Benedictine Monks Holy Cross Monastery 119 Kilbroney Road Rostrevor Co. Down BT34 3BN Northern Ireland Tel: 028 4173 9979 Fax: 028 4173 9978 [email protected] www.benedictinemonks.co.uk Transfiguration 2012 (Letter n°39) “The heavens proclaim his righteousness; and all the peoples behold his glory.” (Ps 96:6) At the beginning of the year 2012, the Anglican Archbishop of Armagh and Church of Ireland Primate, Archbishop Alan Harper, appointed Fr Mark-Ephrem as an ecumenical canon of the chapter of Armagh cathedral for a period of five years. On Sunday 22 April, all the members of our community attended Evensong, in the course of which Fr Mark-Ephrem was installed by the dean of the cathedral, Rev Gregory Dunstan. The new canon is able to participate in meetings of the chapter, but is unable to vote. Fr Mark-Ephrem may, however, attend any of the Services and will be regularly invited to preach during the course of the year. On Thursday 17 May, Fr Mark-Ephrem inaugurated his canonry by celebrating Ascension Day in Armagh (which occurs on the following Sunday in the Irish Catholic calendar). This year in Ireland, we are embarking upon a 10-year period marked by several important anniversaries in the country’s history and in relations between Catholics and Protestants: in 1912, several thousand Protestants from the North of Ireland signed a solemn undertaking that the North of Ireland should remain part of the United Kingdom; in 1916, there was a nationalist rising in Dublin; in 1919, the first nationalist parliament was elected in Ireland; between 1920 and 1922, there occurred the setting up of Northern Ireland, the signing of the Anglo-Irish treaty, the war of independence, and the establishment of the State of Ireland, followed by civil war. From 16 May to 20 June, we were joined, once a week, by Rev Dr Johnston McMaster (a Methodist minister and lecturer in the Irish School of Ecumenics at the university of Dublin), who helped us reflect on the significance of these anniversaries and how we might commemorate them in a positive manner. Over 6 weeks some sixty people from the local area joined with members of the community, to carry out the important task of recalling and reflecting on these events. On 11 July, Johnston and his wife Jonine spent a day with the community. We would remind you that since Easter we have had a new website, which we hope you will find more attractive. On it you can see several photographs of Br Joshua’s profession (in January 2012) and Fr Mark-Ephrem’s installation as canon in Armagh (in April 2012). As we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the beginning of the Second Vatican Council, we share with you this text from Ladislas Örsy, internationally respected canon lawyer. He was born in Hungary in 1921. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1943. During the Second Vatican Council he worked as a peritus (adviser) for participating bishops. A LESSON IN ECCLESIOLOGY It was through the council that I got my most important lesson in ecclesiology, and in particular that I learned about the hierarchy of truth and the role of the magisterium. I did my theological studies before the council at the Jesuit Theological School in Louvain from 1948 to 1952. It was the time of the “new theology”: its newness consisted in fresh approaches to the old mysteries. It promised well: it brought forth insights in abundance. The leaders were Henri de Lubac, Teilhard de Chardin, Yves Congar, M. D. Chenu, Karl Rahner, Edward Schillebeeckx, John Courtney Murray, and many others. There were exciting exchanges. Disputations enlivened the investigations. We, mere students, watched and sensed that there was good wine in the making. At some point, however, the movement ground to a halt. A cold air of suspicion swept over the church, alarms were heard, censors and “visitators” were named and sent. They acted dutifully. They meant to preserve the tradition. In the name of the magisterium, and always for “prudence’s sake,” one outstanding theologian after another was removed from his chair or was ordered to keep silent on some issues, or quite simply in the name of obedience, was given a new job. Then the encyclical Humani Generis was published. Its aim was to protect the Catholic community from error; it brought no inspiration for a new understanding of the old mysteries. Once again, it seemed that there were no prophets in Israel; there was sadness in the land. Then – who could have foreseen it? – an ecumenical council was called by the newly elected pope, John XXIII. By those years, I was already teaching at the Gregorian University in Rome. We watched the preparations for the council. Over seventy documents were drafted covering the whole field of theology. Archbishop Felici (later cardinal), the secretary- elect of the council, foresaw one session, lasting at the most for two months, at which the episcopate of the world assembled in Rome would approve all that had been diligently prepared (mostly) under the direction of the Roman experts. The council opened. And, lo and behold, theologians who a few years before were officially condemned, or effectively silenced, or discreetly transferred, were arriving in the Eternal City. They held seminars for bishops and gave lectures for all who cared about the great synod. That was just the beginning. As the council progressed, the very same theologians were helping the bishops to draft consti- tutions, decrees, and declarations. The once-exiled experts were offering new wine to the shepherds, and the shepherds liked it. There I was, and I saw, and I watched: through the deliberations and decisions of the council, the magisterium was correcting the magisterium. That is, the extraordinary magisterium of the council was supporting much of the new theology. It kept completing, rectifying, even reversing what was presented earlier as the “official teaching of the church.” The council proclaimed not only a new hierarchy of truth, but also showed in a practical way how the authority of day-today official teaching of the Holy See ought to be understood. Thus, I received an existential training in the interpretation of “official teach- ings” – a training that has served me well to this day. THE CONVERSION OF A POPE Another event in my theological formation is difficult to classify. I had the grace to watch what might be termed the “conversion of a pope.” Let me explain what I mean. The council came to a critical point during the first session when the council fathers turned to the discussion of the sources of revelation. The draft was untouched by any new theology. In its paragraphs condemnations abounded. The discussion soon revealed that the majority of the bishops were against the draft. When the first “indicative” vote was taken, some 60% of the council fathers opposed its further discussion. By the rules of the council, however, two thirds were needed to take the document off the floor. As the results were announced, the absurdity of the situation became manifest. The council had to go on discussing a document that the majority wanted to reject. On that day, I happened to have dinner at the English college. A bishop from Down Under was another guest. He just arrived from the session at St. Peter’s. He was upset and told me (there are words once heard that you never forget): “I am going home. This is a farce, not a council.” He did not leave. What he saw as a farce was turned into a council by Pope John XXIII. By the evening the Vatican Radio announced that the draft on the Sources of Revelation would be taken off the floor by the pope’s order and sent back to a committee newly constituted. Moreover, so decided the pope, the council would have for all issues its own committees, each consisting of 24 members, eight appointed by the pope, 16 elected by the council fathers. These new drafting groups would have the authority to change prepared texts and the power to propose new ones. We know what those committees ultimately did: they quietly rejected nearly all the material studiously prepared, and created the documents that brought the church into our modern world. While the organization of the committees was under way, a story circulated in Rome. It was reported that a small deputation went to see the pope, a deputation consisting of persons of power and dignity from the Roman curia. They carried a warning to the Supreme Pontiff: “Holy Father, there is a danger. You must be careful. If you give that much freedom to the bishops, they will run away with the Council. You will not be able to bring them back.” It was reported that Pope John replied: “They too have the Spirit.” There was a magisterial statement, if ever there was one! The successor of Peter perceived the presence of the Spirit in the successors of the apostles and was willing to trust them. Out of this trust, the real council was born and produced plen- tiful good wine. Of course, there is no way to know if Pope John XXIII really made that utter- ance. "Si non e vera, ben trovato" [“If it isn’t true, it’s well put.”]. Whether he said it or not, the events proved that he created a climate of trust. But why do I speak of the “conversion of the pope”? Because before the opening of the council, it was well known that John XXIII was fully satisfied with the preparatory documents.