The Message of Port-Royal FOR OUR Godless World

Quasimodo lecture 14 April 2007

by Ellen Weaver Laporte

with contributions by Angela Berlis and Kees de Groot and an epilogue by Joris Vercammen

edited by Dick Schoon

Oud-Katholiek Seminarie, Vol. 42

Amersfoort/SIiedrecht 2008

MERWEBOEK

The Message of Port-Royal FOR OUR Godless World

The Message of Port-Royal FOR OUR Godless World

Quasimodo lecture 14 April 2007

by Ellen Weaver Laporte

with contributions by Angela Berlis and Kees de Groot and an epilogue by Joris Vercammen

edited by Dick Schoon

Publicatieserie Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie, vol. 42 Amersfoort/Sliedrecht 2008 Merweboek

. ; VCfCiiekSbLiïCihSSk

Utrecht

Cover image:

Les Religieuses de Port-Royal des Champs faisant la Conference dans la solitude.

Engraving by Madeleine Hortemels (1686-1767), published in 1710.

Uitgeverij Merweboek

Postbus 217, NL-3360 AE Sliedrecht

(Publicatieserie Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie; nr. 42)

ISBN 978-90-5787-125-2

© 2008 Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie, Amersfoort

All rights reserved. No parts of this publication may be produced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher.

The “Publicatieserie Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie” is published under the responsibility of the staff and members of the Board of Administrators of the Old Catholic Seminary.

4

Contents

Introduction

Dick Schoon

The Message of Port-Royal for our Godless World

Ellen Weaver

Port-Royal: a Memory for today’s Church

Angela B er Us

How to live as Christians in Consumer Society?

Kees de Groot

An Impression of the Discussion

Sicco Claus

The Dutch Old Catholic Church: a Heritage of two Traditions

Joris Vercammen

Notes

5

INTRODUCTION

Dick Schoon

The Quasimodo lecture 2007 was announced as “an initiative of the Old Catholic Church of the Netherlands, meant for all those, who are involved with questions of faith and Church in modem society.” The layout of the brochure that was distributed, was identical to the one published some years ago, when the Old Catholic Church organized a similar conference entitled Gezag als Gave - Authority as a Gift, on the occasion of the commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the establishment of the new Roman Catholic episcopate in the Netherlands in 1853.' Our good experience with this lecture occasioned today’s sequel, organized by a committee consisting of the archbishop of Utrecht, Joris Vercammen, canon Jan Kinneging, vicar of Utrecht cathedral, professor Angela Berlis, principal of the seminary of the Old Catholic Church, and Dick Schoon, dean of the clergy of the Haarlem diocese.

This organizing committee thought a lot about a convenient title for this lecture. First names such as Willibrord lecture, Emmaus lecture or even Cleresie lecture passed the review. Eventually the title Quasimodo seemed to us the most suitable name. It refers to the liturgy of the second Sunday of Easter, in Latin: Quasimodo Geniti, and comes from the first letter of St. Peter, ‘Like the newborn infants you are, you must crave for pure and spiritual milk, so that you may thrive upon it to your soul’s health.’ This reference to Holy Scripture provided us with a motto for the lecture: we were looking for pure and spiritual milk, so that we might flourish and attain salvation.

The title of the conference did not only have a spiritual or scriptural connotation. Nowadays, Quasimodo is better known as the hunchback of Notre Dame Cathedral from Victor Hugo’s novel. Because of his physical unattractiveness Quasimodo lives secluded, hidden in the cathedral, but at the moment suprême it is he who saves the princess. Whether or not the Old Catholic Church is unattractive and lives a life of seclusion in her hidden churches, is a much debated question. But by organizing the Quasimodo lecture, she offers a modest contribution to the continuity of the catholic Christian tradition.

For this first Quasimodo lecture Ellen Weaver Laporte was invited to

7

give her thoughts on her specialism, the history and spirituality of Port-Royal, by connecting this with modem society. Angela Berlis, professor at Utrecht University, and Kees de Groot, lecturer at Tilburg University, responded to this lecture. Archbishop Joris Vercammen was so kind to share with us his views on the actual situation of Christianity in general.

Ellen Weaver wrote her doctoral thesis on the reform of Port-Royal and defended it in 1973 at Princeton University (New Jersey, USA).^ After that she lectured at several American universities on Christian spirituality, Church history and mysticism, and published a lot of articles and books, in particular on the history of Port-Royal. We made our acquaintance some years ago, at the commemoration of the 800* anniversary of the foundation of Port-Royal des Champs.’ On this occasion professor Weaver gave an inspiring lecture on the vicissitudes of the nuns who resisted orders from the king and the pope and as a consequence were seperated from their sisters who complied to the state and Church authorities. She demonstrated what financial consequences the non-complying sisters had to cope with.'* With her lecture, as with her other works, she shows herself able to provide us with new, and if we may say so, American-fresh insights in a history that we thought we knew already very well.

Angela Berlis defended her thesis in 1998 at Nijmegen University.’ Her subject was the role of women in the emergence and consolidation of the Old-Catholic Church in Germany at the time before and after the Vatican Council of 1870. For some years she worked at the Old Catholic seminary at Bonn University and is now lecturing pastoral care and community building at the seminary of the Dutch Old Catholic Church; in 2002 she became principal of the seminary. She was appointed professor in church history and ecclesiastical structures at the Departement of Theology at Utrecht University on behalf of the Old Catholic Seminary.

Kees de Groot defended his thesis in 1995 at Leiden University.® His subject was the relation between psychotherapy and religion from a sociological point of view. Next he lectured sociology of religion at several universities and worked at the Diocesan Pastoral Centre of the Roman Catholic diocese of Rotterdam. Since 2002 he lectures practical theology, in particular community building, at Tilburg University. The main subject of his publications is the changing role of religion in society and the dynamics of new religious movements within, at the edge and outside of the Church.

8

The parish of Utrecht was so kind to offer us hospitality at the beautiful surroundings of the former hidden cathedral church of St. Gertrude’s. We would like to thank the parishboard and the people of de Driehoek for their generosity. We also thank Sicco Claus, who made a summary of the reactions of the audience and the answers of the contributors. Jaap Theunisz acted as translator, not only of the Dutch contributions during the conference, but also of the first drafts of the Dutch papers. Last but not least we thank all the participants at the conference, whose attendance, questions and remarks greatly contributed to the success of this first Quasimodo lecture.

9

THE MESSAGE OF PORT-ROYAL FOR OUR GODLESS WORLD

Ellen Weaver Laporte

In the nineteenth century, the great English poet, William Wordsworth, wrote :

The world is too much with us; late and soon. Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers: Little we see in Nature that is ours ...

Here we are in the twenty-first century. If these words were true two centuries ago, how much truer today - or even in the seventeenth century when the Port-Royal which is my subject was struggling with many of the problems that we face today. The world is truly with us - television unveils before us, in the privacy of our homes, a world tom with war, violence in the streets of our finest cities, extreme poverty in Africa, but also in the heart of our cities. Nothing is sacred any more. The erotic which was presented discretely in the movies of the past has become pornographic in the most highly rated films. The society we live in has become more and more obsessed with wealth, with possessions - a “consumer society”.

Today in France, and I believe it is the same all over Europe, we who are Christian believers are a minority. Those who are believers and also regularly attend services in their church are an even smaller minority. The world confronts us with serious challenges: war and violence; conflicting religious beliefs; authorities in church and state who are out of touch with the people; and finally the challenge to live according to our principals in an overwhelmingly consumer society. How do we cope with the challenges of this world which is too much with us? Does Port-Royal have anything to say to us?

First of all, the challenge of war and violence. The monastery of Port-Royal, founded in 1206, was established in the valley of the Chevreuse, west of Paris, bounded on one side by the domaine of Versailles. The community was a member of the Cistercien Order, and the site had been chosen because, following the custom of Cîteaux, it was remote. The site

10

was also swampy, mosquito ridden and unhealthy. Between 1625 and 1648, because of the insalubrity of the location, the abbess. Mère Angélique Arnauld, moved the community to Port-Royal de Paris. This property had been purchased for the monastery by her mother, the matriarch of the family Amauld, who were important supporters and included many members of the monastery. When the monastery in the valley of the Chevreuse again became inhabitable, thanks to the draining of the swamps surrounding it, a group of the nuns returned to Port-Royal des Champs.

