CHAPTER ONE

 

Methodological and bibliographical indications[1]

 

 

 

1. Introduction to the theme, with reference to Pastores dabo vobis (PDV)

 

 

Concerning priestly formation, reference to the origins of the Church is not only useful, but absolutely “obligatory”. In fact, due to its chronological proximity to Christ and the apostles, the Church of the early times is a privileged witness to the formative relationship that Jesus established with his disciples, and which the Church must always refer back to in order to understand the true meaning of presbyteral formation.[2]

In fact, the reference to the Fathers of the Church as teachers of priestly formation is implicit in many pages of the Apostolic Exhortation On the Formation of Priests in the Circumstances of the Present Day (PDV),  and also explicitly present, in particular in the citations of Saint Augustine (eleven) and various other Fathers (Cyprian, Beda).

Furthermore, speaking of the theological formation of the presbyter, the Exhortation affirms that the studying of the Word of God, «soul of all theology», must be guided by the reading of the Fathers of the Church and the pronouncements of the Magisterium.[3]

 

However, I do not intend to limit myself to reviewing and analyzing the patristic citations in the PDV. I prefer to reflect on the underlying issue, which in the end submits to those citations, and that is: in what sense are the Fathers of the Church teachers of priestly formation?

We will proceed in this reflection examining separately the two facets of the question. First of all, we will look at the subject of priestly formation in the Fathers of the Church (this is the most important subject of these pages, which we will return to in subsequent chapters, choosing some of the more important texts for comment and reflection); we will then examine the study of the Fathers in the formation of the presbyterate (this is not a marginal issue, especially for those involved, in one way or another, in the problems of organizing the course work in the seminaries and theological institutes).

 

 

2. Priestly formation in the Fathers of the Church. The example of Bishop Ambrose

 

A few months prior to the Synod dedicated to priestly formation (September-October 1990), the Faculty of Christian and Classical Letters of the Salesian University (Pontificium Institutum Altioris Latinitatis) celebrated a Convention on the theme: “Formation to the ministerial priesthood in the catechesis and life witness of the Fathers” (Rome, 15-17 March 1990).[4]

The Convention intended to offer the Synodal Assembly a qualified scientific contribution in an historical-catechetical perspective. Its Acts appeared in 1992 in a volume which remains fundamental in outlining various aspects of priestly formation in the Fathers of the Church.[5] We wish to offer a taste here, choosing as a reference point Bishop Ambrose of Milan (337 or 339-397) and two reports devoted to him: those of G. Coppa and of J. Janssens.

 

The report of G. Coppa[6] - extremely comprehensive and articulate - systematically revisits the life and work of Ambrose, in order to highlight the more prominent needs of human, spiritual and pastoral formation of the presbyter.  

These needs prove rich in theological content and practical guidelines and should be contextualized in a vision of the priesthood that offers several precise characteristics.

It is a Christic vision, as is moreover the orientation of all the Ambrosian work. Christ is the true Levite, who communicates his priesthood to the entire church, and specifically to the presbyters, who in turn must therefore live as if consumed by him, love him, imitate him, present his image to the faithful, give his life. If Christ is the verus levites, the presbyter is also levita verus, engaged in an unrelenting struggle against himself and the spirit of the world, in order to be – like him – belonging totally to God.

It is a totalitarian vision: Eucharistic communion, humility, obedience to the bishop, perfect chastity and oblation of self are expressions of this love for Christ, which does not allow for compromises or accommodations.

It is a communitarian vision: the formation of the presbyterate has a cosmic breath and is inserted in the mystery of the Church. The spiritual life for Ambrose is openness to the needs of the world, not being closed in on oneself: the priest is a man who lives for others, he keeps nothing for himself, and therefore he seeks holiness not only for himself, but for the enrichment of the entire ecclesial community.

It is a practical vision: Ambrose does not understand the presbyter as an unreal “angelic creature”, but as a Christian who possesses solid human virtues, according to the Ciceronian model of ancient morality, elevated and Christianized by the practice of the Gospel.

Finally, it is a dynamic vision:  the priest must become holy through the practice, rich in zeal, of the munera which the Church entrusted to him by means of the bishop, that is, through the celebration of the Eucharist and of the Word of God.

Just as he is consumed by Christ, the priest is consumed by souls: pastoral care absorbs all of his time, all of his physical, intellectual, spiritual and even economic resources, without allowing him to think much about his own needs. His pastoral duties, however, are not limited solely to the area of worship and rituals, but involve the formation of the presbyter in the constant practice of charity, requiring he live a life that is simple, poor and disinterested.[7]

 

We, for our part, could add a complementary reflection.

