Fr. Louis Bouyer (1913-2004) was a member of the Oratory of France and one of the major theologians of the twentieth-century. Born to a Protestant family, in 1935 he became a Lutheran minister. However, his study of St. Athanasius and the liturgy prompted him to enter the Catholic Church, in 1939. Subsequently, he entered the Oratory of France, was ordained a priest, and taught theology at a number of institutes. A leading member of the liturgical and ecumenical movements prior to the Second Vatican Council, Paul VI appointed him to the Consilium for the renewal of the liturgical books and to the International Theological Council. He published influential books on the liturgy, spirituality, theTrinity, creation, and the situation of the post-conciliar Church.
In this interview, Dr. Keith Lemna selects and discusses five of Bouyer's best works.
Dr. Keith Lemna is Associate Professor of Systematic Theology at Saint Meinrad Seminary and School of Theology. He has published scholarly articles in numerous journals, including The Heythrop Journal, Nova et Vetera, Communio: International Catholic Review, International Philosophical Quarterly, Logos: A Journal of Catholic Thought and Culture, The Gregorianum, and Antiphon. He is the author of The Trinitarian Wisdom of God: Louis Bouyer's Theology of the God-World Relationship and The Apocalypse of Wisdom: Louis Bouyer’s Theological Recovery of the Cosmos (recipient of a Catholic Press Association book award in 2020)
- The Memoirs of Louis Bouyer: From Youth and Conversion to Vatican II, the Liturgical Reform, and After
by Louis Bouyer - The Paschal Mystery: Meditations on the Last Three Days of Holy Week
by Louis Bouyer - The Decomposition of Catholicism
by Louis Bouyer - The Church of God: Body of Christ and Temple of the Holy Spirit
by Louis Bouyer - Cosmos: The World and the Glory of God
by Louis Bouyer
1.
The first book on your list is Bouyer’s Memoirs. Who was Fr. Louis Bouyer and why are his books worth reading?
Louis Bouyer was a former Lutheran minister who converted to Catholicism and became a priest of the Oratory.
He was a prodigious scholar. He was an expert on Cardinal John Henry Newman, liturgy, and systematic theology. He was also a teacher who inspired many students. He was a novelist as well!
Bouyer was a friend and collaborator of some of the great twentieth-century theologians. These included Henri de Lubac, Hans Urs von Balthasar, and—during his time on the International Theological Commission in the early 1970s—Joseph Ratzinger.
He was a favorite of Pope Paul VI, who read his books and once recommended him, along with de Lubac and Cardinal Journet, to the Roman clergy as one of the theologians they should read to deepen their theological understanding and improve their preaching.
He is worth reading because quite a few of his books are now classic studies: in liturgy, ecumenism, ecclesiology, and Mariology.
I especially recommend his nine-volume synthesis of Catholic doctrine. I write about it in my two books on him. It provides a dynamic presentation of the Christian understanding of reality. It is rooted in the whole Tradition—starting with scripture and the Church Fathers—but is also modern and unafraid to address head-on the questions and challenges that the Church faces today and in the foreseeable future.
In these latter volumes, his theological vision is beautiful and expressed in a prose that rivals that of his great nineteenth-century role model, Cardinal Newman.
"His book, The Paschal Mystery, brought this very expression to the fore."
Bouyer had published important books before the Second Vatican Council and participated in it. Did he influence any of the Council’s documents?
It is difficult to gauge the influence his work had at the Council.
A few years ago, Pope Benedict XVI spoke about some of the theological greats who were not at the Council. Hans Urs von Balthasar was one. He also included Bouyer in the list.
However, Bouyer's pre-conciliar theological perspective was embraced by the Council in many ways, if not in every way.
His book Rite and Man was being read by periti at the Council. I have already mentioned Pope Paul VI’s fondness for him. His studies of ecumenism, the theology of grace, ecclesiology, sacramental theology, and divine revelation are deeply congruent with the conciliar texts. His book, The Paschal Mystery, brought this very expression to the fore. The paschal mystery is a major theme in conciliar and post-conciliar Catholic theology.
