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

Thursday, January 22, 2026

Short Story Analysis: “To Build a Fire” by Jack London, Part 1

This is the first of two posts on my analysis of Jack London’s short story, “To Build a Fire.”



The first thing to realize about this story is that there are two versions, one London wrote in 1902 and one in 1908.  They are significantly different though the premises of the stories are the same.  I had read the 1902 version of “To Build a Fire” and never thought much of it. I could not understand how it could be so famous. I just had an opportunity to revisit the story.  It was the 1908 version and it was great. This I can see being a great story.  It is incredibly tense. 

Jack London is best remembered as the author of The Call of the Wild, a novel set in the arctic Yukon from the point of view of a house dog who finds himself lost in the arctic and reverts to his wild instincts.  He also wrote another novel, almost equally as good, called White Fang, a novel from the point of view of a wild arctic wolfdog that gets domesticated.  I loved both novels and recommend them both.  Jack London lived only to 40 years old (1876-1916) and was an adventurist, journalist, and writer.  He used the experiences from his adventures to form most of his fiction.  If you want to compare London with various writers, I would say good analogues would be Stephan Crane and Ernest Hemingway.  London’s writing can be categorized as Naturalism, a literary movement in the late 19th century that sought to view humanity as mere animal and nature as deterministic, overwhelming, and confining.  In that sense, Stephan Crane might be a closer analogy than Hemingway, though there is some of that in Hemingway as well.  Whether you agree with the philosophy or not, it makes for great outdoor adventure stories.

“To Build a Fire” is also set in the Yukon north, but this 1908 story is told from the point of view of an unnamed human, male narrator.  [The 1902 version, the point of view is also from a male character, Tom Vincent, who needs to build a fire to stay alive in the Yukon but in that version that character calmly builds the fire and survives.  There is no dog in the 1902 version and is about one-third the length of the 1908 version.]  The narrative is one direct arc from setting off on the Yukon trail to meet up with his friends in a camp to ultimately * SPOILER * collapsing and freezing to death.  For the purpose of analysis, I divide the story into six parts.  I will walk you through the six parts.

First though, if you wish to read the story, you can find it online at American Literature.Com.  There are a number of audio reads on YouTube of “To Build a Fire” but frankly the best read is from a Substack called Classics Read Aloud.  Ruby Love, the owner of the Substack is a fantastic reader.  In my analysis, I will be citing from the Short Stories of Jack London: Authorized One Volume Edition, Edited by Earle Labor, Robert C. Leitz III, Milo Shepherd; Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 1991. 



###

Part 1:

The man sets off on the Yukon trail to meet up with his friends who are at camp some ten miles away (p. 282) and concludes at twelve noon when the man comes to a fork in the road (p. 286).  It is cold, colder than what the man understands, and though he is conscious of the danger ignores it.  Here is the opening paragraph that speaks to the strangeness of the environment.

 

Day had broken cold and grey, exceedingly cold and grey, when the man turned aside from the main Yukon trail and climbed the high earth- bank, where a dim and little-travelled trail led eastward through the fat spruce timberland. It was a steep bank, and he paused for breath at the top, excusing the act to himself by looking at his watch. It was nine o'clock. There was no sun nor hint of sun, though there was not a cloud in the sky. It was a clear day, and yet there seemed an intangible pall over the face of things, a subtle gloom that made the day dark, and that was due to the absence of sun. This fact did not worry the man. He was used to the lack of sun. It had been days since he had seen the sun, and he knew that a few more days must pass before that cheerful orb, due south, would just peep above the sky- line and dip immediately from view.  (282)

Following the man is a dog who’s instinct understood the danger better than the man.

