And the opportunity came up again this year. I urged it not to skip, but it's on its way. Regina allowed it to be enjoyed, isn't it? Oh, you're going to the chapel, is that it? Yes. LAUGHTER And so Father Leclerc is able to stay here with us for today and Monday and Tuesday. On Wednesday you have to leave. Yes. So we have to take advantage of it. And thereby invite him to give us the first conference tonight on what is about.

[01:08]

It is an ambitious topic to teach what is wrong to their own works. When is that real? You always say it's complex. But also, I am not in the class in order to be. I studied last winter. What? I don't know. I don't know. according to a very small method, you see, just with the dictionaries. And that is the dictionary, one of my preferred sources. I'm always more interested in the history of words. And I'm reasonably spiritual to the spirituality of the dictionary. And that's why I studied the word modus, you see, the history of the word modus.

[02:10]

And in order to try what's... what idea it may draw from the history itself. And so, I propose to deal with two points. First, remember, recall the origin and the history of the word. And first, establish the fact of the very ancient use of this word. And secondly, to discern the meaning of this word in the monastic tradition. First, it is a fact that the word Monarchus has been used in the most ancient Christian literature, first in the Bible itself, as we have it now, and then in the non-canonic but Christian and pre-monastic writing. In the Bible, of course, if we take now a very get, we don't find the Latin word Monarchus.

[03:11]

But the vulgar is not the only approach to the second text. If it weren't, this would have justified the objection made against monastic life by some reformers of the 16th century, after them, quote a certain Odius, who wrote, To what answer can a Catholic apologist, a certain John of Buda, by another syllogism, . But if we look at the ancient Greek and Latin versions of the Bible, as we may know them nowadays, we are not reduced to such sophisms. There are, in the Bible, a certain number of texts in which the word eunus, or solitarius, or eunicus, were translated by monarchus, or monadson, in certain ancient Greek versions, and by monarchus in certain Latin versions.

[04:48]

To result in Psalm 218, they could pass their solitarius into, where instead of solitarius, we find monarchus. That's a monarch who's into it. She's not trying here to identify the bird. That's the anise, which was in Greek, amacropalus. And it's sort of Pelican, you see. And very interesting. But he has a whole symbolism, the tradition. Because he's sort of solitary with blood. He has a true portion, et cetera. Yes, he has a double pocket, and he eats twice. So he gathers food, and then he goes into the solitude and he digests the ruminants.

[05:51]

You see, also a monastic aspect, because ruminations belong to the monastic community. And then the problem is to know why he is in tectum. We shall see later. Another text was Psalm 67, 7, where some Greek texts have for monarchs, and some Latin versions have solitarius, or qui habitae facit monachos, in Greek, and habitae facit solitarius, or unanimous, or uni-animous. And Saint Jerome quotes in a sermon to monks this verse, Deus qui in habitae facit monachos, in Greek. Other texts were... Lamentations.

[06:51]

Lamentations. Lamentations, yes. It's another symbol of the log. I tried to redentify it. I saw something look on the log's bestiary. But of course it appears that... They did, after all, when they commented this one idea, which is one of the typical symbols of Marx, they only knew it through literature, because they never... You see, if they had seen it, they wouldn't have... In Tex and Gregor, and so it was so nice to see these other girls, Solitarius and Tex, Solitarius, Stevie, and so on.

[07:56]

But of course... The context and commentaries explain the significance of Monarchus as Solitarius Unanimus Unus. But before coming back now to the significance, let's note that, secondly, in the very ancient Christian literature, pre-monastic, we find also the word Monarchus. It occurs in the Gospel according to Thomas. The Coptic text, which has been recently discovered in Egypt and published two years ago, comes from a Greek original, redacted about the middle of the 2nd century, but depends upon more ancient sources. And there we find some logia of Jesus, among which we read his beatitude. Blessed are the monacoids.

[08:58]

And elsewhere, the monacoids will enter in the natural world, which means in the kingdom. A very recent study in the Review des Étudiants this year shows that such notions have their origins in the Hebrew tradition. And that in this context, monakos means the man whose conduct is simple, unique. The man to whom God gave this simplicity, this heightened respect, thanks to which he will perfectly fulfil his obligations toward God. The man who has this interior unity, which is opposed to every replacement of the hypocrite, without duality, without doing what God requires, and thinking, and something else has gone. It's this sort of deep sukhya, at least doing things without intention.

