Next: The Mystic Ascent Up: The Charisms of the Previous: Lectio Divina: Reading the Contents
The Greek translation of the Hebrew texts of the Old Testament (such as the Aquila version) applies the word laikos--profane or lay--not to men but to things, for example, a “profane land”, a “profane journey”. “The profane” or “common bread”24.1(bebelos in the Septuagint, laices panes in the Vulgate) are “profane things” that are not destined for the service of the temple.24.2
The first Christian document that mentions the word “lay” is the letter to the Corinthians, said to be by St. Clement of Rome (ca. 95 A.D.). It speaks of the conduct of men of the people according to “lay rules”. From the 3rd century, with Tertullian and St. Cyprian in North Africa, the term “lay” takes its place beside that of “cleric”. Here there is already a juridical interpretation that opposes “lay” to “cleric”. Finally we find with St. Jerome (the beginning of the 5th century) not a definition but a clearly pejorative statement: opposite the clergy, those set aside for the things of God, are the lay people, those who look after the things of this world, who marry, carry on business, cultivate the land, testify in court.
If in the Bible the word “lay” is rare and somewhat vague, it contains, however, a very rich and clear notion of the laos, the People of God. At the side of a functional priesthood (the levitical, priestly caste), Scripture speaks of the universal priesthood of the People of God in its totality. Since the giving of the Torah to Moses, the Lord declares: “You shall be a kingdom of priests (mamleket kohanim), a holy nation.”24.3 The Greek text translates it as basileion hierateuma, a royal priesthood, a “people of priests” in the service of the heavenly king. In the New Testament, St. Peter takes up the expression, “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood.”24.4 The People of God, set apart and formerly united to the temple of Jerusalem, is now associated with the acta et passa Christi in carne. From the prophetic regime, the people now constituted as the Church pass to the revealed reality. Henceforth they are united in Christ and share in the unique priesthood and royalty of Jesus. Christ has made of all Christians “a kingdom and priests, and they shall reign over the earth”.24.5
The idea of a profane or lay people has no place in the Bible; it would be absolutely unimaginable. The Scriptures teach in a most firm and constant manner the sacred and priestly character of each member of the people.
The first disquieting signs appeared as early as the end of the 4th century--premature fruit of the age of Constantine. It was the lay people themselves who relinquished their dignity as a universal priesthood, and then inevitably the bishops became more and more the point of concentration of the sacred, the priestly, “the consecrated”. A distance was formed by the indigence, the progressive impoverishment of the laity, by its terrible refusal of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. This was the great “treason of the laity”, a betrayal of their priestly character. Of the two poles of the laos, the People of God, one was that of the Christian king who protected the Church and was called “the exterior bishop” and “ecumenical deacon” (title of the Byzantine emperors), and the other was that of the monk, who lived in the things of God. These two poles safeguarded the charismatic dignity of the laity; but the rest, what was between these two poles, fell into a vacuum, now really profane. The mass of people, though baptized, was identified with the things of this world, and expressed the Old Testament meaning of the word “lay” that had been applied to things, and became themselves one of the profane things of this world. It is in this state of rapid decadence that the pejorative terms of biotikoi [carnal; concerned only with bios] and of anieroi [unsacred] are applicable--those who live in the world and are strangers to sacred and holy things. Since then, the definition of the laity is negative.
A lay person is a passive element of pure receptivity; he has nothing to do in the Church (except contribute financially), for he has no ecclesiastical function; he has no ministry or charism.
Now the Epistle to Diogenetos (beginning of the 3rd century) affirms: “Each one dwells in his country as a resident foreigner. Every foreign land is to him a fatherland, and every fatherland, a foreign country. He passes his life on earth, but he is a citizen of heaven.” This text only accentuates the teaching of St. Paul: the faithful, the laity, are the chosen of God and fellow citizens of the saints; they have here below no lasting city. We can note a dizzy descent from the dignity of “saints” (those called to holiness) to the profane state of those occupied solely with the things of this world. This is an extreme profanation of the sacred.
In the face of this decadence, the true tradition has nevertheless remained unchanging. We find it in the dogmas, in the sacramental and liturgical consciousness, in the rich and explicit teaching of the Fathers of the Church.
