‘Sister, there is a time for penance, and a time for partridge!’ And she continued to enjoy her meal (cf. Noel O’Donoghue, O.C.D., Adventures in Prayer: Reflections on St Teresa of Avila, St John of the Cross and St Thérèse of Lisieux (London: Burns and Oates, 2004) 38).

Today and these days of festivity are, therefore, time for partridge, for rich fare. Just glancing at the ‘menu’, the festivities brochure, one is dazzled by the array of musical and theatrical events on offer, the impressive range of speakers from the worlds of current affairs, politics and literature. These are days of imagination. A feast of images and sounds, intended to encourage or perhaps even to challenge us to think imaginatively. The courage to think imaginatively is what we need more and more in our world today. As Christians we need to think ever more openly, creatively, imaginatively. As Christians we are certainly called to be intelligent. To be realistic. To face reality. But really seeing our world requires imagination. Without imagination our intellects and our moral sense can be narrow in their focus. Without imagination Christianity is cold and ineffective and Christian love well nigh impossible. One leading writer on liturgical spirituality warns us: ‘The theologian without a sense of poetry and art can become a mortician’ (Philip H. Pfatteicher, Liturgical Spirituality (Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1997) 23-4).

The Christian liturgy, our Christian worship, undoubtedly preserves the fullness of Christian experience and tradition. The purpose of our worship is to give glory to God in words, in music, in image and in symbol. Art and music, particularly in our time, should also stretch our imagination, test our limits, call us to larger and more inclusive ideas and views. And, in the context of our worship, far from making us turn in on ourselves, art actually intensifies our sense of the world around us. Art pushes us to see beyond the obvious to what lurks in the crevices of the human-divine experience.

So, my brothers and sisters in Christ, let us think imaginatively. Thinking imaginatively for the Christian involves our being able to look within, to look around and to look beyond. And the arts and the artistic encourage and enable us to do this. Let us think imaginatively of where we are today, in this cathedral church, lovingly restored, in this ancient city of Chichester.

This cathedral is rooted not simply in the ground. It is rooted also in the faith and worship of a community stretching back over many centuries. It reaches down deep into the earth from which we are all made, it rises in faith and embraces all who come to it and lifts the heart and mind to God in worship, music and art. Its cruciform shape reminds us of the cross of Christ firmly planted in the earth its arms embracing all creation but also pointing ever upwards to the heavens, the cross which was once the instrument of death but which becomes the means of life and salvation.

I was captivated by the statue of St Richard by Philip Jackson, cast for the millennium, which stands in the grounds of the Cathedral. As with all holy people, he does not seek to draw attention to himself but rather in a striking and telling pose he points to God, the source and goal of all life.

Art reveals something of God to us. It has the capacity to broaden and deepen our understanding and help us make connections with the divine. Art, if it is good, has the capacity to draw us in to capture our attention to speak to the depths of our being. But it does not stop there. If we are captured or drawn in by a painting or a piece of music we are not simply held on the surface of the canvas or momentarily aware of the sound of the notes on a page, we are moved beyond the here and now and given a glimpse, an insight, into the eternal in what the French organist-composer Olivier Messiaen might call a ‘transport de joie’, an outburst of joy (Olivier Messiaen, L’Ascension: Quatre méditations symphoniques (1933-4), iii: ‘Transports de Joie’).

Art undoubtedly goes to the heart of what it means to be human. It is an expression and celebration of humanity. ‘Art is,’ as G. K. Chesterton declared ‘the signature of man’ (G. K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man, I, 1). In art humanity is at its most creative. In art humanity thinks imaginatively, and thinking imaginatively is immensely powerful if turned to the good. Working for good requires imagination and is itself a kind of art. Thinking imaginatively enables us to be broad-minded and open in the conduct of human affairs, employing the kind of thinking James Joyce describes as a playful ‘two thinks at a time’, making connections and building bridges (James Joyce, Finnegan’s Wake, 583.7). And Mozart, whose glorious music adorns our worship this morning, witnesses to the power of imaginative thinking in the process of musical composition, saying: ‘Nor do I hear in my imagination the parts successively. I hear them all at once. What a delight this is! All this inventing, this producing, takes place in a pleasing, lively dream.’ (Letter of Mozart cited in Brewster Ghiselin, The Creative Process: A Symposium (1955) 45).

