Saturday, April 25, 2015

“Now Let’s Start Working Together”


The resignation of Pope Benedict XVI came as a shock to the entire Church. It had been the first time in centuries that a Pope had decided to leave the papacy. However, due to health related reasons, he felt as if he could not perform the duties which the Bishop of Rome entailed. Once the white smoke had risen towards the sky, the crowd within St. Peter’s square grew in anguish. I remember sitting in the common room at Saint Vincent College, alongside the rest of the Theology department and the Benedictine monks, as we waited to see the face of our new Pope.



The initial message to the crowd, given by the new Pope, is always significant. It represents to the Church, the thoughts and attitude of the new Pope as he begins his legacy in the papacy, leading the world wide Church. Pope Francis began by asking the crowd to pray for Bishop Emeritus Benedict XVI. He said, “Let us all pray together for him, that the Lord will bless him and that our Lady will protect him.”[1] They prayed together for the universal Church, so that all may know peace and sense the love of brotherhood. He stated that his hopes for his papacy are that together, we “may be fruitful for the evangelization of this beautiful city.”[2]



Pope Francis then requested a prayer intention from the crowd. This prayer request was unlike any other. He said, “Now let us begin this journey” and asked for all to pray to the Lord, so that he may bless him.   He asked for “the prayer of the people for their Bishop.”[3] This act of humility had already won over the hearts of many, for immediately people fell in love with Francis. Immediately following this, he blessed the Church, Urbi et Orbi meaning “To the City and to the World.”[4]


Pope Francis leaves the crowd by stating that tomorrow, he will pray to the Madonna for the protection of Rome. He chose to begin his papacy in prayer, prayer to the worldwide Church, our Blessed Mother, and God. Pope Francis’ mission thus far has been centered on the evangelization of Christ to the modern world. Reaching out to those of Christian faith and those not of Christian faith. His genuine love for humanity has been shown through his actions. I believe his papacy had begun during a time of uneasiness and unsureness among the faithful. Pope Francis’ message of love and hope set the tone for his papacy. By which he prays “that he may lead the Church for many years to come, and that he would grant peace to the Church throughout the world.”[5] The incredible first words which he had spoken from the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica, still ring in the hearts of the Church, “Now let’s start working together!” His humble words show that he recognizes the entirety of the Church as the body of Christ.




                [1] Pope Francis’ First Words (Vatican City: Vatican Radio, 2013). Found Recording at http://www.news.va.
                [2] Pope Francis’ First Words (Vatican City: Vatican Radio, 2013). Found Recording at http://www.news.va.
                [3] Pope Francis’ First Words (Vatican City: Vatican Radio, 2013). Found Recording at http://www.news.va.
                [4] Pope Francis’ First Words (Vatican City: Vatican Radio, 2013). Found Recording at http://www.news.va.
                [5] Pope Francis’ First Words (Vatican City: Vatican Radio, 2013). Found Recording at http://www.news.va.
Image 1 Found at: http://www.npr.org/
Image 2 Found at: http://www.rediff.com/

"Holiness is not the luxury of a few"

The Second Vatican Council called for spiritual renewal of the Church and the faithful. Pope John XIII called for an ecumenical council of Catholic bishops in order to renew the world wide Church in the 21st century. Pope John XIII stated, “They [clergy] must not engage in sterile academic controversies, but must find meaningful, positive, and fresh ways of stating the Church’s age-old doctrine”[1] This council is distinct from the others, for it is simply evangelizing the Church of Christ through refreshing Church doctrine in the minds of the modern world. This council’s aim was to direct the Church into the new ear. But after his unexpected death, the council was revealed to the world by the new Bishop of Rome, Pope Paul VI.



As a baptized member of the Catholic Church, each one of us is a priest. Not an ordained priest such as the priest at your home parish. However, as a baptized member of God, we are all priests, prophets and kings of Christ. Recognizing this duty which we are all called to fulfill, what does this mean for our vocation here on earth? A chapter within the document, Lumen gentium, calls each human being to holiness.[2] This piece of writing within the document calls upon the world wide Church to strive towards holiness. Christians within this modern era seem to understand holiness as only being attained by being an ordained priest or religious brother/sister. Our Roman Bishop reminds the world that each Christian is called to holiness and called to the sainthood. One does not have to be an ordained priest, religious brother or sister, or even a pope to attain holiness. The laity should strive for holiness within their heart, body and soul, striving to become saint-like. Regardless of the vocation which one is called to, one is called to live a life reflecting the image of God.


