Is there anything you would want to say further? No, perhaps it would be better that you are speaking. I wish to say this morning I tried to give you only a little bit of the atmosphere of which Father Adamadous was coming. And then I must next time speak also about the difficulties. And he, in a certain way, when he went away from Germany in 1938, in a very famous conference he has given to the young people, young monks, was a little bit criticizing our situation. Not everything was perfect. For example, we had still, and we haven't known it, We knew it, but you could not change it. This many masses in the morning, it was not ideal. Only the Vatican Council has given us this wonderful opportunity to stay all together in one celebration. At this point, and then also we had two classes of monks. We had 100 brothers, wonderful men, famous men, masters in their different branches.

[01:05]

And some of them also became famous in the world. For example, Brother Radbot, the great master of the Mosaics in Sant'Anselmo in Rome, and of many of our works in Maria Lack. Bruder Notke, our famous painter, in many churches entirely painted by him in Germany and in France, Alsace and in Luxembourg and so on. and Bruder Reinhold, and so on. And all the masters in a different, how do you say, Kraftwerk? Kraftwerk, electricity, carpenter. What's that? Forger, and Taylor, and Baker, and we have been the entire city. Today, Noam was so wonderful. Nevertheless, he came to organize here a new life, but I must speak about it later. Therefore, only to give you a vision of this atmosphere.

[02:06]

And you can no more imagine how it was, the enthusiasm, the admiration of the abbot, and also the the wonderful way in which you could work together with him. And so many men we had, not only 3, 4, 5, but 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. And finally we have been all together 170. Only 60 choir monks. And then fighting, a little bit fighting, and at the same time received enthusiastically by the young people, by many theologians, also by the popes. Pius XI has been very kind to us, but Pius still more in a certain way because he was very friendly to Abbot Ildefons when he was an apostolic nun in Germany. And more than all, Paul VI, who has been with us sometimes

[03:12]

as Montignore, as young priest, when he was helping in the Secretary of State, and then he nearly never, when he was spoken to the abbots, perhaps you remember it, he very often was speaking about the great abbots, Marmion, Herwegen, and so on. Yes, and then I must speak about this always later. Only to show you the ground from which all the damages was coming to realize this world, but in a new way, in a more simple way, in a more authentic way, and also in a more American way. Again here, before coming the idea of the Vatican Council of Adaptation, you could not have one Roman liturgy in the entire world from the first until the last point.

[04:19]

Also, perhaps Abbot Helwig sometimes was thinking about it so, we must remain in Latin, we must remain in the old Roman liturgy. But nevertheless, he did it seeing the theological essence of the liturgy. Here in this wonderful article of Balthasar Fischer, Appreciation of Abbot Ildefons after the Second Vatican Council, he says, In the former times, liturgy was conceived as the technique to celebrate mass, to know accurately when you must say credo and when you must omit it. And when he was nominated the first professor of liturgy in the theological faculty of Trio after the Second War, the clergy of the diocese said, stupid people who are making a professor ordinarius, therefore a great professor with a special cathedra, only to teach the clergy to know when they must omit Gloria and Credo.

[05:21]

But no, no, no, we must know the essence of liturgy celebration. And the essence is? actualization, realization of the work of redemption, death and resurrection of our Lord. But I must speak about it later on, perhaps you must speak about it, if you have some ideas. There's one biography of Baudouin in English. His influence, I was really kind of astounded to read all that he was able to... Of Lambert Baudouin? His greatness is you know him. Lambert Baudrouin has been a monk of Mont César, the Abbey of Mont César in Belgium.

[06:22]

It was until the end of the First World War the Abbey of the Congregation of Beuron, of the old Beuron system. In a certain way, we must be We, and also in a certain way you, must be very thankful to Beuron and Solène. But on another side, you could say all these peoples are old-fashioned. You remember the terrible judgment of Louis Bouyer in his book, Liturgical Piety, his lectures given to Notre Dame here in the United States, when he said, Gironji has founded an antiquarian abbey with an archaeological monastery. Terrible judgment. And Father Damazos then has written an excellent defense to defend Solem and Gironji

[07:26]

in the American Benesikton Review against Bourdieu. In a certain way, we have received from Soleim, from Guérin-Gy, and then from the old Beuron, this vision of liturgy as the center of our life. But sometimes Solemne, more still than Beuron, and Beuron also a little bit, were too medieval still. And Lombard-Brunner has been one of the first who was speaking in another way. in this famous congress of 1909, Malin, we speak about it as, in German, das Mechelner Ereignis, what do we say in English? The event of Malin. It was a congress of the Catholic works in Belgium. And at this occasion, two men, Lambert Baudel, monk of the Bavarian Congregation and of the Abbey of Mont César, and a lay professor, Gottfried Gottfried Kurt, from the university in Louvain.

