On Father Rahner and Other Controversies
First, my thanks to those generous-spirited people who stopped by to help clear up some of the difficulties involved with Father Rahner. As with many theologians who are working largely beyond the concerns of most laymen, it can be very easy to misinterpret what he is saying. Without proper training in the use of terms and a fairly thorough understanding of the background of the matter being discussed, it would seem that one could easily misread such theologians. Fr. Balthasar, for example, has been accused of teaching universalism, when nothing I have read has made any suggestion of the sort. Others have been accused of various other modernists heresies. I sited the "Our Lady's Warrior Site" because they were one of the few that sited Fr. Rahner alone, without the entire panoply of every modern theologian.
One conclusion I have drawn from this is that the vast majority of Fr. Rahner's work is probably NOT appropriate for spiritual reading for the vast majority of those of us without degrees in theology. It is obvious that one could become confused, disoriented, and experience potentially serious disruptions in spiritual life. However, Fr. Jim has said that he may post some Eucharistic meditations. In addition, I have a book of prayers that I find good reading.
On Father DeMello--while I know that some of the later works are said to be syncretistic, I have not found this in my reading. I have found much of his writing extremely helpful, and I read the Vatican Notification as perhaps a bit over-cautious. However, given the tendency of people to go to extremes, it is probably salutary to warn those sould inclined to embrace things without reservation, that caution should be employed in approaching these works. I have read much of DeMello's early work myself, and have profited greatly from the insights provided--but I would be cautious about the ones I would suggest to others to read. I feel that to a certain extent I come with a kind of built-in protection. Having been a protestant for quite some time, I have "my antennae" up for things that do not sound orthodox. Some of these I'm inclined to dismiss as my overly suspicious mind, others are serious concerns. For example, Matthew Fox comes to mind as one who is immediately recognizable as a problem even in early works. Be that as it may, I think that many may benefit from reading Fr. DeMello so long as they bear in mind that certain tendencies might be present, particularly in later works, that could be misinterpreted. One of the difficulties with the notification on Fr. DeMello's work, if I recall, is that it was issued after he was dead, and thus not able to revise or explain what he intended by some of the "errors" noted in the notification. I have read some writings by close friends of Fr. DeMello that suggest that he may have been misinterpreted.
As in all things--caution and charity. St. Ignatius of Loyola advises us that if something can be interpreted as in-line with Church doctrine, we should do so. If it is obviously in error, then we should take care to correct the error, preferably privately, with the individual involved. Overall, a very charitable policy.
I do want to once again extend my thanks to all of those who so generously spent time and energy trying to help us understand some of the controversy surrounding Fr. Rahner. Ignorance may be worse than heresy, for at least with heresy, you have hold of part of the truth; in ignorance, you are completely blind.
My Warmest Appreciation
My thanks to all of those whose prayers helped to buoy me through what could have been a very bad day. Thank you all.
Another Blog From One Entering the Church
Y'all may want to stop in and say hello to Mr. Cuddy at The Directed Path. He has already said some very interesting things, and I expect future insights along the path will be equally illuminating. Even if you don't stop in, please remember him and Will of Mysterium Crucis, and all who are pondering the faith in your prayers.
Spiritual Direction Once Again
I suppose you can't tell that I am a real enthusiast as far as Father Dubay goes. The following passage really spoke to me, and after you have a chance to read it, I'll tell you why.
from Seeking Spiritual Direction Fr. Thomas Dubay, S. M.Carefully moderating enthusiasm for extraordinary phenomena While religious minded people often perceive a need for guidance in their pursuit of God, perhaps the most acutely felt need occurs among those who have been converted from a life of serious sin or from mediocrity. The former are often enough confused as to where to turn and what to do, while the latter need both encouragement and enlightenment. There is a third group that decidedly needs guidance, even if they are unaware of it. I refer to men and women who feed on excitements of various types: outlandish liturgies, for example; or claims that this seer or that one is in contact with heaven, usually in the person of Our Lady. Not only do these 'seers' need direction, but so do those who flock to them, who avidly read everything about alleged locutions and vision, who build their spiritual lives on the latest reports of what the Mother of Jesus is supposed to have said.
Part of the problem here is that many of these people tend either not to seek guidance about the alleged phenomena or to disregard the advice if it runs counter to their personal convictions. Most likely this type of situation is precisely why St. John of the Cross seems to come down so hard on those who think they have supernatural visitations and either make much of them or refuse to let go of them when instructed to do so. There are likely to believe almost any claim to a supernatural intervention, whether is be a message or a cure or some other miracle. What they resist believing is that just possibly they may be mistaken. (p. 58-59)
Now, this is in no way to detract from legitimate, Church-approved apparitions, etc. However, for every approved apparation there must be dozens and dozens that have no approval. A recent example threatened one Carmelite Community in our area. They invited a speaker to come in and talk about the visions of a woman named Deborah in Australia. They started talking about something called the "Magnificat Meal movement," or something of the sort. They spread this infection into the community and indoctrinated any number of people, who then went to other communities with the message. Shortly thereafter the Bishops of Australia issued a strong condemnation of this visionary's teachings, and we had to intervene in several communities to prevent people from continuing because, of course, the visionary was reporting the Lord's words (or Our Lady's) and a bishop is, after all, only a bishop.
I know that I do not espouse a popular sentiment when I state that I will await the Church's FINAL determination on any vision, locution, or private devotion. When it has been through all approved channels, and if the Lord speaks to me strongly through another person or supernatural means about following this, then I will do it. Until then, there are too many temptations to human vanity, to many appeals to human credulity, too many opportunities to go astray. The spiritual wealth of the Catholic Church is so great that were I to begin exploring every legitimate channel and expression right now, I could continue for a great many lifetimes and not begin to exhaust them all. These new things may be for us, they may be for the future. Just as when the Rosary was first proposed, it may have excited some at the time, but it has become a prayer for all time. I do not need the novelties, though I will not eschew them if the Lord invites.