As spoken by Blessed Mother Teresa, “Holiness is not the luxury of a few. It is a simple duty for you and for me."[3] The universal call to holiness has created “a move to recognize more lay men and women as saints, as models of sanctity for lay Catholics.”[4] This understanding of holiness as a lay member of the Church is significant, for it portrays holiness as a humble sacrifice of one’s self.  The Church’s holiness flows from the holiness of our founder, Jesus Christ. Therefore, the holiness which we strive comes from the same source-Christ. “For example the second Eucharistic Prayer states "You are indeed Holy, O Lord, the fount of all holiness." Thus, it is not so much moral perfection as a sharing in the holiness of Christ who is our sanctification. Jesus called all to be holy and sent the Holy Spirit to make this possible.[5] At our baptism, entering into the body of Christ, we received holiness from our Lord. Through the sacraments, we receive the fruits of the Holy Spirit which serves as a foundation of our moral lives within the Church.


Each Christian is called to live a holy and Christ-like life, and the Second Vatican council calls the Body of Christ to universal holiness. This document serves as a reminder that holiness can be attained by simple people within the Church. One does not have to die for one’s faith, found a religious order, or give ones entire life to serving the poor in Calcutta to become holy. Each person in Christ is called to be like him, for we are all one in the Body of Christ. In the Gospel of John, he reminds us of the sacred words of Christ, "You did not choose me, but I chose you."[6]


                [1] Alan Schreck, The Compact History of the Catholic Church (Cincinnati: Servant Books, 2009),  131.
                [2] Schreck, The Compact History of the Catholic Church, 136.
                [3] “The Universal Call,” America Magazine (2011). Found at ebscohost.com.
                [4] “The Universal Call,” America Magazine (2011). Found at ebscohost.com.
                [5] Brian Dunn, “Sacrosanctum Concilium and the Call to Holiness,” Worship (2012).
[6] The Holy Bible: New American Bible the College Study Bible (Winona, MN: Saint Mary’s Press, 2007).  John 15:16.
Image Found at: http://carmeliteconnectconference.blogspot.com/2011/01/thought-for-week_31.html

Dialogue of Comfort Against Tribulation


Death is an inevitable suffering which every human must endure. Once death is upon us, how does one find solace when facing such uneasiness? St. Thomas More endured great suffering and tribulation while preparing for his death as a martyr. St. More was put to death, by decapitation, for his immutable belief that no lay ruler will ever triumph the divine ruler, God. More refused to declare that King Henry VIII held authority over the Church in England. Leading unto his inevitable death, More wrote a fictional dialogue titled, Dialogue of Comfort Against Tribulation. This story follows the heartfelt thoughts of a saddened nephew who remains in the presence of his dying uncle. His uncle, Anthony, speaks on finding comfort in the Lord when facing death.
The main theme which follows through the entirety of the book is that comfort alone comes from God. St. Thomas More even suggests that before we can be comforted by him, we must have faith in him. Anthony, the dying uncle, says

“For God is, and must be, your comfort, and not I. And he is a sure comforter, who (as he said unto his disciples) never leaveth his servants comfortless orphans, not even when he departed from his disciples by death. But he both sent them a comforter, as he had promised, the Holy Spirit of his Father and himself, and he also made them sure that to the world's end he would ever dwell with them himself.”[1]

This piece of writing is distinct from other fictional pieces, for these thoughts and values which are portrayed through the characters, are thoughts More’s own thoughts during his own time of tribulation. Thomas More had full understanding of his inevitable death, and in order to detail his thoughts on suffering, he wrote them down as a story. He understood that Christ is the sole source of comfort during out earthly sufferings. Thomas More wrote, “methinketh the greatest comfort a man can have is when he can see that he shall soon be gone”[2] As a person in the modern world, a world which seems so concerned with living in the moment, this thought appears rather shocking. If we all seek comfort during suffering and death, then how could one find the greatest amount of comfort when facing death? More explains that this is because we know that soon we will be with our God. Vincent cries to his dying uncle, on his heartache and fear that he will not find comfort in this world. He cries out to his uncle, seeking solace, because he knows he still has a long life to live, one that will place more time between him and the coming of the Lord. He seeks comfort and counsel in his dying uncle, for he weeps that he has little time left with him.

