Review for Religious - Issue 27.1 (January 1968)

Issue 27.1 of the Review for Religious, 1968.21, CHASTITY AND LOVE Joseph J, Sikora, S.J. VIRGINAL TEMPLES Thomas Dubay, S.M. ALIENATION OF MANUSCRIPTS James I. O’Connor, S.J. COMPREHENSIVE MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMMING John F. Muldoor~ 66 INDIVIDUAL FORMATION PERIODS William F. Hogan. C.S.C~ GROUP METHODS IN SPIRITUAL DIRECTION Quentin Hakenewerth, S.M. AUTHORITY AND RELIGIOUS LIFE J. M. R. Tillard, O.P. 104 LOVE HAS ITS PROPRIETIES Sister Mary Sheila, S.N.J.M. COMMUNITY AND MYSTERY AT MASS Robert A. Bagnato, S.J. THE JESUIT NOVITIATE Nicholas A. Predovich. S.J. 137 THE TERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE Sister Teresa Margaret, O,C.D 143 THE PIETY VOID Kevin O’Shea, C.Ss.R. 163 SURVEY OF R~)MAN DOCUMENTS 170 VIEWS. NEWS, PREVIEWS 174 ’QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 186 BOOK REVIEWS 1;12 121 EDITOR R. F. Smith, S.J. ASSOCIATE EDITORS Everett A. Diederich, S.J. Augustine G. Ellavd, S.J. ASSISTANT EDITORS Ralph F. Taylor, S.J. John C. Treloar, S.J. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS EDITOR Joseph F. Gallen, S.J. Correspondence with the editor, the associate editors, and the assistant editor, as wei| as books for review, should be sent to I~EVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS; 612 Humboldt Building; 539 North Grand Boulevard; Saint Louis, Missouri 63~o3. Questions for answering should be sent to Joseph F. Gallen, S.J.; St. Joseph’s Church; 32x Willlngs Alley; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania tgxo6. + + + REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS Edited with ecclesiastical approval by faculty members of the School of Divinity of Saint Louis University, the editorial offices being located at 612 Humboldt Building; 539 North Grand Boulevard; Saint Lores, Missouri 63103. Owned by the Missouri Province Edu-cational Institute. Published bimonthly and copyright © 1967 by REVIEW YOU RI~LIGIOUS at 428 East Preston Street; Baltimore, Mary-land 21202. Printed in U.S.A. Second class postage paid at Baltimore, Maryland. Single copies: $1.00. Subscription U.S.A. a~d Canada: $5.00 a year, $9.00 for two years; other countries: $5.50 a year, $10.00 for two Orders should indicate whether they are for new or renewal subscriptions and should be accompanied by check or money order paya-ble to REvmw ~,oa RELIGIOUS in U.S.A. currency only. Pay no money to persons claiming to represent REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS. Change of address requests should include former address. Renewals and new subscriptions, where accom, panied by a remittante, should be sent to REVIEW VOR R~LmIOUS; P. O. Box 671; Baltimore, Maryland 2120~. Changes of address, business correspondence, and orders not accompanied by a remittance should be sent to R~vl~w RELIGIOUS; 428 East Preston Street; Baltimore, Maryland 21202. Manuscripts, editorial cor-respondence, and books for review should be sent to REVIEW FOR I~[~ELIGIOUS; 612 Humboldt Building; 539 North Grand Boulevard; Saint Louis, Missouri 63103. Questions for answering should be sent to the address of the Questions and Answers editor. JANUARY 1968 VOLUME 27 NUMBER x REVIEW FOR RELI(~IOUS Volume 27 1968 . EDITORIAL OFFICE 539 North Grand Boulevard St. Louis, Missouri 63103 BUSINESS OFFICE 428 East Preston Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 EDITOR R. F. Smith, S.J. ASSOCIATE EDITORS Everett A. Diederich, S.J. Augustine G. Ellard, S.J. ASSISTANT EDITORS Ralph F. Taylor, S.J. John L. Treloar, S.J. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS EDITOR Joseph F. Gallen, S.J. Published in January, March, May, July, September, Novem-ber on the fifteenth of the month. REVIEW FOR RELI-GIOUS is indexed in the Catholic Periodical Index and in Book Review Index. Micro-film edition of Review for Re-ligious is available from Uni-versity Microfilms; Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106. NOTICE TO SUBSCRIBERS On February i, 1968, R~vaEw FOR P~ELI~IOUS will publish clothbound reprints of volumes 2I to 25 (1962-I966) incluslve of the REv-mw. These clothbound reprints will cost $7.5o each per volume or’ $37.5o for all five volumes. However, until January 3I, x968, these volumes will be sold at a special prepublication price of $6.oo per volume or $3o.oo for the entire set of five volumes. However, to take advantage of this special prepublication price, orders mhst be accompanied by full payment in U.S.A. funds and must be postmarked on or before January S~, 1968" The first twenty volumes (1942-I96I) inclusive of the R~vmw have already been reprinted in twenty clothbound volumes. These normally sell at $6.5o per volume or $I3o.oo for the set of twenty. However, from November ~ 5, 1967, to January 3 I, 1968, inclu-sive, they will be sold at the special price of $5.o0 per volume or $1oo.oo for the set of twenty. On February I, I968, and thereafter the price of these first twenty volumes of the REvmw will return to their normal price of $6.5o per. volume. Postage is included in all the above prices. Orders for all the above should be sent to: R~vmw Foa REL~C~OUS; 6x2 Humboldt Building; 539 North Grand Boulevard; St. Louis, Missouri 63103. JOSEPH J. SIKORA, s.J. Chastity and Love Recent* decades have seen a gradual change in theo-logical emphasis and perspective regarding various as-pects of human sexual love in the state of marriage. Four such aspects might be distinguished: pleasure, procreation, mutual help, and personal love