The Spiritual Exercises of Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuit order, presuppose Roman Catholicism, but are today made by many who are not Catholics. Moreover, even Roman Catholics who make Ignatian Exercises often are not spontaneously inclined to obey Roman ecclesiastical authority. Neither avoiding the ecclesial dimension nor an authoritarian ‘follow the rules!’ provides spiritual directors with adequate orientation when working with issues at Church frontiers. This dissertation in pastoral theology seeks to navigate a middle position by moving beyond the individualism and the a-historical assumptions of the existing relevant literature. The dissertation remains close to the Ignatian primary sources, in the awareness that the Ignatian tradition needs to be constantly updated and that the contemporary ecclesial frontiers are not fully foreseen in the canonical texts. The main hypothesis is that a notion is needed of a ‘pilgrim Church’ in space and time, with Christians who are related to one another in a deep and fundamental sense. The minor hypothesis is that the individual needs to be open towards and prepared to learn from the Roman Catholic Church, in order to understand and to be profoundly moved by these exercises, but not necessarily to become a Roman Catholic. Having presented and discussed various approaches in the writings of twentieth-century and recent thinkers, this thesis puts forward its own ecclesiological position informed by Charles Taylor, Hans-Georg Gadamer and Karl Rahner. The aim is to take Ignatian studies forward by combining relational anthropology, hermeneutics and a sacramental understanding of the Church, and to apply this synthesis to the practice of giving Ignatian Exercises. The final chapter discusses a selection of cases in the light of my ecclesiological position. The synthesis and application claim originality.

Cette étude de philosophie comparée propose une herméneutique de l’idée de soi à partir d’une analyse de la dimension ascétique de la question « quel soi ? », qui se manifeste à travers les disciplines de libération mises en place par les traditions du Portique et du Zen. Déclinée sous différentes formes, cette question constitue la pierre angulaire des pratiques de soi propres aux deux traditions. Il apparaît que sa principale fonction est celle d’orienter l’idée de soi, eu égard à une polarité soi ↔ non-soi, afin de parvenir à la condition du sage, celle d’un accord libérateur avec une nature originelle commune à tous. Ainsi, au lieu de désigner simplement un fondement ontologique – réel ou supposé – l’idée de soi joue alors bien plutôt un rôle de vecteur, qui, selon son orientation,permet ou non d’actualiser cet accord. Par la prise en compte comparative du rôle de la négation (détachement) de soi, cette étude cherche donc à élargir le spectre des processus de subjectivation ou des pratiques de soi et, ainsi, de mettre au jour un aspect assez négligé par l’histoire occidentale de la subjectivité. Par là même, cette thèse permet de mieux comprendre comment une (méta)physique stoïcienne du plein peut être à même de penser la négation (détachement) de soi et, inversement, comment une métaphysique bouddhiste de la vacuité peut développer une pensée de la subjectivité morale et de la responsabilité / This study in comparative philosophy offers a hermeneutics of the idea of self. It explores the ascetic dimension of the question “what self?” apparent across the various disciplines of liberation developed by the Stoic and Zen traditions. In its diverse guises, this question is the cornerstone of specific practices of the self within these traditions. As such, its main function is to guide the idea of self, with regard to the polarity self ↔ non-self, in order to achieve the status of the sage, which represents a kind of harmony with an original nature that is common to all individuals. Therefore, rather than simply designating an ontological foundation – real or alleged – the idea of self has the role of a vector, which, depending on its orientation, allows one to actualise (or not) this harmony. Through comparative analysis of the role of negation (detachment) of the self, this study seeks to broaden the spectrum of the processes of subjectification or practices of the self and, thus, to bring to light an aspect that has been somewhat neglected by the Western history of subjectivity. In doing so, this thesis enables better understanding of how the full-bodied (meta)physics of the Stoics is able to think the negation (detachment) of the self and, conversely, of how the Buddhist metaphysics of emptiness can develop an idea of moral subjectivity and responsibility

A deep visual analysis of Ludovico Carracci’s 1588 Madonna and Child, Angels, and Saints Francis, Dominic, Mary Magdalene and the Donor Cecilia Bargellini Boncompagni with an emphasis on the role of the patron, the significance of the locality, and the visual semiotics of the Virgin Mary’s gaze in prompting conversion in the repentant prostitutes of the Carmelite convertite convent associated with Ss. Filippo and Giacomo in Bologna, Italy. Including a commentary on contemporary social expectations of modest behavior and the painting’s deliberate incorporation of inappropriate female behavior towards a religious purpose. A discussion of uniquely Carmelite iconography, the use of Ignatian mental prayer in convents, and self-determination in imagery by a Bolognese aristocratic woman.