Vincent then questions his uncle as to who will teach him the virtues and the way of Christ when his dear uncle has passed. Vincent would often visit his uncle for his wise words. Anthony said to Vincent, that just as God will comfort you and never leave you alone, he will never leave you without teachers. He continues, God will bring teachers into your life, or he will teach you inwardly.

There also seems to be a theme of suffering which brings about our redemption and salvation in heaven with our Lord. Anthony tells his worried nephew, “And that point is to refer the final end of their comfort unto God, and to repute and take for the special cause of comfort that by the patient sufferance of their tribulation they shall attain his favour and for their pain receive reward at his hand in heaven.”[3] Our suffering is only temporary, for once we die and reach eternal salvation, and suffering will have been defeated. Suffering and death are only things which we endure during out temporary life on earth. If during these times we seek the comfort in our God, we will be comforted until our death. Which then, by his great mercy, we will live forever with him.

St. Thomas More


This piece is rather beautiful and inspiring in its message on suffering, death and finding comfort during times where we feel as if hope is all lost. It states that while we are in good spirits and health we should seek to know, understand and love God. For the foundation of comfort in the Lord is to first have faith in the Lord. As Christ spoke to his disciples, “I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.[4] Christ will not leave us as orphans, especially in moments where we need his embracing arms the greatest. If we believe in Christ and keep his commandments, he will never abandon us. Because we are from him, and we will return to him, true comfort during times of grief can only come from him. St. Thomas More centers the entire book on this belief.




                [1] St. Thomas More and Monica Stevens (eds), Dialogue of Comfort Against Tribulation (London: Sheed and Ward, 1951), 4.
                [2] More, St. Thomas and Monica Stevens (eds), Dialogue of Comfort Against Tribulation, 3.
                [3] More, St. Thomas and Monica Stevens (eds), Dialogue of Comfort Against Tribulation, 7.
                [4] The Holy Bible: New American Bible the College Study Bible (Winona, MN: Saint Mary’s Press, 2007).  John 14:18.

Image found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

Thursday, April 23, 2015

A Review of Ivanhoe, Why Are There no Good Priests?

