Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Meet our spiritual director: Father Paul H. Dumais
Father Paul H. Dumais, a priest of the Diocese of Portland, is presently assigned to Saint Joseph's College of Maine as chaplain. Fr. Paul completed a Master of Arts in Philosophy at Boston College in 2001 while at St. John’s Seminary in Brighton, Massachusetts, where he earned a Master of Divinity and a Master of Arts in Theology. He was ordained as a priest in 2004 by The Most Rev. Richard Malone.
On Work and Leisure
Dr. Krom delivered the opening lecture of the 2007 program and recently had it published in Homiletic and Pastoral Review (July 2008). This essay serves as an introduction to the overall theme of instilling a sense of the richness of a Catholic life; a life grounded in prayer, rooted in divine leisure, and blossoming into good works that manifest Our Lord's sacrificial love.
1) The Worker
2) The Three Characteristics of the Worker
[1] Augustine, Confessions 11.14.17.
[2] See ibid., 10.31. In 10.31-34 St. Augustine works through the temptations of the sense under the heading of “lust of the flesh.”
[3] Gaudium et Spes 24.3.
[4] CCC 356.
[5] Josef Pieper, Leisure, the Basis of Culture, tran. Gerald Malsbary (South Bend, Ind.: St. Augustine’s Press, 1998), 29.
[6] See ibid., 29-30.
[7] Ibid., 27.
[8] Ibid., 24.
[9] Ibid., 29.
[10] Ibid., 24.
[11] Mt. 5:16.
[12] Ps. 65:11.
[13] Pieper, 60.
[14] I would like to thank the participants at the 2007 Sophia Institute Summer Program held at the Perron Family farm in Sumter, ME, for providing the occasion for the original drafting of this essay. Special thanks go to Fr. Paul Dumais for allowing me to deliver this as the opening lecture of the program. In addition, I thank the members of my ethics courses in the Fall of 2007 for their leisurely patience with me when asked to read an earlier version of this. They rose to the occasion and provided helpful criticism; special thanks go to Br. Nathanael Polinski, O.S.B.
Working Toward Leisure: A Criticism of a Most Modern Malaise
In his Confessions, St. Augustine asks himself ‘What is time?’ Before proceeding to investigate this most central aspect of Creation, he observes that “if no one asks me, I know; if I want to explain it to someone who asks me, I do not know.”[1] This is a great example of what is entailed in the quest for Truth, for the lover of Wisdom challenges him- or herself and others to think reflectively upon ordinary aspects of human life whose reality we take for granted. We all “know” what justice is and assume its existence in that we cannot help but demand that we receive what is ours and are angered when we are wronged; we all know the feeling of having been wronged by another and naturally cry out “that’s unfair!” at a perceived injustice. However, when we read one of Plato’s dialogues and see Socrates’ interlocutors frustrated in their attempts to define justice, we come to realize that our “knowledge” is only partial, that our ignorance lies just beneath the surface. The aim of the Socratic gadfly is to foster wonder and kindle the desire to know; the awareness of our ignorance should be an occasion for thought and lead us to pursue wisdom ever more ardently.
Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God . . . . And they [who were invited to eat this bread] began all at once to make excuse.
~Luke 14:15-18
In his Confessions, St. Augustine asks himself ‘What is time?’ Before proceeding to investigate this most central aspect of Creation, he observes that “if no one asks me, I know; if I want to explain it to someone who asks me, I do not know.”[1] This is a great example of what is entailed in the quest for Truth, for the lover of Wisdom challenges him- or herself and others to think reflectively upon ordinary aspects of human life whose reality we take for granted. We all “know” what justice is and assume its existence in that we cannot help but demand that we receive what is ours and are angered when we are wronged; we all know the feeling of having been wronged by another and naturally cry out “that’s unfair!” at a perceived injustice. However, when we read one of Plato’s dialogues and see Socrates’ interlocutors frustrated in their attempts to define justice, we come to realize that our “knowledge” is only partial, that our ignorance lies just beneath the surface. The aim of the Socratic gadfly is to foster wonder and kindle the desire to know; the awareness of our ignorance should be an occasion for thought and lead us to pursue wisdom ever more ardently.
Such is the effect of reading Josef Pieper’s Leisure, the Basis of Culture upon the honest reader. We all “know” what leisure is . . . until Pieper boldly claims that one can have free time and yet be incapable of leisure: are leisure and free time two different things? When we hear the word leisure, do we not conjure up images of Friday night amusements with our friends? Of listening to music or playing sports? Of watching TV as we unwind at the end of a busy day? These may occupy us in our free time, but Pieper challenges us to consider whether they constitute leisure. Leisure, as it turns out, may have a deeper and more central connection to who we are than is suggested by innocent frivolities and recreational activities.
What follows is not so much a defense of Pieper’s ideas (although I happen to think Pieper is profoundly right) as an invitation for us to consider his meaning with a sympathetic ear. This is important because we are prone to misunderstand and wrongly attack people’s positions when we have not attempted to interpret them with the principle of charity. For example, when St. Augustine tells us that we should never eat food except in the way we take our medicine, that eating food because it tastes good rather than because it nourishes us is a sin, we cannot help put accuse him of a puritanical spirit that rejects the goodness of God’s gift of the fruits of the earth to man.[2] However, let us remember that St. Augustine thinks of his relationship with God as a love affair whose joys and pleasures surpass anything physical delight could provide; for St. Augustine, focusing on the fleeting pleasures of food over the unchanging love of God would be like a man enjoying a romantic dinner by delighting in the food rather than his beloved wife. Such a man denies to his wife the attention and care that she deserves and, ultimately, robs himself of true happiness. Even if we may think St. Augustine goes too far in his condemnation of physical pleasures, for surely the pleasant food could enhance the romance felt between husband and wife, nonetheless a sympathetic and charitable reader is open to initially surprising or even seemingly wrongheaded views.
The way I have chosen to open us up to the possible verity of Pieper’s claims concerning leisure is to paint for us a picture of the “Worker” who Pieper has in mind; the Worker will turn out to be a likeable and familiar character (at least to me). He works hard, sacrifices for his goals as well as for others, and is generally well-intentioned. However, in the process of laying bare his character, we will see that he suffers from a serious flaw that prevents him from being that which God intends: a creature “that God has willed for its own sake”[3] who “is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life.”[4] He is called to God’s heavenly banquet and yet is too busy to attend, for there is always work to be done. This essay consists of three parts: first, I will give a brief background of our Worker with an example of his inability to be at leisure despite possessing free time; second, I will use the three characteristics of the Worker outlined in the third chapter of Leisure, the Basis of Culture as a means to explain why the Worker has free time but no leisure; third, I will conclude by discussing what we as individuals and as a society need in order to avoid becoming Workers.
1) The Worker
The Worker can occupy any socioeconomic class, for this phenomenon can be found just as much among the rich as it is among the poor. I have chosen the example of an upper-middle class individual: he has enough to be comfortable and yet needs to work hard to maintain this state. After providing a brief biography, I will discuss his relationship to his family and his lack of leisure.
Our Worker was born into a middle class family; his parents could always ensure that there was a roof over his head, food on the table, clothes on his back, and medicine when he was not well. And yet he often went without: he was never without necessities, but often went without luxuries. When he played little league baseball, he was the one with the old, second or third generation equipment, while the popular kids had the $200 gloves and brand new bats. At school, his clothes were neat and clean, but not caught up with the latest fashions; and when he went out with his friends, he found his wallet empty when others had only begun to spend. Although his parents cared about his happiness and even insured that he attended church as well as was told about the Gospel message to seek treasures that rust not, they never ensured that this informed his daily life; they were too busy to talk about such intimate life lessons and over time he formed his opinions about happiness out of envy for the goods others enjoyed.
When he went off to college, our Worker told himself that he was going to “make it,” that he was going to be better off than his parents and be able to afford all those things denied to him at home. He happened to be good at math (though it in no way interested him) and he had been told by his high school counselor that engineers make a good salary without having to spend too many years in school. One of his friends was in chemical engineering, and although electrical engineering was more interesting to him, he wanted to hang out with his friend and, besides, the class wasn’t at 8 am! Finally, as it turned out he met his future wife in the class and everything seemed to work out for him.
When he went off to college, our Worker told himself that he was going to “make it,” that he was going to be better off than his parents and be able to afford all those things denied to him at home. He happened to be good at math (though it in no way interested him) and he had been told by his high school counselor that engineers make a good salary without having to spend too many years in school. One of his friends was in chemical engineering, and although electrical engineering was more interesting to him, he wanted to hang out with his friend and, besides, the class wasn’t at 8 am! Finally, as it turned out he met his future wife in the class and everything seemed to work out for him.
Let us move forward about 15 years in the Worker’s life. Our Worker now has a stable and relatively high-paying job in a lab working for a major research company; while he does not have everything that he could want, he and his family rarely need to deny themselves the luxuries that they desire. Further, he is insured of many raises in the coming years just by sticking with his work; while he finds what he does dull and monotonous, the money is good. Lest we think of him as frivolous and consumed by the pursuit of luxury, let us bear in mind that most of his money goes toward providing for his family. He is a decent man and the luxuries his money produces are such things as top-notch private schools, sports equipment, spending money for the kids, and family vacations. His great joy is not in bigger and faster cars for himself, but in ensuring that his kids do not go without. He takes his family to church every Sunday, although this is more for social reasons and the lessons he wants his kids to learn are vague notions such as being “good” or “helpful” to others. Let us complete our picture of the Worker with the family vacation; here we will see the free time that his paycheck affords, but the leisure that his mentality denies.
Our Worker has been working overtime for the last three months straight, and his wife keeps begging him to spend time with the family. She loves him dearly (as he does her) and keeps telling him that they have enough money but not enough time together. While he is apprehensive and fears what taking a break will do to his career and investment portfolio, he decides to take his family to the mountains for a much-needed Spring Break vacation. He is excited about the vacation for he had always loved hiking, camping, and fishing, and he feels as much as his wife that some free time would be nice. Unfortunately, as it turns out the Worker’s mind will not let him leave the lab.
On the first night he rushes through dinner and is thinking the whole time about those last few details from work that he needs to sort out. The conversation is about what they are going to do over the course of the week, and yet his mind is on the Monday following and the work he needs to do to be prepared. He rushes to get the kids in bed rather than go stargazing or play board games because he needs to put an hour or two in before bed. As it turns out, that hour or two turns into four and he wakes up exhausted the next day.
First thing in the morning his children are excited about the prospects of going hiking after breakfast. While our Worker wishes he could put just a little work in before lunch, he concedes and takes them to a beautiful summit where they can soak in the vistas and the warmth of the sun’s rays. As much as he enjoys himself on the hike, once again his mind turns to work and he remembers that he needed to discuss the upcoming project with a colleague at work. Once they get to the summit, he quickly glances at the view and gives the obligatory exclamations of wonder and joy for the sake of his kids, but immediately gets on his cell phone (that infernal destroyer of leisure!) and spends the next half hour or so on the phone while his wife and kids are snacking. He apologizes to his wife, who tries to understand and yet cannot help but wish she could throw the phone off the cliff! In short, the entire vacation goes by without our Worker ever leaving the lab.
Hopefully this portrait helps us to see what Pieper means: our Worker clearly has free time, and could have even more if he was willing to settle for less money, and yet he has rendered himself incapable of leisure. He works so that he can have money, he has money so that he can provide his family with luxuries, he provides his family with luxuries so that they can . . . have luxuries? What he and his family needs in order to enjoy one another and find the happiness they desire is to spend time together; his wife and children need his love and affection. He knows this and yet he thinks these will come once he has enough money in the bank. Our Worker cannot heed God’s call to be at leisure.
2) The Three Characteristics of the Worker
In order to uncover the reasons why our Worker lacks leisure, let us turn to the third chapter of Leisure, the Basis of Culture; here Pieper brings together the results from the previous chapters and, in exploring the nature of the Worker, simultaneously outlines the nature of leisure. Leisure turns out to be 1) the opposite of acedia (‘sloth’ or ‘idleness’); 2) consenting to man’s true nature in a celebratory spirit; and 3) perpendicular to the world of work. Let us explore these by laying out the characteristics of the Worker.
The Worker is characterized firstly as one whose whole life focuses on the development of “the industrious spirit of the daily effort to make a living.”[5] As Pieper explains, the Worker cannot help but think of rest from work as laziness, or even worse, as idleness. One could say that this is a secularized form of the Protestant work ethic: one must be working in order to possess moral value as an individual. This is a gross misunderstanding of what it means to be idle; the vice of idleness (acedia in the Latin) is not refusing to work, but refusing to love Our Lord and His gift of life. As Pieper explains, according to St. Thomas Aquinas idleness is a violation of the Third Commandment, for the idle person is incapable of observing the “holy rest” of the Sabbath.[6] Leisure, which is the true contrary of idleness, consists in affirming our very existence as a gift from God. The Worker is ever-working, ever-in-motion, and yet he is not “at one with himself.”[7] All his work is in vain, for when he goes to enjoy the fruits of his labor by taking a family vacation, though his body is in the mountains his spirit remains tethered to the lab.