And, for the Christian, art means so much more, is even more transcendental in its significance. While still in the world we see, through art as through a window, into the realm of God. On looking at an Icon of Christ, St John of Damascus was able to exclaim, ‘I have seen the human form of God, and my soul is saved’ (John Damascene, On Holy Images, I).

Let us conclude as we began. Let us salute this festival day, and as we Irish might put it, let us ‘welcome in’ these days of festivity for another year. I would like to end with the words of the Irish poet Brendan Kennelly who sees with a poet’s eye and grasps the cyclical nature of life and the optimism which is part of every human soul. His poem entitled ‘Begin’ ends:

Though we live in a world that dreams of ending,

that always seems about to give in

something that will not acknowledge conclusion

insists that we forever begin.

(Brendan Kennelly, Begin (Newcastle: Bloodaxe, 1999) 104)

Fr. P. Breen, O.Carm.

Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches

From the death of Christ the Church began to grow and to spread geographically. For many years it was simply known as “the Christian Church.” In time a divide developed. Those who first travelled west into Europe brought the message to the people and also particular liturgical rituals. Those who travelled north and east from Israel brought the same message but their liturgical ritual was slightly different, as was their governing structure. In time, those who west into Europe became known as the Western or Latin Church (because Latin was the predominant language of the Roman Empire) while those who went north and east became known as the Eastern or Greek Church (because Greek was the predominant language in their region). As a result, these two sister Churches believe the same things (with very few exceptions) and celebrate the same sacraments with the same understanding of each. For many years both Churches attended the same Ecumenical Councils – these councils were meetings of the bishops which settled disputes regarding theological issues, amongst other things. But in 1054 a split took place which, sadly, exists to this day, though relations are now improving. Both Churches flourished and spread geographically. The Eastern Church also uses the title ‘Orthodox Church’ which simply means that they are faithful to the teaching of Christ as handed on by the Apostles.

All large institutions and systems require an ‘overhaul’ or a reform as the years pass by. By the Middle Ages the Latin Church was in great need of reform. Martin Luther, a German Augustinian friar, set this reform in motion and sparked the Protestant Reformation which gave birth to a number of ecclesial communities which did not accept all that the Latin Church taught. Some, for example, only hold two sacraments – Baptism and Eucharist – and most do not accept all the Latin Church’s canon of sacred scripture. With the split the term ‘Catholic Church’ became more widely used for the Latin Church. The Latin Church rejected the ‘reforms’ which the Protestants instituted. It did acknowledge the need for reform and thus the Council of Trent took place from 1545 to 1563. Among the reforms at the Council was the standardisation of the celebration of the sacraments. Up to this time, there were many different rites for celebrating the sacraments, some of which can still be seen in places today. Rome had a standard way of celebrating the sacraments and, as clergy from other regions and countries visited Rome, they brought the Roman rite back home with them, thereby spreading a standard way of celebrating and also strengthening the unity of the Church and the position of Rome as the head of the Church. In time, the term ‘Roman Catholic’ became common for the Latin Church because of the role that Rome came to play. It is used more and more today to differentiate between the Latin Church headed by Rome and the Protestant communities who see themselves as catholic.

Structure

While the word ‘church’ designates a particular building in which people gather for worship, it has a much greater meaning for Roman Catholics. The Church is also the Mystical Body of Christ here on earth. As the Mystical Body of Christ, the Church includes all the baptised. The baptised people of God are not just members of the Church but they are the Church. There is a third meaning for ‘church’ and this refers to the faithful in a particular geographical area, and is referred to as the ‘local Church.’ Each local Church has a leader or shepherd in the person of its bishop. In the early years after Christ’s death, a local Church was no bigger than the village in which it was found and the bishop, or over-seer, was able to look after it alone. As these local Churches grew the bishop delegated some of his authority and duties to priests in his area. Today, the area a bishop is responsible for is known as a ‘diocese’ which covers several parishes. This is the local Church for which the bishop is the shepherd.