La confrontation du théâtre et de la liturgie est un lieu commun de la pensée. Il est un motif rhétorique récurrent chez les pères de l’Église pour définir a contrario et par surenchère le bon ethos du chrétien à l’Église. Ce tour de pensée ecclésiastique, typique de la synthèse augustinienne de la rhétorique antique et du christianisme, n’est pas seulement un héritage livresque au XVIIe siècle. Il est particulièrement pertinent à la vue des enjeux auxquels est confrontée l’Église catholique : elle doit répondre aux accusations protestantes, qui traitaient la messe de farce ; le théâtre renouvelé de l’antique se rétablit grâce au soutien du pouvoir, se sédentarise et devient un divertissement régulier. Cette banalité nouvelle fait de la Comédie, aux yeux des augustiniens, le lieu d’une « représentation vive » et continuelle des passions du monde, particulièrement de l’amour et de l’honneur : le théâtre apparaît comme une liturgie inversée. Là où les pratiques de piété sont censées amoindrir les passions et nourrir la foi, le théâtre excite les passions et étouffe l’esprit de prière. La querelle de la moralité au théâtre montre non seulement une concurrence morale, mais aussi psychique et affective. Les deux représentations prétendent susciter la présence d’esprit et « toucher » le cœur, voire lui « imprimer des mouvements ». La messe est qualifiée de « représentation vive du sacrifice de la croix », pendant laquelle le fidèle doit se remémorer vivement le sacrifice christique et sa signification grâce à une lecture allégorique, et se l’appliquer à lui-même. Par la considération et l’accomplissement de cérémonies, par la vocalisation des psaumes, le fidèle est invité à produire des « actes » du cœur pour s’unir à Jésus-Christ. Ce rapport au texte comme trace à suivre, et ce rapport au corps et à la voix comme media pour s’auto-exciter, expliquent pourquoi les comédiens professionnels sont condamnés par les dévots : ils excitent en eux les passions contraires à l’Esprit saint, ils rappellent des sentiments qu’un pénitent ne pourrait pas se remémorer sans « horreur ». La « représentation » est alors conçue comme un effort de remémoration.Le rétablissement du théâtre à l’antique nécessitait un discours pour en éclairer les visées et en légitimer l’existence dans une société chrétienne et monarchique. Traduire la mimesis aristotélicienne par « représentation » plutôt que par « imitation » rendait le théâtre beaucoup plus proche de la liturgie et lui ajoutait les connotations de vue, de présence et de mémoire. Le débat entre plaire et instruire est un débat entre théâtre-divertissement et théâtre-cérémonie. Incomber au théâtre la fonction d’instruire, c’était le rapprocher d’une prédication et de la messe, car instruire, signifiait instruire chrétiennement. L’échec de sanctification du théâtre des années 1640 fit conclure à une incompatibilité du théâtre avec la folie et la modestie chrétienne, mais la possibilité d’une instruction civique par le théâtre émerge à la fin du siècle. Le théâtre participe de la construction d’une morale laïque. / The confrontation between liturgy and theater is a topos of the discourses which reveal deeply-rooted issues of representation in the seventeenth century. This commonplace had been a recurrent rhetorical device in the patristic sermons, where it emphasized the differences between Christianity and paganism. It is vigorously reactivated in seventeenth-century France as the Catholic Church faces its Calvinist critics, who accuse mass of being a comedy. Profane theater becomes a regular and professional kind of entertainment in the city and at the court, thanks to the protection of the royal power. This is why it is seen by Augustinians as a recurrent “lively representation” of the values of the world, such as love and honor, which are contradictory to the celestial Christian spirit. Treatises against Comedy written by Christian zealots reveal not only a moral, but also an emotional and psychological competition between liturgical practices and theater. Both “representations” try to force the presence of the mind and to touch, or even to print, the heart. The mass is then qualified as the “lively representation” of the Passion of the Christ, during which Catholic prayers must commemorate the mystery of divine sacrifice. By considering and acting out ceremonies, by vocalizing prayers, the believer is invited to produce certain acts of the heart and to unite with Christ, applying the Christ’s sacrifice to himself. Thus, the believer can be assimilated to an existential comedian on the divine stage : he actively involves his sensibility in the imitation of the great Christian model, by entering into the spirit of the psalms. This relationship to the text as a vestige to follow, this use of the voice and the body as mediums to excite devotion, explain the condemnation of the professional comedian by the Christian zealots (dévots). Indeed, the comedian is seen as someone who excites his own passions, playing a dangerous game with his heart and reminding himself of former worldly passions which can only lessen his faith.The reestablishment of theater questions the legitimacy, the definition and the goals of this art in a Christian society. Translating mimesis by “representation” and not “imitation” brought the theater closer to the liturgy. The discourses on theater in the 1620s and 1630s show that the authors tended to see a memorial, reiterative and visual dimension in theater that was not present in Aristotle. The debates finally conclude on the definition of theater as an honest form of entertainment rather than as a living form of instruction, namely because the latter was the responsibility of predication and mass. Saint Thomas could justify theater as a way of merely releasing the mind without interesting the heart or touching the soul ; at that time, indeed, instruction meant Christian instruction. In the 1640s, to please the devout Spanish queen Anne of Austria, several playwrights did attempt to call back the theater to its former institutional position by assimilating it with religious ceremony and creating sanctified tragedies. But this attempt failed for both poetic and political reasons. The disposition of the spectators in the city was not to be instructed. The theater was finally recognized as incompatible with Christian folly and modesty, but slowly participated in the formation of a secular morality in a new civic sphere.