Asceticism at the Service of Grace Donald C

Louvain Studies 28 (2003) 32-47

Asceticism at the Service of Grace Donald C. Maldari

Christian theology proposes that the vocation to which God calls all people is nothing less than perfection, holiness, the fullness of human life: “Be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt 5:48). Chris- tian theology ultimately identifies this perfection as a participation in the divine life of love. Perfection is a daunting goal! Augustine’s theology of grace goes a long way to relieve anxiety concerning responsibil- ity for responding to the divine invitation. He demonstrates that God takes the initiative for the response and, with the freely chosen cooperation of human nature, brings the process to fulfillment. Human nature, however, demonstrates a penchant for distraction from this process, i.e., it is sinful. Among the remedies that the Christian Tradi- tion uses against this human penchant for resisting grace is asceticism: religious discipline which hones the human capacity to receive grace efficaciously.1 The Christian Tradition has distinguished the “evangelical counsels” of poverty, chastity and obedience as among the more particularly useful practices of asceticism in its arsenal against sin. All lifestyles need to adapt them and can profit from their practice. Their forms are as a varied as

1. The etymology of the word, from Greek âséw, âskéw, âsketßv meaning exercises or discipline which hone one’s ability to participate in a physical or spiritual activity, helps to clarify this understanding. See M. Olphe-Galliard, “Ascèse, ascétisme. II: Développement historique,” Dictionnaire de spiritualité ascétique et mystique, 1937, I: 939-941. For discussions of currents and understandings of asceticism which may have influenced the Christian understanding, see ibid., I: 941-960; M. Viller & M. Olphe- Galliard, “Ascèse, ascétisme. III: L’ascèse chrétienne. A: Les origines scripturaires,” ibid., I: 960-964; Anthony Meredith, “Asceticism – Christian and Greek,” The Journal of Theological Studies 27 (1976) 313-332; Mervin M. Deems, “Early Christian Asceticism,” Early Christian Origin: Studies for H. T. Willoughby, ed. A. Wilkgren (Chicago, IL: Quad- rangle Books, 1961) 91-101; Albert-Marie Denis, “Ascèse et vie chrétienne: éléments concernant la vie religieuse dans le Nouveau Testament,” Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 47 (1963) 606-618. ASCETICISM AT THE SERVICE OF GRACE 33 the particular lifestyles which people pursue. Joseph de Guibert clarifies the character of asceticism in Christianity by noting that “it is the col- lective responses of the soul to grace which constitutes for it the ascetic effort.”2 Unfortunately asceticism in general, and the evangelical counsels in particular, are often misunderstood as purely negative enterprises which disdain the works of creation; as means by which to earn divine favor, or as practices restricted to a select group of Christians. It is the contention of this essay that asceticism is in fact a positive enterprise of discipline, that it serves to promote a person’s reception of grace rather than attempt to earn grace, and that it is a useful practice for all Chris- tians regardless of lifestyle, career or ministry. It serves to promote the process of Christian initiation: a radical death to the sinful and deluded human stance of independence from God and a rebirth into the reality of human contingency toward God. Ascetic practices attempt to redirect the Christian’s focus away from any distractions from God. The Tradi- tion has distinguished obedience as a means of promoting attentiveness to the divine Word; poverty as a means of promoting receptivity of the divine Word, and chastity as promoting the actualization of the divine Word in each person’s life. They help Christians to combat tendencies to independence, pride and selfishness. They serve to help Christians to cultivate a relationship with God which is characterized by receptivity to grace which sanctifies them, urging them to the perfection of love.

Asceticism as a Means of Developing Christian Commitment

Asceticism developed in Christianity as a way by which people could imitate Jesus’ attitude toward the world and his Father.3 T. J. van Bavel proposes that the oldest form of Christian asceticism comes from the eschatological nature of Christianity. That is to say, the Christian lives in the conviction of the transitory character of this world. This time and this

2. “Ascèse. III: Questions théologiques,” Dictionnaire de spiritualité ascétique et mystique, 1937, I, 990-1001, c. 991. Cf. Martin Luther’s critique of asceticism when it is perceived as a substitute for grace in George Yule, “Luther and the Ascetic Life,” Monks, Hermits and the Ascetic Tradition: Papers read at the 1984 Summer Meeting and the 1985 Winter Meeting of the Ecclesiastical History Society, ed. W. J. Sheils (London: Blackwell, 1985) 229-239. 3. See Robin Darling Young, “Recent Interpretations of Early Christian Asceticism,” The Thomist 54 (1990) 123-140. 34 DONALD C. MALDARI