Shortly after their return to Port-Royal des Champs from Port-Royal de Paris, a civil war, known as la Fronde, broke out. Troups ravaged the countryside, and the monastery became a refuge for the peasants, who moved into the monastery with their meager belongings, including cattle and poultry. The nuns did their best to feed and house them. In Paris, the monastery was also threatened. The nuns housed there sought shelter in the homes of friends in the city. To summarize, the response of Port-Royal to war and violence was to reach out in charity to those who suffered, and for aid and shelter to turn to their pious friends with whom they had shared their liturgies and their spiritual guidance in the past.

To the challenges of conflicting religious beliefs, and orders decreed by authorities - royal and papal - which were contradictory to their principals, the réponse of the port-royalists is somewhat ambituous. The response of the nuns is commendable for their loyalty to their spiritual leaders and their defense of their beliefs, but it is tragic in its consequences. A major conflict over the doctrine of grace arose after the publication of the Augustinus, a treatise by Cornelius Jansen, latinized as Jansenius, the bishop of Ypres in Belgium and scripture scholar at the University of Louvain. Jansenius had devoted his life to the study of the doctrine of grace in the theology of Saint Augustine. The Augustinus was the summation of his life’s work. The first edition was published under the auspices of the University of Louvain in 1640.

It is not my task here to go into the details of the long debate over the doctrine of grace which reaches back into the sixteenth century when the treatise of the Spanish Jesuit, Luis Molina, created a bitter debate between the Dominicans and the Jesuits. The debate was quieted by a papal order, but in spite of the order, it was carried on at the University of Louvain. The work of Jansenius was intended to defend the strict augustinian doctrine against the more pliable doctrine of the Jesuits. In

II

Rome the Jesuits were numerous and powerful and they persuaded Urbain VIII to issue the Bulle In eminenti in 1642 eondemning the Augustinus.

What is important here is what followed, and the reaction in France. There were editions of the Augustinus in Paris in 1641, and in Rouen in 1643, which received the approbation of the doctors of the Faculty of Theology of Paris. The condemnation by the Bulle In eminen-ti was only the beginning. After much debate in the faculty of theology in Paris, described in detail in the excellent study by Jacques Gres-Gayer, Le Jansénisme en Sorbonne,'' five propostions said to be in the treatise were sent to Rome and in 1653 the bulle Cum occasione was issued condemning the five propostions. In 1657 the Assemblée du clergé accepted the condemnation and demanded the signature of a Formulaire endorsing this decision. The demands of the bishops were strengthened by the support of the king, Louis XIV. The signature was required of all clergy and members of religious orders. Thus began a battle which lasted for two centuries, between those who defended the theology of grace of Saint Augustine and Jansenius, and who became known as Jansenists, and the Jesuits, who had the support of the pope and the king

The repercusions in the community of Port-Royal were tragic. The community of Port-Royal was larger than the members of the monastery. The spiritual director of the nuns was Jean Duvergier de Hauranne, abbé de Saint-Cyran. Saint-Cyran had gathered around him a group of lawyers, philosophers and theologians and other intellectuals, drawn to Port-Royal des Champs by similar convictions, and by family connections. They withdrew from the world and formed a pseudomonastic community known as the Messieurs de Port-Royal. Many of the Messieurs lived in small dwellings they had constructed in the environs of the monastery. It is they who had done much of the work to rehabilitate Port-Royal des Champs. Among the members of this community were found Blaise Pascal, Pierre Nicole, and Antoine Amauld, and others who left their mark on the philosophy, theology and literature of the seventeenth century in France.

The majority of the nuns and the messieurs de Port-Royal refused to sign the Formulary. The nuns who refused to sign were gathered together in the monastery of Port-Royal des Champs. The signers were sent to or remained in Port-Royal de Paris. As the battle heightened the leaders of the non-signers were placed in convents favorable to the

12

Formulary. Accounts of this banishment, entitled Relation de la Captivité, were written by several of the nuns. The leaders among the Messieurs de Port-Royal left Paris for exile in the Netherlands.

The response of the nuns and the messieurs to the order to sign the Formulary issued by the Bishops, supported by the King, was resistance - resistance to ecclesiastical and royal authorities in defense of their principals. This refusal to sign the formulary in defiance of the authorities both royal and papal was, in the words of Louis Cognet, “the forerunner of the modem idea of the freedom of the individual conscience”.® The response was also an enormous production of literature on both sides pamphlets, theological arguments, and many polemical treatises. The debate grew more and more bitter. Sanctions were placed on the monastery of Port-Royal des Champs where the nuns became the scapegoats. Forbidden to receive more members, the community slowly diminished. In 1709 the king ordered the destmction of the monastery and the twenty-one remaining nuns, old and feeble, were placed in separate convents in the surrounding cities.

The consequences of this resistance, the destruction of Port-Royal des Champs, and the polemical literature, resulted in a hardening of positions on both sides. In the eighteenth century catholics in France were required, before presenting themselves to receive communion, to present a guarantee from their confessor that they had signed the Formulary. I leave to my audience to decide what we can learn from Port-Royal from this tragic episode.

Consideration of Port-Royal’s response to the challenge of worldliness leads us to a definition of the theology and consideration of the history of the monastery and the movement. Port-Royal was a member of the feminine branch of the Cistercian Order, one of the strictest orders in the Roman Catholic Church. The life of the nuns was regulated by the rules of the order, which prescribed cloister, abstenance, perpetual silence, with exceptions for a brief period of recreation, and, of course confession and spiritual direction, and, most importantly, the prayer of the Divine Office. The nuns gathered seven times daily to perform this Divine Office which consisted of the chant of psalms and readings from scripture, the early fathers of the Church, and important counciliar decrees. The seven offices were :

Matins - the evening vigil - an office scheduled in the hours between midnight and morning, which included time for meditation;

13

Laudes - conclusion of Matins - the office of morning praise; Prime - the first hour;

Terce - the third hour - at about 9 o’clock;

Sext - the sixth hour - the noon office;

None - the ninth hour - the afternoon office;

Vespers - the evening prayer of praise; Compline - night prayers.

The hours of Prime, Terce, Sext, and None represented, in the spirituality of those who chanted the Divine Office, stages in the passion of Christ. The most important offices were Laudes and Vespers. After Laudes the daily Mass was celebrated.

It is clear from this resumé that just following the rule of Cîteaux implied separation from the world. Add to this the fact that Saint-Cyran, their spiritual director, had introduced the nuns to a radical form of the theology of Saint Augustine. It was a pessimistic view of human nature and of the world, and emphasized this separation from the world.

Thus, it would seem that the response of Port-Royal to the challenge of worldliness was simply to withdraw from the world to a life of prayer and penance. It was not that simple. Paradoxically, the nuns and the Messieurs de Port-Royal may have withdrawn from the world, but the world was still very much with them. The most striking evidence of the nuns’ knowledge of the ways of the world is the way they managed their large and diverse properties: farms, rentes, censives. Their properties included the farms surrounding the monastery, but extended west as far as Chartres, north of Paris to Nanterre, and south of Paris to Melun. They were among the largest proprietors of farms in the île de France. The nuns kept careful registers of their revenus and expenses. They were aided in the administration of their properties by members of the Messieurs de Port-Royal, especially the Akakia brothers. The eldest, Akakia du Mont, was one of the confessors of the nuns. Akakia de Vaux and Akakia du Plessis were business men who managed the affaires of Port-Royal. They were aided by another friend of Port-Royal, Hilaire Charles Piet, who obtained for the nuns much valuable property, including a water mill on the river Rodon in Germainville, actually Saint-Lambert.

As for the Messieurs de Port-Royal, their retreat from the world is quite ambiguous. Antoine Arnauld’s enormous volume of writings, philosophical, theological, and polemical, attests to his unceasing activi-

14

ty throughout his long life. Robert Amauld d’Andilly wrote and edited twenty-two works in his lifetime. He also embellished Port-Royal des Champs with plantations of fruit trees and and other plants and flowers.

In sum, the response to the ehallenge of the world by the members of the community of Port-Royal - nuns and Messieurs - was two-fold. They did indeed live apart from worldly activities - the “getting and spending that lays waste our powers” - the nuns in their monastery, and the Messieurs in their private residences, but at the same time they were involved in many worldly tasks. How did they maintain their equilibrium? I believe it was their life of prayer that sustained them. The liturgy played a major role in the life of the nuns and the messieurs. And for both, meditation on scripture was important. For the nuns, psalms and readings from the Bible formed the Divine Office. Evidence of their devotion to the psalms is found in the life of Mère Angélique de Saint-Jean Arnauld d’Andilly, niece of Mère Angélique Arnauld. In her Relation de la Captivité, she recounts how, imprisoned in her quarters and unable to assist at the offices of the convent in which she had been placed, she paced back and forth in her small room, reciting the Divine Office by heart. As abbess she demanded, and received, permission to replace the office of the diocèse of Paris, which the monastery had been required to take in 1627 when the jurisdiction was transferred from Citeaux to the diocese of Paris, with the monastic office in order to follow the Rule of St Benedict which prescribed the recital of the entire Psalter during the week.