With his own life Ambrose offers the clearest example of the various instances of the formation and mission of the presbyter. How much this witness must have effected the conversion of Augustine and ultimately his formation as priest and pastor can be seen from some famous passages of the Confessions.[8]

Having recently arrived in Milan – we are in the autumn of 384 - Augustine, a young eloquent professor, goes to visit the various leaders of the city, and also meets with the bishop Ambrose. Our source narrates that Ambrose receives him satis episcopaliter (with episcopal kindness). It is a rather mysterious adverb: what did Augustine mean to say? Probably that Ambrose welcomed him with the dignity befitting a bishop, with paternity, but also with some detachment.

It is certain that Augustine was fascinated by Ambrose; but it is also true that a one on one meeting on what interested Augustine most, that is, on the fundamental problems in the search for the truth, was put off day after day, to the point that someone was able to assert that Ambrose was very cold towards Augustine, and that he had little or nothing to do with his conversion.

And yet Ambrose and Augustine met with one another on several occasions. However, Ambrose maintained their discussion on general topics, limiting himself for example to singing the praises of Monica, and congratulating the son on such a mother.

When Augustine would then go especially to see Ambrose, he repeatedly found him busy with crowds of people filled with problems, to whose infirmities he devoted himself; or, when he was not with them (and this was true for very short periods of time), he was either refreshing his body with necessary food, or nourishing his mind with reading.  

And here Augustine is amazed, because Ambrose read the Scriptures without opening his mouth, only using his eyes. In fact, in the first Christian centuries reading was conceived strictly for the purpose of proclamation, and reading out loud facilitated comprehension also for the person reading: that Ambrose could glance over the pages with only his eyes, suggested to the impressed Augustine a unique capacity to know and understand the Scriptures.

Augustine often sat to the side discreetly observing Ambrose; then, not daring to disturb him, he would leave in silence. “Thus”, Augustine concluded, “I could find no opportunity of putting the questions I desired to that holy oracle of thine in his heart, unless it was a matter which could be dealt with briefly. However, those surgings in me required that he should give me his full leisure so that I might pour them out to him; but I never found him so”.[9]

 They are very serious words: so much so that it would cause one to doubt Ambrose’s pastoral concern and his genuine care for the people.

Instead, I am convinced that Ambrose’s behavior in Augustine’s regard was an authentic strategy, and that it effectively represents the figure of Ambrose, pastor and formator.

Ambrose is certainly aware of Augustine’s spiritual situation, above all because he enjoyed the confidences and full trust of Monica. The bishop does not yet feel it is opportune to enter into a dialectic debate, from which he, Ambrose, could also have come out the loser…

 Thus, the bishop postpones his words, allowing the facts to speak, and with this praxis affirms the primacy of the pastor’s “being” over “speaking”.

What are these facts?

First of all, there was the witness of Ambrose’s life, interwoven in prayer and service to the poor. Augustine is positively impressed, because Ambrose proves to be a man of God and a man totally donated at the service of the faithful. The prayer life and charity, shown by this formidable pastor, take the place of words and human reasoning.

The other fact that speaks to Augustine is the witness of the Milanese Church. It is a Church strong in faith, gathered as a single body in the holy assemblies of which Ambrose is the animator and teacher, thanks also to the psalms which he wrote; a Church that was capable of resisting the demands of Emperor Valentiniano and of his mother Justina, who in the first days of 386 had come back to demand the confiscation of a church for the Arian ceremonies.

Augustine recounts how in the church that was supposed to be confiscated, the devout kept vigil during the night, ready to die with their bishop. “We too” – and this witness from the Confessions is precious, because it shows that something was stirring deep within Augustine – “even though still spiritually tepid, participated in the excitement of all the people”.[10]

Thus, even though Augustine was not able to dialogue as he would have liked with Bishop Ambrose, he remained positively infected by his life, his spirit of prayer, the charity he showed towards his neighbor and by the fact that Ambrose proves to be man of the Church: he sees him dedicated in the animation of the liturgy, he grasps his courageous plan of building a Church that is united and mature. 