I believe that his influence on the Council was pretty large, even though he was in absentia. However, I am unsure how one could verify the scope of his influence on the Council documents. I can only say that studying Bouyer helps one understand the deep meaning of the Council.
What led you to study Bouyer?
I came across Bouyer’s work quite by accident, although I am sure it was providential.
I was interested in theological cosmology and planning to do a doctoral dissertation on the subject.
To get a manageable handle on it, I went in search of a single theologian that I could focus on. I wanted someone who took modern scientific cosmology seriously but who was also steeped in the Catholic Tradition and not too naively correlational in dealing with the interpretation of modern scientific cosmology. It is necessary to maintain a balance between embracing modern science and not making it the ultimate authority on everything we do or think on the metaphysical plane.
I picked up Bouyer’s Cosmos: The World and the Glory of God at the old Newman Book Store in Washington, D.C., off the campus of The Catholic University of America, in Brookland.
Immediately, I was struck by how Bouyer brought into play all the things I thought needed to be brought into play when dealing with the cosmological question in the (post-)modern context. Furthermore, he seemed to possess the balanced approach I was looking for. I was hooked.
Soon, I discovered the sophiological roots of his cosmological perspective and made that the focus of my studies on him.
“Sophiology” refers to a school of interpretation that comes from the Russians Vladimir Soloviev, Sergei Bulgakov, and Pavel Florensky. It centres, in new and interesting ways, on the theology of Wisdom, a topic that had been underdeveloped in the mainstream theological tradition, East and West. Bouyer knew Bulgakov in Paris.
There was not much on the topic at the time in English. Since then, the number of studies of Sophiology in the English-speaking world has exploded. Nonetheless, Bouyer’s importance in this field is still underappreciated.
2.
Bouyer wrote extensively on the liturgy. Why have you singled out his study on the liturgy of the sacred triduum, The Paschal Mystery?
During his lifetime, this book was probably his most famous and influential book.
He wrote it in his early thirties, and it made him famous (at least as far as theologians who are not popes can be famous). It resonated with people.
As one commentator on Bouyer, Davide Zordan, once put it, it presented God under the living figure of love, not of judgment. It prefigured, I suppose, the turn to the theme of mercy that we have seen in the post-Vatican II papacy.
Bouyer centred his theological vision on the overwhelming love that God shows us in the redemptive Incarnation. This love is constitutive of his own inner being as interpersonal, Trinitarian exchange.
The book is a profound reflection on Holy Week. It shows the unity of Christ’s redemptive action, which culminates not only in the Cross and Resurrection, but in the Ascension, as well as our participation in this holy action through the Eucharist.
It is a beautifully written, serious text (no literary witticisms here).
As I suggested, it may be the source of our common usage of the expression “Paschal Mystery.” That mystery is such a major theme in conciliar and post-conciliar Church teachings.
It is a very appropriate book to read during Lent or Holy Week and has been reissued recently in English.
Balthasarians might be a little disappointed by it. Bouyer does not develop the Holy Saturday theme in what would become the “Balthasarian fashion.” Moreover, his Trinitarian theology is a little different from Balthasar’s. Of course, it was published before Balthasar’s study on the Paschal Mystery came out.
"Bouyer thought the liturgical reform was too often being carried out by people who had lost a living sense of the sacred."
Bouyer took part in Consilium, the commission charged with drafting the liturgical texts after Vatican II. What was his view of the liturgical reform?
He saw much promise in the Council and supported Sacrosanctum Concilium. However, he disliked the implementation of the reform very much. His dispute with Annibale Bugnini, and distaste for him and his direction of the reform, is well known among people who are interested in liturgical questions. It is spelled out in his Memoirs.
Bouyer thought the liturgical reform was too often being carried out by people who had lost a living sense of the sacred. He fiercely opposed religionless Christianity. He insisted that Christianity does not do away with religion, the sacred, myth, or ritual. It brings a supernatural transfiguration of them. Too many liturgists were—in Bouyer’s view—leveling the Christian sacred down to the pre-Christian sacred, or were desacralizing it altogether, but not in the way of the Gospel.