 

At the man's heels trotted a dog, a big native husky, the proper wolf-dog, grey-coated and without any visible or temperamental difference from its brother, the wild wolf. The animal was depressed by the tremendous cold. It knew that it was no time for travelling. Its instinct told it a truer tale than was told to the man by the man's judgment. In reality, it was not merely colder than fifty below zero; it was colder than sixty below, than seventy below. It was seventy-five below zero. Since the freezing-point is thirty-two above zero, it meant that one hundred and seven degrees of frost obtained. The dog did not know anything about thermometers. Possibly in its brain there was no sharp consciousness of a condition of very cold such as was in the man's brain. But the brute had its instinct. It experienced a vague but menacing apprehension that subdued it and made it slink along at the man's heels, and that made it question eagerly every unwonted movement of the man as if expecting him to go into camp or to seek shelter somewhere and build a fire. The dog had learned fire, and it wanted fire, or else to burrow under the snow and cuddle its warmth away from the air. (283-4)

Here we see just how cold it is—beyond the man’s imagination—but instinctually the dog understands it.  What author is suggesting is the power of nature to overwhelm human capability to withstand it, and that man’s loss of instinct is a danger to himself.  The wild dog understands it because of his instinct.

Part of the trail the man is on runs along a frozen creek bed, and while the creek is frozen there are unfrozen spots that pose danger if one breaks through the ice and gets wet.  Wetness in this environment means instant freeze and the death of flesh.  The man calls these thin ice spots with water underneath, “traps.”  If he got wet he would be forced to build a fire to warm the flesh and dry the clothing.  At one point he forces the dog to walk over the ice to discern the danger.

 

In the course of the next two hours he came upon several similar traps. Usually the snow above the hidden pools had a sunken, candied appearance that advertised the danger. Once again, however, he had a close call; and once, suspecting danger, he compelled the dog to go on in front. The dog did not want to go. It hung back until the man shoved it forward, and then it went quickly across the white, unbroken surface. Suddenly it broke through, floundered to one side, and got away to firmer footing. It had wet its forefeet and legs, and almost immediately the water that clung to it turned to ice. It made quick efforts to lick the ice off its legs, then dropped down in the snow and began to bite out the ice that had formed between the toes. This was a matter of instinct. To permit the ice to remain would mean sore feet. It did not know this. It merely obeyed the mysterious prompting that arose from the deep crypts of its being. But the man knew, having achieved a judgment on the subject, and he removed the mitten from his right hand and helped tear out the ice- particles. He did not expose his fingers more than a minute, and was astonished at the swift numbness that smote them. It certainly was cold. He pulled on the mitten hastily, and beat the hand savagely across his chest.  (286)




###

Part 2:

At noon, the man arrives at a fork in the creek, stops to eat, and feels the bitter cold on his exposed flesh (286).  He continues on when he breaks through ice and gets his feet wet (287).

 

At twelve o'clock the day was at its brightest. Yet the sun was too far south on its winter journey to clear the horizon. The bulge of the earth intervened between it and Henderson Creek, where the man walked under a clear sky at noon and cast no shadow. At half-past twelve, to the minute, he arrived at the forks of the creek. He was pleased at the speed he had made. If he kept it up, he would certainly be with the boys by six. He unbuttoned his jacket and shirt and drew forth his lunch. The action consumed no more than a quarter of a minute, yet in that brief moment the numbness laid hold of the exposed fingers. He did not put the mitten on, but, instead, struck the fingers a dozen sharp smashes against his leg. Then he sat down on a snow-covered log to eat. The sting that followed upon the striking of his fingers against his leg ceased so quickly that he was startled, he had had no chance to take a bite of biscuit. He struck the fingers repeatedly and returned them to the mitten, baring the other hand for the purpose of eating. He tried to take a mouthful, but the ice-muzzle prevented. He had forgotten to build a fire and thaw out. He chuckled at his foolishness, and as he chuckled he noted the numbness creeping into the exposed fingers. Also, he noted that the stinging which had first come to his toes when he sat down was already passing away. He wondered whether the toes were warm or numbed. He moved them inside the moccasins and decided that they were numbed.  (286-7)

 

Even before he cracks through the ice, the cold is starting to affect his flesh.  And then it happens.