Back when I was asking for recommendations for reading, I mentioned Early Karl Rahner and was asked why. When I responded I was told that I was completely wrong about Fr. Rahner, wrong about Fr. DeMello, and an ignorant newbie whose benighted continuation of this calumny was a sign of all that was wrong with newcomers to the Church. I overstate the case, but not the tone of the reply. In a partial reply, I posted a link to the "notification" concern Anthony DeMello, which may have been retracted at this point, but I saw no evidence of it. Now I approach the question of Fr. Rahner. From Our Lady's Warriors (I don't vouch for the accuracy of the source) this statement concerning Rahner's teaching:
From Our Lady's Warriors Website On Karl Rahner Karl Rahner--Proposes a "transfinalization" or "transignification" which claims the "meaning" of the bread changes after Consecration - a symbol - rather than the Bread really and truly changing into the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. This heresy is specifically condemned in the Pope Paul VI Eucharistic Encyclical Mysterium Fidei.
Now, the analysis above may be a misreading of what Fr. Rahner wrote. However, it may also be true--if true, it would suggest that Fr. Rahner did stumble into error later in life. If not, the charge should be answered and laid to rest. I do not like to report unsubstantiated rumor as fact, and it took me a while to find where I had read this and what the particular difficulty was.
Now, I would say that this means that Fr. Rahner stumbled into a serious theological error (if indeed it is so stated in his works) and I have no idea whether he responded with due humility or outright defiance. Fr. François Fenelon also stumbled into error, but submitted his works to the correction of the Church. Much has to do with the attitude of the one in error. Theologians--all theologians make mistakes--they do not speak with magisterial authority. Theology, in some ways, is an experimental science. The experiments take the form of thoughts and propositions that must be tested against church understandings. The humble theologian recognizes the potential for error or misstatement in his work and submits it to the teaching authority of the church.
I have found sufficient additional, reliable questionings of Fr. Rahner's later work to give me pause before plunging into it. Admittedly, I have also found innumberable Feeneyite slurs and "traditionalist" (in the SSPX sense) aspersions, to give me reason to doubt the accusations made against him. What is the agenda; what is the authority. Nevertheless, when this type of controversy swirls around a figure, it seems most wise to stand back from the area of controvery and not to indulge oneself with the thought that "I can find the truth in this matter." I do not know if I can, in fact I doubt my ability to do so. Therefore, my caution remains firmly in place. Even more firmly when I see the good editors of America, that bastion of Catholic Orthodoxy, running to Fr. Rahner's defense with Fr. Häring and Fr. (?) Schillebeckx in tow.
I do not like controversy, no more do I like off-hand ad hominem remarks that impugn the integrity of a great many people in one fell swoop. One may say what they wish about me, and they may well be right--but when uttering remarks about a large group of people, one should be very, very cautious. Such judgements do not weigh lightly.
Blogspot
The servers at Blogspot are giving some interesting results once again. If you act now, you may find yourself sent to a random site by clicking any one of the links to the left. Try you luck on the wheel of Fortune--never can tell where you might wind up.
On the Necessity of Spiritual Direction
From Fr. Thomas Dubay--
from Seeking Spiritual DirectionDetecting mediocrity or inner weakness Were it a knowing being, lukewarm water would hardly perceive that it is "neither hot nor cold" (Rv 3:15). So also in human affairs progress cannot be ascertained except in terms of some norm of excellence. Whether it be tennis or basketball, scholarship or medicine, music or law, philosophy or theology, performance is evaluated in terms of the best. In matters religious, the Incarnate Word of the Father is the supreme norm.
Yet, there are more than a few people in our churches on Sunday morning who are quite satisfied with their moral and religious behavior. Polls report high percentages of the general population who feel they are clearly on the path to heaven, and few who fear the possibility of hell. These people may be well-mannered and respectable and decent in their conduct. But they regard thirsting after God and the holiness of the saints as visionary, high-flown, romantic, perhaps even fanatic, and certainly not required of themselves. Newman wrote of these men and women, "They have a certain definite and clear view of their duties; they think that the summit of perfection is to be decent and respectable in their calling, to enjoy moderately the pleasures of life, to eat and drink, marry and give in marriage, and buy and sell, and plant and build, and to take care that religion does not engross them.
One may say that their standard of concern with God and their own eternal destiny is a refined mediocrity, surely nothing resembling and absorbing pursuit of God as "The one thing necessary." (pp. 55-56)
Too true (for me) to be entirely comfortable. I like to think that I am ardent in my pursuit of God, but if I use any measuring stick--for example, am I further along the path to union today than I was last year at this time, I'm afraid I fall terribly short. I feel the Holy Spirit, Hound of Heaven, straining at that interior leash and occasionally pulling me along, or pulling my spiritual shoulder out of joint, and my primary reaction (though unwilled) is to say, "Bad dog, heel." But thank goodness for the yearning, because it is the only thing that comes close to keeping me on track.
The Best Way to Learn
Last night, casting about for a way to organize my future reading, I happened upon a statement of St. Francis de Sales, which I must necessarily paraphrase at this point. He said something to the effect that reading and talking were good ways to learn, study and examination were better ways, but the very best way to learn something was to teach it. This I can speak to from experience. In order to teach anything, you must crawl inside of it and really get to know how it works. A superficial knowledge is untenable because what you will then convey to your students will be a mass of confusion without focus. Better still, if you both practice and teach, but the necessity of teaching requires an intimate knowledge of your subject matter.
And One More
From the aforementioned extremely long poem
from In Memoriam, A. H. H. LXXVIII Alfred, Lord TennysonAgain at Christmas did we weave
The holly round the Christmas hearth;
The silent snow possess'd the earth,
And calmly fell our Christmas-eve:The yule-log sparkled keen with frost,
No wing of wind the region swept,
But over all things brooding slept
The quiet sense of something lost.As in the winters left behind,
Again our ancient games had place,
The mimic picture's breathing grace,
And dance and song and hoodman-blind.Who show'd a token of distress?
