Volume Nine, Number 2, Summer 2010 - Mundelein Seminary
Volume Nine, Number 2, Summer 2010 - Mundelein Seminary Volume Nine, Number 2, Summer 2010 - Mundelein Seminary
Address by Fr. Douglas Martis on the Occasion of The Liturgical Institute’s Tenth Anniversary university of saint mary of the lake, mundelein, illinois, july 7, 2010 ten years is not a long time, and yet this first decade of the 21st century has been full. In July of the year 2000, two young men, for whom the beauty of this campus had been foreign, arrived as new pioneers, explorers on the edge of a complex ecclesiastical frontier. They immediately were seized, inspired by the vision of Cardinal Mundelein, that this place should be a center of formation for the sake of the entire Church. Through the leadership, vision, and profoundly theological intuition of Francis Cardinal George, omi that the rites of the liturgy should be studied from their long-ignored sacramental perspective, these two had the audacity to launch a new liturgical endeavor into the largely sated and settled landscape of the post- Conciliar Church. They discovered in this campus a kind of laboratory, where the values of authentic liturgical renewal could be taught, practiced and promoted. For a newly minted architectural historian, Denis Robert McNamara, this campus was a play-ground in classicism, an opportunity to merge and consociate theological ideas and their expression in brick and mortar. His academic and professional career reached a decisive moment when Providence brought him here. In his area of expertise he is unrivaled. There is no one in the United States today, who speaks more intelligently, more articulately, more convincingly of the sacramentality of church buildings and the urgent need to be thoughtful and deliberate about construction and renovation of churches. I am proud to call him colleague. For the Irish-born priest, Michael Francis Mannion, whose adopted home was the territory of Mormons, whose curriculum vitae shows him notable as pastor and rector of cathedral, as founder of the Society for Catholic Liturgy, as promoter of the Choir School of the Madeleine, as theologian, teacher and author, this endeavor was the realization of a dream to establish a school where the principles of the Second Vatican Council and genuine renewal could get a fair hearing, it was the chance to provide an environment where the rites of the Church could be allowed to speak for themselves and where their logic, truth and age-less beauty would be appreciated and fostered without partisan polemic or edgy liturgical Gnosticism. We all owe an enormous debt to Monsignor Mannion. I have the pleasure of caring for and carrying on what others have begun. There are different ideas about what constitutes a liturgical institute. For some, it is a center of higher learning, a base of direct assistance to parishes, a resource for those looking for real answers. Some have described our Institute as a kind of national (or even international) worship office. Cardinal George established the Liturgical Institute to explore the connection between liturgical expression and sacramental theology. We take as our starting point the liturgical rites as given and then ask the questions about their origin, meaning, and implementation. Our purpose it not to change the liturgy but rather to help the faithful better understand and appreciate the Church’s prayer in its purest form. Our approach is nourished by the insights of the pioneers of the twentieth century liturgical movement such as Dom Lambert Beauduin, Virgil Michel, Justina Ward: to make the treasure of the liturgy accessible to the people. We are aware that in the future, another generation will pick up the torch and promote renewal with the same urgency and commitment that their predecessors have held. Liturgical renewal must be done in every age because each generation must claim the Church’s public prayer in the way that is consistent with its proper genius. As people who deeply love Christ, the Church and the people, and who have been touched by liturgical renewal we must constantly remind ourselves that we are situated in an historical context that none can escape. The reality of our day and time is not that much different from earlier periods: people have perhaps always called for renewal. Folks like Hillenbrand and Hellriegel complained that the faithful were not involved in the liturgy as much as they should be, that they understood little of what was going on, that they needed to learn more and to be more serious about its celebration. The Liturgical Institute, from its inception, has resisted being categorized as liberal or conservative, progressive or traditional. Rather than saying that we situate ourselves as part of one group or another, I believe it is more accurate to say that the Liturgical Institute is blazing its own trail. At the Liturgical institute, we believe that a return to the original insight of these liturgical pioneers will help protect us from falling into the trap of “liturgical renewal” as a slogan. We