The man took a chew of tobacco and proceeded to start a new amber beard. Also, his moist breath quickly powdered with white his moustache, eyebrows, and lashes. There did not seem to be so many springs on the left fork of the Henderson, and for half an hour the man saw no signs of any. And then it happened. At a place where there were no signs, where the soft, unbroken snow seemed to advertise solidity beneath, the man broke through. It was not deep. He wetted himself half-way to the knees before he floundered out to the firm crust.  (287-8)

I’m struck on how London slips in, “And then it happened” in the middle of the paragraph.  This is actually the defining event of the story.  The rest of the story emanates from there.  One would have thought it would have been better highlighted.  Intuitively I might have started a new paragraph.  But if you want to suggest that the importance of events to a single person are incredibly small to ongoings of nature, I think London has chosen well. 



###

Part 3:

The man’s feet break through the ice and are soaked halfway up to his knees (288).  He then builds a fire to dry his clothes and warm his flesh (289).

 

He worked slowly and carefully, keenly aware of his danger. Gradually, as the flame grew stronger, he increased the size of the twigs with which he fed it. He squatted in the snow, pulling the twigs out from their entanglement in the brush and feeding directly to the flame. He knew there must be no failure. When it is seventy- five below zero, a man must not fail in his first attempt to build a fire--that is, if his feet are wet. If his feet are dry, and he fails, he can run along the trail for half a mile and restore his circulation. But the circulation of wet and freezing feet cannot be restored by running when it is seventy-five below. No matter how fast he runs, the wet feet will freeze the harder.

Part of the power of this story is that we are privy to the man’s thoughts as he experiences his environment and processes the events.  I have a word for such narrative process, contemplatio, the Latin word for contemplation.  It is sometimes referred to as “free indirect discourse” or “internal focalization.”  But I think those terms are broader.  Contemplatio focuses more on the character’s weighing of options or figuring out the circumstances and possibilities.  Anyway, that’s my term.  Here are some examples in this section.


All this the man knew. The old-timer on Sulphur Creek had told him about it the previous fall, and now he was appreciating the advice. Already all sensation had gone out of his feet. To build the fire he had been forced to remove his mittens, and the fingers had quickly gone numb. His pace of four miles an hour had kept his heart pumping blood to the surface of his body and to all the extremities. But the instant he stopped, the action of the pump eased down.

We see there his mind processing the old-timer’s advice and applying it to his circumstance.  London continues this processing—contemplatio—in the next paragraph.


The fire was a success. He was safe. He remembered the advice of the old-timer on Sulphur Creek, and smiled. The old-timer had been very serious in laying down the law that no man must travel alone in the Klondike after fifty below. Well, here he was; he had had the accident; he was alone; and he had saved himself. Those old-timers were rather womanish, some of them, he thought. All a man had to do was to keep his head, and he was all right. Any man who was a man could travel alone. But it was surprising, the rapidity with which his cheeks and nose were freezing. And he had not thought his fingers could go lifeless in so short a time. Lifeless they were, for he could scarcely make them move together to grip a twig, and they seemed remote from his body and from him. When he touched a twig, he had to look and see whether or not he had hold of it. The wires were pretty well down between him and his finger-ends.

 

Notice all he contemplates there: the old-timer’s advice, how he had now found it wrong, the hubristic thought that “all a man had to do was to keep his head…” and that he was such a man, and the thoughts on how his brain’s control of his lifeless fingers was “down.”  In addition to the contemplation, we see the irony that he had been warned of the dangers and because of his hubris had disregarded it. 




Monday, January 19, 2026

Matthew Monday: Società Onoraria Italica

Matthew’s best class year after year in high school has been Italian language.  He consistently gets high 90s as grades.  This year Matthew’s high school, Monsignor Farrell High School, was accepted into the Società Onoraria Italica, in English known as the National Italian Honor Society.  This now allows the schools top students in Italian to become members of this prestigious honor society.  Matthew earned the honor!

The purpose of the Società Onoraria Italica


The National Italian Honor Society is a society formed to acknowledge superior scholastic performance in the field of Italian Studies: language, literature, cinema, and culture. It is open to membership at institutions of higher learning in both the United States and Canada.

Membership criteria is the following:

 

Candidates who are juniors or seniors, are currently completing or have completed their third year of Italian, have achieved an average of 90% or above in their Italian studies and an overall average of 85%, have demonstrated qualities of good character, and have expressed an interest in the study of the Italian language and culture are eligible for membership.