Image taken from Amazon.com



            Sir Walter Scott’s novel, Ivanhoe, stirs the imagination with its villains and heroes, its knights and castles, and its love and hate.  Written in the early nineteenth century and set in England at the time of the Third Crusade, Ivanhoe was a literary success.  In spite of its classification as a historical novel, its history is inexact.
            Ivanhoe is set during the reign of King Richard I.  The friction between the Normans and the Saxons has not yet ended.  The Saxons feel oppressed, and the Normans feel superior.  This conflict between the two ethnic classes divides the characters into two opposing factions, and the novel’s sympathies are aligned with the Saxons.
            Ivanhoe, the novel’s title character, returns home from the Holy Land, but is unable to declare his presence openly since his father, Cedric, has dispossessed him.  While in England, Ivanhoe takes part in a tournament and defeats Sir Brian de Bois Guilbert, but is injured in the process.  Rebecca, who in many ways is the character that moves the story, cares for him.  While she is transporting Ivanhoe, she is captured by Sir Brian who tries to take her as his mistress, even though he is a member of the monastic Knights Templar.  When the castle of Torquilstone is sacked by Cedric, Robin Hood, and a mysterious Black Knight, Sir Brian brings Rebecca to Templestowe and is surprised by the Grand Master of the Templars.  Rebecca is tried and found guilty of bewitching Sir Brian.  She calls for a champion to defend her, and Ivanhoe fights and defeats Sir Brian.
            The storming of Torquilstone, the presence of Robin Hood, the tournaments all add to the excitement of the story.  However, the novel is not a simple action piece.  It is complex and biased.  One area of this bias is the presentation of the clergy.
            Every member of the clergy that appears in the story is shown to be corrupt.  The Templars are shown to be womanizers and seekers of wealth.  The one Templar who does not fall into this category is the Grand Master, yet he is shown to be hateful and superstitious.  Aside from the Templars, the Pryor Aymer, a Cistercian, is worldly, a confirmed lover of pleasure and ease.  He is even rumored to love the beauty of women too much.  The one cleric who is allied with the Saxons against the Norman oppressors is the Friar of Copmanhurst, Friar Tuck.  However, even Friar Tuck is not a good priest – he loves wine, battle, poaching deer.  He does not know his Latin, nor is he willing to hear the confession of one who is condemned to death.  In short, there is not a good priest in the novel.
            This poor opinion of the clergy has its roots in the state of the relations between the laity and the priests before the Reformation and even for some time after.  Helen Parish explores the origins of anticlericalism in England in an article titled, “It Was Never Good World Sence Minister Must Have Wyves”: Clerical Celibacy, Clerical Marriage, and Anticlericalism in Reformation England.  She explains that before the Reformation, many priests kept mistresses, and this did not help the English people hold their priests in high esteem.  They considered these priests to be whoremongers.[1]  When the clergy were permitted to marry under Edward VI, the absence of celibacy removed the sense of the priest as a consecrated minster from the minds of the laity.[2]
            The reign of Queen Mary did not help the perception of the English laity.  She brought England back to the Catholic Church, and in so doing, forbade married clergy.  Priest who had married had to either forgo the priesthood or separate from their wives and perform a public penance.  Parish writes:
The restoration of clerical celibacy might well have been welcomed in many parishes: however, the spectacle of widespread disciplinary proceedings against the clergy – certainly more widespread than pre-Reformation actions against incontinent priests – and the public penance and humiliation of married priests and their wives, was unlikely to make public perceptions of the priesthood any more positive.[3]
            The return of married clergy under Queen Elizabeth did not help to alleviate the negative perception the laity had of the clergy.  They still retained the perception of a married priest to be a womanizer.  This loss of respect for the clergy may be why Sir Walter Scott does not present the priests in thirteenth century England as shepherd of their flocks.
            Another element of the anticlericalism in Ivanhoe is his presentation of the Knights Templars.  The Templars are seen as being cabalistic, self-serving womanizers.  In fact, when the Templars were suppressed, these were some of the accusations brought against the order.  Helen Nicholson explores the origins of these accusations in her article, Saints or Sinners? The Knights Templar in Medieval Europe.   She explains that the Templars did become avaricious, however that “no critic before 1300 accused the Templars of immorality.”[4]  Nicholson references an English poet of the thirteenth century who claims that the Templars were so concerned about making money that they did not have time to pursue women.[5]
            While Scott’s characterization of the Templars does not seem accurate, it is understandable that he would use this accusation as immorality was one of the many accusations upon which Pope Clement V based his suppression of the order.[6]  His portrayal of the clergy reflect the cultural anticlericalism of England where priests were not seen to be faithful to their vows.  In the words that Sir Walter Scott places in the mouth of the Pryor Aymer: “Vows are the knots which tie us to heaven – they are the cords which bind the sacrifice to the horns of the altar – and therefore, as I said before, to be unloosed and discharged unless our Holy Mother Church shall pronounce the contrary.”[7]
            While clergy are not shown as shepherds of souls, the book itself is full many unexpected character twists.  Scott presents stereotypes, then makes the stereotypes complex, as in the case of Isaac the Jew.  He has condemnation of bias and bigotry coming from the Sir Brian, the story’s antagonist.  He shows prejudice in the good characters, and true charity only in a non-Christian.
            Ivanhoe is a complex novel filled with adventure, romance, and daring, and in spite of its anticlerical perspective, remains an interesting view of late thirteenth century England.  While the vision of the middle ages is not accurate, the book provides us with a glimpse of Sir Walter Scott’s romantic impression of the past.




[1] Hellen L. Parish, “It was never good sence minister must have wyves: clerical celibacy, clerical marriage, and anticlericalism in Reformation England,” Journal of Religious History 36, no. 1 (1 March, 2012) ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed April 21, 2015) 56
[2] Parish. “It was never good” 58
[3] Parish. “It was never good” 63
[4]  Helen Nicholson. “Saints or Sinners? The Knights Templar in Medieval Europe.” History Today 44, no. 12 (December 1994) Academic Search Premier, EBSCOHost. (accessed April 21, 2015) 33
[5] Nicholson. “Saints or Sinners?” 33
[6] Nicholson. “Saints or Sinners?” 30
[7] Sir Walter Scott. Ivanhoe (Signet Classics, New York. 2009) 55, 56

The Catholic Church Legitimizes Fascism?