No single tear, no mark of pain:
O sorrow, then can sorrow wane?
O grief, can grief be changed to less?O last regret, regret can die!
No--mixt with all this mystic frame,
Her deep relations are the same,
But with long use her tears are dry.
Dedicated with love to MSR--choirs of angels sing thee to thy rest.
A Classic, but It Serves the Purpose
From the pen of Tennyson, who wrote one extremely long poem in a similar vein:
Break, Break, Break Alfred, Lord TennysonBreak, break, break,
On thy cold gray stones, O Sea!
And I would that my tongue could utter
The thoughts that arise in me.O, well for the fisherman's boy,
That he shouts with his sister at play!
O, well for the sailor lad,
That he sings in his boat on the bay!And the stately ships go on
To their haven under the hill;
But O for the touch of a vanish'd hand,
And the sound of a voice that is still!Break, break, break
At the foot of thy crags, O Sea!
But the tender grace of a day that is dead
Will never come back to me.
Study Guide for The Ascent of Mount Carmel
It is with not a little trepidation that I make this available to all. No matter how one goes about it, there is a certain amount of presumption in producing such a guide.
I don't know its worth as it is untested material. Please send any feedback you, or anyone you know how may use it, may have. It would be nice to have the series of these available to any who hope to study The Ascent of Mount Carmel in the future.
A few caveats. The edition used for this study is the Complete Works of St. John of the Cross from ICS publications. I do not pretend to be expert in these matters--I am not. I am a student as anyone who choses to undertake these readings. As a result, expect limitations. Also, the audience I am writing for needs direction not just in the esoterica but also in the basic flow and connection of the ideas. Much of the study guide is aimed in that direction. I can assure you that I will endeavor to improve the quality of this work as it continues; however, feedback would be most helpful.
Anyone who wishes to is welcome to use this. If you have a study group or other group that needs to use them, please feel free to make copies for them--but include my name and contact information so that I can use any feedback to improve them. If you have need of it, write to me at my email address, and I can send you a Word-formatted doc so that the whole thing looks a bit better.
Without further ado, here it is:
Assignment 1: p. 114-123—Prologue, Book I—Chapters 1, 2, 3. Read through the assigned pages at least twice. The first time get an overall sense of what is being said. The second time you may want to pencil in “subheads” for each section or small groups of sections. For example, a subhead for the Prologue sections 5-7 might read: On Spiritual Direction. (Sections are numbered in the text)
Study Questions
Prologue
Section 2
What is to be St. John’s primary help in discussing “this dark night”? Why?
Section 3
Why do soul not advance toward union with the divine? Which of these is most likely in your own case? Take this consideration with you to prayer and/or adoration.
Sections 4-5
For whom is this book written? For what purpose? What does St. John of the Cross have to say about spiritual directors? What should you be looking for in a spiritual director?
Sections 6-7
Note at least three cautions St. John gives regarding spiritual direction and directors.
Section 8
Why will some have difficulty with this doctrine? (Ignore St. John’s explanation of his own inadequacy.)
Section 9
What essential quality does St. John demand of all those for whom the book is intended?
Book 1 Chapter 1
Sections 1-3
What and how many are the “nights” a soul passes through? What is the ultimate goal? At what points should one expect these nights?
Section 4-5
What does St. John of the Cross tell us about ridding ourselves of appetites?
Book 1 Chapter 2
Section 1
What are three reasons for calling the journey toward union a dark night?
Sections 2-5
Where does St. John say the dark night is represented in Scripture? Read these scriptures. How does St. John interpret the instructions of the Angel?
Chapter 3
Read this chapter several times—it is extremely difficult at first and only becomes clear with additional reading and prayer. Pay particular attention to section 4. Paragraph 2 of section 4 is a critical key to this portion of the reading. Note the first sentence. What is the difference between “lacking” and “nakedness?” Write an example using John’s analogy of the sense of one that lacks and one that is naked. What is another word for this nakedness? How does one attain it?
Request for Prayers
Hate to be selfish, but really must--please pray for me today--the day, unbidden, weighs very heavily on mind and heart. Thanks.
Translation Engines
I am astounded by the work of many translation engines. While they are hardly perfect for any language, many times one can piece together a basic sense of what is being said using the translation and a rudimentary understanding of the language. But what amazes me is that the language family from which English supposedly derives is amongst the poorest in actual translation into English. German must be a highly inflected language, for here is an example of a translation from an engine from Credo ut intelligam:
Marvelous BabelFish translationMysterium Crucis because the in this country normal catholic usually desperately of the church and because its orthodoxer with catholic despairs of his normal with catholics, a Web log does such as Mysterium Crucis well: There one discovers the truth, not only well oekumenisch irenisch interreligioes dialogisch its own, in the catholic church but the truth of the world. Thanks A plumb bob, wants. God bless you.
Here's the original:
Original from Credo ut intelligam Mysterium Crucis Weil hierzulande der normale Katholik meist an der Kirche verzweifelt und weil sein orthodoxer Mit-Katholik an seinen normalen Mit-Katholiken verzweifelt, tut ein Weblog wie Mysterium Crucis gut: Da entdeckt einer in der katholischen Kirche die Wahrheit, und zwar nicht nur gut ökumenisch-irenisch-interreligiös-dialogisch seine eigene, sondern die Wahrheit der Welt. Thanks a lot, Will. God bless you.
I am a cripple polyglot with only French (modern and Old), minimal Latin, and Welsh in my bag of language tricks--as a result I can puzzle out much Spanish (although probably with ludicrous errors in some simple matters). I read some Academic German, which is largely a matter of stringing together English cognates and looking up the verbs. But I would probably do better at attempting to make some sense of the message than relying upon the engine which says absolutely nothing to me at all. I'm particularly intrigued by the hyphenated string (which of course is completely untranslated) does it come out to something like, "ecumenical-irenic(peace seeking)-interreligious-dialogue?"
