What is the cause of the Pope Francis effect? It is nothing new. On the contrary, it is his conformity to tradition!

He is a model of the New Evangelization that we can all imitate. After his visit to the United States, the sense is that Pope Francis has done a remarkable job in connecting with people beyond the Church. True, there is constant argument about what he actually says, what people want him to say and what he really means. But despite the confusion no one can doubt that he has a knack for connecting with people. Just today, as I write this, I had a spam email from a political candidate who is, as far as I know, an avowed socialist asking me to vote for him  with a connection to a speech he made praising Pope Francis because of his concern for the poor. (I am not entitled to vote for anyone in the US incidentally so he had wasted his time even if I agreed with thim). It is interesting that this should happen despite the fact that Pope Francis has repeatedly condemned socialism and a the fact the the candidate wants to use Francis to push his agenda, indicates how strong his public image is. My reaction to this was to think that this is not an argument for me to vote for socialism, as the candidate thinks; but rather one for the socialists to realise that their aims would be better met if they converted to Catholicism! Stranger things have happened!

I am presenting three articles about him to mark the occasion of his visit, sparked off by a conversation with a friend who told me that she had noticed how many of her friends, especially non-Catholics seemed to warm to him. We were asking ourselves why he is so popular. Is it really just that the non-Catholics like him because he sounds as though he is reversing Catholic teaching? I don't think so as you'll see. You will see that I am largely still optimistic about the Franciscan papacy. I do hope that I feel the same after the synod on the family which is taking place as speak :)

Two of these three contain some things I have written before, but represented in this new context.

How does he do it? The answer, I believe is quite simple and it is nothing to do with PR tactics or political spinning if ever there was a Pope that really seemed less interested and less skilled in the art of polished media manipulation it is this one. Rather, to the degree that he is connecting with people and drawing them to the truth, what is drawing people in is supernatural.

Those who do not believe in the supernatural will not account for it in this way, even if they like him, but that doesn't invalidate the point. I suggest that what we see here is a case of the New Evangelization at work. For Catholics it works like this - or rather it ought to if we followed the Church's teaching: by our participation in the sacramental life, we are transformed supernaturally so that we partake of the divine nature. By degrees in this life, and fully in the next, we enter into the mystery of the Trinity, relating personally to the divine godhead by being united to the mystical body of Christ, the Church. When this happens we shine with the light of Truth as Christ did at the Transfiguration - people see beauty and love in our daily actions because they are, quite literally, graceful. They see the joy in our lives. This is what people are seeing in Pope Francis, I suggest. And here is the great fact that so often seems to be missed, the Pope is not especially blessed in participating in this. On the contrary, what he is showing us something that is available to every single one of us, low or high. This is what he wants us to believe.

How do we get this. The place of transformation, if I can put it like that, is our encounter with God in the sacred liturgy, most especially the Mass and the Liturgy of the Hours with the Eucharist at its heart. All of the Christian life is consummated in this life by our worship of God. It is by accepting the love of God first, and most powerfully in the sacred liturgy, that we are transformed into lovers who are capable of loving our fellow man and the Franciscan way.

This message is precisely the same as Pope Benedict XVI and John Paul II before him. In this sense Francis is utterly traditional. He is, I suggest, able to be the Pope of evangelization because he comes after the work of these two great Popes who did so much, beginning with John Paul II, in the chaotic aftermath of  Vatican II to implement the true message of the council. Contrary to what is often reported, he does not stand out against his predecessors. Rather, in his own way, he is in conformity with them.

Let us take the case in point. What is his view on the liturgy and the need for supernatural transformation. His words and actions indicate that he understands that all Benedict XVI did was not only necessary, but he now wants to continue in the same vein. This may be a surprise to many, but this is why I think so.

I have heard some express disappointment that there was not enough emphasis on the liturgy in the apostolic exhortation of Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium. It is true that there is little direct reference to the liturgy, and so it might appear at first sight that there is little interest from the Pope on this matter.

I have no special access to the personal thoughts of the Holy Father beyond what is written, so like everyone else, I look at the words and ask myself what they mean. In doing this, given that the Holy Father is for the most part articulating general principles, and given that I am not in a position to ask him directly, I am forced to interpret and ask myself what does he mean in practice? And then the next question I ask myself is this: to what degree does this change what the Church is telling me I ought to do? Or rather is he simply directing my attention to an already existing aspect of Church teaching that he feels is currently neglected?

If I want to, of course, I can choose to look at it the Exhortation as a manifesto in isolation and assume that is the sum total of all that the Pope believes; or I can choose to see this in the context of a hermeneutic of continuity. In other words I will assume that in order to understand this document, I must read read it as a continuation of those that went before, and this means most especially the period just before the advent of Pope Francis, that is, the documents of the papacy of Pope Emeritus Benedict. So unless I see something that contradicts them, I will assume that they are considered valid and important still.

If we read it this way, then because he doesn't have much to say on any particular issue, it doesn't mean that he opposes it, or even that he thinks it is unimportant, rather it means that he feels that what is appropriate has already been said and so has little or nothing to add.

This is what traditionalists within the Church say that the liberals failed to do after Vatican II.  Sacrosanctum Concilium must be read, we have been told (and I think quite rightly) in the context of what went before to be properly understood; and is one reason why Pope Benedict XVI encouraged celebration of the Extraordinary Form of the Mass - so the people could learn from and experience of that context, so to speak. I accept this argument fully, and therefore, it seems reasonable to read the writings of the new Pope in this way too.

Now to Evangelii Gaudium and the liturgy. The following paragraph appears:

'166. Another aspect of catechesis which has developed in recent decades is mystagogic initiation.[128] This basically has to do with two things: a progressive experience of formation involving the entire community and a renewed appreciation of the liturgical signs of Christian initiation. Many manuals and programmes have not yet taken sufficiently into account the need for a mystagogical renewal, one which would assume very different forms based on each educational community’s discernment. Catechesis is a proclamation of the word and is always centred on that word, yet it also demands a suitable environment and an attractive presentation, the use of eloquent symbols, insertion into a broader growth process and the integration of every dimension of the person within a communal journey of hearing and response.'

So what is mystagogical initiation? What the Pope is saying seems to me be referring to and reiterating what was said in the apostolic exhortation written by Pope Emeritus Benedict, Sacramentum Caritatis. This is headed 'On the Eucharist as the Source and Summit of the Church's Life and Mission' and was written following a synod of bishops (I don't know, but I'm guessing the Pope Francis was present). In a section entitled 'Interior participation in the celebration' we have a subheading 'Mystagogical catechesis' in which the views of the gathered bishops are referred to specifically:

'64. The Church's great liturgical tradition teaches us that fruitful participation in the liturgy requires that one be personally conformed to the mystery being celebrated, offering one's life to God in unity with the sacrifice of Christ for the salvation of the whole world. For this reason, the Synod of Bishops asked that the faithful be helped to make their interior dispositions correspond to their gestures and words. Otherwise, however carefully planned and executed our liturgies may be, they would risk falling into a certain ritualism. Hence the need to provide an education in eucharistic faith capable of enabling the faithful to live personally what they celebrate.'

This is so important that the following paragraph was included also:

c) Finally, a mystagogical catechesis must be concerned with bringing out the significance of the rites for the Christian life in all its dimensions – work and responsibility, thoughts and emotions, activity and repose. Part of the mystagogical process is to demonstrate how the mysteries celebrated in the rite are linked to the missionary responsibility of the faithful. The mature fruit of mystagogy is an awareness that one's life is being progressively transformed by the holy mysteries being celebrated. The aim of all Christian education, moreover, is to train the believer in an adult faith that can make him a "new creation", capable of bearing witness in his surroundings to the Christian hope that inspires him.' [my emphases]

I don't think it is possible to make a stronger statement on the centrality of the liturgy to the life of the Church and the importance of the faithful understanding this and deepening their participation in it. There is no reason to believe that Pope Francis is dissenting from this, in fact quite the opposite - he seems to be referring directly to it and re-emphasising it. If this is what he doing, then he might be stressing the liturgy in a way that even some Catholic liturgical commentators do not. (Indeed, one wonders if the first step in mystagogical catechesis for many is one that begins by explaining the meaning of the phrase 'mystagogical cathechesis'!)

I wonder also how many Catholic colleges and universities (I am thinking here of those that consider themselves orthodox) actually make mystagogy the governing principle in the design of their curricula? How many Catholic teachers, regardless of the subject they are teaching, consider how what they are teaching relates to it? If we believe what Pope Benedict wrote (and Francis appears to be referring to) then if I can't justify what I teach in these terms, then it isn't worth teaching.

Am I choosing to interpret Pope Francis the way I wish to see it too? Perhaps - like most people I would always rather that others agreed with me than the other way round. Only future events will demonstrate if I am correct. However, his papacy so far seems to support this picture: while there are some new things, I have read nothing that that explicitly rejects anything that developed during the previous papacy (that's not to say that he hasn't said things that could be interpreted that way if we chose to). In fact, the signs seem to indicate the reverse: his appointment as the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has told us the he was directed explicitly by Pope Francis, to 'continue the good work in the liturgy started by Pope Benedict XVI,'  He has broadened and strengthened the mission of the Anglican Use Ordinariate, which is all about enrishment of the liturgy in the English vernacular. I wrote about this in an article 'Has Pope Francis saved Western culture?'. And I have read articles in the New Liturgical Movement website and elsewhere heard anecdotal evidence that he has rejected direct appeals from deputations of emboldened liturgical liberals asking him to ban the Extraordinary Form and celebrating the Mass ad orientem (I attended at a papal Mass in St Peters that was celebrated by him in Latin two years ago).

His personal preferences may not be precisely the same as mine, and I will freely admit that in some of the specifics of matters where I am not bound to agree with him - matters of science and politics for example. But in but in his reinforcement of matters of the Faith, I don't hear anyone telling me that the views I had three years ago need to be changed at all. So in regard to liturgy, art, music and even free market economics (despite the alarm of many), I see nothing as yet that worries me at all...quite the opposite.

Denis McNamara on the Theology of Architecture

Here is the first of a series of 10 short videos (about six minutes each) presented by the architectural historian Denis McNamara of the Liturgical Institute in Mundelein. I had the pleasure of meeting him recently and sitting in on one or two of his classes. They were excellent.

