Category

Why Aren’t We Saints?

Aug 04
0

Two Husbands Begin Studying the Writings of G.K. Chesterton: A Letter to a Dear Friend

By | Marriage & Family, Why Aren't We Saints? | No Comments

A dear friend recently emailed me and the opening sentence read as follows:

This may seem like a trick question to you, but would you like to read Chesterton with me?

He asks in this fashion because I have a bad habit in our men’s group of rather incessantly quoting the great Gilbert. My response was, of course, quite positive and in fact I was so invigorated and inspired by his request, that my resulting letter to him ended up being a bit of a tome. Through the urging of my wife, I decided to post it, in case it inspires any other men out there to begin a similar study.
*****

What a delightful email to have received, for a number of reasons:

First, it is a continuing testament to the importance of Catholic men supporting each other in the faith. I appreciate so heartily that in our group we have fellowship with other guys who take the their vocations to holiness and family life so seriously.

Of course the real test of such seriousness is that when it becomes clear that some new action is needed, we respond to the call. Our men’s group has shown that seriousness by challenging each other to greater accountability and weekly resolutions. And now, this suggestion of yours I do think is yet another important step.

Second, a few years ago the thought of having a “Chesterton” group seemed a little narrowly focused to me. Though even then I had read some of Gilbert’s writings and knew generally of their importance, he as yet seemed to be simply an important figure to be read and learned from among others.

But in the last few years I have steeped myself in his writings, particularly those that pertain to the vocation of the family, and have only just finished reading the long and definitive biography by Maisie Ward. I have lived and breathed Chesterton.

I can truly say now that I understand why there is a push to open a cause for his canonization.

Like one of the great saints or doctors of the Church, he really is one that you could steep yourself in, learn from and imitate. In fact I have taken to asking for He and his wife’s intercession, for in them I find a wonderful model of marital fidelity and love, and in his writings one of the most compelling visions of the full richness and glory prepared for us, even this side of Heaven, in the family.

It is hard to put fully into words, but though I hitherto identified Chesterton more with philosophy and politics, his writings more important “out there” on the level of the culture wars, I have discovered more and more that his greatest triumph, the most distinct and transcendent threads of thought that run through his writings, all lead back to the family – the wonder of the basic human experience of this gifted universe, the glorious call to holiness of every man and woman, and the pre-eminence of the family as both the pillar and peak of human society and the primary place – there in the domestic Church – that God comes to meet man.
 
Thirdly, to reiterate the first point and your own sentiment: a test of seriousness is whether we take action. However, in the spirit of Chesterton here, in a time of history in which everyone is perpetually tempted to the futility of focusing on that which is beyond their sphere of influence and should be beyond their sphere of the better part of their concern – national politics, the culture wars, the economy, etc – how glorious, how radical, how chivalrous is it for a few, or even two, good men to reject this siren call and to rise to the far greater and ultimately more efficacious challenge of simply sanctifying themselves and their own families? What our world needs is, simply, saints, and saints come properly and primarily from Holy Families, and those striving for Holy Families, methinks, will find no better patron than G.K. (and Frances!) Chesterton.

So, thanks again for this email, and a hearty “yes!” is my answer. Early morning would be best, I’d be happy to host and provide fine and fresh (local!) coffee for discussion. The three books I’d recommend we begin our study with would be “Orthodoxy”, “Heretics”, and “ What is Wrong with the World”, the last of which, as you’ll see, is Chesterton’s great guidebook for the modern family (and upon which I am writing a book about). There are also a couple short fictional works we might read too, particularly “Manalive”.

And lest ye think I have, in my Chestertonian revelry, lost sight of the point and purpose of this study: It is to seek out and carry back to our homes (and to the other men in our group!) whatever will sanctify and enliven our families, for the Glory of God. In a sense one can rarely if ever discover anything new in this regard, and yet in an important way Catholic families must break new ground, for we have few models for how to fully live the Gospel in the family in this overwhelming and distressing age. Like Innocent Smith, the protagonist in Chesterton’s  “Manalive”, we set out as husbands on pilgrimage around the world, in our case into Chesterton’s writings, our only purpose being to end up back where we started and there to see our wives, children, and homes anew, in all their glory and wonder.

God be with you brother!

JonMarc Grodi

Sep 10
0

You Have Nothing Better To Do

By | Marriage & Family, Philosophy and Culture, Uncategorized, Why Aren't We Saints? | 4 Comments

In my recent post “Discernment and the Hard, Long, Right Road Beneath Your Feet” I pointed out that as we discern what to do with our lives, since God never intends us to reach some good end via evil means, we can rule out options, however attractive, which seem to necessitate blameworthy shortcuts. Either we have been deceived (from within or without) about the actual goodness of the good we have in mind, or it is indeed a good, but not one we are being called to do, or perhaps we are and we just have to be patient. With this in mind, I concluded by talking a bit about this very challenging notion that, thus, in some sense, the road we are on is the road we are meant to be on. It doesn’t mean God doesn’t have something better in mind for us and it doesn’t mean that if we are in dire straits we are meant to stay there, but it does mean that the next step is most likely somewhere within 2-3 feet from where we are standing (give or take a bit, depending on the length of your legs).

With this in mind, here is an interesting question: Is the familiar colloquialism “I have better things to do” ever really true? When we say, merely mutter, or mentally muse “I have better things to do,” we assert that the present frustration or inanity is keeping us from something more important – something “better”. But is this really the case? What does “better” mean here?