Republican Communists desecrating the Sacred Heart
during the Spanish Civil War[1]


            On Sunday October 13, 2013, over five hundred Spanish martyrs were beatified.  This beatification ceremony was controversial since these were martyrs from the Spanish CivilWwar, and the Church was accused of being sympathetic to the Spanish “fascist” dictator, Francisco Franco.  According to The Guardian, “More than 100 support groups for victims of Franco’s forces wrote an open letter to the pope last week, calling him to apologize for the church’s role, which they said helped to legitimize ‘the military uprising and the Franco dictatorship that claimed so many victims.’”[2]  Who were these martyrs, and does their beatification give support to the military uprising of General Franco and his subsequent dictatorship?
            In 1931 King Alphonso XIII abdicated.  The government formed after his abdication closed Catholic schools, expelled the Jesuits, and removed all religious symbols off the walls of public buildings.[3]  In 1936, the Popular Front, a coalition of socialists and communists, took power and began to systematically eliminate the presence of the Catholic Church.[4]  Largo Caballero, the Spanish head of state, ordered the murder of bishops, priests, and nuns.  Whole convents were massacred, bodies of religious and priests were exhumed and defiled.  By the time Franco’s forces had seized control of Spain at least thirteen bishops, four thousand priests and seminarians, two thousand five hundred religious and nuns, and four thousand laymen had been martyred for the faith.[5]  Besides the killings, thousands of churches had been destroyed and religious articles desecrated.[6]
            Largo Caballero and the communists, also know as Republicans, had waged a war of extermination against the Catholic Church. They almost succeeded in their plan to crush the Church in Spain.  The greatest motive of those fighting the communists was to defend the Chuch.  The Carlists for example, Franco’s strongest and largest supporters, fought to defend the Church.
            Regardless of any problems that may or may not have existed in the course of Franco’s rule, the cause for the military uprising was just.  Spain’s culture was profoundly Catholic, and the majority of the people were members of the Church.  Democratic elections only served to increase the power of the Communists, and in spite of petitions seeking an end to the brutal attacks on the religious and the Church, the persecution only grew more powerful.  The military coup was an act of self-defense.
            Franco was maligned by the western powers during the Second World War because he would not join the Allies.  He is also branded with the label of fascism.  There are accusations of concentration camps and of a violent cleansing of the military after he had secured control of Spain.[7]  Many of the accusation may be fueled by those who were sympathetic to the communists, but the picture of Franco nonetheless remains confused.  He saved Spain from the communists, prevented the Nazi takeover of Gibraltar possibly ensuring Hitler’s eventual defeat, restored the Church to its former place in Spanish society, and rebuilt the Spanish economy.[8]  However, in doing these things, he may have also have been a coldhearted despot.  Regardless of how he ruled after the Spanish Civil War, the beatification does not provide commentary on his rule.
            These beatified Spanish were martyred for their faith.  They refused to abandon Christ and thus lost their lives, gaining the eternal possession of the vision of God as their reward.  This is what is honored by the beatification.  The only commentary that this ceremony gives regarding the political situation in Spain was that those who martyred these Spaniards had done evil.  The just military uprising and the controversy surrounding Franco’s rule have nothing to do with the declaration of beatification.  The only judgment passed by the Church was that these martyrs are blessed because they died for their faith and not because of Franco.