These talks introduce succinctly and well, I feel, some of the themes that I heard him talk about in his classes. He is a good and entertaining teacher and speaker and this comes across in the videos. You can find more detail of the subject matter in his book, Catholic Church Architecture and the Spirit of the Liturgy.

What was of great interest to me was to see how he tackled issues for which there are parallel problems in sacred art. For example, how do you reconnect with tradition without falling in the error of historicism? Historicism is an undiscerning respect for the past that says, in simple terms: 'Old is always good; new is always bad.'

The corrollary of this has to be considered too: to what degree should we use aspects of contemporary architecture? How can we ensure that the form we are using connects with people today, while ensuring that we don't compromise the timeless principles that are essential to make it appropriate for its sacred purpose? You might say that what we want to do is to be able to innovate if necessary while avoiding the errors of modernism ('new always good; old always bad') or post- modernism ('anything is good if I think it is').

When I was considering just these questions in art, the only way I could respond was to try to look for a theology of form that connected the material form to the truths that the artist was trying to convey. If we understood this, I thought, then it would give us the freedom to innovate without stepping outside the authentic traditions of liturgical art. (A large part of my book, the Way of Beauty is devoted to consideration of this.)

It seems to me that this is just the conclusion that Denis has drawn too. In this video he introduces the idea of the theology of form for architecture by which the church building becomes a symbol of the mystical body of Christ. You might say the church manifests the Church in material form and in microcosm, He refers to this as a 'sacramental theology' of architecture.

In the nine videos that follow (which I will be posting weekly with a short introduction each time) he unpacks some important parts of this theology for us. If you are impatient to see them, you'll find them on YouTube!

https://youtu.be/2PDWXMMgy9c?list=PLmb-kTzyYnt5i14gShUc1ZYNPGTqG7P6p

More information about the painted dove in the Newman Center, Lincoln, Nebraska

Showing us how to re-establish a cultural tradition

In my recent posting about most recent edition of the Adoremus Bulletin, I showed the cover photo of the publication, which is of a beautiful wall panel.

I was delighted to hear just now from the architect James McCreery whose firm was the design architect for the Thomas Aquinas Chapel of the Newman Center. He sent me this fine photo of the panel in its setting, which shows that this was a detail of an arched recess designed as a backdrop for the chapel's Baptismal font...hence the descending dove! The painting work was done by artists at the Evergreene Studios, he tells me.

He explained to me that the font itself is hand-carved oak dating from the English Arts and Crafts / Gothic Revival period of the late 19th/early 20th centuries. This is the movement that came out of the work of Pugin, Ruskin and Morris particularly.

I am an admirer of this style, what might be termed Victorian neo-gothic art and architecture. Some talk of it as though it is a pale version of what went before. I don't think of it that way at all. To me this is an authentic model of Christian art and architecture that characterizes the 19th century.

In many ways I see theirs as a lesson of how revivals ought to take place, one which can help us today. There method was one of the study of underlying principles from the great models of the past - in this case looking at gothic architecture, and gothic and romanesque art and decoration - and then the application of those principles in a comtemporary setting - the 19th century. The desire was to change as little as possible, but it was not an unthinking copying of the past. There was a willingness to modify or change those aspects that were no longer appropriate to needs of the Church of the time; and those aspects that might, when considered in humility, might be improved upon.

Now, 100 years or so later, the same process goes on. This time the model of the past is the Victorian style and the Church to which it must relate is that of the early 21st century. This is how it works!

Film review: The Intern

Entertaining, funny, easy to watch...and noble (mostly). This film offers us lessons in how to promote the New Evangelization and offer the Mass to the masses. Really, I mean it!

The Intern is an entertaining and very funny feelgood movie which has a good story and along the way reinforces good traditional values. It has greater depth than most critics give it credit for and furthermore, I think that this shows us how the mass culture could be used constructively to draw people back to the Church and the Mass more powerfully, entertainingly and in about the half the viewing time that Into the Great Silence ever could. It also shows us what the strengths of movies are in this regard.

It is not without flaws but, I suggest, these could be easily remedied and so that it could have made a strong endorsement of Catholic social teaching. I am hoping there are some Catholic film makers watching who might take note.

Any who read last week's review will be aware of my view of what makes a good film, but for those who didn't: I hate self-consciously arty films that stress character development or visual beauty at the expense of the plot. I think that all these have to be there but a movie is successful when all serves the narrative. This means that in my view the American film industry, which understands this, is superior to the British and European; and as a rule I avoid anything that has sub-titles because I assume I'm going to be bored to death. The famous line that sums up why the British film industry is so unsuccessful (a question that discussion panels on BBC Tv and radio programs have discussed ad infinitum) is that the British directors always make films to impress their friends at dinner parties and nobody else...and they do it very well.

For this film I read the reviews first and the critics seemed to split. Some found it entertaining and funny, while others disliked it for being shallow and lacking philosophical depth. Given what most film critics require to be philosophically stimulated - angst and doom - I took both types of review as an endorsement!

As it turned out it certainly wasn't self-consciously philosophical but in fact it reveals a natural philosophy of life that is, broadly speaking, good and derived from Christian principles. It doesn't feel deep because it doesn't challenge our sense of what is good, it affirms it.

The plot is simple. A retired 70-year-old business executive and widower, Ben (Rober De Niro), is bored and looking to 'fill the hole' in his life. He had already tried getting out and being involved in activities that gave him some human contact, but this was not enough. He needed to a have purpose and so he applied for a job at a new internet startup that had subscribed to a 'senior intern' program as part of a publicity exercise. He had a job interview with the 'talent acquisition' executive in which he was asked what was obviously a standard question given to all applicants, regardless of the job: 'Where do you see yourself in 10 years' time?' De Niro's perfectly timed response was, 'You mean when I'm 80?'

This being an internet startup, Ben is just about the only employee over thirty. The comic moments relate to the clash of the generations in which each misunderstands the other. Without pushing himself on them, or complaining, he gently offers his wisdom based upon life experience and the younger people around him realise that he can help them in their work and their personal lives.

Gradually, the founder and CEO of the company, Jules Austin, (played by Anne Hathaway) starts to rely on him for advice in the same way. We realise that he is filling the hole in his life not by getting a second career, but rather by being of service to all around him in the workplace. His new job is his opportunity for service. Through his example, others start to adopt his approach in what would be an otherwise cut-throat commercial environment. We see how, through his personal interractions with the people around him, he is affecting this society in microcosm for the good and helping to make it a community.

The climax of the film revolves around troubles in the marriage of Jules Austin. Her husband, a stay-at-home dad who gave up his career when the hers took off, feels neglected and retaliates badly (if you want the details you'll have to watch the film). The film does not justify the behaviour of either, however, but instead takes them to a point of reconciliation whereby each reflects on the situation and admits independently the part they have played. Each resolves to make personal sacrifices for the other and for the marriage (there is a synchronicity to it that reminds us of O Henry and Gift of the Magi).

Although the story is simple, it is believable and the wisdom imparted through it seems true. It was also very funny and I wonder how much of this is down to the great performance of Robert De Niro whose timing and delivery are impeccable.

On the negative side, there's one risque joke, which stands out in contrast with the tone rest of the film and which, unfortunately, appears in all their publicity trailers that I have seen. Also, incidental to the plot, there are moments that go against Christian morality - for example, there is some reference to promiscuity that presents it in a positive light. These are almost to be expected nowadays, sadly.

Aside from these, the major regret that I had is the writer and director, Nancy Myers, did not in some way connect the good standards to that the De Niro character lived up to to their true source - God and his Church. I wouldn't expect a scene in which a character reads a passage from the Catechism, but it would have been nice if we had found out that Ben was a virtuous man because he was a Christian. I am guessing that the reason that this was not done is that Myers doesn't believe.

However, she almost did it.

There was an allusion to spirituality, at least, as the source of his strength. In the opening scene of the film we see Ben in the park participating in a controlled exercise routine - it looked to me like the Chinese practice of Qigong. We hear him in the voiceover describing his general disatisfaction at life as we see him doing it. In the final scene of the film, all seems to have turned out well and Jules is looking for Ben at work to thank him. She is told that he took the day off. She eventually found him in the park, back with the Qidong group. There was no discussion of what he was doing or reference to it in any other way. We just saw it as an aspect of his previous life that was something good and he he wanted to retain. This was reinforced by the fact that he asked her if she wanted to join in with him before they talked, and she did so.

I don't know if this was the director's intention but occurred to me that in an understated but powerful way, what the film had portrayed was a bit of Qidong New Evangelization! She had portrayed (perhaps unintentionally) the Christian idea of the cycle of worship: the exitus and reditus (exit and return) by which we are inspired by God and are dismissed to go out to love our fellow man. Then, transformed by our love for God through man, we come back to God as greater lovers, and the positive cycle is repeated.

How wonderful this film would have been if this little detail - the topping and tailing of the film with a spiritual reference - had been a one by which he went to a beautiful Mass. And rather than joining the stretching in the park, Jules was sat silently in the pews at church contemlating what was going on and listening to Ave Verum Corpus before they left to have their conversation.

If we want to get more people back into the Church, this film is showing us, is a small way, how to do it. So, Catholic screenwriters here's your challenge! Create a Catholic version of a film like, this. Once you have your script all you need is several million dollars and Robert De Niro and you'll have a box-office hit that promotes the Faith.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thv8myYCUQE

Pictures from the Way of Beauty: Pythagoras in Raphael's School of Athens

The wall painting, the School of Athens, was commissioned by Pope Julius II from Raphael in the first part of the 16th century at the height, if you'll forgive the pun, of High Renaissance. It is considered by some as his greatest work and is part of a whole series of frescoes that decorate the wall of what were Julius's private rooms in the papal palace at the Vatican. It shows all the greats of Classical Greek philosophy.

This painting also highlights the point that for the Christian the bible is not the only source of knowledge on matters spiritual. We can get an understanding, even of God, by reason based upon information mediated from the senses. We cannot know all things this way - some things are known only because God revealed them to us through scripture, such as the existence of the Trinity. The truths that cannot be deduced by natural philosophy are called the 'mysteries' of the faith.

