"It is not important to succeed, but to do right. The rest is up to God." -- C.S. Lewis

The True Equality of the Sexes

"Christianity has asserted the complete equality of the sexes, and this as plainly as possible. Saint Paul says: 'The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband; and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.'

Once she is man's equal, woman cannot be 'man's goal'. Yet at the same time she is spared the bestial abasement that sooner or later must be the price of divinizing a creature. But her equality is not to be understood in the contemporary sense of giving rise to rights. It belongs to the mystery of love. It is but the sign and evidence of the victory of Agape over Eros. For a truly mutual love exacts and creates the equality of those loving one another. God showed his love for man by exacting that man should be holy even as God is holy. And a man gives evidence of his love for a woman by treating her as a completely human person, not as if she were the spirit of the legend--half goddess, half bacchante, a compound of dreams and sex." -- Denis de Rougemont

I disagree in some respects with de Rougemont overall--I think he goes just a bit too far in trying to demystify and demythologize love, whereas I believe that the mythic and mystical Eros is subsumed into Christian Agape rather than completely replaced by it, so that there is still a "magic" to marital love, as evidenced in the Song of Solomon.

That aside, this is one of the best statements of what I call "the third alternative" that I have seen. By that, I mean that the almost universal assumption in modernity is that there are two and only two alternatives in the relation of man and woman: chauvinism and feminism. Of course, this is typical of modernity: everything is reduced to simplistic dichotomies, usually with one choice being offered merely as a straw man so that one is coerced into acceding to the presenter's view. My response to being given this choice has always been, and will continue to be: "I'll have neither: have you any others?"

Chauvinism is the product of paganism, and feminism the product of rationalism. Only Judeo-Christianity presents us with a true view of what it means to be created male and female: equal in humanity, complementary in identity.

On Virtue

"My child, there is no happiness without courage nor virtue without struggle. The word virtue comes from strength. Strength is the foundation of all virtue. Virtue belongs only to a being that is weak by nature and strong by will. It is in this that the merit of the just man consists.... I have waited for you to be in a position to understand me before explaining this much profaned word to you. So long as virtue costs nothing to practice, there is little need to know it. This need comes when the passions are awakened. It has already come for you. Raising you in all the simplicity of nature, I have not preached painful duties to you but instead have protected you from the vices that make these duties painful. I have made lying more useless than odious to you; I have taught you not so much to give unto each what belongs to him as to care only for what is yours. I have made you good rather than virtuous. But he who is only good remains so only as long as he takes pleasure in being so. Goodness is broken and perishes under the impact of the human passions. The man who is only good is good only for himself.

Who, then, is the virtuous man? It is he who knows how to conquer his affections; for then he follows his reason and his conscience; he does his duty; he keeps himself in order, and nothing can make him deviate from it. Up to now you were only apparently free. You had only the precarious freedom of a slave to whom nothing has been commanded. Now be really free. Learn to become your own master. Command your heart, Emile, and you will be virtuous.

Here, then, is another apprenticeship, and this apprenticeship is more painful than the first; for nature delivers us from the ills it imposes on us, or it teaches us to bear them. But nature says nothing to us about those which come from ourselves. It abandons us to ourselves. It lets us, as victims of our own passions, succumb to our vain sorrows and then glorify ourselves for the tears at which we should have blushed.

You now have your first passion. It is perhaps the only one worthy of you. [i.e. the love of a chaste, modest, and virtuous woman. --ed.] If you know how to rule it like a man, it will be the last. You will subject all the others, and you will obey only the passion for virtue."

-- Rousseau


Rousseau, being a deist and a naturist, of course doesn't understand grace. And he is theologically mistaken in a sentence I have omitted from the quote, when he says that God is good but not virtuous, because it takes no effort for Him to be good (Jesus, in his humanity, exerted the supreme effort in undergoing all temptations and sufferings known to man).

Apart from those shortcomings, however, this is no less than inspiring. We modern Christians tend to think almost exclusively of grace, and not of effort. But although God forgives us for our failings, he wants us to learn to live virtuously in this life: we cannot, because we know we will be forgiven, neglect or refuse to try to be good. It is for this reason that our loving Father allows us to be injured and insulted; to be rejected and ridiculed; to have our dreams crushed and our hearts broken. For only through overcoming the trials and vicissitudes of this life can we become truly good.

"This is, then, the summary of the whole of human wisdom in the use of the passions: (1) To have a sense of the true relations of man, with respect to the species as well as the individual. (2) To order all the affections of the soul according to these relations." -- Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Jacqueline du Pré - Schubert's Forellen Quintet (The Trout)

Came across this rare jewel today. I didn't know Jacqueline had recorded this. It's good to be reminded there are still good and beautiful things in the world.

