All these things, which I have securely in mind to the extent that in this life I have been able to understand them, are, compared with what I have said, extremely great.  Beside them, all the sights and sound and justice and truth of this world seem to me lies and nothingness.  I am left confused because I cannot find words extreme enough for these things (St. Catherine of Genoa, Treatise on Purgatory).

St. Catherine of Genoa (+1510) was a great mystic who was given insights into the plight of our poor brothers and sisters in Purgatory.  Like all mystics she was given an understanding of supernatural realities that she had a hard time putting into words.  The pain of the Poor Souls in their purification was beyond her ability to describe.  But so was the love and joy of these souls who were so drawn to God by the bands of His love and who were so eager to be delivered from the imperfections that hindered them from uniting themselves to Him completely and freely.

The world lies to us about happiness and about the relative value of the experiences of this life as compared with those that exist beyond the veil of death.  Every time we sin we make a false estimation of the consequences of our actions.  We take imprudent risks to our own detriment.  We sell our inheritance for a bowl of porridge.  All the while we settle on a transient relief from suffering and purification, like addicts getting their next fix only to crash harder than before.

Even on the night before Our Blessed Lord and Savior died, just after the apostles had received the first Eucharist they preferred sleep to His company. He underwent purification for them, suffering the pain of pure love, not because He had no other choice, as those of us who wind up in Purgatory, but because he willed to undergo pain and suffering so that we might be delivered from that necessity . . . and worse.

Cardinal John Henry Newman spoke of the mental sufferings of Christ, by which He assumed not only our guilt, but the very experience of our compromises, as He sweat blood in the garden, and how like a myriad of demons they all descended upon Him as though He was the depository of every iniquity:

Hopes blighted, vows broken, lights quenched, warnings scorned, opportunities lost; the innocent betrayed, the young hardened, the penitent relapsing, the just overcome, the aged failing; the sophistry of misbelief, the wilfulness of passion, the obduracy of pride, the tyranny of habit, the canker of remorse, the wasting fever of care, the anguish of shame, the pining of disappointment, the sickness of despair; such cruel, such pitiable spectacles, such heartrending, revolting, detestable, maddening scenes; nay, the haggard faces, the convulsed lips, the flushed cheek, the dark brow of the willing slaves of evil, they are all before Him now; they are upon Him and in Him. They are with Him instead of that ineffable peace which has inhabited His soul since the moment of His conception. They are upon Him, they are all but His own; He cries to His Father as if He were the criminal, not the victim; His agony takes the form of guilt and compunction. He is doing penance, He is making confession, He is exercising contrition, with a reality and a virtue infinitely greater than that of all saints and penitents together; for He is the One Victim for us all, the sole Satisfaction, the real Penitent, all but the real sinner.

And the apostles slept, as we sleep, content with the thought that there is still time for us to change and that our compromises are small.  How we deceive ourselves.

St. Catherine has no words for the extremity of our danger . . . and of the love that is the cure of our torpor. The souls in purgatory when they were alive thought too little about their danger and too little about love.  Now they think nothing of their pain and only about the love of God.  They will their purification.  They do not sleep and they have no desire for it.  Yet for all their love and joy in the midst of their pain, it is for them no merit, for their time has passed.

Remembrance of the holy souls is self-forgetfulness.  It is the cure . . . for them, and for us.  Unless, God forbid, we go to hell, someday we will forget ourselves and remember the ultimate realities:  God and our obligations toward one another.  We can do it now or we can do it later.  The souls in Purgatory would have us do it now.

They remember us.  Do we remember them?  This is no time to sleep.  Rest will come, but until now, we have not toiled for God nearly enough.

The good men we have canonized at their funerals will not thank us for the kind and laudatory eulogies.  We forget the sufferings of others so as to console our families, and ourselves and in this no one is served, not ourselves, not our families, and certainly not the souls of the departed.

Oh, sweet sleep.  How we crave rest, yet we will not find it unless we give it.  During this November we would do well to do more than a casual visit to a cemetery or a  write a check  and conveniently hand it to our pastor for yearly masses, though both of these we should do.  Indeed, nothing can be more efficacious than the Mass, except a Mass that is dedicated by the stipend of our own hearts.

The apostles slept through Our Lord’s agony and we sleep through the agony of the poor souls.  It is so easy to do.  Perhaps we could offer time with Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, or more frequent communions for the grace to understand better the extremity of the situation and how the deliverance of the poor souls from their suffering will help protect us against our own peril, and how our imitation of their selfless desire for purity may save us from their present distress.

Love is not loved.  But it need not be that way.  Now is not the time for us to rest.

Eternal rest grant unto them, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon them.  May they rest in peace.  Amen.

I kid you not.  I would have thought it was satire, if I did not know better.  It is an old piece from Crisis Magazine, regurgitated, I guess, to capitalize on the  interest drummed up by West’s reply.  From my point of view it could not come at a better time because it is perfect example of how Team TOB USA has wandered off the track and got lost in the wild.  Too much.