In this way Augustine finds in Bishop Ambrose’s witness an authentic “school of formation” and a model of priest and pastor.[11]

 

A stimulating study by J. Janssens was performed on a particular aspect of G. Coppa’s research, concerning the subject of verecundia or «dignified conduct» in Saint Ambrose’s De officiis [ministrorum].[12]

Starting from a comprehensive comparison between the De officiis of Cicerone and the Ambrosian treatise of the same name, Janssens concentrates his analysis on the subject mentioned.  

In fact, both Cicerone and Augustine considered the verecundia as an integral part of the formation of the youth, of the citizens and the clerics respectively. According to Janssens, the value Saint Ambrose gave to outer decorum is comparable with his concept of Christian conduct, characterized by truth and simplicity. What is important is to be a true and loyal man “on the inside”, and this translates consequently into conduct that is dignified and natural.

The rules proposed by the bishop from Milan are not dependent upon worldly appearances, which would attempt to hide ones true inner reality in order to fool others: on the contrary, they contribute to highlighting the intimate riches of the person. Furthermore, - if Ambrose establishes a certain type of conduct for his clerics, and thus assumes the rules of conduct in use in the patrician environment of the Ciceronian time – we must add that he intends them to be animated by an Evangelical spirit. It is the soul, it is the spirit, that establishes the nature, the character of a rule of conduct.    

The decorum which Cicero speaks of, which includes the fundamental virtues of prudence, justice, fortitude, temperance, and the same sophrosyne of the Greeks, even though they are at the basis of the Ambrosian treatise, receive from the biblical inspiration of the holy bishop a special spiritual connotation, which makes the verecondia an essential component of the formation of the clerics.[13]

 

 

3. The study of the Fathers in the formation of the presbyter

 

To the second aspect of the question under consideration, the recent Instruction on the Study of the Fathers of the Church in the formation of priests (= IPC) of the Congregation for Catholic Education intended to offer a punctual response.

The document – which is dated 10 November 1989, feast of Saint Leo the Great – was presented in the Vatican News Room by Mgr. J. Saraiva Martins, Secretary of the Congregation. The text of his intervention, also signed by the Prefect, Cardinal W. Baum, illustrates the basic concerns that led to the drafting of the IPC, specifically the search for the causes and remedies of that “lack of interest” in the Fathers that seems to have characterized the post-councilor period.

It alludes to the perplexities of a certain theology, so intent on the urgent problems of the present that it overlooks the importance of looking to Christian tradition. It also criticizes an approach to the Fathers that – overly confident in the historical-critical method and little attentive to the spiritual and doctrinal values of the patristic magisterium – in the end proves to be dangerous, or even hostile, to the full understanding of the early Christian writers. However, the gravest responsibility is attributed to the “dominant contemporary cultural climate of the natural sciences, technology and pragmatism, in which the humanistic culture rooted in the past is always more marginalized”: in many cases “there seems today to be lacking a true sensitivity to the values of early Christianity, as well as an adequate knowledge of the classical languages.”

Ultimately, patristics is “impacted by the tensions between old and new, between opening and closing, between stability and progress, between a predominantly technological world and a world that continues to believe in the spiritual values of Christian humanism”.[14]

It follows that the stakes are very high: the “slightest interest” in the Fathers could actually be the sign of a guilty compromise between current theology and a culture invalidated by secularism and technologism.

Thus – presented with a document which goes straight to the heart of a debate that by now is unavoidable - the reaction of the theologian and pastor can only be to receive it with attention and gratitude, as if presented with a long-awaited gift: a gift that is all the more precious, in that not only are its recipients generously rewarded, but it also obliges them to “put to use the talents” they have received – that is, to elaborate the magisterial message, and grasp its implications, and above all to render it operational -.

We say above all, because the weight of the document itself is “down by the stern”, in some conclusive measures which in certain respects revolutionize the teaching of patristics.

First of all, its duration in the institutional theological cycle should last “for at least three semesters with two hours a week minimum”.[15] More generally speaking, again according to Bishop Saraiva Martins, “clear demands are placed on both the students and the Professors, requiring a specific preparatory course taken in specialized Patristic Institutes. In this regard, we are pleased to mention two Institutes founded at a certain point in Rome by the Supreme Pontiff Paul VI: the Pontifical Superior Institute of Latin Studies of the Pontifical Salesian University and the Patristic Institute “Augustinianum” affiliated with the Pontifical Lateran University. Both institutes have for some time been carrying out, in accordance with their aims, a commendable scientific and formative activity, which has greatly contributed to the exploration and spreading of patristic thought, and could effectively help the bishops and other ecclesiastical superiors in the faithful application of the present Instructions”.[16]

At this point the Salesian University and the Pontifical Superior Institute of Latinità could not escape an original scholarly contribution, intended to favor the reception of the IPC and its principles. Pursuant to their acceptance, a miscellaneous volume of comments on the magisterial text was born.[17]

It consists of eight contributions written by the same number of professors of the Faculty of Theology and the Institute of Latinità (Faculty of Christian and Classical Letters) of the Salesian University.