world are not for him the last word. The Christian knows that he is constantly “en route” and therefore he takes up a freer stance.4 A brief consideration of some witnesses of asceticism in primitive Christianity support this contention. The ancient Christians embraced actions that promoted a freedom from anything that would distract them from being dependent upon and receptive to God’s grace. Martyrdom was among the first ways of expe- riencing that freedom. The ancient Christians saw it as a way of partic- ipating in the suffering Christ, as a release from the evil in the world, and as a means of passage to a different state of consciousness.5 Margaret Miles summarizes: “The emphasis on asceticism that began with Clement of Alexandria and became a constant theme of Christian theology after the third century was a direct continuation of the martyrdom consciousness of the times of persecution.”6 The haunting words of Jesus as remembered in the synoptic tradition inspire Christian spirituality: If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it. For what will it profit them to gain the whole world and forfeit their life? Those who are ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of them the Son of Man will also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels (Mark 8:34-38 and parallels in Matt 16:24-27; Luke 9:23-26). and in the Johannine tradition, Those who love their life lose it, and those who hate their life in this world will keep it for eternal life. Whoever serves me must follow me, and where I am, there will my servant be also. Whoever serves me, the Father will honor (John 12:25-26). The juxtaposition of the pericopes containing Jesus’ teaching concerning the necessity of Christians to die to themselves, to take up their cross, and the transfiguration in the synoptic gospels (Mark 8:34–9:1; Luke 9:23-27; Matt 16:24-28 and Mark 9:2-10; Luke 9:28-36;

4. De kern van het religieuze leven (Tielt: Lannoo, 1973) 58; revised and published in English as The Basic Inspiration of Religious Life (Villanova, PA: Augustinian Press, 1996) 50. 5. Margaret R. Miles, Fullness of Life: Historical Foundations for a New Asceticism (Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press, 1981) 33-36. 6. Ibid., 20. Lumen gentium: The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, paragraph 42 of the Second Vatican Council takes the same stance. ASCETICISM AT THE SERVICE OF GRACE 35

Matt 17:1-9) may well be significant. It suggests the relationship between self-abnegation as a response to God’s love and the experience of one’s own transfiguration when done in communion with Christ.7 Real death is con- formity to the corrupt world; real life is growth into the Kingdom of God, attainable only through a death to the old life and a rebirth to the new.8 The early Christians considered the deaths of the martyrs as the fulfillment of their baptisms by which they had inchoately died with Christ and risen with him. It was the ultimate human participation in Christ’s freedom to receive and live in divine love.9 Martyrdom served to focus Christians on their commitment to the Kingdom and to prioritize all things in function of that commitment. It was a moment of decision, affirming what they valued as the supreme good, their love for God, even as that implied the rejection of other goods. It was the ultimate act of asceticism in Christianity. Once the period of active persecution and the probability of martyrdom had ceased, Christians looked for other ways than martyrdom to fulfill their baptisms. They recognized the need of exercises that promote their dependence upon God, which prioritize their values and existentially clarify their relationship with creation. Ascetic practices, some of which became known collectively as “evangelical counsels,” provided that opportunity. These counsels are useful for all Chris- tians as they strive to promote their process of Christian initiation by responding to grace in their everyday lives.

The Authentic Character of Christian Asceticism

The word “asceticism” does not generally evoke reactions of enthu- siasm in contemporary society. Unfortunately its negative aspect, that of renunciation of the pleasures of creation and the various levels of dis- comfort which we associate with that act, are often the first images which

7. Enrique Nardoni, “A Redactional Interpretation of Mark 9:1,” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 43 (1981) 365-384; Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Luke I-IX, Anchor Bible, 28 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1979) 786; C. S. Mann, Mark, Anchor Bible, 27 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1986) 354. 8. See Ignatius of Antioch, To the Magnesians, ch. v; Irenaeus of Lyons, Adv. haer. IV.xx.6; Didache. 9. Ancient Christian writers used the words teleíwsiv, téleiov and teleioÕn to describe the fulfillment or perfection of human life accomplished in martyrdom. See, for example, Ignatius of Antioch, To the Romans. See further Guerric Couilleau, “Perfection: II. Pères et premiers moines,” Dictionnaire de spiritualité ascétique et mystique, 1984, XII: 1081-1118, cc. 1082-1083; Gerhard Delling, “télov,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Friedrich (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972) 8: 49-57, p. 57. 36 DONALD C. MALDARI spring to mind.10 Christian theology rejects the proposal that there is something intrinsically meritorious in the practice of asceticism or with the renunciation or pain associated with it. A cursory consideration of some scriptural and patristic witnesses demonstrates that authentic Chris- tian asceticism does not pursue renunciation for its own sake nor does it purport to earn merit from God. In contrast with its Gnostic variant and in accord with the Biblical evaluation of the essentially good character of creation, Christian asceticism values the intrinsic goodness of the world while promoting a disciplined use of the goods of the world. It does not reject the world as evil nor does it evaluate it as nothing but a temptation to be distracted from God. Christian spiritualities of the pedigree of Ignatius Loyola call for asceticism11 while boldly affirming that creation exists in order to help people in the process of salvation.12 St. Paul, who has never been accused of promoting salvation as a result of human merit, expresses the purpose and character of asceticism in Christianity when he writes, “… I pommel (üpwpiáhw)13 my body (s¬ma) and subdue (or enslave) it (doulagwgéw), lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified” (1 Cor 9:27).14 Paul uses the word êgkráteia, self-con- trol, once, in 1 Cor 9:25 where, as Walter Grundmann observes, it does not denote the asceticism of merit. It simply tells us that for the sake of the goal towards which he strives, the commission which he has been given and the task which he must fulfil, he refrains from all the things which might offend or hamper.15