[10:04]

And the monarchs, I wonder, are those who have made their internal unit, who are simple, who have the heart pure, who have found, again, the spiritual child. Ancient ideas explain this fact according to different theories, which I can just here sum up. Primitively, the elect belonged to the kingdom of God. They were in the unit. They were one as the Father is one. Then they fell into duality. I see. separated between man and woman, between man and woman, and both separated from God, between body and soul, between intelligence and sensibility. All sorts of separations appear as a consequence of this. And so they have to find, again, thanks to God, their primitive unit, being reconciled with God and therefore with each other and within themselves.

[11:13]

And it is with the ancient meaning that the word monarchos, as we find it in the Bible, entered in the monastic tradition since the third century. Let's now examine its history in our Latin monastic tradition. Because the history of monarchos in the Greek and Syriac traditions has been different times. But in the Latin tradition, till now known. What was the meaning of monarchs in the patristic and medieval tradition of the West? We may distinguish three stages in history, during which were elaborated three elements contained in the word and idea of monarchs. I indicate them first, and then we shall come back to the explanation. The first answers to reply to the biblical word solitarius.

[12:17]

Monarchus means solus, solitary, alone with God. He is a man, isolated, forgotten from the other. He is sicut passe, solitarius in tectum. An ancient writer explained that he is paleruf, in tectum, because he is detached from the earth. His device, the wisp, is soli Deo vivere, or, as St. Gregory said of St. Benedict, soli Deo capturae desiderans. And this first unity with God has to be mainly explained by St. Jerome. who is sometimes called the hermit of Jerusalem. In fact, he was a stracely hermit. He had at least two communities of men and women.

[13:20]

But he was a literary hermit. So he spoke very much of it. He always insisted on the solitary aspect of monastic life. He has also a sort of counter. The second element answers the biblical word unanimous. E muscina vitale facit unius moris in domo, or unius modi, or unius anim. Monarchus means not only solus, but also unius, one with many in God. And this aspect has been mainly explained by St. Augustine, who applied often the text of Acts

[14:24]

St Thomas was almost obsessed by the idea of community in the church. And that was wonderful for him. He contributed so much to focusing on theology and spirituality. And then, each time he was speaking for more than two months, he learned to process two texts of Psalms and Acts. And to the first of these steps, is bound the idea, which I had mentioned yesterday evening, that we also live the apostolic life, that means in common and in part. For instance, in the Middle Ages, will write for the disciples of St. Boniface . And it is in this meaning that the monastic order is traditionally an apostolic order.

[15:42]

The third element answers to the biblical word . The attitude of the phlogion blessed are the monarchs. Monarchus means not only solus, not only unanimity, but also, and fundamentally, unus, unicus, one in himself. So it's not only alone is solus, not only one with many unanimous but cunicus, one in himself stands to God a finger. That is opposed to the truth. It is the fact of long pain divided, but unified by the grace of God. And this idea will be perfectly expressed in the Greek tradition, like this, in the Hierarchia Ecclesiastica, Greek Pathology 3.2.

[16:50]

Their name of Monaco, says Denis, comes from their life without division, one which unifies them in a recollection which excludes everything which could share them. to lead them to the deiform banal and to the perfection of the divino. This aspect will be beautifully elaborated by the Latin monastic authors of the 12th century, Leviticus and Cistercians, and finally summed up by St. Thomas, who in the Summa Theologicae Secunda Secundae, when I read Articulo 11, after connecting 1 Corinthians 7 to 33, at Divisus Est, . Those were the three unit involved in the name of . Now let's come back to each of them in order to draw some consequences.

[18:05]

We have not to choose one element and twist to the other. We have to realise inside them in a living sentence. Let's go up to Monarchus as Solitarius, Solus Cum Deo. This expresses the part of desire of God, which is essential to monastic life, the part of contemplation, of eschatological tendency. St. Gregory explains it at the very beginning of his commentary on King Swan, which begins, so, through it feel onus. And he explains, this man was a monk, onus. He is vain and strideous because he despises all that is transitory. But he is onus because of his singular love for God, of his exclusive desire for enjoying the only vision of God.

[19:09]

Other authors say he has the unity because he only wants to perceive the union necessary. Oswald gave the etymology, Monarchus comes from mono-oculus. Just when I look towards the other. Oswald applied the verse of Solonius 130. Singularity assume ego, the electrons. He yearns toward the final passage to God, Domitrania. All that lives in God, extramundum, according to Saint Paul, lo stracum receptio in ceres. And this thought unity expresses the psychological aspect of being human.