Universal priesthood implies no opposition to the functional priesthood of the clergy. The latter is not all an emanation of the laity, a delegation of the congregationalist type. The Church has received a hierarchical structure from the institution of the college of the Twelve in conformity with the divine plan. The People of God is differentiated by God in its “priestly principle”, by means of charismatic ministries. The episcopate is chosen from among the people; it is of its priestly flesh and blood; it does not form a structure above, for it is an organic part of the body, of the ontological unity of all its members. Its origin is divine and it is exercised by virtue of apostolic succession. Every candidate is advanced by God: “I have chosen you, and have appointed you.”24.6 The sacramental power of celebrating the mysteries, and above all, of being an apostolic witness to the eucharist, and the power of promulgating doctrinal definitions--charisma veritatis certum--belong to the episcopate in virtue of the apostolicity of the Church. There is also the pastoral charism of leading the body' the royal priesthood, toward the glorious parousia. As a living image of Christ, the bishop has only one true power, that of charity, and only one true force of persuasion, and that is his martyrdom. As these beautiful words declare magnificently: “We are not the masters of your faith, but the servants of your joy.”
We can clearly see the essence of the Eastern tradition; it is neither an anti-clerical egalitarianism nor a division by the clergy of the one body into two parts, but the sacerdotal participation of all in the one divine priest by means of two priesthoods. Each one is established by God, and it is this divine origin that lifts them out of this world and out of all profane perspective.
What is gathered in the only one, Christ, the unique priest, is spread throughout the whole body; the priest goes toward the kingdom and the universal priesthood of the priests. The passover and the parousia have not yet occurred; from this comes the coexistence of the two priesthoods, without confusion or separation, and outside any impossible opposition. It is in the differentiation of charisms and ministries that the one Christ is realized.
Thus the tradition does not lead to confusion, but decisively affirms the equality of nature: all are, before everything else, equal members of the People of God. By baptism, “the second birth”, all are already priests, and it is in the heart of this priestly equality that the functional differentiation of charisms is produced. It is not a new “consecration”, but an ordination for a new ministry of one who was already consecrated, already changed in his nature once for all, having already received his priestly character.
The sacrament of the anointing by chrism (confirmation in the West) establishes all the baptized in the same hieratic, priestly order. From this equality, some are chosen, withdrawn and established by a divine act, as bishops and presbyters.24.7 A functional difference of ministries suppresses all ontological difference of nature and makes all separation between clerics and laymen impossible. Balsamon, a canonist of the 12th century, mentions the opinion that episcopal ordination brings with it a plenary absolution from sins, which would make of it a “second baptism” and would thereby change its nature. Such a doctrine has never been accepted by tradition, for it would institute a difference in nature between bishops and the faithful. The possibility of reducing a priest to the lay state with the authorization of conjugal life demonstrates just the contrary. In this case, the cleric sets aside the functional ministry and remains a priest of the universal priesthood; he does not undergo, either before or after, any ontological change. This affirmation stands out more sharply in the presence of two traditions which express, each in its own order, the principle of “divine paternity”. One goes back to St. Ignatius of Antioch,24.8 for whom every bishop is a “father” by reason of his liturgical function; by water and the Spirit he generates divine sonship.24.9 Another tradition goes back to the “fathers of the desert”. They were great spiritual laymen, whose charisms were not functional, but personal. A spiritual father, pneumatikos pater, was a “theodidact”, taught by God and guided by the Spirit. Though simple monks, they were the spiritual fathers of everyone.
Thus, if the bishop participates in the priesthood of Christ by his sacred function, every lay person does so by his very being; he participates in the unique priesthood of Christ by his sanctified being, by his sacerdotal nature. In view of this dignity, of being a priest in his very nature, every baptized person is sealed with the gifts, anointed with the Holy Spirit in his very essence. Every lay person is the priest of his existence; he offers in sacrifice the totality of his life and of his existence.