want to celebrate the liturgy as carefully as possible, to let its own beauty be revealed. We have been seized by the foundational notions of Liturgical Movement, such as “without intelligence, there can be no worship.” (Dom Virgil Michel) We would like to see people engaged in the liturgy not as a curiosity, not as an occasional, frenzied (or ecstatic) experience, but as something that really grounds their lives as Christians. Liturgical renewal is a perennial task because the liturgy continues to reveal her treasures gradually. I like to say that the liturgy is designed for those who are in it for the long-haul, true liturgical expression cannot be reduced to a “flash in the pan” encounter. This is why the Roman liturgy is radiant with noble simplicity. We tend to say people are participating actively if they sing, and doubt the participation of those who do not sing… but the liturgy is much more complex than that. Regardless of the form of the liturgy, the faithful will always have the ability to participate actively if the notion is correctly understood. If people do not understand the Christian cultural symbols, even if they know what the words mean, they will derive little benefit. For example if one says “water” or “agua” or “aqua” or “wasser” or “eau” if one only thinks “H 2 0”, then the liturgy will have little effect. The one who is literate in the Christian language will understand any of the terms as flood, and creation, and baptism at the Jordan, and water and blood flowing from the side of Christ. The one with the Christian cultural language will make an immediate connection between the wood of the cross and the Tree of Life and the Tree in the Garden of Eden and Christ as the New Adam. This, I believe, is the urgent task for us. Most liturgists are beginning to acknowledge that understanding what words in a vernacular liturgy denote is not the same as comprehending the rich and expansive nuance that the term offers. At the Liturgical Institute, we pray in Latin and in the vernacular without stigmas. For us there is no shame in being polyglot (our community is, after all, international!) Rather we see a real benefit in terms of insight and understanding that is brought by celebration and discussion in different languages. For us, language is not a political statement, but is seen as a natural aspect of our Catholic faith and celebration. What would our communities be like if we worshipped effortlessly in Latin and in the vernacular without hostility or aversion? We see Latin not as archaism but as heritage. Our approach is what Dr. McNamara calls an “easy orthodoxy”. We feel no need to be angry. These are the liturgical rites we’ve been given; they are what we have received. Our liturgical expression is both patristic and scholastic, it is modern and ancient. There is room for Aquinas and Augustine. We don’t have to choose one or the other. We try to balance immanence and transcendence. We see the Eucharist as the body of Christ without compromising our participation in it. In short, all we need in the liturgy is already available to us. Like grace, as Augustine says, it is always present, but needs to be received. We have no purpose other than the praise of God and imploring the sanctification of the world. If we are fortunate, the by product is community, engagement, nourishment. Thank you for being a part of this vision. The future of liturgical renewal is here.
Institute Commissions Painting of Saint Paul from Artist Leonard Porter as part of its mission to sponsor special projects which advance the sacred liturgy and its allied arts, the Liturgical Institute commissioned a painting entitled “Saint Paul Preaching on the Areopagus” from Leonard Porter, a New York painter who specializes in paintings of classical antiquity. A gift for the Liturgical Institute’s first alumnus to be named bishop, His Excellency James Wall of Gallup, New Mexico, the painting celebrates a man energized with an evangelical spirit whose mission is to persuade a thoughtful audience who yearn for spiritual meaning in their lives. Porter, who has spoken at the Institute as a Hillenbrand Distinguished Lecturer, was the winner of the Arthur Ross Award for Excellence in the Classical Tradition in 2006. Below are excerpts from Leonard Porter’s own description of the painting: The painting depicts Paul preaching on the Areopagus, the small hill that stands above the Agora and below the Acropolis. On the lower level, the Agora is a world of profane commercialism and idolatry, while the Acropolis represents the heights of spiritual ascension with its temples of wisdom. The Areopagus was the site of a court and therefore a place for arguments and persuasion and it is here that Paul calls on them to forsake the worldly lower ground and follow a higher path. Paul seeks to enlighten them and light is a principle metaphor in the painting. As God’s word is revealed by Paul, clouds in the sky break and allow sunlight to show through. Light illuminates the Acropolis while the Agora is obscured by shade. Likewise in the