10. See, for example, the working definition of Christian asceticism which Pierre Hadot assumes in Philosophy as a Way of Life, trans. Michael Chase (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995) 128. Hadot adopts the “modern sense” of the word asceticism as that proposed by K. Heussi, Der Ursprung des Mönchtums (Tübingen, 1936) 13: “Complete abstinence or restriction in the use of food, drink, sleep, dress, and property, and especially continence in sexual matters.” 11. Ignatius Loyola, Spiritual Exercises. The first annotation draws an analogy between physical and spiritual exercises and sees both as a preparation for some desired goal. 12. “… and the other things on the face of the earth are created for humans in order to aid them in the pursuit of the end for which they were created. Ibid., paragraph 23, “The First Principle and Foundation.” 13. From üpÉpion, the part of the face below the eyes, from üpó + æc, to strike one upon the parts beneath the eye; to beat; to discipline, coerce. The word also appears in Luke 18,5 where it suggests pester or wear out. 14. Konrad Weiss interprets üpwpiáhw as expressing Paul’s subjection of his resisting body to the service of his ministry. He refers to Rom 8:13 as an explication of this image: “… for if you live according to the flesh (katà sárka), you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body (prázeiv toÕ sÉmatov), you will live.” Weiss emphasizes that Paul is not referring to the practice of asceticism for the purpose of meriting salvation. “üpwpiáhw,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 8: 590-591. 15. “êgkráteia,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 2: 339-342, p. 342. Cf. Acts 24:25; 2 Pet 1:6 and Titus 1:8 for other uses of the word in the New Testament. ASCETICISM AT THE SERVICE OF GRACE 37

Paul values the body as good. He disciplines it such that it might be “subdued” or “enslaved” to Christ. The New Testament values “enslavement” to God as a virtuous condition. Through this relationship one receives grace from God which subsequently produces good results.16 Mary, who declares herself the “slave of the Lord” and asks that “it be to me according to your word,” in Luke 1:38 typifies this condition. Theologians of the patristic period further illuminate the character of orthodox Christian asceticism. Clement of Alexandria and Origen17 are particularly helpful witnesses of that development. They charted a course between the Scylla and Charybdis of the two Gnostic responses to the physical world: total rejection or total indifference.18 Their theology demonstrates a deep appreciation for the goodness of creation and a rejection of dualism. They identify asceticism as any practice which promotes one’s cooperation with the divinely initiated process of salvation. Although this often took the form of sexual continence, Clement recognizes that marriage, too, can be a form of asceticism which, depending on the person, can serve the same purpose.19 J. A. McGuckin summarizes the patristic appreciation of asceticism as follows: The patristic asceticism was a kathartic celebration of life, a sensiti- zation to higher psychic levels, and in its own way was faithful to the memory of one who came “eating and drinking” to try and excite his contemporaries with the heady new wine of God’s dawning reign of Justice.20

Grundmann explains that the concept of self-mastery in the Hellenistic sense by which one would earn holiness is alien to Christianity: “… belief in creation cut off the way to asceticism. It saw in the world with its gifts the hand of the Creator. Finally, the gift of salvation in Christ left no place for an asceticism which merits salvation” (342). 16. Cf. Acts 4:29; 16:17; Gal 1:10; Js 1:1; Tit 1:1; Rom 1:1; 6:18,22; Ph 1:1, Jd 1. See further Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, “doÕlov, súndoulov, doúlj, douleúw, douleía, 2. Christians as doÕloi of God and Christ,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 2: 273-277; John L. McKenzie, Dictionary of the Bible (New York: Macmillan, 1976) 825. 17. Margaret Miles demonstrates that both appreciated the value of the body. An accurate understanding of Origen’s theology is made difficult by the condemnation of ideas whose origin were attributed to him by the Second Council of Constantinople in 533. Few of his original works remain. Most of the sources available to us are Latin translations, many made by his opponents such as Jerome. See Margaret Miles, Fullness of Life: Historical Foundations for a New Asceticism (Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press, 1981) 37-61. 18. See, for example, Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis III.v.40; Miles, Fullness of Life, 39. 19. Stromateis VII.xii.70. 20. “Christian Asceticism and the Early School of Alexandria,” Monks, Hermits and the Ascetic Tradition, 25-39, p. 39. See further Kallistos Ware, “The Way of the Ascetics: Negative or Affirmative?,” Asceticism, ed. Vincent L. Wimbush & Richard Valantasis 38 DONALD C. MALDARI

The Value of Asceticism: The Promotion of the Counter-Cultural Value of Contingency