A close correspondence between the “initiation” of the faithful (baptism and anointing) and the ordination of priests confirms this. In fact, the prayer for the eighth day after baptism mentions “the imposition of the hand of God” that establishes the baptized in “the dignity of his sublime and heavenly vocation”. The white color of the baptismal tunic is the color of the priesthood in the two covenants. We can understand that for practical reasons only the clergy have kept it. The rite of tonsure signifies the total consecration to ecclesial service; therefore, all, clerics and laity, are set aside for the things of God; all are consecrated. For a child of the male sex, an ancient tradition prescribed a procession around the table of the altar, corresponding to the dignity of a priest of the universal priesthood. According to Hippolytus of Rome,24.10 the baptized received the kiss of peace (just like a bishop), as one who is worthy of his new state--dignus effectus est. In regard to “the white stone” on which is graven the new name,24.11 Hippolytus specifies that this name was pronounced during the eucharist; it symbolized admission to the kingdom, it was the name of a new creature, a member of the royal priesthood. The astonishing liturgical relationship of these rites with the ordination of the clergy accentuates strongly the sacerdotal dignity of every baptized person.
The initiation (the three great sacraments of the faithful) introduces each and every one into the order or sacred hierarchy of the people, differentiated solely by functional ministries.
This perfect equality of nature in all the members of the Church corresponds to the fundamentally homogeneous character of Orthodox spirituality. Likewise there exists no separation into the teaching Church and the Church taught, but it is the total Church that teaches the Church, just as it is in the whole of its teaching that the Gospel is addressed to each and all. Prayer, fasting, the reading of the Scriptures and ascetic discipline are imposed on all for the same reason. That is why the laity very exactly forms the state of interiorized monasticism. Its wisdom consists essentially in assuming, while living in the world and perhaps on account of this vocation, the eschatological attitude of the monks, their joyous and impatient expectation of the parousia.
As an example of inward monasticism, common to all, we might mention the ancient tradition that looked upon the period of betrothal as a monastic novitiate in order to prepare for “the conjugal priesthood”. Thus the crowns of the betrothed, at the time of the Eastern rite of Coronation (the sacrament of marriage), were kept for seven days, and it was then that the priest gave the blessing to put an end to this time of continence for the spouses. Likewise in the Russia of former days, after the ceremony of marriage in the church, the spouses left directly for a convent.
They were initiated for a time into the monastic life in order to be better initiated into their new conjugal vocation, their conjugal priesthood.
Nicolas Cabasilas, a great liturgist and layman of the 14th century, entitled his treatise on the sacraments, The Life in Jesus Christ. John of Cronstadt, a priest of great sanctity in the beginning of the 19th century, described his eucharistic experiences in My Life in Christ. All this shows that the true fatherland of Orthodox souls is the Church of the liturgical mysteries. Nicolas Cabasilas even paraphrased the text of the Acts, saying: “It is by the sacraments that we live, that we move and have our being.”24.12
The sacrament of anointing by chrism is the sacrament of universal priesthood. On the man newly born in baptism, the Holy Spirit descends to infuse in him the gift of action. The anointing is the sacrament of strength which arms us as “soldiers and athletes of Christ”, in order “to render testimony without fear or weakness”, to realize the apostolate of charismatic love. St. Cyril of Jerusalem said to the catechumens: “The Holy Spirit arms you for the combat... He watches over you as over his own soldier... You will stand firm against any opposing power.”24.13 Every lay person is before all else a combatant.
The sign of the cross made with chrism on all parts of the body (the Eastern tradition) symbolizes the tongues of fire of Pentecost. It is accompanied by the sacred formula: “Seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit.” It is therefore in his entire being that every lay person is sealed with the gifts; he is an entirely charismatic being.
The prayer placed in the heart of the sacrament specifies the aim of these gifts: “That it may please him to serve thee in every act and every word.” This is the consecration of one's whole life to the ministry of the laity, a ministry that is essentially ecclesial.
The totalitarian and absolute character of the consecration stands out clearly in the rite of tonsure, a rite that is identical with that performed for one entering a monastic order. The prayer asks: “Bless thy servant who has come to offer thee as first gifts the tonsure of the hair of his head.” Its symbolic meaning is unmistakable--it is the total offering of his life.
The eschatological accent of the prayer reinforces this meaning: “May he render thee glory and may he have all the days of his life the vision of the joys of Jerusalem.” Thus all the instants of time are directed to their eschatological dimension; all acts and words are in the service of the king. In undergoing the rite of tonsure, every layman is a monk of interiorized monasticism, subject to all the requirements of the Gospel.
