It’s easier for an elephant to fit into a mouse’s swimsuit, a Benedictine abbot once explained, than it is for God to fit into our ideas about him. This is an intentionally funny observation, but it’s certainly true, especially in light of today’s gospel.
The people of Jerusalem thought that they has Jesus all figured out. They were convinced that he wasn’t the Christ, because they were sure they knew where he came from! But Jesus simply shook his head and told them otherwise.
Jesus sometimes has to do the same thing with us. We create idols- caricatures of Jesus- and he has to come along and smash them. Usually, like the mouse’s swimsuit, our image of Jesus is just too small. We tend to emphasize one aspect of his person and minimize the others. For instance, we might count upon his mercy, but forget about his justice. We focus on his power, but overlook his humility. We highlight his humanity, but neglect his divinity. And vice versa.
However, whenever we think we have him in a nutshell, the real Jesus eludes us, just as he slipped away from the angry Jerusalem mob. He knows that we’re always tempted to refashion him in our own image. Thankfully, he never stops trying to re-create us in his.
Fr. Robert Barron is famous for the insight that the Bible is not a Book, it is a library of many books from different periods and using different genres. Christians sometimes get asked, “Do you read the Bible literally?” But this is like asking, “Do you read the Library literally?” Well, of course that would depend on what section I was in. If I were in the science section I might read rather literally and technically. But if I were in the poetry section I would read rather differently with an openness to allegory, hyperbole, and the like. Other interpretive modes would be operative in the history section, the computer and technical manual section, the science fiction section, philosophy, religion and so forth. When walking into a library we have enough sophistication to make distinctions as to the genre of a book, its historical period, its purpose and so forth.
In reading Scripture we need a similar sophistication. Some of the Bible is straight forward history. But other sections are poetry, saga, Biography or exhortation. Still other sections use literary techniques such as parables, analogy, simile, metaphor, hyperbole, and expressions of the day.
In order to understand and sort all this out, some knowledge of the period when the text was written is helpful. Knowing something of the people involved and their circumstances is also essential. This is the kind of sophistication we bring to any other ancient writing we might encounter.
But one of the problems many bring to scripture is the tendency to read it in a crudely literalistic and mechanistic manner that does not respect the genre and purpose of a particular part of the Bible. To be sure there are passages we do read and understand in a literalistic manner. For example, “this is my Body.” Further we accept that the Scriptures record the things that Jesus actually said and did. But where many get lost is by taking literally what are figures of speech. Now we use figures of speech all the time. For example, We might say “It’s raining cats and dogs.” or “The world is turned upside-down.” Now we know what these expressions mean and that we do not mean them in a literalistic way. And so, we need some sophistication when we read in scripture that we are to gouge our our eye, or cut off our hand. When we are told not to cast our pearls before swine, nor give what is holy to dogs. When we are told by Jesus that we must love him and hate our father and mother, son and daughter, even our very self. These were expressions of the day which have a true meaning but which require a little sophistication to properly understand.
Again, the Bible is a library, not a book and we need to take heed of what “section” we are in. That said, The Scriptures have within them an internal unity where all the many individual books announce God’s plan and sets forth the ultimate destiny of man which is caught up in God’s redeeming love.
The Catechism gives some rules when it comes to interpreting Scripture:
Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture”. Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover. (CCC # 112) It is for this reason that we read the Old Testament in light of the New. For ultimately, everything there points to Christ, and to the life of Grace he would bring forth.
Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture. (CCC # 113). Scripture emerges from and is a part of the living Tradition of the Church. Hence it must be understood within that context.
Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By “analogy of faith” we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation. (CCC # 114). For the truths of faith must be held in a balance. When we allow one truth to eclipse others this is heresy. Further, one text of the Scripture does not the whole bible make. Texts have to be understood with the balance of the whole, and of the faith in general. There is a danger in “proof-texting” because it often removes a certain passage from the whole of Scripture which can help to balance and nuance it. Further, proof-texting may also take a text out of the wider context of the faith as a whole which may also help to balance and nuance it.
According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church. (CCC # 115)
The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: “All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.” (CCC # 116) Be careful here, “literal does not mean “literalistic” but, rather, what is the literary meaning of a text. That is, “What is the text actually saying.”