[08:39]

We are speaking about the liturgy. in this totality of the Catholic works, and they could not find a place for it, only in the section of art. Liturgy is a symbol of aestheticism. And here, the words of both have been like a bomb, exploding. Liturgy is not only aesthetical, work. It's not only some external apparatus. It is the soul of the church. Lambert Baudelon said it, and Gottfried Kurt, the professor, the layman, said the same. And the entire Congress was enthusiastic about it under the patronage of a great bishop, Cardinal Mercier, very famous because he was the first to begin a communicative dialogue with the Anglican Church. Conversation de Malin, also the Mechel. It was the Archbishop of Mechel.

[09:41]

Malin. Mechel in Dutch, Malin in French, the same name. And under the patronage of this eminent cardinal, who during the war was the great leader of the Belgian population against the German army, as the cardinal in Poland, No, the former. His name. Yeah, the fourth who died already. Was the great, Wyszynski was the great leader of the Polish people. So Cardinal Mercier, a wonderful man in a communicative situation and in also political difficulties and a friend of this liturgist. And immediately after, this wonderful congress, they were starting a work of liturgical apostolate that the faithful could really actively participate in mass and in Vespers, both in French and in Dutch.

[10:47]

And then immediately later began this great controversy because the Jesuits were fearing that the liturgical movement would destroy their piety, their method of spirituality. And then, to conceal the difficulties, Lombard Bonhomme has written an excellent little book, A Piety des Eglises, The Piety of the Church. And you can see the research movement, which was beginning perhaps a little bit in the Illuminism, which started then with Solem, which was acknowledged by Pius X, remained always a stream under the earth. And only in Berlin for the first time it came to public life in Belgium. Belgium was the wonderful country in which all this work was beginning. But the greatness of Ildefond Herdringen has been to bring it to Germany.

[11:51]

He was not alone. He was working with all his monks, with the other abbeys, the Benedictine abbeys, and he was working especially later together with Austria, with Pius Parsh, who was more working in the field of liturgical pastoral liturgy. So the importance of Lombard, by the way, is to have begun, to begin this work. And the second point of his great, wonderful work is that he then was founding the monastery of Chevetogne, perhaps in 26, to make a monastery in which Latin and Greek and Russian rite was celebrated together, therefore, for the unity of the church. And he did it so strongly. He was working so strongly liturgically and this tendency for unity of the churches that he was

[12:54]

was exiled. And now the third point of his importance is that he obeyed, remained in silence in Paris during the war. And during the war, he had the opportunity to speak with the apostolic nuns there, after the war. And these nuns, he's called And when Roncalli then became Pope, as far as I remember, under his pontificate, or at least some years later, he could come back to Sevitonia as the great patriarch of all these works, liturgy and communicative dialogue, and also in the same time, obedience to the Church. And then we tried to go on with this work in Germany. sorry, for Lumber Burrow and in the same time was in these years when he was a monk of Mont César, there was a rector for the monastic students who was studying in the University of Louvain

[14:12]

a simple monk of Maretsu, the greater abbey of the Bavarianese congregation in Belgium, Columba Marmion. elected then Abbott in 1910, I think, or 1911, 1909 already. And he was the great spiritual writer who, in a wonderful way, has shown also this liturgical spirituality which is coming out from the liturgical celebration. In his wonderful books, you know them, Christ Life of the Soul, Christ and His Mysteries, L'Ideal du Moine, L'Ideal du Prêtre, at least four big books, one of the great spiritual writers. Perhaps in a certain way we can say a little bit too I don't find the right word. Pious.