All the local Churches together form the ‘Universal Church’ which is also headed by a bishop. In the Roman Catholic or Western Church, this person is the ‘pope’ who is Christ’s vicar on earth. “The Roman Pontiff, as successor of Peter, is the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of unity of both the bishops and the faithful.” (Lumen gentium, 23) Over the centuries the authority of the papacy grew more and more as people looked to Rome for advice and leadership. The first pope was St Peter to whom Christ entrusted the care of his Church (Matthew 16:13-20). Peter eventually travelled to Rome and it was here that he died for the faith. Over his tomb today is built the basilica dedicated to him in Rome, in the small independent country known as the Vatican, or the Holy See. As the popes are the successors of Peter, so the bishops of the Church are the successors of Peter and his fellow apostles. As the first Apostles grew old they selected successors who would carry on their duties and over-see the Church. They laid their hands on these chosen ones and invoked the Holy Spirit upon them. Today’s bishops do likewise and through this ritual they can trace their line to the original apostles, which gives rise to the term ‘Apostolic Succession’ in the Catholic Church. It is the same in the Orthodox or Eastern Church. “The Roman Pontiff, as successor of Peter, is the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of unity of both the bishops and the faithful.” (Lumen gentium, 23)

While all members of the Church are equal there is a particular structure necessary for the ‘running’ of the Church. As already said, the head of the Church is the pope who is also the Bishop of Rome. As his advisors he has the ‘College of Cardinals’ who are themselves bishops and whose numbers are limited by papal decree. Since apostolic times the leaders of the Church have had special advisors and over time this evolved into the College of Cardinals. It is this sacred college which elects the new pontiff, though one need not be a cardinal to be elected. In earlier times, cardinals tended to be exclusively Italian but this ended during the twelfth century. Cardinals now come from all five continents.

Next to the cardinals are the bishops and they form the ‘College of Bishops.’ The pope and cardinals are also bishops and all work in unity together. Every diocese is headed by a bishop and a group of dioceses together in one area form a metropolitan area. The bishop in the main diocese of a metropolitan is known as an archbishop, though this does not give him any authority over the bishops in neighbouring dioceses.

Assisting the bishops in their task of ministering to the people and the running of the local Church are priests and deacons. To these they delegate certain duties and responsibilities. The geographical area looked after by a priest is called a ‘parish.’ The faithful are ministered to by the clergy and work with them wherever possible for the building up of the kingdom.

This, in a nutshell, is the basic structure of the Church. Yet, while the pope may be treated with utmost respect it does not mean that he is any greater than any other member of the Church. All are equal members of the Church through their baptism though each serves Christ in his or her own way. All the members of the Church are human and all struggle to live a life worthy of the Gospel.

Orders, Institutes, Congregations, etc

As part of the Mystical Body of Christ we are called to witness to the Gospel of Christ. Some are called to serve the Lord in the ordained ministry while many others are called to serve in the lay state. No matter what our status in life or our occupations we can all witness to Christ and to the Gospel by the way we live and how we interact with our fellow men and women. Within the Catholic Church there is another form of service which is known as ‘religious life.’

In religious life men and women join particular communities which are known as religious orders or institutes of religious life. In religious life the individual makes three vows – poverty, obedience and chastity – which they vow for the rest of their life. Religious live together in communities and hold all material goods in common, being obedient to the community’s superior and, if there is one, their regional superior. They also live a life of chastity, committing their entire life to Christ. Some religious take an active and public apostolate or ministry in that they may run schools or teach in them, they may be part of a parish team, or work with the poor, or in hospitals, or on the missions, etc. Others take prayer and contemplation as their apostolate and live in monasteries. Each order or religious institute has its own charism and spirituality, and its own particular reason for having been founded. For example, the Order of Preachers (better known as the Dominicans) was founded by St Dominic to preach the word of God at a time when the Albigensian heresy was rife in Europe. The contemplative Carmelite nuns were founded to live a life of contemplation and prayer and, for this reason, they live in enclosed monasteries which they rarely leave, spending their day praying for the world beyond their walls.