This desacralizing approach is—he insisted—found in symbolisms that do away with ad orientem prayer or that try to turn the Eucharistic banquet into a common meal. It is tied to Christian atheism, which is indeed a thing. It continues to exist in our day, and quite overtly so, with its philosophical defenders.
That said, I have tried to show that Bouyer is not simply a liturgist.
When I started working on him, I discovered that liturgists knew about him but no one else did. As I saw the scope and depth of his work in systematic theology, I found this surprising.
His theological work is founded upon his liturgical studies. One might even refer to it as a “liturgical theology.” But it also takes up the larger classical and modern concerns of Christian theology.
A perusal of Bouyer on the web shows that the things that seem to be of greatest interest in his work have to do with liturgy. People who are dissatisfied with post-conciliar liturgical reforms look to Bouyer for support because he provides criticisms that align with their views.
However, it is important to realise that Bouyer presents a comprehensive theological vision in his work. He is not easily pegged when it comes to our usual right-left categorizations.
"Bouyer insisted that, in the long run, integralism would exert more of an attraction on the young in the Church than progressivism would"
3.
Bouyer wrote the next book—The Decomposition of Catholicism—in 1968 France. At the beginning, he notes how, though people had high hopes for the Second Vatican Council, those hopes have not been met during the three years that have passed since its close. “Unless we are blind, we must even state bluntly that what we see looks less like the hoped-for regeneration of Catholicism than its accelerated decomposition.” Is this book’s analysis exaggerated, outdated, or still valid?
Of course, the book is not anti-Vatican II. Bouyer gave voice to the experience of many of his generation. The reforms of the Council were being carried out in an incompetent or even diabolical manner, placating the whims of the journalistic classes or the secularists who did not even believe in God. Yet he was very much on board with Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II. He saw the true “spirit” of the Council in their guidance of the Church.
His analysis in The Decomposition of Catholicism is valid and permanently relevant. He gets at the root of the polarization in the Church between integralism and progressivism. This polarization is not only still with us today but has become increasingly exacerbated. Indeed, Bouyer foresaw that integralism would become attractive. Many at the time dismissed this, thinking that only some kooks would go down that route. However, Bouyer insisted that, in the long run, integralism would exert more of an attraction on the young in the Church than progressivism would. It seems to me this insight has been borne out, especially in the United States.
He recognizes that bad notions of authority—downright authoritarianism—are at the root of this split between the ecclesial left and the ecclesial right.
For Bouyer, the solution is to follow Newman’s scriptural and patristic recovery, with its profound sense of Christocentrism, legitimate development, the legitimate place of conscience in the life of the Christian, and the rightful dignity of the entire people of God.
Let me quote a key passage, which clearly is as valid today as ever before:
“…bishops must not be autocrats…they are responsible for the unity of the Church: first of all, the unity of the particular Church entrusted to them, then its unity with all the Churches under the supreme responsibility of the bishop who is Peter’s successor. They must always remember that this unity is no uniformity, it is not simply an outward conformity obtained by decree. It is the unity of charity, the unity of a great concert, of a full symphony of which they are to be the conductors, where they must be concerned that each voice be heard, but in its place and in accordance with its proper value, recalling that the only definitive choirmaster is Christ himself.”
Does not this quotation succinctly present the basic principles of a healthy and balanced notion of synodality? Bouyer’s ecclesiology is relevant at this moment and in all future moments.
"This understanding of how it is not only the Body that is inseparable from its Head, but also the Head from his Body, helped draw Bouyer to Catholicism."
4.
Fourth is Bouyer’s book on ecclesiology: The Church of God. The Second Vatican Council focuses on the Church primarily as the People of God. Bouyer, on the other hand, views it primarily as the Body of Christ and the Temple of the Holy Spirit. What is the central argument of this book?