The two central figures in the painting are the giants of Greek philosophy: Plato, who is pointing upwards to his non- material world of ideals; and Aristotle, who points downwards and was so interested in the material world and information discerned by the senses.

In my book, the Way of Beauty, I focused on one figure in particular, who is front left: Pythagoras. Many know his name today because of his theorem that enables us to calculate the length of the third side of a right angled triangle given the length of the other two. However, he was better known in ancient Greece and by Christians up to the Enlightenment for his discernment of the spiritual significance of numerical relationships in the cosmos. Pythagoras suggested that once they are known they can become guiding principles by which the culture can manifest this cosmic beauty too, and by which a pattern of living and worship is ordered. This beautiful pattern of life is for the good of man and in harmony with the rhythms and patterns of the cosmos. Although Pythagoras's fame is great, very little is known about him directly and what we do know is handed down to us by later figures who wrote about him, such as Plato.

It may surprise many moderns that not only is the passage of the Catholic liturgy through the seasons of sacred time built on these patterns of cosmic beauty, but even today in this aggressively secular culture, the pattern of time that we live - days, weeks, months years - follows this cosmic rhythm. It is natural for man to do so. Attempts to depart from it, such as after the French revolution, caused such disruption to the society that they quickly returned to heavenly time...even if they didn't believe in it.

Plato, who lived about 150 years after Pythagoras, is shown in Raphael's portrayal carrying the Timeaus. This book refers to Pythagoras, and Plato incorporates his mystical number theory into his own account of the world. For centuries the Timeaus was the most known of Plato's works in the West. Two leading figures who brought the ideas of Pythagoras into the Christian thought and reconciling them with scripture were St Augustine and St Boethius whose lives together spanned the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries AD. Boethius, who is the later of the two, is the source I rely on most heavily in my book when describing how these Pythagorean ideas govern the beauty of the cosmos and the culture. If you look at the fresco there is a figure behind Pythagoras looking over his shoulder at the chalk board (which is a diagrammatical representation of the numerical relationships that create musical harmony). The identity of this figure is disputed, but some think that it is Boethius. I would certainly like to think that this is the case.

The medium of this painting is fresco, in which finely ground pigment is suspended in water (like clay in stream water when the bottom is disturbed). This is then painted in onto the wet plaster in multiple washes. As the plaster dries it chemically binds with the pigment and fixes it in place. It is one of the most durable of mediums and if the surface is clean the painting will look as fresh as the day it was painted. It is always difficult to paint deep shadow in fresco, as with egg tempera which is used in icons, black tends to look like soot sitting on the surface. For this reason artists tend to work in the upper register of light and frescos often have this light, airy look to them.

Pictures of the house and gardens of the Weathersfield estate in New York

This has everything I love - beautiful house, gardens, landscaped farmland views...and even a Little Oratory! I have just had an email from a former student of mine at Thomas More College of Liberal Arts, Nicole Martin who tells me that she and two other recent graduates, Amy Green and Gracey Lloyd have spent the summer at the Weatherfield estate in New York State cataloguing the art collection.

The estate is 1200 acres, 20 miles of carriage and walking trails, with a three-acre formal Italian/English medieval garden. The house is Georgian style brick and brownstone. As Nicole said to me, 'It is very beautiful and very interesting!' It certainly is.

The late owner Chauncey D. Stillman was of "old" New York money and he built up this estate in 1950's and 60's. He converted to Catholicism and gave generous donations of money to the church and Catholic organizations (including Thomas More College).

The estate website tells me that the chapel, which he called his 'Oratory' (I am liking this more and more!) contains a painting by the Spanish baroque master, Murillo; a 16th century Swabian crucifix and a mannerist painting from the school of the 16th century Greek painter based in Spain, El Greco.

What a place to spend a summer. Thank you for sharing this with us Nicole!

— ♦—

My latest book the Way of Beauty is available from Angelico Press and Amazon.

—JAY W. RICHARDS, Editor of the Stream and Lecturer at the Business School of the Catholic University of America said about it: “In The Way of Beauty, David Clayton offers us a mini-liberal arts education. The book is a counter-offensive against a culture that so often seems to have capitulated to a ‘will to ugliness.’ He shows us the power in beauty not just where we might expect it — in the visual arts and music — but in domains as diverse as math, theology, morality, physics, astronomy, cosmology, and liturgy. But more than that, his study of beauty makes clear the connection between liturgy, culture, and evangelization, and offers a way to reinvigorate our commitment to the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in the twenty-first century. I am grateful for this book and hope many will take its lessons to heart.”

September edition of the Adoremus Bulletin now out

I have just heard that the latest edition of the Adoremus Bulletin is available. As usual there are many points of interest concerning the liturgy in particular details of preparations for the liturgies for the upcoming visit of Pope Francis; and about the new translation of the Order of Confirmation.

One piece that caught my eye is the reproduction of an article by Virgil Michel, OSB written during the Depression entitled City or Farm?. In this he describes the importance of an awareness of nature and man's place within it. He is an advocate of back-to-the-land movements in the context of the typical cityscape of 1939. He describes how people were so unaware of where their milk came from that a cow was paraded through the streets of one metropolis in order to show them.

In the accompanying and thoughtful commentary the writers (the 'Adoremus Editors') point out, that this is a subject that is important 'not only for its own relevance to the life of grace generally, but as a topic supremely relevant to the celebration of and participation in the Church’s sacred liturgy'. The glory of nature directs man to God, reflects the pattern of our worship and inspires us to want to do so.

Some may feel that the cities of 2015 are not much better - I guess it depends on which city and which part the city we want to focus on. I can think of cities are at both ends of the spectrum. Nevertheless the points that Virgil Michel makes will almost certainly resonate with many today. I think that the editors hit the nail on the head when they comment on this and say: '..it must be acknowledged at the same time that the city is also a key locus for the Christian faith. It is toward the heavenly city of Jerusalem that we journey (Rev. 21:2).'

For my part, I think that the answer to the question, city or farm? is neither one nor the other but both. The ideal is a society in which each has his part to play and this incorporates city and farm...and garden! This is the glory of man in harmony with the rest of creation in which both the culture and the cultus (field) point to the cult (the liturgy) and each is derived from the forms contained within the liturgy.

The link to the Adoremus website is here; while the link through to the online presentation of the Bulletin itself is here.

 The cover image of the bulletin has wall panel from the Newman Center at Lincoln, Nebraska. Love this depiction of the dove of the Holy Spirit with the Romanesque style design behind it. This image speaks to the discussion on the Sacrament of Confirmation.

and here's the full panel in situ:

Film review: A Walk in the Woods

All films need a good story. This one is funny, it has great acting, has beautifully photographed scenery...but it isn't enough because there isn't enough plot to keep you interested.  One of running themes in the arts when I was living in Britain was about just how unsuccessful the British film industry is. We seemed to have good actors who seem to be able to compete with the Americans. Our guys cans can knock Shakespeare out the summer-festival park; and we could make great TV adaptations of Jane Austin novels and our TV advertising is much cleverer and more sophisticated and wins awards all over the world for art direction. But our film industry is a dead loss. No one seems to want to go to see the films.

One view as to why came from a Brit who directed box-office hits in Hollywood called Michael Winner (who made Death Wish films starring Charles Bronson in the 1970s). He said that the difference between British film makers and their American counterparts was that the Americans tried to make films that were commercially successful, whereas British filmmakers tried to make films that would impress their friends at dinner parties, and unfortunately that's all they manage to impress.

If you were characterize what he is getting at, British (and European film) tries to be high art, while American film tries to entertainment. I think he's right. I go to see movies because I want to be entertained first, and for all the Shakespearean talent they employ, and no matter how deep and profound the character development, often as not I find British and European films dull. I studiously try to avoid anything with subtitles. I know I'm going to find them self-consciously arty and as dull as watching paint dry...there was even Spanish film about watching paint dry called the Quince Tree Sun. This is possibly one of the dullest movies ever made. It won loads of awards of course.

What seems to be forgotten by the Europeans is that film is basically a medium for telling a story, and if you don't have a good story well told, you don't have a good film. This is the problem with A Walk in the Woods. It is an American film, but it seems to be suffering from the British disease!

It is based on the book by the travel writer Bill Bryson about walking the Appalachian Trail. I went to see it because I like Bill Bryson's books. Each one is usually a serious of very amusingly related stories and encounters. The only threads connecting each event are Bryson's presence and the place where the book is set. This seems to work in the books, but it just doesn't work in this film. There just isn't enough plot -  we want a logical transition from beginning, to middle and to end - to hold it together and it isn't there.

The jokes are funny, Robert Redford is good as the laconic, deadpan Bryson; Nick Nolte is brilliant as his bad tempered companion. The encounters with bears and with eccentric walkers in the trail are hilarious, and the scenery is beautiful. But in the end we really can't work out why these two guys who are so obviously unsuited physically for the job are trudging this 1,000 mile trail from Georgia to Maine; or what makes it interesting enough to film it. Finally, it seemed neither could the characters. It finished with Redford asking Nolte, 'You want to go home don't you?' At which point Nolte answers, 'Yes.' And they leave the trail. Nolte catches the greyhound back to the Midwest, Redford to Hanover, New Hampshire...and that's the end of the film.

It also the end of this review.

0

St Matthew the Evangelist from the Lindisfarne Gospels - lessons for all who wish to pray...and for all who wish to paint

To mark the Feast of St Matthew here is the illumination from the 8th century British manuscript (the original is in the British Library). There are profound lessons here for those who wish to pray, and for those who wish to paint...or both. This simple painting, which is over 1200 years old and was created by an obscure monk working on a bleak island of the northeast coast of England in the North Sea can tell us so much. It reveals truths about St Matthew, and from its style we can discern things about the whole history of Christian art. These are lessons that budding artists can apply today, even if we want to paint in completely different styles such as the baroque.

To be able to see these things in the painting we will look first at the historical context. This little painting even tells us about the history of Britain! Art historians - (and the font of all knowledge, Wikipedia of course!) - will describe the style of this art as 'insular' or 'hiberno-saxon'. This refers to the Celtic style of art and literature of the Christians who remained in the British Isles and Ireland after the retreat of the Romans. It is viewed as 'insular' in two ways - first more literally as it belongs to the islands of Britain and Ireland; and secondly because it is often viewed as a style that is distinct from others of this period. There is a third reason particular to this gospel, in that Lindisfarne, the site of an abbey, is an remote island off the coast of Northumberland in northeast England. The artist of this painting was a monk called Eadfrith and he later became the abbot of Lindisfarne Abbey.