In the new covenant, Jesus elevates marriage to a sacramental sign. Marriage no longer simply represents the natural union of man and woman but makes visible Christ’s total and irrevocable gift of Himself to the Church. Just as He gave Himself away to the Church so that He could be one with her (cf. Ephesians 5:31-32), so husband and wife are called to give themselves away so as to image the oneness of Christ and the Church. This self-gift doesn’t happen in some ultraspiritual realm but in the body. Christ said, “This is my body, given up for you.” So, too, man and woman say to each other, “This is my body, given up for you.”

How could this possibly apply to tango? Danced in all its beauty and artistry, Argentine tango expresses the theology of the body: The man gives himself away to the woman, the woman gives herself away to the man, and suddenly the two are no longer dancing as two but as one. Right before our eyes we see union and communion, two and one, giving and receiving. The man and woman are a visible sign of the self-giving union between Christ and the Church.

Despite the many times I’ve been tempted to throw in the tango towel, this is why I continue: Tango is not just a dance, it’s sacramental. It constantly propels me toward my heavenly calling — union and communion with Christ through a total gift of self.

Every time I re-read it I scratch my head.  I am in that sort of surreal state, where I know this stuff is nothing to be surprised at, but then I wonder if the very sense of commonness is an indication that I must be dreaming, or hallucinating.

But my real reason for posting this is the gem of a comment  from Father George Rutler:

I respond to a request that I comment on the religious significance of the tango dance. First, I have found that the “theology of the body” is widely perceived as an unsystematic melange of theology, philosophy, and frail romantic poetry, which can be problematic even in skilled hands and is commonly invoked by people who are limited in their knowledge of the subject, Secondly, I am relatively ignorant myself of social activities which cause perspiration. With those advisories, I think I may assume that all of us are familiar with the Kaiser’s condemnation of the tango in 1913, for fear of its effects on his Crown Princess. More pertinent to the theological aspect, is Pope St. Pius X’s informal condemnation of the tango after he had watched an exhibition performance at the request of Cardinal Merry del Val who thought the Pontiff might approve a sober version of it as choreographed by the Roman dance master Professor Pichetti. The Pope did not at all approve and recommended instead the “Furlana,” an Italian folk dance which goes back to the early seventeenth century in Friuli Venezia Giulia and with which he had been familiar in his youth.

Good thing I wasn’t drinking anything when I read that.  That second sentence is about the best and most concise summary of the situation I have read.

Capuche tip to Terry.

Grant, we beseech Thee, O Lord, that Thy faithful people may ever rejoice in honoring all Thy Saints, and may be defended by their unceasing prayers (post-communion prayer, Solemnity of All Saints).

After Holy Communion has been received during the Mass for the Solemnity of All Saints, the priest asks Almighty God that the prayers of the saints be a defense to all the faithful.  All the saints are our elder brothers and sisters who have been victorious over sin and death through Christ’s death and resurrection.  These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb (cf. Ap 7:14).  They have passed through the fire and have come out the other side unscathed (cf. Dn 3:26).  Now they are present to us in the Holy Spirit as our defenders and protectors.

But we must want to be protected.  He who loves danger will perish in it (Eccl. 3:27).  And danger is everywhere.  We have a real enemy who is bent upon our destruction and all of sacred history is a chronicle of this endless war. Our enemy is our constant foe and our better in the art of war.  For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places (Eph 6:12).  We are not strong enough to resist this enemy, unless we want to be protected by one who is stronger.

So the Lord walks with us in the midst of our peril:

His truth shall compass thee with a shield: thou shalt not be afraid of the terror of the night.  Of the arrow that flieth in the day, of the business that walketh about in the dark: of invasion, or of the noonday devil (Ps 91:5-6).

Thus the Solemnity of All Saints is a feast in which we rejoice in the victory of the saints and in their protection.  It is also a yearly occasion when we see played out before us the great conflict of the ages between light and darkness.  The cosmic battle raging in our hearts is characterized by a particular violence because the opposing forces of history have, in our time, crossed the last river and met for one final wreck on the field of Armageddon.  This is no prophecy of the last days, only the recognition of the signs of our times.  This is the age of Satan unchained.  It is the hour of darkness.  But a voice pierces that darkness and it says:  Who is like God.  Only the saints can teach us to place ourselves under the protection of humility.

Thus in our own day, we celebrate the victory of the saints every year and even while thus celebrating we are engaged in the struggle between light and darkness.  Halloween means “Holy Evening.”  The name is not derived, as sometimes asserted, from the druid feast of Samhain.  The name belongs to the light and we should reclaim it from the darkness.

It is a night that belongs to the saints.  And yet it has been claimed by the Prince of this World and very often even those who profess to be the friends of God follow the spirit-piper into the abyss of the pagan festival of darkness.