The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs. (CCC # 117) Scripture is always more than historical occurrences. It is also about you spiritual journey and mine. Scripture is not spectator sport. You and I are in the story. I am Peter, Mary, Pilate, Joseph and so forth. The events and words of scripture transcend time and have spiritual meaning now as well. The crossing of the Red Sea was more than an historical event. It is baptism, it is salvation. And so forth.
The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism. The word allegory comes from the Greek allēgoría, meaning to speak so as to imply something other. In other words, the events and deeds of the Bible point beyond themselves to something greater and other.
The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.
The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem. Another example might be that the journey of the Jewish people for forty years in the desert is a sign of our pilgrimage trough the desert of this life to the Promised Land of Heaven.
A medieval couplet summarizes the significance of the four senses: The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith; The Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny.
Here are a couple of very good videos that make rather plain the Catholic approach to Biblical interpretation. The first video is from Fr. Robert Barron and details two key Catholic interpretive principles: the importance of Genre and that Jesus Christ is the interpretive key to to understanding the whole Bible.The second video is from John Martignoni and is a very brief description of the Literal vs. Literalist interpretation.
The Thursday after the Fourth Sunday of Lent brings us to San Martino ai Monti. Originally a house church, the original structure was built by Saint Sylvester (314-335) and was later dedicated to St. Martin of Tours (317-393) and Pope St. Sylvester. A preparatory meeting for the Council of Nicea in 325 was held here. Here Christians in Rome first proclaimed the Nicene Creed, a practice that continues to this day through the entire catholic world.
God’s Fidelity
Our reflection today is on the fidelity of God. The Lord made a promise to Israel, to build a house for it, to make it a great nation with descents beyond number. The Holy Catholic Church is the new Israel and the Lord’s promise extends to each of us. We often think of making acts of faith in the Lord, but don’t as often think about His fidelity to us, His great love for us. Even when we fail to trust in Him, even when we fail to follow His word, He is still faithful to us. He will never turn back on his promise. He is always there for us, always available. Because of our sins, we have much to answer for. But because of God’s promise, He has more to answer for. God is faithful
One evening, Stephanie my wife prayed for guidance as to whether or not she should return to work part time. The very next morning, an absolutely perfect job practically fell into her lap. To us, this was an obvious sign from God. Yet that night, as we adjusted our family budget to reflect Stephanie’s new income, we started to worry about money. God had just answered our prayer and shown us how much he cares for us. But still we didn’t “get it;” still we didn’t trust.
Sadly, that’s all too common, as reflected in today’s Scripture readings. In the first, God’s people rejected him for an idol, even after he had freed them from slavery in Egypt. And in the gospel, there were those who refused to believe in Jesus, even though they were surrounded by evidence that he was the one sent by the Father. In both cases, people just didn’t “get it.” God had done so many good things for them. But still they doubted him, rejected him, and forgot about him.
Sometimes we’re guilty of the same things. When times are hard, we can doubt God’s love and care for us. And when times are good, we can forget about God altogether, and replace him with the idols of success, beauty, security, and wealth. We do this even after God has done so many good things for us. Things that should make us “get it,” and call forth our obedience, our trust, and most of all, our love.
I have a large Icon of Christ in my room (see photo at right). What icons from the Eastern tradition do best is to capture “the Look.” No matter where I move in the room Christ is looking right at me. His look is intense, though not severe. In the Eastern spirituality Icons are windows into heaven. Hence this icon is no mere portrait that reminds one of Christ, it is an image which mediates his presence. When I look upon him, I experience that he knows me. It is a knowing look and a comprehensive look.
The Book of Hebrews says of Jesus, No creature is concealed from him, but everything is naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must render an account. (Heb 4:13).
But his look in the Icon is not fearsome, it is serene and confident. Hence the text from Hebrews goes on to say, Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast to our confession. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has similarly been tested in every way, yet without sin. So let us confidently approach the throne of grace to receive mercy and to find grace for timely help. (Heb 4:14-16)
Particularly in Mark’s Gospel there is great emphasis on the eyes and the look of Jesus. A frequent expression in that Gospel is “And looking at them He said….” Such a phrase or version like it occurs over 25 times in Mark’s Gospel referring to Jesus.
Looking on Christ, and allowing him to look on you is a powerful moment of conversion. Jesus himself said, For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.” (Jn 6:40) and the First Letter of John says, What we shall later be has not yet been revealed. We do know that when it is revealed we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is (1 Jn 3:2).