[15:14]

Too fine. Lomber Burrow, and then later on also Oro Castle, has been more powerful to insist in the necessity of a liturgical spirituality. Nevertheless, he remains a great man. And yes, Lombard, Bologna, Colombo, Magnum. But perhaps now I would like to also hear your questions. It would be more easier. How has Romano Guardini been a Yes. Olmani Guadini was first a friend of Kuhnbert Mohlberg. And together with Albert Hilde von Serwegen, they were discussing in 1916, 17, to start this historical work. And then, when In certain difficulties, yes, they were saying, we must begin immediately.

[16:27]

You cannot wait for the end of the war. And therefore, Romano Godini had already ready some chapters to bring out his first book of Spirit of the Liturgy, the first volume of the Ecclesia Orans, the collection started by Abadildo von Zerbeck in Easter 1918. This book remained the great, how do you say, apostle, hero, herald, apostle of the liturgical movement for all the years. And Romano Guardini was an Italian by birth, but his father was General Consul of Italy in Mainz, Mainz, Mainz. And he as a boy was sent to the school in Germany and has chosen German language, German school, German university, and he became more German than we are.

[17:35]

A wonderful master of German language and complicated in his ideas sometimes, but an excellent man who was also able to speak in a living way to young people, and therefore here is perhaps his second great importance. He was the apostle of the first liturgical movement together with Maria Lark, and he was the spiritual leader of this Catholic youth movement which is called Quickborn. and when he came for the first time to the center of this movement to the castle of hortenfelds near to a workforce in bavaria i have seen him for the first time he was celebrating mass and we have longed for him for the first time how to could speak the mess itself in a wonderful living way to the people not very high

[18:44]

ideas, but insisting in the reality of the celebration, in the actuality of it. Therefore, in a certain way, realizing the importance of liturgical celebration as it was shown by scientific means by Odo Kassel. They were working all together. So that he was, together with Odo Kassel, the first editor of the first volumes of the Liturgisches Jahrbuch, of the yearbook for liturgy wissenschaft. And here, in the first volume, Guadini has written an article about the objective reality in the liturgical movement, commenting a very famous book of this first group of Belgian monks in 1909 and 1913, Maurice Festigier, monk of Maritzau.

[19:53]

Qu'est-ce que c'est la liturgie? What is the liturgy? And this book was the origin of this famous controversy. He was saying liturgy is everything. Without liturgy there is no church. You can live as a good Catholic only if you are celebrating liturgy and so on. And therefore the Jesuits were protesting against him in a very terrible battle. Le Civita Cattolica, Les Etudes de France, all these periodicals of the Jesuits, they are fighting against him. And it was so terrible that nearly the entire religious movement would have been forbidden by Rome. But nevertheless, the war stopped these difficulties. The war stopped. It's also a providence of God. And now, Guadagni, in 1921, has written an article about these problems. the objectivity in the historical celebration. And he said, liturgy is the objective norm of our piety. But only the objective norm.

[20:54]

To have the reality and the actuality of life itself, you need always a second element. Not only objectivity, but also subjectivity. In German, he called it Gegensatz. What is Gegensatz in English? Opposition. Therefore, all concrete life is opposition. And when I came to the university in Bonn where he was in his first semester as young professor, first beginning, I was in my first semester as student When we were helping him in the disposition of his library in his house in a certain afternoon and evening, he was telling us, the secret of my life is to show how the entire human life is constructed by oppositions. Concretely, here in liturgy, objectivity and subjectivity.

[21:56]

Therefore, you need to celebrate liturgy, objective worship of the church, and objectively, you must celebrate the Volksandacht, popular piety. Volksandacht, in German, very famous element, Rosary, Via Crucis, and all these elements. An excellent article. But the first editor, Otto Kassel, has written, has joined to it a very big note saying, excellent is what Dr. Romano Gaudi said. Nevertheless, I am from a different opinion. Perhaps it is right to speak about opposition as a fundamental element of every human life. But in liturgy, the two elements are not liturgical worship of the church, and piety of the people, Miocicius, Rosary, and all these devotions. But the opposition is liturgy and my private prayer after it, my silent prayer, my meditation, in which I give personally, subjectively, my answer in a certain way.