A number of articles in popular periodicals have recently expressed a renewed appreciation of the usefulness of asceticism in contemporary Western culture. Margaret R. Miles, for example, in a 1983 article in Commonweal, resumes a position which she took in her 1981 work, Full- ness of Life: Historical Foundations for a New Asceticism: Before Christianity was knowledge, before it was rectified moral commitment, even before it was community, Christian faith was explicitly an orientation to the source of life, a “conversion” to full vitality from the deadness of secular culture.21 The “deadness” of secular culture is a result of the illusion that humanity is not contingent upon God and is able to achieve fulfillment independently of God’s help, i.e., of grace. The Enlightenment embraced the Pelagian belief in the human capacity to achieve success without divine intervention.22 Christianity finds itself in the counter-cultural position of denying that capacity and of appealing to grace for human beings to come to fulfillment. Asceticism is a counter-cultural exercise that serves to promote the human capacity to receive grace.23 Christianity, too, is counter-cultural in the face of “the world,” as understood in the Johannine sense. It needs safeguards to prevent it from losing its radical focus on the ultimate goal of humanity and thereby losing its essential character as a witness of God in the world. Without those safeguards Christians risk the loss of themselves in a gratification which degenerates into what Jesus calls the

(New York: Oxford University Press, 1995) 3-15; Robin Darling Young, “Recent Inter- pretations of Early Christian Asceticism,” The Thomist 54 (1990) 123-140. 21. “The Recovery of Asceticism,” Commonweal 110 (1983) 40-43, p. 41. See also Steven J. Scherrer M.M., “Asceticism in the Christian Life,” Review for Religious 43 (1984) 264-274; Robert F. Morneau, “Principles of Asceticism,” Review for Religious 44 (1985) 410-425; Janet Morley, “Redeeming Asceticism,” The Way 27 (1987) 174-183; Elizabeth Ann Dreyer, “Asceticism Reconsidered,” Weavings 3 (1988) 6-15; Columba Steward, “The Greening of Asceticism,” The Way 31 (1991) 303-312. Cf. Marc Gunther, “God and Business,” in Fortune (July 9, 2001) 59-80. 22. See Henry Chadwick, “The Ascetic Ideal in the History of the Church,” Monks, Hermits and the Ascetic Tradition, 1-23, p. 6. 23. See J. Duncan M. Derrett, “Primitive Christianity as an Ascetic Movement,” Asceticism, 88-107, p. 96; Albert-Marie Denis, “Ascèse et vie chrétienne: éléments concernant la vie religieuse dans le Nouveau Testament,” Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 47 (1963) 606-618; Vincent Desprez, “Christian Asceticism between the New Testament and the Beginning of Monasticism,” American Benedictine Review 42 (1991) 163-178, 334-344. ASCETICISM AT THE SERVICE OF GRACE 39 forfeiture of one’s life (Mark 8:36; Matt 16:26; Luke 9:25) instead of losing themselves in God’s love, and thus becoming fully alive. The phenomenon of the desert hermits in the 3rd and 4th centuries and the development of monasticism and, subsequently, those lifestyles collectively known as “religious life,” give further evidence of a fervor among Christians to exercise asceticism for the purpose of growth in the life of love, i.e. in perfection and holiness. The project was positive and congruous with the writings of the earlier Fathers. It was not a depreciation of the body. Athanasius’ Life of Antony recounts that Antony fled to the desert as a means of responding radically to the Gospel. The story of the “Rich Young Man” (Mark 10:17-22; Matt 19:16-22; Luke 18:18-23) prompted Antony to see that his possessions were a burden to him, that they hindered his response to God’s vocation to love. That story and the Gospel’s encouragement not to be anxious but to trust in God inspired Antony to change his lifestyle. He divested himself of all his possessions and “he henceforth devoted himself outside his house to discipline.”24 Later, after having spent twenty years in seclusion, Athanasius describes Antony as being in excellent physical and spiritual health.25 His asceticism was a means that cultivated the conditions by which God could help him to grow in holiness.26 The eremitic and, after Pachomius, the monastic life, became lifestyles which helped people fight their demons in order to receive God’s grace more abundantly and thus grow in love, holiness and perfection. They were countercultural movements, expres- sions of uneasiness with a secularizing tendency in Christianity that blurs the Christian’s focus on the Kingdom of God and the prioritization of all things in function of that commitment.27 Christian ascetic practices aim first at producing an experience of the realization of one’s absolute contingency and dependence upon God. It is for this reason that the Tradition recognizes the value of the “evangelical