[1] Image take from: Pat McNamara Martyrs of the Spanish Civil War. (Patheos, 2015) patheos.com
[2] Paul Hamilos. “Vatican Beatifies over 500 “Martyrs of Faith’ Killed During the Spanish Civil War”. The Guardian (13 October, 2013) theguardian.com
[3] Anne W. Carroll, Christ the King Lord of History. (Tan Books and Publishers, Rockford. 1994) 424
[4] Carroll, Christ the King. 424
[5] Woldzimierz Redzioch, “The Martyrs of Spain’s Civil War”. CatholicCulture.org. (December 2007) catholicculture.org
[6] Redzioch, “The Martyrs”
[7] A+E Networks, “Francisco Franco” History (A+E Networks, 2015) history.com
[8] Carroll Christ the King.  426, 427

Impressionism – a Commentary on Modernism in the Church


      The nineteenth century was a pivotal point in European history.  The continent revolted against the last vestiges of Christendom.  This political revolution began in 1789 and ended with the conclusion of World War I in 1917.  Between these two dates, new thoughts and principles were violently enforced on the body politic of Europe.  Monarchs were overthrown; bloody riots occurred in all of the major European cities; modern philosophy overthrew man’s connection to reality; Liberalism and Modernism infected the Church.
      The philosophical underpinnings of this revolution was a distorted concept of liberty.  The philosophes of the French Revolution proposed that liberty meant a complete freedom of choice and of conscience, that the governing body had to respect the will of the people, and that the governing body had no power to determine moral absolutes other than what was pragmatic for keeping the peace.  Thus, these philosophers concluded, the government cannot infringe on the will of the people even if what the people want is considered immoral.  The people determine morality and truth.
      This shift in philosophical perspective, which began with Descartes, was a denial of the nature of reality.  Descartes claimed that the senses could not be trusted, and as the senses are how we know the world around us, this brought about doubt in the nature of truth.  This doubt began to be explored by other philosophers, such as Kant and Husserl.
Impressions: Sunrise by Claude Monet
            The philosophical and political revolutions in the nineteenth century were visually recorded, not just by their effects on subsequent events in the twentieth century in the world and the Church, but also in the changing nature of art.
      Art in the Middle Ages tended to be theocentric.  Most of the art contained religious themes, even the art that was not used for religious purposes.  In the Renaissance, the perfection of the human form was stressed as a result in a shift in societal perspective.  Man and his perfection, while still connected to religion, became the center of attention.  In the mid nineteenth century, artistic styles changed suddenly.  No longer were figures and shapes clearly delineated, but the colors blurred together, giving an impression of the subject.  Maria Teresa Benedetti in her contribution in The History of Art titled, “Impressionism,” says that this style was a representation of an experience of the senses.[1]  The focus was on what the eye perceived, and not on the nature of the subject.  This focus on perception or impression had its source in the political and philosophical upheavals of the 1800’s.
      Bruce Cole and Adelheid Gealt in Art of the Western World explain this upheaval:
In 1848, the year in which Marx and Engals published the Communist Manifesto, revolutions broke out in Paris, Vienna, Berlin, Venice, Milan, Parma, and Rome.  Though inspired by different circumstances, these revolts shared a common ideology centered on a growing belief in democracy, a sense of individual freedom, and an emerging social awareness.[2]

Beach Scene: Guernsey 
by Pierre Auguste Renoir
      Cole and Gealt claim that this political revolution was also shared by artists who “…challenged the philosophy and the aesthetic principles of the academies”.[3]  Kenneth Clark in his study, Civilisation, makes a similar observation about two of the first French Impressionists, Gustave Courbet and Jean Francois Millet: “They were both revolutionaries; in 1848 Millet was probably a communist, although when his work became fashionable the evidence for this was hushed up; Courbet remained a rebel and was put in prison for his part in the Commune – very nearly executed”.[4]  As the political revolutionaries challenged the conventions of the old political order, so the artists seemed to challenge the traditional conventions of art.  Art no longer attempted to faithfully reproduce reality.  Instead artists presented their perception of the world.  For this reason, clear delineation was no longer used – after all, how can we be sure enough of reality to reproduce it?  Impressionism reflected the destruction of a social order that had been founded on ten fixed rules – the Ten Commandments.  As morality had become something which the people determine and was no longer something to which the people had to follow, so the very rules of painting had become arbitrary.
      An understanding of what happened to secular society and the world of art in the nineteenth century can help to clarify the sources of Modernism in the Church.  As truth and liberty became subjective, so religion became subjective as well.  According to Pope Pius X in his condemnation of Modernism in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, Modernism claims that religion has it source in a personal religious experience, a vital immanence welling from the subconscious and revealing the divinity.  For the Modernist, God was no longer someone outside who reveals His reality to all mankind, rather He is within, revealing Himself to us individually through experience and in different ways to different people.[5]  The same philosophical thought that led artists to present impressions instead of reality, also caused theologians to speak of personal religious experience instead of the truth of the Divine nature.
      Art and religion and philosophy are intimately connected.  While philosophy has often been called the handmaid of theology, art is the reflection of both.  Claude Monet and Pierre Renoir reflect the denial of objective reality of transcendental truths.  Impressionism visually shows us what was happening in Europe and the Church.