[20:11]

Ab secundum, monarchus as unanimis, unus concluens. This solitude in common implies charity. It supposes the absence of singularity. The monk is isolated from the world, but not separated from his brethren, neither from the world itself. Particularly, that means that, negatively, so to speak, he is not singular. He does everything with and like the others, according to Saint Benedict, chapter 6, 8 degrees, communis monasteriae. He has no private property. Everything is in common. Positively, he makes a constant effort towards communion. Ancient monastic authors explain this idea with a tumultuous like Monarchus coming from Monoscore or Monabis Custos, Custos Unicus, and showed that this requires unity, serenity, psychological peace and calm, the fact of not being too temperamental.

[21:34]

And some put Monarchus in relation with monarchy, self-position, self-government. The first unity expressed the charity for God. The second unity expresses the charity for the ego. Now, at Perseus, Monarchus has rules. He is a man who has interior unity, founded in God, coming from the divine oneness. Hence, etymologies have Monarchus, Remit, and Monarty. This has been especially elaborated by authors of the 12th century, which, at the end of this evolution, comes back to the origins of the concept, to this interior simplicity so well expressed by Denys. The history of Holocaust, along with the religious films of the 4th century,

[22:38]

is like a struggle, you see, between two tendencies, two etymologies, thrown by two Greek church fathers, contemporaries. Jerome insists on soul, Augustine on eunuchs. And then, during the whole Middle Ages, according to the circumstances, the evolution of monastic life, what is relation with the water institution in the church, and so on, we see that one or two, one or the other of the eunuchs of souls vanquishes successively. But at the end, the victory comes to reunions. And one has to go down to a century when Englishmen and Cistercians have contributed very much. I quote just one instance to Pax Neil. Nori esse vultus mea, id est multarum cogitation, esto vil unus, id est unius voluntatis et unius in pensiunis. Et illam volitate metit tensionem reflera unum.

[23:42]

Et quod est ille unum, fidelice ille unum quod est necessario. Quid est unum? Libera et plena contemplatio te. Esto ergo unus, et quene unum, adere unum, utsis unus cum Deo. And this author, who is an anonymous author in the Regia Latina, 2, 3, 8, 9, 7, goes on saying that to fight against this unity is to restore in the soul the image of God, who is unique and simple, and so to share in the mystery of a unique son, to anticipate and desire the vision of the unique face of God. And St. Bernard, so rightfully, stands on account of matter and merit, simplex estu, non tantum sine dolo et simulatione, sed et absque multiplicitate occupatione, tecum sit celon sinatio ius, hulus et vox dulcis et facies tecula.

[24:52]

And in a sermon on the Ascension, he described, well, this sort of trigger in the soul, this division of the soul which is not unified, and a struggle to keep too many tones and tendencies. and shows that we must try to get a real peace, thanks to the puritas codis of which the best guarantee and proof is the struggle of choice. Other authors illustrate this idea with texts as canticle una est Columba mea perfectamia, They explain that the Church is one because it shares with the unity, with the unity of God and Christ.

[25:58]

The one is one because he shares in the unity of God, in Christ and in the Church. He expresses, he shows, he symbolises their unity, testifies this unity. in Christ and the Church, placed twice in the world. Belonging to Christ, he received his Spirit, sent to whom he may be truly a monk, a unified creature. His whole conduct thus then manifests this mystery of union which the Father in the Son and the Spirit both sent to us in the Church. Dispersion, division, was our tradition. To remedy to it, the unique mediator came from the Father and sent us his Spirit, who leads us again to the Father. Christian unity will be perfectly manifested in the eternal life in eschatology, but it is already realised, given to us, in our eschatological life on this earth.

[27:16]

This is the unity by participation of God. We are unis. We all share in the same unity. We are unanimous. And this unity unifies us in God. We are soli cum deo et cum deos. This unity unites us to the other. we belong inseparably to God and to our presence. That's where a few ideas which just come out, I think, from the history itself of the work, which I just would summarize here. But I wrote a chapter on this with many footnotes. We'll give you a chapter where it is now being printed to justify it. Just to present this to you. Now let's conclude. We have seen that the Lord is the same in the same time, a man of solitude, of isolation, of separation, and a man of communion, of unanimity.

[28:30]

Is there any contradiction? Not at all. The solution is in the unique and universal love of God, which was revealed and given to us in Christ by the Spirit, The synthesis has to be made in us by God himself, provided that we don't oppose the obstacle of our selfishness. Saint Benedict said to deny oneself in order to follow Christ. And the result will be simplicity, a simplification of our spiritual life, of our relations with God and with the other. Traditionally, simplicity is a monastic virtue par excellence, the mark of the monk. Other plaintiffs may have said, and so on, that monks are the simplicitas monastis.