Second, the Worker stands in “readiness to suffer in vacuo unrelated to anything;”[8] life is work and work is meaningless toil. Instead of consenting to the gift of life by responding to God’s ever-fervent call to know Him, our Worker fills the void that can only be filled by God with work. So long as he is working, he feels himself justified. Not that he lives for himself – he is not a selfish man – yet he sacrifices by working harder without ever asking what the point of his sacrificial work might be. By contrast, the man at leisure responds to his social role by filling it with celebration; he “consents to his own true nature and abides in concord with the meaning of the universe.”[9] As Pieper goes on to say, leisure is at root festival, or man’s free offering of the fruits of his toil and of his very self to His Maker. Even further, the purest and highest feast takes place when man accepts God’s sacrificial offering of Himself in the Eucharist.
Third and finally, the Worker demands of all his actions that they are “complete[ly] absor[bed] in the social organism.”[10] Even when he takes a break, he demands that relaxation serve the purposes of the state – the refreshed man is a better worker. While we should be thankful that we are exempted from 15 minutes out of every four hours of work, this still stands in the world of work. A break makes us better at working, not better at being at leisure. Pieper provides us with a nice mathematical image: leisure “runs at right angles to work . . . [and] cuts across it, vertically” (30). Life as work provides us with a horizontal horizon; the infinite limits of the world of work provide no meaning but only one pointless event after another; like TV sitcoms, in such a world there are episodes but no narratives. The man at leisure, on the other hand, understands why the Gothic cathedral stands so vertically: the loftiness of its spires calls to mind the soaring heights to which we can ascend by abiding in God’s salvific embrace. Leisure elevates us above work and allows us to take part in the divine life to which we are called.
3) The Work of Leisure
As odd as it initially seemed, we now understand why Pieper says that leisure does not necessarily coincide with free time. Paradoxically, leisure is something that we must “work” for. How can we be at leisure? Further, how can we help society keep at bay the tendency toward producing Workers? I will conclude with some thoughts on this vexing challenge.
I consider myself a recovering Worker; now that I have left behind the joyous days of being a career student, and now that I am trying to maintain my position as a professor while helping to raise three children, I know what it is like to become a Worker. While the outline of our model worker was not autobiographical, I could describe him so vividly because I have felt and thought as he does. I do not have a particularly strong proclivity toward material goods, nor did I pursue my line of work because I thought it would provide me with material comforts (anybody who pursues philosophy for the money has not thought things through!). However, as a husband and father I have experienced the sleepless nights and worry-filled mind that only the most steadfast in faith can avoid. I see in myself the tendency to combat this by working more and more rather than by trusting in God’s providence. This is an all-too human response to the need for security, and the only solution is rising above work by accepting God’s ready embrace. We can all become Workers, and only a solid spiritual life will suffice in overcoming the temptation to solve material woes with material solutions.
I consider myself a recovering Worker; now that I have left behind the joyous days of being a career student, and now that I am trying to maintain my position as a professor while helping to raise three children, I know what it is like to become a Worker. While the outline of our model worker was not autobiographical, I could describe him so vividly because I have felt and thought as he does. I do not have a particularly strong proclivity toward material goods, nor did I pursue my line of work because I thought it would provide me with material comforts (anybody who pursues philosophy for the money has not thought things through!). However, as a husband and father I have experienced the sleepless nights and worry-filled mind that only the most steadfast in faith can avoid. I see in myself the tendency to combat this by working more and more rather than by trusting in God’s providence. This is an all-too human response to the need for security, and the only solution is rising above work by accepting God’s ready embrace. We can all become Workers, and only a solid spiritual life will suffice in overcoming the temptation to solve material woes with material solutions.
Knowing this, what can we do for society? Once again, the solution is not activism; demanding more free time from employers and governments is arguably necessary but certainly not sufficient, for free time does not help us to rise above the mentality of the Worker. We ourselves must be at leisure and let our “light shine before men.”[11] The man at leisure is a witness merely by being a steady boat in stormy waters, just as the Church’s sacramental life is a barque in the midst of a flood. To speak more concretely, what we are doing here, now, and for the remainder of our lives, is training ourselves to be at leisure. If we do so, we will go out into the world with the armor of Christ, and our battle will be to change the minds and hearts of others by giving them a glimmer of the new life that is in those who have accepted His call to “have leisure and know that . . . [He is] God.”[12] This inward and silent witness is and ought to be the response to a world that loves to work but cannot answer why it does so.
Work is directed toward celebration, and at root the festive spirit is made possible through the Eucharistic banquet. As Pieper says, the stillness of the man who is withdrawn from the outward exertion that characterizes the Worker is precisely he who can appreciate the “sacramental visibility” that the Incarnation makes possible.[13] Delighting in the presence of the Lord begins with the Eucharistic banquet, and it is through this that we can heed His call to join in the Heavenly banquet: we are called to His banquet and yet as Workers we are tempted to “make excuse,” for we are too busy to attend. Let us work toward such leisure, bearing in mind always that the act of Creation itself was consummated by a day of rest.[14]
Michael P. Krom, Ph.D.
Department of Philosophy
St. Vincent College
Latrobe, PA
Department of Philosophy
St. Vincent College
Latrobe, PA
[1] Augustine, Confessions 11.14.17.
[2] See ibid., 10.31. In 10.31-34 St. Augustine works through the temptations of the sense under the heading of “lust of the flesh.”
[3] Gaudium et Spes 24.3.
[4] CCC 356.
[5] Josef Pieper, Leisure, the Basis of Culture, tran. Gerald Malsbary (South Bend, Ind.: St. Augustine’s Press, 1998), 29.
[6] See ibid., 29-30.
[7] Ibid., 27.
[8] Ibid., 24.
[9] Ibid., 29.
[10] Ibid., 24.
[11] Mt. 5:16.
[12] Ps. 65:11.
[13] Pieper, 60.
[14] I would like to thank the participants at the 2007 Sophia Institute Summer Program held at the Perron Family farm in Sumter, ME, for providing the occasion for the original drafting of this essay. Special thanks go to Fr. Paul Dumais for allowing me to deliver this as the opening lecture of the program. In addition, I thank the members of my ethics courses in the Fall of 2007 for their leisurely patience with me when asked to read an earlier version of this. They rose to the occasion and provided helpful criticism; special thanks go to Br. Nathanael Polinski, O.S.B.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Sophia Institute Summer Program: For the Study of Faith and Reason (July 25-29, 2008)
The Sophia Institute Summer Program promises to evoke a sense of wonder as the basis for intellectual, moral and spiritual excellence. Consider joining us for full immersion into Catholic culture in a formative environment for college-age students asking the questions:
This meeting of university students in a retreat-like context introduces young men and women to the rich intellectual and spiritual patrimony of the Catholic Church through conversation about perennial truths. Participants will be reading and reflecting upon some seminal works from the history of Western thought—both Christian and otherwise. The program will benefit those pursuing a wide range of academic studies at a variety of schools.
Thanks to the sponsorship of Saint Joseph College of Maine campus ministry and the hospitality of the Perron family, we will spend a week in a rural setting well suited to our purpose—fostering a sense of wonder inspired by the beauty of creation. The Saint Padre Pio Chapel and Retreat Center is located on a 217 acre farm in the western foothills of Maine only an hour from Augusta in Sumner where we will enjoy leisure on small working farm, family-style meals, folk music, hikes on Speckled and Bald Mountains as well as swimming in the river that winds its way through homestead.
The ideal candidate will be a motivated student who is eager to develop the human and theological virtues characteristic of an authentic Catholic life. We encourage a vigorous exchange of ideas among students who will also benefit from the guidance of tutors in a common reading of texts. Our days will be punctuated with prayer as we participate at Mass, pray the Liturgy of the Hours and take time to be quiet.
What is a good life? What does it mean to be happy? Can the existence of God be proved? How has God revealed Himself to us? What is the relationship between faith and reason, or science and religion? How does one pray? Am I called to live a holy life? What is my life’s vocation? What does an integral Catholic life look like for me?
This meeting of university students in a retreat-like context introduces young men and women to the rich intellectual and spiritual patrimony of the Catholic Church through conversation about perennial truths. Participants will be reading and reflecting upon some seminal works from the history of Western thought—both Christian and otherwise. The program will benefit those pursuing a wide range of academic studies at a variety of schools.
Thanks to the sponsorship of Saint Joseph College of Maine campus ministry and the hospitality of the Perron family, we will spend a week in a rural setting well suited to our purpose—fostering a sense of wonder inspired by the beauty of creation. The Saint Padre Pio Chapel and Retreat Center is located on a 217 acre farm in the western foothills of Maine only an hour from Augusta in Sumner where we will enjoy leisure on small working farm, family-style meals, folk music, hikes on Speckled and Bald Mountains as well as swimming in the river that winds its way through homestead.
The ideal candidate will be a motivated student who is eager to develop the human and theological virtues characteristic of an authentic Catholic life. We encourage a vigorous exchange of ideas among students who will also benefit from the guidance of tutors in a common reading of texts. Our days will be punctuated with prayer as we participate at Mass, pray the Liturgy of the Hours and take time to be quiet.
Sophia Institute Summer Program Reading Plan
Part I: The Natural Desire for Happiness
1. On Pleasure, Wealth, Power, and Honor
1. On Pleasure, Wealth, Power, and Honor
2. The Happiness of this Life
3. Happiness and the Christian Life
Part II: Faith and the Fulfillment of Human Desire
1. Philosophical Proofs for the Existence of God
2. Salvation History from Adam to Christ
3. The Church of Christ and the Sacraments of Faith: the Pursuit of Happiness God’s Way
Part III: The Life of Faith
1. On Faith and Reason
2. On “Catholic” Art: Literature, Music, and the Visual Arts
3. On the Universal Call to Holiness and One Particular Vocation
Part II: Faith and the Fulfillment of Human Desire
1. Philosophical Proofs for the Existence of God
2. Salvation History from Adam to Christ
3. The Church of Christ and the Sacraments of Faith: the Pursuit of Happiness God’s Way
Part III: The Life of Faith
1. On Faith and Reason
2. On “Catholic” Art: Literature, Music, and the Visual Arts
3. On the Universal Call to Holiness and One Particular Vocation
The Apology, Plato (selection from Part I, Session 2)
Someone will say: And are you not ashamed, Socrates, of a course of life which is likely to bring you to an untimely end? To him I may fairly answer: There you are mistaken: a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong - acting the part of a good man or of a bad. Whereas, according to your view, the heroes who fell at Troy were not good for much, and the son of Thetis above all, who altogether despised danger in comparison with disgrace; and when his goddess mother said to him, in his eagerness to slay Hector, that if he avenged his companion Patroclus, and slew Hector, he would die himself - "Fate," as she said, "waits upon you next after Hector"; he, hearing this, utterly despised danger and death, and instead of fearing them, feared rather to live in dishonor, and not to avenge his friend. "Let me die next," he replies, "and be avenged of my enemy, rather than abide here by the beaked ships, a scorn and a burden of the earth." Had Achilles any thought of death and danger? For wherever a man's place is, whether the place which he has chosen or that in which he has been placed by a commander, there he ought to remain in the hour of danger; he should not think of death or of anything, but of disgrace. And this, O men of Athens, is a true saying….Men of Athens, do not interrupt, but hear me; there was an agreement between us that you should hear me out. And I think that what I am going to say will do you good: for I have something more to say, at which you may be inclined to cry out; but I beg that you will not do this. I would have you know that, if you kill such a one as I am, you will injure yourselves more than you will injure me. Meletus and Anytus will not injure me: they cannot; for it is not in the nature of things that a bad man should injure a better than himself. I do not deny that he may, perhaps, kill him, or drive him into exile, or deprive him of civil rights; and he may imagine, and others may imagine, that he is doing him a great injury: but in that I do not agree with him; for the evil of doing as Anytus is doing - of unjustly taking away another man's life - is greater far. And now, Athenians, I am not going to argue for my own sake, as you may think, but for yours, that you may not sin against the God, or lightly reject his boon by condemning me. For if you kill me you will not easily find another like me, who, if I may use such a ludicrous figure of speech, am a sort of gadfly, given to the state by the God; and the state is like a great and noble steed who is tardy in his motions owing to his very size, and requires to be stirred into life. I am that gadfly which God has given the state and all day long and in all places am always fastening upon you, arousing and persuading and reproaching you. And as you will not easily find another like me, I would advise you to spare me. I dare say that you may feel irritated at being suddenly awakened when you are caught napping; and you may think that if you were to strike me dead, as Anytus advises, which you easily might, then you would sleep on for the remainder of your lives, unless God in his care of you gives you another gadfly. And that I am given to you by God is proved by this: - that if I had been like other men, I should not have neglected all my own concerns, or patiently seen the neglect of them during all these years, and have been doing yours, coming to you individually, like a father or elder brother, exhorting you to regard virtue; this I say, would not be like human nature….
Someone may wonder why I go about in private, giving advice and busying myself with the concerns of others, but do not venture to come forward in public and advise the state. I will tell you the reason of this. You have often heard me speak of an oracle or sign which comes to me, and is the divinity which Meletus ridicules in the indictment. This sign I have had ever since I was a child. The sign is a voice which comes to me and always forbids me to do something which I am going to do, but never commands me to do anything, and this is what stands in the way of my being a politician. And rightly, as I think. For I am certain, O men of Athens, that if I had engaged in politics, I should have perished long ago and done no good either to you or to myself. And don't be offended at my telling you the truth: for the truth is that no man who goes to war with you or any other multitude, honestly struggling against the commission of unrighteousness and wrong in the state, will save his life; he who will really fight for the right, if he would live even for a little while, must have a private station and not a public one….