The British islanders who remained after the retreat of Roman troops in the 5th century were culturally Roman and so wrote in Latin. Gradually over the following centuries they were overwhelmed by the incursions of German and Nordic tribes. Even in the 8th century, there were pockets of Latin culture left and most of the Lindisfarne Gospel is written in Latin. In this page 'Mattheus' is in Latin and he is referred to as a saint with the word 'Hagios' (Greek). Matthew is depicted writing his gospel with the figure of the winged man, the symbol of Matthew, standing on his shoulder (imago hominus - the image of a man). This, is one of the four faces of the cherub described by Ezekiel in his vision. Over time Germanic and Viking culture dominated more and more and by the 9th century Latin was not so widely spoken; and so on other pages the original Latin gospel text is translated into the vernacular in red ink. The curtains are present to indicate that the person is inside and are drawn back to reveal the scene to the observer. Some commentaries refer to this as a symbolic unveiling by which the truth is revealed. I have to be honest and say I do not know who the figure peeping out from behind the curtain is. Can anyone help me here? The painting is ink on vellum, made from the skin of sheep. Vellum is a material that is resistant to decay over time and was also very expensive and so rare. This is one reason, incidentally, that so many Icelandic sagas remain I found out recently - because there were so many sheep on Iceland and such a small population, vellum was more plentiful and so unusually they recorded a much higher proportion of their folk tales on vellum and this is how we know of so many today. Tolkien was an expert in all of these ancient forms of British and of the Icelandic language and literature - so this is the world that fired his imagination so strongly. Back to this painting - the style of Lindisfarne gospels art is certainly distinctive. While retaining its unique look, it still conforms largely to the iconographic prototype, which governed Christian art, East and West from about the 5th century through to the 13th century. This is a Western variant, so while it doesn't look like a Russian icon, it still conforms in many ways to the same prototype. So this has the characteristic flatness and lack of perspective that one expects in an icons, revealing the heavenly dimension which is outside space. In order to emphasize this the bench upon which Matthew is sitting is in inverse perspective. He has his feet on a pedestal indicating a holy person. There is one little anomaly however. A feature that pulls it away from strict conformity to the icon is the fact that the symbolic winged man is in profile. Generally, in icons faces are in three quarter profile or full face (like the other two figures) indicative of a saint who is happy to reveal is person to the viewer because in his purified state he has nothing to hide. Generally images from this period conformed fully to the iconographic prototype. Here is a portrayal of the symbol of St Matthew along with those of the four evangelists in the Book of Kells, which was produced about 100 years later and is considered of the same period and style. We can see St Matthew portrayed in three quarter profile, the standard for human forms. I don't know why Eadfrith departed from this in his version. It might be a mistake or even an act of defiance, or perhaps a little bit of ignorance. There is another aspect to this and it relates to how we know what an icon is. What is it that makes an icon rather part of the gothic tradition? Anyone who has done an icon painting class or read a book about icons is aware that there are stylistic principles which govern what they do. What many do not know is that the rules that they are being given are a modern construct. They were for the most part written and popularized in the 20th century. I have researched and asked many people and am not aware of any writings prior to the recent period that represent a codification of the stylistic elements that make in icon an icon, rather than, say, a piece of gothic art. There are no writings by Church Fathers for example. The rules that you come across in the books were devised by a group of Russian ex-patriots in Paris, especially influential were two men called Ouspensky and Lossky. They looked at the images that they judged to be good and worthy of veneration and the devised a set of rules that seem to apply to them to aid people to create art in a similar style in the future. To my knowledge no such code was in existence in writing when Eadfrith was active. We do not know the degree to which the style, which seems to have been preserved by force of tradition, was directly linked to the theology of style in the way that it is presented today. Perhaps, in fact, there was more leeway than we imagine and Eadfrith was just making what would have seemed a legitimate artistic decision. Make no mistake, people such as Ouspensky and Lossky did a great job, in my opinion. they provided a set of guidelines by we have seen the re-establishment of what was in the 19th century a wayward tradition in Russian and Greece, into a strong and clearly defined form so that  icon painters today can be every bit as good as the top icon painters of the past. These Russians were not without their own agenda in setting this down however. They were Eastern Orthodox and deliberately set down the rules so as to reflect their belief that the Western forms of art were inferior ('degenerate' is the term I have heard used to refer to the gothic and the baroque for example) . Catholics should be aware of this. The idea that all sacred art has to look like an icon is, from the point of view of the Catholic Church flat wrong. Unfortunately that doesn't stop many Catholics unquestioningly accepting and repeating the anti-Catholic rhetoric that they have heard in their icon painting class. Contemporary Orthodox commentators are motivated to make Western forms that were created prior to the schism between East and Western Church (around 1000AD) , such as this example of insular art, fit in with the iconographic prototype because it supports and argument that Christian culture was unified before the schism and then fragmented afterwards. Then, the argument runs, we can see that the Eastern Churches remain faithful to the original forms of Christianity, while it is the Roman Church that has veered away. We don't have space here to give the full theology of the image that governs the Western traditions in art, but to give you a general picture of what is legitimate for the liturgy and what is not, I take my lead from Benedict XVI. He said in his book, the Spirit of the Liturgy that the icon is appropriate for the liturgy (in this he agrees with the Orthodox) but in addition, he says, for the Roman Rite, the gothic and the baroque styles are appropriate too. So you can continue to enjoy and worship with paintings in the style of people such as Duccio and George De La Tours. I would say that the one thing where the Eastern Church does lead the West is in the reestablishment of these traditions. We are 60 years behind in propogating a theology of style of the uniquely Western styles, in the way that it has been done for icons. My book, the Way of Beauty, was an attempt to do for the theory of the gothic and the baroque traditions what Lossky and Ouspensky did for the iconographic tradition. Below, classic baroque - St Matthew and the Angel by Guido Reni of the 17th century - with the angel...legitimately... in profile; and the same evangelist by Duccio

— ♦—

My book the Way of Beauty is available from Angelico Press and Amazon.

     

Film review: the War Room - portraying a suburban alternative to the Benedict Option

It also proves that Christian morality sells - the film making is not that great, but the message is good and that is why it is popular! I went to see this film because I noticed that it has been in the top three in box office receipts since it was released; and because it is clearly Christian in inspiration and is pushing a moral and spiritual message.

The War Room is about a troubled marriage in which the wife begins to pray for her husband and we see how this changes her and in turn her interaction with her husband and their daughter for the good. The plot is simple, the message is moral and uplifting and the portrayal of the prayer, if  a little on the protestant charismatic side of things for my temperament, is authentic, I think. There are no appearances of angels or visions - which while they do happen in reality are not the experience of most people in their relationship with God and so this helps to give the film a down to earth reality. The prayers are answered with happy results that work their way through via positive outcomes in ordinary events. All negative turns in the plot were neatly and happily resolved (and perhaps over simply treated).

The reviews of the film are mixed. Some critics, I sense, are reacting to the message itself which is good and overtly Christian. This can work both ways depending on the personal belief of the critic. Others do seem to be trying to detach from their personal beliefs and critique the quality of the film making. Most of the latter do not like it. Even in my inexpert opinion it could have been a lot better - the dialogue is wooden, the interplay between the characters is superficial and unsophisticated and the jokes are fairly obvious. This is no Christian Woody Allen film...but still, I do think it is worth seeing! I can see why it is popular and despite the negatives, I found myself genuinely enjoying it. I was uplifted by the message and it transmitted a strong affirming message of faith.

I am pleased that such a film was made and is so popular. What this tells me is that the market for good films is huge and if something like this, notwithstanding the negatives can be so popular, then anything that has the essential elements of truth and is at the same time well made cannot help but be a box office smash. Furthermore, it seems to me, if it were in addition overtly Catholic, then it would have the popularity of the Sound of Music and It's a Wonderful Life all rolled into one.

The 'war room' of the title is the converted closet that became he inner sanctuary of prayer. The young wife in the family posted prayer requests on the wall, prayed and then checked them when they were answered. She had been instructed by an elder mentor to develop a prayer strategy in the real war, which was not as she supposed, against her husband, but against the devil and his influence.

There is a point here for those of the Benedict Option mentality who wish to retreat from society, re-group and then emerge at some point in the future when the next Charlemagne creates a safe environment to be openly Christian. This film is about personal transformation and engagement, rather than withdrawal. I do think that retreat is needed but it is not geographical or cultural, but spiritual. The wilderness is the place where we meet the devil and we deal with him in prayer, then we emerge to engage with society wherever we are now, transformed by prayer. The inner room is the symbol of the place inside ourselves where we pray and engage with our demons. As I was watching I was thinking how a similar film could show the person engaging in the pattern of prayer described by Benedict XVI in his paper on the New Evangelization, and the person was praying not in the broom closet, but to the home altar or icon corner! The film strikes me as being closer to the Benedict XVI Option of personal transformation in Christ by which we transfigure the culture right where we are now; than it is the Benedict Option.

Interestingly, there was an, apparently inadvertent, reference to the need for praying for the dead. I don't know if the protestant film producers did this consciously but as my friend Fr Nick, with whom I went to see the film, pointed out, it probably wasn't  a deliberate pitch for the existing of purgatory (which it can only have reflected in logic). Rather, it reflected something that is innate, a desire to pray for those who are gone, which has been planted in us by God.

I doubt that this film is going to convert many non-Christians, but I think it would act to help reinforce a lukewarm faith - this seemed to be what it was trying to do. The protagonists were just that, people of faith who were not fervent until the events of the story caught up with them. Nevertheless, it is heartening that a film is of ordinary quality in other ways should be so successful. It demonstrates, perhaps, that, despite what Hollywood is supposed to believe, morality sells!