Oh well, it looks like I will just have to rely upon the occasional communication of M. Matthias, blogmeister of Credo ut intelligam. But those who read/understand German, please go to his site. It looks like there is a well of worthwhile material there.
On St. John of the Cross and Detachment
Mr. O'Rama is evidently enjoying the works of one of the great Carmelite thinkers. One of the points St. John brings up over and over again is the question of attachment to things, even to good, wholesome spiritual things. Mr. O'Rama notes it in this passage:
from Dark Night of the Soul St. John of the CrossMany can never have enough of listening to counsels and learning spiritual precepts, and of possessing and reading many books which treat this matter, and they spend their time on all these things rather than on works of mortification.
And that is the human way--we spend our time swirling about the center of the matter but never progressing toward it. This may be a problem that speaks loudly to those inclined to blog. St. John consistently teaches about detachment--when a bad or even a very good thing impedes our progress toward an important goal (unity with God) that thing must be discarded. Not literally, but one must develop true detachment from it. This work of detachment seems to be two-fold--we must begin it with an act of will that firmly states that we wish to be detached from it, but then, through the work of prayer, we must seek the grace to be truly detached from it. Only the work of grace will do this because seeking to become detached from a thing is rather like tar baby, the more we seek to extricate ourselves, the more enmeshed we find ourselves. To use a timely example, when we seek detachment on our own, we are rather like Bilbo Baggins giving up the one ring. While we may surrender it, our minds turn upon it and in odd ways continue to seek it and it continues to dwell on our minds and within us. We may be detached from the physical object, but we are not detached from the thing itself. That work, that freedom from bondage, was purchased for us by Jesus Christ, and it is only through the grace of God that final detachment comes. However, that doesn't mean we can roll around in our materialist delights and wait for God to one day decide we will be detached from these things. Nor does it mean that we can continue to pursue such things as "spiritual reading" or other ways of hiding from God and wait for Him to peek through. We must take steps, will an end to such attachments, and read only what He would have us read, either for enlightenment or recreation (it's important to remember that even in the Carmelite Foundations of St. Teresa of Avila, recreation was considered an extremely important part of a well-rounded approach to God.)
This is one of the reasons why a good spiritual director is so crucial to our advancement. While we can get some notion of the way to go through prayer, scripture, and discernment, we are also capable of tremendous self-deception. A spiritual director can actually assist us in finding direction, guide our reading, and assist us in organizing a prayer life. This is also the reason why one must be most careful in finding a proper spiritual director--one who is holy, who has experienced deep prayer with the Lord or union itself, and who is courageous enough to actually direct rather than subject one to the Rogerian--"How do YOU feel about that?" "What do YOU think of that?" form of directionless directing.
Detachment is NOT easy, but it IS absolutely necessary. One of the things I have said to my Carmelite group to startle them into the reality of detachment is that we must be detached even from those we love most. Perhaps especially from those we love most. St. John points out that this is the only way love can increase. There are two points I would like to make regarding this--one the continuation of what I point out to my group, the other an example from C. S. Lewis.
I usually continue to say that detachment is not indifference--it is, in fact the opposite. Detachment means that you recognize the independence and sovereignty of the Other (assuming of course that they are of age for appropriate independence) and that by detaching yourself from them, you are floating them in the ocean of God's merciful love, rather than leaving them in the dry-dock of mutual codependence. Often our "love" carries with it a tremendous psychological and physical price. Detachment allows us to love, completely, passionately, entirely, and yet not attempt micromanagement of another's life. It allows us the distance to pray and to bring this person constantly before God, but the intimacy also to be available when that person begins floundering his or her way toward grace.
The second point comes from a moment in C.S. Lewis's magnificent work, The Great Divorce. There we see a mother who loved her son more than anything on Earth. Encountering him in this strange space (likely purgatory) she attempts to bring him once again under her "loving reign." She attempts to get him to understand how much she sacrificed for him, how her whole life was centered about him, etc. As she continues, we see the picture move from loving mother to matriarchal tyrant. That is what we become when our life is centered on anything other than God, and if we are not detached from loved ones, we cannot be attached to God. God is holy and singular, He is simple (see, I do know a bit of Aquinas!) and demands fidelity and simplicity from us. If we intend attachment to God and then spend all of our time fussing about other things, we are not simple or single in mind, we are duplicitous. "You cannot worship God and mammon."
So I use the radical example of loved ones to examine the true necessity for detachment. Now, before I continue, I must say that I'm a better evangelist than practitioner. I KNOW all of this, but it has yet to find its way to a place of action. (Isn't it amazing the way sloth obtrudes its poisonous head into nearly everything?) Knowledge must become action or all is lost. But I do know the path and I do see what is required, which means I've taken one step. Now it's time to start taking the others. And I do pray, and I do make feeble motions of the will. It's one of the reasons why St. Thérèse of Lisieux speaks so loudly to me--if I recognize my infancy in the Lord, I have a better chance of turning toward His grace and allowing it to work.
I've gone on far too long at this point. But St. John of the Cross is much on my mind these days, and perhaps 2003 can become a better year through true application of his teaching rather than following my own way for yet another year. Please pray for me.
Once Again, Happy New Year, Blessed Solemnity!
And my entry for the day: Reading Hitler's Niece I stumbled across an explanation of the name of the city of Munich: in German München. According to one of the characters, München is a corruption of a phrase including the word Mönchen, meaning "The Place of the Monks," so named because 12th or 13th century Franciscans founded the town and a number of breweries there. Don't know the veracity or historical accuracy of this, but quite interesting if true--a light on the past otherwise unshed.
Found this inkblot test via Father Jim's blog.
Here are my results. The test itself was fascinating and better executed than a great many of these kinds of things.
My Results from Inkblot PeaceYou are driven by a higher purpose than most people. You have a deeply-rooted desire to facilitate peacefulness in the world. Whether through subtle interactions with love ones, or through getting involved in social causes, it is important to you to influence the world.