There is just something in us that seeks the face of God and desires that look of love that alone can heal and perfect us. I often think of this verse from Scripture when I am at Eucharistic Adoration: Look! There he stands behind our wall, gazing through the windows, peering through the lattice. (Song 2:9). Yes, I long to see the Lord, and the Scripture also speaks of his longing to “see” us.
Here are some scriptures that remind us to seek the face of the Lord and to look to him:
Seek the LORD and his strength; seek his presence continually! (1 Chron 16:11)
If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. (2 Chron 7:14)
You have said, “Seek my face.” My heart says to you, “Your face, LORD, do I seek.” (Ps 27:8)
Look to the LORD and his strength; seek his face always. (Ps 105:4)
I [the Lord] will return again to my place, until they acknowledge their guilt and seek my face, and in their distress earnestly seek me. (Hosea 5:15)
Everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:40)
He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him. (John 14:21)
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. (Matt 5:8)
Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. (1 Cor 13:12)
For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ. (2 Cor 4:6)
An old song says: We shall behold Him, Face to face in all of His glory….The angel will sound, the shout of His coming, And the sleeping shall rise, from their slumbering place. And those remaining, shall be changed in a moment. And we shall behold him, then face to face.
Allow Christ to look on you.
This video is a wonderful collection of many of the looks of Jesus and the reaction of the people that follows that look. Pay special attention to it. The video also features a lot of “looks” that come from us. Notice how people look upon Jesus, and how they, as human beings react, as they look on Jesus. Look for the “looks” in this video. The final looks are especially moving.
The Patriarchal Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls is the largest church in Rome after Saint Peter’s Basilica and is sometimes referred to as the “Ostian Basilica” because of its location along the Ostian Way. The Apostle Paul was brought to Rome as a prisoner and martyred between the years 64 and 67 during the persecution of Nero. Aquae Salviae, today’s Tre Fontana, about two miles from the basilica, is the traditional site of Paul’s martyrdom. Since he was a Roman citizen, his execution was probably by beheading rather than public torture. The body was claimed by the Roman matron Lucina, who buried it in her family tomb near a vineyard on the road to Ostia. An oratory was soon erected over it.
This basilica was the traditional site of the First Scrutiny of the Catechumenate. This is the reason why a major basilica was erected by Gregory the Great as a station church in mid-week. The tomb of the Apostles, called so specially by Christ, reminds one of the Lenten theme of conversion.
Today, let us take some time to pray for the more than 1,100 men, women and children(catechumens and elect) coming into the church in the Archdiocese of Washington at Easter.
Adapted from the Pontifical North American College Guide to the Station Churches
Certain husbands are quite comfortable calling their fathers-in-law “Dad.” Other husbands, however, find that to be awkward or inappropriate. The prospect makes them uneasy.
Sometimes we can be uneasy about calling God our “Father,” or even “Dad,” as Jesus always did. In fact, this so outraged our Lord’s critics in today’s gospel that they wanted to kill him! Calling God our “Father” hopefully doesn’t infuriate us like that, but it sure can make us feel uncomfortable.
We can be fine praying to “Almighty God,” as that title reflects God’s distance from us. But “Father” speaks of God’s nearness; it implies love, family, and intimacy. And that can scare us, because we worry about getting too close to God. After all, who knows what that might lead to? We wonder: “What will God ask of me? What demands could he make? How might my life have to change?” It can seem easier, and a whole lot safer, to keep God at arm’s length.
Jesus challenges us to move beyond our fears. As our brother, he wants us to know the Father, not only as one who dwells above us, but also as one who abides within us. The same life and love the Father gives to Jesus, is also offered to us. Our Father doesn’t want to be kept at arm’s length. Instead, he wants to hold us in his arms.
We live in a time where some of the troubling philosophical premises of previous centuries have reached full flower. In particular the skepticism of our time, which plagues us, goes back several hundred years. Doubt and cynicism are a huge factor in our times and they underlie a lot of the atheism and agnosticism of this modern age.
Allow me for a moment to speculate as to how we have gotten here. As with all things, there are many causes, but I suspect that a lot of it goes back to Rene Descartes and his (flawed, I think) attempt to overcome the doubt he experienced. And, due to the significant influence he had, he set forth a kind of “Cartesian Anxiety” which keeps us from attaining to a proper balance between certainty and doubt, faith and reason, body and mind. I think it has also severed our ties with the world as it is and has caused us to retreat into our minds.