There was a ceremony at the school last week, the 12th of January, to recognize the honorees and present them with certificates and pins.  I didn’t record the speeches by the language teachers, the president of the school, and the principal but they were funny and moving.  What I recorded was Matthew being called up to the stage and receive his award and then later the boys reciting the honor society oath.  First a couple of pictures.







Here is the video clip of names being called.  There is a gap when the boy’s name is called and when he actually gets to the stage.  You will be able to tell when it’s Matthew because I follow him with the camera all the way to his seat.

 

 

Finally the boys (and it’s an all-boys school, if you are unaware) had to take an oath in Italian.  The oath was the following:

 

Come componente della sezione di “Santa Rosalia,” a Monsignor Farrell High School, prometto di dedicarmi allo studio della lingua Italiana ricordando che una lingua può costituire una forte legame fra persone di varie origini etniche e religiose.

 

Da cittadino della mia patria m’impegno a promuovere l’amicizia e l’armonia fra essa e le altre nazione del mondo.  Questo é il mio giuramento.

Here is the video of the boys taking the pledge.

 

Using Google Translate, the Italian translates into English as:

 

As a member of the "Santa Rosalia" section at Monsignor Farrell High School, I promise to dedicate myself to the study of the Italian language, remembering that a language can constitute a strong bond between people of various ethnic and religious backgrounds.

 

As a citizen of my country, I pledge to promote friendship and harmony between it and other nations of the world. This is my oath.

That looks about right.  Santa Rosalia is some sort of regional identification named after St. Rosalie. 

I framed the award.


And the pin.


We are very proud of him!  And so is his nonna!

Sunday, January 18, 2026

Sunday Meditation: On Whom the Spirit Descended

Last week, on the Feast of the Baptism of the Lord, we saw in the Gospel of Matthew the Holy Spirit descend upon Jesus after undergoing John’s Baptism.  Last week was considered the First Sunday in Ordinary Time for Year A.  Today, the Second Sunday in Ordinary Time for Year A, we hear John the Baptist testify he was a witness to the descent of the Holy Spirit upon Jesus.  What is interesting about this testimony is that it comes from the Gospel of John.  The Gospel of John has no such narrative about Jesus being baptized but has John witness to the baptism we see in Matthew’s Gospel.  This is an occurrence of intertextuality, which I think leads credibility to the events.  If they are described in on Gospel and testified in another, that seems to me to be verification.

Another interesting thing in today’s Gospel passage is that John twice says he did not know Jesus.  Why doesn’t he know Jesus, they are supposed to be cousins?  It’s quite possible that other than when the two “met” when they were each in their mother’s wombs, they never met again in the flesh.  This not knowing of Jesus recalls an event later in Matthew’s Gospel, when John from prison asks Jesus’ disciples whether Jesus is the “One to come” (Mt 11: 2-3).  Both times we see John unsure of Jesus’s role.  When multiple texts cross check with each other, they verify each other.

 


Here is today’s Gospel reading.

 

John the Baptist saw Jesus coming toward him and said,

“Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.

He is the one of whom I said,

‘A man is coming after me who ranks ahead of me

because he existed before me.’

I did not know him,

but the reason why I came baptizing with water

was that he might be made known to Israel.”

John testified further, saying,

“I saw the Spirit come down like a dove from heaven

and remain upon him.

I did not know him,

but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me,

‘On whomever you see the Spirit come down and remain,

he is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’

Now I have seen and testified that he is the Son of God.”

~Jn 1: 29-34

 

Why does John call Jesus the Lamb of God?  Why not the Lion of God?  The lamb has a particular cultural significance in Judaism, and it’s more complex than just the daily sacrificial lamb at the ancient temple.  Fr, Geoffrey Plant explains.

 


So Jesus takes away the “sin” of the world not just the sins of the world.  He is taking away the alienation from God.  The Lamb evokes (1) the two daily sacrificial lambs, (2) the Passover the lamb that allows for freedom from slavery, (3) the annual slaughtered lambs in preparation for Passover, and (4) the gentle lamb Isaiah refers to as being led to the slaughter.  This slaughtered lamb will be present in the Book of Revelation, forever bleeding but yet standing (Rev 5: 6).