The book opens with a reflection of E. dal Covolo on the nature of patristic studies and their objectives, commenting on numbers 49-52 of the IPC. The author, while pointing out in the document “a decisive and authoritative step ahead in the recognition and definition of the disciplinary and methodological autonomy of patristic studies”, suggests some lines of reasoning complimentary to the text being examined, in hopes of a more articulated and comprehensive dialogue with followers of Christian antiquity.[18]

The next article by F. Bergamelli, which deals with the method in the study of the Fathers, continues the commentary referring above all to numbers 53-56 of IPC, yet also extends the analysis to other references that the document dedicates to the same question. The author renounces out of necessity an exhaustive discourse on the empistemological statute of patristic studies, but offers abundant prospects and orientations to expand and deepen the magisterial reflection.[19]

The same analytical-integrative design is assumed by O. Pasquato in revisiting the relationship between patristic studies and historic disciplines outlined in the IPC, above all in number 60. In the first part, the contribution offers a brief look at the comprehensive role of the historical sciences with respect to patristic studies; the second part, more analytical, considers the peculiar contribution of each historical discipline to the study of patristics.[20]

With respect to the first three articles, the subsequent interventions seem to choose the path of reflecting “around” the IPC, or “on the occasion” of same, without wanting to tie directly to the commentary or integration of specific paragraphs.

Consequently, the contribution of A. Amato takes on a central issue of the document; that of the mutual service between study of the Fathers and dogmatic theology. Amato presents a vivid outline of the global context within which the relative magisterial contribution is found.[21]

R. Iacoangeli also adopts the same methodical approach, defining the classical “humanitas” as “praenunita aurora” to the teaching of the Fathers. His exposition is a passionate appeal – accompanied by appropriate illustrations - to the study of culture and classical languages, as an indispensable condition to a fruitful approach to the patristic message.[22]

The same discussion on the importance of philosophical and literary studies follows in the subsequent article by S. Felici: he also recognizes in linguistic and literary competence the “technical” instrument for deciphering the writings of the Fathers.[23]    

For his part, A.M. Triacca, considering the use of patristic “passages” in the Documents of the Second Vatican Council, on the one hand recognizes in the lectura Patrum an irreplaceable aid to sentire cum Ecclesia, consistent with the discipline incorporated in the liturgy of the hours; on the other hand he finds in the liturgy a formidable key to understanding and assimilating the thought and spirituality of the Fathers, according to a petition received and shared by the conciliar magisterium.[24]

Finally, M. Maritano, outlines the situation of patristic students in the nineteenth century providing a precious bibliographic guide which – although concentrating mainly on last century, when new historic and cultural circumstances favored a rediscovery of patristic tradition – it, in fact, extends to the present.[25]

Thus, the last two studies conclude the volume relaunching the research, while also encouraging the scholar to take to heart the recent teaching on science and history.

We believe that these eight contributions can together provide a fairly good x-ray of the more significant passages of the IPC.

Instead, the volume does not enter into questions pertaining to the genesis of the document. We will limit ourselves here to mentioning the fact that its “incubation” period was rather long, since – as Mgr. J. Saraiva Martins -[26] announced to journalists – “they had been working on the drafting of this Instruction since 1981”. It should not be left out that “the immediate purpose for the presentation of the Instruction”, offered by the synodal assembly of September-October 1990, might have suggested shortening the time of the final draft. Perhaps this explains one of the reasons why the initial “extensive consultation” was not followed by an equally participated examination in the final elaboration of the document.

 

Quickly reviewing the perspectives opened by the IPC, it is necessary to recognize above all that the document appears clearly projected towards the future.

Its main request for a renewed increase in patristic studies in the formation of priests could perhaps come about through a more complete and coherent doctrinal elaboration, extending the range of arguments in size and incisiveness with the interdisciplinary dialogue becoming more open and comprehensive.

Nevertheless, the magisterial dictation, soundly orientated towards the concluding Dispositions, gives the IPC a characteristic dynamic quality.

