The Exultet of the Ambrosian Rite

 Introduction

Translated here is the opening of the Paschal Vigil in the Ambrosian Rite, which begins after the chanting of the Ninth Hour on Holy Saturday.   My translation is based on the scanned missal pages included in Nicola de Grandi, "Easter in the Ambrosian Rite -- Part II," 4/04/2010, https://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2007/03/further-notes-on-ambrosian-rite.html.  I'm not sure what the source is for de Grandi's scanned pages, but the text seems generally identical to that found in the 1640 Missale Ambrosianum, pp. 145-157 of the second paginated section, though I have not compared every line.  De Grandi's article gives an overview of the whole Paschal Vigil in the Ambrosian Rite; the ceremonies translated below stop before the Scripture readings.

Let the angelic crowd of the heavens now exult:
let the divine mysteries exult,
and, because of such a King’s victory, let the trumpet of salvation sound.
Let the earth, irradiated by splendors, rejoice so much,
and, lustered by the eternal King’s splendor, let the whole globe feel the gloom depart.
Let Mother Church delight too, adorned with the splendor of such light,
and let this hall resound with the great voices of the peoples.
Wherefore, you who stand, beloved brethren, in the so wondrous clarity of this holy light,
one with me, I beseech you, invoke the mercy of the Almighty God.
So that He Who deigned to gather me among the number of Levites, not by my merits,
infusing the grace of His light, would begin to complete the praise of this Candle.
With the aid of our Lord Jesus Christ His Son,
living and reigning with Him, God, in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
through all the ages of ages. Amen.

℣: The Lord be with you.

℟: And with your spirit.

℣: Lift up your hearts.

℟: We lift them up to the Lord.

℣: Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.

℟: It is right and just.

It is right and just, indeed, it is truly right and just, fitting and saving, for us, here and everywhere, to give You thanks, holy Lord, Father Almighty, eternal God. Who declared that the Pascha of all peoples would be [offered], not with the cattle’s blood or fat, but with the Body and Blood of Your Only-Begotten, our Lord, Jesus Christ, so that, supplanting the rite of the ungrateful nation, grace would succeed the law, and one victim, once offered by itself to Your Majesty, would expiate the offense of all the world. This is the Lamb prefigured in the stone tablets, not led forth from the flocks, but sent forth from heaven, not lacking a shepherd, being being Himself the Good Shepherd Who lays down His soul for His sheep and takes it up again, so that the divine deigning would show us humility, and the bodily resurrection, hope. Who, before the shearer, did not send out a cry of bleating complaint, but proclaimed with evangelic oracle, saying: “Henceforth you will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of majesty.” Let Him reconcile us and You, Father Almighty, and grant it, supported by a majesty equal with You. For what reached the fathers in figure comes to us in truth.

Here the Subdeacon bears the lamp lit with the new fire into the Choir. Then the Deacon lights the great Candle, and two other candles; immediately there follows:

Behold, now the column of fire shines, which goes before the people, in the time of the blessed night, to the saving streams, in which the persecutor is submerged, and [from which] Christ’s people emerge liberated. For, conceived by the wave of the Holy Spirit, born to death through Adam, it is reborn to life through Christ. Let us therefore unloose the voluntarily-celebrated fasts, for Christ our Pascha is sacrificed; let us not only feast on the Body of the Lamb, but let us also be inebriated by His Blood. For let the drinkers not believe that His Blood is propitiation,¹ but [rather] salvation. Let us also eat of this unleavened bread, too, for man does not live on bread alone, but on every word of God. Indeed, this is the bread which descended from heaven, far more wondrous than that frugal-flowing dew of manna, having feasted upon which, Israel then perished. He who feeds on this true Body, becomes a possessor of perennial life. Behold, the old have passed away: all things are made new. For the sword’s point of Mosaic circumcision is now dulled, and the sharp bitterness of the stones of Joshua [son] of Nun² has grown old; truly, Christ’s people are signed on the forehead, not on the groin, with the wash, not with the wound, with Chrism, not with bloodshed.

Here the Deacon sticks five grains of incense into the Candle, in the shape of a Cross.

Therefore, it is fitting, on this arrival of the evening resurrection of our Lord and Savior, for us to burn wax instead of fat, whose heat it accords with in appearance, sweetness in scent, splendor in light, which does not flow with wasting liquor, nor exhale the offense of foul stench. For what is more befitting and more festive than that we keep watch³ over Jesse’s flower with flowers and torches? Especially when even Wisdom sings of herself, “I am the flower of the field, and the lily of the valley.”⁴ Therefore, the burnt-up pine does not sweat wax, nor does the wounded cedar with close-knit two-edge branches weep with it, but its creation is a secret of virginity, and they grow white through the transfiguration of snow’s whiteness. Truly, the liquid wave of the reeds’ font produces it, which, an image of the innocent soul, is divided into no interwoven joints, but, enclosed in virginal matter, the nursling of rivulets is hospitable to fires.⁵ Therefore, it is fitting to meet the coming of the Bridegroom with the sweet lamps of the Church, and, having received the largesse of holiness, to think of how much the gift of devotion avails, to not interrupt the holy watches with darkness, but to wisely prepare a torch with perpetual lights, lest, while candle-oil is added, we approach the coming of the Lord with a late service, He Who will certainly come in the blink of an eye, like lightning.⁶

Here the lamps are lit, and the other lights of the Church.

Therefore, in the evening of this day, all the fullness of the venerable sacrament is gathered together, and those things which were prefigured or done in various times are supplied in the unfolding of the course of this night. For, first, this evening light comes forth, like that star leading the Magi. Then follows the wave of mystical regeneration, that is, the Lord granting it,⁷ the streams of Jordan. Third, the apostolic voice of the Priest announces the Resurrection of Christ. Then, to fulfill the whole mystery, the crowd of the faithful is fed on Christ. May the day of the Resurrection of the Lord be thus undertaken,⁸ sanctified by the prayer or merits of Your high Priest and Archbishop Ambrose, with Christ making everything prosper. Through Your good and blessed Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom, blessed, You live and reign, God, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, through all the ages of ages. Amen.