Over a decade ago at our friary in Griswold, Connecticut we resolved to fight on the side of the Saints and reclaim October 31 for the light.  We celebrated a triduum of Masses from October 29-31, culminating in the celebration of the vigil of All Saints on the very night when the darkness seemed to hold sway.  We offered our Communions in reparation for the sins committed against Almighty God around the world during Halloween and we encouraged our children place themselves in the shoes, tunics, habits and armor of the saints:  to do more than play make-believe, but to make their costumes into “sacramentals,” so to speak, so as to invoke the presence of the saints and imbibe their virtues.

Over the years, unfortunately, the ideas of reparation for sin and real spiritual combat have taken second place to the opportunity of providing clean and wholesome family fun as an alternative to the usual compromises with the spirit of this world.  And in the process of thus providing we have been sucked in by the spirit of unreality.  Myths can point upward, but they can also lead astray, become a distraction from the real work needed to be done and from the very real danger at hand.  I have to offer my mea culpa for leading the way in this.  I apologize.

We live in very dangerous times, in which not only the godless serve the Prince of this World, albeit knowingly and willingly, but in which also the pious and religious use all kinds of holy pretexts for acting in self-serving and worldly ways.  We sometimes sacrifice our interior lives on the altar of conformity and groupthink, substituting the external forms of religion for a deep and uncompromising conversion.

In some ways Halloween at the friary has become like so many other things, a way to separate ourselves from those who do otherwise and create our own little culture of isolation.  And in the end our evening is really not as different from the worldly ways of Halloween.  That is not to say that the children should not have an opportunity for fun, but that we should all have a greater sense of our opportunity to find holiness and conversion; to find light and the generosity to sacrifice ourselves for the lost souls of the world, among whom we should place ourselves as members of the same family, because in fact we are.  Who is to say how lost anyone is compared to anyone else, except Him whose searing judgment we should all fear?

And so Halloween remains a yearly enactment of the cosmic war between light and darkness, and even among the hosts of God, we are not sure always if we are completely on the side of light.  The enemy inserts his influence wherever he finds an opening, and we are generally lackadaisical in regard to protecting ourselves from his influence.

We need to want to be protected.  Sometimes the prophetic voice of conscience is not a welcome sound.  Sometimes we ignore the voice that God sends us, or discount its seriousness and its power.  Sometimes we don’t want to listen because we really do not want to be challenged or are afraid to leave our comfort zone.   When “sometimes” becomes too many times our spiritual hearing is stifled by another voice, a voice of complacency, pride, self-interest and deception.  It is then we loose our desire to be protected.

We cannot afford to loose the protection that God offers us.  The Solemnity of All Saints is our opportunity to pray for protection as we do in the prayer from the Mass.  We need to turn to the saints, our friends, and show them our gratitude by spitting into the darkness and turning our back on it forever.  We need to be grateful to the voice of light and kiss the feet of God’s messenger: How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings (Is 52:7).  We need to want to be protected and make decisions that are in accord with that desire.

The Solemnity of All Saints originated in 609 when the Byzantine emperor Phocas gave the Roman temple, the Pantheon, to Pope Boniface IV, who, “after the pagan filth was removed,” consecrated it to Holy Mary of the Martyrs.  Pope Gregory III transferred the celebration of this event and extended its significance to All the Saints in the 8^th century.  It just so happened that the celebration corresponded more or less to the time of the druid harvest festival of Samhain, which was also a festival of the dead.

This history is a parable of life.  The emperor paid his dues to God and the Church honored the Blessed Mother and the Martyrs.  And God protected his people.  But the enemy is always right around the corner, looking to wedge himself through any open crack and claim God’s territory for himself.

On Halloween we need to do more to repent of our own sins and make good on the promises we have made to God to serve Him with all our hearts and to be instruments of forgiveness and mercy for souls lost in the darkness.  We are to bear the torch of God’s holiness to others, but we cannot do this unless we guard our hearts and beg the Blessed Mother, Queen of Martyrs, and all the saints to protect us.

Be mindful therefore from whence thou art fallen: and do penance and do the first works. Or else I come to thee and will move thy candlestick out of its place, except thou do penance (Ap 2:5).

It would be a grace to go back to our old triduum and the simple spirit of reparation with which we began our celebration of Halloween.  Try to spend some quiet time, if possible, at the friary before the Blessed Sacrament, on the night of the celebration.  Make a visit to Jesus, and in his Holy Name ask for the grace to do penance and to make reparation for the sins of the night of darkness.  Ask for the grace to want to be protected and give thanks for the godly voice that calls us back to our first love.