[23:11]

If we stay in the church only, without any personal prayer, in the church during the liturgy, participating internally with our soul and also continuing after it, then it remains dead. It would be really the death of all. You need internal participation so strongly that after liturgy you are continuing in continuous prayer. and all the modern tendencies of charismatical renewal and prayer groups and so on are going in this direction. But both together, liturgy already filled with personal participation and continuation after it. And this note, very famous, is the beginning already of the separation between Guardini and Odocastle. And Guardini was furious about this note joined to his article by Kassel. And after this second volume, in the third volume, he was no more co-editor.

[24:15]

And in a certain way, they were separated forever. But Guardini has been so great that he, some years later, for the first time, the files, I remember, in 1930, no, twenty-nine, twenty-nine already. And therefore, five, six years later, he was so great to recognize Kassel in his fundamental intention is right. The mystery, the mysterion, therefore, the actualization of the plane, the disposition of God fulfilled in Christ, given to us in his redemption work, in the Paschal Mystery, actualised by the mysteries. That is the centre of Christian life. He said it in some articles and then he could explain it in a wonderful way in this famous book in which he has given His Sunday homilies given in Berlin when he became professor in Berlin, perhaps from 32, 33, the Lord, you know it perhaps, the Herr, the Herrn, Christ the Lord, not only

[25:28]

the men of Palestine, but also the Lord, the glorified Christ, the risen Christ, who died and is risen and so on. Very famous. And they did other books where he said explicitly, the mystery, as Kassel has shown it, is the soul of Christian life, of Catholic worship. Therefore, here is the greatness of Guardini. And he tried also to join him again. and came to Herstelle, where Kassel was the chaplain of the sister's convent, but he was not received by Kassel. Here is one of the limits of Udo Kassel. He wasn't quite a different type, typus, type, type, type, as Guardini. Nevertheless, everyone has taken his way, and everyone has contributed excellently to the entire work.

[26:33]

Romano Guardini on one side, and Oricaldi another way. When you say that Bodo Cossel refused to receive Guardini, do you mean he refused to talk to him or refused to accept his co-winnership? No. First, he refused to receive him only because Guardini made the mistake to come there in the hours of perfect silence in Hersteller. He was not admitted, therefore. But no, he was not against this exposition of Guardini, and he was not against the work of Guardini, but there were different types of thinking. Orocaso was the man of philological and historical inquisition research, and Guadagni was a great thinker.

[27:37]

Guadagni was also a man of exact study, yes. My first lecture I heard from him in the University of Bonn in 1922. My first semester has been the Theology of the Roman Missal. So he was studying the texts But his first quality was a theological thinker. Kassel was first a man of exact research, but he was also clever in his mind. Nevertheless, the first form of everyone was so different they could not work together. But everyone in his area was working, and so they were nevertheless finally working together, to say so. We would say today it is a pity that they could not stay together. After the war, after the second war, there was one monk in our monastery, very famous too,

[28:44]

who was trying to work together with Romano Guardini to retain his friendship to us. And Guardini himself always was remaining friend of us. And he sometimes, nearly every year, has written to Abbot Ildefon Serwergen saying, from time to time, I must come to you to expose to you my situation, Also, both, Helwegen and Gordini, were not working too well together, but different types of men, in a certain way. And this monk in Lach, who was working together with Romagnoli, was our prior, Theodor Buchler. Theodor Buchler, very famous man, too. He was officer, he was a Protestant man, officer in the first war, active officer. After the war, he left the army and was married, and became an artist, how do you say, baking ceramics.

[29:51]

Yeah, pottery. Famous, a great man as artist. And then his wife died, and he became Catholic, became monk in 27, I think, or 26. And then, perhaps in 1935, there was, in the times of the Nazi, a terrible book against religious life from an ex-Dominican, two years behind the walls of a monastery, with a terrible description of religious life, and columniation, and an awful book of a traitor. And then a Catholic edition house asked Fr. Albert, could you not write a book against this book? Fr. Albert Ildefons answered, we don't write against somebody. But I have a monk who could speak about monastic life.

[30:55]

Our Theodor Bruckler is still a simple monk who has written a wonderful book after the experience of 10 years in the monastic life. a very famous book, Soldat und Mönch, Soldier and Monk, where he, in a wonderful way, 35, 36, when Germany was rearmed, was describing the First War, his activity as officer, encounters with the Emperor, with Marshal Hindenburg, and then comparing it to the Army of Christ, the monastery as army, where we are fighting against the devil, and describing our daily life, our theology, and so on. A big book who had many, many editions, also during the war. And then we, during the war, had a military hospital with 1,000 wounded soldiers sometimes. This book was read by everyone. And at that time, he became prior. And an excellent, excellent man.