You are driven by a desire to encourage others to think about the positive side of things instead of focusing on the negative. The reason your unconscious is consumed by this might stem from an innate fear of war and turmoil. Thus, to avoid that uncomfortable place for you, your unconscious seeks out the peace in your environment.
Usually, the thing that underlies this unconscious drive is a deep respect for humankind. You care about the future of the world, even beyond your own involvement in it. As a result, your personal integrity acts as a surrogate for your deeper drive toward peace and guides you in daily life towards decisions that are respectful toward yourself and others.
As with all of these predictors, analyses, etc., I hope that what it says is true. I certainly see elements of it. However, you will see elements of anything anyone suggests is true. Perhaps that's why it's important to listen to what Jesus and God have to say to you. Psalm 8 would make a good starting point. And then the Gospels--particularly verses such as, "God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son that whosoever should believe in him shall not die but have everlasting life." Enjoy the silly, fun diversions, but believe and find yourself reflected in the truth of the Bible.
On The Fight Club
The blogmeister of Mysterium Crucis has an admittedly not very Nietzschean, but vastly entertaining and insightful series of observations on The Fight Club. I have to say, very frankly, that I enjoyed this film tremendously, even while finding what it had to say somewhat disconcerting. The blogmeister's interpretation of events int he tale differs markedly from my own--he sees the primary theme as fatherlessness--I see it as addiction and obsession/compulsion. In fact, the entire film is a paean to OCD (and I'm not talking about the sister branch of my own O.Carm.). The entire film centers around compulsion and a reckless nihilism that supposedly ultimately gives meaning to life. The ultimately destrcutive activity of the main character is finally revealed to be self-destructive, and the final scene basically gives us a "Waiting for Godot" kind of climactic frisson of meaning that is ultimately meaningless. This is Becket for the Space age--nothing has meaning except violence which is shown to have no meaning because it is ultimately self directed.
What is fascinating about the film is the way it contradicts and undermines itself resulting in both a possible nihilistic interpretation, or a very profoundly moral vision which shows that the ultimate end of all violence is toward the destruction of the perpetrator--it annhilates understanding, meaning, and interpretation.
The Fight Club is ultimately a vision of the abyss that does not really understand WHAT the abyss is or where it is to be found.
Well, there's another thought about it. I do recommend, however, that you see what Mysterium Crucis has to say about it.
Happy New Year
A bit early, but if I'm up, I don't plan to be blogging. May your new year be blessed with a fuller knowledge and far greater love of our Lord and God. Thank you all for stopping in as often as you do.
St. John of the Cross
For my Carmelite Community I have written a brief study guide for reading the very first part of the Ascent of Mount Carmel. The process of preparing the guide was simple enough, but it is amazing what you learn when you open your mind and heart. Now the problem is to maintain this open posture. How does one open oneself consistently to God's action. Well, that is part of what St. John of the Cross teaches in his major works.
As we have spoken before of spiritual reading, it is interesting to note here that while I cannot claim always to have understood St. John of the Cross, his language and his stance appealed to me. I have longer for what he describes. Similarly, I now long for a spiritual director who is not afraid to direct. These must be the rarest of the rare. I know that others out there have such directors as I have read reports from them of their directors. Unfortunately, I have yet to find one. One person I visited seemed to spend much of her spiritual life in the hinterlands of the New Age movement--she wanted to walk labyrinths and do enneagrams. I don't know whether or not these things are bad in themselves, but they certainly didn't strike me as the Christ-centered direction I wanted to take. I've had other "directors" who largely talked about the Church and the state of the world and the current crisis (whatever it may have been at the time). Better no director than such as these--while their talk is undoubtedly elevating, interesting, and enlightening, it doesn't function much as direction. One director I visited spent all of the time talking about Our Lady of Mudjegorje (please forgive any misspelling). Devotion to Our Lady under any of her titles is a commendable thing, but again, I didn't really want to hear about listening to visionaries, particularly if we weren't going to get around to prayer. This director would probably be enormously helpful to others more attuned to the message that meant so much to him; unfortunately, I was not that individual.
Father Dubay emphasizes the incredible importance of finding a competent spiritual director to help the beginner along the path to proficiency. In section four of the prologue, St. John of the Cross writes:
Ascent of Mount Carmel Prologue 4 St. John of the Cross Some spiritual fathers are likely to be a hindrance and harm rather than a help to these souls that journey on the road. Such directors have neither understanding nor experience of these ways. They are like the builders of the tower of Babel. When these builders were supppoed to provide the proper materials for the project they brought entirely different supplies because they failed to understand the language. And thus nothing was accomplished. Hence, it is arduous and difficult for a soul in these periods of the spiritual life when it cannot understand itself or find anyone else who understands it.
It seems that above all, one must exercise caution in whom one asks to be a director.
Alexander Schmemann--Found Via Surfing
First the site and then the prayer:
Thank You, O Lord! Alexander SchmemannEveryone capable of thanksgiving is capable of salvation and eternal joy.
Thank You, O Lord, for having accepted this Eucharist, which we offered to the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and which filled our hearts with the joy, peace and righteousness of the Holy Spirit.
Thank You, O Lord, for having revealed Yourself unto us and given us the foretaste of Your Kingdom.
Thank You, O Lord, for having united us to one another in serving You and Your Holy Church.
Thank You, O Lord, for having helped us to overcome all difficulties, tensions, passions, temptations and restored peace, mutual love and joy in sharing the communion of the Holy Spirit.
Thank You, O Lord, for the sufferings You bestowed upon us, for they are purifying us from selfishness and reminding us of the "one thing needed;" Your eternal Kingdom.
Thank You, O Lord, for having given us this country where we are free to Worship You.
Thank You, O Lord, for this school, where the name of God is proclaimed.
Thank You, O Lord, for our families: husbands, wives and, especially, children who teach us how to celebrate Your holy Name in joy, movement and holy noise.