Images from the Way of Beauty: Christ Enthroned and the Quincunx - Symbolic Images of the Gospels

This week we show images, one is representational are and one is geometric art. First is Christ Enthroned. I painted this for the childrens coloring book, Meet the Angels. It went on the back cover. It shows Christ, as described in the vision of Ezekiel and the Book of Revelaton, enthroned with the four faces of the Cherubim in each corner. Around the throne also are many six-winged seraphim - just wings and faces - and who are transparent so the colours of the background show through. This is a standard iconographic image and if you look on Google images for 'Christ Enthroned' or 'Christ in Majesty' you will see many in this style. It is painted in egg tempera. The almond shape around Christ is called a Mandorla (Italian for almond!) and represents the cosmos.

The other images are examples of cut stone floorwork and are geometric designs in the 'Cosmatesque' or 'Cosmati' style. It is named after the Cosmati family which, over several generations, developed this distinctive style of work. If they were covering a large area, such as a whole church floor, they worked on three scales. For the grand form they tended to compartmentalize into rectilinear shapes. Then the sub-form would be a geometric design consisting of faceted polygons or interconnected circles. The final stage would be an infill of with very small repeated regular geometric shapes such as squares, triangles of hexagons (which are the three forms that can put together without creating gaps).

One of the standard designs is the ‘quincunx’. This the generic name for the arrangement of five equivalent shapes that has four arranged symmetrically around the fifth which is centrally place (it is also a game-winning word in Scrabble so it'll pay to remember this, if for no other reason). The five dots on dice, for example, are in a quincunx shape. I understand the name comes from the Latin for five-twelfths, a coin of this fraction value of the currency had this name and often had this arrangement of dots on it.

This one is in Westminster Abbey:

..and this is in Santa Croce in Rome:

In the context of geometric patterned art, it is the shape of four smaller circles spinning of larger secondary one was not limited to the Cosmati craftsmen. It is seen in both Eastern and Western Churches and across many centuries and was seen in Roman floor mosaics.

What is the connection between the geometric and representational forms?

The answer is that both sybolize the Word of God being taken to the world through the gospels. Around the central image of the enthroned Christ we see four figures representing the four evangelists carrying the Word to the four corners of the world. Wikipedia describes the source as follows:.

'Matthew the Evangelist, the author of the first gospel account is symbolized by a winged man, or angel. Matthew's gospel starts with Joseph's genealogy from Abraham; it represents Jesus' Incarnation, and so Christ's human nature. This signifies that Christians should use their reason for salvation.

Mark the Evangelist, the author of the second gospel account is symbolized by a winged lion – a figure of courage and monarchy. The lion also represents Jesus' Resurrection (because lions were believed to sleep with open eyes, a comparison with Christ in the tomb), and Christ as king. This signifies that Christians should be courageous on the path of salvation.

Luke the Evangelist, the author of the third gospel account (and the Acts of the Apostles) is symbolized by a winged ox or bull – a figure of sacrifice, service and strength. Luke's account begins with the duties of Zacharias in the temple; it represents Jesus' sacrifice in His Passion and Crucifixion, as well as Christ being High priest (this also represents Mary's obedience). The ox signifies that Christians should be prepared to sacrifice themselves in following Christ.

John the Evangelist, the author of the fourth gospel account is symbolized by an eagle – a figure of the sky, and believed by Christian scholars to be able to look straight into the sun. John starts with an eternal overview of Jesus the Logos and goes on to describe many things with a "higher" christology than the other three (synoptic) gospels; it represents Jesus' Ascension, and Christ's divine nature. This symbolises that Christians should look on eternity without flinching as they journey towards their goal of union with God.'

One of the reasons that the Church settled on four gospels was to emphasis this symbolism (see St Irenaeus writing in the 2nd century AD in Against Heresies). The quincunx also symbolizes Creation, as the number four represents the cosmos. The symbolism is of, again the four corners of the world - Christ spoke of the 'four winds' and the symbolism of the four points of the compass comes from this.

Sassoferrato's Virgin at Prayer - for the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary

For today's Feast of the Birthday of the Blessed Virgin Mary here is the Virgin at Prayer by the Italian artist Giovanni Battista Salvi da Sassoferrato who is generally known simply as Sassoferrato. He lived from 1609 to 1685. Records of the commemoration of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary on September 8th go back to the 6th century. The Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception of Mary was later fixed at December 8, nine months prior.

There is a commentary on the Feast from the following information is drawn, here, by Fr Matthew Mauriello: 'The primary theme portrayed in the liturgical celebration of this feast day is that the world had been in the darkness of sin and with the arrival of Mary begins a glimmer of light. That light which appears at Mary's holy birth preannounces the arrival of Christ, the Light of the World. Her birth is the beginning of a better world: "Origo mundi melioris." The antiphon for the Canticle of Zechariah at Morning Prayer expressed these sentiments in the following way: "Your birth, O Virgin Mother of God, proclaims joy to the whole world, for from you arose the glorious Sun of Justice, Christ our God; He freed us from the age-old curse and filled us with holiness; he destroyed death and gave us eternal life.

'The second reading of the Office of Readings is taken from one of the four sermons written by St. Andrew of Crete ( 660-740 ) on Mary's Nativity. He too used the image of light: "...This radiant and manifest coming of God to men needed a joyful prelude to introduce the great gift of salvation to us...Darkness yields before the coming of light."

This painting, like the painting of Gregory the Great by Vignali, described last week, is in the baroque style of the 17th century. Again, we see the sharp contrast between light and dark symbolizing the Light overcoming the darkness, and again like the Vignali, the face is in partial shadow ensuring that this is distinct in style from a portrait (I described the reasons behind this in more detail in the earlier posting). There is an additional element here in the portrayal of the face that was not so strongly present in Vignali's painting. The facial features are highly idealized and bear the likeness of the ancient Greek classical ideal.

Sassoferrato's training and influences were all in the classical baroque school. This is a stream within baroque art that looks to Raphael from 100 years before as its inspiration. Raphael's faces, in turn, strongly reflected the classical Greek ideal and this was picked up by the Caraccis in the late 16th century (most famously Annibale) who founded a school from which most of line of influential figures in the classical baroque line emerged.

All Christian sacred art must have a balance of idealism, which points to what we might become; and naturalism which roots the image in the particular and what we see and know in the here and now. The different styles of Christian sacred art look different from each other because they look to different sources for their ideal, and because of the exact balance of idealism and naturalism they reflect. Baroque classicism is called so to distinguish it from 'baroque naturalism' in which, though still partially idealized in accordance with what is good for Christian sacred art, has a greater emphasis on natural appearances. Ribera would be an example of the naturalistic school and Poussin was one of the most famous proponents of baroque classicism.

We can see the similarities in the facial features of the Sassoferrato Virgin, Raphael's Alba Madonna (which I describe in more detail in a posting here) and the ancient Greek statue the Venus of Arles from the Louvre. This strong idealization is another way that the artist ensures that portrayal of Our Lady is a piece of sacred art and avoids it looking like a portrait of the girl from next door dressed in historical costume.

Here is the Venus of Arles:

We can see the difference between the way in which sacred art and mundane art are painted by contrasting what these works with Sassoferrato's self portrait. Notice how in the portrait the image engages the viewer much more directly and we look deeply into his eyes, the deep shadow is absent and background is blue rather than black so the contrast between light and dark is not so pronounced. There is still some shadow in the face certainly - this necessary in order to describe form - but it is not so marked. Also there is not such an obvious fusion of the natural features of the face with those of the Greek ideal as we would see in the sacred art.

Sassoferrato's Virgin is in the National Gallery in London and I have a great fondness for it, even long before my conversion, it was one of those paintings that I always made a point of going to look at every time I visited the gallery. As a gallery that has no entrance fee, I often used to just drop in for 20 minutes on my way home from work, or even sometimes just to escape the rain! The peaceful repose and expression of Our Lady, which is even more apparent if you see the original, always drew me in.

— ♦—

My book the Way of Beauty is available from Angelico Press and Amazon.

—JAY W. RICHARDS, Editor of the Stream and Lecturer at the Business School of the Catholic University of America said about it: “In The Way of Beauty, David Clayton offers us a mini-liberal arts education. The book is a counter-offensive against a culture that so often seems to have capitulated to a ‘will to ugliness.’ He shows us the power in beauty not just where we might expect it — in the visual arts and music — but in domains as diverse as math, theology, morality, physics, astronomy, cosmology, and liturgy. But more than that, his study of beauty makes clear the connection between liturgy, culture, and evangelization, and offers a way to reinvigorate our commitment to the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in the twenty-first century. I am grateful for this book and hope many will take its lessons to heart.”

More About the Images from the Way of Beauty book - the Trinity Shield

The Trinity Shield is a diagrammatical way of representing the Trinity. This is useful in couple of ways:

First, pedagogically - ie as a teaching tool - it demonstrates simply the idea that there is one God but three distinct persons, and that each person is always in relation to another (being in relation to another is the essence of being a person, in fact).

Second, it is way of representing the Trinity artistically while avoiding what can be a tricky debate over what is appropriate for imagery when representing the persons of the Trinity directly. To be true, the image must be consistent with the idea that Christ is one person, both human and divine in nature; and that the Father and the Holy Spirit are both spirit. It took about 500 years for that to be resolved dogmatically by the Church in regard to Christ, and almost another 500 years for the implications of this in regard to sacred images of Christ. Even if we feel that we have now clearly sorted out the issue of whether or not images of Christ are legitimate, some might still object to the idea of representing what are in truth spiritual beings  - the Father and the Holy Spirit - as a agrey-haired old man and a dove, for example. I discuss this in greater detail in a past article, Should We Paint God the Father. Even if we agree that representing them in this way is legitimate, we might decide that it not prudential today, given the difficulty many modern people have in reading a symbolic language and the tendency to see things a literal and material. Anything that would make people thing that the Father really is a man - ie to 'anthropomorphize' Him' would be unwise.

In the following example we can see how it explains the nature of the Trinity so clearly. We can read the shield as follows: each person, Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Pater, Filius, Sanctus Spiritus) is not (non est) either of the other two, but each is God (est Deus).

This diagram was popular in France and England in the middle ages and the illumination in the Way of Beauty is a detail from a 13th century manuscript by and artist called William Peraldus. It shows the knight armed with the shield of the Trinity preparing for battle with the seven vices. It is similar in style to the gothic 'School of St Albans' style from a similar period and which relies heavily on line drawing to describe the image and the uses washes of colour in moderation.

— ♦—

My book the Way of Beauty is available from Angelico Press and Amazon.