[31:56]

And he was found one of the great men of our liturgical editions. the founder of our review liturgy and monastic life after the second war and so on which we did not continue when he died therefore in twenty five volumes and so on therefore he nevertheless was a friend of Guardini and he went always meeting him in the liturgical commission of the German bishops where were working together in great liturgies as Jungmann, the Jesuit, Karl Rahner, the Jesuit, Theodor Böckler, and the Vicar General of Trier, Heinrich von Meuris, and other people still, and the oratorians of Leipzig, working all together. He met always Guardini, working together with him. And so we remained friends to him.

[32:58]

Also, a certain separation remained because we have been different types of men. We had different areas of work, but finally all were working together until the Vatican Council has given the last approbation of all that. But again, perhaps it's better that you ask. It's more to do it historically, but how was it that the liturgy of the hours, I mean, the more primitive, say, in the fourth century, and the synaxis where the Desert Fathers would come on Saturdays and Sundays to receive the Eucharist, And then we see it fairly well maintained in Benedict's time, although the Eucharist was becoming more just a receiving of the Eucharist rather than associated with the Mass, I suppose, on Sundays. So the liturgy became more I don't think that St.

[34:00]

Benedict would separate already both. He does not speak about Eucharist. Perhaps he could speak about monastic Eucharist, according to the rule later on. But we have no certain security that he was separating communion from Mass. I would say with Armand Veilleux, the great Trappist in Canada, who was Abbot of Missigno, yes. But he was too radical, therefore he must resign already. But he was my student, and he had made his doctor dissertation about the liturgy of the Pacomigan monks in the fourth century.

[35:10]

An excellent work. And he did not write it against Abbot Elysius Dikos, the abbot of a Dutch abbey, a Flemish abbey in Belgium. Elysius Dacus, in the memorial book of Odo Casel, he was a great friend of Odo Casel, has written an article, Les anciens moines ont-ils célébré la liturgie? The old monks didn't celebrate liturgy. And he answered, liturgy in the meaning of solemn. of Beuron, a little bit also of the old Maria Laage of the times of Abbot Herwig, was not so celebrated in the old times. But okay, we are agreeing with that. But Armin Veilleux shone a little bit against Abbot Eligius Dekkers, who was exaggerating his idea.

[36:11]

They celebrated liturgy as it was common custom in their time in the fourth century. Therefore, they came to the Sunday Eucharist in the parish church. They were celebrating as every Christian in the fourth century was celebrating liturgy. In a certain way, this remained typical for the monks in all the centuries, and we could say Until the late Middle Age, monks were celebrating the Eucharist and receiving Holy Communion in it as a sacrificial meal. And only in modern times, during the Middle Age, in consequence of the certain evolution of the Eucharistic theology, there was a separation with insistence of the presence of our Lord in the bread, in the wine, therefore under the species and the Israel presence in consequence of this wonderful theology of transubstantiation in the 11th, in the 12th, in the 13th century.

[37:26]

St. Thomas, in his theology in the 13th century, sees still really the wonderful nexus, the wonderful union between the Eucharistic memorial of our Lord, where we are celebrating the memorial of his death and resurrection, and are receiving then the fruit of his sacrifice in the Holy Communion, there is unity. But nevertheless, with time, consideration, the meditation of this wonderful work of transubstantiation, of the presence of body and blood of our Lord unto this kind, has brought the Christians to see it only, to adore it outside, to expose it, to give benediction, and to celebrate the Feast of Corpus Christi, introduced only in the 13th century, And here still in the liturgy per se, the accent is given on the Mass and on the sacrificial meal, but also on the real presence.