From what I have just said, it is clear that Bouyer does not oppose the theme of the People of God. However, he clarifies its sacramental foundation. It is rooted in the reality of the Church as the Body (and Bride) of Christ and the Temple of the Holy Spirit.
He speaks at length of the People of God in this book, but he places a different accent on it than Lumen Gentium does. He stresses that the People of God is not just a historical or geographical reality but a People called by God to enter into relationship with him. In fact, he goes deeper than Lumen Gentium in this regard, though in harmony with it.
The book is a thorough presentation of ecclesiology that takes a “positive” approach in terms of its method. Methodologically, it is concerned with developing a conceptual understanding on the basis of the history of the Church and the inner logic of its doctrinal development. Rather than present a central argument, it aims at developing an ecclesiology along the lines of the eminent nineteenth-century theologians Newman and Moehler. This is an approach fully in line with Vatican II.
Moreover, it is steeped in Bouyer’s sophiological perspective. This comes out especially at the end of the book.
Bouyer presents the Church as the locus of the personalization of the universe in Wisdom. The theme of uncreated and created Wisdom, that one finds in St Athanasius and St Augustine, is explored near the end and in connection with humanity's interpersonal union with the Lord in the Church, which is not only his Body but also his Bride.
The theme of the Church as the Body of Christ was omnipresent in Bouyer's work throughout his career. Christ is not himself without his Body. This is a lesson that Bouyer learned from St Athanasius, on whom he did his graduate work.
Athanasius spoke strikingly of how the Body, the Church, is joined to Christ even during his lifetime on earth. This understanding of how it is not only the Body that is inseparable from its Head, but also the Head from his Body, helped draw Bouyer to Catholicism.
The book is also Pneumatocentric. The Holy Spirit has a very active role in Bouyer’s theology. The Holy Spirit is the active fullness of the Trinity in the eternal life of the divine processions and in the economy of salvation, which is summed up in the Church.
Throughout The Church of God, Bouyer approaches the unity of the Church as a unity of charity (as he said in Decomposition, which I quoted above).
It is a unity in the Spirit, who is the bond of love between the Father and the Son.
The hierarchy, in this understanding, must show forth the true nature of the unity of the Church through an exercise of ministry as service rather than domination or authoritarian autarchy.
The book has a very collegial attitude. Later, Bouyer later came to be dissatisfied with it. However, just as it stands, it is a book that could be very helpful in guiding us in the current situation, although it is not wholly decisive in this regard.
5.
Today, we are accustomed to think of the universe in purely scientific terms. In Cosmos: The World and the Glory of God, Bouyer articulates the Christians view of the world and urges us to view it in those terms. Why do you recommend this book?
As I mentioned above, this is the book that got me into Bouyer’s work.
It is idiosyncratic of me to feature this book. The book is only of interest if one is studying theological cosmology. It just so happens that this topic is my primary research interest. Cosmos: The World and the Glory of God is the most important book written on theological cosmology in the 20th century.
At first glance, it may not have that weighty an appearance. It may come across as encyclopedic, merely reporting what others have said. However, plumb a little deeper, and there is a very profound interpretation of the scientific understanding of the world from a Christian perspective. Bouyer brings together Scripture, patristics, myth, ritual anthropology, scientific cosmology, and the fundamental questions of European idealism, to recover a vision of the universe as a cosmic liturgy. I contend that such a vision is desperately needed in our day.
Bouyer urges Christians to view the world on Christian terms, but he is not rejecting scientific cosmology. He represents the Christian worldview in an evolutionary light, which leads to a most interesting presentation of angelology and demonology. His interpretation of quantum physics recovers the doctrine of the divine ideas. He shows the common ground that exists, in the domain of mythopoetic thinking, between divine revelation, pre-Christian worldviews, and post-Christian ones.
Ultimately, he takes up the Teilhardian problematic of “personalization” as the law of evolution. However, he gives it a sophiological stamp. Moreover, he puts the Russian sophiological approach in the context of a broadly Augustinian-Thomist philosophical perspective.