24. Athanasius, Vita Antonii, 3. 25. Ibid., 14. 26. See further Samuel Rubenson, “Christian Asceticism and the Emergence of the Monastic Tradition,” Asceticism, 49-57; Miles, Fullness of Life, 136-141; Karl Baus, Hand- book of Church History: From the Apostolic Community to Constantine, ed. Hubert Jedin & John Dolan (New York/Freiburg: Herder and Herder, 1965) 296-298. 27. Basil, Reg. fus.tract., 6,1. See further Robert Murray, S.J., “The Features of the Earliest Christian Asceticism,” Christian Spirituality: Essays in Honour of Gordon Rupp, ed. Peter Brooks (London: SCM, 1975) 65-77; Henry Chadwick, “The Ascetic Ideal in the History of the Church,” Monks, Hermits and the Ascetic Tradition, 1-23; Guerric Couilleau, “Perfection. II: Pères et premiers moines,” Dictionnaire de spiritualité ascétique et mystique, 1984, XII: 1081-1118; Karl Suso Frank, “Perfection chrétienne. III: Moyen Âge,” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité ascétique et mystique, 1984, XII: 1118-1131, cc. 1119- 1125. 40 DONALD C. MALDARI counsels” which promote the practice of the theological virtues. The Tra- dition recognizes the value of evangelical obedience, to be distinguished from demeaning subservience or subjugation, as promoting one’s ability to be attentive to God. Through this attentiveness one hears that of which one would otherwise be unaware. The exercise of obedience leads to that of faith, the theological virtue which promotes an affective, loving trust which transforms those who believe from the condition of “deadness” of which Margaret Miles has spoken to that of authentic life. Evangelical poverty, to be distinguished from destitution or misery, carves out an emptiness that is subsequently filled with grace. Mary, again, serves as the exemplar of this poverty in her relationship of receptivity to God, and thus the angel Gabriel in Luke 1:28 recognizes her as “endowed with grace”. The exercise of poverty promotes that of hope, the theological virtue that inchoately fulfills the human desire for communion with God. It serves to transform the one who hopes such that one already begins to live and to experience that in which one hopes.28 The Tradition recognizes the value of evangelical chastity. This chastity, to be distinguished from any particular form of it, e.g. matrimony or celibacy, hones one’s ability to be loved and to love authentically. Chastity serves to purify one’s response to the myriad, conflicting affective attractions that people experience. It is that discipline which directs and cultivates one’s responses into that love which is characteristic of the communion of saints. It thus promotes the theological virtue of love, the perfection of humanity. One should not, however, limit the possibilities of Christian asceticism to these three, nor attempt to impose uniformity in their expression. Prayer, for example, is a positive and universally useful form of asceticism as well.29

Objections to the Contention that Christianity Proposes Asceticism for All Christians

1. A Hierarchy of Lifestyles By the Middle Ages, Christianity distinguished a hierarchy of two levels of Christian vocation and life: that of the counsels and that of the

28. For a discussion of the psychological effects of hope, see Viktor Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning (New York: Washington Square Press, 1959). 29. See J. Douma, “Gebed en ascetiek,” De biddende kerk: Een bundel studies over het gebed aangeboden bij gelegenheid van het 125-jarig bestaan van de Theologische Hogeschool te Kampen, ed. C. Trimp (Groningen: De Vuurbaak, 1979) 84-115 for an interesting discussion of prayer as a useful ascetic practice in the Dutch Reformed tradition. ASCETICISM AT THE SERVICE OF GRACE 41 precepts or commandments. Jean-Marie Tillard’s opus magnum on religious life, Devant Dieu et pour le monde: Le projet des religieux,30 offers an excellent historical summary, explanation and critique of this theory. From an analysis of patristic sources, Tillard concludes that all the patristic writers exhibit a certain uneasiness in contrasting the vocation to the counsels with that of all Christians to perfection and that they all agree that the counsels help to free Christians from encumbrances hindering the full growth in perfection. They appreciate the value of the counsels to open one to the Spirit’s power as well as to manifest God’s powerful attraction through the unfolding of his gratuitous love. Furthermore, he notes, none of the patristic writers limits the evangelical counsels to poverty, chastity and obedience nor do they define religious life by them. It is not until the Council of Aachen in 816 that one finds a distinction between the way of the precepts, required of all Christians, and that of the counsels, required only of monks.31 At the end of the eleventh century Pope Urban II extended this distinction officially to the universal Church.32 The first evidence of an official recognition of the traditional triad of the three counsels of poverty, chastity and obedience is in the middle of the twelfth century.33 The First and Second Rules of St. Fran- cis explicitly speak of them34 and Pope Innocent IV in the middle of the thirteenth century is the first witness who most clearly relates the three counsels with the essence of religious life.35 Thomas Aquinas offers a highly nuanced discussion of the distinction between two manners of Christian life, that of the precepts and that of the counsels. Thomas’ central position is that Christian perfection is quite simply the life of infinite charity, the precept imposed at baptism. It is ludicrous to suggest that something could extend the scope of infinite