From this point of view – we believe – the document itself recommends to pastors and theologians operative convergence and coherence in decisions, while it leaves the way open to critical-integrative interventions of its theoretical instrumentation.

This is the point of view professed in the volume we have presented.[27]

 

However, in the margins of the IPC there exists an ulterior, authoritative contribution by Cardinal P. Laghi, succes­sor to W. Baum at the head of the Congregation for Catholic Education. We are speaking of a conference he gave at the Salesian University on 31 October 1991, in the context of the “relaunching” of the scientific manifestations of the Corona Patrum, the prestigious Torinese series of patristic texts.[28]

It would be opportune to summarize the more relevant passages here.[29]

Cardinal Laghi first of all affirms that the Instruction, while encouraging and sustaining the commitment to studies and research in the field of patristics, also looks beyond its boundaries, pursuing more general objectives. In fact, it looks not only to patrologists, but to all theologians, inviting them to offer future presbyters a healthy and possibly complete cultural formation:  and it is precisely the study of patristics, observes Cardinal Laghi, which can help priests to integrate their theological knowledge.

Consequently, the IPC invites students of theology to the school of the Fathers, a school that always looks to the essential. “As Yves-Marie Congar affirms in this regard, the patristic tradition “is not dissociative, but instead synthesis, harmonization.  It does not proceed from the outside isolating some texts here and there, but on the contrary works from inside, connecting them all in the center and arranging the details according to their relationship to the essential.” The pratristic tradition “is therefore generator of totality, harmony and synthesis. It lives and gives life from the sense of togetherness of God’s design, out of which the architecture of what Irenaeus calls system or oikonomia is distributed and understood.”[30]

But it is obvious that students of theology should not be content with the simple indications of patrologists to assimilate such a spiritual attitude and habit, but must enter into an ever more intimate familiarity with the patristic works. Embarking on this path, they will learn to more easily grasp the essential nucleus of Christian theology. The unity of theological knowledge – like all knowledge – is a very lofty goal, which takes effort and which can be achieved only in the awareness of the true nature and mission of theology itself.[31] Quite conveniently number 16 of the IPC carries a famous passage of a letter Paul VI wrote in 1975 to Cardinal M. Pellegrino on the centennial of the death of J.P Migne. We read, among other things: “the study of the Fathers "is absolutely necessary for those who care about the theological, pastoral and spiritual renewal promoted by the Council and who wish to cooperate in it”.[32]

But there is another reason, Cardinal Laghi continues, why the Fathers are teachers of priestly formation. They, in fact, who were for the most part bishops expert in and fully dedicated to the ministry, offer the students excellent examples and impulses for the preparation to their mission as pastors. The pastoral dimension, heavily underlined by Vatican II, is a formative component to which much importance is given today, and that impassions the candidates to the priesthood. Often, however, this enthusiasm turns into unilateral activism, lacking in motivation and theological content, in contrast with that sublime pastoral ideal personified by the Fathers of the Church. The more well-known patristic writings dedicated to the priesthood, such as, for example, the Dialogue on the priesthood by John Chrysostom or the Pastoral Rule of Gregory the Great, reveal the true heart of the pastors, who, while stooping to the spiritual needs of the people, try to raise them up to the heights of evangelical perfection, without neglecting the difficulties and material needs in which they find themselves.

To avoid the danger of a horizontal flattening, the candidate to the priesthood and all priests must learn from the Fathers how to be in this world and not of this world; how to be profoundly human and at the same time supernatural, true men of the Church. This grandiose concept of the pastoral ministry includes the deeply felt concerns of the Fathers for the unity of the Church (it is what today we would call the Ecumenical issue); those efforts for the engrafting of Christianity in the Greco-Roman cultural context (the missionary issue of inculturation), and the untiring concerns to alleviate the lot of those who are oppressed and of the poor (the social issue).    

From the pastoral guidelines indicated above, Cardinal Laghi concludes, we can see the Christocentric theology of the Fathers, which sustains and nourishes their entire sacred ministry. It is a shining example for the preparation of future priests, who, to become good pastors of souls, must place at the basis of all their apostolic activity a healthy theology and a profound spiritual life.[33]

 

For my part, I believe that the appeals of the IPC for a renewal of patristic studies in the formation of priests are many and well-motivated.

I am satisfied in this regard by a simple comment, enough, however, to give an idea of the rapid change of perspective that has come about in recent years.