To the epiklesis of the sacrament, to the request for the Holy Spirit, the heavenly Father answers by sending him who clothes the baptized person with Christ, “Christifies” him. In the prayer over the holy chrism, the bishop asks: “Oh God, mark them (those who are to be confirmed, anointed, made “Christs”) with the seal of the immaculate chrism; they will bear Christ in their heart in order to be a dwelling of the Trinity.” We can remark here how the Orthodox Church centers all in the Trinity; the trinitarian balance is stressed here: sealed with the Holy Spirit, become a Christ-bearer, in order to be the dwelling of the Holy Trinity.
For a religious service, the choice of a text is a commentary in itself. During the sacrament of anointing, the last verses of St. Matthew's Gospel are read: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations.” By this reading the Lord's order is addressed to every confirmed Christian, to everyone of the laity, and it is in order that he may accomplish this that the sacrament offers him its grace. “He must preach to others what he has received in baptism.” Besides the accredited missionaries, every confirmed person is “an apostolic man” in his own way. It is by his whole being, and by his life, that he is called to give constant testimony.
The idea of a passive people is in flagrant contradiction with patristic ecclesiology; the universal priesthood of the faithful shares in the three powers--government, teaching and sanctification.
The first Council of Jerusalem in the time of the apostles24.14united all the elements of the Church--apostles, elders and brethren. The words, “the Holy Spirit and we have decided”, became the sacred formula of the Ecumenical Councils, and this “we” is the collegial we of the body in its totality. It is the bishops that constitute the Council, but they bear within them the whole body, and their supreme power is exercised only on the level of the mystery of the consensus of all; the bishops act ex consensu ecclesiae. As the encyclical of the Eastern patriarchs in 1848 states so well: “With us, innovations cannot be introduced either by the patriarchs or by the Councils; for with us, the safeguarding24.15 of religion dwells in the entire body of the Church, that is, in the people themselves who wish to preserve their faith intact.”24.16 Lay persons are not judges (kriteis) of the faith; the promulgation of doctrinal definitions is the charism proper to the episcopate. On the other hand, laymen are the defenders of the faith. The “shield” is the Church in its entirety, and that is why the ability to distinguish truth from error, “to verify and to testify”,24.17 is given to all. This defense is even the sacred duty of each lay person. We know that the laity played this role at the time of the Arian crisis in the 4th century, and later in the 15th century, but above all, in the 16th and 18th centuries, in the southwestern part of Russia, when the Orthodox brotherhoods saved the purity of the faith and constituted the real ramparts of truth in the face of a faltering episcopate. The consensus of the universal priesthood appeals, in the case of a weak episcopate, to the episcopate enlightened by the Holy Spirit.
In the rites of episcopal ordination, the axios, or the final amen in other services, is like the sacred signature of the body in its totality on every act of the Church. During the liturgy, every one of the faithful is concelebrant with the bishop; the people participate actively in the eucharistic anaphora, and in the epiklesis where the plural is always employed; the priest says in the name of all: “We pray thee,” and then he is the apostolic witness of the miracle accomplished. The communion of spirit between the celebrant and the assembly is total, corresponding to the word liturgy, which means action in common.
In teaching, and this is a fact peculiar to Orthodoxy, the pro- fessors of theology are for the most part laymen. The ministry of the Word is linked with the charism of holy orders, but the bishops delegate to chosen ones among the laity the power of teaching and of preaching in virtue of their universal priesthood. In the theocratic society of Byzantium, the emperor had the power of calling Councils, and imperial preaching had a normal place. We know also the beautiful homilies of Nicolas Cabasilas, a layman and great liturgist. We can mention, too, the name of Cyril of Philea, an ardent hesychast, who was married and the father of a family. In present-day Greece, laymen are sent by the Synod on apostolic missions; they teach and preach in the churches; here likewise they exercise their priestly charism.
In a diocese, the councils and the consistories administer temporal matters. The bishop is a spiritual father, a pastor and a celebrant. When it happens, as for example in Greece today, that the State exercises supremacy in the material organization of the Church, it is because the State, in principle, represents here the Christian people.
On the plane of sanctification, the monastic state is entirely independent of ordination.24.18 The spiritual direction of the starets is not linked to the priesthood. The “pneumatics”, the “spiritual men”, whether monks or laymen living in the world, and whom the people call “the men of God” or “the fools for Christ”, enjoy a very great spiritual authority. The people recognize them as directors of conscience; often it is simple monks who are the spiritual fathers of bishops and patriarchs. This purely charismatic ministry will never cease to exist in the Church at the side of the ministry of clerics.