READING QUESTIONS:
1. What is Socrates’ response to the claim that he should be ashamed of himself? What should one consider in determining how to live?
2. Why does Socrates claim that the Athenians will harm themselves more than him if they put him to death? Which is worse, to act unjustly or to suffer an injustice?
3. To what animal does Socrates compare the city? What is the point of this analogy? How does the philosopher benefit the city?
4. Why does Socrates prefer the private life to the political life? What happens to good men when they pursue politics?
The Holy Bible, 2 Macchabees 7:1-42 (selection from Part I, Session 3)
In the last two seminars we considered various approaches to happiness. We have discussed ancient philosophers who rule out pursuing happiness through base means, as well as the claim that one ought to pursue virtue at all costs because this is the only path to happiness. This first part of our seminars concludes with a consideration of the Christian approach to happiness. Can we be happy in this life? What problems do those who pursue happiness in this life face? What is needed in order to find true happiness?
1 It came to pass also, that seven brethren, together with their mother, were apprehended, and compelled by the king to eat swine's flesh against the law, for which end they were tormented with whips and scourges. 2 But one of them, who was the eldest, said thus: What wouldst thou ask, or learn of us? we are ready to die rather than to transgress the laws of God, received from our fathers. 3 Then the king being angry commanded fryingpans, and brazen caldrons to be made hot: which forthwith being heated, 4 He commanded to cut out the tongue of him that had spoken first: and the skin of his head being drawn off, to chop off also the extremities of his hands and feet, the rest of his brethren, and his mother, looking on. 5 And when he was now maimed in all parts, he commanded him, being yet alive, to be brought to the Are, and to be fried in the fryingpan: and while he was suffering therein long torments, the rest, together with the mother, exhorted one another to die manfully, 6 Saying: The Lord God will look upon the truth, and will take pleasure in us, as Moses declared in the profession of the canticle: And In his servants he will take pleasure. 7 So when the first was dead after this manner, they brought the next to make him a, mocking stock: and when they had pulled off the skin of his head with the hair, they asked him if he would eat, before he were punished throughout the whole body in every limb. 8 But he answered in his own language, and said: I will not do it. Wherefore Ire also in the next place, received the torments of the first: 9 And when he was at the last gasp, he said thus: Thou indeed, O most wicked man, destroyest us out of this present life: but the King of the world will raise us up, who die for his laws, in the resurrection of eternal life. 10 After him the third was made a mocking stock, and when he was required, he quickly put forth his tongue, and courageously stretched out his hands: 11 And said with confidence: These I have from heaven, but for the laws of God I now despise them: because I hope to receive them again from him. 12 So that the king, and they that were with him, wondered at the young man's courage, because he esteemed the torments as nothing. 13 And after he was thus dead, they tormented the fourth in the like manner. 14 And when he was now ready to die, he spoke thus: It is better, being put to death by men, to look for hope from God, to be raised up again by him: for, as to thee thou shalt have no resurrection unto life. 15 And when they had brought the fifth, they tormented him. But he looking upon the king, 16 Said: Whereas thou hast power among men, though thou art corruptible, thou dost what thou wilt: but think not that our nation is forsaken by God. 17 But stay patiently a while, and thou shalt see his great power, in what manner he will torment thee and thy seed. 18 After him they brought the sixth, and he being ready to die, spoke thus: Be not deceived without cause: for we suffer these things for ourselves, having sinned against our God, and things worthy of admiration are done to us: 19 But do not think that thou shalt escape unpunished, for that thou attempted to fight against God. 20 Now the mother was to be admired above measure, and worthy to be remembered by good men, who beheld seven sons slain in the space of one day, and bore it with a good courage, for the hope that she had in God: 21 And she bravely exhorted every one of them in her own language, being filled with wisdom: and joining a man's heart to a woman's thought, 22 She said to them: I know not how you were formed in my womb: for I neither gave you breath, nor soul, nor life, neither did I frame the limbs of every one of you. 23 But the Creator of the world, that formed the nativity of man, and that found out the origin of all, he will restore to you again in his mercy, both breath and life, as now you despise yourselves for the sake of his laws. 24 Now Antiochus, thinking himself despised, and withal despising the voice of the upbraider, when the youngest was yet alive, did not only exhort him by words, but also assured him with an oath, that he would make him a rich and a happy man, and, if he would turn from the laws of his fathers, would take him for a friend, and furnish him with things necessary. 25 But when the young man was not moved with these things, the king called the mother, and counselled her to deal with the young man to save his life. 26 And when he had exhorted her with many words, she promised that she would counsel her son. 27 So bending herself towards him, mocking the cruel tyrant, she said in her own language: My son, have pity upon me, that bore thee nine months my womb, and save thee suck years, and nourished thee, and brought thee up unto this age. 28 I beseech thee, my son, look upon heaven and earth, and all that is in them: and consider that God made them out of nothing, and mankind also: 29 So thou shalt not fear this tormentor, but being made a worthy partner with thy brethren, receive death, that in that mercy I may receive thee again with thy brethren. 30 While she was yet speaking these words, the young man said: For whom do you stay? I will not obey the commandment of the king, but the commandment of the law, which was given us by Moses. 31 But thou that hast been the author of all mischief against the Hebrews, shalt not escape the hand of God. 32 For we suffer thus for our sins. 33 And though the Lord our God is angry with us a little while for our chastisement and correction: yet he will be reconciled again to his servants. 34 But thou, O wicked and of all men most flagitious, be not lifted up without cause with vain hopes, whilst thou art raging against his servants. 35 For thou hast not yet escaped the judgment of the almighty God, who beholdeth all things. 36 For my brethren, having now undergone a short pain, are under the covenant of eternal life: but thou by the judgment of God shalt receive just punishment for thy pride. 37 But I, like my brethren, offer up my life and my body for the laws of our fathers: calling upon God to be speedily merciful to our nation, and that thou by torments and stripes mayst confess that he alone is God. 38 But in me and in my brethren the wrath of the Almighty, which hath justly been brought upon all our nation, shall cease. 39 Then the king being incensed with anger, raged against him more cruelly than all the rest, taking it grievously that he was mocked. 40 So this man also died undefiled, wholly trusting in the Lord. 41 And last of all after the sons the mother also was consumed. 42 But now there is enough said of the sacrifices, and of the excessive cruelties.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. How do the seven brethren and mother face their cruel torture? What are they dying for? What would they rather do than betray God’s laws?
2. What allows this noble family to so confidently face death (be sure to consider the individual statements of each of them)? Consider whether a similar consolation is offered to the philosophers we discussed in seminar two.
1 It came to pass also, that seven brethren, together with their mother, were apprehended, and compelled by the king to eat swine's flesh against the law, for which end they were tormented with whips and scourges. 2 But one of them, who was the eldest, said thus: What wouldst thou ask, or learn of us? we are ready to die rather than to transgress the laws of God, received from our fathers. 3 Then the king being angry commanded fryingpans, and brazen caldrons to be made hot: which forthwith being heated, 4 He commanded to cut out the tongue of him that had spoken first: and the skin of his head being drawn off, to chop off also the extremities of his hands and feet, the rest of his brethren, and his mother, looking on. 5 And when he was now maimed in all parts, he commanded him, being yet alive, to be brought to the Are, and to be fried in the fryingpan: and while he was suffering therein long torments, the rest, together with the mother, exhorted one another to die manfully, 6 Saying: The Lord God will look upon the truth, and will take pleasure in us, as Moses declared in the profession of the canticle: And In his servants he will take pleasure. 7 So when the first was dead after this manner, they brought the next to make him a, mocking stock: and when they had pulled off the skin of his head with the hair, they asked him if he would eat, before he were punished throughout the whole body in every limb. 8 But he answered in his own language, and said: I will not do it. Wherefore Ire also in the next place, received the torments of the first: 9 And when he was at the last gasp, he said thus: Thou indeed, O most wicked man, destroyest us out of this present life: but the King of the world will raise us up, who die for his laws, in the resurrection of eternal life. 10 After him the third was made a mocking stock, and when he was required, he quickly put forth his tongue, and courageously stretched out his hands: 11 And said with confidence: These I have from heaven, but for the laws of God I now despise them: because I hope to receive them again from him. 12 So that the king, and they that were with him, wondered at the young man's courage, because he esteemed the torments as nothing. 13 And after he was thus dead, they tormented the fourth in the like manner. 14 And when he was now ready to die, he spoke thus: It is better, being put to death by men, to look for hope from God, to be raised up again by him: for, as to thee thou shalt have no resurrection unto life. 15 And when they had brought the fifth, they tormented him. But he looking upon the king, 16 Said: Whereas thou hast power among men, though thou art corruptible, thou dost what thou wilt: but think not that our nation is forsaken by God. 17 But stay patiently a while, and thou shalt see his great power, in what manner he will torment thee and thy seed. 18 After him they brought the sixth, and he being ready to die, spoke thus: Be not deceived without cause: for we suffer these things for ourselves, having sinned against our God, and things worthy of admiration are done to us: 19 But do not think that thou shalt escape unpunished, for that thou attempted to fight against God. 20 Now the mother was to be admired above measure, and worthy to be remembered by good men, who beheld seven sons slain in the space of one day, and bore it with a good courage, for the hope that she had in God: 21 And she bravely exhorted every one of them in her own language, being filled with wisdom: and joining a man's heart to a woman's thought, 22 She said to them: I know not how you were formed in my womb: for I neither gave you breath, nor soul, nor life, neither did I frame the limbs of every one of you. 23 But the Creator of the world, that formed the nativity of man, and that found out the origin of all, he will restore to you again in his mercy, both breath and life, as now you despise yourselves for the sake of his laws. 24 Now Antiochus, thinking himself despised, and withal despising the voice of the upbraider, when the youngest was yet alive, did not only exhort him by words, but also assured him with an oath, that he would make him a rich and a happy man, and, if he would turn from the laws of his fathers, would take him for a friend, and furnish him with things necessary. 25 But when the young man was not moved with these things, the king called the mother, and counselled her to deal with the young man to save his life. 26 And when he had exhorted her with many words, she promised that she would counsel her son. 27 So bending herself towards him, mocking the cruel tyrant, she said in her own language: My son, have pity upon me, that bore thee nine months my womb, and save thee suck years, and nourished thee, and brought thee up unto this age. 28 I beseech thee, my son, look upon heaven and earth, and all that is in them: and consider that God made them out of nothing, and mankind also: 29 So thou shalt not fear this tormentor, but being made a worthy partner with thy brethren, receive death, that in that mercy I may receive thee again with thy brethren. 30 While she was yet speaking these words, the young man said: For whom do you stay? I will not obey the commandment of the king, but the commandment of the law, which was given us by Moses. 31 But thou that hast been the author of all mischief against the Hebrews, shalt not escape the hand of God. 32 For we suffer thus for our sins. 33 And though the Lord our God is angry with us a little while for our chastisement and correction: yet he will be reconciled again to his servants. 34 But thou, O wicked and of all men most flagitious, be not lifted up without cause with vain hopes, whilst thou art raging against his servants. 35 For thou hast not yet escaped the judgment of the almighty God, who beholdeth all things. 36 For my brethren, having now undergone a short pain, are under the covenant of eternal life: but thou by the judgment of God shalt receive just punishment for thy pride. 37 But I, like my brethren, offer up my life and my body for the laws of our fathers: calling upon God to be speedily merciful to our nation, and that thou by torments and stripes mayst confess that he alone is God. 38 But in me and in my brethren the wrath of the Almighty, which hath justly been brought upon all our nation, shall cease. 39 Then the king being incensed with anger, raged against him more cruelly than all the rest, taking it grievously that he was mocked. 40 So this man also died undefiled, wholly trusting in the Lord. 41 And last of all after the sons the mother also was consumed. 42 But now there is enough said of the sacrifices, and of the excessive cruelties.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. How do the seven brethren and mother face their cruel torture? What are they dying for? What would they rather do than betray God’s laws?
2. What allows this noble family to so confidently face death (be sure to consider the individual statements of each of them)? Consider whether a similar consolation is offered to the philosophers we discussed in seminar two.
Summa Theologiae I q. 32 article 1, Saint Thomas Aquinas (selection from Part II, Session 1)
God’s existence is knowable according to the natural human power of reason, without the aid of supernatural revelation. However, this knowledge of God is indirect, a matter of understanding God as the condition for finite existence. Knowing who God is in himself requires a personal self-revelation on God’s own part, for the divine nature as such infinitely transcends our nature and its capacity to know. But this is precisely what God has done. In Jesus Christ, God has freely revealed, out of sheer love, the innermost secret of his life: that God is Trinity— Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This is the central mystery of Christian faith, which means that it is the deepest truth of all being. Here we glimpse the ultimate context for our natural sense that human happiness is to be found in loving and being loved (already implicitly contained in Aristotle’s definition of man as the political animal): God reveals that his life is nothing other than an eternal exchange of love—God is love. Even more, Jesus Christ reveals that the Blessed Trinity has graciously willed that man’s ultimate fulfillment, the fulfillment of our embodied powers of knowing and loving, be found in nothing less than incorporation into this Trinitarian life. That is, man’s final good, his end, is not natural; it is supernatural. God himself is our end. This opens for humanity a horizon of happiness that infinitely surpasses even the natural joys of human life: a life of eternal love in the embrace of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Here we move beyond philosophy. For the remaining sessions, we will be operating in the orbit of Catholic theology, which is the use of reason to gain some understanding of the riches of faith in Christ.