The messieurs, once they chose Saint-Cyran as spiritual director, followed a retreat which he had created. They prayed the Divine Office, together or alone if they made the retreat in their own residence. An important element of the retreat was the meditation on scripture. Their instructions were a remarkable contrast to the Jesuit retreat in which a daily meditation was prepared by the director, who gave the retreatant an outline of points to be considered on a certain chosen passage of scripture. Those who followed the retreat of Saint-Cyran were instructed to open their Bible at random and begin to read. When a passage spoke to them, they were to meditate upon it. They could do this in their room, or walking in the woods, if the retreat were made in a secluded area outside the city. In the course of their meditation, if so inspired, they could pause and in silent contemplation let the Holy Spirit guide them.

I believe the message of Port-Royal for us to meet the challenge of the

15

violent, consummation obsessed world, is to preserve an inner sanctuary where we can escape from the chaos of this world in which we must live. Our participation in the liturgy aids us to maintain this sanctuary. Inner prayer - silent recitation of our favourite psalm, or a prayer of our choice - forms a bulwark against the myriad forces that attempt to separate us from God.

16

PORT-ROYAL: A MEMORY FOR TODAY’S CHURCH

Angela Berlis

Professor Weaver’s inspiring lecture draws the audience into the history of Port-Royal. In my response, I ask about the message of Port-Royal for today, beginning with a personal account.

A convincing story of conversion

I was first told the story of Port-Royal when I was studying theology at the University of Bonn. I was struck by the story of Jacqueline-Marie Arnauld (1591-1661), this young woman who became as Mère Angélique abbess of Port-Royal in 1602 at the very young age of eleven (her real age was faked because otherwise she could not have become an abbess).® Her family considered this position a good means for ensuring the well-being and a guaranteed, life-long income for the daughter of a noble family. Life in the monastery was not very pious at that time, but resembled life at the nearby court of Versailles. As Angélique grew older, doubts about her vocation came to dominate her thinking. She read about the mystical experiences of Teresa of Avila (1515-1582) and Juan de la Cruz (15422-1591) and this led her to reform the convent and restore the old way of living a strict Cistercian life of silence, prayer and fasting.

This strength of spirit and determination would influence not only her life but also the lives of many others. This was what primarily impressed me. The stories of such conversions are, I think, still very convincing today. They offer a response to the longing of many people today to abandon what is fake or insincere - or, to put it positively: the longing for a sincere and authentic relationship with God and neighbour.

The reform of Port-Royal did not take place solely as the result of one person’s decision. As an abbess, Angélique Arnauld would have had the power to impose her will on others. But the young abbess chose another way. The reform took place by persuasion: she convinced her sisters that another form of life would be appropriate for a nun. The way she shared her authority was another part in this story which I found very

77

inspiring. And thirdly, I was impressed by the power of resistance which the nuns showed in the battles to come. Jacqueline Pascal (1625-1661), who as a nun in Port-Royal took the name Sr. Euphémie, was always one of my favourites, and in 1984 I wrote one of my assessed essays about her.‘° When Sr. Euphémie refused to sign the so-called “formulary” of Pope Alexander VIIquot; she is reported to have said; “when bishops show the courage of women, women may show the courage of bishops.”'^

The heritage of Port-Royal in the Church of Utrecht

When I first came to the Netherlands some twenty years ago, I found the history and spirit of Port-Royal still alive here in the Old Catholic Church. In the former Old Catholic seminary in Amersfoort every visitor can see the pictures of mère Angelique and her sister mère Agnès (1593-1671) of the monastery of Port-Royal, and of other important Port-Royalists.

If we look at the meaning of Port-Royal for the Old Catholic Church of the Netherlands, there is no doubt that there have been strong influences and connections between them, in terms both of theology and of people, which kept alive the spirit and the spiritual heritage of Port-Royal. The history is well known*’, and so I bring to your attention only the role of the so-called Jansenists who found refuge in the Netherlands, and inspired and influenced the Church of Utrecht (called in Dutch the Bisschoppelijke Cleresie - English: Episcopal Clergy). Until the beginning of the twentieth century, there was a significant French influence on the education of our ordinands at the seminary in Amersfoort, and a continuing relationship between ‘Old Catholics’ and adherents of Port-Royal during the last 350 years. For example, in the 19* century, there were close contacts between Christianus Karsten (1810-1884), president of the seminary in Amersfoort, and the sisters Sophie (1812-1877) and - more important - Rachel Gillet (1815-1875) in Paris.*'* In 1984 friends of Port-Royal - among them Professor Ellen Weaver - came to Amersfoort for a conference about Port-Royal en exilj^ However, the history of Port-Royal and the Church of Utrecht is not only connected by theological thinking and people, but also by their common condemnation as ‘heretics’, or more specifically Jansenists. Professor Weaver mentioned that signing the formulary of Pope Alexander VII was a condition for receiving communion in France. The formulary declared adherence to

18

the Bull of Pope Innocent X, Cum Occasione (1653), which condemned five propositions from the book Augustinus. In the Netherlands, Rome also demanded that it be signed - as a condition of ending the schism. It was only in 1966, 310 years after its publication, that its signing by the Old Catholics ceased to be required by Rome. Kardinal Alfrink and Archbishop Rinkel celebrated Evening Prayer together in Utrecht Cathedral of St. Gertrude’s to mark this new situation and the first steps of reconciliation.

However, the heritage of Port-Royal in the Old Catholic Church is primarily a spiritual one. The strong Eucharistic piety and the celebration of the sacraments as the heart of the church’s mission have been very important, as is a piety which sees the task of the church as the directing of individuals towards salvation in God, caring (and curing - in English priesthood is the “cure of souls”) by feeding it with the Word and the Sacraments. Also important is the refusal of superficial devotional practices and displays of power by the church.

What is the message of Port-Royal for today?

Weaver has described Port-Royal’s answers to three challenges:

• 1. Port-Royal reacted to the challenge of war and violence with charity and the offer of shelter to those in need.

• 2. It responded to the challenge of conflicting religious beliefs and to the orders of authorities, both ecclesiastical and royal, who were “out of touch with the people” and acting in ways which contradicted their own principles. Here she suggested, the reaction of Port-Royal was commendable for its loyalty but tragic in its consequences.

• 3. To the challenge of worldliness the answer of Port-Royal was paradoxical, for it became involved in many worldly tasks while at the same time living a life set apart from worldly activities.

Weaver asks how the nuns and the solitaries of Port-Royal found their equilibrium in all these challenges, and points to the “inner sanctuary” as a bulwark against the violent world and against all forces attempting to separate us from God. I find the idea of an inner sanctuary very attractive, not in the sense of a hiding place or a cocoon, but as a place of inner freedom and strength. I shall comment on the first and the third challenge and consider the second more extensively.

To the first: when the nuns of Port-Royal shared their scarce food

19

with those in need during the civil war of the Fronde (1648-1653), they added a social component to the religious meaning of fasting. Similarly, the strength of pacifist reactions to violence has been demonstrated during the twentieth century. Regarding the third; it is apparent that from biblical times onwards many others have shared the nuns’ paradox of being in the world, and with the world'®, but not of the world.

We find a holding together of common sense in dealing with the things of the world combined with a close connection to God in the thought of Teresa of Avila, and also in our times, for example in the work of the Benedictine monk Anselm Grün. In an interview published in the Dutch newspaper “Trouw”, Anselm Grün was asked how he maintained his balance in life. He then pointed to his prayer life, rooted in the daily offices as the basis that allowed him to carry out his busy tasks in the world.