In his long-awaited reply to his critics, West honestly admits that he did not want to say anything until he had received the all clear from the bishops, a boon given in abundance by Cardinal Rigali and Bishop Rhoades.  While the bishops’ endorsement is significant, it does not mean that West’s teaching is magisterial or that it is on the level of those who themselves hold the teaching office of the Church. Even a theologian who has gained the endorsement of a pope, such as Hans Urs von Balthasar or Cardinal Walter Kasper, is not considered above respectful criticism when he articulates views that may legitimately be shown to be difficult to reconcile with the Church Fathers and Doctors.

West is gracious for thanking his supporters, but his reference to the “profound consolation” proffered by the faithful is a bit off-putting.  He has chosen the path of controversy of his own volition, and for him that it is a matter of truth.  Speaking the truth has its consequences, as does making mistakes as a teacher.   It must be difficult to the focus of so much criticism, so I do pray for him. Nevertheless, he is considered, the authority on Theology of the Body, even more so now that he has been so strenuously defended.  Constructive criticism is in order.

The Pivotal Obfuscation

In my opinion, his concentration on the question of concupiscence is, for the most part, a straw man.  It seems evident that since Cardinal Rigali has blessed his entire work without qualification, West considers it is sufficient to reply to what he considers the central issue of contention.  Thus, he conspicuously omits any discussion his crusade against prudery or of any of the practical matters that have been dealt with at length by the critics (e.g. the phallic symbolism of the paschal candle, his treatment of interlocutors, his interpretation of his writings of the saints).  I will even grant that the question of concupiscence is central to the discussion.  However, West mischaracterizes the objections of his critics.

West suggests that those of us who disagree with him deny the possibility of the redemption of the body and that sanctity includes liberation from the domination of concupiscence.  He also suggests that our argument is more with John Paul II, than with him.  He says he concentrates on the question of liberation from the domination of concupiscence because it is the pearl of the Theology of the Body, as though, in this regard John Paul II is revolutionary.

In fact, no one to my knowledge denies that grace effects liberation from the domination of concupiscence.  West himself admits that he was guilty earlier on of underestimating the factor of concupiscence in his presentation.   His tendency is clearly in this direction.  His critics object to this tendency, not to the possibility of a more spontaneous, less anxious, less scrupulous and less repressed attitude toward sexuality.  That this problem still exists in West’s approach is evidenced in the way in which in his response he minimizes the value of continence, suggesting that St. Thomas Aquinas relegates it to a lower level of redeemed man.   In fact, St. Thomas, as well as John Paul II, affirms that continence is a virtue, contrary to the assertion of West.

The Pearl of Great Price

No one is disagreeing with John Paul II.  In fact, West’s critics are very appreciative of the positive and exalted view of marriage and sexuality expressed in the Theology of the Body.  The real pearl of John Paul’s teaching, in my opinion, is not the question of concupiscence, but his emphasis on the positive aspects of the unitive dimension of marriage and sexuality.  That emphasis surely changes one’s attitude toward concupiscence, but John Paul II in not really innovative on the transformative power of grace relative to concupiscence.  We have had saints and mystics for the whole of Christian history that the Church has held up as certain guides to the way of perfection. Their example and teaching has been and will continue to be safely followed.

In my own commentaries, I have long since abandoned any argument with Christopher West over concupiscence, because very often this involves subtle interpretations of John Paul II, as for example when the discussion turns to the difference between liberation from concupiscence and liberation from the domination of concupiscence, and, to use West’s own words, “what that looks like.”  I would most certainly agree that the saint is generally more spontaneous and less conflicted when it comes to all moral matters, not just sexuality, but I believe we will all be hard-pressed, short of prophetic graces, to unravel all the movements of the human heart, so as to analyze responses on the spot and set in hierarchy the less perfect responses and more perfect responses. I will just say that I believe West thinks he knows more than he really does when it comes to the assessment of human responses.

Prudery Police

Instead I have concentrated on West’s penchant for unveiling sexuality and for identifying every resistance against this tendency as prudery and Manichaeism.   Regardless of where theoretical discussions about liberation from concupiscence may lead us, this latter tendency of West makes is much clearer what he actually means by liberation from concupiscence.  He is continually targeting the Manichean demon with his considerable rhetorical arsenal, and misidentifying disparate reactions as prudery and body-hatred.  Shame is, for West, at the very best, a reaction of a man who has experienced redemption only imperfectly..  The idea that some sexual realities ought to remain veiled because it is fitting to treat them in this manner out of reverence seems foreign to his thinking.  There really does not seem to be any room in West’s theology for holy bashfulness in a man who has experienced redemption fully, at least not for one who has been illumined by his version of the Theology of the Body.