All of what I have just said attests to the book’s importance. This is why I recommend it. I would only warn the reader that, like other ressourcement theologians, Bouyer does not always speak overtly in his own voice. Often, he presents his views through an exposition of others. But nothing is merely an exposition for him. He is engaging in a recovery, but not by way of static repetition. He recovers views by treating them as sources of inspiration and insight for the questions that we face today.
"Bouyer recovers the ancient patristic motif of cosmic liturgy in a modern context"
Could you explain in brief the two books that you have published on Bouyer’s theology of creation: The Apocalypse of Wisdom and The Trinitarian Wisdom of God?
The first book I published on Bouyer was The Apocalypse of Wisdom. It centred on his cosmology text. However, I used that text as an entrée into the totality of his work, particularly his volumes on systematic theology.
I argue that Bouyer recovers an integrated Christian vision of the world, one that reestablishes the unity of humanity and the cosmos in the Incarnation.
Bouyer helps us to recover, in the context of the modern scientific understanding of the universe, a sense of the cosmological dimension of Christ’s redemptive work and of the dignity and immensity of our own humanity as the predestined centre in which this work of redemption is recapitulated.
In the book, I follow Bouyer as he traces the history of humanity’s reflection on the meaning and mystery of the cosmos: from prehistory in myth and ritual-centred cultures, to the ancient Greco-Roman world and the cosmological philosophies that were prevalent there, to the divine Revelation's transfiguration of our cosmic sense, to the development of modern scientific cosmology, which is rooted in the biblical manner of seeing the world as both divinely ordered and contingent upon God’s creative freedom.
The world shows forth the glory of its triune Creator if we only have eyes to see it aright. Humanity exists to give voice, through its uniquely embodied rationality and freedom, to the whole of creation in its return to God.
I show that Bouyer recovers the ancient patristic motif of cosmic liturgy in a modern context, and, going beyond what he does explicitly, I put his work into open conversation with his own sources.
My second book, The Trinitarian Wisdom of God, is an updated, revised version of my doctoral dissertation.
In this book, I try to get to the heart of Bouyer’s Trinitarian ontology and Sophiology and show the logic of their conjunction in his work.
I center my considerations on the theme of “mediation.” How is God mediated to the world, able to make contact with it, without destroying it in the fire of his absolute divinity, or without being increased in his divinity by creating it and establishing relation with it?
Everything centres on Christ, the one mediator between God and man. However, the question is, "How can he be this mediator?"
It comes down the intrinsic relationality between his divinity and his humanity. There is a fundamental, intrinsic kinship between divinity and humanity, despite the immense incommensurability between God and humanity.
This theme of mediation is, of course, an ancient one, but Bouyer does not spell it out in his work in the way that I do in the book. In this way, I clarify what he is doing and develop his theological understanding.
I show that the Sophiology that he employs is precisely suited to explaining mediation: uncreated and created Wisdom mutually indwell in one another, in creation and in God, although especially so with respect to the eschatological completion of creation. Our focus should be more eschatological than protological.
I show that Bouyer develops this theme of sophiological mediation in a deeply Trinitarian fashion, and I develop some implications of his Trinitarianism.
I suggest that he thinks of the life of the Trinity in terms of mediated manifestation, of the knowing and loving of the Persons, in and through one another, in an immutable life of external exchange that is a supereminent process-recess.
This description might all sound terribly abstract, but it gets to the heart of an issue that is crucial for humanity, even if we have forgotten about God or have become embittered by the very notion of God.
How can “deification” or union with God be—as the Christian tradition holds it to be—our transcendent consummation or perfection rather than a divine invasion that limits or destroys our being?
The Trinitarian Sophiology that I present has much to teach us in this regard. It points to deification as a true “transhumanism,” a surpassing consummation of our nature, divinization by transcendently perfecting humanization.
It might also sound a little foreign to more standard approaches, but Bouyer is drawing on and developing deep and important strands of Tradition that had tended to be forgotten. I try to develop his thought beyond its explicit formulations but in line with what I take to be his fundamental insights.