However, 1 do have some questions about the response of Port-Royal to the second challenge. Weaver referred to their reaction as loyalty followed by the bearing of tragic consequences. My question is, whether it would be helpful today to follow the model of enduring the power struggle even to the point of being oneself destroyed? In his memoirs, king Louis XIV bragged: “I dedicate myself to the destruction of Jansenism and to the scattering of those communities which have fostered that spirit of novelty.”'^ As Nicholas Hammond has pointed out, “it is impossible not to consider the seventeenth-century Port-Royal from its later perspective, knowing as we do of its destruction and of the legacy left by its major figures.”'^ Seventeenth-century writings by members of the Port-Royal community show that they were aware of the community’s possible destruction. On 1 January 1665, Claude Lancelot (1615-1695) wrote to Isaac-Louis Le Maistre de Sacy (1613-1684): “The ruin of Port-Royal will be its glory”.” I would suggest that this heroic approach is no longer applicable today - or at least not without an explanation. What is meant here is not suicidal martyrdom but “martyria” in the sense of “confession”: the decision to offer a witness and to do so while consciously taking into account the consequences.^quot;

At the same time another kind of victory through witness was prepared: historiographical material was gathered by the adherents of Port-Royal to record the reforms made in the monastery in 1609. They also documented conversations between the main figures about the struggles in which the nuns and solitaries had been involved. This was done “pour servir à l’histoire de Port-Royal”^', for the purpose of writing a history of

20

Port-Royal. As Hammond notes, this assumes the expectation that someone would bring together the fragmented voices of Port-Royal and eventually (re-)construct its history. By gathering these records, its supporters hoped to transmit their own history to posterity (“digne de la transmettre à la postérité”).22 They wanted to preserve and safeguard the memory for the time after, assuring the posterity of Port-Royal, and warding off complete destruction.

This wish to construct a communal memory has succeeded. Many of today’s Church Historians would argue that the supporters of Port-Royal struggled for a good cause, for the authenticity of their faith and the integrity of their conscience. Nonetheless, their memory remained long contested within the broader Catholic Church.^^ This has to do with how memory is shaped by the predominant cultural memory. The frameworks of the wider societal collective memory had no space available for dissenting memory. Indeed, even now, the judgement on Jansenism passed by writers such as Octavio Paz or some other contemporary philosophers still suggests that there is still no space within dominant cultural memory for a re-reception.

This project of memory was of more than mere historical interest. The adherents of Port-Royal wanted to pass on a testimony of what they had experienced as truth. This was their notion of themselves as a “spiritual elite” (with an ideal of “erudite piety”^'*), “chosen by God to defend a saintly cause.”’’ It is therefore no surprise that the heirs of Port-Royal in the 19*’' century called themselves “Amis de la Vérité” (Friends of Truth).

This truth consisted in their being a part of the Catholic Church, marginalized at this point in history, but bearing ideas and interpretations from the early church into a new era. At the same time it was an indictment of the obsession with power in both church and state, which could only be confronted with vulnerability.

Port-Royal has always been of great significance for the Old Catholic Church in the Netherlands. Today it is important to broaden this focus and to consider the value of these memories for today’s Christian community within a changing society.

I want to sum up six ways in which the legacy of Port-Royal challenges modem time religion:

1. The importance of meeting the longing for individually experienced faith (giving space to experiencing and living out a personal devotion: what Prof Weaver calls “the inner sanctuary”).

21

• 2. The danger of the atomisation of faith; not each person searching for their own truth, but staying within the current of Catholic tradition.

• 3. The danger of sectarianism: the importance of staying loyal to the Christian sources, not in a subservient, fundamentalistic way, but rather doing justice to contemporary views and discoveries.

• 4. The importance of morality as continuing question: overcoming the self-evidence of normativity and common values. In the Netherlands the combined Socialist / Catholic / Calvinist government confronts us with new questions of ethics and morality, and there is currently a shift from “everything goes” to a new search for values, not from a “conservative” perspective but out of a sincere quest to discover what is good for the wellbeing of the citizens.

• 5. The importance of leaving space for alternative opinions and variations in practice, and of creating space for individual creativity.

• 6. The essential aspect of being true to yourself and your faith and standing for the things you believe in.

Conclusion

Though many practices and ideas of the seventeenth-century Augustinian movement around Port-Royal may seem strange to us as people of the twenty-first century, the spirit of Port-Royal is alive today and authenticity of the persons involved then is still convincing.

When I first visited Port-Royal in 1984, together with other students of the Old Catholic Seminaries in Utrecht and in Bonn, I was struck by the “emptiness” of the place. Today it is a place where silence prevails, where history is present in the resting stones and the forest, in the dovecote and in the graveyard in the near-by village. The place tells a story of destruction, but it tells also an ongoing story which captures the imagination of the visitor. And the visitor may herself sometimes turn out to be not simply a tourist but also a pilgrim who may do her bit to keep alive the memory. Port-Royal is an important “lieu de mémoire” - a term created by Pierre Nora^^ - of French history, both secular and religious.^^ It is also a place of memory and remembrance for us Old Catholics - and should be so for the whole Christian community.

22

HOW TO LIVE AS CHRISTIANS IN CONSUMER SOCIETY?

Kees de Groot

The question you, professor Weaver, have presented us this afternoon directly addresses us, living in the world of today. The worldview you have sketched is not a very comforting one. Violence, pornography, poverty on one hand and the obsession with wealth on the other were presented as characteristic for our ‘godless’ world. These are, indeed, real challenges for those hoping, in various particular ways, for the kingdom of God.

You have, at the least, met the difficult challenge to use your expertise on the community of Port-Royal in order to provide relevant insights for the way we live our lives today in this context. This is indeed a difficult challenge: what does history teach us? The first question is; how normative are the practices of the nuns and the messieurs of Port-Royal? The second: how can we translate their response to their context to our context? These questions will direct the few critical comments I would like to make, not as an expert on Port-Royal, but as a sociologist and theologian living in this world.

I will summarize very briefly the lessons you have drawn and focus on the last part of your lecture. The nuns of the monastery reacted to war and violence with charity, helping those in need. During the conflict with religious and political authorities they remained loyal to their leaders and their principals, and chose for resistance, despite the tragic consequences. Following their strict views on the notion of grace, they did not expect much salutary effects - if you will excuse this informal expression - from activities in the world. Prayer was considered as far more important. Yet, nuns were active in investments and messieurs in science and agriculture.

In your concluding sentences you have expressed what I consider as your belief in the relevance of the message of Port-Royal: ‘to preserve an irmer sanctuary where we can escape the chaos of this world in which we must live’. With St. Paul, you have recommended us to persevere in liturgy, in prayer, in order to withstand the forces ‘that attempt to separate us from God’. Among these forces are, what sociologists would call, the mechanisms of consumer society.

23

Critical comments on Port-Royal

Firstly, some preliminary comments on Port-Royal: what was the typical response of its adherents to their context? As a graduating sociology student (twenty years ago) 1 studied some literature that appears to be quite relevant for our discussion today. Among this literature was the work of the Marxist author Lucien Goldmann who characterized the Jansenist worldvision as essentially tragic - a worldview that ‘fitted’ the needs of those early civilians that were not able to rebel.^’ And according to the historian Groethuysen, working in the spirit of Max Weber, the ‘inner-worldly ascesis’ of the Jansenists contributed to the rise of a ‘civil world-view’.’® Belief in the afterlife successively lost its relevance when a culture of ascesis proved to lead to success in society.

These approaches have probably influenced my evaluation of Port-Royal. I admire the way how the adherents of Port-Royal recognize harsh reality and refrain from escapism. It is focused on the question how to maintain. I am not sure, however, whether a tendency towards escapism can be avoided, since the transformation of societal circumstances doesn’t seem to have a high priority. This escapism is, for sure, not the escapism of the cloister. Indeed, the worldly activities you have mentioned may reveal a high degree of adjustment to the ways of the word.

Consumer society

Back to our context. Social theorists such as Zygmunt Bauman have characterized our world as a world where fixed class and status boundaries are vanishing, people have more choice than ever, and identity is no longer prescribed, but has to be constructed. In what he calls ‘solid’ modernity, people were determined by their role in the production process; in late, or liquid, modernity, they are determined by their role in consumer society.’* The market has become more powerful than the state, the church, or the family once were. We are tempted to buy the products that provide elements of an ‘authentic’ identity. We have to choose what to wear, what to do, what to eat, what to believe. Even leading a traditional life and clinging to a religious tradition must be by

24

choice - in case we are interested in religion at all. People living in risk society do not appreciate the religious message of vulnerability, but are longing for the reassurance that they are able to deal with the uncertainties. They only need a short introduction in the way they can do this. They need experts.

