"Love follows knowledge."
"Beauty above all beauty!"
– St. Catherine of Siena

Friday, August 30, 2024

Poetry Analysis: “The Quickening of John the Baptist” by Thomas Merton

Yesterday, August 29th was the Memorial of the Passion of St. John the Baptist, and you can read and pray more about it here at Catholic Culture.  

In my reading of the accolades to St. John the Baptist, I was also directed to a poem Thomas Merton wrote on St. John, not on his beheading but on his leap in his mother's womb when the Blessed Virgin arrived at her visitation to Elizabeth. I was absolutely floored by the beauty of this poem, "The Quickening of John the Baptist."  I want to present it here and provide a little analysis.  First the poem.

 

The Quickening of John the Baptist

On the Contemplative Vocation

By Thomas Merton

 

Why do you fly from the drowned shores of Galilee,

From the sands and the lavender water?

Why do you leave the ordinary world, Virgin of Nazareth,

The yellow fishing boats, the farms,

The winesmelling yards and low cellars

Or the oilpress, and the women by the well?

Why do you fly those markets,

Those suburban gardens,

The trumpets of the jealous lilies,

Leaving them all, lovely among the lemon trees?

 

You have trusted no town

With the news behind your eyes.

You have drowned Gabriel’s word in thoughts like seas

And turned toward the stone mountain

To the treeless places.

Virgin of God, why are your clothes like sails?

 

The day Our Lady, full of Christ,

Entered the dooryard of her relative

Did not her steps, light steps, lay on the paving leaves

like gold?

Did not her eyes as grey as doves

Alight like the peace of a new world upon that house, upon

miraculous Elizabeth?

 

Her salutation

Sings in the stone valley like a Charterhouse bell:

And the unborn saint John

Wakes in his mother’s body,

Bounds with the echoes of discovery.

 

Sing in your cell, small anchorite!

How did you see her in the eyeless dark?

What secret syllable

Woke your young faith to the mad truth

That an unborn baby could be washed in the Spirit of God?

Oh burning joy!

 

What seas of life were planted by that voice!

With what new sense

Did your wise heart receive her Sacrament,

And know her cloistered Christ?

 

You need no eloquence, wild bairn,

Exulting in your hermitage.

Your ecstasy is your apostolate,

For whom to kick is contemplata tradere.

Your joy is the vocation of Mother Church’s hidden children -

Those who by vow lie buried in the cloister or the hermitage;

The speechless Trappist, or the grey, granite Carthusian,

The quiet Carmelite, the barefoot Clare, Planted in the night of

contemplation, Sealed in the dark and waiting to be born.

 

Night is our diocese and silence is our ministry

Poverty our charity and helplessness our tongue-tied sermon.

Beyond the scope of sight or sound we dwell upon the air

Seeking the world’s gain in an unthinkable experience.

We are exiles in the far end of solitude, living as listeners

With hearts attending to the skies we cannot understand:

Waiting upon the first far drums of Christ the Conqueror,

Planted like sentinels upon the world’s frontier.

 

But in the days, rare days, when our Theotokos

Flying the prosperous world

Appears upon our mountain with her clothes like sails,

Then, like the wise, wild baby,

The unborn John who could not see a thing

We wake and know the Virgin Presence

Receive her Christ into our night

With stabs of an intelligence as white as lightning.

 

Cooled in the flame of God’s dark fire

Washed in His gladness like a vesture of new flame

We burn like eagles in His invincible awareness

And bound and bounce with happiness,

Leap in the womb, our cloud, our faith, our element,

Our contemplation, our anticipated heaven

Till Mother Church sings like an Evangelist.

 

The poem is in free verse with ten stanzas, or perhaps more accurately, ten sections that are separated by a space since they are so irregular I’m not sure “stanza” would apply.  The poem starts with the Virgin Mary off on her visitation to her cousin Elizabeth, who pregnant with St. John the Baptist.  If you number the sections of the poem from one through ten, I can summarize the narrative flow and gist of each.  Here is my section by section gist.

1 – Addressing the Blessed Virgin, the poet asks why are you traveling across the country?

2 – Still addressing the Virgin, the poet highlights points on the journey and asks her why her clothes are like sails?

3 – The poet narrates her arrival.

4 – The poet narrates Mary’s greeting and the awakening of St. John in the womb at the sound of her voice.

5 – The poet addresses John and asks how in his enclosed space could he see and hear the Blessed Mother?

6 – The poet still addressing John asks what her voice did to him, and to know she was carrying Christ?