Already in the early fifties, Cardinal M. Pellegrino complained that studies of patristic theology were “lacking an adequate philosophical foundation and a solid historical setting”, which was often substituted by “a more comfortable doctrinal schematism”, “suggested by the developments of theological thought” often times extraneous to the mentality of the Fathers.[34]

M. Pellegrino, therefore, denounced that “ancillary character” of patristic studies with respect to dogmatic theology, which characterized the theological curricula of the fifties and sixties. Frequently the study of the Fathers did not represent an independent discipline in them.  Instead, a more or less comprehensive exposition of the patristic doctrines was assured, but always strictly dependent upon the dogmatic treatise under discussion. Thus, very often the ecclesiastical writers could appear to the students as real people inserted in a specific historical-cultural context. The obvious danger was that of “flattening” the theological reflection and of an undue absolutization of the theological model underlying the dogmatic treatise: the reading of the Fathers was adapted to this model like to a “Procrustean bed”.[35]

In this context, the IPC inaugurates – as already mentioned – a sort of “Copernican Revolution”, if we consider that patristics was included among the main disciplines of the formative curriculum, to be taught separately, with its own method and material, “for at least three semesters for two hours per week”.[36]

 

 

4. Provisional conclusions

 

It is evident that the magisterial documents cited – specifically the IPC and the PDV – consider the Fathers of the Church as irreplaceable teachers in the intellectual, spiritual and pastoral formation of future presbyters.[37]

I believe, in fact, that it is above all to the ministers of the Church that the words with which Benedict invited the monks to read the holy Fathers should be directed, for – he explained – their teachings can lead “to the highest degree of perfection”.[38]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


[1]Initial bibliography, by paragraph: 1) JOHN PAUL II, Pastores dabo vobis, «Acta Apostolicae Sedis» 84 (1992), pp. 657-804 (from now on: PDV); E. DAL COVOLO-A.M. TRIACCA (curr.), Sacerdoti per la nuova evangelizza­zione. Studi sull'Esortazione apostolica «Pastores dabo vobis» di Giovanni Paolo II (= Library of Religious Sciences, 109), Rome 1994, pp. 333-345; 2) S. FELICI (cur.), La formazione al sacerdozio ministeriale nella catechesi e nella testimonianza di vita dei Padri (= Library of Religious Sciences, 98), Rome 1992; 3) CONGREGATIONE FOR CATHOLIC EDUCATION, Instructio de Patrum Ecclesiae studio in Sacerdotali Institutione, «Acta Apostolicae Sedis» 82 (1990), pp. 607-636 (from now on: IPC); E. DAL COVOLO - A.M. TRIACCA, Lo studio dei Padri della Chiesa oggi (= Library of Religious Sciences, 96), Rome 1991.

[2]On the «normative nature» and, on the other hand, the risks of the «idealization» of the primitive Church, see R. FARINA, La Chiesa antica modello di riforma, «Salesianum» 38 (1976), pp. 593-612; L. PERRONE, La via dei Padri. Indicazioni contemporanee per un «ressourcement» critico, in A. and G. ALBERIGO (curr.), «Con tutte le tue forze». I nodi della fede cristiana oggi. Tribute to Giuseppe Dossetti, Genoa 1993, pp. 81-122 (especially 94 ss.), and now E. DAL COVOLO, Raccogliere l'eredità dei Padri, «Journal of the Italian clergy» 77 (1996), pp. 57-63.

[3]Cfr. PDV 54, pp. 753 s.

 

[4]Cfr. E. DAL COVOLO, La formazione sacerdotale nei Padri della Chiesa. Il XIII Convegno di catechesi patristica, «Salesia­num» 52 (1990), pp. 703-715. On the topic - after A. ORBE, Lo studio dei Padri della Chiesa nella formazione sacerdota­le, in R. LATOURELLE (cur.), Vaticano II: bilancio e prospettive venticinque anni dopo (1962-1987), Assisi 1987, pp. 1366-1380 - see A.-G. HAMMAN, La formation du clergé latin dans les quatre premiers siècles, now in ID., Études patristi­ques. Méthodologie - Liturgie - Histoire - Théologie (= Théologie historique, 85), Paris 1991, pp. 279-290, and the ample bibliographic reviews of A. FAIVRE, Ordonner la fraternité. Pouvoir d'innover et retour à l'ordre dans l'Église ancienne (= Hi­stoire), Paris 1992, pp. 455-511, and of S. LONGOSZ, De sacerdotio in antiquitate christiana bibliographia [in Polish], «Vox Patrum» 13-15 (1993-1995), pp. 499-555 (cfr. ibidem, pp. 29-311, some important contributions on our topic).