Thank You, O Lord, for everyone and everything.
Great are You, O Lord, and marvelous are Your deeds, and no word is sufficient to celebrate Your miracles.
Lord, it is good to be here! Amen.
in The Orthodox Church, Vol. 20, No. 2, February 1984, p. 1:1
A Rare and Wonderful Delight--The Diary of Samuel Pepys
For fans of the seventeenth Century, someone is putting up an annotated entry from Samuel Pepys's diary for each day of 2003! Huzzah! (Found via Ms. Welborn's blog). The annotations include the original footnotes from the paper edition, a list of "people in the diary" and of "Places in the diary" and annotations added by others on such points as might be obscure to modern readers. The one "Place" entry thus far has a superb map to identify the location of the place--Axe Yard. This promises to be almost as wonderful as my superbly annotated Thucydides of three or four years ago.
Request for Your Contributions
Continuing to think and write about Spiritual Reading, I'd like to compile a list of A-1 Moderns. Many will note that in my previouslist there are few figures of the Twentieth Century and almost none from the latter half. I know that sometimes works must be tried by time in order for their efficacy to be tested. However, I also know that there are probably a great many writers of recent days that I am missing out on because of my own ignorance.
I will start with a modest contribution, but one that has radically altered the way that I have perceived the world--Fr. Thomas Dubay. I find his works highly intellectual and supremely spiritual. You cannot hurry through them, or, if you do, you have not really read them. I have benefited from every work of his that I have read because of his seemingly endless knowledge of spiritual direction and profound aspects of prayer life. This is the man I would choose (if possible) as a director.
I am also very fond of Thomas Merton and Anthony DeMello. But because of warnings issued on the latter, hesitate to recommend him. I know whereof the Vatican was speaking and the reason for the warning, but I did not find that DeMello's eastern influences unduly disorienting. There are also a great many Merton detractors out there, largely for the same reason as DeMello--many argue that his later work was corrupted by Asian influences--and it may well be true, but I never see him turning to the nothingness of the Zen Buddhists with whom he corresponded. I have not read all of his later works, so this may be true. But the power and the faithfulness of The Seven Storey Mountain The Sign of Jonas and many other earlier works certainly must be considered when looking at Merton--should they not?
One person recommended Sister Faustina, who still doesn't quite make it into the second half of the century. I believe Dylan Recommended Carlo Carretto, an excerpt of whose work he has blogged today. I can't find his original list on his site, so I'll go back and look through the archives here to see what other suggestions emerged.
But I'd really like to here from all of you about life-changing spiritual works of the late Twentieth Century.
Oh, and for you Carmelites out there (or the Carmelitically inclined) Pere Marie-Eugène of the Child Jesus--I Want to See God, I Am a Daughter of the Church and Under the Torrent of His Love.
For those better acquainted with their works: what about Balthasar, Lubac, Speyr, Hildebrandt, Gilson? Are these all deep philosophical tracts or is there something an ordinary person can read and carry away with him? Garrigou-Lagrange? Early Rahner? Haring? Are any of these works worthwhile. Vann? (I've read a bit, and recommend what I've read, but I have no great acquaintance with his work).
I guess I'm asking for opinions about the great spiritual masters of the Late 20th and Early 21st centuries.
Keating? Green (again, I've liked what I have read, but thought that it might be rough-going for a great many)? Please name them, and a key work in spirituality, spiritual direction, and I'll try to compile a reasonable list.
Guidelines for Joy
Dylan calls them rules for living, but his lovely post strikes me more as guidelines for consistent, growing, wonderful joy. Read them and incorporate the spirit of them if not the actual rules. His important point, the final line, I would elaborate on by truncation: "Cultivate gratitude." A wise Jesuit Priest was fond of saying (and I believe it to be true) that a truly grateful person cannot be unhappy. This makes sense to me. If you are thankful for everything, there is no time to be miserable. It explains the "paradox" of the "happy poor." Thank for the reminder Dylan.
On Mistry's Family Matters
Okay, because it was due at the Library and could not be renewed, I blitzed (well, actually crawled) through Rohinton Mistry's marvelous new work, Family Matters. There are points in the book with which I must disagree, if the author truly supports the contentions of his characters; however, here are some varied insights from the remarkable work.
from Family Matters Rohinton Mistry Sometimes when Mr. Kapur spoke about 1947 and Partition, Yezad felt that Punjabi migrants of a certain age were like Indian authors writing about that period, whether in realist novels of corpse-filled trains or in the magic-realist midnight muddles, all repeating the same catalogue of horrors about slaughter and burning, rape and mutilation. . . (p. 130)"This beautiful city of seven islands, this jewel by the Arabian Sea, this reclaimed land, this ocean gift transformed into ground beneath our feet, this enigma of cosmopolitanism where races and religions live side by side and cheek by jowl in peace and harmony, this diamond of diversity, this generous goddess who embraces the poor and the hungry huddled masses, this Urbs Prima in Indis, this dear, dear, city now languished--I don't exaggerate--like a patient in intensive care, Yezad, my friend, put there by small, selfish men who would destroy it because their coarseness cannot bear something so grand, so fine. (p. 138)
*****
Would he, he wondered? What folly made young people, even those in middle age, think they were immortal? How much better, their lives, if they could remember the end. Carrying your death with you every day would make it hard to waste time on unkindness and anger and bitterness, on anything petty. That was the secret: remembering our dying time in order to keep the stupid and ugly out of your living time. (p. 310)
One must have a certain amount of respect for an author who can deliver such a magnificent off-hand slam against Salman Rushdie and his much lauded, nearly unreadable opus.
If I were to fault Mr. Mistry for one thing, it would be that he assumes too much acquaintance with Parsi ritual, food, and life. Parsi is the Indian, and perhaps larger modern name for Zarathustrians, the name by which what we might term Zoroastrians may prefer to be known. Sometimes there are insufficient hints of what is going on for it to be clear. For example, one must go outside the book to discover what the "Towers of Silence" are and what is involved in a Parsi funeral and burial. Almost none of the food is described, and that puts one at a distance.