foreground only Paul, Dionysius and Damaris are lit. A beam of light comes very close to the seated figure in the lower right corner while reflected light bounces on him. Beside him the water of salvation flows from the mouth of the fountain “Saint Paul Preaching on the Areopagus,” Leonard Porter, 2010. just as it flows from Paul’s speech. A cup of acceptance is placed just before him. He has but to pick it up and drink. The reflections in the pool of water allude to reflection and thought. Behind him a crowd listens. Among them are a young family and an elegant lady wearing a wide brimmed hat, a common accessory in sunny Greece, but in this case it shields her from the word of God. This beam of light strikes Dionysius and the woman Damaris as they are converted. Damaris purposely removes her own wide brimmed hat to accept the light. Close inspection shows that this green wide brimmed hat is in fact a bishop’s hat. And it falls at the feet of Dionysius. He is called to become a bishop, the first bishop of Athens. This seems appropriate because the painting is a gift for a man also called to be a bishop. Dionysius’ foot also stands upon a rock covered with mysterious runes, which are in fact symbols taken from the Liturgical Institute’s heraldic crest, celebrating Bishop Wall’s experience at Mundelein. For those unaware of this allusion the strange symbols may appear to demonstrate the Greek philosophers’ inability to decipher the truth of the universe. The philosophers point toward them as they question Paul. Institute Faculty Member Dr. Denis McNamara Leads Architecture Conference on april 30th, 2010, liturgical institute faculty member dr. denis mcnamara led a full-day workshop called “The Glory of Catholic Architecture: Shadow, Image Reality” based on insights from his new book Catholic Church Architecture and the Spirit of the Liturgy. Attended by nearly 140 participants, the workshop addressed both theological and practical concerns for building and renovating Catholic churches. McNamara used the first session, entitled “Temple, Living Stones and Heavenly Jerusalem,” to lay the biblical and sacramental foundations for church architecture. Introducing the concept of shadow, image and reality as metaphors for the Old Testament, New Testament and the heavenly future, he explained that today’s churches still have roots in the Temple of Solomon even as they prefigure the Heavenly Jerusalem. His second talk, “Why Classical? Baptizing the Architectural Inheritance,” explained the developed meaning of classical architecture in the pagan world which was then fulfilled in Christianity. McNamara explained how the classical world understood architecture in terms of rhetorical expression based on proto-sacramental understanding of beauty and anthropology. He then asked the participants to see how the early Church adapted and transformed the classical tradition, and how those adaptations provide lessons for today’s church builders. McNamara’s third talk, “Eschatological Flash: The Place of Iconography Today,” explained the sacramental role of liturgical imagery as the vehicle for perceiving the heavenly future, urging church builders to reengage the visual power of liturgical murals which reveal the heavenly Jerusalem. Distinguishing between historical, devotional and liturgical imagery, he cited insights from the Liturgical Movement and the Second Vatican Council which support the use of proper imagery in today’s churches. In the day’s final session, Dr. McNamara addressed contemporary concerns in a talk called “Lessons for Today: Meeting House or Church?.” Asking questions about the ontology, or essential being, of church architecture, he argued that churches are not domestic buildings grown large as much of the architectural profession claims, but rather sacramental buildings which are part of the liturgical rite. As such, they should be understood as built theology intimately related to questions of divinization and salvation.
- Page 1 and 2: TIDINGS the liturgical institute of
- Page 3 and 4: Institute Sponsors Retreats for Pri
- Page 5: (left to right) Institute student F
Institute Commissions Painting of Saint Paul from Artist Leonard Porter<br />
as part of its mission to sponsor special projects which advance the sacred liturgy and its allied arts, the Liturgical Institute commissioned<br />
a painting entitled “Saint Paul Preaching on the Areopagus” from Leonard Porter, a New York painter who specializes in<br />
paintings of classical antiquity. A gift for the Liturgical Institute’s first alumnus to be named bishop, His Excellency James Wall of<br />
Gallup, New Mexico, the painting celebrates a man energized with an evangelical spirit whose mission is to persuade a thoughtful<br />
audience who yearn for spiritual meaning in their lives. Porter, who has spoken at the Institute as a Hillenbrand Distinguished Lecturer,<br />
was the winner of the Arthur Ross Award for Excellence<br />
in the Classical Tradition in 2006.<br />
Below are excerpts from Leonard Porter’s own description<br />
of the painting:<br />