In the essays I have written on this subject I have given a number of examples of this tendency, since it has been asserted that the critics of West do not substantiate their claims.  For example, Professor Janet Smith humbly confessed to being a prude because of her reaction against West’s assertion that the paschal candle is a phallic symbol.  Her conversion from prudery was occasioned by the discovery that such was the teaching of the “early fathers.”  So I showed at great length that patristic authority for this idea is a myth.  No one to my knowledge has even attempted to demonstrate the contrary.  I have also shown that West’s use of St. Louis de Montfort to justify the use of sexual imagery in reference to the virginal conception was a complete misrepresentation of the saint’s writings (same link).  There are many other examples that could be given.  I will just mention one more, one that I have not mentioned in any essay up to now.  (In the following critique I utilize a comment I made on The Linde).

Body Language

There is a video on YouTube of West taking a young man from an audience and standing him up in front of everyone and then saying:  “Everyone, look at Paul’s body.”  A few of the listeners appear uncomfortable and others snicker, so he goes on to question them about their reaction.  West tells them that the way they responded to his invitation to gawk at Paul indicates a discomfort with the body.  He says that if he had said “Look at Paul” no one would have reacted, but because he said “Look at Paul’s body,” everyone got a bit nervous.

This is just another illustration of West’s tendency to see prudery and Manichaeism where is simply does not exist.  I suppose that if West read souls–a claim that, to my knowledge, he has never made–he might divine the motives of men, but on the face of things discomfort with his remark has nothing to do with body-hatred or unacknowledged and unresolved lust.

First off, no one talks that way:  “Look at Paul’s body.”  The inappropriateness of the whole thing would have been obvious to everyone immediately had he invited a woman up in front of the audience.

Secondly, West would be the first one to say that we should not depersonalize anyone.  But that is precisely what he does when he says “Look at Paul’s body.” The problem people have with that language has nothing to do with prudery; it has to do with the way the imperative objectifies the person of Paul and the way in which this language is used to manipulate the audience.

If you say to me “Look at Paul,” I will look and see his body, or better I will see him with his body, and I will have no problem looking at him (which is to see his body).  But if you say to me, “Look at Paul’s body,” I will say “What the heck are you saying and what are you trying to accomplish?”  The whole thing is absurd.

And then I am supposed to feel bad because I am a prude?  No.  It does not wash.

Examine Your Own Conscience

I don’t want to belabor this point.  It is enough to say—and I think the critics have pretty well documented this—that West has cultivated a habit of seeing prudery everywhere and of suggesting that his doubtful interlocutors need to do an examination of conscience on the point of their discomfort with his presentation.

West’s practical behavior in respect to the whole question of prudery makes it clear, that, unlike John Paul II, he does not really attribute any essential appropriateness to external modesty.  For him, it is all a matter of intentionality, and that is all a matter of the heart.  The externals of modesty are necessary because there are unredeemed men, but in a more perfectly redeemed world, one for which we hope, the need for external modesty will pass:

But through the grace of redemption, can our sexuality not become in our practical, lived experience the realm of the sacramental and the holy? Can it not become the realm of a truly sacred conversation? “To the pure all things are pure,” St. Paul said (Titus 1:15). But to those bound by lust, even the pure seems impure. Oh, how tragic when we label as ugly that which is beautiful!

West misses the point of our critique entirely.  It is not a matter of labeling that which is beautiful ugly.  It is a matter of affirming the sacrality, the beauty and the mystery of marriage and sexuality by insisting on a modicum of reverence and holy bashfulness.  The need for the externals of modesty shall not pass away.  (I will just take this opportunity, once again, to reaffirm my own concern about prudery and the excesses of an over emphasis of external modesty to the detriment of modesty of the heart.  But prudery, Manichaeism, and holy bashfulness should not get all lumped together.  They are all different.)

Sexual Idiom

There are two complementary but not entirely resolved movements in West’s work that underscore the problem that I have identified.  West uses the colloquial language of an apologist in order to meet the people where they are.  For most of us the veil over sexuality was ripped off and trampled upon a long time ago, so West tells us like it is, even very effectively utilizing his own personal witness concerning his past addiction to pornography.  This, we are told serves as a justification for dispensing with veiled language.  West certainly uses the idiom of the people, with plenty of references–some quite revealing–to pop culture (toying with the full-frontal nudity in the movie Titanic; giving us a play by play of a pop singer’s lurid video; whooping it up about the goodness of desire in the context of rock music).

West shows no bashfulness in suggesting that for the Blessed Mother sex with St. Joseph would have been a step backwards, or that what men are really looking for in a woman is exemplified by the exposed breast of the Blessed Mother being offered to the Child Jesus (Naked without Shame, tape series, 1999).  Father Thomas Loya, faithful disciple and defender of West, takes the Westian verbal disrobing to a whole other level.  There are many, many more examples that could be offered.  West will just say I am trying to hide something beautiful because I am suspicious of the body.  But that presumes that external modesty has no positive value of being a manifestation of reverence and respect for mystery.  If West is wrong, as I believe he is, his approach is undermining a very important aspect of purity.

I am inclined to mind my own business when it comes to the work of popular catechesis.  I am not a professional apologist.  Nevertheless, holy bashfulness has been jettisoned without any regret and without any estimation of the loss.  This is a big mistake.