All of these religious orders, institutes and congregations are Roman Catholic and are not separate churches or systems of belief. Each brings out in its way a different aspect of the Kingdom of God which they bring closer to those they come into contact with.

Some of the larger and older orders also have special ‘associations’ or lay organisations for lay members. Those who are not called to the religious life but who wish to participate more closely in the spirituality of the order and to serve Christ in a different way, may join these associations. They take three promises of poverty, obedience and chastity, though there is a different understanding of these than for those who are ‘full’ members of a religious order. They promise poverty in that they accept what they have been given as gifts from God and which they share with those who are less well off. They promise obedience in that they will be obedient to their local bishop and to the Church. They promise chastity in that they will live a chaste life, though this does not mean celibacy. All are members of their local parish but they have an extra commitment in their lives.

C. O’Donnell, O. Carm.

On the 25 March in 1858 the twelve-year old peasant girl, Bernadette Soubirous felt drawn to the grotto where a beautiful lady had been appearing to her frequently since 11 February that year. Bernadette asked her who she was, and the lady in white said in the local dialect, “I am the Immaculate Conception.”  It would be difficult to say how much that statement might have meant to the barely literate Bernadette. The clergy knew its significance. Only four years earlier Pius IX had defined the Immaculate Conception as a dogma of faith.

There can be some confusion about the meaning of this doctrine. Some people confuse it with the conception of Jesus in the womb of Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit. No. The Immaculate Conception is the conception of Mary. But it is still a big mouthful. The problem is with the word “immaculate.” This is a negative word, meaning, “not spotted or stained.” The stain in question is of course original sin. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception can be put quite simply, “whatever original sin is, Mary never had it.” But original sin is also negative. Sin is a privation, namely something missing, in this case the grace of Christ. The doctrine of original sin means that all are born in a state of lacking grace and salvation. Each one is in need and has to receive grace as a gift. A child born of two saints is still a child that is short of grace. Grace, in other words, cannot be inherited.

At this point we can say that the Immaculate Conception means that Mary was never in a state of lacking grace. We can state the doctrine positively and say that from the very first moment of her existence, Mary was the most beloved of God and enjoyed grace, which made her holy, sharing in the life of the Trinity.

The Eastern Orthodox and other Churches do not celebrate this feast; they do not accept the doctrine either. Original sin was a Western problem, and this doctrine was hammered out in North Africa through St. Augustine’s controversy with Pelagius, who more or less stated that we could save ourselves. Not so, replied Augustine. We need grace. The Eastern Churches have a major celebration of the Presentation of Mary on 21 November. The idea that Mary was presented in the Temple as a young girl is making the same point: Mary always belonged to God.  She was always full of grace.  Thus far from being negative, the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is a positive affirmation about God’s gift of grace and holiness to Mary.

If we wish to reflect deeper on the Immaculate Conception, the obvious place to go is the Mass text for the feast. In particular we should read the Preface, that is the opening part of the Eucharistic Prayer that comes before the Holy Holy.  Whenever we celebrate Mass the preface reminds us  why, today, we should thank God.  It may be for a great feast like Easter or Christmas; it may be for a penitential season like Lent; it may be the occasion of a funeral or a wedding. All of these have their own prefaces which invite us to praise and thank God for the mystery we are celebrating on a particular day. There are also more general prefaces in use for weekdays or when there is no special occasion, feast or season.

When we look at the preface of the Immaculate Conception we find two themes interwoven: this feast of Mary is related to both to her Son and to the Church. It reads:

Father all powerful and ever-living God,

we do well always and everywhere to give you thanks.

You allowed no stain of Adam’s sin to touch the Virgin Mary.

Full of grace she was to be a worthy mother of your Son,

your sign of favour to the Church at its beginning,

and the promise of its perfection as the bride of Christ, radiant in beauty.

Purest of virgins, she was to bring forth your Son,

the innocent Lamb who takes away our sins.

You chose her from all women

 to be our advocate with you and our pattern in holiness.