Then the Deacon sprinkles [holy water] and lights the Candle. 

 

1Piaculum refers to some means of appeasing a deity, such as a sin-offering or a propitiatory sacrifice.

2In Jos 5:2, the Lord commands Joshua to circumcise the Israelites a second time with “stony knives” (cultros lapideos) or “flint knives” (RSV-CE).

3Excubo originally has the sense of “camping out” of “sleeping outside”; thus the watch being kept here is an outdoors one.

4Sgs 2:2.

5I confess that I had trouble fully understanding these two sentences, especially with their heavily poetic nature. The prayer seems to be explaining the origin of the wax used: it does not come from pines or cedars, but from reeds (papyrum). Reeds grow singular and straight, not jointed like a tree’s branches; I think that is what is meant by it being “divided into no interwoven joints” (nullis articulatur sinuata compagibus). Being singular, a reed is virginal, and an image of an innocent soul—consider Kierkegaard’s Purity of the Heart Is to Will One Thing, and St. James’ rebuke of the “double-souled” (Jas 1:8).

6Here is an interesting twist on the Parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins. In Jesus’ parable, the wise are those who have oil, and the foolish must go buy some. Here, even having oil is foolish, because it takes time to refill the lamp with oil, and this causes a delay. Instead, the truly wise have wax candles instead, which, lit once, never need to be refilled. That way, there will be no “late service” (tardo...obsequio).

7Dignante Domino.

8More literally, this phrase should be worded, “Let this”—what was just discussed—”undertake the day of the Lord’s Resurrection” (Quae...Resurrectionis Dominicae diem...suscipiat).

Translation ©2024 Brandon P. Otto.  Licensed via CC BY-NC.  Feel free to redistribute non-commercially, as long as credit is given to the translator.

St. Ambrose's Foot-Washing Rebellion

 In English, Holy Thursday is traditionally known as Maundy Thursday, that is “Commandment Thursday” (maundy coming from the Latin mandatum, “commandment”). For this day is the day that Christ gave His Apostles a commandment, and not just the commandment of the Eucharist, but a commandment of love: “A new commandment I give to you, that you love each other, even as I have loved you” (Jn 13:34).¹

Though this commandment is given later in the Last Supper, as Jesus is beginning His long Johannine discourse, it is typically linked back to the foot-washing at the beginning of John 13, where Jesus similarly declares “If I, therefore, the Lord and master, have washed your feet, you too ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example so that, just as I have done to you, so you, too, should do” (Jn 13:14-15). So the “Maundy” of Maundy Thursday is taken to mean the commandment of foot-washing, of service, of love, rather than the commandment of the Eucharist.

A Holy Thursday foot-washing has long been a practice in the Roman Church—and occasionally in the Orthodox Churches—in emulation of Jesus’ example. But it need not be a once-a-year event: the early Christians went out and washed the feet of the poor throughout the year, as an act of service and humility, a practice that Pope Francis recalls when he takes the Holy Thursday foot-washing outside the church, into prisons and other places.

Foot-washing, then, can be a liturgical re-enactment of Christ’s acts at the Last Supper, and it can be a non-liturgical act of service. But it can also have another liturgical use, though rare, and it is best represented by St. Ambrose.

St. Ambrose was Bishop of Milan, mentor and baptizer of St. Augustine (and the one who taught him how to read silently),² and a prolific writer—and even more prolific if one counts all the later works stamped with his name, such as the Pauline commentator known as “Ambrosiaster.” Milan was a stubborn town, liturgically, so much so that, even after the Council of Trent, they kept their own liturgical rite, the Milanese Rite, better known as the Ambrosian Rite.

Under Ambrose’s name, we have two mystagogical works, sermons giving to the neophytes, the newly-baptized, explaining the meaning of the rites they had experienced at the Paschal Vigil.³ Whether these works were written for publication or were merely notes put together by listeners is unclear; certainly the shorter of the two works—On the Mysteries—seems more cliff-note-like, while the much longer work—On the Sacraments—seems more likely geared for publication. Both cover the same general topics, though with some different emphases and details, so it is assumed that, if they are based on courses of sermons St. Ambrose gave, that they are based on two different years’ sermons.

These two works, along with other mystagogical works, are key sources for learning about the liturgical rites of the Fathers’ time, including its regional differences. Among such differences is foot-washing during the rite of Baptism.

On the Mysteries only half-discusses this ritual. He mentions how the neophyte “ascended from the font, with the Evangelic reading having been brought to mind” (VI.31). This reading is that of the washing of the apostles’ feet, and, in it, Peter “did not notice the Mystery, and, therefore, he denied the ministry, since he believed that, if he patiently accepted the Lord’s yielding to him, it would weigh down the servant’s humility” (VI.31). Yet Jesus rebuked him, and declared that, in order to be all clean, Peter had to have his feet washed—but only his feet, not his hands and head. So, too—it is implied—the one who is baptized has had the head and hands of his soul washed: all that remains is the washing of his feet. So Ambrose pleads the neophyte to “recognize that the Mystery consists in that same ministry of humility... For when the Author of Salvation redeemed us through obedience, how much more ought we, His servants, to exhibit the yieldingness of humility and obedience!” (VI.33)

The neophyte, then, had his feet washed after his Baptism (after he “ascended from the font”), as an example of humility and obedience. But there is something else here: this foot-washing is described as a mystery. Byzantine ears perk up at this, for Mystery is what we call a Sacrament. We can see this in the parallel titles of Ambrose’s two works: On the Mysteries and On the Sacraments cover the same topic. Is Ambrose saying, then, that foot-washing is a Sacrament? (Some Orthodox have said so throughout the centuries.) The hints in this cliff-note text are small, but the issue is clear when we turn to On the Sacraments.

Here, Ambrose makes clear what happens: “You ascended from the font, what followed? You heard the reading. The high priest being girded...he washed your feet” (III.1.4). Again, this is called a Mystery, and a wondrous one: “See all justice, see humility, see grace, see sanctification: Unless I wash, He says, your feet, you will not have My part (Jn 13:8)” (III.1.4).