On Being a Gentleman

Some of you, my friends, have grown up or lived long inside the “sanctuary”; that is, had the guidance of truly devoted parents, a fine education (most often by homeschooling), orthodox religious formation, an exposure to and appreciation of traditional high culture, and sound instruction in social etiquette. Others have, like me, come from “out there”. Some of us belonging to the latter group have climbed the wall and appropriated some of the blessings of the sanctuary for ourselves; others have looked over it longingly but not found a way past; still others are unaware of the sanctuary’s existence and are yet wallowing in primetime TV, fast food, and top 40 radio. But even those of us who find a way inside still face many obstacles before we can truly make ourselves at home.

 

The most daunting of the barriers in my own journey has been social interactions and polite behaviour. Although I am naturally possessed of a gentlemanly nature, I have lacked gentlemanly polish. I find, therefore, an invaluable gem in the 1875 manual The Gentlemen’s Book of Etiquette, by Cecil B. Hartley. (For the ladies, there is The Ladies’ Book of Etiquette by his wife, Florence. Both are, unfortunately, very hard to find in their original form, but available electronically and in scanned reprint.)  

 

From the introduction:  

MAN was not intended to live like a bear or a hermit, apart

from others of his own nature, and, philosophy and reason will

each agree with me, that man was born for sociability and finds

his true delight in society. Society is a word capable of many

meanings, and used here in each and all of them. Society,

par excellence; the world at large; the little clique to which he

is bound by early ties; the companionship of friends or relatives;

even society tete a tete with one dear sympathizing soul, are

pleasant states for a man to be in.

I have actually tried living like a bear or a hermit, and found that Mr. Hartley is correct: it only increased my misery. Despite my protestations to the contrary, I discovered that I did, in fact, need the society of others; most especially that last-mentioned "society tete a tete with one dear sympathizing soul".

 Further:

 

You may set it down as a rule, that as you treat the world,

so the world will treat you. Carry into the circles of society

a refined, polished manner, and an amiable desire to please,

and it will meet you with smiling grace, and lead you forward

pleasantly along the flowery paths; go, on the contrary, with a

brusque, rude manner, startling all the silky softness before you

with cut and thrust remarks, carrying only the hard realities

of life in your hand, and you will find society armed to meet

you, showing only sharp corners and thorny places for your

blundering footsteps to stumble against.

Right again. It was this that drove me into isolation to begin with. On this head, however, although I accept full responsibility for my own actions, I do have something to say on at least part of the cause which I think is not unique to my own story.

Mr. Hartley clearly delineates (as one would expect in 1875) between behaviour appropriate to the society of other gentlemen and that appropriate to mixed company or the society of ladies. His words "startling all the silky softness" &c here are plainly a reference to the feminine. Unlike the gentlemen of the late 19th century, however, my generation of men came of age in the very teeth of feminism, or "women's lib" as it was mostly called then. And at that time, there was an incessant insistence, a la J.S. Mill, (now proved false) that men and women were equal, meaning the same in every way, and all perceived differences were the result of archaic socialization. This was the time when feminists thought it their duty to rebuke men who "patronized" them by trying to hold doors or show other small courtesies. Consequently, although the earliest years of my childhood had inculcated in me a rudimentary sense of gentility toward the fairer sex, every bit of my socialization from outside the home and subsequent to about my sixth year contradicted that, and it became ingrained in my subconscious (and that of the greater part of my generation) that women and men were intellectually and emotionally identical. You see, ladies; gentlemanly conduct is predicated upon the realization of the gentleman that ladies require gentle treatment. Not that they are intellectually inferior, as some boors have maintained in times past; but simply different, and deserving of special consideration. For men, of their nature, are somewhat rough toward each other. We jest, we tease, we provoke, we fight. And a boy has to be taught that he is not to act in those ways toward girls, because it will not at all be appreciated.

But our generation was not allowed to learn this, because it was supposedly patronizing and demeaning to women. Hence, the epidemic of boorish and callous treatment of women by men in our day. (As a brief aside, feminism has now invented their own answer to the problem: turn all men into women. So the younger generations of men and boys have a whole different set of problems to face.)

Mr. Hartley shows us a better way:

You will soon become familiar with the signs, and

tell on your first entrance into a room whether kid

gloves and exquisite finish of manner will be appropriate,

or whether it is "hail, fellow, well met" with the inmates.

Remember, however, "once a gentleman always a

gentleman," and be sure that you can so carry out the rule,

that in your most careless, joyous moments, when freest from

the restraints of etiquette, you can still be recognizable as a

gentleman by every act, word, or look.

I suppose "hail, fellow, well met" was, in 1875 rugged manly coarseness as opposed to the refinement of the drawing-room or ballroom. Another failing of our time, and of mine: that now we curse like sailors (or soldiers, in my case) in all company without restraint.