and com-munion. While all four of these have in fact always been present in this sexual relation, though not necessarily in every case, until only recently the first three were most strongly emphasized. And of these three, procreation has been traditionally regarded as the "primary end" of marriage. But in recent years the fourth, with the help of modern psychological and philosophical studies, has come into much greater prominence, so much so that some have wished to treat it as in fact the really pri-mary end of marriage. In the light of the past teaching o{ the Church this seems quite impossible, but it is at least recognized now that this personal love and com-munion is not just something subordinate to the bio-logically procreative aspect of sexual life. Interpersonal communion among us is one of the pri-mary values of human life, and human sexual love is ordinarily the primary and fullest mode of this inter-personal communion. Sexual intercourse in marriage is the full incarnation of this sexual love in the manner connatural to the human person; it is at once a sign and expression of this love and communion, ~nd also a means of intensifying it still more. When intercourse reaches its natural term in procreation, the child himself is a yet further expression and sign of the mutual love of the parents and at the same time a new bond that joins them still more firmly in this love, now not only mutual but for .the child as well. Thus marriage and family life are most fully human, not at the level of mere biological activity, but at the level of human love and interpersonal * Since the writing o{ this article Father Joseph J. Sikora, S.J., has died; may he rest in peace. This article will appear in a posthumous book by Father Sikora on the theology of religious life to be published in 1968 by Herder and Herder. ÷ ÷ ÷ Chastity and Love VOLUME 27, 1968 4" 4" 4" .loseph .I. Sikora, S.1. REVIEW F~R RELIGIOUS 6 communion. The whole biological structure finally exists only in order to support such a life of persons in mutual knowledge, love, communion, and communication. From a purely biological point of view we might speak of the primary end of marriage and sexual intercourse as b~ing that of the biological species rather than that of the individual, and consequently of its being found in pro-creation rather than in the pleasure and good of the biological individual. Still, this could hardly be said in such a simple way of the domain of personal and inter-personal values that are found ;here. (But this is not meant to suggest any hasty conclu’sions about the thorny problem of contraception.) But if marriage is now understood primarily in its significance in the personal and interpersonal sphere (though without ever setting aside its biological as-pects), this must mean that religions chastity also has an altered significance. Religious chastity, of course, still entails the denial of the pleasures of sex, of the possi-bility of procreation, and of the various joys of married life. But this chastity must also mean that a primary natural mode of human interpersonal communion in love is also excluded. Metaphysical and theological reflection in this light reveals a .most serious problem with the ideal of religious chastity. We do not relate ourselves to God in the same direct manner in which we can relate to our fellow hu-man beings. In fact we come to know God through the analogical resemblance of His creatures to Him; and we understand the meaning of interpersonal love and com-munion with God through our understanding of human love and communion. But if we are, through chastity, to exclude from our lives the primary mode of such hu-man love, then how can we come to the most profound affective relationship to God? And yet the very purpose of religious chastity is to enable us, with the help of grace, to come to just such a deeper relationship of love, not only to God but even to our fellow men. It would seem, then, that religious chastity really defeats its own purpose. This problem has also another aspect. The two sexes are mutually complementary in many ways, and really need each other in order to achieve full human growth to maturity. Either one by itself lacks a certain complete-ness in the line of nature, in some manner is not yet a full person. Especially is this so in regard to the very dimension of interpersonal communion itself. But with-out this interpersonal communion one must remain to some extent closed in upon himself, and, so it would seem, thereby less capable of opening outward in the love of God. Still more, religious chastity tends, in the con-crete, frequently to close off even other modes of mutual human interpersonal affective relation, in the interest of avoiding possible dangers of undue attachment to another person and even of eventual sexui~l difficulty. But all this only appears to weaken the ability of the person to enter into any affective relation at all, even to God. There is in fact a fundamental openness to God---even in the natural order and .the structure of our finite being, but also in the supernatural order through infused faith, hope, and charity--that already exists prior to any hu-man interpersonal relation at. all. It is true that our su-pernatural life is thus intrinsically prior to and inde-pendent of any particular human relationships at all. But still, this supernatural life must make use of our natural knowledge, natural love, natural affective com-munion, in order to come to .some analogical understand-ing of the meaning of the love