7 – Still addressing John, the poet acknowledges the child’s in ability to speak except through the kick in the womb.

8 – Perhaps the key section of the poem where the poet contemplates John’s silence and enclosure and identifies it with the plight of humanity.

9 – The poet continuing his contemplation connects John’s pre-birth existence with the existential nature of humanity.

10 – The poet concludes his contemplation with a final identification of John, the poet, and the reader before Christ.

 “The Quickening” in the title refers to the moment St. John in the womb is enlivened by the presence and voice of the Virgin carrying her own child, the Christ.  So much of the poem is about contemplation.  The subtitle of the poem is “On the Contemplative Vocation,” which identifies John as fetus, in a contemplative vocation.  Perhaps all fetuses have the vocation—at least for those “cloistered” nine months—of a contemplative.  Indeed, in section seven, Merton identifies contemplative and cloistered religious orders: Trappists, Carthusians, Carmelites, and Poor Clares.  We know that Merton himself was a Trappist monk bound to the Abbey of Our Lady of Gethsemani in Kentucky.  And while it is not true that Trappists are never allowed to speak, they are required to limit their speech to only what is necessary.  So you can see how Merton as poet connects with John in the womb, the “small anchorite.”  An anchorite (or anchoress for feminine) is someone who is locked in a cell for the rest of their lives to pray and contemplate.  

There is also the contemplation identified with the Blessed Mother of God.  “But Mary kept all these things and pondered them in her heart” (Lk 2:19).  The Blessed Mother was witness to most of Christ’s life and His death, and so contemplated much.  Contemplation for Catholics starts with Mary.  In the poem she is identified with the sea—which connects with her title as Stella Maris, Our Lady of the Sea.  The vast sea has often through the ages been seen as an instrument that inspires contemplation.  To be on the sea and on a boat is to be isolated from society, and of course being submerged or drowned is a metaphor for the act of contemplation or being lost in thought.  (See the poem, “The Love Song of J. AlfredPrufrock” by T. S. Eliot and how he associates drowning with contemplation.)  When in section two Merton addresses Mary as having “drowned Gabriel’s word in thoughts like seas,” he is referring the Archangel’s words to Mary at the Annunciation.  She hasn’t discarded Gabriel’s words, but submerged them in her consciousness for later meditation.  Why are her clothes like sails?  Because she is navigating an ocean of introspective thought.

###

The first seven sections of the poem establishes the context for the last three sections as they culminate to a thesis.  Let’s look at the last three more closely.

“Night is our diocese and silence is our ministry/Poverty our charity and helplessness our tongue-tied sermon.”

Who is “our” referring to?  The poet as he identifies with St. John in the womb, and I would venture all of us reading who can similarly identify.  The darkness constitutes their church, and silence the ministry, that is the administering of a religious action.  “Poverty” and “helplessness” convey a beatitude in the limitations of transmitting the message, almost an echo of “Blessed are the poor in spirit” (Mt5:3). 

“Beyond the scope of sight or sound we dwell upon the air/Seeking the world’s gain in an unthinkable experience.”

Again, the “we” unifies the poet, St. John, and the reader, caught in a moment of anticipation, waiting for what I would guess is the incarnation of the second Person of the Trinity, building to the last four lines which need to be quoted together:


We are exiles in the far end of solitude, living as listeners

With hearts attending to the skies we cannot understand:

Waiting upon the first far drums of Christ the Conqueror,

Planted like sentinels upon the world’s frontier.

Absolutely breath-taking lines.  The reference to exiles is twofold at least.  Not only are they exiles because they are contemplatives in a world that is hardly contemplative—or perhaps even anti contemplative—they are exiles from their true home of heaven where the first parents were cast out to be exiles.  They (and we) are the “poor banished children of Eve,” but now “sentinels” on the “frontier” waiting for Christ to come and conquer death.  That moment of anticipation has now come, as we see in the ninth section.

 

But in the days, rare days, when our Theotokos

Flying the prosperous world

Appears upon our mountain with her clothes like sails,

Then, like the wise, wild baby,

The unborn John who could not see a thing

We wake and know the Virgin Presence

Receive her Christ into our night

With stabs of an intelligence as white as lightning.

Perhaps that is the poem’s climax; “We wake and know the Virgin Presence/Receive her Christ into our night.”  The statement is not just referring to the contemporaneous moment for St. John in the womb, but for all of us when every moment we realize and contemplate the incarnation, when in prayer the Blessed Mother visits us to bring Christ to us.

Finally in the tenth section we have a denouement.