Similarly, the first chapter ("Conversation") starts with this now utterly unheeded rule:

ONE of the first rules for a guide in polite conversation,

is to avoid political or religious discussions in

general society. Such discussions lead almost invariably

to irritating differences of opinion, often to open quarrels,

and a coolness of feeling which might have been

avoided by dropping the distasteful subject as soon as

marked differences of opinion arose. It is but one out

of many that can discuss either political or religious differences,

with candor and judgment, and yet so far control

his language and temper as to avoid either giving or

taking offence.

This is probably my greatest infraction. Partly out of zeal for the truth, but mostly out of pride and selfish desire to be right, I have both given and taken offense, almost as a way of life. In class, in casual conversation, on social media, and in every possible way I have ignored this invaluable law (although I knew it) and made many enemies where there was no need. Not to say that one should kowtow and compromise his beliefs: when the time is right, it is imperative to stand for the truth. But I, and many, many others, have made a habit of bringing in our opinions when opinions are not called for; of creating tension and dissension when polite amity and kind respect would have better served the cause of truth.

I am still reading, and may post more gems of wisdom as I come across them. But I highly recommend the entire work for any man who wants to improve his character, and especially to the man who wishes to be a better man for the sake of a certain cherished one who deserves the best that he can possibly be and give.

 

Final Lenten Thoughts

I have crucified the Lord Jesus with my sin. But that is not all. I have abandoned him with his disciples, when I chose to follow my own path rather than his. I have betrayed him with Judas when I sinned, knowing full well his grace and the wrongness of my actions before I committed them. I have beaten him with the soldiers when I blasphemed and used his name as a curse. I have denied him with Peter when I tried to befriend the world rather than suffering ridicule with him. I have accused him with the Jews when I brought discredit to his name by my actions. I have reviled him with the thieves when I traded his blessings for the pleasures of the flesh. And I have persecuted him with Paul when I maligned and acted evilly toward the least of these, his brethren; those others here who love him. Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldst come under my roof, but speak the word only and my soul shall be healed.

Psalm 51

King James Version (KJV)

51 Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.

² Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.
³ For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.
⁴ Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.
⁵ Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
⁶ Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.
⁷ Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
⁸ Make me to hear joy and gladness; that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice.
⁹ Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities.
¹⁰ Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.
¹¹ Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.
¹² Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free spirit.
¹³ Then will I teach transgressors thy ways; and sinners shall be converted unto thee.
¹⁴ Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, thou God of my salvation: and my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness.
¹⁵ O Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall shew forth thy praise.
¹⁶ For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
¹⁷ The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

God I wish Lent was over. I need a drink.

I Crucified Thee

Ah, holy Jesus, how hast thou offended,
that man to judge thee hath in hate pretended?
By foes derided, by thine own rejected,
O most afflicted.

Who was the guilty? Who brought this upon thee?
Alas, my treason, Jesus, hath undone thee.
'Twas I, Lord Jesus, I it was denied thee:
I crucified thee.

Lo, the Good Shepherd for the sheep is offered;
the slave hath sinned, and the Son hath suffered;
for our atonement, while we nothing heedeth,
God intercedeth.

For me, kind Jesus, was thy incarnation,
thy mortal sorrow, and thy life's oblation;
thy death of anguish and thy bitter passion,
for my salvation.

Therefore, kind Jesus, since I cannot pay thee,
I do adore thee, and will ever pray thee,
think on thy pity and thy love unswerving,
not my deserving.

-- Johannes Heermann, arr. J.S. Bach

These are not just words. My sin--my personal sin that I have commited, and tragically, that which I have yet to commit--is responsible for the suffering and death of holy Jesus. And there is nothing I can ever do that can ever atone for it. All I can offer is my life in return for the immeasurable favours he has done me and the unfathomable mercies he has shown me, and must rely upon his grace for the rest.

For I acknowledge my transgressions and my sin is ever before me. Against thee, thee only have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight -- Psalm 51:4

The Practice of the Presence of God

It has been a spiritually productive Lent for me. Productive in the sense that physicians mean when they use the word in reference to a cough when you're congested. I won't elaborate on the metaphor.

From Brother Lawrence's The Practice of the Presense of God:

That, as for the miseries and sins he heard of daily in the world, he was so far from wondering at them that, on the contrary, he was surprised that there were not more, considering the malice that sinners were capable of; that, for his part, he prayed for them; but knowing that God could remedy the mischiefs they did when He pleased, he gave himself no further trouble.

It is hard to explain the effect these words have had upon me. In fact, I won't even try: I'll just let you ponder them yourself.

The practice of the presence of God should be a simple thing; the simplest of things, really. What could be more desirable after all than to be continually before the face of our saviour and creator? The problem is that one must get one's self out of the way in order to do it, and one's self does not like to be got out of the way. No, not one little bit. Especially if one's self is an arrogant and belligerant ass like my self is. Thank you, Lord, for permitting afflictions of the flesh in order to cure those of the soul.