[38:38]

And then after Thomas, in the end of the Middle Age, these Eucharistic devotions were growing always, always. And when then Luther was speaking against the multiplication of Masses, denying in a certain way the explication of the transubstantiation. And when Calvin was protesting against the doctrine of real presence, again, the Catholic theology must insist so much in the reality of this real presence that they nearly were forgetting the importance, nearly, not totally, of the mass. and insisting on the real presence alone in the tabernacle, in the exposition, in the visitation of the sacrament and so on. On the other side, theoretically, we retained always the importance also defending it against the Protestants of the reality of the sacrifice, but it was separated and when the Council of Trent must

[39:46]

expose the Catholic doctrine against the Protestants by concrete, awful, historical reasons. They were beginning with the real presence under the species of bread and wine. Speaking ten years later, by terrible historical reasons, wars between the emperor and the Protestant princes and so on, ten years later about the communion, where it is not necessary to receive Holy Communion under both species, because under every species you have the entire Christ. And still later, some years later, in another session, they were speaking about the reality of the sacrifice. And this separation, real presence, communion, and sacrifice of the mass remained typical for the entire Catholic theology in the following centuries, in our dogmatical treaties.

[40:55]

We were speaking about the real presence. Therefore, we must worship and adore it. They must receive Holy Communion at least once a year. Sometimes. No, more or less. Not too often, because we are not worthy. And finally, they must also celebrate the Mass. Communion is not necessary. Only the priest must receive Holy Communion. The people not so much. And this remained for centuries and centuries until Solemn was beginning to change. It did not succeed immediately. in the beginning of the Bavarian congregation, the not-priests could receive Holy Communion perhaps every week, once. And only prior to the 10th was the man who said, no, we must receive Holy Communion very And he has formulated the word, at least he said so.

[41:58]

Also, we could not find the real place where he has said it. You must not pray in the Mass, you must pray the Mass. Therefore, sharing actively in it. And nevertheless, also here again, I said it already this morning, when we received Holy Communion, and when we did it, Every day, when I was a boy in 1916 and 1917, we were receiving Holy Communion very piously before the Mass, to then give thanks to Our Lord, so with closed eyes, during the Mass. And then in 16 and 17, we were beginning to see the importance of the destructivist movement. We had a shot that says Lefebvre, a German missile. Then we were receiving Holy Communion, Thanksgiving, and when the priest was singing the gospel, but in a black mask, therefore in a mask for the dead, then we proudly were following the Latin gospel with our missile in hand.

[43:09]

And only in 1920, in the Catholic movement of Romano Guardini, and in consequence also of the work of Maria Lach, we were saying, no, no more so. We are receiving Holy Communion in the Mass, and we are receiving Holy Communion in every Mass. And then so you can do it actively in the Crypta Mass in Maria Lach and so on. No, we were beginning with your question. You see this evolution. We lost a little bit, by certain reasons, the vision of this essential union between memorial of our Lord, presence of his redemption work, and communion as the consequence, the fruit of the sacrifice. Sometimes, it is true, there were exaggerations.

[44:15]

It's always in the history of the churches. And also in our groups, Catholic youth movement in the 20s, and the social movement after 20, 30, people were saying, to receive Holy Communion outside of the mass is not meaningful. We must not do it. Tabernacle has no importance. And that is also false. Therefore, the Pope, Pius XII, must protest against this exaggeration, especially because in 38, 39, Verdi, Pius' priest, oblate, our lady in Germany, has written a little booklet, Irrewege und Umwege im Frömmlichkeitsleben der Gegenwart. false, distorted ways in the life of piety in our actual times, in which he was very terribly criticizing the religious movement, denying the real presence, denying the opportunity for the communion outside of the mass, and so on.

[45:29]

And this booklet has divided the entire clergy in Germany into campus. not young and old, but young and old here and young and old there, for liturgy and against liturgy, fighting. And then also exaggerating against the rosary, against the via crucis, because you must pray only liturgically, in the sense of orocasol. Your private prayer during liturgy, after liturgy, And in this, the war again a little bit has stopped also these terrible Christians not destroying the unity of the church. But the Pope was nervous in Rome past the 12th, and he asked the German bishops to say how is the situation there. And then the cardinal president of Breslau was a good master of all these things and some excellent theologians were defending the liturgy, Carl Rano and the Bishop of Trio and other people still.