But here Ambrose goes further, discussing, not just the Mystery itself, but how others view it: “We are not ignorant that the Roman Church does not have this custom, she whose time and form we follow in everything: yet she does not have this custom, that she washes feet. See, then, perhaps she declined because of the multitude [of neophytes]. Yet there are those who say—and try to excuse [her]--that this is not to be done in a Mystery, not in regeneration, but that feet are to be washed like guests. One is of humility, the other of sanctification. Therefore, hear that it is a Mystery and sanctification: Unless I wash your feet, you will not have My part (Jn 13:8)” (III.1.5). He boldly affirms that what he is doing is not what Rome does: here he refuses to comply. This refusal not just the stubbornness of local tradition, but a principled refusal: to remove the foot-washing from the Baptismal rite is to deny the theology.

In On the Mysteries, the foot-washing is mainly discussed as an example of humility and “yieldingness” (the root Latin term used in that passage is obsequium); here, it is specifically not mere humility. Washing the feet “like guests” is an act of humility (one that, I think, Ambrose would approve of in other contexts); here, though, it is an act of sanctification.

But, why? Is not Baptism sanctification enough? “In Baptism, all fault is washed away” (III.1.7); “for our own [hereditary sins] are unloosed in Baptism” (Mysteries VI.32). How can foot-washing be required on top of this? The key, for Ambrose, is Peter’s back-and-forth with Christ, where Jesus clarifies that Peter only needs his feet washed, not his hands and head. Why? Because “since Adam was supplanted by the devil (cf. Gen 3:6), and he poured forth venom on his feet, therefore, you wash feet, so that, to that part for which the serpent waited in ambush, the help⁴ of greater sanctification might come, because which, afterwards, he cannot supplant you” (Sacraments III.I.7).

We could view this in two ways: first, the feet may be getting an extra aid (“greater sanctification”), since they represent where the devil constantly waits to strike us; second, this washing may be a completion of the Baptismal washing. Perhaps, in Ambrose’s practice, a Baptism was not a full-body immersion: maybe it was only a dunking of the head, arms, and torso. In that case, the feet remained “unbaptized,” and so the sacramental foot-washing was necessary.

Whichever the case was, Ambrose certainly saw his foot-washing as sacramental and necessary, with Jn 13:8 as the proof text. So necessary was it to him that he even dared to defy Rome. “In everything, I desire to follow the Roman Church, yet we, men, also have sense; therefore, what is rightly preserved elsewhere, we also rightly keep” (III.1.5). As if that wasn’t enough, he claims the Petrine link: “We follow the apostle Peter himself, we cling to his devotion. How does the Roman Church respond to this? Certainly, the author of this assertion of ours is Peter the apostle, who was a priest of the Roman Church” (III.1.6).

How long did this stubbornness hold out after Ambrose’s death? Quite a while, it seems: some Ambrosian Rite sacramentaries of the 11^th and 12^th centuries include the post-Baptismal foot-washing.⁵ A 1640 Missale Ambrosianum, though, simply mentions that the baptizands are to be baptized “in the accustomed way,” with no further details given.⁶ The Catholic Encyclopedia’s entry on the Ambrosian Rite, which includes a brief summary of the order of Baptism, has no mention of foot-washing.⁷ I’ve not yet gotten my hands on a modern Ambrosian missal, but it seems likely the foot-washing was eventually removed, and St. Ambrose’s rebellion against Rome quashed. (Perhaps St. Charles Borromeo’s reform of the rite had something to do with it? Obviously, this is just speculation.)

All in all, the episode of St. Ambrose and the foot-washing rebellion is a quirk of liturgical history, though one that does prod us to think further on Jesus’ words: Unless I wash your feet, you will not have My part (Jn 13:8). Did He say this merely to the Apostles, or did He say it to us as well? If to us, how does He wash our feet today, and what part of His would we lack without it?

Murky thoughts for a Maundy day.

 

1A bit of a Ruthenian in-joke here: the switch-over from the 1970s liturgical translation (the “Blue Book”) to the 2000s translation (the “Green Book”) included some fairly minor changes in very well-known texts. So now, at Pascha, Christ “tramples” death instead of “conquering” it, and He now saves those in the “tombs,” rather than the “graves.” A similar issue happened with this Gospel verse, which became the text of a popular paraliturgical hymn. The translation I gave above is the currently-used one; the Blue Book version reads “This new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, just as I have so loved you.” My first parish—due to an indult—still used the Blue Book texts after the Green Book was released, so those were my first Byzantine translations. Though I’ve adapted to the new version of the Paschal troparion, I still get tripped up by “This/A new commandment” every time we sing it.

2See St. Augustine, Confessions VI.3: “But when he read, his eyes were led through the pages and his heart probed the meaning, but his voice and tongue lay still. Often, when we were present...we thus saw him reading, quietly and never elsewise, and sitting in long-lasting silence.”

3For a bit more on the concept of mystagogy, see my article “The Awe-Inspiring Mysteries: The Importance of Mystagogy,” Homiletic & Pastoral Review, 8/09/2015, https://www.hprweb.com/2015/08/the-awe-inspiring-mysteries/. My undergraduate seminar analyzed the mystagogical works of St. Ambrose, St. John Chrysostom, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and Theodore of Mopsuestia.

4 More literally, the term subsidium often refers to a reserve of troops, which fits well with the description of Satan “lying in ambush.”

5I’m taking this information second-hand, from Gene Finnegan, “Ambrosian liturgical texts,” 4/05/2023, https://memoriesofan80yearoldguy.home.blog/2023/04/05/ambrosian-liturgical-texts/ (accessed March 29, 2024).

6Missale Ambrosianum (Milan: Jo. Ambrosium Sirturum, 1640), 167. Confusingly, the volume is divided into two, separately-paginated sections. This reference is to the second section.

7See H. Jenner, “Ambrosian Liturgy and Rite,” in The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume I (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907), reprinted at https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01394a.htm (accessed March 30, 2024).