Cooled in the flame of God’s dark fire

Washed in His gladness like a vesture of new flame

We burn like eagles…

Purified in fire and water presumably from contemplation, we now become like eagles, a symbol of transformed strength. 

 

…in His invincible awareness

And bound and bounce with happiness,

Leap in the womb, our cloud, our faith, our element,

Our contemplation, our anticipated heaven

Till Mother Church sings like an Evangelist.

We too in Christ’s awareness leap with joy at our now knowledge of our anticipated return to “home.” 

What a brilliant poem.  I have to admit I laughed out loud to this line in section seven: “Your ecstasy is your apostolate,/For whom to kick is contemplata tradere.”  As a Lay Dominican, I particularly understand the reference.  One of the Dominican Order’s mottos is Contemplata aliis trader, which translates into English as "to hand down to others the fruits of contemplation."  A Dominican is not supposed to just contemplate, but the fruits of that contemplation are supposed to be passed on to others.  So Merton refers to St. John’s kick in the womb as a passing on the fruit of the fetus’s contemplation.  I thought that was funny.

Finally John Michael Talbot turned that extraordinary eighth section into a song, “We Are the Exiles.” 

 


John Michael must have found that passage breathtaking as well.  It's a beautiful song but he did take some liberties with the lyrics to fit it better into song form.  I did find this blog post by an unfamiliar blog called Peaceable Wisdom where he posted the lyrics as sung as sung by JMT.  If you’re interested in the lyrics, you can check it out.

 

Wednesday, August 28, 2024

Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis, Post #2

This is the second of a series of posts on Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis.

You can find Post #1 here.  

 


On the first post of Mere Christianity, I provided an overview, a summary of the five chapters of Book 1, and presented the discussion of Book 1.  I didn’t have the space to provide some notable quotes from Book 1.  I could have, but I don’t think super long posts lend to a reader friendliness.  So here are some quotes from the five chapters of Book 1 that I think are memorable.

 

From Chapter 1: The Law of Human Nature

 

Every one has heard people quarrelling. Sometimes it sounds funny and sometimes it sounds merely unpleasant; but however it sounds, I believe we can learn something very important from listening to the kind of things they say. They say things like this: “How’d you like it if anyone did the same to you?”—“That’s my seat, I was there first”—“Leave him alone, he isn’t doing you any harm”—“Why should you shove in first?” “Give me a bit of your orange, I gave you a bit of mine”—“Come on, you promised.” People say things like that every day, educated people as well as uneducated, and children as well as grown-ups.

 

 

Now what interests me about all these remarks is that the man who makes them is not merely saying that the other man’s behaviour does not happen to please him. He is appealing to some kind of standard of behaviour which he expects the other man to know about. And the other man very seldom replies: “To hell with your standard.” Nearly always he tries to make out that what he has been doing does not really go against the standard, or that if it does there is some special excuse. He pretends there is some special reason in this particular case why the person who took the seat first should not keep it, or that things were quite different when he was given the bit of orange, or that something has turned up which lets him off keeping his promise. It looks, in fact, very much as if both parties had in mind some kind of Law or Rule of fair play or decent behaviour or morality or whatever you like to call it, about which they really agreed. And they have. If they had not, they might, of course, fight like animals, but they could not quarrel in the human sense of the word. Quarrelling means trying to show that the other man is in the wrong. And there would be no sense in 4trying to do that unless you and he had some sort of agreement as to what Right and Wrong are; just as there would be no sense in saying that a footballer had committed a foul unless there was some agreement about the rules of football.

 

 

…a man could choose either to obey the Law of Human Nature or to disobey it.

 

 

These, then, are the two points I wanted to make. First, that human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it. Secondly, that they do not in fact behave in that way. They know the Law of Nature; they break it. These two facts are the foundation of all clear thinking about ourselves and the universe we live in.

 

 

 

From Chapter 2: Some Objections

 

(Objection from Instinct)

If the Moral Law was one of our instincts, we ought to be able to point to some one impulse inside us which was always what we call “good,” always in agreement with the rule of right ivilize. But you cannot. There is none of our impulses which the Moral Law may not sometimes tell us to suppress, and none which it may not sometimes tell us to encourage. It is a mistake to think that some of our impulses—say mother love or patriotism—are good, and others, like sex or the fighting instinct, are bad. All we mean is that the occasions on which the fighting instinct or the sexual desire need to be restrained are rather more frequent than those for restraining mother love or patriotism.