The pastoral homily I return to Archbishop Edward Weisenberger.  I try to vary the homilists, but I was so captivated by the Archbishop's homily for today I have to post him two weeks in a row.

 


Social programs that promise to take away the “sins” of this world are of mixed results.  The only entity that truly takes away the sin of the world is the “Lamb of God.”

 

 

Sunday Meditation: “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.”

 

Matt Maher has a wonderful contemporary Christian song, “Behold the Lamb of God.”


 

Very stirring.

 

Sunday, January 11, 2026

Sunday Meditation: To Fulfill All Righteousness

Today we close the Christmas liturgical season with the Feast of the Baptism of the Lord.  In Year A we are presented with Matthew’s version of Christ’s baptism, and only in Matthew’s account does Jesus, who was without sin, explain why He needs to be baptized: “Allow it now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.”  It is also fitting that John who baptizes Jesus, has prepared the way, and I think the baptism concludes the preparation.  With the baptism, Jesus inaugurates His ministry. 

Here is something to think about: how are you preparing the way for Jesus?

 

 


 

Here is today’s Gospel reading.

 

Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan

to be baptized by him.

John tried to prevent him, saying,

“I need to be baptized by you,

and yet you are coming to me?”

Jesus said to him in reply,

“Allow it now, for thus it is fitting for us

to fulfill all righteousness.”

Then he allowed him.

After Jesus was baptized,

he came up from the water and behold,

the heavens were opened for him,

and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove

and coming upon him.

And a voice came from the heavens, saying,

“This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

~Mt 3:13-17

 

I go back to Bishop Edward Weisenberger for today explanatory homily.  He makes a number of observations I had not realized before.

 


To summarize Bishop’s Wiesenberger's observations: 1) It is Jesus who initiates the baptism, 2) He chooses to be baptized to stand in solidarity with mankind, 3) The heavens opening upon the baptism so that a new possibility of communicating with God appears, 4) The dove descending is an allusion to the waters in the first chapter of Genesis; this implies a new creation, 5) God identifying Jesus as “my Son” is a reference to King David, 6) “My Beloved” alludes to Isaac in the 22nd chapter of Genesis, and 7) “well pleased” alludes to the suffering servant in Isaiah chapter 42 and 44.  Wow, so much in just five verse lines of Gospel.  All four of the Gospels are wonderfully written in their own individual way.

The pastoral homily returns us to Fr. Samuel Hakeem O.P.



Remember your baptism.  It initiates your relationship with God.  The water poured on His head sanctifies the water, pours into the Jordan, flows into the seas, sanctifying the entire world so that it returns sanctified to sanctify you.  Isn’t that beautiful!

 

Sunday Meditation: “Allow it now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.”

 

The choir at my Mass today sang this lovely Catholic hymn, “When Jesus Comes to Be Baptized” performed by Stanbrook Abbey.



At least I think it’s Catholic.

Thursday, January 8, 2026

Redeemer in the Womb: Jesus Living in Mary by John Saward, Post #6

This is the sixth and final post on Redeemer in the Womb: Jesus Living in Mary by John Saward.

You can find Post #1 here

Post #2 here.  

Post #3 here

Post #4 here

Post #5 here

 



Summary

Chapter 7: The Witness of Three Women

Saward opens the chapter with this from St. Pope John Paul II:

 

John Paul argues that there are spiritual qualities that are peculiarly feminine. Woman, he says, in the unity of her material body and spiritual soul, is disposed by the Creator to motherhood, to the welcoming of new life. At her body’s center is a space to be occupied by another human being, a child, the fruit of married love and a gift of God. This is the physical predisposition for the spiritual receptiveness that, though often suppressed or corrupted, distinguishes the minds and hearts of women, both married and unmarried.

The chapter follows the meditations of Jesus in the womb by three women in the church: St. Catherine of Siena, St. Elizabeth of the Trinity, and the mystic Caryll Houselander.