30. Devant Dieu et pour le monde: Le projet des religieux, Cogitatio fidei, 75 (Paris: Cerf, 1974) 102-134. See also J.-M. Tillard, “Conseils évangéliques,” Dictionnaire des Instituts de perfection (Rome, 1976) 1653. 31. Ibid., p. 119. See De institutione canonicorum, in J. de Guibert, Documenta ecclesiastica christianae perfectionis studium spectantia (Rome, 1931) 69-73. 32. PL 151, 338. Pope Urban II distinguished between two kinds of life “from the beginning of the Church”: one which was indulgent with the weak and which redeemed daily sins by penance and alms. The second, which was superior, was designed to lead the strong to perfection by daily fervent prayer and the disdain and renunciation of worldly goods. 33. See Tillard, Devant Dieu et pour le monde, 121. See a letter of Odo c. 1148 (PL 196, 1399); the approval by Innocent III of the Rule of the Trinitarians in 1198 (in L. Holstenius, Codex Regularum monasticarum et canonicarum, v. 3 [Augsburg, 1759] 3). 34. Reg. 1a, 1 and Reb 2a, 1. 35. L. Oliger, “De origine regularum Ordinis S. Clarae,” Archivum franciscanum historicum 5 (1912) 203-204; J. H. Sbaralea, Bullarium franciscanum, I: 316. 42 DONALD C. MALDARI charity! Thomas establishes a hierarchy of secondary precepts that act as aids to the exercise of charity. He includes the evangelical counsels in this second category of precepts: they are not obligatory but rather are intended to aid a person in the life of charity. The three counsels correspond to the major human concupiscences that hinder one’s efforts to live the precept of charity.36 They serve, therefore, as correctives to three sinful inclinations that are widespread among people. Thomas speaks of a “state of perfection,” but he does not define it as religious life. In the Summa Theologica Thomas speaks of a person’s “state” in terms of the person’s freedom or servitude.37 As applied to the Church, Thomas distin- guishes states in function of their ability to free or to bind a person to virtue or to sin.38 One is in a state of perfection, he opines, “not through having the act of perfect love, but through binding himself in perpetuity and with a certain solemnity to those things that pertain to perfection.”39 Thomas recognizes that the mere act of binding oneself to those things that pertain to perfection, i.e. by entering the “state of perfection,” by no means guarantees perfection. He observes that some people are in the “state of perfection” but lack charity while others are not in this state but have the “perfection of life.” He concludes, “Nothing hinders some from being perfect without being in the state of perfection, and some in the state of perfection without being perfect.”40 There is no two-tiered hierarchy of Christian life, therefore. Some people publicly bind themselves to a life of the counsels as understood in a particular congregation; some people do not. In order to be perfect, everyone needs to take whatever action necessary to combat concupiscence and live charity.

36. Thomas develops these ideas especially in Contra Impugnantes, De Perfectione vitae spiritualis, Contra Retrahentes. He summarizes this thought in the Summa Theologica, 2a 2ae q. 184-189. 37. Summa Theologica, 2a 2ae q. 183 a. 1. “But that alone seemingly pertains to a man's state, which regards an obligation binding his person, in so far, to wit, as a man is his own master or subject to another, not indeed from any slight or unstable cause, but from one that is firmly established; and this is something pertaining to the nature of freedom or servitude. Therefore state properly regards freedom or servitude whether in spiritual or in civil matters.” 38. Ibid., q. 183 a. 3. “The difference of states and duties in the Church regards three things. In the first place it regards the perfection of the Church. For even as in the order of natural things, perfection, which in God is simple and uniform, is not to be found in the created universe except in a multiform and manifold manner, so too, the fulness of grace, which is centered in Christ as head, flows forth to His members in various ways, for the perfecting of the body of the Church.” 39. Ibid., q. 184 a. 4. 40. Ibid. q. 184 a. 4 sed contra. See Karl Suso Frank, “Perfection chrétienne. III: Moyen Âge,” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité ascétique et mystique, 1984, XII: 1118-1131, cc. 1127-1128. ASCETICISM AT THE SERVICE OF GRACE 43

The so-called “evangelical counsels” are, in effect, highlights of Christian asceticism which can be of help to all Christians by freeing them to live a life of love to a deeper degree regardless of their lifestyle or, in Thomas’ vocabulary, “state.” This “deeper degree” is not in com- parison with a vocation to live only the precepts, but deeper than the life a person would live without in some way incorporating asceticism into his or her life. The rejection of a distinction between the life of the counsels from the life of the precepts accords well with the major thrust of chapter five of Vatican II’s Lumen gentium: Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, which recognizes the universal call to holiness. This chapter was not included in the original conciliar draft, De ecclesia. It replaced a different chapter five entitled De statibus evangelicae acquirendae perfectionis which assumed the validity of the two-way theory.41 The Council ultimately, however, recognized that the Lord Jesus, the divine Teacher and Model of all perfection, preached holiness of life to each and every one of His disciples, regardless of their situation … Thus it is evident to everyone that all the faithful of Christ of whatever rank or status are called to the fullness of the Christian life and to the perfection of charity.42 The Council likewise specified that the evangelical counsels can play an important role in a person’s project of living the fullness of the Chris- tian life and the perfection of charity in any lifestyle.43 The Council thus does not limit the practice of the counsels to religious life.

