Christmas Wishes By Fr James OCSO
12.12.05 (11:54 am) [edit]It is early in the morning. I awoke at two and felt wide awake. I came downstairs, walked into the pantry, found a plastic glass, found the instant coffee, turned on the hot water faucet which gives hot water in a matter of seconds, made the coffee, put some extra sugar in it, walked over to the elevator, pressed the button, walked in, pressed another button and glided up here to the third floor. The elevator door opened and I reached into my pocket and found the key to the door of this large storage room where I write and, well, here I am. Such an ordinary routine, one that I have come to love. Most of the monks are still snoring away. I think Luke is up – he is always an early riser. He is saying Mass as I write this. Then I read a story that bothers me. The story is in this today’s New York Times Magazine. Well, it is not really a story – it is an interview. It took me a little while to notice it because the lead article is all about the new ideas that came our way this past year. There is a long list of them – most of them look weird to me – and you can click on each of them and the link will bring you to the idea and the essay that explains it. I have not looked at them yet, for my eyes wandered to the little interview in the upper left hand corner of the page. It is an interview with a man who has just published a book about the history of ideas – a history that goes way back. Among other things, the man shares his ideas about religion, basically calling it a waste of time and adding that monotheism has been the most destructive force in the history of ideas due to the wars, blood shed and misunderstandings it has caused since the dawn of civilization. The man’s name is Peter Watson. He does not believe in an inner world. He thinks it is more sensible to “look out on the world from a zoo than from a monastery.” He believes in great ideas and that great ideas require a lot of work. There is more, but I will get to that in a bit. Normally, I refrain from writing like this. I do not consider myself smart enough to engage in a rebuttal with someone as smart as Mr. Watson – someone who has entered the Holy of Holies that is a place in the New York Times. But for a man who apparently spent a long time thinking about ideas, he has left out a few important ones. Monotheism is not an “idea.” There are no such things as pure ideas. Ideas are complicated things, and one of the complications is that ideas are of matter. There is “stuff” involved, namely flesh and blood, yearnings and hunches, meanness and long shots, short-sightedness and, not least of all, symbolic imagery. We cannot access anything or anyone as these are assumed to exist “in themselves.” There are no naked facts. Whatever is “out there” and “in here” dances through the corridors of heart, mind and eyeballs through symbols. It is a big dance, too. A lot of stuff goes on at once, all the time, all together – and it is all exquisitely filtered through the marvel that is the human mind. Of course, there are degrees as to how well this filtering takes place. We all have been smart and stupid, sane and crazy. Clarity is not a perpetual state of mind. There are those things called “writer’s blocks.” I would suggest that there are as well blocks of the heart, eyes, and whatever else we use to take in the ongoing buzz of symbols. For better or worse, monotheism is a human response to whatever God is. For worse, thanks to the stupid people who handled the response with murder. For better, thanks to those who inspired men and women to find something of love in their lives and the lives of others. I went down for coffee a little while ago and Augustine smiled and told me that he wanted me to meet a remarkable man, and that maybe I could write a story about him. He met the man in front of our abbey store. The man is deaf and blind. Augustine asked me to hold his hands, and when I did he began to move his fingers and then said, “James, the man could read hands like that. He was with Sabrina and she knows sign language and when she “talked” to him, she moved her fingers in his hand, just like we are doing, and he smiled. It amazed me.” And I thought about Mr. Watson and his denial of an inner world. It is really the only world that the blind and deaf man “knows.” It is not a denial of this “outer world” but at this writing, the separation seems artificial and non-sensical. We are of “both” and yet there is not really “both.” There is only one world – and we come to know it in very different ways. Perhaps Mr. Watson should spend some time with those who have no sight and cannot hear and ask them about worlds of meaning. But he will first have to learn a new way of communicating – a way of accessing another world. Or, he can reach out for someone like Sabrina. We all have ideas. Mr. Watson states that the proof of their worth is in the pudding. A great idea translates into something great. He does not get specific when it comes to identifying a great, concretized idea. But whether he is talking about a wheel, a dancing bear, apple-scented shampoo or a rocket ship, these and other ideas-come-true are communal in their genesis and execution. We need each other for the fundaments of how we speak, learn, share, posit and, hopefully, invent. It is the humble man or woman who realizes that all that she or he is and “makes” does so because of others. We are ongoing gifts to each other. I live in a monastery. It is admittedly perhaps not the finest place on the earth to learn about “life.” Mr. Watson suggests that a zoo is a more appropriate place. I do not know if he thinks that a zoo is more real than this place, or if he is suggesting that a cloistered existence is by its nature blind to the real world, i.e., a zoo. Maybe he should stay with us for a while, live the life (and not just look at it) and I would bet that he would struggle to redefine his definition of “seeing” life. That may be a new idea to him and one he would indeed struggle with. If I read him correctly, that is part of his recipe for a good idea – that it is hard to follow through to the creation of something interesting. Mr. Watson mentions in the interview that his wife says “You are a know-it-all from hell.” I guess he must share some kind of love, as marriages go. And that is good, no? Love is a good idea. It is not “out there” some place. It is here, amidst all these crazy and sane people. You can find it everywhere and I doubt there is anyone who knows all about it or where it came from or where it ultimately leads us. But everyone will tell you it is real. As screwed up as we are, it is the best thing we have come up with as to how to get through all of this. I do not think it started out as someone’s idea. I think Mrs. Watson might be of help along those lines. Merry Christmas, Mr. and Mrs.Watson. Fr James OCSO |