Article 1. Whether the trinity of the divine persons can be known by natural reason?
Hilary says (De Trin. i), "Let no man think to reach the sacred mystery of generation by his own mind." And Ambrose says (De Fide ii, 5), "It is impossible to know the secret of generation. The mind fails, the voice is silent." But the trinity of the divine persons is distinguished by origin of generation and procession (30, 2). Since, therefore, man cannot know, and with his understanding grasp that for which no necessary reason can be given, it follows that the trinity of persons cannot be known by reason.
I answer that, It is impossible to attain to the knowledge of the Trinity by natural reason. For, as above explained (12, 4, 12), man cannot obtain the knowledge of God by natural reason except from creatures. Now creatures lead us to the knowledge of God, as effects do to their cause. Accordingly, by natural reason we can know of God that only which of necessity belongs to Him as the principle of things, and we have cited this fundamental principle in treating of God as above (12, 12). Now, the creative power of God is common to the whole Trinity; and hence it belongs to the unity of the essence, and not to the distinction of the persons. Therefore, by natural reason we can know what belongs to the unity of the essence, but not what belongs to the distinction of the persons. Whoever, then, tries to prove the trinity of persons by natural reason, derogates from faith in two ways.
Firstly, as regards the dignity of faith itself, which consists in its being concerned with invisible things, that exceed human reason; wherefore the Apostle says that "faith is of things that appear not" (Hebrews 11:1), and the same Apostle says also, "We speak wisdom among the perfect, but not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world; but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery which is hidden" (1 Cor. 2:6,7).
Secondly, as regards the utility of drawing others to the faith. For when anyone in the endeavor to prove the faith brings forward reasons which are not cogent, he falls under the ridicule of the unbelievers: since they suppose that we stand upon such reasons, and that we believe on such grounds.
Therefore, we must not attempt to prove what is of faith, except by authority alone, to those who receive the authority; while as regards others it suffices to prove that what faith teaches is not impossible. Hence it is said by Dionysius (Div. Nom. ii): "Whoever wholly resists the word, is far off from our philosophy; whereas if he regards the truth of the word"--i.e. "the sacred word, we too follow this rule."
Excerpt from: Saint Thomas Aquinas, The Compendium of Theology
But there are other truths about God revealed to us in the teaching of the Christian religion, which were beyond the reach of the philosophers. These are truths about which we are instructed, in accord with the norm of Christian faith, in a way that transcends human perception. The teaching is that although God is one and simple, as has been explained above, God is Father, God is Son, and God is Holy Spirit. And these three are not three gods, but are one God. We now turn to a consideration of this truth, so far as is possible to us.
37 The Word in God: We take from the doctrine previously laid down that God understands and loves Himself and that understanding and willing in Him are not something distinct from His essence. Since God understands Himself, and since all that is understood is in the person who understands, God must be in Himself as the object understood is in the person understanding. But the object understood, so far as it is in the one who understands, is a certain word of the intellect. We signify by an exterior word what we comprehend interiorly in our intellect. For words, according to the Philosopher, are signs of intellectual concepts. Hence we must acknowledge in God the existence of His Word.
39 Relation of the Word to the Father: …What is conceived in the intellect is a likeness of the thing understood and represents its species [image]; and so it seems to be a sort of offspring of the intellect. Therefore, when the intellect understands something other than itself, the thing understood is, so to speak, the father of the word conceived in the intellect, and the intellect itself resembles rather a mother, whose function is such that conception takes place in her. But when the intellect understands itself, the word conceived is related to the understanding person as offspring to father. Consequently, since we are using the term word in the latter sense (that is, according as God understands Himself), the word itself must be related to God, from whom the word proceeds, as Son to Father.
45 God in Himself as beloved in lover: As the object known is in the knower to the extent that it is known, so the beloved must be in the lover, as loved. The lover is, in some way, moved by the beloved with a certain interior impulse. Therefore, since a mover is in contact with the object moved the beloved must be intrinsic to the lover. But God, just as He understands Himself, must likewise love Himself; for good, as apprehended, is in itself lovable. Consequently God is in Himself as beloved in lover.
46 Love in God as Spirit: Since the object known is in the knower and the beloved is in the lover, the different ways of existing in something must be considered in the two cases before us. The act of understanding takes place by a certain assimilation of the knower to the object known; and so the object known must be in the knower in the sense that a likeness of it is present in him. But the act of loving takes place through a sort of impulse engendered in the lover by the beloved: the beloved draws the lover to himself. Accordingly, the act of loving reaches its perfection not in a likeness of the beloved (in the way that the act of understanding reaches perfection in a likeness of the object understood); rather the act of loving reaches its perfection in a drawing of the lover to the beloved in person.
47 Holiness of the Spirit in God: …Since good that is loved has the nature of an end, and since the motion of the will is designated good or evil in terms of the end it pursues, the love whereby the supreme good that is God is loved must possess the supereminent goodness that goes by the name of holiness. ...Rightly, then, the Spirit, who represents to us the love whereby God loves Himself, is called the Holy Spirit. For this reason the rule of the Catholic Faith proclaims that the Spirit is holy, in the clause, “I believe in the Holy Spirit.”
49 Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son: We should recall that the act of understanding proceeds from the intellectual power of the mind. When the intellect actually understands, the object it understands is in it. The presence of the object known in the knower results from the intellectual power of the mind, and is its word, as we said above. Likewise, what is loved is in the lover, when it is actually loved. The fact that an object is actually loved, results from the lover’s power to love and also from the lovable good as actually known. Accordingly, the presence of the beloved object in the lover is brought about by two factors: the appetitive principle and the intelligible object as apprehended (that is, the word conceived about the lovable object). Therefore, since the Word in God who knows and loves Himself is the Son, and since He to whom the Word belongs is the Father of the Word, as is clear from our exposition, the necessary consequence is that the Holy Spirit, who pertains to the love whereby God is in Himself as beloved in lover, proceeds from the Father and the Son. And so we say in the Creed: “who proceeds from the Father and the Son.”
50 The Trinity of divine persons and the unity of the divine essence: We must conclude from all we have said that in the Godhead there is something threefold which is not opposed to the unity and simplicity of the divine essence. We must acknowledge that God is, as existing in His nature, and that He is known and loved by Himself. But this occurs otherwise in God than in us. Man, to be sure, is a substance in his nature, but his actions of knowing and loving are not his substance. Considered in his nature, man is indeed a subsisting thing; as he exists in his mind, however, he is not a subsisting thing, but a certain representation of a subsisting thing; and similarly with regard to his existence in himself as beloved in lover. Thus man may be regarded under three aspects: that is, man existing in his nature, man existing in his intellect, and man existing in his love. Yet these three are not one, for man’s knowing is not his existing, and the same is true of his loving. Only one of these three is a subsisting thing, namely, man existing in his nature. In God, on the contrary, to be, to know, and to love are identical. Therefore God existing in His natural being and God existing in the divine intellect and God existing in the divine love are one thing. Yet each of them is subsistent. And, as things subsisting in intellectual nature are usually called persons, [we] say that there are three persons in God, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, can the Triune nature of God be known through reason alone?
2. The three Persons of the Blessed Trinity are really distinct from each other and yet there is only one divine nature: truly one God, truly three Persons. In order to gain some understanding of this incomprehensible fact, Thomas uses an analogy from human knowing and loving. The generation of the Son/Word from the Father is compared to the conception, in the mind, of an inner word expressing an act of understanding or judging (in this case, the self-knowing of God). According to this analogy, how is the Word really distinct from the Father? How are they united?
3. The second procession in God, that of the Holy Spirit, is explained on the analogy of the procession according to love in us. When we understand and affirm something true (and therefore good and beautiful), we love that reality. The Holy Spirit is this Love proceeding from the Father and the Son. How is the analogy of the procession of the Spirit like and unlike that of the Word? How might the procession of the Holy Spirit shed light on the fact that we are given the powers of knowing and loving precisely to love and be loved, that is, the fact that man’s vocation is to make a sincere gift of self?
4. How is human knowing and loving like and unlike that of God?
5. If we cannot prove that God is a Trinity to unbelievers (or “others” as Aquinas says), what can reason do? What does he mean by saying that we can prove that the teachings of the faith are not “impossible?”
Article 1. Whether the trinity of the divine persons can be known by natural reason?
Hilary says (De Trin. i), "Let no man think to reach the sacred mystery of generation by his own mind." And Ambrose says (De Fide ii, 5), "It is impossible to know the secret of generation. The mind fails, the voice is silent." But the trinity of the divine persons is distinguished by origin of generation and procession (30, 2). Since, therefore, man cannot know, and with his understanding grasp that for which no necessary reason can be given, it follows that the trinity of persons cannot be known by reason.
I answer that, It is impossible to attain to the knowledge of the Trinity by natural reason. For, as above explained (12, 4, 12), man cannot obtain the knowledge of God by natural reason except from creatures. Now creatures lead us to the knowledge of God, as effects do to their cause. Accordingly, by natural reason we can know of God that only which of necessity belongs to Him as the principle of things, and we have cited this fundamental principle in treating of God as above (12, 12). Now, the creative power of God is common to the whole Trinity; and hence it belongs to the unity of the essence, and not to the distinction of the persons. Therefore, by natural reason we can know what belongs to the unity of the essence, but not what belongs to the distinction of the persons. Whoever, then, tries to prove the trinity of persons by natural reason, derogates from faith in two ways.
Firstly, as regards the dignity of faith itself, which consists in its being concerned with invisible things, that exceed human reason; wherefore the Apostle says that "faith is of things that appear not" (Hebrews 11:1), and the same Apostle says also, "We speak wisdom among the perfect, but not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world; but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery which is hidden" (1 Cor. 2:6,7).
Secondly, as regards the utility of drawing others to the faith. For when anyone in the endeavor to prove the faith brings forward reasons which are not cogent, he falls under the ridicule of the unbelievers: since they suppose that we stand upon such reasons, and that we believe on such grounds.
Therefore, we must not attempt to prove what is of faith, except by authority alone, to those who receive the authority; while as regards others it suffices to prove that what faith teaches is not impossible. Hence it is said by Dionysius (Div. Nom. ii): "Whoever wholly resists the word, is far off from our philosophy; whereas if he regards the truth of the word"--i.e. "the sacred word, we too follow this rule."
Excerpt from: Saint Thomas Aquinas, The Compendium of Theology
But there are other truths about God revealed to us in the teaching of the Christian religion, which were beyond the reach of the philosophers. These are truths about which we are instructed, in accord with the norm of Christian faith, in a way that transcends human perception. The teaching is that although God is one and simple, as has been explained above, God is Father, God is Son, and God is Holy Spirit. And these three are not three gods, but are one God. We now turn to a consideration of this truth, so far as is possible to us.
37 The Word in God: We take from the doctrine previously laid down that God understands and loves Himself and that understanding and willing in Him are not something distinct from His essence. Since God understands Himself, and since all that is understood is in the person who understands, God must be in Himself as the object understood is in the person understanding. But the object understood, so far as it is in the one who understands, is a certain word of the intellect. We signify by an exterior word what we comprehend interiorly in our intellect. For words, according to the Philosopher, are signs of intellectual concepts. Hence we must acknowledge in God the existence of His Word.
39 Relation of the Word to the Father: …What is conceived in the intellect is a likeness of the thing understood and represents its species [image]; and so it seems to be a sort of offspring of the intellect. Therefore, when the intellect understands something other than itself, the thing understood is, so to speak, the father of the word conceived in the intellect, and the intellect itself resembles rather a mother, whose function is such that conception takes place in her. But when the intellect understands itself, the word conceived is related to the understanding person as offspring to father. Consequently, since we are using the term word in the latter sense (that is, according as God understands Himself), the word itself must be related to God, from whom the word proceeds, as Son to Father.
45 God in Himself as beloved in lover: As the object known is in the knower to the extent that it is known, so the beloved must be in the lover, as loved. The lover is, in some way, moved by the beloved with a certain interior impulse. Therefore, since a mover is in contact with the object moved the beloved must be intrinsic to the lover. But God, just as He understands Himself, must likewise love Himself; for good, as apprehended, is in itself lovable. Consequently God is in Himself as beloved in lover.
46 Love in God as Spirit: Since the object known is in the knower and the beloved is in the lover, the different ways of existing in something must be considered in the two cases before us. The act of understanding takes place by a certain assimilation of the knower to the object known; and so the object known must be in the knower in the sense that a likeness of it is present in him. But the act of loving takes place through a sort of impulse engendered in the lover by the beloved: the beloved draws the lover to himself. Accordingly, the act of loving reaches its perfection not in a likeness of the beloved (in the way that the act of understanding reaches perfection in a likeness of the object understood); rather the act of loving reaches its perfection in a drawing of the lover to the beloved in person.