Thus, people are forced to be and to act as individuals. On the other hand, large proportions are only individuals de jure. They suffer under poverty and their dependency on structures beyond their influence. And their suffering does not create solidarity, at least not by itself. Bauman’s ‘engaged pessimism’ resonates quite well with the spirit of the lecture we listened to just now. A godless world. And this analysis has its convincing qualities. Yet, I am inclined to question it. In my opinion, this analysis should be accompanied by two questions. Firstly, doesn’t consumer society reflect a longing for God, as well? Movies, for example, even commercials, show a real concern with issues such as trust, justice, loyalty and honesty. Secondly, is God not present in the victims of these mechanisms? In those who labour for an alternative world, where justice and solidarity are valued more than they are now; and in all endeavours to promote health, housing, education, care - inadequate as these sometimes may be? Religion, ‘true religion’ in the words of St. James, is still present in today’s world, I would say.

Dealing with the world

My next step is to present the options religious groups have in the encounter with our present context. One has to bear in mind that this scheme presupposes an opposition between ‘believers’ and ‘the world’. For a moment, I will put aside my critique on this dualistic scheme, because it fits very well with the approach professor Weaver has presented to us.

The first option would be to surrender to the surrounding context. This may be the case when a specific Christian identity is given up, such as, in extreme forms of religious liberalism. Another example would be forms of evangelicalism, where God- and Jesus-talk are integrated in a full participation in contemporary culture, including its focus on consumption and events.

The second option would be to gather with equals in a splendid isolation and to seek refuge from the world.

25

The third option would be to transform the world. Peter Berger labels this option as ‘crusade’.The world is entered in order to transform it according to what is regarded as God’s will. The vision of the Kingdom of God may play an important role in this option.

The fourth option is the most common one: negotiating between the religious tradition and the contemporary context in order to safeguard elements that are felt as essential, while giving up elements that seem to hinder the participation in the world.

The message of Port-Royal, as rendered by professor Weaver, contains elements of various options. The second option is easily recognized in the withdrawal from the ‘getting and spending’. The third option may be detected in the resistance to the authorities. The fourth option seems to be present in the paradoxical involvement with the world: withdrawn in a life of prayer and penance, yet involved in worldly tasks.

An alternative?

I have come to my final remark: what, then, is the message we can learn from Port-Royal? Taking into account my personal appreciation of Port-Royal’s response, and my slightly qualified analysis of our purportedly ’godless world’, I would suggest a variation on the inspiring suggestion we have received. I would give less weight to withdrawal (the second option), and more to transformation (the third option).

In the ‘coded language’ we are forced to speak in speeches like this, I may put it as follows. My view on the world of today is probably less pessimistic than the one that was presented here, and my view on spirituality differs from that of Port-Royal. Spirituality, in my view, not only sustains me, but also incites my social and political commitment.

A variation on professor Weaver’s message might, therefore, be the following. In a world where people experience themselves as individuals, people need comfort and the challenge to promote solidarity in the way they live their lives.”

Nowadays, several Catholic movements, to name just one example, are doing just this: promoting a life in prayer, and at the same time working for charity, justice, or a better environment. Examples are the Roman-Catholic movement called the Community of Sant’Egidio, and the not strictly Catholic Movement for Mercy, initiated by the Congregation of the Brothers of Our Lady, Mother of Mercy.”

26

Here, as well as with Port-Royal, ‘innerworldly’ may become ‘worldly’, and ‘retreat’ may be become complete withdrawal. But these movements may succeed in their balancing act as well. Whatever the emphasis is on prayer or commitment, each variety is following its own track between the tendency towards secularization and the ‘seduction of separation’. Port-Royal dealt with its context of shifting feudal structures and a rising civil class by participating in a variety of social fields. Its adherents were active in care, science, economy and politics. Yet, although they were socially engaged, they did not develop a revolutionary consciousness. Their goal was not to contribute to changing the world, but rather to escape from it - in order to maintain a Christian life. I have indicated that this attitude may undervalue the importance of effectively trying to change societal circumstances, being our response to a world in need. When the message of Port-Royal is copied uncritically, our reaction to the challenges of contemporary society runs the risk of opting for a psychological withdrawal from our world, which is, indeed, a world of extreme inequalities. A more positive attitude would perceive the horrible co-existence of mass poverty and ‘conspicuous consumption’, but would also be prepared to discern a godly presence in this world, in those who suffer and work for peace and equality. Such an attitude of hope would open up possibilities for social engagement. Of course, this road leads to disappointments, distractions and has its limitations. One has to resist temptations of wealth, power and above all: cynicism. To resist these, it is vital to preserve an inner sanctuary - as Port-Royal teaches us.

27

AN IMPRESSION OF THE DISCUSSION

Sicco Claus

Social status in relation to the appreciation of Port-Royal

The first contribution to the discussion comes from Professor Dr Hans van Amersfoort, a population geographer. He is a little surprised about the fact that in her lecture, Prof Weaver calls it a paradox when one simultaneously withdraws from the world and is active in that world. Van Amersfoort responds that it was not so difficult to withdraw from the world, because the sisters were in fact part of a kind of Teasurely class’. Weaver’s lecture has only strengthened him in that opinion. The sisters lived of products of the agricultural sector to which they themselves did not actually contribute anything. A conspicuous aspect of the history of the 17* century French rural areas is the relentless exploitation of farmers and peasants by the aristocracy. This often led to revolts, which were forcefully suppressed. The sisters in fact belonged to this aristocratic upper class. Did their reflections of the Bible make these nuns aware of the necessity of justice in this world, including a fair distribution of wealth?

Weaver holds that living of the income from the farms is a trait of all monasteries in that period and that this is not specific to Port-Royal. The amounts farmers had to pay to Port-Royal to use the farms and the lands, were not extremely high. She also thinks that the way in which Van Amersfoort describes the aristocracy is a little exaggerated. Although part of the aristocracy indeed abused its power, this was by no means the case with everyone. Moreover, according to Weaver, monasteries still partly function in the way they did then. We only have to think of the agricultural products that are still sold in monastery shops. But nowadays, according to Van Amersfoort, the Benedictine monks perform their own work, giving heed to the ora et labora, and this labour distinguished them from the sisters of Port-Royal. Weaver answers that the sisters did work, but in different ways, for instance by making investments and baking bread. But Van Amersfoort is more interested in the question whether the sisters realized that they belonged to a particular class. One can meditate on mystical matters, but also on social justice and then adjust one’s behaviour accordingly.

28

Jesuits versus Port-Royal

Dr Andreas Krebs points out that there is an interesting aspect to the conflict between Jesuits and Port-Royalists, which has not been made explicit in the lecture. The Port-Royalists chose to withdraw from the world, cherishing their own inner values and renouncing attempts to influence power structures. The Jesuits on the other hand tried to stay close to where the power was, and acted strategically to benefit from it. Could we say that the way of Port-Royal inevitably led to the destruction of the monastery, a kind of martyrdom, or would there have been another possibility? Weaver does not really address this question, but states that the way in which each party embodied a spiritual life is a clear demonstration of a fundamental difference between the Jesuits and the sisters of Port-Royal. Ignatius’ spiritual exercises take place during a retreat, are very structured and all lead up to the question whether you want te become a Jesuit or not. If you decide to do that, your next assignment is to go out into the world and transform it. When you come out of a Port-Royal retreat, you stay where you are and there you try to live as good a life as possible.

Professor Dr Willemien Otten remarks that one can safely state that the Jesuits, in spite of being regarded as accommodating, did in fact advocate a fairly programmed spirituality. In Port-Royal people were of course programmed too, if that is what you want to call it, but in a different way from for example the Jesuits. Surely Bernard of Clairvaux will have been influential in the way spirituality took its shape. Weaver agrees that the Jesuits had a kind of programming. The image from the meditations of Ignatius, with two armies opposing each other, one representing the Jesuits and the other representing the world, c.q. the Reformation, is well known. The spirituality of the sisters was very different. They got their ideas of what constituted meditation from the rule of St Benedict. He stated that, if the Holy Spirit did so inspire someone, he or she could remain in Church after the Holy Office. So the discipline of meditation was linked to the Holy Office rather than to specific spiritual exercises.

29

A paradoxal vision on morality

Prof Dr Angela Berlis refers to one of Weaver’s articles about the laity in Jansenist liturgy?’ She adds that the Jansenists greatly stimulated the education of lay people, including women, encouraging them, for instance, to read the Bible. Later in the discussion Weaver demonstrates that the sisters did not only know their martyrs and the lives of the saints, but were also very familiar with Holy Scripture, which became evident when they were questioned by bishops. So in one sense, according to Berlis, Jansenists had a positive view of humanity, for they had certain expectations for its developments. This stands in contrast with the usual opinion that Jansenius, in line with St Augustine, would have had a pessimistic view of humanity. How can we make sense of this? Weaver, referring to the work of het late husband Jean Laporte, thinks that Augustine’s pessimistic view of humanity is often greatly exaggerated. Also by Jansenius himself, because his thinking was rather scholastic. In order to correctly understand Augustine, it is necessary to interpret him in the light of all of his works. His letters, for instance, show him to be an excellent pastor, as well.