Cartesian anxiety is a term that refers to a longing for absolute certainty, and the belief that scientific methods, should be able to lead us to a firm and unchanging knowledge of ourselves and the world around us. It is called Cartesian due to its connection to René Descartes who sowed seeds of extreme doubt by insisting upon a kind of absolute or ontological certainty in things. Western civilization has suffered from unrealistic expectations as to the basis of knowledge, and a kind of anxiety ever since, that we can really know anything in a way that will satisfy our doubt. Let’s take a brief look at Descartes. If you think you know about Descartes then skip the block and go to the implications.
René Descartes lived in the Dutch Republic during the first half of the 17th Century. – He is widely held to be the Father of Modern Philosophy.
Descartes, uses a method of fundamental doubt, wherein he rejects any ideas that can be doubted, and then tries to re-establish them in what he considers a firm foundation for knowing them as actual or genuine.
This led Descartes, ultimately to only a single “provable” principle, namely that thought exists. He states this in his treatise, Discourse on the Method and Principles of Philosophy. It is here that we get the well-known cogito ergo sum (I think, therefore I am). In other words, since I doubt, something or someone must be doing the doubting, as so, the fact that I doubt proves my existence. Somewhat more negatively, the well-known phrase could be: “I doubt, therefore I am.”
It seems to me that this is where things begin to go off track since doubt and skepticism move to the center. Further, Descartes seems to conclude that he can only be certain that he exists because he thinks. He considers the senses unreliable. Only thought itself is evident to Descartes as a basis for what is undoubtedly real and existing. He considers that, in order to properly grasp the nature of things we must put aside the senses and use the mind.
Descartes thus went on to construct a system of knowledge that largely discarded perception as unreliable and admitting only deductive reasoning as a method of thinking or knowing.
Descartes was not an atheist and claimed to be able to prove God’s existence but in so doing he had to back away just a bit from his exclusion of the senses as reliable. In effect he argues that because God is benevolent, he can have some faith in what his senses communicate to him. For God has provided him with a mind and with senses and does not wish to deceive him. Thus, he does admit of the possibility of acquiring knowledge about the things based on deductive reasoning and perception via the senses.
Descartes also seems to back away from the radical skepticism his rationalism implies. He argues that since sensory perceptions come to him involuntarily, they are thus, in fact, “out there.” The fact that these sensory perceptions come to him apart from his willing them, is evidence of the existence of something outside of his mind, and thus, an external world.
I personally think that Descartes fails in his attempt to re-establish a basis for reality. For, he first sows the seeds of a radical doubt then, according to me, has to break his own rule to reconstruct some semblance of reality outside his own doubting mind. But to do this he introduces a priori assumptions (e.g. God is benevolent), which, while I agree with them, are assumptions, nonetheless. Either the senses are not reliable, as he first argues, or they are to some extent reliable. In which case he must abandon his original rationalist and reductionist premise that only the inner mind is demonstrably real.
Even though I think he tried to resolve or back away from his radical doubt, In failing to clearly resolve it he left us with a legacy of Cartesian disconnectedness from reality and retreat into the mind.
OK, I hope I haven’t lost or bored you. But here are a few of the problems that seem to flow from Descartes and the Cartesian Anxiety he set forth. I do not say he held all these problems, only that they stem from what he pondered.
1. The retreat into the mind and loss of connection with reality. In radically distrusting his senses, Descartes disconnects himself (and us) from the world of reality. What is real is only what is in my mind. The actual “is-ness” of things is no longer the basis of reality. Now, it is just my thoughts that are real. Reality is not “out there” but it is only in my mind. It is what I think that matters.
This leads to a lot of the absurdity of modern times where we tend to overlook reality and reduce everything to opinion. We often think of things abstractly and as “issues.”
For example, abortion is an “issue” for many people, rather than the dismemberment of a human baby. Many tend to think of abortion abstractly and repackage “it” as choice, or a woman’s right. But abortion is not an abstraction. There is something actually happening “out there” in the real world. An actual child is being dismembered and suctioned into a jar. But the Cartesian retreat into the mind allows many to continue to think of abortion abstractly and as an issue. And the mind, detached from reality can do some pretty awful rationalizing. Showing actual pictures of abortion seems to have little affect on those who have retreated into their minds and think of abortion abstractly as an issue, rather than a real thing.