Chapter 8: Revelation in the Womb

Saward outlines the chapter with the following:

 

The revelatory work of Jesus in the womb is mysterious and silent. He reveals, first of all, simply by being who he is (the eternal Son) and what he has become (true man, a real human embryo). He reveals by the miraculous manner of his conception and birth: “Such a birth befits God.” The first human person privileged to receive this revelation and ponder it in prayer is the Ever-Virgin Mother. From her it is communicated to St. Joseph, St. John the Baptist, St. Elizabeth, St. Zechariah, and so, through the Apostles and Evangelists, to the Church of every age. Our Lady’s faith in the incarnate Word has a chronological and theological priority in the history of salvation; as St. John Paul II says, she “precedes” us in faith. The believing Church first exists in her. More specifically, the Church first exists in the fiat of faith and loving obedience through which the Word took flesh and dwelt within her. Our Lady, great with child, is the image and beginning of the Church that with her “magnifies the Lord.”

The fact that Christ is hidden in the womb and then made manifest with His birth, parallels the Divine hiddenness of God and revealed in the manifestation of the Son.

###

Michelle’s Comment:

I had never heard of Caryll Houselander until reading her thoughts here, and I purchased one of her books. She had some lovely and introspective thoughts. I had highlighted this insight from her:

 

"In becoming a child, God the Son united himself to every child. Every little one of the human family is a reminder of the Infant God, of the divine humility the demons so despise. Every child preaches the Gospel just by being what he is. He embodies the simplicity needed for entry to heaven (see Matt. 18:3). He calls his parents out of self-absorption into self-giving."

Michael’s Reply to Michelle:

Michelle wrote: "Every child preaches the Gospel just by being what he is. He embodies the simplicity needed for entry to heaven (see Matt. 18:3). He calls his parents out of self-absorption into self-giving."

Wonderful. Thanks for sharing!

My Reply to Michelle:

Michelle wrote: "I had never heard of Caryll Houselander until reading her thoughts here, and I purchased one of her books. She had some lovely and introspective thoughts. I had highlighted this insight from her:

Oh you must read Caryll Houselander. She is a brilliant writer. I have read 
The Way of the Cross and thought it a great Lenten read. I have a review here on Goodreads if you can find it. I highly recommend it for the upcoming Lent if you're looking for a book. I don't remember it being that long. She has such mystical insights. Actually I've been thinking of picking up another one of her books.

Michelle’s Reply:

I have that one on my list and two others. I bought Little Way of the Infant Jesus and haven't been in the right frame of mind to read it yet. Good to hear that she's worth reading!

Michelle’s Comment:

In Chapter 8, this stood out to me:

 

"Studiousness, the humble quest for understanding, can be perverted into curiosity, the proud craving for information."

 

I have this fault! I can get lost down the rabbit-hole for hours looking up countries, customs, NASA, Antarctica, the Penninsula Wars, etc. I have been trying not to do this anymore. I read something St. Padre Pio once said which is inline with the above quote. Someone asked him what the gravest sins were, and he named curiosity as one of them.

 

Also in this chapter, I thought the comparison of the tiny Jesus in the womb beginning as a zygote to a mustard seed was very profound. He grew into the Tree of Life over all.

Michael’s Reply to Michelle:

Michelle wrote: "I have this fault! I can get lost down the rabbit-hole for hours looking up countries, customs, NASA, Antarctica, the Penninsula Wars, etc. I have been trying not to do this anymore. I read something St. Padre Pio once said which is inline with the above quote. Someone asked him what the gravest sins were, and he named curiosity as one of them."

I think curiosity, like everything else, can be good or bad, Michelle. When the Apostles tell Jesus what people are saying about him, he asks them, "Who do you say that I am?"
Perhaps this means that as long as the engine of our curiosity is God, it's good. But when curiosity leads you down the path of obscurity, it can be a bad move. Occultism, for example, is all about curiosity about magic and similar stuff.




###

My Comment:

I was surprised to see Saward included St. Catherine of Siena.  As some of you may know, I consider her my patron saint.  Though she prayed to the Blessed Mother, she was not Marian centric.  She was more focused on the incarnate Christ, and I guess Christ is there in the womb.  Despite hidden in the womb, the fetus is incarnate and so is physically there. 