This subject triggers a remark about the philosopher Leszek Kolakowski, who claims, in his book about Pascal and Jansenism, that this pessimistic view of humanity could be the remedy against major totalitarian ideologies such as Communism and Nazism.’’ This view of the human condition protects us from the illusions that people are good, that we know how to define a good person, and that all we need to do to obtain an ideal world is to tie up a few loose ends. This was the approach of the totalitarian regimes in the 20”' century. Weaver goes along with this reasoning. So perhaps a not too positive view on humanity is not an entirely bad thing. Although, someone asks whether this idea is a unique feature, limited to Jansenism.

Krebs wonders if the moral rigorism of Port-Royal might have been a way to cope with a dilemma. On the one hand they did not want to be of the world (which followed from their negative evaluation of it), but on the other hand they wished to work in it. But Weaver is of the opinion that in the 17*''century. Port-Royal did not cherish such rigid morals as the speaker suggests. This was rather a feature of 19* century Jansenism. In Port-Royal things were definitely not stricter than with the Jesuits. The period does reveal a general tendency towards moralism, but that was also the case for the Jesuits.

30

Port-Royal as inspiration for contemporary Church growth?

Sicco Claus wonders if it is possible to learn something from the fact that the messieurs may not have lived in the monastery, but did actively participate in the communal life of the sisters. The Old Catholic Church has no mastic communities around which such activities could evolve. Can we still extract lessons from that which took place there? For it seems clear that those people knew each other well, met more than once a week, and that they thought, discussed and prayed together. Perhaps the model called ‘small Christian Communities’ would be similar.

Kees de Groot confirms that there are groups affiliating themselves with monastic orders, such as tertiary movements, in much the same way als the messieurs of earlier times. Also new Roman Catholic movements are to a certain extent heirs of this, because we find small groups of which the members have regular mutual contacts. Whether this is capable of revitalizing the Church is as yet unclear. Although we are talking about very small groups, they will certainly influence what the Church of the future will look like.

Archbishop Dr Joris Vercammen thinks that these communities can be considered as networks. The Old Catholic Church can also be considered as such. People are living in a kind of community due to their more or less similar spirituality. One of the most important tasks for the future is to expand this spirituality. Perhaps the Old Catholic Church can then become such a new old movement or an old new movement.

Learning from history?

The discussion is rounded off with a number of remarks underlining how difficult it is to determine what can be learned from history, in this care from the history of Port-Royal. Prof Dr Jan Visser warns for too large a hermeneutic jump, from the historical context in which Port-Royal found itself to the present context of the Church. For it would be entirely possible that Port-Royalists would reject much of that which for us modem people is the most normal thing in the world. Having said this, we still ask ourselves what it is the Jansenists can contribute. According to Weaver, they were characterized by the ideal of a return to the Early

31

Church. She states that this is still an ideal worth pursuing. It can reproduce insights that have been lost in the course of history. According to Visser, Berlis makes too large a hermeneutical jump in her lecture. Berlis owes this (as far as it applies) to the size limitations that had to be imposed on the lecture. But she continues to feel that the initiatives of Port-Royal are worth of either being amplified or put in perspective. By trying to learn from what happened around and to the sisters of Port-Royal, we are doing justice to their purpose and struggle to realize an authentic form of Christian life.

32

THE DUTCH OLD CATHOLIC CHURCH: A HERITAGE OF TWO TRADITIONS

Joris Vercammen

“Is it possible to say that lightning strikes well?” This is what the well known Dutch author Willem Jan Otten asked himself when he thought of the significance of Blaise Pascal in the process of his conversion to Christianity?^ Only some years ago he, Otten, converted to Catholicism and on the occasion, only a few weeks ago, of receiving a honorary degree from Utrecht University, he mentioned his unconventional witness to the Christian faith. Many contemporary artists and scholars consider a conversion such as the one of Willem Jan Otten on the one hand as a completely unnecessary complication of an already complicated modern life and on the other hand also as a challenge. Conversion implies surrendering yourself and that is something that is both avoided and sought by contemporary people.

Challenging their society and their culture, as they came more and more in the embrace of modem thinking, was the aim of that self-willed reform of Port-Royal. This attitude signified a radical change of all crucial aspects of people’s lives because of its emphasis on the autonomy of humankind. In contrast to that opinion Port-Royal emphasized a dependence of humankind: their dependence on God. From that point of view the spirituality of Port-Royal is a cultural headwind, indeed a thunderstorm, on what was perceived as a summer day for Western European culture. “One can like Pascal as much as a sailor likes a wind that puts his strength to the test,” Willem Jan Otten writes. In this sense Port-Royal provokes confusion, if anything because it challenges us to cultivate one’s inner self in a world where the exterior is that important. A challenging heritage is laid into our hands!

It is however not only the heritage of Port-Royal that defines the identity of our Dutch Old Catholic Church. Since the second half of the 19* century there was also the Old Catholic movement with its strong emphasis on possibilities of a well understood relationship, and why not to speak even of a marriage, between Christian faith and Western culture. Where Port-Royal seems to underline the possible alienation of humankind under the influence of the culture, the Old Catholic movement stresses the opportunities within the culture of the Enlightenment. As

33

well as scientific, political and economic developments, also religious openness is an opportunity for emancipation. This emancipation is understood within the context of a theology of creation that shows how much freedom and responsibility is given to humankind in order to give shape, with the help of the Holy Spirit, to a world where people receive the dignity intended for them by the Creator, as creators. Where the tradition of Port- Royal is rather pessimistic about the intentions and possibilities of human beings and stresses the contrast to God who surrendered himself for the sake of humankind, the Old Catholic movement is clearly optimistic vis à vis the possible cooperation between God and human beings.

It is my conviction that both the traditions of Port-Royal and of the Old Catholic movement need one another. Port-Royal needs the Old Catholic movement in order to be liberated from the yoke of powerlessness that stems from feelings of guilt and shame. The Old Catholic movement needs Port-Royal in order to become more convinced of the necessity of a culture of the inner self without which it is impossible to cooperate with God in serving His creation. Both traditions are complementary to one another. Port-Royal prevents interpreting the tradition of the Old Catholic movement as merely a liberal ideology. And the latter helps the Port-Royal tradition to already enjoy God’s love and tenderness, namely in all the good things humankind is able to realize here and now. Moreover, both traditions join one another in their conviction that faith is the fruit of a human heart that has surrendered to and now serves the healing dynamics of God’s grace.

It seems appropriate and valuable to me, that in our times we should further explore the spirituality of surrendering oneself. It is perhaps the most important contribution that we, Dutch Old Catholics, have to offer to our fellow Christians. May I thank you for your presence and contribution to this afternoon of study and exchange, this meeting of reflection and fruitful discussion. At the very end of this meeting I like to express my hope that with this first Quasimodo lecture we may be more convinced of the necessity of this reflection on our heritage. Taking into account contemporary developments will lead us to even more interesting insights in order to live our Christian faith today. To bring about encounters between the Gospel and a so called (post)modem lifestyle is one of the most important tasks with which Old Catholics may contribute to the Church of our time. Let us be grateful for the lightning of Port-Royal, that still has the potential to keep us awake and alert.

34

Notes:

Cf. Jan Hallebeek, ed., Gezag als Gave. Gezag in de kerk in oecumenisch spanningsveld. Symposium on 13 December 2003 [Publicatieserie Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie 37], Amersfoort/Sliedrecht: Merweboek 2004.

Cf. F. Ellen Weaver, The Evolution of the Reform of Port-Royal. Erom the Rule of Cïteaux to Jansenism. Paris: Beauchene 1978.

Cf. Lidwien van Buuren, Achtste eeuwfeest Port-Royal des Champs, in: De Oud-Katholiek 120 (2004), 101-103; Angela Berlis / Annick Yaiche, Ein Ort der Erinnerung. 800 Jahre Port-Royal, in: Christen Heute 48 (2004), 247-249; L’abbaye de Port-Royal des Champs, Ville centenaire. Actes du colloque organisé par la Société des Amis de Port-Royal en collaboration avec le Centre d’études de la langue et de la littérature françaises des XVlle —XVllle siècles (Paris IV-Sorbonne). Port-Royal des Champs les 16 et 17 septembre 2004 [Chroniques de Port-Royal 55]. Paris: Bibliothèque Mazarine 2005.