of God, and to those particular acts of prayer and action that fill out our super-natural life under faith, hope, and charity. "If anyone does not love his neighbor, whom he sees, how can he love God, whom he does not see?" Full human life, and even full human life with God, seems to suppose pro-found affective relation to other persons, and perhaps even complete sexual communion with another in mar-riage. Such considerations as the above have led some to consider seriously whether we ought to reverse the ideas of many centuries concerning the value of religious chas-tity as a means of entering into a more intense life of loving communion with God. They point out that hu-man persons are both spiritual and fleshly, that it is simply wrong for us to try to escape this fact about our being, that we must work out with the help of God our salvation in and through the world and in and through our bodies as part of this world and even of our being. And these latter points are, to be sure, valid enough so far as they go. And yet there is in fact an ideal of religious chastity; it remains one of the three evangelical counsels. It has had a long history in the Church, in pre-Christian times, and in non-Christian religions. Quite apart from the position taken by the Church in its regard, religious chastity could not but be regarded with a degree of respect because of this long tradition in its favor in widely varying cultures and religions. It would be some-what naive for us to think that the difficulties cited above are of themselves conclusive and that religious chastity has become an outmoded cultural and religious form. Chastity has some resemblance to religious poverty. Chastity and Love VOLUME 27, 1968 7 REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS Again, there is a renunciation of the use and possession of some creatures in the .interest of a greater freedom of spirit in their regard. This ddtachment from creatures is thought to make attachment to God in love easier than it would otherwise be. At the same time, chastity like. poverty, tends to enable the one who embraces it to achieve a greater degree of order in his love, now his love of p~.rsons and not just of material things, and indeed also ,a greater degree of perfection in this love. Chastity by no means intends to deny the need of grace-elevated human love and communion, as well as of love’ and communion with God through grace. But through the renunciation of sexual love, chastity prepares for a "mystical" love of God :and of all other persons in God. The meafiing of this "mystical" love will be explained in more detail.below. For the moment let it stand for a certain excess in intensity of" love that is so focused on God that everything else, is loved only in relation to Him. The dangers of .religious chastity for many persons have long been known in at least a general way. This way of chastity is not for everybody, nor even for most. "Let him take it who can." An already neurotic person-ality might look tO religious chastity as a way out of some of his problems, but in fact 0nly fall into further en-tanglements as a result of embracing’ it. (And yet it is also possible for some neurotics finally to grow to ma-ture persons in a religious life of poverty, chastity, and obedienceS--but under enlightened direction.) It would be possible for one who embraces religious chastity to pervert its intention by so turning in upon himself as, to be completely unable to relate affectively with other peisons: Chastity here has been twisted into narcissicism. Or one could go not quite so far down this path, by mis-taking the renunciation of sexual love for a renuncia-tion of any intense human love of friendship at all. Such a person would be at least a stunted "personality, some-what’hollow, perhaps al~n’ost mechanical in his life and work. All these are serious .dangers to be avoided by careful direction of those who would enter upon the way of Chasiity. Theyare fhrther reasons, besides the strength of the basic human sexual-impulse, that chastity is not [or anyone and everyone--not even for" everyone wh6’ might think he wants it. But with all this,, the theory of religious chastity is fundamentalIy Osound. It should lead, and most important it has led, to a higher degree of detachment and freedom of spirit in regard to material things and the desires of the flesh. It should provide, and has provided for many, the opportunity for a new height of affective supernat-ural communion with God, and also with all men in God. It.should offer, and has offered in fact, to many a greater freedom for their apostolic work for the kingdom of God. The Church has already taught in an irreformable manner the great value of chastity as a means in the love and service of~ God; in itself the state of virginity or chastity is superior to that of matrimony for this reason. We have the example of Christ Himself, of His Mother, and of many of the canonized saints. In the face of ob-jections concerning the "natdralness" of sexual union and of matrimony, we must first insist that the natural order is not all that is to be considered. In general, however, we must agree that successful human love-rela-tionships (that are also desirable and licit) do tend to favor supernatural life with God and with our fellow men at the level of the reflex articulation of prayer and at that of particular action. They are even dispositions in favor of a good basic moral option of charity under-lying all these particular thoughts and actions (merely negative dispositions