47 Holiness of the Spirit in God: …Since good that is loved has the nature of an end, and since the motion of the will is designated good or evil in terms of the end it pursues, the love whereby the supreme good that is God is loved must possess the supereminent goodness that goes by the name of holiness. ...Rightly, then, the Spirit, who represents to us the love whereby God loves Himself, is called the Holy Spirit. For this reason the rule of the Catholic Faith proclaims that the Spirit is holy, in the clause, “I believe in the Holy Spirit.”
49 Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son: We should recall that the act of understanding proceeds from the intellectual power of the mind. When the intellect actually understands, the object it understands is in it. The presence of the object known in the knower results from the intellectual power of the mind, and is its word, as we said above. Likewise, what is loved is in the lover, when it is actually loved. The fact that an object is actually loved, results from the lover’s power to love and also from the lovable good as actually known. Accordingly, the presence of the beloved object in the lover is brought about by two factors: the appetitive principle and the intelligible object as apprehended (that is, the word conceived about the lovable object). Therefore, since the Word in God who knows and loves Himself is the Son, and since He to whom the Word belongs is the Father of the Word, as is clear from our exposition, the necessary consequence is that the Holy Spirit, who pertains to the love whereby God is in Himself as beloved in lover, proceeds from the Father and the Son. And so we say in the Creed: “who proceeds from the Father and the Son.”
50 The Trinity of divine persons and the unity of the divine essence: We must conclude from all we have said that in the Godhead there is something threefold which is not opposed to the unity and simplicity of the divine essence. We must acknowledge that God is, as existing in His nature, and that He is known and loved by Himself. But this occurs otherwise in God than in us. Man, to be sure, is a substance in his nature, but his actions of knowing and loving are not his substance. Considered in his nature, man is indeed a subsisting thing; as he exists in his mind, however, he is not a subsisting thing, but a certain representation of a subsisting thing; and similarly with regard to his existence in himself as beloved in lover. Thus man may be regarded under three aspects: that is, man existing in his nature, man existing in his intellect, and man existing in his love. Yet these three are not one, for man’s knowing is not his existing, and the same is true of his loving. Only one of these three is a subsisting thing, namely, man existing in his nature. In God, on the contrary, to be, to know, and to love are identical. Therefore God existing in His natural being and God existing in the divine intellect and God existing in the divine love are one thing. Yet each of them is subsistent. And, as things subsisting in intellectual nature are usually called persons, [we] say that there are three persons in God, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, can the Triune nature of God be known through reason alone?
2. The three Persons of the Blessed Trinity are really distinct from each other and yet there is only one divine nature: truly one God, truly three Persons. In order to gain some understanding of this incomprehensible fact, Thomas uses an analogy from human knowing and loving. The generation of the Son/Word from the Father is compared to the conception, in the mind, of an inner word expressing an act of understanding or judging (in this case, the self-knowing of God). According to this analogy, how is the Word really distinct from the Father? How are they united?
3. The second procession in God, that of the Holy Spirit, is explained on the analogy of the procession according to love in us. When we understand and affirm something true (and therefore good and beautiful), we love that reality. The Holy Spirit is this Love proceeding from the Father and the Son. How is the analogy of the procession of the Spirit like and unlike that of the Word? How might the procession of the Holy Spirit shed light on the fact that we are given the powers of knowing and loving precisely to love and be loved, that is, the fact that man’s vocation is to make a sincere gift of self?
4. How is human knowing and loving like and unlike that of God?
5. If we cannot prove that God is a Trinity to unbelievers (or “others” as Aquinas says), what can reason do? What does he mean by saying that we can prove that the teachings of the faith are not “impossible?”
Redemptor hominis, John Paul II (selection from Part II, Session 2)
The Father’s plan of loving goodness is consummated in Jesus Christ, the Father’s only-begotten Son who, to redeem the world, assumes a human nature. He thus enters into, and overcomes, the futility of the human condition. Jesus, the God-Man, in himself reveals both the Trinitarian life and man’s true dignity, healing and elevating human nature. The following selection is from Pope John Paul II’s first encyclical. Here, as throughout his pontificate, he advances the Second Vatican Council’s call to evangelize the modern world. The Council teaches that this requires a renewed appreciation of the human person as created in the image of God, an image only fulfilled in the sincere gift of self and the call to holiness. In embodying the Trinitarian mystery of love, Christ fully reveals man to himself. We are each called to heroically incarnate God’s love in the modern world, and this requires showing that the answers to the deepest yearnings of the human heart are to be found in Jesus, who by his Incarnation has injected into human history the ever-greater dynamism of the Trinitarian communion of persons.
8. Redemption as a new creation
The Redeemer of the world! In him has been revealed in a new and more wonderful way the fundamental truth concerning creation to which the Book of Genesis gives witness when it repeats several times: “God saw that it was good.” The good has its source in Wisdom and Love. In Jesus Christ the visible world which God created for man—the world that, when sin entered, “was subjected to futility” [Rom 8:20]—recovers again its original link with the divine source of Wisdom and Love. Indeed, “God so loved the world that he gave his only Son.” [Jn 3:16] As this link was broken in the man Adam, so in the Man Christ it was re-forged. Are we of the twentieth century not convinced of the overpoweringly eloquent words of the Apostle of the Gentiles concerning the “creation (that) has been groaning in travail together until now” and “waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God” [Rom 8:22, 19], the creation that “was subjected to futility”? Does not the previously unknown immense progress—which has taken place especially in the course of this century—in the field of man’s dominion over the world itself reveal—to a previously unknown degree—that manifold subjection “to futility”? It is enough to recall certain phenomena, such as the threat of pollution of the natural environment in areas of rapid industrialization, or the armed conflicts continually breaking out over and over again, …or the lack of respect for the life of the unborn. The world of the new age, the world of space flights, the world of the previously unattained conquests of science and technology—is it not also the world “groaning in travail” that “waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God”? In its penetrating analysis of “the modern world,” the Second Vatican Council reached that most important point of the visible world which man is, by penetrating like Christ the depth of human consciousness and by making contact with the inward mystery of man, which in Biblical and non-Biblical language is expressed by the word “heart.” Christ, the Redeemer of the world, is the one who penetrated in a unique unrepeatable way into the mystery of man and entered his “heart.” Rightly therefore does the Second Vatican Council teach: “The truth is that only in the mystery of the Incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light. For Adam, the first man, was a type of him who was to come (Rom 5:14), Christ the Lord. Christ the new Adam, in the very revelation of the mystery of the Father and of his love, fully reveals man to himself and brings to light his most high calling.” And the Council continues: “He who is the ‘image of the invisible God’ (Col 1:15), is himself the perfect man who has restored in the children of Adam that likeness to God which had been disfigured ever since the first sin. Human nature, by the very fact that it was assumed, not absorbed, in him, has been raised in us also to a dignity beyond compare. For, by his Incarnation, he, the son of God, in a certain way united himself with each man. He worked with human hands, he thought with a human mind. He acted with a human will, and with a human heart he loved. Born of the Virgin Mary, he has truly been made one of us, like to us in all things except sin” [Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et spes, 22], he, the Redeemer of man.
9. The divine dimension of the mystery of the Redemption
As we reflect again on this stupendous text from the Council’s teaching, we do not forget even for a moment that Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, became our reconciliation with the Father. He it was, and he alone, who satisfied the Father’s eternal love, that fatherhood that from the beginning found expression in creating the world, giving man all the riches of creation, and making him “little less than God” [Ps 8:6], in that he was created “in the image and after the likeness of God.” [Gen 1:26] He and he alone also satisfied that fatherhood of God and that love which man in a way rejected by breaking the first Covenant and the later covenants that God “again and again offered to man.” The redemption of the world—this tremendous mystery of love in which creation is renewed—is, at its deepest root, the fullness of justice in a human Heart—the Heart of the First-born Son—in order that it may become justice in the hearts of many human beings, predestined from eternity in the Firstborn Son to be children of God and called to grace, called to love. …This revelation of the Father and outpouring of the Holy Spirit, which stamp an indelible seal on the mystery of the Redemption, explain the meaning of the Cross and death of Christ. The God of creation is revealed as the God of redemption, as the God who is “faithful to himself,” and faithful to his love for man and the world, which he revealed on the day of creation. His is a love that does not draw back before anything that justice requires in him. Therefore “for our sake (God) made him (the Son) to be sin who knew no sin.” [II Cor 5:21] If he “made to be sin” him who was without any sin whatever, it was to reveal the love that is always greater than the whole of creation, the love that is he himself, since “God is love.” [I Jn 4:8] Above all, love is greater than sin, than weakness, than the “futility of creation”; it is stronger than death; it is a love always ready to raise up and forgive, always ready to go to meet the prodigal son, always looking for “the revealing of the sons of God,” who are called to the glory that is to be revealed. This revelation of love is also described as mercy; and in man’s history this revelation of love and mercy has taken a form and a name: that of Jesus Christ.
10 . The human dimension of the mystery of the Redemption
Man cannot live without love. He remains a being that is incomprehensible to himself, his life is senseless, if love is not revealed to him, if he does not encounter love, if he does not experience it and make it his own, if he does not participate intimately in it. This, as has already been said, is why Christ the Redeemer “fully reveals man to himself.” If we may use the expression, this is the human dimension of the mystery of the Redemption. In this dimension man finds again the greatness, dignity, and value that belong to his humanity. …The man who wishes to understand himself thoroughly—and not just in accordance with immediate, partial, often superficial, and even illusory standards and measures of his being—he must with his unrest, uncertainty and even his weakness and sinfulness, with his life and death, draw near to Christ. He must, so to speak, enter into him with all his own self, he must “appropriate” and assimilate the whole of the reality of the Incarnation and Redemption in order to find himself. If this profound process takes place within him, he then bears fruit not only of adoration of God but also of deep wonder at himself. How precious must man be in the eyes of the Creator, if he “gained so great a Redeemer” [the Exsultet of the Easter Vigil], and if God “gave his only Son” in order that man “should not perish but have eternal life.” [Jn 3:16] In reality, the name for that deep amazement at man’s worth and dignity is the Gospel, that is to say: the Good News. It is also called Christianity. This amazement determines the Church’s mission in the world and, perhaps even more so, “in the modern world.” …Unceasingly contemplating the whole of Christ’s mystery, the Church knows with all the certainty of faith that the Redemption that took place through the Cross has definitively restored his dignity to man and given back meaning to his life in the world, a meaning that was lost to a considerable extent because of sin. And for that reason, the Redemption was accomplished in the paschal mystery, leading through the Cross and death to Resurrection.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. John Paul II (following Saint Paul) presents the redemption of man achieved in Jesus Christ as “a new creation.” How so? What does this have to do with the modern world? Why does preaching the Gospel in our times require emphasis on how Christ addresses the human heart? Answer with reference to the crucial passage from Gaudium et spes that John Paul cites.
2. This key statement in particular, “Christ the new Adam, in the very revelation of the mystery of the Father and of his love, fully reveals man to himself and brings to light his most high calling,” sets the agenda for the next two sections, for Jesus Christ reveals something about God and something about man. The “divine” aspect of redemption has to do with the mystery of the Trinity. How does the Son reveal the mystery of the Father and his loveWhat does John Paul point out concerning how redemption the relation of the Father and the Son? How does Jesus satisfy the Father’s love?
3. In discussing the “human” aspect of redemption, John Paul II points out that man is made for love. How does Jesus reveal the full dimensions of this fact? Why is it that the basic human quest for self-knowledge can only be fulfilled in Jesus Christ? How does Jesus restore man’s dignity?
8. Redemption as a new creation
The Redeemer of the world! In him has been revealed in a new and more wonderful way the fundamental truth concerning creation to which the Book of Genesis gives witness when it repeats several times: “God saw that it was good.” The good has its source in Wisdom and Love. In Jesus Christ the visible world which God created for man—the world that, when sin entered, “was subjected to futility” [Rom 8:20]—recovers again its original link with the divine source of Wisdom and Love. Indeed, “God so loved the world that he gave his only Son.” [Jn 3:16] As this link was broken in the man Adam, so in the Man Christ it was re-forged. Are we of the twentieth century not convinced of the overpoweringly eloquent words of the Apostle of the Gentiles concerning the “creation (that) has been groaning in travail together until now” and “waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God” [Rom 8:22, 19], the creation that “was subjected to futility”? Does not the previously unknown immense progress—which has taken place especially in the course of this century—in the field of man’s dominion over the world itself reveal—to a previously unknown degree—that manifold subjection “to futility”? It is enough to recall certain phenomena, such as the threat of pollution of the natural environment in areas of rapid industrialization, or the armed conflicts continually breaking out over and over again, …or the lack of respect for the life of the unborn. The world of the new age, the world of space flights, the world of the previously unattained conquests of science and technology—is it not also the world “groaning in travail” that “waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God”? In its penetrating analysis of “the modern world,” the Second Vatican Council reached that most important point of the visible world which man is, by penetrating like Christ the depth of human consciousness and by making contact with the inward mystery of man, which in Biblical and non-Biblical language is expressed by the word “heart.” Christ, the Redeemer of the world, is the one who penetrated in a unique unrepeatable way into the mystery of man and entered his “heart.” Rightly therefore does the Second Vatican Council teach: “The truth is that only in the mystery of the Incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light. For Adam, the first man, was a type of him who was to come (Rom 5:14), Christ the Lord. Christ the new Adam, in the very revelation of the mystery of the Father and of his love, fully reveals man to himself and brings to light his most high calling.” And the Council continues: “He who is the ‘image of the invisible God’ (Col 1:15), is himself the perfect man who has restored in the children of Adam that likeness to God which had been disfigured ever since the first sin. Human nature, by the very fact that it was assumed, not absorbed, in him, has been raised in us also to a dignity beyond compare. For, by his Incarnation, he, the son of God, in a certain way united himself with each man. He worked with human hands, he thought with a human mind. He acted with a human will, and with a human heart he loved. Born of the Virgin Mary, he has truly been made one of us, like to us in all things except sin” [Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et spes, 22], he, the Redeemer of man.