In our joy we sing to your glory wit all the choirs of angels, Holy, holy…

The preface is relates Mary to her Son. One reason for the Immaculate Conception according to this lovely preface is that it would have been completely inappropriate for the Mother of the Second Person of the Trinity to have been under the reign of sin.  In our time we have lost both a sense of sin and a sense of holiness, so that we may not feel or appreciate the urgency of sinlessness in the Mother of God.There is utter incompatibility between God and sin. By God’s grace, Mary was then to have been “a worthy mother of your Son.”  In being the mother of God she was to be “purest of virgins to bring forth your Son.”

But the preface also points to Mary’s relationship to the Church, to us. She is God’s “sign of favour to the Church at its  beginning, and the promise of its perfection as the Bride of Christ, radiant in beauty.” For a world that has no hope apart from God, the Immaculate Conception affirms that sin can be overcome, that the sin that weighs down the Church will be conquered by Jesus Christ, and the Church will one day be radiant in beauty. The Church is to be patterned on Mary: she is chosen uniquely to be our advocate and our pattern in holiness.    The perfection of God’s place is already visible in Mary; we wait for God’s salvation to clothe us perfectly too.

The feast is therefore a celebration of what God has done for Mary because she was destined to be the Mother of God; it also celebrates what God has done for the Church by giving it Mary as advocate and model of holiness, as well as the perfect holiness and beauty that God will eventually give the Church. These truths are not a complete account of all God’s favours to Mary. But they are themes that we do well to consider as we begin our liturgical pilgrimage once more to walk with John the Baptism and Mary y and so prepare to marvel once more at the wonder of the Incarnation.

To return to Lourdes. “I am the Immaculate Conception” is clearly a confirmation for the Church of the proclamation of Pius IX in 1854.   But can one go further? Given Mary’s total love of God, surely one of the gifts that she treasured most was to have always been in God’s love, never, even for an instant been separated from his love and grace. To have been sinless is not an achievement but pure gift. A gift of perfect love for the God she loved so perfectly is surely one of Mary’s deepest joys.

Tom Zeitvogel, T.O. Carm.

It is a privilege and honor to have been asked to write these few observations, or perceptions if you will, about a Carmelite friar who has endeared himself to the hearts of a multitude of Lay Carmelites throughout the world. Fr Redemptus Maria Valabek, O.Carm. was unquestionably our friend, our mentor and our advocate. It is for this reason that the comments I’d like to share in this brief article include thoughts from other Lay Carmelites who have been kind enough to provide them to me.

To do this, I’ve decided to organize these perceptions into four categories: Fr Redemptus, the Author and Editor; the Communicator; the Defender of our Traditions; and our Advocate in Rome. With the permission of the reader, I would also like to take the liberty of addressing Fr Valabek as simply “Fr Redemptus.” This is because I believe it is quite safe to assume that many Lay Carmelites may not even recall his last name, but nonetheless have a unique affinity for this special Carmelite friar they simply know by his religious name.

Author, Editor and Man of Peace

As has been the case for so many Lay Carmelites, I first became acquainted with Fr Redemptus through his many writings, such as Mary, Mother of Carmel (Vols. 1 & 2), Prayer Life in Carmel, and as editor of Carmel in the World. Since then, his work on Profiles in Holiness has added to the testimony that defines who he grew to be in the hearts of so many Lay Carmelites.

My first actual meeting with this exemplary friar was during Easter Week of 1991 while participating in a meeting of Lay Carmelites from around the world at The Friars, in Aylesford, England. Among other initial impressions, it became clear that one could differ with him on a given point without becoming alienated from him. A particular case in point was a breakout session where discussion between the merits of retaining a separate “rule” for the “Third Order” of Carmel should be the accepted position or whether we should opt for a “constitution” type of document. That session included both friars and Lay Carmelites, including myself. Although the proponents of each position vigorously articulated and defended their positions, Fr Redemptus was the one who, by word and example, insured that animosity did not follow us out of the meeting. I saw this unique trait exhibited on numerous occasions in meetings since that initial encounter with this remarkable Carmelite friar.