 

 

(Objection from Social Convention)

There are two reasons for saying it belongs to the same class as mathematics. The first is, as I said in the first chapter, that though there are differences between the moral ideas of one time or country and those of another, the differences are not really very great—not nearly so great as most people imagine—and you can 11recognise the same law running through them all: whereas mere conventions, like the rule of the road or the kind of clothes people wear, may differ to any extent. The other reason is this. When you think about these differences between the morality of one people and another, do you think that the morality of one people is ever better or worse than that of another? Have any of the changes been improvements? If not, then of course there could never be any moral progress. Progress means not just changing, but changing for the better. If no set of moral ideas were truer or better than any other, there would be no sense in preferring ivilized morality to savage morality, or Christian morality to Nazi morality.

 

 

 

From Chapter 3: The Reality of the Law

 

The laws of nature, as applied to stones or trees, may only mean “what Nature, in fact, does.” But if you turn to the Law of Human Nature, the Law of Decent Behaviour, it is a different matter. That law certainly does not mean “what human beings, in fact, do”; for as I said before, many of them do not obey this law at all, and none of them obey it completely. The law of gravity tells you what stones do if you drop them; but the Law of Human Nature tells you what human beings ought to do and do not. In other words, when you are dealing with humans, something else comes in above and beyond the actual facts.

 

 

 

From Chapter 4: What Lies Behind the Law

 

The Law of Human Nature, or of Right and Wrong, must be something above and beyond the actual facts of human behaviour. In this case, besides the actual facts, you have something else—a real law which we did not invent and which we know we ought to obey.

 

 

The other view is the religious view.  According to it, what is behind the universe is more like a mind than it is like anything else we know. That is to say, it is conscious, and has purposes, and prefers one thing to another. And on this view it made the universe, partly for purposes we do not know, but partly, at any rate, in order to produce creatures like itself—I mean, like itself to the extent of having minds. Please do not think that one of these views was held a long time ago and that the other has gradually taken its place. Wherever there have been thinking men both views turn up.

 

 

The position of the question, then, is like this. We want to know whether the universe simply happens to be what it is for no reason or whether there is a power behind it that makes it what it is. Since that power, if it exists, would be not one of the observed facts but a reality which makes them, no mere observation of the facts can find it. There is only one case in which we can know whether there is anything more, namely our own case. And in that one case we find there is. Or put it the other way round. If there was a controlling power outside the universe, it could not show itself to us as one of the facts inside the universe—no more than the architect of a house could actually be a wall or staircase or fireplace in that house. The only way in which we could expect it to show itself would be inside ourselves as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way.

 

 

 

From Chapter 5: We have Cause to be Uneasy

 

We have not yet got as far as the God of any actual religion, still less the God of that particular religion called Christianity. We have only got as far as a Somebody or Something behind the Moral Law. We are not taking anything from the Bible or the Churches, we are trying to see what we can find out about this Somebody on our own steam. And I want to make it quite clear that what we find out on our own steam is something that gives us a shock.

 

 

Now, from this second bit of evidence we conclude that the Being behind the universe is intensely interested in right conduct—in fair play, unselfishness, courage, good faith, honesty and truthfulness. In that sense we should agree with the account given by Christianity and some other religions, that God is “good.” But do not let us go too fast here. The Moral Law does not give us any grounds for thinking that God is “good” in the sense of being indulgent, or soft, or sympathetic. There is nothing indulgent about the Moral Law. It is as hard as nails. It tells you to do the straight thing and it does not seem to care how painful, or dangerous, or difficult it is to do. If God is like the Moral Law, then He is not soft.

 

 

Christianity simply does not make sense until you have faced the sort of facts I have been describing. Christianity tells people to repent and promises them forgiveness. It therefore has nothing (as far as I know) to say to people who do not know they have done anything to repent of and who do not feel that they need any forgiveness. It is after you have realised that there is a real Moral Law, and a Power behind the law, and that you have broken that law and put yourself wrong with that Power—it is after all this, and not a moment sooner, that Christianity begins to talk.

Finally I really like this summary of C. S. Lewis and his work from Bishop Robert Barron, put out on YouTube on the 50th anniversary of Lewis’s death.

 



Monday, August 26, 2024

Matthew Monday: Adley Rutschman Bobblehead Day

This and a series of Matthew Monday posts will document the baseball games Matthew and I attended this year.  I already mentioned our Father’s Day game at the Staten Island FerryHawks, which is an Independent Minor League game.  Today I’ll mention our game down in Baltimore on July 28th between my beloved Baltimore Orioles and the San Diego Padres.  We even got to see former Orioles Manny Machado who had come up as an Orioles and who was traded—traded because he was going to be a free agent and Orioles weren’t going to pay him that huge salary he wanted—in 2017.  He got a warm reception.