9. The divine dimension of the mystery of the Redemption
As we reflect again on this stupendous text from the Council’s teaching, we do not forget even for a moment that Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, became our reconciliation with the Father. He it was, and he alone, who satisfied the Father’s eternal love, that fatherhood that from the beginning found expression in creating the world, giving man all the riches of creation, and making him “little less than God” [Ps 8:6], in that he was created “in the image and after the likeness of God.” [Gen 1:26] He and he alone also satisfied that fatherhood of God and that love which man in a way rejected by breaking the first Covenant and the later covenants that God “again and again offered to man.” The redemption of the world—this tremendous mystery of love in which creation is renewed—is, at its deepest root, the fullness of justice in a human Heart—the Heart of the First-born Son—in order that it may become justice in the hearts of many human beings, predestined from eternity in the Firstborn Son to be children of God and called to grace, called to love. …This revelation of the Father and outpouring of the Holy Spirit, which stamp an indelible seal on the mystery of the Redemption, explain the meaning of the Cross and death of Christ. The God of creation is revealed as the God of redemption, as the God who is “faithful to himself,” and faithful to his love for man and the world, which he revealed on the day of creation. His is a love that does not draw back before anything that justice requires in him. Therefore “for our sake (God) made him (the Son) to be sin who knew no sin.” [II Cor 5:21] If he “made to be sin” him who was without any sin whatever, it was to reveal the love that is always greater than the whole of creation, the love that is he himself, since “God is love.” [I Jn 4:8] Above all, love is greater than sin, than weakness, than the “futility of creation”; it is stronger than death; it is a love always ready to raise up and forgive, always ready to go to meet the prodigal son, always looking for “the revealing of the sons of God,” who are called to the glory that is to be revealed. This revelation of love is also described as mercy; and in man’s history this revelation of love and mercy has taken a form and a name: that of Jesus Christ.
10 . The human dimension of the mystery of the Redemption
Man cannot live without love. He remains a being that is incomprehensible to himself, his life is senseless, if love is not revealed to him, if he does not encounter love, if he does not experience it and make it his own, if he does not participate intimately in it. This, as has already been said, is why Christ the Redeemer “fully reveals man to himself.” If we may use the expression, this is the human dimension of the mystery of the Redemption. In this dimension man finds again the greatness, dignity, and value that belong to his humanity. …The man who wishes to understand himself thoroughly—and not just in accordance with immediate, partial, often superficial, and even illusory standards and measures of his being—he must with his unrest, uncertainty and even his weakness and sinfulness, with his life and death, draw near to Christ. He must, so to speak, enter into him with all his own self, he must “appropriate” and assimilate the whole of the reality of the Incarnation and Redemption in order to find himself. If this profound process takes place within him, he then bears fruit not only of adoration of God but also of deep wonder at himself. How precious must man be in the eyes of the Creator, if he “gained so great a Redeemer” [the Exsultet of the Easter Vigil], and if God “gave his only Son” in order that man “should not perish but have eternal life.” [Jn 3:16] In reality, the name for that deep amazement at man’s worth and dignity is the Gospel, that is to say: the Good News. It is also called Christianity. This amazement determines the Church’s mission in the world and, perhaps even more so, “in the modern world.” …Unceasingly contemplating the whole of Christ’s mystery, the Church knows with all the certainty of faith that the Redemption that took place through the Cross has definitively restored his dignity to man and given back meaning to his life in the world, a meaning that was lost to a considerable extent because of sin. And for that reason, the Redemption was accomplished in the paschal mystery, leading through the Cross and death to Resurrection.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. John Paul II (following Saint Paul) presents the redemption of man achieved in Jesus Christ as “a new creation.” How so? What does this have to do with the modern world? Why does preaching the Gospel in our times require emphasis on how Christ addresses the human heart? Answer with reference to the crucial passage from Gaudium et spes that John Paul cites.
2. This key statement in particular, “Christ the new Adam, in the very revelation of the mystery of the Father and of his love, fully reveals man to himself and brings to light his most high calling,” sets the agenda for the next two sections, for Jesus Christ reveals something about God and something about man. The “divine” aspect of redemption has to do with the mystery of the Trinity. How does the Son reveal the mystery of the Father and his loveWhat does John Paul point out concerning how redemption the relation of the Father and the Son? How does Jesus satisfy the Father’s love?
3. In discussing the “human” aspect of redemption, John Paul II points out that man is made for love. How does Jesus reveal the full dimensions of this fact? Why is it that the basic human quest for self-knowledge can only be fulfilled in Jesus Christ? How does Jesus restore man’s dignity?
Summa Theologiae, Saint Thomas Aquinas and Fides et Ratio, John Paul II (selection from Part III, Session 1)
In the first part of our seminars we looked at philosophical accounts of happiness and Christian responses to them. While the Catholic tradition has always appreciated the contributions of philosophy understood as the pursuit of Wisdom through reason alone, the viewpoint of faith stands as a corrective to what reason can discover. Thus, we concluded our discussions with a Catholic perspective and then, in the second part, explored the Catholic view that the happiness sought after by the philosophers through virtuous conduct can only be attained when we are joined with God in the Beatific Vision. For the Catholic, the good life is revealed in Salvation History; the life of Christ, the fount and exemplar of all goodness, is made present to us through the sacraments of His Church.
In this third and final part of our seminars we will explore how a thoroughly Catholic life leads one to an appreciation of the use of reason in conjunction with faith; beauty as revealed through art; and the universal call to holiness. The topic of this seminar is the compatibility of faith and reason. Now we explore what it means to say that the Catholic tradition respects the fruits of unaided human reason and completes them through supernatural revelation. How are faith and reason related? What does faith add that reason cannot supply?
Excerpts from St. Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologiae I q.1 articles 1-2
Article 1. Whether, besides philosophy, any further doctrine is required?
It was necessary for man's salvation that there should be a knowledge revealed by God besides philosophical science built up by human reason. Firstly, indeed, because man is directed to God, as to an end that surpasses the grasp of his reason: "The eye hath not seen, O God, besides Thee, what things Thou hast prepared for them that wait for Thee" (Isaiah 66:4). But the end must first be known by men who are to direct their thoughts and actions to the end. Hence it was necessary for the salvation of man that certain truths which exceed human reason should be made known to him by divine revelation. Even as regards those truths about God which human reason could have discovered, it was necessary that man should be taught by a divine revelation; because the truth about God such as reason could discover, would only be known by a few, and that after a long time, and with the admixture of many errors. Whereas man's whole salvation, which is in God, depends upon the knowledge of this truth. Therefore, in order that the salvation of men might be brought about more fitly and more surely, it was necessary that they should be taught divine truths by divine revelation. It was therefore necessary that besides philosophical science built up by reason, there should be a sacred science learned through revelation.
Article 2. Whether sacred doctrine is a science?
I answer that, Sacred doctrine is a science. We must bear in mind that there are two kinds of sciences. There are some which proceed from a principle known by the natural light of intelligence, such as arithmetic and geometry and the like. There are some which proceed from principles known by the light of a higher science: thus the science of perspective proceeds from principles established by geometry, and music from principles established by arithmetic. So it is that sacred doctrine is a science because it proceeds from principles established by the light of a higher science, namely, the science of God and the blessed. Hence, just as the musician accepts on authority the principles taught him by the mathematician, so sacred science is established on principles revealed by God.
Article 8. Whether sacred doctrine is a matter of argument?
As other sciences do not argue in proof of their principles, but argue from their principles to demonstrate other truths in these sciences: so this doctrine does not argue in proof of its principles, which are the articles of faith, but from them it goes on to prove something else; as the Apostle from the resurrection of Christ argues in proof of the general resurrection (1 Corinthians 15). However, it is to be borne in mind, in regard to the philosophical sciences, that the inferior sciences neither prove their principles nor dispute with those who deny them, but leave this to a higher science; whereas the highest of them, viz. metaphysics, can dispute with one who denies its principles, if only the opponent will make some concession; but if he concede nothing, it can have no dispute with him, though it can answer his objections. Hence Sacred Scripture, since it has no science above itself, can dispute with one who denies its principles only if the opponent admits some at least of the truths obtained through divine revelation; thus we can argue with heretics from texts in Holy Writ, and against those who deny one article of faith, we can argue from another. If our opponent believes nothing of divine revelation, there is no longer any means of proving the articles of faith by reasoning, but only of answering his objections — if he has any — against faith. Since faith rests upon infallible truth, and since the contrary of a truth can never be demonstrated, it is clear that the arguments brought against faith cannot be demonstrations, but are difficulties that can be answered.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. In the first article, what reasons does Aquinas provide as to why Sacred Doctrine (or revelation) is needed?
2. In the second article, what two types of sciences does Aquinas discuss? What examples does he provide? What examples could you give? Finally, what type of science is Sacred Doctrine and why?
3. It would seem that Sacred Doctrine is not a science because it cannot prove its principles. In the eighth article Aquinas admits that the principles of Sacred Doctrine cannot be proved. Why does he still hold that it is a science? How are we to debate with those who do not accept the truths of faith? Even if we cannot prove the truths of faith to the non-believer, what can be done when debating with those who do not accept divine revelation?
Excerpts from Fides et Ratio, John Paul II
Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth—in a word, to know himself—so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves (cf. Ex 33:18; Ps 27:8-9; 63:2-3; Jn 14:8; 1 Jn 3:2)….
Men and women have at their disposal an array of resources for generating greater knowledge of truth so that their lives may be ever more human. Among these is philosophy, which is directly concerned with asking the question of life's meaning and sketching an answer to it. Philosophy emerges, then, as one of noblest of human tasks. According to its Greek etymology, the term philosophy means “love of wisdom”. Born and nurtured when the human being first asked questions about the reason for things and their purpose, philosophy shows in different modes and forms that the desire for truth is part of human nature itself. It is an innate property of human reason to ask why things are as they are, even though the answers which gradually emerge are set within a horizon which reveals how the different human cultures are complementary.
Philosophy's powerful influence on the formation and development of the cultures of the West should not obscure the influence it has also had upon the ways of understanding existence found in the East. Every people has its own native and seminal wisdom which, as a true cultural treasure, tends to find voice and develop in forms which are genuinely philosophical. One example of this is the basic form of philosophical knowledge which is evident to this day in the postulates which inspire national and international legal systems in regulating the life of society.
Nonetheless, it is true that a single term conceals a variety of meanings. Hence the need for a preliminary clarification. driven by the desire to discover the ultimate truth of existence, human beings seek to acquire those universal elements of knowledge which enable them to understand themselves better and to advance in their own self-realization. These fundamental elements of knowledge spring from the wonder awakened in them by the contemplation of creation: human beings are astonished to discover themselves as part of the world, in a relationship with others like them, all sharing a common destiny. Here begins, then, the journey which will lead them to discover ever new frontiers of knowledge. Without wonder, men and women would lapse into deadening routine and little by little would become incapable of a life which is genuinely personal.
Through philosophy's work, the ability to speculate which is proper to the human intellect produces a rigorous mode of thought; and then in turn, through the logical coherence of the affirmations made and the organic unity of their content, it produces a systematic body of knowledge. In different cultural contexts and at different times, this process has yielded results which have produced genuine systems of thought. Yet often enough in history this has brought with it the temptation to identify one single stream with the whole of philosophy. In such cases, we are clearly dealing with a “philosophical pride” which seeks to present its own partial and imperfect view as the complete reading of all reality. In effect, every philosophical system, while it should always be respected in its wholeness, without any instrumentalization, must still recognize the primacy of philosophical enquiry, from which it stems and which it ought loyally to serve….
On her part, the Church cannot but set great value upon reason's drive to attain goals which render people's lives ever more worthy. She sees in philosophy the way to come to know fundamental truths about human life. At the same time, the Church considers philosophy an indispensable help for a deeper understanding of faith and for communicating the truth of the Gospel to those who do not yet know it….
Therefore, following upon similar initiatives by my Predecessors, I wish to reflect upon this special activity of human reason. I judge it necessary to do so because, at the present time in particular, the search for ultimate truth seems often to be neglected. Modern philosophy clearly has the great merit of focusing attention upon man. From this starting-point, human reason with its many questions has developed further its yearning to know more and to know it ever more deeply. Complex systems of thought have thus been built, yielding results in the different fields of knowledge and fostering the development of culture and history. Anthropology, logic, the natural sciences, history, linguistics and so forth—the whole universe of knowledge has been involved in one way or another. Yet the positive results achieved must not obscure the fact that reason, in its one-sided concern to investigate human subjectivity, seems to have forgotten that men and women are always called to direct their steps towards a truth which transcends them. Sundered from that truth, individuals are at the mercy of caprice, and their state as person ends up being judged by pragmatic criteria based essentially upon experimental data, in the mistaken belief that technology must dominate all….