if these relationships are not in-spired by grace, even positive dispositions if they are. in fact inspired by grace). But in order to understand fully the actual role of religious chastity in regard :to super-natural love it is necessary to adopt a quite different point of view. There is a love that is of’its nature a unique love, without the possibility of any simultaneous analogues in the same person. Of itself it is a once-and-once=only affair (though it is possible for one such love to give way to another in the course of life, or in the entrance to eternity). Jacques Maritain has distinguished, in his recent Carnet de Notes (Paris, 1965), between an amour d’amitid and an amour de 7olie, to bring out this point. It is possible for us to take advantage of his elaboration of this distinction a propos of chastity in order to better understand several aspects of chastity and its relation to our supernatural life of grace. But not everything in the presentation here is necessarily to be attributed to Maritain. Amour d’amitid, or ordinary love of friendship, is opposed to amour de [olie. Both of these would certainly have to be called love of friendship in a broad sense, since the amour de folie is a yet more intense form of love that goes still farther, beyond ordinary friendship. But we shall set aside for the moment all consideration of this amour de folie, and concentrate our attention upon various aspects of the ordinary love of friendship (amour d’amiti~)--such as ~is found to exist between hu-man friends and also between a person with sanctifying grace and God Himself. When such a love of friendship comes to its perfection + + + Chastity and Love VOLUME 27, 1968 9 4" 4" 4" .loseph I. Sikora, S..l. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 10 (speaking only relatively, since such a.love could go on increasing without limit), there is profound affective communion between the friends. This communion also includes, both as a support and as a result, the mutual sharing of all their goods in communication and in other forms of mutual giving. All that belongs to one also belongs to the other. And yet it could not be said that each has given his whole self to the other, except by a metaphor. It would be quite possible for each to have other friendships similar to this and simultaneous .with it, at the same or even greater degrees of intensity of love and communion. Each shares all he has, but not all of his very self. There is a love of friendship similar to this between the human person with sanctifying grace and God. This friendship between man and God means that the man has a personal affective regard for, communion with, and commitment to God that does in fact go beyond what he might have for any human friends. This is only to say that he loves God above all things and would prefer to lose any creature rather than God and His friendship. Such a friendship with God already exists at the level of the basic moral option of charity; thus it might be found even in anonymous Christians who would not be able to articulate in their thought or ex-press so well in their particular acts (at least not in such a full and conscious manner) their actual profound love of God. Such anonymous Christians do not have the fully articulated faith of Christians in the Church but only an inarticulate faith-adherence to the saving good who is God. But those Christians who live in the light of articulated faith can cultivate relations with God even at the level of reflex articulation of thought and through the various particular acts that every concrete situation calls for. Such a fuller life with God, at the level and under the direction of reflex consciousness, wouldneces-sarily be understood and lived by analogy with one’s experience of ordinary human interpersonal relations further illumined by the light of faith. Clearly, every licit form of experience of human love and interpersonal communion could aid in enriching one’s life with God at this level. But if there, is analogy between friendship between men and that between man and God, there is also notable difference, It is true that such a friendship between man and God is simply compatible with profound supernat-ural human affection and friendship for other human beings. But at the same time supernatural friendship with God, in its roots in the basic moral option of char-ity, calls for ever greater entry by man into participation in the very life of God Himself. There must be gradual growth of the divine life’ in man, a gradual assertion of its dominion over every aspect of the human life in man. And although natural human tendencies ~ontinne to assert themselves throughout human life until death, these tendencies must themselves be elevated ever more completely by grace--integrated ever more completely into the supernatural life in man--so that God may have an ever more complete dominion in the human spirit in supernatural faith, hope, and charity. Concrete human love continues in this life to have both elements, supernatural grace and natural tendencies that are not thoroughly and completely subjected to supernatural grace. But the fundamental tendency of supernaturally graced man is toward an immediate union and total communion with God that could not exist simply side-by- side with another such communion but rather must really come to dominate exclusively and in utmost inti-macy- so that God really does become the form in some manner of the human soul. This kind of communion with God will be communion with God as one’s Al