 

 Note: The cited passages from St. Ambrose can be found in PL 16:398B-399A (On the Mysteries) and PL 16:432B-433C (On the Sacraments).

 

Text ©2024 Brandon P. Otto.  Licensed via CC BY-NC.  Feel free to redistribute non-commercially, as long as credit is given to the author.

 

St. Maximus of Turin: On the Forty-Day Fast II (Homily 38)

 For an introduction to St. Maximus (or what little is known of him), see my translation of Homily 37, the first homily on the Forty-Day Fast.  Other translations of St. Maximus include Sermon on the Nativity II (Sermon 4) and Sermon on the Epiphany (Sermon 7).  As in my previous Lenten translation from St. Maximus, paragraph divisions below are my own.

Homily XXXVIII

On the Forty-Day Fast II

Yesterday, preaching the devotion of the Holy Forty Days, we offered the examples of the holy letters, by which we proved that this number of forty is not constituted by men, but divinely consecrated, not found by earthly thought, but a precept of heavenly majesty. And, therefore, he who breaks the constituted number by eating on one day is not accused as a violator of one day, but is charged as the transgressor of the whole Forty Days. Wherefore is it good for man to fast for the aforesaid number, without labor, and to pursue the sanctity of the whole Forty Days equally. But these are not the precepts of priests, but of God. And, therefore, he who spurns [them] spurns, not a priest, but Christ, Who speaks in His priest. Therefore, let us see at what time the Lord appointed us to this observance, since He willed all the elements to profit through this devotion.

For, behold, in the appointed Forty Days, the earth, bound up by wintry ice, is loosened, and the currents of the waters receive their paths, the ice being melted; so, too, in our bodies, at this time, the sins bound up in rigidities are unloosed, and our lives, in a purer course, the rigor of the devil being melted, recall their original path. The earth, I say, in the appointed Forty Days, sets aside the bitterness of winter; I, in the appointed Forty Days, relinquish the bitterness of transgressions. That earth is split by plows, so that it be fitting for worldly crops; my earth is plowed by fasts, so that it be apt for heavenly seeds. For just as he who more frequently, toiling, works the field, gains a richer return, so he who more often, fasting, works the field of his body, receives greater grace. For, behold, through a time of abstinence, the grass restrengthens in the harvested field, the shoot of the tree strives in the trunk, the sprigs of the vine ripen to gems, and everything lifts itself up from the lesser to the higher; so, at this same time, the deadened hope of men revives unto posterity, lost faith is repaired unto glory, temporal life advances unto eternity, and all the human race, lifting itself up to heavenly things, rises from the lower to the higher. Now the farmer, bearing iron, prunes the shoots of the vines. So, too, now the bishop, treating of the Gospel, cuts off the filth of the peoples, and, in that same forty-day course, all creatures do this, so that, having put aside superfluous things, they might advance to Pascha adorned or arranged.

Now, everything is in labor, and, then, it will be found in fruit. For, then, in contrast to nature’s kind, the thorn offers a rose, the reed smells of lily, the withered sticks give off sweetness; so, too, everything is adorned with flowers, so that that creature is believed to celebrate the festivity of the great day by its own striving. Therefore, let us, too, in this same time of fasts, produce roses from our thorns, that is, justice from sins, mercy from severity, largess from greed. For those are the thorns of our body, which choke off the soul, of which Scripture says, Thorns and thistles the earth will germinate unto you (Gen 3:18). For my earth germinates thorns unto me, if bodily lust pricks me with tribulation.¹ It generates thistles for me, when it tortures me through the desire for worldly riches. For the thorn, for the Christian, is the root of his greed; the thorn, for the good man, is the ambition for honor; for, in appearance, they seem to be pleasing in themselves, but they harm. Therefore, except by keeping vigil and fasting, we cannot be without these; however, through abstinence, these thorns turn into a rose. For, by fasting, lust produces chastity, pride, humility, sobriety, moderation. For these are the flowers of our life, which smell sweet to Christ, which breathe forth a good scent to God. Wherefore the Apostle says, Since we are the good scent of Christ to God (2 Cor 2:15).

Therefore, the Lord lavished this Forty Days upon us, so that, through the space of this time, in the custom of every creature, we might now conceive the sprouts of virtues, so that, on the day of Pascha, we might proffer the fruit of justice. But, for this number of forty days, the Lord Himself exercised Himself, not so that He might gain advancement, but so that He might show us the advancement of salvation. For there was no thorn of sin in Him, which would turn into a flower; for He Himself was the flower born, not of a thorn, but of a rod, as the prophet says: A rod will go out from the root of Jesse and a flower from his root will ascend (Is 11:1); for the rod was Mary, shining, slender, and virgin,² who germinated Christ like a flower through the integrity of her body.

Therefore, continuing through forty days, the Lord kept this fasting without hunger, but that Evangelist says that He was hungry afterwards (Mt 4:2). How, then, could this be, that He Who did not feel hunger and thirst for such a number of days, hungered afterwards? Clearly, He had hungered, nor can we deny that He hungered; for He hungered, not for the food of men, but for salvation; nor did He desire feasts of worldly dishes, but He desired the heavenly holiness for souls. For Christ’s food is the redemption of peoples; Christ’s food is the effecting of the Father’s will; for He Himself says, My food is that I might do the will of the Father, Who sent Me (Jn 4:34). Wherefore, let us also hunger for food, not that which is arranged in earthly feasts, but that which is gathered in the reading of the divine Scriptures. For that [food] nourishes the body for a time, this one refreshes the soul unto eternity. The end.

1There is a pun here with the Latin word for thistles (tribulos), used in the verse just quoted.

2The Latin word for rod is virga, while virgin is virgo. This wordplay is ubiquitous among Latin writers in discussing this verse of Isaiah.

 

 

Source: PL 57:308C-310C.

Translation ©2024 Brandon P. Otto.  Licensed via CC BY-NC.  Feel free to redistribute non-commercially, as long as credit is given to the translator.