 

For St. Catherine, as much as for the early Christian author Tertullian, “the flesh is the hinge of salvation.” Her genius, says François-Marie Léthel, is “to give bodily expression to all the spiritual realities.” So, when she speaks of the Holy Spirit, and of the charity he pours into our hearts, she thinks of the fire by which he revealed himself at Pentecost. Christian ‘interiority’ is not a disincarnate abstraction but the Christian’s participation in the mysteries of the Word incarnate’s life in his Virgin Mother’s womb and of the Church’s birth from his wounded side on the cross.

 

Saward goes on to quote from a prayer of St. Catherine of Siena.  I’m not going to quote Saward’s quoting of the prayer, but I will quote from my edition of the collected prayers.  Saward quotes from a Cavallini translation, but I think the Suzanne Noffke translation is more to his point. 

 

Oh Mary, my tenderest love!  In you is written the Word from whom we have the teaching of life.  You are the tablet that sets this teaching before us.  I see that this Word, once written in you, was never without the cross of holy desire.  Even as he was conceived within you, the desire to die for the salvation of humankind was engrafted and bound into him.  (The Prayers of Catherine of Siena, 2nd Edition, Suzanne Noffke, OP, Translator and Editor, pp. 193-4)

 

Actually that translation came out in 2001, after Saward had published Redeemer in the Womb.  But you can see the metaphor St. Catherine uses, Mary is the book on which the Word is written.  Noffke lists that prayer as Number 18, prayed on the Feast of the Annunciation, March 25th, 1379 in Rome.  Another factoid, March 25th happened to be St. Catherine’s 32nd birthday, and she was about thirteen months from her death on April 29th, 1380. 

 

Saward develops further from St, Catherine’s prayer, and he concludes the meditation from St. Catherine with this observation.

 

St. Catherine sees Our Lady of the Annunciation as not only speaking for mankind but embodying all that is best and most beautiful in mankind, whether by nature or by grace.

 

I continue to find St. Catherine of Siena one of the most brilliant of persons to have lived.




###

My Comment:

I don’t know that much about St. Elizabeth of the Trinity.  I have come across excerpts of her writing as meditations in the daily readings of Magnificat.  I have been impressed and would love to explore more.  I know she had a spirituality focused on the indwelling of the Trinity.  Here is how Saward opens his section on her meditations.

 

The spiritual doctrine of the Dijon Carmelite St. Elizabeth of the Trinity (1880–1906) is centered on the indwelling of the Trinity in the souls of the just. She came to see the Advent Mary, the expectant Virgin, as the highest model of the contemplative, within whose heart Christ lives by grace and charity and prayer.

 

Then he quotes this from one of her works.

 

It seems to me that the attitude of the Virgin during the months between the Annunciation and the Nativity is the model for interior souls, for those whom God has chosen to live inwardly, in the depths of the unfathomable abyss.

 

That sounds like the central thesis of the whole book.  If one needed to summarize Redeemer in the Womb in one sentence, that’s hits it spot on.

 

Saward also quotes St. Elizabeth from a letter to her sister Guite.

 

Think what must have been going on in the Virgin’s soul after the Incarnation, when she possessed within her the Word incarnate, the Gift of God. . . . In what silence, what recollection, what adoration she must have buried herself in the depths of her soul in order to embrace this God whose Mother she was. My little Guite, he is in us. O let us stay close to him in this silence, with this love, of the Virgin. That is the way to spend Advent, isn’t it?

 

I think other writers have been quoted in this book as such as well: the contemplative life is an act of gestating Jesus within us just as the Blessed Mother carried Jesus for nine months.

Michelle’s Reply:

"...the contemplative life is an act of gestating Jesus within us just as the Blessed Mother carried Jesus for nine months." This is a lovely way of looking at things!