What is distinctive in the biblical text is the conviction that there is a profound and indissoluble unity between the knowledge of reason and the knowledge of faith. The world and all that happens within it, including history and the fate of peoples, are realities to be observed, analysed and assessed with all the resources of reason, but without faith ever being foreign to the process. Faith intervenes not to abolish reason's autonomy nor to reduce its scope for action, but solely to bring the human being to understand that in these events it is the God of Israel who acts. Thus the world and the events of history cannot be understood in depth without professing faith in the God who is at work in them. Faith sharpens the inner eye, opening the mind to discover in the flux of events the workings of Providence. Here the words of the Book of Proverbs are pertinent: “The human mind plans the way, but the Lord directs the steps” (16:9). This is to say that with the light of reason human beings can know which path to take, but they can follow that path to its end, quickly and unhindered, only if with a rightly tuned spirit they search for it within the horizon of faith. Therefore, reason and faith cannot be separated without diminishing the capacity of men and women to know themselves, the world and God in an appropriate way….
READING QUESTIONS:
1. To what in our human nature is philosophy a response? To what human desire and aim is philosophy directed? In what way does each culture have a treasure that we should appreciate?
2. What is the “temptation” to which philosophers often succumb and what must be recognized as primary in order to combat this? What happens when humans forget that philosophy must aim at ultimate truth and transcendence? Could you think of examples that support John Paul II’s claim that the loss of truth as an aim leads to the enslavement of man to “caprice?”
3. John Paul II opens this work with an imagery that compares faith and reason to the wings of the human spirit. Using the final paragraph above as a guide, what does he seem to mean by this?
In this third and final part of our seminars we will explore how a thoroughly Catholic life leads one to an appreciation of the use of reason in conjunction with faith; beauty as revealed through art; and the universal call to holiness. The topic of this seminar is the compatibility of faith and reason. Now we explore what it means to say that the Catholic tradition respects the fruits of unaided human reason and completes them through supernatural revelation. How are faith and reason related? What does faith add that reason cannot supply?
Excerpts from St. Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologiae I q.1 articles 1-2
Article 1. Whether, besides philosophy, any further doctrine is required?
It was necessary for man's salvation that there should be a knowledge revealed by God besides philosophical science built up by human reason. Firstly, indeed, because man is directed to God, as to an end that surpasses the grasp of his reason: "The eye hath not seen, O God, besides Thee, what things Thou hast prepared for them that wait for Thee" (Isaiah 66:4). But the end must first be known by men who are to direct their thoughts and actions to the end. Hence it was necessary for the salvation of man that certain truths which exceed human reason should be made known to him by divine revelation. Even as regards those truths about God which human reason could have discovered, it was necessary that man should be taught by a divine revelation; because the truth about God such as reason could discover, would only be known by a few, and that after a long time, and with the admixture of many errors. Whereas man's whole salvation, which is in God, depends upon the knowledge of this truth. Therefore, in order that the salvation of men might be brought about more fitly and more surely, it was necessary that they should be taught divine truths by divine revelation. It was therefore necessary that besides philosophical science built up by reason, there should be a sacred science learned through revelation.
Article 2. Whether sacred doctrine is a science?
I answer that, Sacred doctrine is a science. We must bear in mind that there are two kinds of sciences. There are some which proceed from a principle known by the natural light of intelligence, such as arithmetic and geometry and the like. There are some which proceed from principles known by the light of a higher science: thus the science of perspective proceeds from principles established by geometry, and music from principles established by arithmetic. So it is that sacred doctrine is a science because it proceeds from principles established by the light of a higher science, namely, the science of God and the blessed. Hence, just as the musician accepts on authority the principles taught him by the mathematician, so sacred science is established on principles revealed by God.
Article 8. Whether sacred doctrine is a matter of argument?
As other sciences do not argue in proof of their principles, but argue from their principles to demonstrate other truths in these sciences: so this doctrine does not argue in proof of its principles, which are the articles of faith, but from them it goes on to prove something else; as the Apostle from the resurrection of Christ argues in proof of the general resurrection (1 Corinthians 15). However, it is to be borne in mind, in regard to the philosophical sciences, that the inferior sciences neither prove their principles nor dispute with those who deny them, but leave this to a higher science; whereas the highest of them, viz. metaphysics, can dispute with one who denies its principles, if only the opponent will make some concession; but if he concede nothing, it can have no dispute with him, though it can answer his objections. Hence Sacred Scripture, since it has no science above itself, can dispute with one who denies its principles only if the opponent admits some at least of the truths obtained through divine revelation; thus we can argue with heretics from texts in Holy Writ, and against those who deny one article of faith, we can argue from another. If our opponent believes nothing of divine revelation, there is no longer any means of proving the articles of faith by reasoning, but only of answering his objections — if he has any — against faith. Since faith rests upon infallible truth, and since the contrary of a truth can never be demonstrated, it is clear that the arguments brought against faith cannot be demonstrations, but are difficulties that can be answered.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. In the first article, what reasons does Aquinas provide as to why Sacred Doctrine (or revelation) is needed?
2. In the second article, what two types of sciences does Aquinas discuss? What examples does he provide? What examples could you give? Finally, what type of science is Sacred Doctrine and why?
3. It would seem that Sacred Doctrine is not a science because it cannot prove its principles. In the eighth article Aquinas admits that the principles of Sacred Doctrine cannot be proved. Why does he still hold that it is a science? How are we to debate with those who do not accept the truths of faith? Even if we cannot prove the truths of faith to the non-believer, what can be done when debating with those who do not accept divine revelation?
Excerpts from Fides et Ratio, John Paul II
Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth—in a word, to know himself—so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves (cf. Ex 33:18; Ps 27:8-9; 63:2-3; Jn 14:8; 1 Jn 3:2)….
Men and women have at their disposal an array of resources for generating greater knowledge of truth so that their lives may be ever more human. Among these is philosophy, which is directly concerned with asking the question of life's meaning and sketching an answer to it. Philosophy emerges, then, as one of noblest of human tasks. According to its Greek etymology, the term philosophy means “love of wisdom”. Born and nurtured when the human being first asked questions about the reason for things and their purpose, philosophy shows in different modes and forms that the desire for truth is part of human nature itself. It is an innate property of human reason to ask why things are as they are, even though the answers which gradually emerge are set within a horizon which reveals how the different human cultures are complementary.
Philosophy's powerful influence on the formation and development of the cultures of the West should not obscure the influence it has also had upon the ways of understanding existence found in the East. Every people has its own native and seminal wisdom which, as a true cultural treasure, tends to find voice and develop in forms which are genuinely philosophical. One example of this is the basic form of philosophical knowledge which is evident to this day in the postulates which inspire national and international legal systems in regulating the life of society.
Nonetheless, it is true that a single term conceals a variety of meanings. Hence the need for a preliminary clarification. driven by the desire to discover the ultimate truth of existence, human beings seek to acquire those universal elements of knowledge which enable them to understand themselves better and to advance in their own self-realization. These fundamental elements of knowledge spring from the wonder awakened in them by the contemplation of creation: human beings are astonished to discover themselves as part of the world, in a relationship with others like them, all sharing a common destiny. Here begins, then, the journey which will lead them to discover ever new frontiers of knowledge. Without wonder, men and women would lapse into deadening routine and little by little would become incapable of a life which is genuinely personal.
Through philosophy's work, the ability to speculate which is proper to the human intellect produces a rigorous mode of thought; and then in turn, through the logical coherence of the affirmations made and the organic unity of their content, it produces a systematic body of knowledge. In different cultural contexts and at different times, this process has yielded results which have produced genuine systems of thought. Yet often enough in history this has brought with it the temptation to identify one single stream with the whole of philosophy. In such cases, we are clearly dealing with a “philosophical pride” which seeks to present its own partial and imperfect view as the complete reading of all reality. In effect, every philosophical system, while it should always be respected in its wholeness, without any instrumentalization, must still recognize the primacy of philosophical enquiry, from which it stems and which it ought loyally to serve….
On her part, the Church cannot but set great value upon reason's drive to attain goals which render people's lives ever more worthy. She sees in philosophy the way to come to know fundamental truths about human life. At the same time, the Church considers philosophy an indispensable help for a deeper understanding of faith and for communicating the truth of the Gospel to those who do not yet know it….
Therefore, following upon similar initiatives by my Predecessors, I wish to reflect upon this special activity of human reason. I judge it necessary to do so because, at the present time in particular, the search for ultimate truth seems often to be neglected. Modern philosophy clearly has the great merit of focusing attention upon man. From this starting-point, human reason with its many questions has developed further its yearning to know more and to know it ever more deeply. Complex systems of thought have thus been built, yielding results in the different fields of knowledge and fostering the development of culture and history. Anthropology, logic, the natural sciences, history, linguistics and so forth—the whole universe of knowledge has been involved in one way or another. Yet the positive results achieved must not obscure the fact that reason, in its one-sided concern to investigate human subjectivity, seems to have forgotten that men and women are always called to direct their steps towards a truth which transcends them. Sundered from that truth, individuals are at the mercy of caprice, and their state as person ends up being judged by pragmatic criteria based essentially upon experimental data, in the mistaken belief that technology must dominate all….
What is distinctive in the biblical text is the conviction that there is a profound and indissoluble unity between the knowledge of reason and the knowledge of faith. The world and all that happens within it, including history and the fate of peoples, are realities to be observed, analysed and assessed with all the resources of reason, but without faith ever being foreign to the process. Faith intervenes not to abolish reason's autonomy nor to reduce its scope for action, but solely to bring the human being to understand that in these events it is the God of Israel who acts. Thus the world and the events of history cannot be understood in depth without professing faith in the God who is at work in them. Faith sharpens the inner eye, opening the mind to discover in the flux of events the workings of Providence. Here the words of the Book of Proverbs are pertinent: “The human mind plans the way, but the Lord directs the steps” (16:9). This is to say that with the light of reason human beings can know which path to take, but they can follow that path to its end, quickly and unhindered, only if with a rightly tuned spirit they search for it within the horizon of faith. Therefore, reason and faith cannot be separated without diminishing the capacity of men and women to know themselves, the world and God in an appropriate way….
READING QUESTIONS:
1. To what in our human nature is philosophy a response? To what human desire and aim is philosophy directed? In what way does each culture have a treasure that we should appreciate?
2. What is the “temptation” to which philosophers often succumb and what must be recognized as primary in order to combat this? What happens when humans forget that philosophy must aim at ultimate truth and transcendence? Could you think of examples that support John Paul II’s claim that the loss of truth as an aim leads to the enslavement of man to “caprice?”
3. John Paul II opens this work with an imagery that compares faith and reason to the wings of the human spirit. Using the final paragraph above as a guide, what does he seem to mean by this?
The Mystery of the Holy Innocents, Charles Peguy (selection from Part III, Session 2)
We now turn to a few poems from two great Catholic poets, which touch on themes of spiritual childhood (compare with filial adoption), fatherhood, how the Incarnation elevates human life into the Trinity, and the Blessed Virgin Mary.
You believe that children know nothing.
And that parents and grown-up people know something.
Well, I tell you it is the contrary.
…
It is the parents, it is the grown-up people who know nothing.
And it is the children who know
Everything.
For they know first innocence,
Which is everything.
…
Nothing is so beautiful as a child who falls asleep while saying its prayers, God says.
I tell you there is nothing so beautiful in the world.
I have never seen anything so beautiful in the world
And yet I have seen some beauty in the world
And I am a judge of it. My Creation overflows with beauty.
My Creation overflows with marvels.
There are so many one doesn’t know where to put them.
I have seen millions and millions of stars rolling at my feet like the sands of the sea.
I have seen days blazing like flames.
Summer days in June, in July, in August.
I have seen winter evenings laid down like a cloak.
I have seen summer evenings as calm and gentle as the descent of Paradise
All sprinkled with stars.
…
I have seen the dark, deep sea, and the dark, deep forest, and the dark, deep heart of man.
I have seen hearts devoured by love
Throughout a life-time
Lost in charity.
Burning like flames.
…
I have seen martyrs flaming like torches
Earning palms forever green,
And I have seen gathering beneath the iron claws
Drops of blood which glittered like diamonds.
And I have seen the dropping of many tears of love
Which will endure longer than the stars of the sky.
…
Well, I tell you, God says, I know nothing so beautiful in all the world
As a little child who falls asleep while saying his prayers
Under the wing of his Guardian Angel
And who laughs to the angels as he goes to sleep.
And who is already confusing everything and understanding nothing more
And who stuffs the words of the Our Father all awry, pell-mell into the words of the
Hail Mary
While a veil is already dropping on his eyelids
The veil of night on his face and his voice.
I have seen the greatest Saints, God says. Yet I say to you.
I have never seen anything so funny and in consequence I know nothing so beautiful in
the world
As the child who falls asleep saying his prayers
(As the little creature who falls asleep confidently)
And who jumbles his Our Father with his Hail Mary.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. What is beautiful about children falling asleep at their prayers?
What could be beautiful about martyrdom?
2. How are these aspects of beauty related to the beauty of Christ?
You believe that children know nothing.
And that parents and grown-up people know something.