Communicator

Lay Carmelites from many regions around North America and the world have shared with me how much the cards, notes, letters, phone calls and faxes from Fr Redemptus meant to them. I gladly and thankfully include myself in this group. Through these various means of communication, Fr Redemptus never seemed far away. He was always there when we needed him, and baffled many of us on how he found the time to maintain these communications! He became our one constant.

A few excerpts from some of the letters that he sent to Lay Carmelites who were kind enough to share them with me may help to substantiate how Fr Redemptus became a “real” person to us, even from his far-off residence in Rome. I would like to first quote verbatim from a letter I received from a Lay Carmelite, who would prefer to remain anonymous, that truly summarizes this point. She writes:

When I consider the over 55 letters I have saved from Fr Redemptus, and I sit here reading them again, I marvel at the time and energy he so lovingly spent caring for my soul. Then again it was in 1987, the Marian Year, that I first met him in Rome and sensed that here was a Carmelite priest living the fullest of his vocation in Carmel. I saw him at retreats no more than five times after that first encounter of grace. I kept in touch with letters. He always made a person feel that he was special in Carmel and encouraged particularly Lay Carmelites to advance in holiness. His response to my letters was as if I were truly his sister in Carmel, inspiring me for continuing the work (in my area) among our Lay Carmelite family. Spiritual direction, encouragement and personal attentiveness were his characteristics in the letters he wrote. Love was always present as the presence of God continued to channel the graces of Our Lady and Our Blessed Lord Jesus whom he loved so dearly: I will always be grateful that this beautiful saint came into my life. He will be remembered always as one of the greatest and most prolific Carmelite writers in our time.

In another letter (he always began his letters with “Dear Fellow Carmelite”) one gets a glimpse of how Fr Redemptus relates our difficulties in today’s world — even within our immediate family — to the message of John of the Cross. He says:

... You mention that you are finding your painful sanctification within your own family circle. How many times this happens. It’s the normal way that the Lord has of purifying us and of leading us on the path to great holiness. At least He invites us to the heights. St. John of the Cross was convinced that too many of us prefer paths that prevent us from a rapid, direct climb of Mt. Carmel. This is why he seems too negative. He is reacting to those who should be on the road to perfection, but who like to take their time about it, and call the shots for themselves rather than being submissive to the Lord and accepting the crosses that he sends us in our normal living, whether it be in our family ambience or in the context of a religious community. We often think of spiritual growth in grandiose terms, whereas the Lord in his goodness links it to our humdrum everyday existence. It’s a lot less glamorous, but much more effective…

A brief note sent just prior to Easter hints at the physical pain that had consumed so much of Fr Redemptus’ physical strength in recent years:

Thank you for your Easter prayers, greetings and message. I too wish you a grace-filled Holy Week and Solemnity of Easter, the highpoints of our yearly re-living of Christy mysteries. May we year by year grow in depth in the meaning of these mysteries in our own lives, because as Christ’s Passion is forever — in us — so is his Resurrection/Glorification ... Like yourself my feet give me many problems, but as you say, others have far more serious problems with their health, both physical and spiritual ...

And finally yet another note on a postcard to a Lay Carmelite relates to us the mind and heart of Fr Redemptus, as he empathizes with tender concern about our spiritual growth.

I find it very disconcerting that we sometimes get bogged down on juridical matters and critiques and forget ‘the first thing necessary. I believe that we Carmelites have to be more and more faithful to our charism of fostering divine intimacy, i.e. seeing the hand of God in our concrete histories, and in the history of our times. When God gives us the spiritual sensitivity to be aware of his mighty loving presence, it is the height of charity to share this grace with others. Don’t you (agree) that this is the most important aspect of our Carmelite witness?

Another enormous “service” that Fr Redemptus rendered to us Lay Carmelites was the untold number of days of recollection and retreats he graciously led for so many of our groups here in North America. These were done almost always during his summer “vacation” time, and were clearly remarkable ways in which he communicated by example and word what genuine holiness and love for Carmel can be. It was infectious and exemplary — from his demeanor in the wearing of his habit and priestly garb, to the traditional basis of his teachings which were always in tune with the Magisterium of the Church. This was a constant that could always be counted on from Fr Redemptus.