 

St. Maximus of Turin: On the Forty-Day Fast I (Homily 37)

 Introduction

Little is known of St. Maximus, besides his writings and the fact that he was Bishop of Turin. It is thought he was a native of Rhaetia, in modern northern Italy, possibly born in the town of Vercelli. Some think he is the same Maximus who attended a few local synods and councils—the Synod of Milan in 451 and the Council of Rome in 465 (thus giving him a much longer life), but there is no certainty. What has truly cemented his legacy is a large collection of homilies and sermons, along with a few treatises.

This homily is the first in a series of 8 on "the Forty-Day Fast" (De jejunio Quadragesimæ), that is, Lent.  I have previously translated his Sermon on the Nativity II (Sermon 4), and his Sermon on Epiphany (Sermon 7).  It should be noted that Maximus' "sermons" and "homilies" are two complete separate sets of writings, with separate numberings.  Paragraph divisions below are my own; the Latin text I used prints the whole homily in one block.

Homily XXXVII

On the Forty-Day Fast I

You have heard, beloved, as the evangelical trumpet sounds it, that our Lord and Redeemer, against the temptations of the devil, indeed fought with words, but strove with the spirit; for He waged the struggle in speech, but He executed victory in majesty. Nor should we deem the conflict to be without a great mystery in this way, the conflict in which either the approaching devil overcomes in words, or the Lord of things, nevertheless, deigns to respond to His tempter with words. But in all this things, our salvation is the reason. For us the Savior went hungry; for us He spoke; we conquered in Him, since we were the cause of His fighting. For who would doubt that the Only-Begotten of the Father, Whom no creature could oppose, took up the struggle on behalf of those in whose flesh He dressed Himself? Therefore, the form of the human body persuaded the shrewdest enemy to approach, whom the true Son of God confused through a true man’s response. Because of which, wandering and uncertain, the tempter seeks out tender and terrible temptations, for, since he beheld the appearance of fleshly man in Christ, yet the presence of His divinity was hidden, he took up arms against He Who is more than man. Therefore, the feminine birth-giving animated him to presume sexual congress, but the virginity of the birth-giver terrified him, since Mary—certainly Eve’s daughter—gave birth to Christ, yet she did not conceive from Adam.

Therefore, when the enemy saw God’s Son procreated through such a miracle, he turned back on himself, so that he would deliberate, and, wondering, he said, “Who is this who, without my knowledge, entered this world? For I know that he is born of a woman, but I don’t know whence he was conceived. Behold, the mother is present, but I can’t figure out the father. I see the birth, but I don’t know the one who is born; and—what increases my stupor—the mother, though she has given forth a son, exults like a virgin, which is not customary to the law of birth-giving. The little one lies in swaddling clothes, he soaks the swaddle with his tears, and he seems to be like mortals in his cries, and, though nothing of infancy is lacking n him, yet no corruption is in him, as in an infant. Bound up, he soils the rags, but heaven smiles at him with the ray of a more joyful star, and angels run between the stars and the lands in his honor, ministering to him, and, exulting, they announce a newness I don’t understand. What is this miracle? I see what I can’t turn away from, I hear what I can’t bear: that a new-born man is honored as God. Never, from the ages, have I encountered this, that someone is born a man and has nothing of human vices. What is this so new and powerful generation? Born among sinners and impious men, and coming forth from a mortal mother, he appears, to me, more purified than all those who are born and purer than heaven itself. No root of avarice rises up in him, no envy beats upon his heart, his tongue does not know lies, his eyes accept no concupiscence, neither ear is softened by lust; certainly, luxury, through which I subjected the human race to me, cannot penetrated his breast; no boasting is in him, no malice. And what more? I find in him nothing which delights me; he casts out all of my urges. What will I do? To whom shall I turn? I feel something stronger; I think he wants to reign in my kingdom—perhaps this is God, Whom no offense can stain. But if it is God, how does he bear the indignities of a woman’s birth-giving? How is content in cradles and rags? Who could believe an infant’s cry in God? To what listener is it not ridiculous that God would be nourished by a woman’s milk? Behold, after everyt8ing, he is hungry, when, certainly, no reason would persuade God to go hungry.”

The devil was excessively ignorant, since the fact that Christ preferred an infant’s food, and that He was hungry like a man, was not due to the body’s weakness, but to the sacrament of heavenly grace. For God’s Son, Whom timeless eternity befits, alongside the sempiternal Father, Who, with His begetter, naturally impassible, reigns in the incorrupt empire, performs the saving mystery in our flesh; and, for this reason, He submits to the common passion of mortals, so that He would triumph over the enemy of the human race in a contest, wherefore that reckless one, blinded by his rage, said to the Lord, If you are the Son of God, speak, so that this stones would become bread (Mt 4:3). Most stupid and empty is this ambush of his: through bread he means to tempt Him Who is bread, thinking that He would work for food-money, He Who preferred voluntary hunger! To which the Lord responded: It is written: “Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word of God” (Mt 4:4; Dt 8:3). That is to say: “In vain, devil, do you again strive to supplant through food; it was sufficient for you to persuade Adam with illicit foods in paradise for him to be deceived by you. Hunger does not conquer me, nor do I yield to your persuasions, for the will of God is My food: the word of God is my perfect refection.” Beaten back by this sentence, again, so I think, the devil said: “What is this thing? I see him hungering, and I don’t find a need for eating; he suffers everything like a man, and he conquers everything like God. That Adam, certainly made by God’s hands, once yield to my snares; this one, born of a women, is not bowed by his needs nor does he acquiesce to my counsels; I overcame that one by the serpent’s mouth, this one condemns me even when I myself speak.” Again, setting the Lord upon the pinnacle of the temple, he said: If you are the Son of God, cast yourself down (Mt 4:6). Troubled, he spoke these things to Him Whom he thought he could persuade to a fall, Him Whom no bread could convince. To which Christ responded, It is written: “You shall not tempt the Lord your God” (Mt 4:7; Dt 6:16). That is, “what you are suggesting, devil, is the presumption of temptation, not the counsel of sanity, the vanity of leaping forth, not the example of virtue; for empty is every miracle which is not performed for the purpose of man’s salvation.” And, foiled by this response of the Lord, he showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their honors, saying: All these things I will give you, if, falling down, you adore me (Mt 4:9). To which, again, He responded: It is written: “You shall adore the Lord your God, and Him alone shall you serve” (Mt 4:10; Dt 6:13). That is, “he who adores you, devil, is not owed kingdoms, but hell. For to adore the true God and to serve Him is the prerogative of ruling; but you, who promise the honors of the world in exchange for the expected transgression, you do not know how to give yourself rule.” Behold, tempter, now a three-fold interrogation has profited nothing; uncertain he came, more uncertain he returned; he assaulted so to prove, reproved, he drew back.