[1] Maria Teresa Benedetti. “Impressionism.” The History of Art. (W. H. Smith, New York. 1989) 319
[2] Bruce Cole and Adelheid Gealt. Art of the Western World. (Simon & Schuster, New York. 1989) 235
[3] Cole and Gealt, Art of the Western World. 236
[4] Kenneth Clark. Civilisation: A Personal View. (BBC Books, 1969) 339
[5] St. Pius X. On the Doctrines of the Modernists, Pascendi Dominici Gregis. (8 September, 1907) §7

___________________________________________________________________________
Sources:
Benedetti, Maria Teresa. “Impressionism.” The History of Art. (W. H. Smith, New York, 1989)
Clark, Kenneth. Civilisation: A Personal View. (BBC Books. 1969)
Cole, Bruce and Adelheid Gealt. Art of the Western World. (Simon & Schuster, New York, 1989)
Monet, Claude. Impressions: Sunrise. 1872. (claudemonetgallery.org. 2015)
Pope Pius X.  On the Doctrines of the Modernists, Pascendi Dominici Gregis. (8 September, 1907)
Renoir, Pierre Auguste. Beach Scene: Guernsey. 1881. (renoirgallery.com. 2015)

Thursday, April 16, 2015

The Devout Life: Easy Sailing

Introduction to the Devout Life by Francis de Sales (Patron Saint of Journalists and Writers)
Translated with introduction by John K. Ryan
Published by Image Books

Reading Introduction to the Devout Life by Francis de Sales is like having your soul read by this fascinating Saint. It is written in letter form, addressed to Philothea, but as I read, I truly felt as though the Saint were addressing me personally. The depths of insight into the human soul that Francis de Sales exhibits strike to the very core of the reader. Not only is his simple style appealing, but his use of distinct imagery and metaphors conveys the truth in a digestible form that even the most novice reader can understand and endeavor to apply to his life. This astute Saint also beckons wisdom from Saints who came before him with meaningful quotes as well as examples of their lives which illustrate his advice in action. Francis has succeeded in putting on paper such indispensable wisdom, which ought to be required reading for RCIA and Confirmation classes. He has a most genius way of articulating universal experiences of the interior life—explicating seemingly ineffable notions that I have never been able to put into words myself. And it’s all here in this 333-page book, written 400 years ago, but how many today are remiss in never having heard of this tremendous, life-changing spiritual work. I hope to make more people aware of just how impactful this book can be in one’s life.

A first edition of Francis’ book appeared in 1609, with the final edition being printed in 1619. By 1656, the translator cites, the Introduction had been translated into seventeen different languages. This is a rare case where the Saint’s writings were indeed popular among his contemporaries. Keep in mind, this was also not long after the Reformation had begun, so a need for Catholic spiritual renewal was paramount. The conception for the book arose from his correspondence with one of his penitents, Mme. de Charmoisy, who was married to a relative of his. She shared his letters of spiritual direction with a Jesuit father, who suggested his advice be made available to the public. Francis got on board and minimally edited three editions to make them more applicable to a general audience. He is extremely humble throughout, but particularly in his Preface where he claims not to be devout and to only be sharing the collected wisdom of others. Also, it is interesting to note that his choice of name for his addressee is fittingly Philothea, whose Greek root means love (philo-) of God (theo- feminized to thea-). It is a general term for any soul who reads the book, since pursuing the devout life entails a deep love and desire for God. The translator, John K. Ryan, notes that the power of this book is attested to by the fact that King Charles I ordered all the copies in England to be seized and burned in 1637. 