The same is true for the issue of homosexuality. Any even rudimentary look into the biology and design of the body makes it clear that something is disordered with homosexual activity. The man is for the woman, not for the man. The biology is clear. But with the Cartesian retreat into the mind, the body no longer has anything to say to many people. “What does the body have to do with it?” Many ask. All that seems to matter is what they think. It is opinion, not reality, that wins the day. Thought overrules the body, dismisses the external reality. Here again is the Cartesian flight from the real world into the mind.
And the same holds true for just about every moral issue today. It is merely my thoughts and intentions that matter. What I am actually doing is, to the Cartesian dualist is not that important. It is what I think that matters.
2. Reality is no longer revelatory – The revelation that comes simply from the way things are, is “not reliable” and is mere opinion in this Cartesian world we have inherited. Scripture and the Natural Law tradition had held that creation and the way things are were revelatory for us. St. Paul says, For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made (Romans 1:18-19). There was a confidence in the Scriptures, and Natural Law Tradition, that the created world, that reality, provided a reliable guide to what was right and true. We had only to study the “is-ness” of things to learn. But this is all jettisoned in the Cartesian world, which remains skeptical that we can really know or reliably perceive the “there” out there.
3. The Cartesian worldview is also unrealistic in insisting upon “absolute” proof. To insist that we, who are contingent and limited beings, can prove or know something absolutely is both arrogant and unrealistic. In the Christian worldview their remains a mystery to all things, a hiddenness that we come to accept. Now mystery does not mean we are clueless. We are clearly able to perceive and come to know what God reveals. But mystery is the Christian acceptance of the fact that things are partially revealed, but that much more lies hidden and unseen.
For example, every human being is a mystery. We are surely able to perceive many things about the people we know. We see their physical presence and know many things about them. But there is also a glorious hiddenness to every person related to their inner life and their place in God’s plan. This is mystery: things are revealed, but at the same time, much lies hidden.
Hence the absolute proof demanded by the Cartesian world is unrealistic.
But simply because we do not know all things, does not mean we know nothing. A balance is required where we can be confident about what we do know and honest about what we do not know. Some degree of doubt or uncertainty is part of the human experience. Yes, we can actually know things, though not as absolutely as demanded by the Cartesian notion of hyperbolic doubt.
4. And this unrealistic notion of needing absolute proof in order to know things is what leads to the Cartesian anxiety of our times and causes us to set up intellectual idols. We tend in our culture to divinize science and the scientific method. And, I would argue, we do this out of Cartesian anxiety. We seem to desperately need absolute proof and so we entertain the notion that science can provide this. Of course, scientific theories change all the time, but never mind, we’re talking about an idol here, and the anxious search for absolute proof is willing to overlook facts like this. “Perhaps older theories have given way, but now we REALLY know! Now the proof is in, and the theory is absolutely proven!” Or so we think. But this is anxiety; it is not reality. Science will continue to change with new data, as it must. And science does not know or prove many things absolutely. We know a lot, but there is a lot we do not know. Good scientists know this and freely admit it. Science alone cannot be our elixir for the radical doubt that troubles us.
And so, here we are. The Cartesian world is in full flower. But it is not a lovely flower. It has led us to an imbalance. On the one hand we distrust reality and have retreated into our minds. Yet, paradoxically we seem desperate to prove some things absolutely to overcome the anxiety that extreme doubt produces. Our confidence in reality as a reliable guide was set aside as we have increasingly retreated into our minds. But, without reality as a reliable guide, we have sought something to soothe the anxiety that uncertainty causes. And so we trot out science and anoint experts and entertain the fiction that they can give the absolute proof our Cartesian anxiety demands.
It is a perfect storm caused by an unrealistic demand that everything be absolutely proven to be knowable at all. As usual, faith provides a better balance. For the fact is, there are many things we cannot know with absolute proof, but we can still know them as reliable. Not everything is known with absolute certainty, but that does not mean it is not known at all. Faith and trust are an important way of knowing. God trains us to trust him through faith. And this also helps us to learn to trust ourselves, our senses, and the reality of the things around us. It even helps us to trust one another.
St. Augustine well described the human person without God as curvatus in se (turned in on himself). That is what seems to have happened to us as we have retreated into our minds. Through faith God can turn us out again to creation, to truth, to one another, and to Himself. This is the real cure for our Cartesian Anxiety.
It’s easier for an elephant to fit into a mouse’s swimsuit, a Benedictine abbot once explained, than it is for God to fit into our ideas about him. This is an intentionally funny observation, but it’s certainly true, especially in light of today’s gospel.