F. Ellen Weaver, Le patrimoine de Port-Royal: seigneuries, fermes, rentes. In: L’abbaye de Port-Royal des Champs, Ville centenaire (see note 3), 41-50.

Angela Berlis, Frauen im Prozess der Kirchwerdung. Eine historisch-theologische Studie zur Anfangsphase des deutschen Altkatholizismus (1850-1890) [Beiträge zur Kirchen- und Kulturgeschichte 6]. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang 1998.

Kees de Groot, Naar een nieuwe clerus: Psychotherapie en religie in het Maandblad voor de geestelijke Volksgezondheid. Kampen: Kok Agora 1995.

Jean Gres-Gayer, Le Jansénisme en Sorbonne. Paris: Klincksieck 1996.

Louis Cognet, Le Jansénisme. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France 1961, 125.

In the library of the Alt-Katholisches Universitätsseminar in Borm was present: Hermann Reuchlin, Geschichte von Port-Royal. Der Kampf des reformirten und des jesuitischen Katholicismus unter Louis Xlll und XIV. Hamburg/Gotha: F.A. Perthes 1839-1844. For Angélique Arnauld’s biography see: Perle Bugnion-Secretan, La Mère Angélique Arnauld (1591-1661). Abbesse et réformatrice de Port-Royal. D’après ses écrits. Paris: Le Cerf 1991.

Angela Berlis, Jacqueline Pascal, Schriftliche Arbeit zum Propädeuticum. Alt-Katholisches Seminar der Universität Bonn 1984, 34 pages (unpublished).

See below. For more information see: William Doyle, Jansenism [Studies in European History]. London: Houndmills, New York: St. Martin’s Press 2000, 31-34.

“I know it is not a woman’s part to defend the truth, and yet one might say that when bishops show the courage of women, women may show the courage of bishops.” Quoted according to Mildred Violet Woodgate, Pascal and his sister Jacqueline. St. Louis and London: B. Herder 1945, 175.

For the history of Port-Royal see the series Chroniques de Port-Royal (since 1950) and Jean Lesaulnier, Antony McKenna eds. Dictionnaire de Port-Royal. Paris: Honoré Champion 2004 (with bibliographical references); for the relationship between Port-Royal, the Augustinian (‘jansenist’) movement and

35

the Church of Utrecht there are several articles by B.A. van Kleef (in German and in Dutch) and by Fred Smit (in Dutch). See also Angela Berlis / Dick Schoon, Jansenism across the border: the interaction in the 17th and 18th century between Catholic theologians in France and in the Northern parts of the Netherlands [Lecture given at the international conference “Les relations religieuses entre la France et le Pays-Bas du Nord”, Lyon, 28 September 2007 (forthcoming)].

• 14 See Dick J. Schoon, Van bisschoppelijke Cleresie tot Oud-Katholieke Kerk. Bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van het katholicisme in Nederland en in de 19de eeuw. Nijmegen: Valkhof Pers 2004, 230-238.

• 15 Port-Royal en exil [Chroniques de Port-Royal 35]. Paris: Bibliothèque Mazarine 1985.

• 16 The nuns of Port-Royal were amongst the richest landowners in France and managed considerable estates. See the research of F. Ellen Weaver, Le patrimoine de Port-Royal: seigneuries, fermes, rentes, in: L'Abbaye de Port-Royal des Champs. Ville centenaire [Chroniques de Port-Royal 55]. Paris: Bibliothèque Mazarine 2005, 41-50.

• 17 “Je m’appliquai à détruire le jansénisme, et à dissiper les communautés où se fomentait cet esprit de nouveauté.” Louis XIV, Mémoires, ed. J. Longnon, Paris: Talliendier 1978, 75.

• 18 Nicholas Hammond, Fragmentary Voices. Memory and Education at Port-Royal [Biblio 17]. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag 2004, 21-22.

• 19 “La ruine de Port-Royal est sa gloire.” Quoted at Catherine Maire, De la cause de Dieu à la cause de la Nation. Le jansenisme au XVllle siècle. Paris: Gallimard 1998, 476. Maire points out that this letter illustrates the port-royalist conviction to be a community of saints and martyrs, “destinée plus tard à édifier toute l’Église” (ibid.).

• 20 Germany’s Confessing Church would be an obvious 20th-century example of confession in this sense.

• 21 See Mémoires pour servir à I'Historie de Port-Royal. Utrecht 1742, called “Mémoires d’Utrecht”.

• 22 Antoine Arnauld, Mémoires de M. l'Abbé Arnauld, contenant quelques anecdotes de la Cour de France depuis MDCXXXIVjusqu 'à MDCLXXV. Amsterdam 1756, 100.

• 23 Carol Baxter, Communal Memory as a Response to Crisis: The Community of Port-Royal, 1661-1711, in: Edric Caldicott / Anne Fuchs, eds. Cultural Memory. Essays on European Literature and History. Berne: Peter Lang 2003, 66.

• 24 F. Ellen Weaver, Erudition, Spirituality, and Women: The Jansenist Contribution, in: Sherrin Marshall, ed.. Women in Reformation and CounterReformation Europe. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press 1989, 189-206, here 194.

• 25 Baxter, Communal Memory, 66.

• 26 It would therefore be worth considering not only a celebration of the anniversary of the day of the reform of Port-Royal (25 September), but also marking the date of its destruction (29 October) as a day of remembrance, perhaps even within the liturgical calendar of the Old Catholic Church.

36

21 Lawrence D. Kritzman / Pierre Nora eds, Realms of Memory. Rethinking the French Past. New York/Chichester; Columbia University Press 1996-1998, 3 vols [Pierre Nora (ed.), Les Lieux de mémoire. 7 vols, Paris: Gallimard 1984-1992], In the first volume of the English edition is a contribution on Port-Royal: Catherine Maire, Port-Royal: The Jansenist Schism, in: ibid., vol 1, 1996, 301-351,578-584.

28 See Port-Royal de Paris. Un lieu de mémoire [Chroniques de Port-Royal 40]. Paris: Bibliothèque Mazarine 1991; Port-Royal des Champs. Un lieu de mémoire [Chroniques de Port-Royal 54]. Paris: Bibliothèque Mazarine 2004.

29 Lucien Goldmann, The Hidden God. A study of tragic vision in the ‘pensées ’ of Pascal and the tragedies of Racine (original title: Le Dieu caché. Étude sur la vision tragique dans les Pensées de Pascal et dans le théâtre de Racine, Parijs: Gallimard 1956). London amp;nbsp;Henley: Routledge amp;nbsp;Kegan Paul, 1977 [1964].

30 Bernard Groethuysen, Die Entstehung der bürgerlichen Welt- und Lebensanschauung in Frankreich, II. Band [Die Soziallehren der katholischen Kirche und das Bürgertum]. Halle/Salle: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1930.

31 Zygmunt Bauman, Community. Seeking Safety in an Insecure World. Cambridge: Polity Press in association with Blackwell Publishers, 2001.

• 32 Peter L. Berger. A Far Glory. The quest for faith in an age of credulity. New York: The Free Press / MacMillan 1992,41-46.

• 33 C.N. DE Groot, Rethinking Church in Liquid Modernity, in: H. Streib ed.. Religion inside and outside Traditional Institutions. Leiden / Boston: Brill 2006, 175-192.

• 34 C.N. DE Groot, Orthodoxie en beleving. Bewegingen in de Rooms-Katholieke Kerk in Nederland, in: Religie amp;nbsp;Samenleving 1 (2006), issue 3, 151-173. Cf. www.santegidio.org;VYWw.cmmbrothers.nl; www.barmhartig-heid.nl.

• 35 Cf. Ellen Weaver, Scripture and Liturgy for the Laity - The Jansenist case for Translation, in: Worship 59 (1985), 510-521.

• 36 Leszek Kolakowski, Gods ows uw nothing: a brief remark on Pascal’s religion and on the spirit of Jansenism. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press 1995.

• 37 Willem Jan Otten, Waarom komt U ons hinderen? Amsterdam: van Oorschot, 22007.