Therefore, now, beloved brethren, since, having recalled the victories of the Lord’s fasting, we have come to know the triumph of our salvation, let us sanctify our fast with religious services. But what else is “sanctifying the fast” but wanting to fast for a holy cause, doing just deeds, avoiding iniquities? He sanctifies the fast whose heart the adulation of powerful friends and the graces of relatives, and the little and great gift-lefts of clients do not turn away from the right path. He sanctifies his fast whose heart does not revile justice. He sanctifies the fast who extinguishes the flames of ferocious wrath with the placability of a meek mind. He sanctifies the fast who turns lusting eyes away form the filthy sight through the reins of chastity. He sanctifies the fast who scatters the darts of revilers, beating them back with the shield of patience. He sanctifies the fast who calms the tumult of lawyers with speech of peaceful sanity and a tongue of more prudent art. He sanctifies the fast who cuts out the thorns of vain thoughts rising up within him, throwing them up with the plough of the Gospel, like some ploughman of his own breast. He sanctifies the fast who aids the poverty of the needy according to the amount of his goods, with a hand of pitying humanity. He most of all sanctifies the fast who, focused on the precepts of the divine law, spits the diabolical temptations out of his heart. And, therefore, beloved brethren, if we want to show God an appeasing fast, let us be strong in heart, just in judgments, faithful in friendship, patient in injuries, moderate in contentions, let us flee foul speech, standing against iniquities, sober in feasts, simple in charity, cautious among crafty, consoling the mournful, resisting arrogance, sparing in suspicions, hold-tongued among ill-speakers, coequal among the humble. If we want to sanctify our fast through such virtues, giving tribute to the Lord, we will come to the festival of Paschal grace and to the joys of the heavenly promises with undoubting trust and a more joyful conscience.

 

Source: PL 57:303D-308B.

Translation ©2024 Brandon P. Otto.  Licensed via CC BY-NC.  Feel free to redistribute non-commercially, as long as credit is given to the translator.

St. John of Ávila: Sermon 65.1 on the Annunciation / Treatise 1 on Mary: Part II

 For an introduction to St. John and this text, as well as Part I of the text, see my previous post here: https://thesaurostesekklesias.blogspot.com/2024/01/st-john-of-avila-sermon-651-on.html

What Bush Is This, Which Burns and Is Not Consumed?

Who will speak?¹ Who will speak the powerful deeds of the Lord (Ps 106:2)? Who will understand His mercies? Have you encountered any book in which you have read the mercies of God? Have you seen a book which tells them?

Moses wandered, pasturing his herd, and set it there in the deepest part of the desert, and, wandering, he, very careless, saw a bramble which burned and was not consumed; he was frightened at how it burned and was not consumed. “Certainly, I have to go there and see this great marvel.” Is there not more, Moses? Is there not more? He goes there, and, as soon as he draws near, he finds that God was in the bramble. See, through your life, he who saw God in the bramble, and [God] spoke to him from there: “Moses, do not come here; you are coming very close; see how the earth where you are is holy.” Is there nothing more except coming to see? “Unshod yourself.” Was he holier by becoming unshod? “Unshod yourself, do not bring your sense, nor your reason, nor your force, nor your knowledge; set aside what avails nothing; you have need of another spirit, another force, another understanding: unshod yourself; you are nothing, you avail nothing; did you think that there would not be more? Glean that you are near God, near Him at Whose Majesty the angels tremble.” God speaks from the bramble: Ego sum Deus Abraham, Deus Isaac, Deus Jacob [I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob] (Ex 3:6). “Marvelous God, and you are in the bramble? What does Your Majesty command?” “I have ears to hear and eyes to see the pains which My people suffer: I have heard the voices which they make to Me in Egypt: I have seen their affliction, and, come what may, I have descended here to free them. Glean that I command you to go to Pharaoh, and tell him this, and this on My behalf.” Admirable is the vision, certainly, but marvelous is its completion. Who will understand the mercies of the Lord (Ps 107:43)? Who His counsel? What is this? What is this? If we enter into the desert, if we take our sheep to the most secret [place], if we retreat to the deepest interior of our hearts, we will see the vision of God, that He is near, that He burns and is not consumed, that our eyes see a pregnant maiden; God is in her, and she is not consumed; she is pregnant and a maiden: if we do not approach to see this mystery, they will say that we go about like fools; remove your reasons and natures, unshod yourselves of your shoes of animal leather, set aside the knowledge and understanding of flesh: Go forth, daughters of Sion, and you will see King Solomon crowned with the crown, with which his mother crowned him on the day of his betrothal (Sgs 3:11). Let us ask our Lady for the grace to know how to receive, and to delight in, and to understand something of this mystery.

Do not come with a profane and dishonest heart: denude your reason, come with feet unshod, untrusting in yourself, separated from yourself, closer to and asking help from God. What is this? Approach a little: what does this Maiden have? What fire is this which she has within her? They will respond to you: “Not an angel nor an angel, but the Lord Himself Who is in her.”² “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, God of Jacob.” O blessed be You, Lord, and glorified forever, and may the angels adore and revere You forever! What does the great God do, enclosed in a maiden? The name of the city of God: Dominus ibidem [the Lord is there] (Ez 48:35): the name of the Son of the Virgin and of God: Emmanuel (Is 7:14). You call the city, you come to the Virgin thinking that there is nothing more; God will respond to you in her: “Behold.” What are You doing, Lord, here, in a maiden? “I saw the work and pains of My people, and the labors and anguishes which they suffer, and I have descended to free them Myself.” O marvelous God! Men and the Prophets, give voices, so that He Who is to come would come already!