The painting depicts Paul preaching on the Areopagus, the small hill<br />
that stands above the Agora and below the Acropolis. On the lower level,<br />
the Agora is a world of profane commercialism and idolatry, while the<br />
Acropolis represents the heights of spiritual ascension with its temples of<br />
wisdom. The Areopagus was the site of a court and therefore a place for<br />
arguments and persuasion and it is here that Paul calls on them to forsake<br />
the worldly lower ground and follow a higher path.<br />
Paul seeks to enlighten them and light is a principle metaphor in the<br />
painting. As God’s word is revealed by Paul, clouds in the sky break and<br />
allow sunlight to show through. Light illuminates the Acropolis while the<br />
Agora is obscured by shade. Likewise in the foreground only Paul, Dionysius<br />
and Damaris are lit. A beam of light comes very close to the seated<br />
figure in the lower right corner while reflected light bounces on him.<br />
Beside him the water of salvation flows from the mouth of the fountain<br />
“Saint Paul Preaching on the Areopagus,” Leonard Porter, <strong>2010</strong>.<br />
just as it flows from Paul’s speech. A cup of acceptance is placed just before him. He has but to pick it up and drink. The reflections in the pool of water allude<br />
to reflection and thought. Behind him a crowd listens. Among them are a young family and an elegant lady wearing a wide brimmed hat, a common accessory<br />
in sunny Greece, but in this case it shields her from the word of God. This beam of light strikes Dionysius and the woman Damaris as they are converted.<br />
Damaris purposely removes her own wide brimmed hat to accept the light. Close inspection shows that this green wide brimmed hat is in fact a bishop’s hat.<br />
And it falls at the feet of Dionysius. He is called to become a bishop, the first bishop of Athens. This seems appropriate because the painting is a gift for a man<br />
also called to be a bishop. Dionysius’ foot also stands upon a rock covered with mysterious runes, which are in fact symbols taken from the Liturgical Institute’s<br />
heraldic crest, celebrating Bishop Wall’s experience at <strong>Mundelein</strong>. For those unaware of this allusion the strange symbols may appear to demonstrate the Greek<br />
philosophers’ inability to decipher the truth of the universe. The philosophers point toward them as they question Paul. <br />
Institute Faculty Member Dr. Denis McNamara Leads Architecture Conference<br />
on april 30th, <strong>2010</strong>, liturgical institute faculty member dr. denis mcnamara led a full-day<br />
workshop called “The Glory of Catholic Architecture: Shadow, Image Reality” based on insights from<br />
his new book Catholic Church Architecture and the Spirit of the Liturgy. Attended by nearly 140 participants,<br />
the workshop addressed both theological and practical concerns for building and renovating<br />
Catholic churches.<br />
McNamara used the first session, entitled “Temple, Living Stones and Heavenly Jerusalem,” to lay<br />
the biblical and sacramental foundations for church architecture. Introducing the concept of shadow,<br />
image and reality as metaphors for the Old Testament, New Testament and the heavenly future, he<br />
explained that today’s churches still have roots in the Temple of Solomon even as they prefigure the<br />
Heavenly Jerusalem. His second talk, “Why Classical? Baptizing the Architectural Inheritance,” explained<br />
the developed meaning of classical architecture in the pagan world which was then fulfilled in<br />
Christianity. McNamara explained how the classical world understood architecture in terms of rhetorical<br />
expression based on proto-sacramental understanding of beauty and anthropology. He then asked<br />
the participants to see how the early Church adapted and transformed the classical tradition, and how those adaptations provide<br />
lessons for today’s church builders.<br />
McNamara’s third talk, “Eschatological Flash: The Place of Iconography Today,” explained the sacramental role of liturgical<br />
imagery as the vehicle for perceiving the heavenly future, urging church builders to reengage the visual power of liturgical murals<br />
which reveal the heavenly Jerusalem. Distinguishing between historical, devotional and liturgical imagery, he cited insights<br />
from the Liturgical Movement and the Second Vatican Council which support the use of proper imagery in today’s churches. In<br />
the day’s final session, Dr. McNamara addressed contemporary concerns in a talk called “Lessons for Today: Meeting House or<br />
Church?.” Asking questions about the ontology, or essential being, of church architecture, he argued that churches are not domestic<br />
buildings grown large as much of the architectural profession claims, but rather sacramental buildings which are part of the<br />
liturgical rite. As such, they should be understood as built theology intimately related to questions of divinization and salvation.
Change language