But if he has a virtue as a writer, it is his humanity. There is no one in the book who is utterly deplorable. People do awful things to one another, but you find it hard to dislike any of them.
I compare this book to another in which one of the central figures has Parkinsons--Jonathan Franzen's The Corrections. In Franzen's book the family is largely dysfunctional (as it is in Mistry's). There is not a single likable character in Franzen's book--they are all cases of immature arrested emotional development (which judging from the author's reaction to Ms. Winfrey's handing to him of several million dollars by her recommendation, might characterize the author himself). In Mistry's book every character is human, if not likeable. Even those you are inclined to dislike, you come to understand in the course of the novel and you have genuine compassion for the situations in which they find themselves.
This family struggles against things that we in the comfortable nations of the west can only begin to imagine. For example, they cannot afford the medications for their father's Parkinsons without themselves having to eat little but onions and potatoes. Mr. Mistry does a superb job of making your aware of what life-on-the-edge means--how uncertain everything is. I cannot make this more clear except by spoiling the novel for those who have not read it, so I instead encourage everyone to read it and begin to understand what it means to be part of the impoverished in underdeveloped countries.
As with A Fine Balance I left the book uplifted and with a clear vision of some of the things that infiltrate and affect the lives of all families. A beautiful, humane, and ultimately kind book--very highly recommended.
St. Thomas Aquinas, redux
A superb post and exposition of the Summa and its virtues from the blogmeister of Minute Particulars. He will hear no disagreement here. As I have said before, I will be among the very first to acknowledge the greatness of St. Thomas Aquinas. He is a gift to the Church and to all of us, and everyone should read some of St. Thomas. Whether that "some" should include the great Summa, or even its cousin, is up to the discernment of the individual and his or her spiritual advisor. But the greatness of the work, the profound impact it had on philosophy, and indeed on its times--one might look upon the Summa as the true beginning of modern ways of thinking, cannot be denied. In fact much of the history of ideas post Summa is a reaction to it and to the "scholastic" thought which it supposedly inspired. (Scholastics are in no way the fault of St. Thomas Aquinas and it is unjust to attribute the worst of the excesses of that school to the Great St. Thomas).
Anyway, please go and enjoy. As always, the commentary at Minute Particulars is incisive and insightful, balanced, just, and truly Christian. Please, if you are following this thread, this commentary is one to read.
More on Spiritual Reading
I really like much that is said at The 7 Habitus, for example:
In any case, at various times, I have tried to read both Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross, without much success. I have to admit I can’t make heads or tails out of St. John and reading St. Teresa brings it’s own problems for me. First, there is the guilt that I feel for being such a spiritual slug in the face of such holiness. Then, there is the heightened tendency to selfish introspection (“Let’s see, am I in the first mansion or can I claim to have progressed to the second mansion?” And “Will I ever be able to make it to the third mansion?”) that is not at all healthy. I view this inability to read these two great saints as a grave personal shortcoming, but there it is.
It so amply demonstrates my point re: St. Thomas Aquinas. I, for one, do not see this a grave shortcoming--I see it as a manifestation of God's grace. Jesus told us "My Father's house has many mentions." God doesn't want to put us all into a cookie press and squeeze out identical cookies--rather, we are gingerbread people, each exactly equal in His eyes, but carefully, deliberately decorated with grace--some of us like chocolate, others (yes, I gasped when I discovered this reality) do not.
I do believe that St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila present insuperable difficulties to a great many people, even to Carmelites. That is why my Carmelite group is reading St. John of the Cross together. Forty minds puzzling away with guidance and help are far more likely to come to some comprehension of the work than a single mind on its own. But, being confused and led astray by entry into these wilds is not a personal shortcoming--it is rather a sign of God's particular will for us. For example, I have a personal distaste for many of the legends that surround St. Francis of Assisi. I can't tell where the truth is in that bramble, and so, rather than denigrate the Saint and many of his followers, I conclude that I have absolutely no inclination toward Franciscan Spirituality--it is confusing to me. This isn't a shortcoming, but a clear signpost that God has granted that says simply--don't go here--it is not, for whatever reason, for you.
That is why I don't see that my impression of St. Thomas Aquinas is particularly deleterious. There are those who are called to him, and others who are warned away.
And here is another important point, which if I read correctly, confirms and supports all that is said above:
So there are saints that we might have great difficulty reading or might never be able to read and appreciate, depending on our spirituality. But you see, we don’t have to read St. Teresa, we don’t have to read St. Thomas, and we don’t have to read St. Francis to be good and faithful Catholics and Christians. We can understand that they all have something to teach us about the truth of our faith, and they have given the Church the great legacy of their individual wisdom, but not all of us will be able to read all of them with the same benefit. Each of us is different and drawn to God in a certain way and it is important for each of us to try to discover that way and do our best to grow within it.
Absolutely true! In fact, for some of us, as I said, we may be warned away from some of these. And it may be that with time we grow into approaching them. For the longest time, the prose of St. Louis De Montfort, the seeming excesses he describes, and just his mode of expression was so utterly aliment to me that I couldn't read more than a sentence or two without revulsion--yes, very strong reaction, but remember I had a long road to walk from being a Baptist to acknowledging any sort of Marian Devotion. However, with time, God led me to a place where I not only see the value of St. Louis, but I recommend him highly to those trying to learn more about devotion to Mary.
So--spiritual reading, as with all things in the spiritual life, is a matter of careful discernment. One does not plunge willy-nilly into anything and everything. In fact, often reading can be used as a substitute for the more important matter of prayer. We become attached (to use St. John's terminology) to spiritual reading, and thus what can be a very good thing becomes a barrier in the way of God's grace for us. Anything to which we become attached--blogdom, books, a certain kind and place of devotion, a certain church--literally anything that we are not willing to let go with joy, becomes a roadblock on the way to God. These seemingly minor things serve as well as great sins to keep us from approaching God. After all God is the All in All, to want anything less is to completely miss the point. Spiritual Reading should not become a way to sidestep correct prayer and contemplation of God. Spiritual Reading should always lead us TO Christ, not just BY Him.