Mystics and Mistakes

But the other movement is expressed in his response to his critics under the title of “The Journey of the Interior Life,” a matter that as a Franciscan I know something about—the great masterpiece of the Seraphic Doctor St. Bonaventure is his signature treatise on the interior life entitled The Journey of the Soul into God.  West suggests that this freedom from the demands of external modesty is a matter of the unitive way, the highest and mystical state of the interior life.  (St. Bonaventure, would differ from St. Thomas Aquinas on this, insofar as he would identify the three ways [purgation, illumination and union] as modes of operation in the soul irrespective of stages in the spiritual life.)

Without doubt, the mystical life pierces the veil of the sanctuary and is a revelation of the Divine Spouse analogous to that between husband and wife in the bedroom.  But since when is the message of the Gospel synthesized as the New Evangelization in terms of a single corpus of Wednesday audiences of the pope, so that now the conjugal act becomes the central point of reference for everything spiritual?  In fact the mystics, even when speaking in the terms of nuptial language, used a manner of speech that was largely veiled. The Song of Songs as erotic as it is, is not a peep show, nor is its imagery the central dictum of biblical typology.

The reason the nuptial language of the mystics is veiled language, of course, has nothing to do with prudery, but with reverence, a disposition which grows as union with God grows.  That spouses should have eyes only for each other’s nakedness is not a sign of imperfection, but of fulfillment.  Nuptial language for the mystic is a way of expressing what eye has not seen nor ear heard (1 Cor 2:9), what he or she has experienced but is unable to speak about adequately in human language.  The use of nuptial language is not a reason to eroticize everything, or to criticize every effort to keep a veil on the mystery of sexuality.  In fact, it is to speak with precision to say that mysticism is under a veil.  That is exactly what makes it mystic.

The Parting of the Ways

Perhaps Christopher West chose to speak about liberation from the domination of concupiscence and not about prudery and his pastoral practices, because he knows there is far more possibility for common ground in the former.  And perhaps he plans to modify his approach to modesty and prudery, especially as it touches upon his popular presentation and the way he deals with those who are not comfortable with his unveiling tendency.  I hope so.

If not, it is time for many of us to part ways with Christopher West on the matter of the interpretation of the Theology of the body.  At this point there are many people, some of them deep thinkers, who are not convinced and will not be convinced that the minimization of modesty is the way of perfection.  I don’t see how the jettisoning of external modesty and holy bashfulness can be reconciled with the teaching and example of the saints.  Furthermore, the perfection of wholesome modesty and bashfulness, is not an inconsequential issue.  It is first of all a matter of truth, but it is also a matter of the authentic and effective practice of chastity.  This is a good faith disagreement, but one that cannot, in my view, continue indefinitely.  One is right and the other is wrong.  Period.

Up until now the views of Christopher West have been the point of departure for everything said in the United States on the question of the Theology of the Body.  I think its time that those of us who disagree not allow this particular interpretation to set the terms of our own reflection.

In Defense of Purity

I for one believe that Dietrich von Hildebrand’s writings on marriage and purity are a key to understanding the Theology of the Body, and Christopher West’s minimalistic attitude toward modesty is certainly not consistent with von Hildebrand’s work.  At least it is pretty clear what his wife, Dr. Alice von Hildebrand thinks of the matter.   Like John Paul II, von Hildebrand places great weight on the beauty and holiness of the unitive aspect of marriage and sexuality.   He also addresses the problem of prudery frankly and vehemently, but, unlike Christopher West, he also has profound appreciation for modesty and holy bashfulness.

I will continue my own reflections on the complementarity of John Paul II’s and von Hildebrand’s thought and their mutual advocacy for a holy and pure kind of bashfulness in matters pertaining to the great gift of marriage and sexuality.  This is just a small contribution, but I think it is a direction of thought which would be of great value to develop and a necessary corrective to West’s approach.

Ave Maria!

You will notice in the side bar a new widget which will allow you to watch Standing Fast without my turning the videos into individual posts here on MaryVictrix. You see, my commitment to vlogging belongs to AirMaria, so all my videos get posted there and then uploaded to various share sights. I am grabbing the videos from our YouTube account so that they can be played in the side bar.

I am sorry the formatting of the widget is not the greatest.  I will work on it when I have a chance.

The most recent video is “Guarding the Heart,” and expands on what I wrote in my latest post.

I have been reflecting lately on the notion of Dom Chautard concerning that aspect of the interior life that is Englished in his book “custody of the heart.”  Perhaps a more militant way of translating this notion in modern English would be “guarding the heart.”