37

,L - nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. -.. Jir -iT-Ti-in, - nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;j

^f^R^JW*Û--■|**^^ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■quot; * - ‘ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;* • —•*

m*. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;1« PtaöCc « to Paÿs^Jw» **.Nortf*; Lym, a«MRhjU£ 20B?d

•l» nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;wtfonàm »lal^ jÂ3 .«-®*1 sb 1»lt;9SI^«\ ♦»? «£ quot;

-«‘MtotMbrVBd tAl«m)Mn£'i.- nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;» Si

■ -«vT«^gg(l^ïA nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;ld «wfc gt;i kotii*! «b «oàeaaH jjttii aa^ii^t »'^ïiv |

4Mt^HtfiM^^5S*a^i»^bqbBOÉ^lt;îe5te«HÂia«feteiâ!(àm:^»Ââ»^ and ''l »«ƒ nXbE%i:(^*i^l'MvMMeinhK9t*Hdwlt;h^^ lt;Ha«fu«TH»w»'iö«*K»jtó ÂïÈi- ?

________________ .... _ . nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;aB»»UT«f »‘»•Æ

WUMÖVS {F.

ÂiàÂi?^-*iW»Âï TaJtteßr't W«. 15, 'Jj nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;a»0iMi»M 8»t4 atfT otoY 1

,^«JM8i«W4» l nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;»wwlal^

îgt; ’‘U'rtoß« to Port-Moyal e« ««

atoi.’(Xlt;H;Wi«»«lt;feb« nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;óJMOÈföB«» fffeÄ

3» .EtWHÜBdS nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;I

co3xtoterfi*^»^fB«»tfwtoÈfdirW8toJltó^4ïW*^^

•BÄ oaaoJÄjiitoiiVanfej^tAl «Jt «3 xgr«ÄJ tes wrfsÿW? »hr/AäW Maxiä 30 î£ ’J

20 Oamwfly's C^es»amp;«'CWc»2W«iWW)e^^to^».t«P«WWto^^^^

, . nbsp;nbsp;..........rt»^W^Wï?7JBgt;rTT quot;^-ito

(jvf«t àf to Co**' nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^gptfh nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;à jllt;PCJXty,^i®ljgfaitoæ;;i

nsfe,ilt;»o nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. ;i

23 C-*»CM. -ilt;'AJm.»H' Clt;gt;aH»«toî .'Mmwy «# a iô ôtotoî Tî» O».quot;..-fïaHji.i?r'jî af fors-Roylt; îlt;5«i-t7U; sa, '^’C CM^urr'^lAyisn' Fü^'ustf»,

R^»amp;3a 9n‘£t)iK:pftiK iJtgrmitr^ eatii nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Ppîïr b*«5i ^î»/'

lt;*- ■ lt;

24 F. ÊUJSi Wmvw, feÛMtÎQB, SpBiôJ«l^, tóid Wo««,; 11» gt;an«aia«.... . ,,. ticefi^l«; Säbmkw nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;»lt;*, ht

Rifiifunetßntt Stpn^. WofSWtigWmtoufSwi^Joli»: îfltftow Uwiwöïy f*««s i W. ■

23 Bimtx.Ohaaöxsid Memory,''W. 3

M M «ottfd tiwatoa fee w:** .fr.»ss»ki-b|f w «rfy a «éWattca «lt; th«, «aai wwy. J ot rf» day lt;lt;nbsp;t» «fo«a of ftjivfteytf.|15 S«^s»ów% nbsp;nbsp;♦s» aawkàsÿ the rf»to|

of iH rfeswam po nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;«i toy irfïeöwtówweiïwwh«^ «rmwift«

ïiK8|P«d«to»lt;ii»=r»ftfceOWlt;MMklt;^^ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;quot;3

... 's-it .

Tot op heden verschenen delen in de serie:

• 1 Drs F. Smit, Dr J. Visser en Mgr A.J. Glazemaker: 250 jaar Oud-Katholiek Seminarie

• 2 Dr J. Visser; De kandelaar van het licht

• 3 Drs M.A. Haitsma: De Rooms-Katholieken te Leiden van ongeveer 1650 tot de tweede helft van de achttiende eeuw

• 4 Mr G.Chr. Kok; Beknopte bibliografie van de geschiedenis van de Oud-Katholieke kerk van Nederland

• 5 Dr P.J. Maan: Chiliastische en charismatische stromingen en de Clerezy in het begin van de 19e eeuw

• 6 Mr J.J. Hallebeek: Communis omnium possessio et omnium una libertas (Twee opstellen over Thomas van Aquino)

• 7 H.J.W. Verhey: Naamlijst der pastoors van de Oud-Katholieke kerk

• 8 Dr J. Visser: Het ideaal van de ‘Ecclesia Primitiva’ in het Jansenisme en het Oud-Katholicisme

• 9 Drs F. Smit: Franse oratorianen en de Clerezy in de jaren 1752-1763

• 10 Mr J.A.C. de Jonge: Eenheid in conciliariteit

• 11 Dr P.J. Maan en Dr J. Visser; 1931-1981: Vijftig jaren full communion tussen de Anglikaanse en Oud-Katholieke kerken

• 12 Drs F. Smit: Het hofje van Buytenwech te Gouda in de jaren 1684-1713 (Bijdrage tot de katholieke armenzorg in de 17e eeuw)

• 13 Dr P.J. Maan: 1054 in het spanningsveld van Utrecht, Rome, Constantinopel en Canterbury

• 14 C.E. Schabbing: Verzuilingstendenties in de Oud-Katholieke kerk van Nederland

• 15 *Drs K. Ouwens: De theorie van de pentarchie en het primaatschap in de kerk

• 16 Drs F. Smit: De fundaties van Sasbout en Pieter van der Dussen (1622-1752)

• 17 Mr G.Chr. Kok; Uit de geschiedenis van de Synode

18*Lic. G. Theys: Van Van ‘t Sestichhuis tot college van de hoge heuvel, 1633-1752

• 19 C. Tol: Concelebratie, afscheidscollege 28 september 1985

• 20 Dr M.F.G. Parmentier; Vincentius van Lcrinum, de beide Commonitoria

• 21 * Angela Berlis; Gottes Haushalter - Der Bischof im Alt-Katholischen Kirchenrecht Deutschlands

• 22 Dr M.F.G. Parmentier: Het pastoraat aan katholieken tussen Vecht en Eem (1638-1646)

• 23 Dr J.J. Hallebeek: Over de oorsprong van jurisdictie

• 24 Drs F. Smit; Batavia Sacra

39

25*Idelette Otten: Uitblazing als aanblazing - Over het doven van de paaskaars in de ehristelijke eredienst

26 Joris Vercammen: Vrouwen, mannen en maeht in de kerk

27 ‘De Haagse teksten’: Referaten en beschouwingen op de studiedagen ‘Vrouw en kerkelijk ambt’, 18-20 januari 1994

28 Koenraad Ouwens: Het Stukjesboek; Missen en Gezangen 1745-1803. De basis van het oud-katholieke kerklied in Nederland

29 Jan Hallebeek: Alonso “el Tostado’’ (c. 1410-1455). His doctrine on jurisdiction and its influence in the Church of Utrecht

30* Christoph Schuler: The Mathew Affair - The failure to establish an Old Catholic Church in England in the context of Anglican-Old Catholic relations between 1902 and 1925

31 Jan Hallebeek: De‘Wondere Afscheidpreekens’van pater Daneels - Oudewater 1705

32* Jan Visser e.a.: Staat de kerk haar eigen boodschap in de weg?

33 M.G. Spiertz; Op weg naar een rehabilitatie van Petrus Codde?

34 Koenraad Ouwens en Adrie Paasen (red.): Liturgievernieuwing in de Oud-Katholieke Kerk

35*Martien Parmentier (ed.): The Ecumenical Consistency of the Porvoo Document

36 Mattijs Ploeger: High Church Varieties - Three Essays on Continuity and Discontinuity in Nineteenth-Century Anglican Thought

37 Jan Hallebeek (red.): Gezag als gave - Gezag in de kerk in oecumenisch spanningsveld. Symposium op 13 december 2003

38 A.J. van den Bergh: De drie hoofdgeschillen van Het Zwarte Boek (bezorgd en ingeleid door Jan Hallebeek)

39 Ineke Smit: Reasonable and Reverent, the critical orthodoxy of Charles Gore and Lux Mundi

40 Angela Berlis: Vergelijking als weg tot historische kennis

41 Hubert Huppertz; Ignaz von Döllingers Lutherbild

De publicatieserie van de Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie wordt uitgegeven onder verantwoordelijkheid van docenten en leden van het curatorium van deze stichting.

Redactie: Prof. Dr J.J. Hallebeek, Prof. Dr A.K.H. Berlis, Mw A. Paasen

Administratie: Centraal Oud-Katholiek Boekhuis

Koningin Wilhelminalaan 3

3818 HN Amersfoort

www.okkn.nl

*) niet meer verkrijgbaar

40