As far as the structure of the book is concerned, it made my soul sing. A well-ordered book can go a long way in helping the reader comprehend the subject matter. It is divided into 5 parts, with 119 short chapters with felicitous headings. Actually, the order is somewhat reminiscent of the current Catechism of the Catholic Church, especially due to the frequent references to Scripture and to the words and lives of the Saints. The Introduction is extremely easy to navigate, especially when returning after an initial reading, as one will, to refresh on a certain difficulty. As Ryan writes in his introduction to the Introduction, Francis clearly lays out for the soul both “the theory and practice of the purgative way, the illuminative way, and the unitive way, the three levels of thought and conduct that are required for a completely moral and religious life.” 

Francis’ book was also quite the game-changer for his time because in large part, spiritual direction was reserved for clergy and religious. One could say the Introduction has served as a restoration of the universal call to holiness because he highlights the diversity of gifts which require Christians in various states of life to pursue the road to holiness in different, but equally meritorious ways. Francis’ tone throughout the book is that of a loving father, who draws the soul toward beauty, truth and goodness (especially with his poetic use of metaphor). Also, he is quick to express the undiluted Truth in admonishing bad tendencies and motives within the soul, which constitute the stagnant pool that breeds sin. But, it is always leveled with love and care. In some ways, this method recalls Dante’s use of the whip and the reign in the Purgatorio—urging souls onward with the beauty of virtue and keeping souls reigned in by sharing those bad qualities that prevent virtue and lead to spiritual death.

It is difficult to adequately give any type of summary of this treasury due to it’s surpassing comprehensiveness. The more fruitful route may be to simply give a taste of the sweetness of Francis’ writing so people will desire to read more for themselves. I would like to give some examples of Francis’ metaphors because they are far too beautiful and powerful to simply paraphrase or allude to. First of all, I found the most striking example to be when he gives a whole new meaning to the Biblical laboring in the vineyard: 

“Amid the difficulties you meet in the exercise of devotion, remember the words of our Lord: ‘A woman about to give birth has great sorrow, but when she has brought forth her child, she no longer remembers the anguish for joy that a man is born into the world.’ Within your soul you have Jesus Christ, the most precious child in the world, and until he is entirely brought forth and born you cannot help suffering from your labor. But be of good heart for these sorrows will pass and everlasting joy will remain with you for having brought forth such a man into the world. He will be wholly brought forth for you when you have wholly formed him in your heart and deeds by imitating his life.”

Furthermore, Francis gives a lovely idea of a Spiritual Bouquet that differs from the common use of the term today, which infers prayers we offer God as a spiritual gift to someone else. He writes about this spiritual bouquet which we ought to gather from the garden of spiritual meditation and prayer:

“You must gather a little devotion bouquet . . . People who have been walking about in a beautiful garden do not like to leave without gathering in their hands four or five flowers to smell and keep for the rest of the day. In the same way, when our soul has carefully considered by meditation a certain mystery we should select one, two, or three points that we liked best and that are most adapted to our improvement, think frequently about them, and smell them spiritually during the rest of the fay. This is done in the place where we meditated, either remaining there alone or walking by ourselves for some time.”

All in all, this book is a brilliant window into the workings of the soul, which are often neglected in the hustle and bustle of today’s world. St. Francis adamantly tells all his readers, we Philothea’s that no matter the level of external activity required of us in life, it is possible and indeed vital that we embark on this journey of spiritual growth. St. Francis himself had many duties to fulfill, and he tells us of St. Catherine of Siena who lived a very busy life, but she learned to create an inner prayer cell in her heart, which was simply a constant awareness of the presence of God. This cell can be a source of strength that is necessary to fulfill our earthly duties, and we must remember that all our duties on earth need to be oriented toward God, even if it seems to be simple housework or the meanest of occupations. Everything in life can be offered to Jesus, who was a carpenter Himself for the majority of His life. Francis writes that we must seek grace in prayer, both communal and private, and the Sacraments if we are to make any attempts at living life in God. Perseverance in prayer and continual repentance are key to Francis’ entreaty  for us to practice the universal Christian call to holiness. I will leave you will some of his final words to Philothea in the Introduction:

“Perform these exercises confidently . . . and God will give you sufficient leisure and strength to perform all your other duties. Yes, even though he should have to make the sun stand still for you, as he did for Joshua. We always do enough when God works with us.”