It is the duty of a knight to guard and protect, and we often associate this role with his perennial preoccupation with the Damsel in Distress.  Elsewhere I have noted that the Blessed Virgin is the personification of the Damsel in Distress–not so much because She is helpless, which She is not, nor is that an essential quality of any such damsel, but because She personifies everything true, good and beautiful.  She does this precisely at the foot of the cross as the personification of the Bride of Christ and as Mother and exemplar of the Church.  Ultimately the Christian Knight must be at Her service.

But the curious fact is that the knight, while an image of Christ, the Bridegroom and Savior, is first of all a sinner and one who must identify with the needy Bride as much as any woman should.  This is not to say that the knight must become a woman spiritually, but that his masculinity need not be threatened by whole-hearted honesty about his dependence on God.

In fact, nothing could be more important.  In order to stand fast in the breach that has been blasted in the wall of the City of God, Our Lady’s knight must first repair the breach in his own heart.  How can a knight defend the City of God, how can he fight for the honor of the Immaculate Heart and guard it from the dishonor of the heathens, if he has not first mastered the art of guarding his own heart?  In fact, there is nothing more urgent than the attention we pay to our own vulnerabilities.

To this end, I would like to associate the notion of Dom Chautard with that of St. Paul concerning the Armor of God.

Ephesians 6

Finally, brethren, be strengthened in the Lord and in the might of his power.  Put you on the armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places (10-12).

This particular passage of St. Paul’s writings is perhaps the most militant in expression of anything he wrote.  In fact, St. Paul was a fearless man, undergoing every suffering willingly for the sake of the gospel, facing whatever danger and enemy with which he was confronted for the sake of souls.  Whenever a spiritual writer refers to “the Apostle” without mentioning a name, we know that he is referring to St. Paul.  This is because the Apostle exemplified in himself the man of action in the heart of Christ.

However, this most militant passage of his writings is not about the apostolate or action, but about the interior life.  His exhortation is to stand fast against the enemy of our soul, which is not flesh and blood, but the Prince of this World.  Interesting how the one who pretends to have the world in his hand is not a power of this world, but one of the world of darkness.  And the subtle liar would like us to believe that all our fights in this world are the wars of righteousness, meanwhile he insinuates himself into our hearts and makes mayhem of our spiritual lives, compromising our prayerful union with God and throwing smoke in the eyes of our discernment.

How often we invest ourselves in our daily concerns without having first invested ourselves in prayer.  The life of a warrior is nothing if not one of discipline.  Spiritual combat is more than anything a matter of our interior union with God.

Therefore, take unto you the armor of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day and to stand in all things perfect (13).

Because of these considerations, I was inspired then to reflect on St. Paul’s words in the form of a prayer.

The ordination of a knight or his investiture (clothing) is the matter at hand.  In the ancient text, De benedictione novi militis (Blessing of a New Knight), the prayer in which the candidate receives his shield reads thus:

O Lord, we pray of your mercy, that your servant, who receives this shield in honor of chivalry, may pass through this temporal world without losing the eternal one.  Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

There are plenty of dangers in this world, the greatest of them are spiritual and have little to do with pagans and profligates.  Sometimes we are our own worst enemy.  We should be careful not to lose the one fight that really matters.

There is long standing tradition of “vesting prayers” within the Church, very often reflecting the words of St. Paul.  The text of the vesting prayers of the priest are the most eloquent example, though many religious have their own form adapted to their habit and charism.  The following is my own adaptation of vesting prayers for the Christian and modern knight, not necessarily to be prayed as such, but at least an expression of custody of the heart.

At Rising

Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth (14a) . . .

Heavenly Father, in the Holy Name of Jesus, let me guard my heart from all falsehood and allow me to live in Thy truth.  Give me Thy help to keep far from me every deception of the enemy.  May I be strong and ready for every arrow that flieth in the day, of the business that walketh about in the dark: of invasion, or of the noonday devil (Ps 90:6).  Amen.

At Kneeling Down

. . . and having on the breastplate of justice (14b):

In Jesus’ Name, I beg for His righteousness, Lord God, because I have none of my own.  Clothe me in His life and virtue.  Give me His spirit so that I guard the recesses of my heart from every sinful inclination and false inspiration. May zeal for justice increase in me as I stand fast against my own compromises. Set a watch, O Lord, before my mouth: and a door round about my lips.  Incline not my heart to evil words; to make excuses in sins (Ps 140:3-4).  Give the grace to submit myself entirely to Thy holy will.  Amen.

At Dressing

And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace (15).

Father, All-Powerful, Our Lord Jesus Christ, who said, Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword (Mt 10:34), also spoke to us saying: Peace I leave with you: my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, do I give unto you. Let not your heart be troubled: nor let it be afraid (Jn 14:27).  May I be prepared by His gospel of peace to bring peace wherever I go, by resisting the enemy of my soul and helping others to do likewise.  Let me die to myself for Jesus Christ to win souls for Him, in who’s Holy Name I trust and pray.  Amen.

At Leading the Family

In all things taking the shield of faith, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one (16).