[46:40]

We did not, we must not read Maria Laack. And then Pius XII has published his wonderful encyclical, Mediator Dei, where he is criticizing the liturgical movement, yes, but at the same time acknowledging the importance of it. He says then, okay, liturgy is really the source of the life of the church, not only an external apparatus. He says, the liturgical authentically celebrated is the soul. This is wonderful. Therefore, against this meaning of the clergy who said sometimes, liturgy is only the aesthetical apparatus of the church. And then he said, it is right to receive Holy Communion in every mass, after good preparation, also after confession and so on. in the mass, but nevertheless it is also allowed and sometimes necessary to receive Holy Communion outside of the mass, to adore it, to worship it, but to give the viaticum, viaticum, to give the last communion to the sick people, to the dying people, and sometimes also to receive Holy Communion outside of the mass.

[47:59]

But because we must preserve it in the tabernacle, the real present body of our Lord, we must adore it. Therefore, from time to time, we must also make a visitation, pray before it, and expose it, and make processions. But Pius XII has solemnly said, the first reason is not to adore, but to preserve it only. And when we have edited, I was a consultant in this congregation, in the Council for the Fulfillment of the Liturgical Reform, and we edited in 1967 a wonderful instruction, the Culto Mysterii Eucharistici. the adoration, the cultus of the Eucharist is mystery. We could recite this wonderful word of Pius XII. The reason for the reservation is not the adoration, but the last communion for the sick people.

[49:05]

Nevertheless, it is really the body of our Lord, therefore we must adore it. And all the forms of devotion are good. if they are submitted, if they are subordinated to the liturgical celebration. And therefore in this instruction we have said the Eucharist is first of all the memorial of our Lord, the real presence of his sacrifice, who can give us the fruit of his sacrifice in the reception of blood and body and blood of our Lord. of our Lord. And then, because therefore we must reserve it in the tabernacle, we must also adore it in certain forms of devotion which do not which cannot hinder the reality of the Eucharistic celebration, of the action, of the sacrifice. And therefore, from this time on, it is really forbidden to celebrate Mass as it was done in my young years in our Diocese of Trio.

[50:13]

Very often, Quoram exposed to Sacramento. It is forbidden today to celebrate Mass before the Sacrament is exposed. And then in this instruction we were insisting then, therefore, the first form of Eucharistic piety is the communitarian celebration of the Eucharist, in Sunday Mass, where the people must come together. And it's not convenient to celebrate at the same time, in the same church, two or three Masses, one Mass only. And you remember in our great abbeys, also in Maria Lark, we were celebrating after the communitarian celebration of the vigils in 12 altars or masses. Here, here, [...] in silence. And when the faithful came to the church in this mystical atmosphere, only lights on the altars, in silence, very pious.

[51:14]

He said, oh, it's wonderful. You can participate in 12 Masses, here for confession, here for gospel, here for consecration, without communion, because you could not receive for the communion these Masses. That's the Winklmessel of Martin Luther, the Winklmessel, the mess in the angle. And we abolished it already in 56 in Maria Lach. Before the council, to insist in one mess only. center of the entire day, entire life of the monastery. And because in that time you must still celebrate private masses, we have must build a new wing for private masses in in the cloister, in the Kreuzgang, and so on. I don't know how Father Damasus... You have the same situation here below.

[52:14]

In the first years, you have said private mess in your crypt. And when we stopped it, the faithful protested. It was so nice. It was so pious. It was so mystical to assist with this mess. This is true. Our necessity is, and I think you do it really in your mess here. It is one mess. where all are sharing together, be really pious, recollected, yes, in internal participation, not only in external apparatus. So we insist in this instruction so. And then we said, secondly, so far as possible, we must concelebrate. And in certain occasions, this is allowed to receive Holy Communion unto both species. And I see you in the states here you are really realizing the possibilities given by the council and by the instruction after the council.

[53:18]

In every con celebration it is allowed to give the communion unto both species to all the assistants who normally assist to this mass. As you are doing it here, as they did it in Darlington, in Morristown Abbey, Meanwhile, we in Maria Lake, we are not able to do it. We give Holy Communion, but under one kind only, especially because we are so many. To do it every day, every day, with sometimes 50, 60, 70, 80, it's too much in a shorter In a smaller community, it's more easy. In Moritzstown, this is not every day, but at least on Sundays, also with many faithfuls drinking from the chalice. We are doing it in Maria Lake only on Easter night and Christmas night, to the entire church, also if we have 500 there. So, in these instructions, therefore, we have given the conclusions.