[29:32]

I think I only mentioned the fact that so many monks in the Middle Ages were called Simplex, simplexio, simplexia. And I think I wrote an article which I need to assert at the very time, so I don't insist. But, you see, I think it's very important to us to remember that. It's important not vain share, vain mixed. in commixta simplicitas, not being complicated. And I think that must appear, and I must say that appears in our faith. We are not complicated in our real life. We should be simple, very peaceful and so on. That must appear and does appear in reality. To be plain, as it is, George, unifying because unified. Unifying and unified because united with God.

[30:35]

to live with a total generosity and sincerity in the research of love, with an absolute exclusivity in the service. And that is the way to be a monastic monk. You know, if we are all monks, we have to try to realise the whole content of the world. The monk is a saboteur. His vocation in the church is not a holiest monk, But it is interiority of life and action. He is a man of unity, chiefly in the common life. Interiority of community. He is a man of simplicity and purity of heart, of intention. He is a man of solitude and of universality, because he shares in the universal love of God. And this simplicity is a gift. We read sometimes in the light of the medieval sense that some was .

[31:39]

And this simplicity is a special gift of the Holy Spirit to the monk. It is in the list of the seven official ones, but it is an additional gift of the Holy Spirit for the monks, a monastic gift of the Holy Spirit, and I think we have all to pay to receive this gift of simplicity. Thank you very much. All convinced? All surprised? Could you explain more what you meant by the two traditions that started by Saint Augustine and Saint Jerome around the words solus and ulus?

[32:50]

Yes. You see, they didn't fight against each other because separately they were all in the same time on this topic. But Saint Jerome always insisted on the aspect of solitude, you see. so to speak, the elemitical aspect of Jurassic World, which is fundamental and essential, traditional, because St. Jerome was a... was a... a haven of desire. The only desire to be a heaven and encourage other people to be, you see. But himself, he needed to deal with lungs and nerves and so on, you see. But in the literary tradition, then, all these wonderful texts in which he explains this meaning of classical text, after entering the canon law, the click of Russian, you see.

[33:58]

So he had great influence. And of course, in the Middle East, then the writer defined this idea. But in the same terms, I thought this thing who also had to deal very much with smog, you see. But we who was also in Africa, in Africa of this time, you see, in which monasticism just began, some abused those who were, insisted too much on singularity, you see, on separation from the Church, you see, That's why he wrote this book, for instance, The Opera in Monaco against laziness. We don't belong to the community, we have nothing to do, and so on. So he always insisted on the current aspect of religious life, foremost and foremost. And Schiffler, in a wonderful text, when he comments this one or two

[35:00]

except one born from the kingdom of . He says that that's their . And . And so they, according to the peripheral tendencies or to the needs of different ,, they insisted more on the aspect of solitude or on the aspect of community. And by the way, I mentioned that in the same time of St. Jerome and St. Tobias, there was already a very living monasticism in the whole Latin Church. We sometimes used to think that the monastic life was just, in this time, the privilege of the Marian culture, you see. Because, in fact, this Oriental poetry has led a literature, since the end of the 13th century and before it really was.

[36:10]

But now, this year, we are celebrating the 16th century of Saint-Domingue. It's only in the 61st century that it belongs to Father Peter. And on this occasion, we have prepared a book, which is now being printed in the studio in Sardinia. And this is in the time of Sintmann, in the first century. And then we asked different scholars, officials of each country, one from Spain, one from France, Italy, and so on, you see, England. What was the state of monasticism in each area? And it appeared that there was already a very efficacious and very spread-away monasticism, but of course not yet organised. But it's remarkable that about 200 years before Saint-Bernard, Saint-Bernard didn't found the monasticism in the founding.

[37:19]

found the rest of the town. He found all of the which was . But then his whole and all the whole to organize. And by the way, I mentioned also that on occasion of this centenary of St. Martin, the Pope sent to the Archbishop of Tours a wonderful letter. I don't know if you have read it. I wrote a copy of it, you see. I think it would be the worst being translated. In which it says, we are so glad... And of course, how sad we went to... because you know the wonderful story of the the barrier of Baldwin, not of Alcreen, of psychology, you know.

[38:42]

You see, he was making the... And then he said, then Teresa Alonso said, oh, it's special to the Benedictines, but he didn't remember. And then Father Oscar, well, sure, knew it. He understood badly, and he said, Agnes, a pastoral activity. And he demanded it. So it was Father Pascal who said, Yes, Excellency. His patron was Alcuin of Tours.