 

[5]Cfr. S. FELICI (cur.), La formazione al sacerdozio ministeriale...

[6]Cfr. G. COPPA, Istanze formative e pastorali del presbitero nella vita e nelle opere di S. Ambrogio, in S. FELICI (cur.), Formazione al sacerdozio miniterialed..., pp. 95-132.

 

[7]Ibidem, pp. 131 s.

 

[8]Cfr. A. PINCHERLE, Ambrogio ed Agostino, «Augustinianum» 14 (1974), pp. 385-407; G. BIFFI, Conversione di Agostino e vita di una Chiesa, in A. CAPRIOLI-L. VACCARO (curr.), Agostino e la conversione cristiana (= Augustiniana. Testi e Stu­di, 1), Palermo 1987, pp. 23-34.

 

[9]AUGOSTINE, Confessioni 6,4, edd. M. SKUTELLA - H. JUERGENS - W. SCHAUB, BT, Stuttgart 1981, p. 102. See also S. AUGOSTINE, Confessioni, 2 (libri IV-VI), edd. M. SIMONETTI et alii, Fondazione Lorenzo Valla 1993, pp. 94-99 (com­mento, pp. 252-255).

 

[10]AGOSTINE, Confessiones 9,7, edd. M. SKUTELLA et alii, p. 192.

 

[11]Regarding care for vocations and the priestly ideal of Augustine, for many aspects similar to that of Ambrose see lately JOHN PAUL II, Lettera Apostolica «Augustinum Hipponensem», «Acta Apostolicae Sedis» 79 (1987), pp. 164-167; G. CERIOTTI, La pastorale delle vocazioni in S. Agostino (= Quaerere Deum, 9), Palermo 1991; A.-G. HAMMAN, Saint Augustin et la formation du clergé en Afrique chrétienne, now in ID., Études patristiques..., pp. 269-278; P. LANGA, La ordinación sacerdotal de san Augustín, «Revista Augustiniana» 33 (1992), pp. 133-143.

 

[12]Cfr. J. JANSSENS, La verecondia nel comportamento dei chierici secondo il "De officiis ministrorum" di Sant'Ambrogio, in S. FELICI (cur.), La formazione al sacerdozio ministeriale..., pp. 133-143.

 

[13]Ibidem, pp. 142 s.

 

[14]Cfr. «L'Osservatore Romano» 10.1.1990, pp. 1.5.

 

[15]IPC 62, pp. 634 s.

 

[16]«L'Osservatore...», p. 5.

 

[17]Cfr. E. DAL COVOLO-A.M. TRIACCA (curr.), Lo studio dei Padri della Chiesa.... For its part the Patristic Institute Augu­stininum published Lo studio dei Padri della Chiesa nella ricerca attuale, Rome 1991 (drawn from «Seminarium» n.s. 30 [1990], pp. 327-578): for our study C. CORSATO, L'insegnamento dei Padri della Chiesa nell'ambi­to delle discipline teologiche: una memoria feconda di futuro, ibidem, pp. 460-485 is particularly useful.

 

[18]Cfr. E. DAL COVOLO-A.M. TRIACCA (curr.), Lo studio dei Padri della Chiesa..., pp. 7-17.

 

[19]Ibidem, pp. 19-43.

 

[20]Ibidem, pp. 45-88.

 

[21]Ibidem, pp. 89-100.

 

[22]Ibidem, pp. 101-131.

 

[23]Ibidem, pp. 133-148.

 

[24]Ibidem, pp. 149-183.

 

[25]Ibidem, pp. 185-202.

 

[26]«L'Osservatore...», p. 5.

 

[27]Cfr. E. DAL COVOLO-A.M. TRIACCA (curr.), Lo studio dei Padri della Chiesa..., pp. 3-6. See also the ample review of G. CREMASCOLI in «La Civiltà Cattolica» 143 (1992) III, pp. 448 s.

 

[28]Cfr. E. DAL COVOLO, Corona Patrum: recenti e prossime pubblicazioni nel progresso delle ricerche patristiche italiane, «Ricerche Teologiche» 1 (1990), pp. 207-219; ID., La «Corona Patrum»: un contributo al progresso degli studi patristici in Italia, «Filosofia e Teologia» 6 (1992), pp. 321-330; ID., I Padri della Chiesa e la cultura odierna. In margine a due convegni sugli studi patristici, «La rivista del clero italiano» 73 (1992), pp. 221-231.