[54:24]

Now we must insist in this vision, which finally, after a certain in the last four centuries is given to us again. We must insist on it to celebrate the Eucharist all together, very piously, receiving Holy Communion, at the same time not denying the reality of the Eucharistic presence in the tabernacle with a genuflection, from time to time a short oration, and so on. Also, we don't do any more exposition and so on and so on, but we couldn't allow it to ever, and we would like to do it. to remain, therefore, in a certain equilibrium, in a good sound, good practice in all these points. We don't have much of a reference, I think, of the actual celebration of the Eucharistic village in monasteries in the earliest centuries.

[55:38]

you have never seen it. You are right. How much the libraries on liturgy as celebrated at monasteries in the early ages? It is one of the difficulties of the wonderful years of our monastery before the second war, before the Council. We had a solemn liturgy, a solemn hymnus, pontifical hymnus, with the greatest solemnity according to the rites more or less of the Ordo Romanus Primus, of the first Roman order of the fifth century of the time of St. Gregory. Ordo Communion. It's awful. Therefore, we had a wonderful theology of Ordo Caso, insisting in the greatness of the liturgical celebration in which we are re-actualizing the work of redemption. And in practice, last, complete, active participation was given only to the priests. in their own priests, in their little masses.

[56:41]

And also the priests could not receive Holy Communion in the high mass. And I can tell you, my first dialogue with Protestant theologians during the war, 42 in Wien, Vienna, we came together with Lutheran theologians, later Bishop Wilhelm Stahlin, a great friend of Odo Kassel, of our monastery, and other theologians, Karl Hahner, the young Jesuit, and some people of Wien and all, so I myself, I was called to present the Doctrine of Orthodoxy there. Our topic was Mass Eucharist. And we were discussing, I was trying to speak about this conception of Odo Castle in the Eucharistic celebration. We don't celebrate a new sacrifice, but we actualize, we represent the unique sacrifice of the cross, which is not repeated, but is given present, more or less so.

[57:46]

And after our discussions about it, the leader of the partisan group said we came here, we came to this dialogue, to this discussion, to this meeting with great preoccupations because we must discuss a problem about which our fathers four hundred years ago was divided so terribly. And to our greatest surprise, we see that there is no distinction, theoretically, in our theological visions between you and us. But we must remain what our fathers have been, because your praxis does not correspond to your theory. And what was the praxis? The Wengel method, the small methods, the private methods. enumerously repeated, paid by the faithful to make free their poor souls from the purgatory, and to obtain everything.

[58:57]

Because everything is, again, a sacrifice, a real sacrifice. Repeating. I am a little bit exaggerating, but more or less, for many Catholic people, the opinion was so. And no, This was so in 1942. We were protesting, saying, my dear, one of the Protestant pastors who was officer in the war, he came from Sevastopol to Germany on Easter Sunday to win. He went to St Stephen's Cathedral to assist to the mass because he was a very pious Protestant pastor, the Catholic mass. And he saw the priest celebrating his small mass on the side altar and a lady was assisting. On the Easter Sunday, he, the Protestant pastor, wished to assist to the great Eucharistic celebration and he saw a small mass with one lady assisting.

[60:00]

And we said, well, dear pastor, this poor lady had no other possibility to have a mass on Easter Sunday. Why not at least a small mass when she could not assist to the high mass occupied with sick people and other people and so on? Nevertheless, the situation was in 1942. And now, where is the private mass? Practically, it disappeared. We could say, in a certain way, there is no more distinction between us and the Protestants in our good Eucharistic celebration, celebrated in this eucharistic theological vision, as we have given it by Otto Kassel. No repetition, but actual presentation of the unique sacrifice of Christ. The difficulty is, and we must speak a voice still a little bit, how is it possible that the unique sacrifice of Christ, passed forever historically, is still present again here?

[61:09]

In a certain way, we did not just resolve the problem, but also the Vatican Council did not resolve it. Nevertheless, the reality that there is no repetition, that we are in the Eucharistic memorial celebrating the unique sacrifice of Christ, having it presently here as our sacrifice, is approved, acknowledged by the Council. You must go to your work, yes. Okay.

[61:43]

@Transcribed_v004
@Text_v004
@Score_JJ