[39:51]

And so he sent the letter to the Archbishop of Tours when he said that St. Martin has been a great apostle and so on, but we must forget that he would have not been this wonderful apostle if he had not been among us. And then he made a great energy of a great place of monastic life, a true monastic life. And he says it is very precious today in our time we have so many expectations of doing only external activities exist for the clergy to stress the importance of the monastic life of prayers, and he said, ourselves, we took in order to show that our sympathy and esteem for this work, right? We have been recently in Subiaco, in Grottaferrata, and in the general areas of the .

[40:57]

Why is that? That's a very nice speech. And this day on the, what do you call that, the feast of purification? Candlelight. Candlelight, yes. You know that in every religious order, an association brings a candlelight. All this house of candlelight, you know, just entered in the caches of the church. people of the Antichrist. But he decided to send each of them, you see, with a certain intention. And this year, I don't know if you heard, he said, I shall send one of the scoundrels to each ordinary, each bishop. He sent it to... the most austere and contemplative community of Israelis. I don't know if you've received. And I was supposed to be the editor of this wonderful so I read through the paper.

[42:35]

And it appears that even already in this fourth century, in the Roman Curia, there was people favorable to Marx and other enemies. And one pontificate was monastic, and the other anti-monastic. And that explains why St. Dionysus, St. Dionysus was very monastic. That book, Dionysus, that was a monastic one. He took a secretary, St. Jerome, and so on, you see. But as soon as Dionysus was at Dionysus' time, St. Jerome asked him to fly away, because the next boat and carrier, you see, the Roland Trajans were quite against this. And so St. Jerome was from then to subject. And thus explained that why and how was written the life of St. Mark. Through Pistius Severus, what the life was a problem, then you see, to answer to those objections coming from the Roman tree.

[43:42]

An apology of domestic life. But there have been recent decrees, you see, they tried to prevent, to show monastic vocation. And there was a decree, you see, for you, that everybody having been in the army could not enter the monastery. And so, since the party had been in the army, you see, Sir Precious Severus had to transform the whole collage, you see. to explain that he was in the army before this victory. And so this chronology of Martini has been a great project for all the historian's . The chronology of the text does not agree with the chronology . And so now two reasons for which one is an American one. The American of Washington . The reason why they have to change it, you see.

[44:49]

So that when we see that now, fortunately, the Pope is favorable, you see, but that could change, you see. That has always been. So that helps to put to a certain relativity, you see, as in the history of liberty, of condition, right? In justice to the reputation of St. Jerome, is it true that when he first tried monastic life, he did spend about three years in the desert in a very austere, solitary life? I don't know. I don't know if the life of St. Jerome is such. It's possible. It's possible. Well, I think he describes it in his... Ah, yes, but you see, when St. John's said, once he said, we must always consider that there is a great deal of literature.

[45:51]

So we must separately hear what said other people. What did I say? What did I say? I don't know. I don't remember. But it would be easy to verify this point. It really was. But we must also know that when they speak of solitude, desert, you see, we must imagine the Alaska or the Sahara. It was a suburb, the suburb. Predictable. In the valley of Lear and Larry, it was incestuous. to live far from the places where there was water. This solitude was there. Well, he claims that he went out to a place in the Assyrian desert, where the Assyrian desert meets another desert, and there's nothing but desert all around. It's possible. He spent three years there. It's possible. But let us see... I think he was too late a monk, see?

[46:57]

But not solitary, as he said. Or else to be. I think he does consider that there were other solitaries in the neighborhood, you know, whom he used to see from time to time. I mean, they were in the... Dimitri was good. I mean, he doesn't... You couldn't say that he never saw a single poet for three years, but he must have been still a soldier at life. Yes. And it seems so. Then when he wrote The Life of Saint Paul, you see, Some historians think that it was a criticism, a satire, to criticise different sorts of mocks, by insisting too much in the marvellous aspect of this life and form.

[48:05]

This life seems to be a sort of lover, you see. I was just going to say, in the book on the light of St Anthony, Dean Steinman... Yes, please. You think St. Paul is a figure or imaginative fabrication, that there really wasn't any St. Paul there? Yes, yes, yes, yes. And I think you mentioned... Jerome Marsman, if he was, made it up. Yes, yes. It's a good example, you know. Yes, yes. I said, is that a way to prove that there was or wasn't a St. Paul there? The water is not that simple, it is that it's life, I mean, we can see, we can die, you know. The problem is the thing, you see, the idea.

[49:15]

The idea.

[49:16]

@Transcribed_v005
@Text_v005
@Score_83.64