—JAY W. RICHARDS, Editor of the Stream and Lecturer at the Business School of the Catholic University of America said about it: “In The Way of Beauty, David Clayton offers us a mini-liberal arts education. The book is a counter-offensive against a culture that so often seems to have capitulated to a ‘will to ugliness.’ He shows us the power in beauty not just where we might expect it — in the visual arts and music — but in domains as diverse as math, theology, morality, physics, astronomy, cosmology, and liturgy. But more than that, his study of beauty makes clear the connection between liturgy, culture, and evangelization, and offers a way to reinvigorate our commitment to the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in the twenty-first century. I am grateful for this book and hope many will take its lessons to heart.”

A Painting for Today's Feast - St Gregory the Great by Jacopo Vignali

And How It Reveals the Supernatural End of All Education Today is the Feast of one of the four great early Latin Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church, St Gregory the Great. The others are Ss. Jerome, Ambrose and Augustine.

A Benedictine monk, Gregory was known as the Father of Christian Worship because of his reforms to the Roman liturgy and of course gregorian chant is named after him (although the degree to which he actually composed it is not so certain). He is the patron saint of musician, singers, teachers and students.

Universalis.com, which has the full office for the day, gives the following reflection on him to accompany the Hours of his feast day:

'He was born in Rome and followed the career of public service that was usual for the son of an aristocratic family, finally becoming Prefect of the City of Rome, a post he held for some years. He founded a monastery in Rome and some others in Sicily, then became a monk himself. He was ordained deacon and sent as an envoy to Constantinople, on a mission that lasted five years.

'He was elected Pope on 3 September 590, the first monk to be elected to this office. He reformed the administration of the Church’s estates and devoted the resulting surplus to the assistance of the poor and the ransoming of prisoners. He negotiated treaties with the Lombard tribes who were ravaging northern Italy, and by cultivating good relations with these and other barbarians he was able to keep the Church’s position secure in areas where Roman rule had broken down. His works for the propagation of the faith include the sending of Augustine and his monks as missionaries to England in 596, providing them with continuing advice and support and (in 601) sending reinforcements. He wrote extensively on pastoral care, spirituality, and morals, and designated himself “servant of the servants of God.

'He died on 12 March 604, but as this date always falls within Lent, his feast is celebrated on the date of his election as Pope.'

This painting by Jacopo Vignali is on the ceiling of the library of Dominican monastery of Santa Maria Novella in Florence. It was painted in about 1630 is one of a set of four, which contains the four Latin Fathers mentioned earlier. He is shown from below and is there for the contemplation of the studying monks. We see an angel holding the papal tiara and the dove of the Holy Spirit coming down to him to inspire him in his writings. One imagines that the monks would look at this painting and hope that Divine Wisdom would be given to them also.

Stylistically it is classic 17th century baroque: we see the contrast of light and dark which is part of the visual vocabulary of the baroque - symbolizing the Light of the World overcoming the darkness.

It is interesting to note that the face of St Gregory is in shadow. If this were a portrait, the artist would focus very strongly on the facial features. However, in naturalistic baroque sacred art the artist emphasizes the facial features less than if he were painting a portrait of the same person. This is because the purpose of the two genres is different.

A portrait seeks to emphasize the individuality of the person, what makes him distinct from all others. Sacred art, on the other hand, seeks to emphasize those aspects that are common to all of us. The desire of the artist is to create an image that inspires us to emulate the deeds of the saint. We can never emulate those aspects that are peculiar to Gregory, only those qualities in him that are common to all of humanity. So, baroque sacred art seeks to emphasize the whole person. In this respect it is a question of balance, the artist does not wish to remove the sense of an individual altogether for we always ascertain the general through the particular. But we don't want to overemphasize the particular to the degree that the perception of his general human characteristics are lost.

This is a mistake that many contemporary artists make who have been trained as portrait painters and who then turn their hand to sacred art. Very often the work will be skillfully rendered but in reflecting portrait artist's craft there can be too great an emphasis on the facial features. The end result is of something that looks not like a saint, but of a contemporary man - perhaps the artists' neighbor - dressed up in biblical costume. It resembles a Victorian tableau.

If the face is not a main area of focus, then it introduces new problems for the artist. He must try to indicate some sense of emotion and mood, and usually he would do this through facial expression. As this is not available to him in the same way he will tend to resort to other means. We also discern the mood of a person through body language, or as the art critic would call it 'gesture'. So it is through gesture - displayed in the body posture, the stance and especially the what he is doing with his hands and arms that the artist portrays emotion. This is one reason why the dramatic poses we associate with baroque art are present. The artist does not always put the face in shadow as markedly as we see here, but if there is strong gesture, then we tend to focus less on the face when we look at the painting.

Vignali's painting is not the dramatic action shot that we might see in the lives of others saints - the conversion of St Paul comes to mind - but still he is trying to convey a sense of the person through the pose. Compare his painting with this painting of St Gregory which is in the iconographic tradition. This is less naturalistic and more highly stylized (and so less inclined to look like a portrait), so we can have more emphasis on the face. Therefore there is less need to convey information through the gesture and consequently it is much more restrained.

One question that one might ask in regard to Vignali's painting is this - is this really sacred art? Do we need to follow the principles of sacred art when decorating a library? I would say yes, because the end of all education is supernatural and the Sacred Liturgy cannot be separated from it. Every education ought to be placed in the context of enhancing our love of God and love of God through love of neighbor. This means therefore, that regardless of the actual subject taught, the worship of God in the Sacred Liturgy is the ultimate end, in this life, of all education. By this we are transfigured and can bring the love of God and divine wisdom into our daily activities, whatever they may be. An education that is not in accord with this, even if it is Catholic doctrine that is being learned, is not a real education at all. It is sacred learning that points us to the place of the greatest teacher who works though the words and actions of the liturgy. This is why in the medieval colleges, such as we can still see in Oxford, the main quadrangle contained the three most important buildings - the chapel, the library and the dining hall. Each is beautifully decorated and in design the two lesser pointing to and derived from the higher. This painting is telling those Dominican friars exactly that point in regard to study. Writing in 1929, Pius XI wrote the following in his encyclical on education Divini illius magistri: 'The proper and immediate end of Christian education is to cooperate with divine grace in forming the true and perfect Christian, that is, to form Christ Himself in those regenerated by Baptism...For precisely this reason, Christian education takes in the whole aggregate of human life, physical and spiritual, intellectual and moral, individual, domestic and social, not with a view of reducing it in any way, but in order to elevate, regulate and perfect it.' In education, as in all things, the Sacred Liturgy is both the source of grace from which we start and the highest summit towards which it is directed.

— ♦—

My book the Way of Beauty is available from Angelico Press and Amazon.

—JAY W. RICHARDS, Editor of the Stream and Lecturer at the Business School of the Catholic University of America said about it: “In The Way of Beauty, David Clayton offers us a mini-liberal arts education. The book is a counter-offensive against a culture that so often seems to have capitulated to a ‘will to ugliness.’ He shows us the power in beauty not just where we might expect it — in the visual arts and music — but in domains as diverse as math, theology, morality, physics, astronomy, cosmology, and liturgy. But more than that, his study of beauty makes clear the connection between liturgy, culture, and evangelization, and offers a way to reinvigorate our commitment to the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in the twenty-first century. I am grateful for this book and hope many will take its lessons to heart.”

Mass for the Third Anniversary of the Anglican Use Community of St Gregory the Great in Massachusetts, September 3rd

The Anglican Ordinariate community of St Gregory the Great will be have a special Mass for its third Feast of Title and Dedication at St Patrick's Parish in Stoneham, Massachusetts on September 3rd. It promises to be particularly beautiful, see the poster below or go to their website for more information, www.saintgregoryordinariate.org.

On another but connected note, some readers may remember that I featured the commissioning of chalice and paten by the community which was made in silver. The original article was here. This set has just been given an award by the journal Faith and Form in conjunction with the Interfaith Forum on Religion, Art and Architecture. The designer and maker of the set, silversmith Vincent Hawley will be presented with the award at the May 2016 National Convention of the American Institute of Architects in Philadelphia, PA. His website is www.vwhjewelry.com. Congratulations Vincent!

It is great to see an Anglican Use community flourishing like this!

I'm trying not to think of Danny Kaye...the chalice with the palace has the wine which is fine....:) No sorry, I couldn't avoid it... https://youtu.be/TJ9f2rnjB84

— ♦—

My book the Way of Beauty is available from Angelico Press and Amazon.

—JAY W. RICHARDS, Editor of the Stream and Lecturer at the Business School of the Catholic University of America said about it: “In The Way of Beauty, David Clayton offers us a mini-liberal arts education. The book is a counter-offensive against a culture that so often seems to have capitulated to a ‘will to ugliness.’ He shows us the power in beauty not just where we might expect it — in the visual arts and music — but in domains as diverse as math, theology, morality, physics, astronomy, cosmology, and liturgy. But more than that, his study of beauty makes clear the connection between liturgy, culture, and evangelization, and offers a way to reinvigorate our commitment to the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in the twenty-first century. I am grateful for this book and hope many will take its lessons to heart.”

Images from the Way of Beauty book: the Alba Madonna by Raphael

Most of the images in my new book, the Way of Beauty are reproduced in black and white. For any readers who wish to see them in colour, the publisher, Angelico Press has posted all of them on the book webpage, here (scroll down past the reviews and you'll see them). I plan to do a series of postings highlighting these paintings, indicating their importance in the book and also offering a little more about the artists and the history of the painting itself. The first featured is the Alba Madonna by Raphael. I used this painting in the book to illustrate the idea that the geometric shape can be used to enhance the beauty. In this case it is the idea of unity which is communicated through the circular shape. As I explain in the book we know that Raphael was aware of the idea of number symbolism and of traditional harmony and proportion and that he used it in his paintings. He incorporated these elements into his designs not because he wanted to build in a secret code, but rather because he felt that they were intrinsic to the subject portrayed and so would enhance the beauty of the painting, perceived intuitively,  and its power to communicate the truth.