2. The Distinction between a Normal and a Radicalized Christian Life Although few theologians now speak of a distinction between the “way of the precepts” and the “way of the counsels,”44 Vatican II, the

41. The draft read, “The great shepherd of the sheep, the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Heb 13:20) not only furnished and fortified his Church with salutary precepts, thanks to which the gate to salvation would be open to all those who believe in him (cf. Matt 19:17-19), but he also provided it with very holy counsels so that those who so desired might be shown a more suitable and more certain path to the achievement of charity, which is the fullness of the divine law (cf. Rom 13:10).” See further Gustave Thils, “The Universal Call to Holiness in the Church,” Communio 17 (1990) 494-503. 42. Lumen gentium 40. Pope Pius XI expressed the same principle in his encyclical Rerum omnium perturbationem, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 15 (1923) on the occasion of the third centenary of the death of Francis de Sales. In Traité de l’Amour de Dieu, book 8, Fran- cis de Sales explores how the counsels serve to aid a person in his or her desire to live love. 43. Lumen gentium 39. See also G. Philips, L’Église et son mystère au IIe Concile du Vatican, vol. II (Paris: Desclée, 1968); Karl Rahner, The Practice of Faith: A Handbook of Contemporary Spirituality (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 236-241. 44. Cf. Jean Galot, “Le fondement évangélique du vœu religieux de pauvreté,” Gregorianum 56 (1975) 441-467; id., Vivre avec le Christ: La vie consacrée selon l’Évangile (Louvain: Sintal, 1986). 44 DONALD C. MALDARI

Roman Catholic magisterium after Vatican II, and a good number of Catholic theologians have introduced new distinctions. There is now a tendency to refer to the distinctive character of religious life as the lifestyle by which one lives the Gospel “more radically” or by which one follows Christ “more closely” or which “consecrates” a person “more intimately” to God, or which is a symbol of the Church to itself, or which serves a prophetic role in the Church.45 One wonders about the accuracy and usefulness of these distinctions. The description of religious life as a symbol of the Church to itself or as having a prophetic role in the Church has merit, but it does not appear to distinguish religious life from other forms of Christian life. The description of religious life as a radicaliza- tion of the Gospel, as a way of following Christ more closely or as a more intimate consecration begs the question, “more than what?” Lumen gentium as well as a large number of theologians exhibit a certain unease with this distinction in light of the radical nature of Christian commitment through the sacraments of Christian initiation. Lumen gentium 44 observes, It is true that through baptism he [the faithful in Christ] has died to sin and has been consecrated to God. However, in order to derive more abundant fruit from this baptismal grace, he intends, by the profession of the evangelical counsels in the Church, to free himself from those obstacles which might draw him away from the fervor of charity and the perfection of divine worship. Thus he is more intimately consecrated to divine service. This consecration gains in perfection since by virtue of firmer and steadier bonds it serves as a better symbol of the unbreakable link between Christ and His Spouse, the Church. The Council recognizes the radical nature of baptism: it involves death to sin and consecration to God. To whom, then, do the comparisons which follow the sentence on baptism refer? If religious derive more abundant fruit from baptismal grace than non-religious; if they are more intimately consecrated to divine service than non-religious; if they gain

45. Lumen gentium, 44; See John Paul II, Vita consecrata, 1996. See inter al. Tillard, Devant Dieu et pour le monde; Leonardo Boff, God’s Witnesses in the Heart of the World (Chicago, IL: Claret Center for Resources in Spirituality, 1981); Antonio Sicari, “Inspiration and Genesis of the Evangelical ‘Counsels’,” Communio 9 (1982) 51-66; John M. Lozano, C.M.F., Life as Parable: Reinterpreting the Religious Life (New York: Paulist Press, 1986); B. Rollin, O.S.B., “Le radicalisme des conseils évangéliques,” Nouvelle Revue Théologique 108 (1986) 532-554; Sandra M. Schneiders, I.H.M., New Wineskins: Re-imagining Religious Life Today (New York: Paulist Press, 1986); Alexis Brault & Noël Rath, La vie religieuse: L’un des chemins pour le bonheur (Paris: Cerf, 1987); Jean-Claude Guy, S.J., La vie religieuse mémoire évangélique de l’Église (Paris: Centurion, 1987); Laurent Boisvert, La consécration religieuse (Paris: Cerf, 1988); Simon Decloux, S.J., Inac- tualité de la vie religieuse, Collection Vie Consacrée, 4 (Namur: Vie Consacrée, 1993). ASCETICISM AT THE SERVICE OF GRACE 45 in perfection by virtue of firmer and steadier bonds than non-religious, and if they serve as better symbols of the unbreakable link between Christ and His Spouse, the Church, than non-religious, it would appear that the old two-tiered hierarchy of the way of perfection and the way of the precepts has reappeared under another name.46 In this model, God calls religious to participate more fully in the Christian life than non-religious. Yet, God calls all people to baptism, which is the primal Christian experience of commitment and of consecration. Marc Van Tente querries, Is the distinction between the general vocation to “the Christian life in the world” and “the specific vocation” [to religious life or to ordained ministry in the Church] realistic? Is it congruous with the Bible? To what extent do we project historically developed situations into the gospel and the first Christian communities? Are there really “specific vocations”? Or would it not be more correct to speak of one vocation to consequent following of Christ which would be lived by each Christian, each Christian family and each Christian community or group with its own accents and in its own form?47 All Christians must subsequently specify the manner by which they will live and cultivate that commitment and consecration.48 Although it is unlikely that the authors of Lumen gentium had this in mind, a better interpretation of the comparisons in this quotation is that all Christians derive more abundant fruit, are more intimately consecrated, have firmer and steadier bonds when they employ the wisdom which lies behind the “evangelical counsels” in their lives. That wisdom is the recognition of the usefulness of asceticism in order to promote the work of grace in a person’s life. By recognizing the radical and primordial nature of Christian initiation, the need to specify Christian commitment in a lifestyle, and the usefulness of asceticism in the promotion of the Christian life, one would replace a two-tiered model of Christian vocation with one which appreciates the tremendous diversity and complementarity of Christian lifestyles. It would also free those lifestyles from identification with any