Heavenly Father, in Thy power and in the Holy Name of Thy Son, Jesus, I beg the Grace to be a shepherd after the heart of Christ to my family and all those entrusted to my care.  May my faith not fail and may my conversion be complete so I might confirm my brethren in their faith (cf. Lk 22:31-32).  Grant that I might shield myself and my people from every wile of the enemy and rise in joy and confidence in the Power of the Holy Name of Jesus.  Amen.

At One’s Daily Duty

And take unto you the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God (17).

Lord, All-Powerful, blessed art Thou, who teacheth my hands to fight, and my fingers to war.  Thou art my mercy, and my refuge: my support, and my deliverer: My protector, and I have hoped in Thee, who subdueth my people under me (Ps 144: 1-2).  Guard my mind from impurity and deception that I may discern your holy will in all things.  Separate from my heart by Thy armed right hand every motive that does not come from Thee.  May I do Thy work, and only Thy work, in the manner of Thy Son, Jesus, and with the honorable intentions of His Sacred Heart.  I ask this in His Holy Name.  Amen.

****

St. Paul concludes with the following:

By all prayer and supplication praying at all times in the spirit: and in the same watching with all instance and supplication for all the saints. (18).

In Dom Chautard’s teaching’s on custody of the heart he mentions spiritual disciplines like “purity of intention,” the “practice of the presence of God,”devotion to Our Lady,” continual formation in custody of the heart and vigilance at all times.  St. Paul says: all prayer, all times, with all instance, for all the saints.  The matter is preaching clear:  before anything else, to stand fast means to guard our own heart.  And for this we must not count the cost, but fight in a manly way for the kingdom of God

Blame it on the weather.  Look forward to seeing everyone next year in Spring.

Forget pies and jack o lanterns.

Update: Encampment Cancelled due to weather.

The Encampment widget in the sidebar has been updated. The advertising flyer and the Registration form are now available in the link provided for download.

Click on the picture:

The Feast of the Holy Rosary is a feast of prayer and recourse to the Blessed Mother. It is also a feast of the action of brave men who were men of prayer. That is why it is also the Feast of Our Lady of Victory.  On this day we pray for the Spirit of Lepanto.

In the current postcommunion oration for the Mass we find the closest thing in the current formulary to reference to Our Lady of Victory:

May we be helped we beseech Thee, O Lord, by the prayers of Thy most holy Mother, whose Rosary we celebrate; that we may draw strength from the Mysteries which we commemorate, and likewise obtain the fruit of the Sacraments which we have received: Who livest and reignest with the God Father in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, forever and ever.  Amen.

We are to draw strength from the paschal mystery, the mystery of the sacrificial love of Christ for all men.  The mysteries of which the oration speaks are the death and resurrection of the Lord.  But the feast integrates into these mysteries the mystery of Our Lady’s victorious mediation, and the “strength” which we draw from our participation in the Mysteries of Christ through Her mediation.

On this occasion I have returned to vlogging my series Standing Fast which you will be able find each week in the side bar on the right.  (It should be up momentarily.) Well I guess the widget won’t fly yet, so here is the video:

Here is the link to The Soul of the Apostolate that I mention in the video. And a Google Books version here.

You will also be able to find it on AirMaria as a regular post in a larger format.  I have delayed my post today due to the learning curve with some new video software.  My apologies for not posting sooner on Our Lady’s feast day.

The above painting was created by Tony Stafki and is available in various kinds of prints.  Tony sent my some information about the painting:

The battle formation of the ships just before the main clash.

The Catholic ships form a cross and the Muslim ships form a cresent.

The standard of the Holy Cross which was blessed by Pope Pius V can be seen on Don Juan of Austria’s ship which is leading the charge

Papal ships (St. Peter’s keys)

The miracle of the wind: just before the armies met the wind completely switched in favor of the Catholic ships.

Devils can be seen amongst the Muslim ships (they were summoned from hell by the Muslim leader).  The devils have peacock feathers as swords, a manifestation of their pride.

Our Lady of Victory with a sword in one hand ready to crush the devils and the other hand outstretched to the Muslim souls.

St. Michael leading the Angels

There are small white lights by the oars on the Muslim ships representing the souls of the Catholic prisoners.

The image of Our Lady with the sword reminds me of this:

The King looked up, and what he saw
Was a great light like death,
For Our Lady stood on the standards rent,
As lonely and as innocent
As when between white walls she went
And the lilies of Nazareth.

One instant in a still light
He saw Our Lady then,
Her dress was soft as western sky,
And she was a queen most womanly—
But she was a queen of men.

Over the iron forest
He saw Our Lady stand,
Her eyes were sad withouten art,
And seven swords were in her heart—
But one was in her hand.

I have always been a little put off that the image of Our Lady of Victory does not have a sword:

Nor images of our Lady at Lepanto, such as this:

Hats off to Tony.