The world was captive to the power of the demon, and in great anguish; great were the forces of the demon, and great sorrow was it to see what sin worked in the hearts of men, with efficacy. “There is no other remedy,” says God, “I know what My people suffer, I know their anguishes, I have had compassion on men, on the Holy Fathers in limbo, on the seats which are to be repaired: I have descended and come to free them.” O, glorified be You, Lord, Who comes from one to the other! He sent Moses over there so that His people would be freed by him from their captivity by Pharaoh, and God remained Himself without costing Himself anything: is He here in the same way? No. Descendi ut liberarem populum meum [I descended so that I might liberate My people] (Ex 3:8). “I descended to liberate My people.” What will it cost You? When Moses liberated Your people, You threw many plagues at Pharaoh: You throw dog flies at him, then frogs, then other things which give them great pain and labor: but what must it cost You? What thing is this, Lord? Propter nos homines, et propter nostram salutem descendit de cœlis, et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine, et homo factus est [For us men, and for our salvation, He descended from the heavens, and He was incarnate of the Holy Spirit from Mary the Virgin, and became man].³ Men, there is a reason to no longer have a heart of stones instead of flesh (Ez 36:26), since the Word of God is become flesh for us men, and for our salvation. God incarnated and became man: over there He remains in the bramble, and they do not touch Him; here, He descends from the heavens, and has become man.

There Is No More; It Was a Marriage For Love

What does God have [in common] with man? Join those extremes for me.

Give me the desire today (if it were not [already] with him who knows so much) to say to Him: “Lord, do You know what You are doing?” What thing is higher than God? What thing lower than man? God and man! Since Adam sinned, “man” is a name of dishonor, since man and sinner are one and the same thing. And when Saint Paul wants to rebuke someone, he calls him “man”:⁴ Non ne homines estis [Are you not men]? (1 Cor 3:4). And the Psalmist: Ut sciant gentes, quoniam homines sunt [That the nations may know that they are men] (Ps 9:20). May they know that they are men, that they are sinners, and miserable. Who could ever think such a thing? That heaven is with the ground? That the high is with the low? That the rich is with the poor? That the pure is with the dirty? That the gold is with the mud of man? What is this, Lord, that you have so truly joined with man? Erunt duo in carne una [The two will be one flesh] (Mk 10:8). What is it to become man? He becomes man, and He does not leave off being God; two natures and one person; in such a manner that He is called God, God man, and man God, and that which is said of the one, is said of the other. They are married. O mira Dei usque ad hominem exinanitio! O mira hominis usque ad Deum exaltatio! [O marvelous emptying of God towards man! O marvelous exaltation of man towards God!]⁵ God descends unto becoming man, and raises man towards God: how low, and how high!

So that you might know how much God and His goodness can do, God is abased to become man, as far as joining with humanity, and [as far as] giving it the hypostasis⁶ and personality of God, and there are not two hypostaseis, but two natures joined, human and divine nature; and the human is impersonal, it is hypostasized and joined to the divine Word, not two persons, but one, in order to make you understand that the goodness of God could, without any reward, raise that humanity to hypostasize it in God, and to adorn it with so many excellences and graces; and that He Who had goodness for this, will have it to raise you yourself from the dung, so that you might be a son of God by participation; that He did this for this [reason], so that you would see in the head that which was to pass in the members. That, as He thus came to it without rewards, so He will come to you yourself without yours: Præclarissimum nobis proponitur exemplar prædestinationis nostræ Dominus Jesus [The Lord Jesus is proposed to us as a clearest exemplar of our predestination].⁷ The example of predestination—if you are predestined, if God calls you—is justifying and saving, because it is predestined by grace.

Today the Word is wedded with that holy soul and body. Wedded, Lord? For this reason He said [it], so that I would tell it to you if you did not know it: “wedded.” Take that equality away from me! Are there those here who understand marriage? Take that equality away from me in the manner of lineage! Are they equal in one? What goes from lineage to lineage? From knowledge to knowledge? From riches to riches? A greatest difference, which all the angels are terrified to hear of. Who sees God descend today and abase Himself? (I say God abases Himself, not by changing place, but rather, I mean to say, by taking that humanity.) It was an unequal thing; but, to the end, that soul and body were most clean and holy: Your love, Lord, undergoes all of it, suffers all of it, enriches all of it in exchange for performing mercies. O great good, O great honor! Do you think that there is nothing else [to do] except wedding Yourself with that humanity? O my King, even the relatives of the Spouse are very unequal, poor and disobedient! If one would come from the Indies with much money, if they knew that he gave alms, what would the poor relatives do in order to demand it and take it from him! Then see, Lord, that Your Spouse owes nothing, never sinned, was most clean in her conception: then see how much we, the relatives, owe, how weighted with debts we are, how infirm, exiled, condemned to death, unraveled, and enemies of God, with a thousand debts and traps, and all would be laid upon You. If You were not, Lord, Who You are, I would tell You: “Lord, do You know what You are doing? All the sins of men would be laid upon Your shoulders: You would have to pay it, upon You would all fall, since nothing would be remitted You.