This particular painting shows Our Lady with the young Jesus and John the Baptist. Raphael's work characterizes the High Renaissance style of the early 16th century and it's style is drawn, consciously, from that of ancient Greek and Roman statues and art - the facial features of Our Lady for example, bear a striking resemblance to a classical Venus. This painting reflects another departure from what was the norm in Christian sacred art for centuries, and that is to place the figures in a landscape that is painted so as to create the illusion of space. The gothic and iconographic styles for example would generally have had a flat background in order to communicate the heavenly dimension that is outside time and space. He paints in oil paint because this is a medium that has special properties (in contrast to egg tempera or mosaic) that helps the artist create the illusion of space .

Raphael uses perspective very skillfully - the objects in the distance are smaller than the objects in the foreground. He also uses colour perspective. The more distant the object is, the bluer it gets. I always thought that Raphael had exaggerated this until I spent time in Italy myself. There is something about the Italian landscape itself that makes this effect more pronounced than I was used to seeing in England. This effect doesn't come out in photographs so strongly as it appears in nature, and as Raphael, Leonardo et al faithfully reflect in their paintings. I did wonder if the reason for this was that the Cyprus and olive trees that dominate the Italian landscape have a bluish green foliage, but I don't really know why this should be.

One last story in connection with this painting. It is in the National Gallery in Washington DC. Once some years ago, when visiting the gallery I was admiring it and thought I would take a photograph for my own use. I had been told by someone that the gallery had recently changed their policy and you were now allowed to do so. This is quite a common policy now, but at one time it was unknown and I was skeptical about whether it was really true. So tentatively I took my camera out and glanced up to see a security standing at the door. He didn't seem to be objecting so I carried on. I was just sizing up the composition of the photo when I felt a tap on my shoulder. The security guard was standing next to me. I was ready to be chastised and so was about to explain that I had been told by something that this was allowed. Before I could do so he spoke: 'Excuse me sir, but I think you'll find that the photograph will turn out better if you use the flash.'

In fact even with the flash, the photo wasn't good enough - you can still see the shadow from the overhead lights on the photo I took:

So here's a better version of the picture for you to study. For even more understanding of the High Renaissance style of art by my book, the Way of Beauty.

— ♦—

My book the Way of Beauty is available from Angelico Press and Amazon.

—JAY W. RICHARDS, Editor of the Stream and Lecturer at the Business School of the Catholic University of America said about it: “In The Way of Beauty, David Clayton offers us a mini-liberal arts education. The book is a counter-offensive against a culture that so often seems to have capitulated to a ‘will to ugliness.’ He shows us the power in beauty not just where we might expect it — in the visual arts and music — but in domains as diverse as math, theology, morality, physics, astronomy, cosmology, and liturgy. But more than that, his study of beauty makes clear the connection between liturgy, culture, and evangelization, and offers a way to reinvigorate our commitment to the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in the twenty-first century. I am grateful for this book and hope many will take its lessons to heart.”

Woody Allen's Irrational Man - the film that Crimes and Misdemeanors should have been?

Woody Allen is a filmmaker who I always wish was a Catholic. He observes human nature brilliantly and knows how to portray that in film; he has an erudite wit and he seems to be able to write this into the dialogue of his characters without it coming across as forced or affected; and he knows how to reflect a philosophical outlook in that dialogue in such a way that even if you don't agree with it, you find yourself enjoying the film and laughing at his jokes. The problem with many of his films is that while he very often knows how to portray the absurdity of modern philosophy, he does not always leave you with a good alternative. Sometimes, from the message portrayed in his films, you wonder if he is unsure himself what the answers are. When he does seem to offer answers, it has looked to me as if he is trying to justify whatever aspect of his tumultuous personal life most recently hit the news. If only he was a Catholic, or alternatively we had Catholics who knew how to make films like Woody Allen, how much greater would those films be. Also, I would say in order to encourage any Catholic filmmakers out there, the films would be even more successful as a result because they would now represent more fully what is good and what is true. When any art form does this well, then it will have mass appeal for it will have greater beauty too.

When I saw Woody Allen's latest film, the Irrational Man I wondered if (at the age of 79), he is changing. You will have to watch the film to see the plot, but in general terms, this one struck me as a new version of his 1989 film Crimes and Misdemeanors.  Both have the well crafted dialogue and nicely observed human interactions in the context of the confused sexual politics of the liberal elite. And both have a murder in which the film examines the how the conscience of the murderer reacts and changes over time, placing this in the context of right and wrong.

There are two differences. First, the Irrational Man is not as funny - in this sense it is a little disappointing, but perhaps you need to the comic genius Allen himself or Alan Alda, who star in the earlier film, to deliver the lines. It seems that although there are a few chuckles as you go along, but I think that perhaps this wasn't Allen's intention with Irrational Man. Joaquin Phoenix, who plays a bitter and philandering (and murderous) philosophy professor in a Rhode Island college, plays it just right for me in a more serious role and doesn't make the mistake of trying to a replacement for Woody Allen in the way that he plays it.

The other is the nature of the philosophical message of the resolution of the film. In this respect I liked Irrational Man much more. In Crimes and Misdemeanors, the conscience of the murderer, played by Martin Landau, is at first tortured, but in time, the discomfort disappears and the film closes with him a scene of him laughing heartily and saying to friend that he has nothing on his mind that he regrets - in time he indicates, all guilt disappears. This was reinforced by the line from character played by Alan Alda, who said that in the end all comedy is just 'tragedy plus time' - ie the worse it is initially, the funnier it is in the end.

I remember thinking at the time that this was a dangerous message - it was saying that there is no objective right and wrong. No matter how bad something seems, its just the perception, and time if nothing else can change that. I am convert and part of what brought me to the faith was the realization that there was only one thing that would appease my conscience and that was the mercy of God. My experience was that no matter how I tried to tell myself I was good person, I did not believe it until I had confessed my wrong doing. If I had listened to the message of Crimes and Misdemeanors, I thought, I might have found it attractive initially, but I would still be hanging around just waiting until I felt better, feeling miserable and heading, very likely, for hell. In the Irrational Man, on the other hand, the murderer is initially exhilarated by what he has done as he believes his own hype but as time progresses things get worse and his crime, so to speak, catches up with him. The voice of his conscience is the student with whom he is having an affair, played by Emma Stone, who is initially in thrall to his reputation and all that he does. Gradually, she realizes what he has done and reacts against his justifications and the philosophical theories that underpin them. Unlike the plot in Crimes and Misdemeanors, the effect on the murderer of his past action will not go away in time. It becomes clear that he must face a choice. Either acknowledge what he has done truthfully, or else continue the lie and try to erase the voice of his conscience. From the point of view of moral law, he makes the wrong choice and attempts to do the latter. The outcome of the protaganist here, again, unlike that of Crimes and Misdemeanors, is a just reward for his actions. So as I saw it, the film resolves itself in support of natural law, objective good and bad and a condemnation of the modern philosophy that the professor espoused in the classroom to his students.

What is interesting is to me is to see how the mainstream film critics reviewed each film. They had just about the opposite reaction to me! They loved Crimes and Misdemeanors and at the time it was nominated for host of awards - best actor, best film, best director, best screenplay...the list goes on. But they hated the Irrational Man. I don't know if the differing reviews are a reflection of the differing quality of the films, or of the worldview of the critics. I suspect the latter!

— ♦—

My book the Way of Beauty is available from Angelico Press and Amazon.

—JAY W. RICHARDS, Editor of the Stream and Lecturer at the Business School fo the Catholic University of America said about it: “In The Way of Beauty, David Clayton offers us a mini-liberal arts education. The book is a counter-offensive against a culture that so often seems to have capitulated to a ‘will to ugliness.’ He shows us the power in beauty not just where we might expect it — in the visual arts and music — but in domains as diverse as math, theology, morality, physics, astronomy, cosmology, and liturgy. But more than that, his study of beauty makes clear the connection between liturgy, culture, and evangelization, and offers a way to reinvigorate our commitment to the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in the twenty-first century. I am grateful for this book and hope many will take its lessons to heart.”

Talk on John Singer Sargent at the Ingbretson Studios, Manchester, NH this Thursday August 27

Paul Ingbretson is opening up his painting school the Ingbretson Studios, on Thursday to give a talk on one of the great artists of the naturalistic tradition, John Singer Sargent and the movement that was inspired to a large degree by his influence, the Boston School of the latter part of the 19th century and early 20th century.

John Singer Sargent was not a religious man, was not known for sacred art and neither was the Boston School. However, I recommend this talk for two reasons. First, because stylistically Sargent was an anachronism. Although he was trained in Paris in the 19th century, under the influence of his teacher Charles Durand (known as Carolus-Duran) he rejected the sterile neo-classicicism of the French academy and its corollary, the overly emotional portrayals of the Romantics and strove to follow the style of the great Spanish master of the 17th century baroque, Velasquez. This was not a theological or philosophical decision, as far as I am aware, it was based upon personal taste. He wanted to paint like Velazquez because he preferred his style. After training with Duran in Paris he went to the Prado in Madrid and taught himself further by copying every Velazquez on display in the museum. So, in his portraits and landscapes he incorporates the essential elements of the style of the baroque, which is an authentically Christian style, and can be accounted for by a Christian worldview. This style is rooted in the religious art that grew out of the Catholic counter-Reformation of the period. Therefore, anyone who wishes to understand the balance between natural appearances and idealization that must be present in all genuine Christian art, could do worse than study the work of Sargent.

Idealized naturalism is as much about what you don't show as much it is about what you do. The artist controls the focus, the intensity of colour and contrast of light and dark to draw your attention to the important points of interest, which must coincide with those which we would look at naturally if we were presented with the scene itself. We are made by God to curious about important things and uninterested in unimportant things and the artist must understand this.

The other reason for highlighting this is to give a profile to Paul Ingbretson. One of the most important reasons that there are any ateliers teaching the academic style at all today is the group of young men trained in Boston in the 1970s under the guidance of almost the only remaining teacher of the academic style at that time, an octogenarian called Ives-Gammell. Paul was one of these young men who went on to devote himself to passing on what he learnt to others.

Paul is not Catholic but he is, as far as I am aware, Christian. Certainly, his strong libertarian views mean that he encourages people of faith to connect this with their art when he teaches. This is not true of all the ateliers around, which can be just as aggressively secular in their worldviews as any other modern art school. Some of you may be aware of the Catholic painter based in Virginia, Henry Wingate. Henry, who paints portraits, still lives and sacred art, is one of Paul's star pupils.