Here are some pictures from the game.  We were sitting in left field, not far from the foul pole and just a couple of rows behind the left field wall.



I always love a picture of the Warehouse, that great brick building that was built in Babe Ruth’s day and is situated right behind the right field stands.



And here’s a couple of pictures of father and son both wearing Orioles tee shirts. 



 


For the record, Matthew is not, to his father’s dissatisfaction, an Orioles fan.

The game was great.  We got to see the Orioles win 8-6 with a big six run inning.  Now it was Adley Rutschman Bobblehead Day, and we each got an Adley Bobblehead doll.  Now Adley is a switch hitter, so they had two sets of bobblehead dolls, one batting right handed, the other left handed.  We had hoped that between the two of us, we would come away with one of each kind.  Unfortunately we did.  We both got a right handed batting Adley.  Now, where we were sitting, there was a man who had a whole bunch of boxes with Adley Bobblehead dolls.  At least six, if not more.  And I have no idea how and where he got them, and I was afraid to ask.  He asked if we wanted to trade one for the left handed batting Adely and we did!  So we got an Adley Bobblehead batting from each side of the plate.

Here’s a picture of both Adley dolls.



The black jersey is Adley left handed and the Orange is right handed.  We'll add these to our collection on baseball bobblehead dolls/

A fun time was had!  You can get the detailed box score of this game here.  

Sunday, August 25, 2024

Sunday Meditation: The Bread of Life, Do You Want to Leave?

So last week Jesus completed Hid Bread of Life Discourse, and now will respond to their reaction.  Let’s summarize first.  On the Seventeenth Sunday of Ordinary Time, we had the “sign” of Jesus’ divinity, the supernatural power to feed the multitudes, a precursor of sorts.  On the Eighteenth Sunday, we had the first part of the Discourse on the Bread of life, connecting Jesus with the Manna from heaven.  On the Nineteenth Sunday we have Jesus saying that He is the living Bread.  On the Twentieth Sunday, Jesus concludes His discourse telling us His flesh is the Bread of heaven, and that you must eat His flesh and drink His blood to have life.  Today there is a conclusion, or an epilogue if you will.  On the Twenty-First Sunday, Jesus makes clear it is not a metaphor and does not stop the listeners from leaving Him.

 

Many of Jesus' disciples who were listening said,

"This saying is hard; who can accept it?"

Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this,

he said to them, "Does this shock you?

What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending

to where he was before?

It is the spirit that gives life,

while the flesh is of no avail.

The words I have spoken to you are Spirit and life.

But there are some of you who do not believe."

Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe

and the one who would betray him.

And he said,

"For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me

unless it is granted him by my Father."

 

As a result of this,

many of his disciples returned to their former way of life

and no longer accompanied him.

Jesus then said to the Twelve, "Do you also want to leave?"

Simon Peter answered him, "Master, to whom shall we go?

You have the words of eternal life.

We have come to believe

and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God."

~Jn 6:60-69

 

Oh, again, Bishop Barron gives the best exegesis of this passage.    


Bishop Barron I think is the only one I have come across that touches on the Ascension in Verse 62.  If Jesus were to rise to heaven right in front of you, would you not believe?  But He doesn’t.  He will save that for later.

One verse that Bishop Barron does not touch on is on verse 63: “It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail.  The words I have spoken to you are Spirit and life.”  Some critics take this as proving Jesus is indeed speaking as His body and blood being a metaphor or symbol.  When Jesus says the “flesh is of no avail” and it is “the spirit that gives life” He is not referring to His flesh and spirit.  He is referring to your (or the apostles’ there) flesh and spirit.  What He is saying is that His body and blood will give your flesh life by infusing your spirit.

 

Sunday Meditation: "Do you also want to leave?"

 

But it always has struck me as Jesus putting them to the test in a way that doesn't fully reveal the full understanding of the Eucharist.  What if Jesus explained that they will be eating His body and blood under the accidents of bread and wine?  What if He explained it's only the substance of His body and blood they will be eating, not the accidents?  The accidents will remain something non-revolting?  Would everyone have left?  Maybe, maybe not.  It's only at the Last Supper that the full understanding of this passage will make sense.

Since Bishop Barron mentioned the Bob Dylan song, “Gotta Serve Somebody,"” this will be our hymn for the day.