“Do You know with whom You are wedded? Do You not dishonor Yourself with the relatives of the betrothed? Son of the Father, so rich in heaven, do You come here, to earth, to wed Yourself, and to live among so poor a people? If You were, Lord, some avaricious man whom the needs of others would not move, there would not be much in it; but, being Yourself, Lord, so amorous, so merciful, and You Who gives Your heart⁸to him whom You see in need, how do You place Yourself among such poor men? What have You done? That the needs of all would be laid upon Your shoulders, and that which the other sinned in his flesh, and that which the other sinned in his madness, and the other in his adulterizing and in his blaspheming. What have You done, Lord? I have to say it, Lord. Blessing the heavens and the earth: I will do it, since You love the ugly, and he appears handsome to You.” There is nothing more; it was a wedding for love, the Father well loved, so that He gave even the Son to us in such a marriage: Sic Deus dilexit mundum, ut Filium suum unigenitum daret [God so loved the world, that He would give His only-begotten Son] (Jn 3:16). The Father well loved us, the Son well loved us, He Who consented to such, the Holy Spirit well loved us, He Who ordered such. Why did the Father give Him? So that He would die and they would skin Him, so that they would wed Him with the slave. Here I am, the slave of the Lord. He who is born of a slave woman is a slave, although He be the son of a free man, because birth follows the womb. Is it not so? The Virgin calls herself a slave, and He Who is born of her calls Himself a slave: O Domine quia ego servus tuus sum, et filius ancillæ tuæ [O Lord, for I am Your servant, and the son of Your handmaid] (Ps 116:16). O Father, I am Your slave, and the son of Your slave! You were a slave, Lord; who shackled You to that cross with nails? The Son of God did not come to be served, but to serve (cf. Mt 20:28). You were a slave of men, since You served them, and they want to thank You for it with hard pains.

O blessed [be] Your goodness, and cursed our illness! That God would send His Son to the world to heal men! What was it, Lord, which moved You? Quæ te vicit clementia, ut ferres nostra crimina ]What clemency conquered You, that You would bear our crimes]?⁹ Would it not be enough to send a Moses? Non angelus, non legatus, ego feci, ego feram, ego portabo, ego salvabo [Not an angel, not a legate, I Myself did, I will bear, I will carry, I will save] (cf. Is 63:9, 46:4).¹⁰ “Hear Me, My people, those whom I bring, reared in My womb,” says the Lord: “I did, I will suffer you, I will carry you, I will save you, I will carry you between My shoulders; because I made You, I will carry you, and I will save you unto old age, unto your canes I will give you hope.” Blessed be You, Lord, since He Who made the vase came to solder it, and He in Whose mold it was made, He Himself came to remedy and mold it! “I want to descend,” says God—what was this? God guard you with love! The Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit well loved us. This matter is all love. You do not ask for equality, You do not place Yourself in that work, You do not ask a reason for love: it is love; will there be eyes to see this, that, because of the grand love which He had, He abased Himself and enclosed Himself in the womb of the Virgin, determined to pay and suffer and die for men, and to pay all his debts, even though it costs Him His life?

1Here the “treatise” version of this sermon cuts out numerous lines. The original sermon reads: “Ecce ancilla Domini, etc. ubi supra [Behold the handmaid of the Lord, etc., as above]. The words which, through the mediation of divine favor, will give our sermon a base, the holy Gospel says them in the Mass that is said today, as you have heard. Quis loquetur potentias Domini, auditas faciet omnes laudes eius; quis sapiens custodiet hoc [Who will tell the powerful deeds of the Lord, will make all of His praises heard; which wise man will guard this]? (cf. Ps 106:2)”

2 This line is based on Is 63:9, as found in the Septuagint, which reads (in part), “Not an elder nor an angel, but the Lord Himself saved them.”

3 A quote from the Nicene (Niceno-Constantinopolitan) Creed.

4The sermon version adds another Pauline quote: “Contentiones et rixae [Contentions and strifes] (Gal 5:20), etc.”

5 See St. Thomas of Villanova, Conferences on the Lord’s Natal Day IV.12, in St. Thomas of Villanova, Opera Omnia, Volume IV, Conciones Omnes in D.N. Jesuchristi ac B.V. Mariæ Festa Complectens (Manila: Amigos del Pais, 1883), 47: “Marvelous emptying of God towards flesh, marvelous, too, exaltation of flesh towards God.”

6 In this paragraph, St. John seems to use the word supuesto as a literal translation of the Greek hypostasis, with the related verb supositar meaning “to hypostasize.” Among the older Fathers, the term was used to refer to a nature, substance, or essence, but it later developed the meaning of “person”; where the older Fathers might have spoken of two hypostaseis, the later ones would speak of two ousiai (singular ousia, “essence”), with a single hypostasis, hence the term “hypostatic union.” Since hypostasis literally means “standing” (stasis) “beneath” (hypo), it lent itself to the understanding of the base substance, essence, or nature, but that meaning was changed; it is the later meaning, equivalent to “individual” or “person,” which St. John is referring to with his translation of supuesto (from the Latin suppositus, literally “placed” (positus) “under” (sub), etymologically identical to hypostasis). The DRAE gives a philosophical meaning of supuesto as “every being which is the principle of its own actions,” which also applies to a hypostasis in the later sense. See Real Academia Española, Diccionario de la lengua española, 22^nd ed. (Madrid: Espasa Calpe, S.A., 2001), 2112. “Hypostasize” means, at least here, “to unite with a hypostasis,” or “to form a hypostatic union.”

7 See St. Augustine, On the Predestination of the Saints, XV.30 (PL 44:981): Est etiam præclarissimum lumen prædestinationis et gratiæ, ipse Salvator, ipse Mediator Dei et hominum homo Christus Jesus [For a clearest light of predestination and grace is the Savior Himself, the Mediator of God and men Himself, the man Christ Jesus]. See also St. Augustine, On the Gift of Perseverance XXIV.67 (PL 45:1033): “There is no more illustrious example of predestination than Jesus Himself, wherefore I also argued this in the first book, and I have decided to recall it at the end of this one: there is, I say, no more illustrious example of predestination than the Mediator Himself.”

8 Literally “innards” (entrañas).

9 Two lines from the hymn Jesu, nostra redemptio, the Office Hymn for the Feast of the Ascension, dating from the 9^th or 10^th century.

10 See n. 6 above on the quote from Is 63:9.

 

 

Sources: Tercera parte de las obras del padre maestro Juan de Ávila... (Madrid: Pedro Madrigal, 1596), II:161-185.
Obras completas del B. Mtro. Juan de Ávila, ed. Luis Sala Balust (Madrid: La Editorial Católica, S.A., 1953), II:1004-1019.

(References given are for the full sermon.)

Translation and Notes ©2024 Brandon P. Otto.  Licensed via CC BY-NC.  Feel free to redistribute non-commercially, as long as credit is given to the translator.