Additionally, the spiritual direction he provided for an untold number of Lay Carmelites, both in person and with correspondence (as testified to in just some of his personal letters that were quoted above), will unquestionably have eternal value for these individuals.

Defender of Traditions

It is a fact that we are living in an era of permissiveness with tremendous pressures from well-meaning individuals. They often suggest and articulate vocally and in writing positions that are seemingly justified straying from solid traditional expressions of not only our Catholic roots, but also even from our roots in Carmelite spirituality This ranges from several aspects of the liturgy, to misinterpretations and even challenges some of the long-standing characteristics of our spirituality. Fr Redemptus remained a fiercely staunch advocate of the Order’s long-standing charisms. This was a common perspective related to me by many Lay Carmelites.

But even when it came to debates such as whether or not Lay Carmel should have its own “rule” or evolve to a “constitution”, the debates were never marred by animosity but, always conducted with charity and understanding. Both positions never questioned our “tradition,” but one always knew that Fr Redemptus was speaking from what he strongly believed was the true tradition of the Order. Lay Carmelites will forever be grateful for his example in this regard.

Advocate in Rome

For many years, Fr Redemptus was the promoter of causes for Lay Carmelites. I shall never forget the many times he would share with me the stories of the lives of Carmelite laity in the far-flung regions of the world who lived even hundreds of years ago; but how baffled he was that so many of them have not yet been officially canonized. In the same conversation he would always marvel at the heroic holiness being lived out by many Lay Carmelites today. These were edifying conversations that filled those of us privileged to be part of them with renewed hope in our own Carmelite vocations.

With his language skills in English, Italian and French, I personally witnessed Fr Redemptus on many occasions quietly but firmly argue on behalf of all Lay Carmel during meetings at the Order’s headquarters in Rome. But that was only the tip of the iceberg in the legacy he established for himself on our behalf for many many years — even within the various offices of the Vatican. It can truly be declared that he was our champion in Rome!

For me personally, I will always consider Fr Redemptus as my primary advocate in Rome. I give him full credit for the opportunities that I have had to work with the International Commission, to give a major talk at the 2001 Sassone Congress, to champion the work I have done with formation materials, and in so many other ways. This makes his passing an even deeper personal loss; however, I pray that he will not forget us from his eternal home above.

So on behalf of all Lay Carmelites who knew, respected and loved this great Carmelite, I say ... Thank you Fr Redemptus. You will be sorely missed by those of us who remain in this vale of tears, but we now ask your continued influence from your place with Jesus and Our Lady of Mount Carmel. Please help us all to be with you one day with you when our time has finally come to leave our earthly journey.

n August 2003, Redemptus Valabek, O.Carm. died tragically in a road traffic accident while on holidays in the United States. Redemptus had been the editor and driving force behind “Carmel in the World.” This edition is therefore dedicated to him and contains tributes to him.

On account of the 450th anniversary of the birth of St. Mary Magdalen de’Pazzi, the Apostolic Penitentiary has granted that all Carmelite monasteries be places where people may obtain a plenary indulgence throughout this year, beginning on the 2nd of April, 2016 and ending on the 25th of May, 2017. The same applies to churches and chapels dedicated to her.

On the 2nd of April, the date of her birth in 1566, there will be a solemn opening of the centenary year in the monastery of Careggi (Florence, Italy) where her body is venerated.

Christus resurrexit!
Resurrexit vere! AlleluIa!

In Pascha Domini
A.D. 2016

Fernando Prior Generalis
Domusque Generalis Communitas

The Elective Chapter of the Carmelite Monastery of Camerino, Italy, was held 19 March 2016. The following were elected:

• Prioress:  Sr. M. Teresita Marino, O.Carm.
• 1st Councilor:   Sr. M. Paola Colletta, O.Carm.
• 2nd Councilor:  Sr. M. Simona Staffieri, O.Carm.
• Director of Novices:  Sr. M. Paola Colletta, O.Carm.
• Treasurer:  Sr. M. Simona Staffieri, O.Carm.
• Sacristan:  Sr. M. Grazia Di Palma, O.Carm.