 

[29]Cfr. P. LAGHI, Riflessioni sulla formazione culturale del sacerdote in margine all'istruzione sullo studio dei Padri della Chie­sa, in E. DAL COVOLO (cur.), Per una cultura dell'Europa unita. Lo studio dei Padri della Chiesa oggi, Turin 1992, pp. 77-86.

 

[30]Ibidem, pp. 83 s.

 

[31]Ibidem, p. 84.

 

[32]PAUL VI, Lettera a Sua Eminenza il Cardinale Michele Pellegrino per il centenario della morte di J.P. Migne, «Acta Apo­stolicae Sedis» 67 (1975), p. 471.

 

[33]Cfr. P. LAGHI, Riflessioni sulla formazione culturale del sacerdote..., p. 86.

 

[34]Cfr. M. PELLEGRINO, Un cinquantennio di studi patristici in Italia, «La scuola cattolica» 80 (1952), pp. 424-452 (republished in ID., Ricerche patristiche, 2, Turin 1982, pp. 45-73). See also ID., Il posto dei Padri nell'insegnamento teologico, «Seminarium» 18 (1966), p. 894; E. DAL COVOLO, I Padri della Chiesa negli scritti del salesiano don Giuseppe Quadrio, «Ricerche storiche salesiane» 9 (1990), p. 443; ID., Fra letteratura cristiana antica e teologia: lo studio dei Padri, «Ricerche Teologiche» 2 (1991), pp. 45-56; ID., Un'intervista al prof. Manlio Simonetti, ibidem, pp. 139-144.

 

[35]Cfr. ID., I Padri della Chiesa..., p. 443. Tuttavia M. PELLEGRINO, Un cinquantennio..., segnalava tra i sintomi di un rinno­vamento ormai attuale il fatto che già intorno agli anni Cinquanta l'insegnamento della patrologia veniva introdotto come di­sciplina autonoma in vari Seminari. Secondo A. MARRANZINI, La teologia italiana dal Vaticano I al Vaticano II, in Bilancio della teologia del XX secolo, 2. La teologia del XX secolo, Roma 1972, p. 104, «i progressi degli studi biblici e patristici dopo la seconda guerra mondiale si risentono nei trattati dogmatici, scritti ancora per lo più in latino ma che differiscono non poco da quelli dell'anteguerra». Il Marranzini individua le caratteristiche del rinnovamento nella «migliore conoscenza dell'esegesi, della patristica e del metodo storico» e «nella maggiore preoccupazione di far risaltare il valore vitale dei dogmi e di additare il rapporto fra la perenne verità cristiana e gli atteggiamenti spirituali degli uomini» (ibidem).

 

[36]Cfr. supra, nota 16 e contesto.

 

[37]«I Padri possono, per la ricchezza del loro pensiero teologico, per la loro profonda spiritualità e per la loro sensibilità pastora­le, contribuire in modo efficace, anche nel nostro tempo, ad una solida formazione dei futuri presbiteri»: J. SARAIVA MAR­TINS, Lo studio dei Padri della Chiesa nella formazione sacerdotale, «L'Osservatore Romano» 13.6.1992, p. 5 (ripubblicato in Vi darò pastori secondo il mio cuore... Testo e commenti [= Quaderni de «L'Osservatore Romano», 20], Città del Vaticano 1992, p. 302); cfr. ID., Gli studi teologici secondo gli orientamenti del Magistero. Loro funzione nella preparazione al presbite­rato, «Seminarium» n.s. 32 (1992), pp. 330-345, là dove si indicano «le ragioni che ci inducono a studiare e insegnare le opere dei Padri» nella formazione sacerdotale (ibidem, p. 333); ID., I Padri della Chiesa nella ricerca teologica attuale, «Semina­rium» n.s. 33 (1993), pp. 272-285. Vedi inoltre P. MELONI, Lo studio dei Padri della Chiesa nella formazione sacerdotale, in Theologica. Annali della Pontificia Facoltà Teologica della Sardegna, 2, Cagliari 1993, pp. 85-94; C. DAGENS, Une certaine manière de faire de la théologie. De l'interêt des Pères de l'Église à l'aube du IIIe millénaire, «Nouvelle Revue Théologique» 117 (1995), pp. 65-83.

 

[38]BENEDETTO, Regula 73,2, edd. A. DE VOGÜÉ-J. NEUFVILLE, SC 182, Paris 1972, p. 672.