Well, I tell you it is the contrary.
…
It is the parents, it is the grown-up people who know nothing.
And it is the children who know
Everything.
For they know first innocence,
Which is everything.
…
Nothing is so beautiful as a child who falls asleep while saying its prayers, God says.
I tell you there is nothing so beautiful in the world.
I have never seen anything so beautiful in the world
And yet I have seen some beauty in the world
And I am a judge of it. My Creation overflows with beauty.
My Creation overflows with marvels.
There are so many one doesn’t know where to put them.
I have seen millions and millions of stars rolling at my feet like the sands of the sea.
I have seen days blazing like flames.
Summer days in June, in July, in August.
I have seen winter evenings laid down like a cloak.
I have seen summer evenings as calm and gentle as the descent of Paradise
All sprinkled with stars.
…
I have seen the dark, deep sea, and the dark, deep forest, and the dark, deep heart of man.
I have seen hearts devoured by love
Throughout a life-time
Lost in charity.
Burning like flames.
…
I have seen martyrs flaming like torches
Earning palms forever green,
And I have seen gathering beneath the iron claws
Drops of blood which glittered like diamonds.
And I have seen the dropping of many tears of love
Which will endure longer than the stars of the sky.
…
Well, I tell you, God says, I know nothing so beautiful in all the world
As a little child who falls asleep while saying his prayers
Under the wing of his Guardian Angel
And who laughs to the angels as he goes to sleep.
And who is already confusing everything and understanding nothing more
And who stuffs the words of the Our Father all awry, pell-mell into the words of the
Hail Mary
While a veil is already dropping on his eyelids
The veil of night on his face and his voice.
I have seen the greatest Saints, God says. Yet I say to you.
I have never seen anything so funny and in consequence I know nothing so beautiful in
the world
As the child who falls asleep saying his prayers
(As the little creature who falls asleep confidently)
And who jumbles his Our Father with his Hail Mary.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. What is beautiful about children falling asleep at their prayers?
What could be beautiful about martyrdom?
2. How are these aspects of beauty related to the beauty of Christ?
The Story of a Soul, Saint Therese of Lisieux (selection from Part III, Session 3)
We end with a selection from Saint Thérèse of the Infant Jesus and of the Holy Face, who was declared a Doctor of the Universal Church by Pope John Paul II in 1997, who called her “a Teacher for our time.” Indeed, though she entered heaven in 1897, Saint Thérèse can be seen as the great, perhaps decisive, inspiration for the Second Vatican Council’s teaching on the universal call to holiness. Saint Thérèse teaches us the “little way” to heaven in entrusting ourselves to Jesus and concentrating on making simple sacrifices in the course of everyday life. This emphasis on littleness deepens our understanding of filial adoption, that is, our being made children of the Father through incorporation into the eternal Son. Jesus Christ is the eternal Child of the Father, and lives wholly on the will of the Father. We followers of Jesus can find no other way to happiness than in this mystery of Trinitarian littleness, this absolute dependence on love. And Thérèse’s little way makes clear that our everyday lives, in their minutest aspects, ought to embody the glory of God’s love. It also makes clear that all are called to holiness: there is a heroism in the self-sacrificial love of ordinary life (think of the love of parents) that may not appear spectacular but that is in fact world-shaking: the smallest act of genuine love opens the world to the torrent of Trinitarian love. Love is the source and goal of all: this is the mystery of the Trinity which enfolds all of space and time.
To be Your Spouse, to be a Carmelite, and by my union with You to be the Mother of souls, should this not suffice me? And yet it is not so. No doubt, these three privileges sum up my true vocation: Carmelite, Spouse, Mother, and yet I feel within me other vocations. I feel the vocation of the WARRIOR, THE PRIEST, THE APOSTLE, THE DOCTOR, THE MARTYR. Finally, I feel the need and the desire of carrying out the most heroic deeds for You, O Jesus. I feel within my soul the courage of the Crusader, the Papal Guard, and I would want to die on the field of battle in defense of the Church. …O Jesus, my Love, my Life, how can I combine these contrasts? How can I realize the desires of my poor little soul?
…During my meditation, my desires caused me a veritable martyrdom, and I opened the Epistles of St. Paul to find some kind of answer. Chapters 12 and 13 of the First Epistle to the Corinthians fell under my eyes. I read there, in the first of these chapters, that all cannot be apostles, prophets, doctors, etc., that the Church is composed of different members, and that the eye cannot be the hand at one and the same time. … Without becoming discouraged, I continued my reading, and this sentence consoled me: “Yet strive after THE BETTER GIFTS, and I point out to you a yet more excellent way.” And the Apostle explains how all the most PERFECT gifts are nothing without LOVE. That Charity is the EXCELLENT WAY that leads most surely to God.
I finally had rest. Considering the mystical body of the Church, I had not recognized myself in any of the members described by Saint Paul, or rather I desired to see myself in them all. Charity gave me the key to my vocation. I understood that if the Church had a body composed of different members, the most necessary and most noble of all could not be lacking to it, and so I understood that the Church had a Heart and that this Heart was BURNING WITH LOVE. I understood it was Love alone that made the Church’s members act, that if Love ever became extinct, apostles would not preach the Gospel and martyrs would not shed their blood. I understood that LOVE COMPRISED ALL VOCATIONS, THAT LOVE WAS EVERYTHING, THAT IT EMBRACED ALL TIMES AND PLACES.... IN A WORD, THAT IT WAS ETERNAL ! Then, in the excess of my delirious joy, I cried out : O Jesus, my Love.... my vocation, at last I have found it.... MY VOCATION IS LOVE ! Yes, I have found my place in the Church and it is You, O my God, who have given me this place. In the heart of the Church, my Mother, I shall be Love. Thus I shall be everything, and thus my dream will be realized.
…You know, Mother, I have always wanted to be a saint. Alas! I have always noticed that when I compared myself to the saints, there is between them and me the same difference that exists between a mountain whose summit is lost in the clouds and the obscure grain of sand trampled underfoot by the passers-by. Instead of becoming discouraged, I said to myself: God cannot inspire unrealizable desires. I can, then, in spite of my littleness, aspire to holiness. It is impossible for me to grow up, and so I must bear with myself such as I am with all my imperfections. But I want to seek out a means of going to heaven by a little way, a way that is very straight, very short, and totally new. We are living now in an age of inventions, and we no longer have to take the trouble of climbing stairs, for, in the homes of the rich, an elevator has replaced these very successfully. I wanted to find an elevator which would raise me to Jesus, for I am too small to climb the rough stairway of perfection. I searched, then, in the Scriptures for some sign of this elevator, the object of my desires, and I read these words coming from the mouth of Eternal Wisdom: “Whosever is a LITTLE ONE, let him come to me.” [Prov 9:4] And so I succeeded. I felt I had found what I was looking for. But wanting to know, O my God, what You would do to the very little one who answered Your all, I continued my search and this is what I discovered: “As one whom a mother caresses, so will I comfort you; you shall be carried at the breasts, and upon the knees they shall caress you.” [Is 66:12-13] Ah! Never did words more tender and more melodious come to give joy to my soul. The elevator which must raise me to heaven is Your arms, O Jesus! And for this I had no need to grow up, but rather I had to remain little and become this more and more.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. Relate Thérèse’s little way of love to the universal call to holiness described in Lumen gentium. Why do you think John Paul II found Thérèse to be so relevant to what the Holy Spirit is asking of Christians today, in a globalized modernity?
2. In what way is love the vocation of every Christian?
3. Reflect on spiritual childhood in Péguy and on the fact that the Blessed Virgin Mary, the greatest of all created persons, keeps nothing in reserve in her childlike Yes to the will of the Father. Is the “littleness” of childlikeness before God at odds with being a fully mature human man or woman? For what purpose do we seek to cultivate our spiritual powers to know and love?
To be Your Spouse, to be a Carmelite, and by my union with You to be the Mother of souls, should this not suffice me? And yet it is not so. No doubt, these three privileges sum up my true vocation: Carmelite, Spouse, Mother, and yet I feel within me other vocations. I feel the vocation of the WARRIOR, THE PRIEST, THE APOSTLE, THE DOCTOR, THE MARTYR. Finally, I feel the need and the desire of carrying out the most heroic deeds for You, O Jesus. I feel within my soul the courage of the Crusader, the Papal Guard, and I would want to die on the field of battle in defense of the Church. …O Jesus, my Love, my Life, how can I combine these contrasts? How can I realize the desires of my poor little soul?
…During my meditation, my desires caused me a veritable martyrdom, and I opened the Epistles of St. Paul to find some kind of answer. Chapters 12 and 13 of the First Epistle to the Corinthians fell under my eyes. I read there, in the first of these chapters, that all cannot be apostles, prophets, doctors, etc., that the Church is composed of different members, and that the eye cannot be the hand at one and the same time. … Without becoming discouraged, I continued my reading, and this sentence consoled me: “Yet strive after THE BETTER GIFTS, and I point out to you a yet more excellent way.” And the Apostle explains how all the most PERFECT gifts are nothing without LOVE. That Charity is the EXCELLENT WAY that leads most surely to God.
I finally had rest. Considering the mystical body of the Church, I had not recognized myself in any of the members described by Saint Paul, or rather I desired to see myself in them all. Charity gave me the key to my vocation. I understood that if the Church had a body composed of different members, the most necessary and most noble of all could not be lacking to it, and so I understood that the Church had a Heart and that this Heart was BURNING WITH LOVE. I understood it was Love alone that made the Church’s members act, that if Love ever became extinct, apostles would not preach the Gospel and martyrs would not shed their blood. I understood that LOVE COMPRISED ALL VOCATIONS, THAT LOVE WAS EVERYTHING, THAT IT EMBRACED ALL TIMES AND PLACES.... IN A WORD, THAT IT WAS ETERNAL ! Then, in the excess of my delirious joy, I cried out : O Jesus, my Love.... my vocation, at last I have found it.... MY VOCATION IS LOVE ! Yes, I have found my place in the Church and it is You, O my God, who have given me this place. In the heart of the Church, my Mother, I shall be Love. Thus I shall be everything, and thus my dream will be realized.
…You know, Mother, I have always wanted to be a saint. Alas! I have always noticed that when I compared myself to the saints, there is between them and me the same difference that exists between a mountain whose summit is lost in the clouds and the obscure grain of sand trampled underfoot by the passers-by. Instead of becoming discouraged, I said to myself: God cannot inspire unrealizable desires. I can, then, in spite of my littleness, aspire to holiness. It is impossible for me to grow up, and so I must bear with myself such as I am with all my imperfections. But I want to seek out a means of going to heaven by a little way, a way that is very straight, very short, and totally new. We are living now in an age of inventions, and we no longer have to take the trouble of climbing stairs, for, in the homes of the rich, an elevator has replaced these very successfully. I wanted to find an elevator which would raise me to Jesus, for I am too small to climb the rough stairway of perfection. I searched, then, in the Scriptures for some sign of this elevator, the object of my desires, and I read these words coming from the mouth of Eternal Wisdom: “Whosever is a LITTLE ONE, let him come to me.” [Prov 9:4] And so I succeeded. I felt I had found what I was looking for. But wanting to know, O my God, what You would do to the very little one who answered Your all, I continued my search and this is what I discovered: “As one whom a mother caresses, so will I comfort you; you shall be carried at the breasts, and upon the knees they shall caress you.” [Is 66:12-13] Ah! Never did words more tender and more melodious come to give joy to my soul. The elevator which must raise me to heaven is Your arms, O Jesus! And for this I had no need to grow up, but rather I had to remain little and become this more and more.
READING QUESTIONS:
1. Relate Thérèse’s little way of love to the universal call to holiness described in Lumen gentium. Why do you think John Paul II found Thérèse to be so relevant to what the Holy Spirit is asking of Christians today, in a globalized modernity?
2. In what way is love the vocation of every Christian?
3. Reflect on spiritual childhood in Péguy and on the fact that the Blessed Virgin Mary, the greatest of all created persons, keeps nothing in reserve in her childlike Yes to the will of the Father. Is the “littleness” of childlikeness before God at odds with being a fully mature human man or woman? For what purpose do we seek to cultivate our spiritual powers to know and love?
A Day in the Life of the Sophia Institute
Thursday; June 26, 2008
7:30 Breakfast
8:00 Morning prayer
8:30-10:00 Seminar I.2: The Happiness of this Life
11:00 Holy Mass
12:00 Lunch
1:00 Recreation
3:00-4:30 Seminar I.3: Happiness and the Christian Life
5:30 Evening Prayer
6:00 Supper
7:00-8:30 Seminar II.1: Philosophical Proofs for the Existence of God
9:00 Night Prayer and Benediction
9:30 Hospitality
9:30-11:00 Sacrament of Confession available)
11:00 Good night
7:30 Breakfast
8:00 Morning prayer
8:30-10:00 Seminar I.2: The Happiness of this Life
11:00 Holy Mass
12:00 Lunch
1:00 Recreation
3:00-4:30 Seminar I.3: Happiness and the Christian Life
5:30 Evening Prayer
6:00 Supper
7:00-8:30 Seminar II.1: Philosophical Proofs for the Existence of God
9:00 Night Prayer and Benediction
9:30 Hospitality
9:30-11:00 Sacrament of Confession available)
11:00 Good night
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