Sure, in the general, abstract, objective sense there may be higher goods than are attainable in the long line at the grocery store, or when faced with the third poopy diaper in the span of 10 minutes, or when having to go help with breakfast whilst one’s magnum opus lies unfinished on the computer screen (alas!). However, the good/best (or evil/worst) actions are also contextual:

…the morality of every human act is determined by the object, the circumstances and the intention. If any one of the three is evil, then the human act in question is evil and should be avoided.  – What Makes Human Acts Good or Bad? by Fr. Kenneth Baker, S.J.

As we can only ascertain the “better” in light of the “best,” and since the “best” actions (in a moral sense) must not only be good objectively but also good in relation to our circumstances and the state of our heart, I find the conclusion rather inescapable: There is never a moment in which I really have “better things to do” than those right in front of me, as frustrating, humbling, or inane as they may be.

Whatever situation I am currently in is the one which I am (now) called to embrace with heroic virtue. No matter where we are going, to whatever more exciting or glamorous goods we are impatient to get started on, our next step is right in front of us and it is that step, first (temporally) and foremost (eternally) that we must seek to live out as perfectly as we can.

So, wait patiently in that grocery store line and be sure to give the cashier a smile. Change that poopy diaper whilst singing “Bingo,” and be prepared for a fourth barrage. And go ahead and hit save on that magnum opus because…

*yells* “I’m coming down, sweetheart!”

… you really have nothing better to do.

(Click here to read more of my musings on holiness in the now: One Day Holy)

Aug 23
0

Discernment and the Hard, Long, Right Road Beneath Your Feet

By | Why Aren't We Saints? | 4 Comments

Christian discernment takes patience and prayer and is not something easily reducible to a few simple axioms or methods. However, through the use of our reason we can at least approach discernment having ruled out certain impossibilities. One thing that we can be sure of, for example, is that God will never intend for us to sin as a means of accomplishing or reaching a good. The question of “ends and means” may be a familiar one in regards to imagining more extreme circumstances, but consider a more ordinary example:

Read More
Aug 22
0

Lying and Other Obstacles to Truth

By | Truth, Why Aren't We Saints? | No Comments

I very much appreciated Leah Libresco’s succinct treatment of the topic of lying that was featured on Strange Notions today as the third in a series of articles about the topic. Her title was “Interfering with the Eschaton:Why Lying is wrong”.

As I have read the various explorations of the topics over the past couple of years I have had to agree with Leah and others who conclude that lying simply can’t be rationalized the way we sometimes want it to be. The world is broken and in need of healing and any time we deal with this difficulty through sinful means, we have passed the buck. We have insisted that the heroic virtue is someone’s else’s job,

This is not a comfortable conclusion but it is the one that seems most logically coherent with how I understand the world. It makes me uncomfortable in precisely the way that the cross makes me uncomfortable.

Near the end of her article, Leah introduced a very important point:

Honesty is a starting point; you can take the duty to avoid passive deception much further. Humans are prone to any number of biases that make it hard to hear or notice the truth. You may be telling the truth when you use CAPS LOCK, but you’ve made it harder for your interlocutor to listen to you. Tone can be as effective a barrier to truth as misdirection.

This caught my eye because the problem of inadvertently (or sometimes intentionally) erecting unnecessary barriers for other people to come to the truth is a favorite topic of mine and one I plan to write on more. On the topic of the morality of lying, this excerpt introduces an aspect of the the debate that I have wanted to address.

To Leah and others who have so eloquently treated this issue and explained the tough conclusion that lying is simply wrong, I would like to make a suggestion per not erecting unnecessary barriers to others whom we would like to help see this truth.

While I myself have come to accept this tough conclusion, I sympathize (perhaps because of the recency of my change in thinking) with those whose gut-reaction in response to the hypothetical Nazi scenario is to rationalize lying. One of the difficulties here is that we have too much hollywood and not enough saints. We have a plethora of mental images of how easy it would be to lie and all the goods that might come in consequence, and we have little mental material with which to imagine the alternative.

I think it would be helpful (as well as charitable) for some of the excellent writers and thinkers on this topic to indulge people who are morally paralyzed by such hypothetical scenarios by exploring what the alternatives to lying might be. If the Nazis really do show up at our doors tomorrow morning, and yet we are convicted against lying, what should we do? What does it look like? Let me be quite clear: I am not asking this rhetorically as a sort of “gotcha” as is the cliche, I am sincerely asking a question which I suspect is probably on the minds of many well-intentioned but troubled souls. We need to help re-populate the moral imaginations of those who find this a “difficult teaching”. (Would any good fiction writers out there like to take up the task? Or do you have some good sci-fi scenarios to recommend?)

Refusing to sympathize with such people and to address their concerns, I think, would be an example of one of these unnecessary barriers to truth. We may be tempted to consider such concern with contempt, perhaps recollecting our own past weaknesses and rationalizations, but we mustn’t lose souls in our enthusiasm to assert the point. Just as the rejection of lying involves embracing the Truth over what is immediately gratifying or comforting, so does tempering self-satisfaction and indignation such that we can speak charitably and sympathetically to those in doubt. As Leah states: “Love begins by not placing any new obstacles in the way of our neighbors.” If we want more people to be freed by this tough truth, let us love them enough to attempt to tell the Truth in a way that will help them better hear it (i.e. wight he CAPS LOCK turned off for starters).

In closing, we should expect to be challenged by the Truth and suspicious when we aren’t. In this case, the easy but ultimately wrong road is unfortunately a very familiar one in our minds. Speak the truth in charity, sympathize with those who are troubled, and regarding this particular topic, help people imagine what the hard but right road might look like – you may give them the nudge they need to embrace the cross.

(Caveat: Any potential character flaws alluded to in this piece are directed at the only soul I have first-hand knowledge of: my own. They may be of limited relevance to the rest of the world.)