The laity forms an ecclesial atmosphere that is, at the same time, of the world and of the Church. Laymen do not have access to the power of giving the means of grace (the sacramental power of the clergy); but, on the other hand, their sphere is “the life of grace” and “the state of grace”. By the simple presence in the world of “sanctified beings”, of “priests” in their very substance, of “trinitarian dwellings”, the universal priesthood of the laity holds the power of worship in the world. Outside the church walls, lay people continue the liturgy of the Church. By their active presence, they introduce into society and into human relations the truth of the dogmas they live, thus dislodging the evil and profane elements of the world.
In addition to an active participation in the powers of the Church, the Fathers emphasize the triple dignity of the laity. St. Macarius of Egypt says: “Christianity is not at all something mediocre; it is a great mystery. Meditate on your own nobility... By the anointing, all have become kings, priests and prophets of the heavenly mysteries.”24.19
The royal dignity is of an ascetic nature; it is the mastery of the spiritual over the material, over the instincts and pulsations of the flesh, the freedom from all determination coming from the world. St. Ecumenius expresses it as “kings, by the ascendancy over our passions”.24.20 St. Gregory of Nyssa says likewise: “The soul shows its royalty in the free disposition of its desires; this is inherent only in a king; to dominate all is the characteristic of a royal nature.”
The royal dignity is thus the “how” of existence, the royal quality of dominating, of being one's master and lord. Its “what”, its content, is in the priestly dignity. St. Paul exhorts us to offer our bodies as a living sacrifice, a “spiritual service”,24.21 to make of our being and its existence a worship, a liturgy, a doxology. Origen expresses this admirably: “All those who have received the anointing have become priests... If I love my brothers even to give my life for them, and I fight for truth even to death... if the world is crucified to me and I to the world, I have offered a sacrifice and I become the priest of my existence.”24.22 With the same meaning, St. Gregory of Nazianzen synthesizes: “We are priests by the offering of ourselves as a spiritual host.”24.23
In order to define the prophetic dignity, St. Ecumenius gathers all the dignities together: “kings, by dominion over our passions; priests, to immolate our bodies; prophets, in being informed of the great mysteries”.24.24 St. Theophylactus adds: “prophet, because he sees what eye has not seen”.24.25 According to the Bible, a prophet is one who is aware of “the designs of God” in the world, one who grasps the providential course of history under the eyes of God. Eusebius of Caesarea, in his Evangelical Demonstration,24.26 writes: “We burn the prophetic perfume in every place and we sacrifice to him the fragrant fruit of a practical theology.” Here is a magnificent definition of the laity: by his whole being, by his whole existence, to become such a living theology--theophany--the luminous place of the presence of the parousia of God.
In following the patristic tradition, we can draw in broad outlines a certain “type” of lay person. He is above all a man of prayer, a liturgical being, a man of the Sanctus and the Trisagion, one who sums up his life in these words of the psalm: “I will sing praise to my God while I live.” Abbot Anthony24.27 speaks of a man of great sanctity, who practiced his profession of medicine in the world; he gave all that he did not need to the poor and sang the Trisagion every day, uniting himself to the choir of the angels. He makes us think of the type of saint called anargyros, “disinterested” [unmercenary]; he practiced his profession as a form of his priesthood, as a priest. He makes us think also of “the good doctor” of Camus --but such as the author must see him now.
Today, in Communistic countries where the Church is more than ever reduced to a single liturgical life, this destitution becomes a powerful appeal to center oneself on the one thing necessary. Just recently, the Russian episcopate exhorted the laity, in default of a regular liturgical life, to become a temple, to continue the liturgy in their existence, to present to men a liturgical countenance and smile. In the tragic conditions of the utmost tension, the Church teaches above all how to pray, how to share in the combat by a silent testimony, how “to listen to the silence of the Word” in order to render more powerful every compromised word.
According to an old tradition, St. Michael offers on the altar on high “lambs of fire”, the souls of martyrs. Their testimony is not necessarily spectacular. As a priest in the world, the layman practices the discernment of spirits and says “no” to every demoniacal enterprise. The others, those who are “under the altar” cry, “How long, O Lord?”24.28 The Church can with all its wealth of human culture make a splendid icon of the kingdom of God, but it can also be despoiled even to martyrdom, and “naked follow Christ naked”.