46. See John Paul II, Vita consecrata, 1996 which reads, “… the Christian tradition has always spoken of the objective superiority [concreta vitae consecratae praestantia] of the consecrated life,” par. 18. See also Brendan Kneale, F.S.C., “Superiority of the Religious Life,” Review for Religious 47 (1988) 503-511. One wonders why the sacrament of matrimony rather than the non-sacramental vow of celibacy is not mentioned as a “better symbol of the unbreakable link between Christ and His Spouse, the Church.” 47. “Navolging van Christus in onze tijd: Het religieuze leven en nieuwe vormen van christelijk gemeenschapsleven,” Meedenken met Edward Schillebeeckx bij zijn afscheid als hoogleraar te Nijmegen, ed. Hermann Häring, Ted Schoof, Ad Willems (Baarn: Nelissen, 1983) 292-308, pp. 292-293. 48. See A. de Bonhome, “Estne consecratio per consilia nova consecratio?,” Periodica de re morali, canonica, liturgica 67 (1978) 373-390. 46 DONALD C. MALDARI particular function or ministry within the Church. Such recognition seems to correspond to the reality of the Church: the ministries which religious undertake are not, in fact, different from those undertaken by non-religious. Non-religious serve as prophets, eschatological symbols, etc. just as religious do. This admission in no way denies the reality and validity of religious life in the Church. It does, however, imply that the identity of religious life lies elsewhere.49 It also stimulates reflection on the utility of asceticism in all Christian lifestyles as all Christians respond to the vocation to “perfection,” the life of love.

Asceticism as a Means to Liberty for the Service of Love

The recognition that the distinction between religious life and non- religious life based upon the profession of the evangelical counsels is false extends much of the theology of the counsels to all Christians. All Chris- tians suffer from the concupiscence which the counsels are designed to combat. The particular spirituality, character and charism of different religious congregations or families of congregations is reflected and expressed in the different manner of practicing asceticism by means of the traditional triad of the “evangelical counsels” or any other ascetical practices which the congregation finds useful.50 The ultimate motivation for entering religious life is to specify a mode of living the Christian life. People feel attracted to a particular religious congregation because they sense that its charism, including its spirituality, lifestyle and possibilities of apostolate, will help them to develop their capacity to love. This is a vocation to develop one’s baptismal project by means of the structure which a particular religious congregation has to offer. Part of the congregation’s charism is its practices of asceticism. For centuries Christians have found that the various ways of living Christianity which the various religious congregations explicate have helped them to grow in love

49. It is not the intention of this article to explore the identity of religious life. I would suggest, however, that its identity is found in the charism of each congregation or in the charism of the founder of a congregation. In essence, these are ways of specify- ing the Christian life in particular lifestyles. See Van Bavel, The Basic Inspiration of Reli- gious Life; “Charisma en geloften: de twee pijlers van religieus leven,” Aggiornamento 27 (1995) 28-39. 50. Van Bavel, “Charisma en geloften,” 28, writes “Het onderscheidende [between religious life and other forms of Christian life] ligt volgens mij in de toeleg op een bepaald charisma beleefd in geloften.” ASCETICISM AT THE SERVICE OF GRACE 47 and thus in holiness and perfection. The majority of Christians do not feel a vocation to such a lifestyle. They too, however, must find ways of developing their baptismal project. Many of the principles and insights concerning the usefulness of asceticism usually associated with religious life are in fact useful for all Christians. One must, however, be careful not to impose particular forms of that asceticism which are designed specifically as a means of fostering a person’s development within a specific congregation. In other words, a theology of asceticism applicable to all people must not seek to make all people “religious.” Christian spirituality suggests the usefulness of some form of ascetic practice for everyone. This practice promotes, in union with and incor- porated in Christ, one’s dependence upon God, especially through the theological virtues. It simultaneously frees one from the temptation to find fulfillment apart from God. Authentic Christian asceticism ultimately consists in whatever exercises help people or groups promote their receptivity to grace.

Donald C. Maldari S.J. holds a doctorate in Theology from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. He is a lecturer in the Department of Religious Studies, Le Moyne College, in New York. Address: 1419 Salt Springs Rd., Syracuse, NY 13214-1399, U.S.A.