###

My Comment:

Saward ends the book on a chapter on how the hiddenness of Christ in the womb leading to His birth is a reflection of the revelation of God through Jesus Christ’s incarnation.  Saward quotes Dei Verbum from Vatican II:

 

Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh, sent “as man to men,” “speaks the words of God” (John 3:34) and accomplishes the saving work that the Father gave him to do (cf. John 5:36; 17:4). It was therefore he himself—to see him is to see the Father (cf. John 14:9)—who completed and perfected revelation and confirmed it by divine testimony. He did this by his whole presence and self-manifestation: by words and deeds, by signs and wonders, but especially by his death and glorious Resurrection from the dead, and finally by sending the Spirit of Truth.

 

Saward seems to imply that the gestation time and subsequent birth for Jesus’ birth was fitting as a process for revelation.  He also quotes St. Bernard of Clairvaux.  “He who is incomprehensible and invisible, said St. Bernard, wanted to be comprehended and seen.”  This brings Saward to a concluding statement.

 

The same is true of the Word’s first nine months as man. Even then, as truly as when he “preached on the mountain,” he was at the work of revelation; by the simplicity of his embryonic life, Christ revealed God.

 

Saward expounds the thought further, but I think that’s the gist.




###

My Comment:

I also found this passage in the final chapter beautiful.

 

For nine months, Mary’s faith and love are embodied in the physical and emotional experience of pregnancy. It begins, as it does for every expectant mother, with “a blind sense of touch, with the bodily sensing of a presence.” Touch, as Aristotle and St. Thomas well understood, is not a deficient form of sensation, but the foundation of all the other senses; it can even supply for sight and hearing in those born blind and deaf. The other senses operate through a medium, but touch is direct encounter. This first sensation, in which the Son of the Most High is felt deep within the Virgin Mother’s body, as he draws his bodily substance and sustenance from her, will not be cast aside but be incorporated into all her later seeing, hearing, and holding. She knows with unique authority what it means to say that “the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.” And Our Lady’s experience is more than simply individual. It is utterly unique, yet completely Catholic: in some way, it can be shared in the communion of saints. For the sake of the whole Church, by touching the marks left by the nails and the lance, St. Thomas the Apostle, who could not at first believe, proved the bodily solidity of the risen Christ. Similarly, for us all, by her touch, Mary, who never wavered in her faith, felt within her the reality of God’s taking of flesh. The mind and heart of the Holy Virgin, while she is with Child, are the beginning and the permanent measure of the Church’s confession of the realism of the Incarnation. A Christology that does not have something of Mary’s wonder at the Verbum abbreviatum, the embryonic Word within her, is destined for Docetism, the heresy that imagines that God assumed the semblance of a human body.

 

The point of the last sentence is interesting.  Jesus nine months of gestation shows He was truly man, not the illusion of a man as per the Docetic heresy.  He didn’t just show up on earth one day.  One might also conclude that a natural fertilization of Mary’s egg occurred in her womb.  It wasn’t just something planted in her.

 

I also found in this passage the beauty in the touch that developed between mother and child during the nine months.  I’ve never obviously been pregnant with child (:-P) but I can imagine the tactile relationship was as great or if not greater than that of St. Thomas the Apostle when he put his fingers into Christ’s wounds.

###

My Comment:

Finally, Saward ends the book not with Mary, not with Jesus, but with St. Joseph who Saward feels is the vocation of every Christian, “to welcome Jesus living in Mary into our souls by faith alive with love and for their sake to welcome and keep safe every unborn human child and his mother.”  He continues:

 

St. Joseph was the first man to grant the Virgin Mother of God “a room in his abode.” Before ever he sought for her the hospitality of the innkeepers of Bethlehem, he took her into his own heart and home (see Matt. 1:24). He is the model of the chivalry of Catholic faith and charity. He offered a house, a roof but also a lineage, to the unborn Jesus. He gave sanctuary to God incarnate and his Ever-Virgin Mother. May St. Joseph by his prayers keep us faithful to the Gospel of Life first preached by the Redeemer in the womb.

 

Does this seem like a sequence of Russian nesting dolls?  Jesus inside Mary inside Joseph inside Me! 

 

I thought this was a marvelous advent devotional. 

Frances Comment:

Beautiful image, Manny. Thank you.