Books in Progress
A list, to be updated intermittantly as the thought and fancy take me:
-Ron Hansen Hitler's Niece
-Rohinton Mistry Family Matters Mr. Mistry is rapidly becoming my favorite modern author. I look forward to every new work with great eagerness.
-Donna Tartt The Little Friend
-Isabel Allende Daughter of Fortune, Eva Luna
-Nathaniel Hawthorne House of the Seven Gables
-Thomas Dubay Seeking Spiritual DirectionThough I hate the subtitle that uses an incorrect mood of the verb "to grow" common in New Age neologisms
-St. John of the Cross Ascent of Mount Carmel
-J. R. R. Tolkien Fellowship of the Ring
-G.K. Chesterton Heretics
-Joseph Pearce Wisdom and Innocence
Upcoming on the list
-Paul Claudel
-Josef Pieper
-Gertrude Himmelfarb
-Elizabeth Fox-Genovese
This is an ASYC (as if you care) entry to my blog. But perhaps it will be something interesting for me to look back upon in my blog.
-
Mr. Moffat's Comments Redux
Mr. Moffat has asked me to call him Ron, and therefore I shall from henceforth, except for my titles, etc. However, he has delivered as promised a thoughtful and thought-provoking response to an ongoing discussion--nearly all of which I agree with. Most particularly I liked:
First, I too, do not consider St. Thomas “spiritual” reading, at least in the sense that I would look, say, to the Summa Theologica as a source of inspiration for prayer or meditation. I would be much more likely to look to Scripture or something from another saint, for example, St. Francis or St. Francis de Sales or St. Augustine, or any number of other saints or spiritual writers. St. Thomas is not what I would call “spiritual” reading. But, St. Thomas, even with his 13th century knowledge of science and technology, has a great deal to say to us today concerning the nature of man and his relationship to God. These things do not change over time; truth is not a function of time. This is why I would, and do try to read St. Thomas at least from time to time.
With which I agree for the most part--although as I delineated in a previous post, I have a broad view of what constitutes "Spiritual Reading," and so I probably do think the Summa falls within that realm, although I have a lot of sympathies with the viewpoint expressed here.
I think he has largely restated what I have intended in almost every particular. I do not think we differ so much--however, I am perhaps just a bit more timid, but take refuge in another clause: "As I have said in other posts, to seek the truth is to seek Christ, to deny truth is to deny Christ. To the extent that there is truth in St. Thomas, and to the extent that we are able and so inclined, we should read St. Thomas. " Able and inclined--perhaps part of my reaction is that I am not so inclined--that lack of inclination the blossom on the flower of pride as it were--better to pinch off the sick rose and save the plant, than to allow that bloom to open and poison the entire plant and the atmosphere around it with its sickly stench--for that is where pride will lead.
One other point of mild demurral--I do not think St. Thomas is necessarily the best place to seek the truth about humankind. While he did dissect and lay open much--there are other sources (most notably the Bible itself) that tells us much, if not all, that we really need to know of humankind. St. Thomas did not so much discover much new in the truth, as lay open for us what was already clearly present. In a sense St. Thomas's work is a demonstration and proof of the concept of "development of doctrine." And St. Thomas himself with his final words on writing makes clear the recognition that his contribution was not in the realm of innovation so much as it was in the realm of explication.
These small points aside, Mr. Moffat and I agree in words that differ. I read nothing there that was either antagonistic nor even largely at odds with what I believe and, I hope, have expressed if at too much length.
On Kubrick and Cinema
Transcript of an exceedingly long comment Chez Dylan, revised for commercial blogdom here:
Kubrick has the famed attraction of the cobra that supposedly hypnotizes its potential victims before striking.Some Kubrick movies I like, a lot--Paths of Glory, Spartacus, A Clockwork Orange, 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Shining, The first half of Full Metal Jacket. Others I find either unwatchable or just uninteresting--Lolita (objectionable, and I thought the same of its literary progenitor. I don't care what the reason the subject is deplorable), Barry Lyndon (dull beyond words), Eyes Wide Shut (a panoply of every one of his perverted obsessions trotted out one after another).
One thing I can say for all of them--they fail to inspire any emotion at all, except perhaps horror. I do not laugh at "Strangelove" though I know some who do. I am not worried or engaged by Cruise in "Eyes Wide Shut," Alex and his droogs largely leave me terrifyingly cold. Kubrick did not inhabit a normal emotional space--his points of confluence with normal emotional life as represented by his films are few and far between.
I don't know whether I would call him Nietzschean or simply sociopathic/misanthropist. He mocks everything because he values nothing and he values nothing because he is locked out of converse with the normal world. Even Hollywood threw him out, and given whom they have embraced, it's hard to figure what has driven them.
There are modern-day Capras. The director of a small film titled "The Spitfire Grill." There are other warm and engaging moments in Cinema--but they are admittedly intermittent and often decried by Hollywierd as they do not tend to make money.
Oh well, too much and too long. Suffice to say, largely in agreement--although I do see some profound merits in some of Kubrick's statements. The warnings of Spartacus and A Clockwork Orange are salutary reminders of where we head when we are in charge. I think of Kubrick as a cinematic T.H. White whose most remarkable statement concerning humanity I find true--90% are sheep, 9% are blackguards, and the 1% fit to lead know better. After all, we're talking the race that gave you the Crucifixion, Leopold X of Belgium, Armenia, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Bosnia, Kosovo, Rwanda, and apparently blooming elsewhere in Africa--Ivory Coast, and Nigeria. If that is all that you look at, Kubrick's films begin to make a whole lot more sense. A man driven by despair is unlikely to see much of redemption.