During the liturgy, the bishop collects the prayers and the gifts of the faithful and bears this offering to the Father, and pronounces the epiklesis on behalf of all. The presence of the layman in the world is also a perpetuation of the epiklesis, which sanctifies every particle of the world, contributes to the peace of which the Gospel speaks, and aspires to the liturgical “kiss of peace”. In following the litanies, his prayer is directed to the day ahead, to the earth and its fruits, to the efforts of all men, In the immense cathedral, that is, the universe, man, the priest of his life whether he be workman or scholar, makes of everything a human offering, a hymn, a doxology.
A lay person is an eyewitness of the resurrection of Christ. Such is the teaching of the liturgy and the meaning of the service of Easter night. The liturgical mystery goes beyond the simple commemoration; it “re-presents” the event, even becomes the event. Before the people, the risen Christ appears, and this confers on every one of the faithful the apostolic dignity of a witness.
That is why a layman is also an “apostolic man”24.29 in his own way. According to the spiritual writers, he is the one who corresponds to the final words of St. Mark's Gospel: the one who will tread on serpents, cure all sickness, move mountains and raise the dead, if such is the will of God. If he lives his faith simply, he arrives at his final end.
His attitude of recollected silence and humility must also be penetrated with passionate tenderness. St. Isaac and St. John Climacus say that we must love God as a man loves his betrothed, and then to be in love with all of God's creation in order to decipher the meaning of God in everything. According to Merleau-Ponty,24.30“man is condemned to meaning”; we say that he is invited to live his faith, to see what is not seen, to contemplate the wisdom of God in the apparent absurdity of history, and to become light, revelation and prophecy.
Marveling thus at the existence of God, “the world is full of the Trinity”, a layman is also slightly mad with the folly of which St. Paul speaks; his is the paradoxical humor of “the fools of Christ”, which alone is capable of shattering the portentous gravity of innumerable doctrinaires.
A lay person is also one who is freed by his faith from “the great fear” of the 20th century, fear of the bomb, of cancer, of Communism, of death; whose faith is always a way of loving the world, a way of following his Lord even into hell. This is certainly not a part of a theological system, but perhaps it is only from the depths of hell that a dazzling and joyous hope can be born and assert itself.
Christianity in the grandeur of its confessors and martyrs, in the dignity of every believer, is messianic, revolutionary, explosive. In the domain of Caesar, we are ordered to seek and therefore to find what is not found there--the kingdom of God. This order signifies that we must transform the form of the world, change it into the icon of the kingdom. To change the world means to pass from what the world does not yet possess--for this reason it is still this world--to that in which it is transfigured, thus becoming another thing--the kingdom.
The central appeal of the Gospel is to the Christian violence that alone lays hold of the kingdom. In speaking of St. John the Baptist the Lord indicated violence. Thus St. John is not only a witness of the kingdom; he is already the place where the world is conquered and where the kingdom is present. He is not only a voice that proclaims; he is its voice. He is the friend of the bridegroom, the one who decreases that the other, the divine lover of men, may increase and appear. To be a true lay person is to be one who, by his entire life, by what is already present within him, proclaims him who is to come; to be one who, according to St. Gregory of Nyssa, full of “sober intoxication”, cries out to every passerby: “Come and drink”; to be one who says with St. John Climacus these words so winged in their joyousness: “Thy love has wounded my soul, and my heart cannot endure thy flames; I go forward, singing to thee...”24.31
The Gospel speaks to us of the violent who bear away the kingdom. One of the sure signs of its approach is the unity of the Christian world. In this expectation of the final accomplishment, hope, the great Christian hope, takes on life. The prayer of an the Churches ascends, formulating an ecumenical epiklesis, invoking the Holy Spirit to descend on the possible miracle of unity. This is our ardent desire, our ardent prayer. The destiny of the world rests on the Father's response, but this is dependent on our transparent sincerity and the purity of our hearts.
Jesus Christ, by the total gift of himself, has revealed the perfect priest. As the image of all perfections, he is the supreme bishop; he is also the supreme and unique layman. This is why his priestly prayer bears the desire of all the saints: to glorify the Holy Trinity with one heart and one soul and to unite all men around the one and only chalice.
The divine lover of men awaits us to share this joy, which no longer is only of this world; it already inaugurates the feast of the kingdom.