The paintings shown are by Sargent, the first is Gassed, which comes from his work as a war artist during the First World War and shows soldier who have survived mustard gas and are blind being led from the battle ground. The second is Venetian Interior in which we can see how much Sargent communicates by his use of colour (or deliberate lack of it), focus and contrast.

David Clayton's book, the Way of Beauty, which contains a description of theological basis of the form of Western naturalistic art is now available from Angelico Press and Amazon.com.

A Course on the Poetry Inspired by the Mystical Tradition of the Church - Offered by Andrew Thornton-Norris

A new liturgically centered approach to teaching  literature. The first in a series offered by Andrew Thornton-Norris - Resident Poet of the Imaginative Conservative and author of A Spiritual History of English

Pontifex.University, is offering a new course entitled The Romance of the Soul - the Mystical in Verse, Spiritual Approaches to Literature. This one is for personal enrichment, and costs just $99 - a for anyone interested in understanding what makes great literature and especially those who wish to be creators of beautiful poetry and prose.

This is the introductory course to a series that are planned which will give a new exciting approach to teaching literature. The goal is to impart wonder at the beauty of the literary tradition that is derived from and points us to the words of the Poet - the Holy Spirit who speaks in the Sacred Liturgy especially through the psalms. The hope is that through this it will deepen are participation in the liturgy and help lead us to our ultimate end. Poets considered in this introductory course include Gerard Manley Hopkins, Dante, St John of the Cross, T.S. Eliot and John Burnside.

This particular course is an introduction the poetry that arises from the mystical tradition of the Church. It is  presented through the prism of Andrew Thornton-Norris's general thesis on literature, articulated in his excellent book the Spiritual History of Literature. In this slim volume,  Andrew Thornton-Norris does for poetry and prose what I have been trying to do with art. He relates the actual structure of the writing and the vocabulary used to the worldview of the time. See he shows us, for example, how even if the poet or novelist is sincerely Catholic and trying to express truths that are consistent with the Faith, he is at a great disadvantage if he is seeking to express those truths with the vocabulary and poetic form that reflect a post-Enlightenment culture. He takes us through a philosophical and literary journey from Bede through to the present day. 

The true purpose of literature is to instill wonder in those who read it and a desire for God. It ought to direct us therefore to the place where, in this life we have the most profound encounter with God, the Sacred Liturgy. The poetry of the mystical tradition of the Church arises from the tradition of contemplative prayer. This is the prayer whereby we develop the faculty for the reception of God as He gives himself to us through his love. Its consummation is in the liturgy and when written well it allows for an ever deeper and more active (in the true sense of the word) participation in the liturgy where there is the most profound encounter with God. Contemplation itself is that reception of God and it can only be realized by the action of God himself. All we can do is increase our readiness for him, until He chooses to give to us. When he does so we are have peace and joy and this is the heavenly state that is only fully realised in the next life. However, on our journey towards that point, we can have it by degrees and some might experience temporary anticipations of that ecstasy.

The poetry is the work of mystics who specialize in this prayer and it reflects their experiences and directs us to us - helping us to in our own contemplative prayer and inspiring us to make the attempt. In the hierarchy of literature it might be considered the highest outside the inspired work of the Poet Himself and especially the psalms when sung in the liturgy. It is the psalms that they direct us to.

Here is Andrew's introduction to the course:

'The most profound meeting place between the spiritual and literature is where the mystical tradition inspires poetry. This course will introduce you to some of the key texts and principles of this tradition and the poetry it has inspired. We begin with an introduction to the central concept of mysticism, contemplation, and look at how this relates to the poetry of Gerard Manley Hopkins. Then we will consider the emergence of the subjective perspective characteristic of modernity, in the thought and feeling of the twelfth century. Then we look at the poetic tradition this inspired, from that of the time of Dante, through the English Renaissance, to the emergence of modern poetry at the time of Baudelaire and Eliot. Then we will consider two contemporary accounts of this meeting in the theology of John Paul II and Hans Urs Von Balthasar, which provides the spiritual context for creative activity today. The two further planned courses in this series will cover the same ground, but in greater detail. You can progress from one to the other, and have the cost of the earlier ones discounted from the later, or take any of them individually.'

For more details and to take the course go to Pontifex.University.

The Christian Environmentalism the Media Chooses to Ignore - Man is the Answer, Not the Problem

We need more people in the world, not less, if we are to solve the world's problems. And we need more gardeners - I am serious here. For the true gardener is the man transformed in Christ who works in the world to raise it up to what it is meant to be.

It is common nowadays for people to think of man as an unnatural animal whose work necessarily destroys the environment. Much of the back to the land movement, I always feel, has a romantic vision of the past and assumes that only a man who lives as he did before industrialization can live in harmony with nature. This pessimistic view of modern man could be seen in various influential figures going back to to Rousseau in 18th century France who hated industrialization and thought that all modern society corrupted ideal man. The ideal for Rousseau was the noble savage  who could be conceived, unlike modern man, of living as an intrinsic part of nature as the animals do, rather than in opposition to it.

This may all sound fairly innocuous stuff - a high regard for the environment is good thing, surely? But in fact it is the neo-paganism we see today, that removes man from his a place as the highest part of creation to something separate from it, and lower than it. This false elevation of the rest of creation to something greater than man in the hierarchy of being has serious, deadly consequences. And I do mean deadly.

Man is not only part of nature, he is absolutely necessary to it - the eco-system needs the interaction of man in order to be complete. Through God's grace human activity is the answer to all the environmental problems we have, not the cause. This is the part of Pope Francis's message in his latest encyclical; a part that so many eco-warriors who were enthusiastic about the encyclical seem not to have noticed...or to have ignored. It is possible to have cities, heavy industry, mass production, and forms of capitalism that are creative expressions of the God's plan for the world, and which add to the beauty and the stability of nature. But, we do need a transformation of the culture in order to see a greater realization of this. The formation that I believe will lead to such an evangelization of the culture is derived from a liturgically centered piety and is described in the book the Way of Beauty.

For me, the flower garden is the model of natural beauty in so many ways. First, It symbolizes the true end of the natural world in which its beauty can only be realised through the inspired work of man. It symbolizes what Eden was to become. It is worth noting that Adam was the first gardener and Christ, the new Adam, prayed in the garden during the passion, was buried and resurrected in the garden and after the resurrection was mistaken by Mary Magdalene for the gardener.

Here is a quote from St Augustine from the Office of Readings on the Feast of St Lawrence, August 10th:

'The garden of the Lord, brethren, includes – yes, it truly includes – includes not only the roses of martyrs but also the lilies of virgins, and the ivy of married people, and the violets of widows. There is absolutely no kind of human beings, my dearly beloved, who need to despair of their vocation; Christ suffered for all. It was very truly written about him: who wishes all men to be saved, and to come to the acknowledgement of the truth.'

This may seem a rather innocent little quote about flowers and the things of religion - martyrs and virgins and so on, but in fact reveals so much about the difference in attitudes between one of the Faith, and the modern world. Here's how: we see Rousseau's worldview today in many of the green movements that assume that any influence that man has on the eco-system is bad, because man himself is an unnatural entrant into it, he is not part of it.

Millions of people have been killed as a result of a simple philosophical error. If we believe that  civilized man's effect on the environment is necessarily destructive, then the only method of an effective damage limitation is to limit the number of people in the world. The most effective way to do this is to control the population and, because they do not wish to dispense of the pleasure of sex, the solutions offered are contraception and abortion.

The Christian understanding of man and his interaction with the natural world is very different. The first point to make is that both are imperfect. We are fallen and we live in a fallen world. Man is part of nature, and it is certainly true that his activity can be destructive on the environment (just as he commit the gravest crimes against his fellows). However, through God's grace and the proper exercise of free will, he can choose to behave differently. He can work to perfect nature. He has the privilege of participating in the work of God that will eventually lead to the perfection of all things in Christ. Then all man does is in harmony with nature, and with the common good. This is the via pulchritudinis, the Way of Beauty.

There are so many signs in modern culture that reveal this flawed perception of the place of man in relation to his fellows, The changing attitude to the garden is one of these. Even in something that seems so far removed from the issue of abortion, we can see a change which has at its root, in my opinion, the same flaw.

What is the model of natural beauty? For the modern green, neo-pagan it is the wilderness. National parks in the US seek to preserve nature in a way that they perceive as unaffected by man (although this is an impossibility, even the most remote national park is managed wilderness!). I do not say that is a bad thing that some part of nature is preserved, or that the wilderness is not beautiful. Rather, the point is that it is not the pinnacle of nature and it is not the standard of natural beauty. When man works harmoniously with the environment, then he makes something more beautiful. Beautifully and harmoniously farmed land takes the breath away - as we might see in the countryside of France, Spain, England and Italy for example, places of which I am familiar. This the sort of landscape in which Wordsworth saw his host of wild golden daffodils.

Higher still is the garden that is cultivated for beauty alone. A garden is a symbol of the Church. Each part, each plant is in harmony with every other just as every person who is unique has his place in God's plan, as St Augustine points out in the quote given above.  Gardens will have their place in the New Jerusalem. We know this because the description of the City of God in the Book of Revelation contains gardens.

The activity of gardening for beauty is a symbolic participation in the completion of the work of God in the world for it raises creation up to what it ought to be, through God's grace. The garden itself is a sign to all others of the fact that all of creation is to be transfigured supernaturally. The act of gardening is both reflective of and points to, therefore our participation in the Sacred Liturgy by which we are transfigured and by which we participate in the work of God. Gardening for beauty is an act of love that is formed by our greatest act of love, the worship of God in the Sacred Liturgy. It can be likened to the action of Mary with our Lord, anointing his feet; and contrasted with the cultivation of the land in order to create produce to eat, which can be likened to an action of Martha. Both are good, but Mary's is the highest.

Pius X likens the activity of gardening to that of singing the Psalms in the liturgy: 'The psalms have also a wonderful power to awaken in our hearts the desire for every virtue. Athanasius says: Though all Scripture, both old and new, is divinely inspired and has its use in teaching, as we read in Scripture itself, yet the Book of Psalms, like a garden enclosing the fruits of all the other books, produces its fruits in song, and in the process of singing brings forth its own special fruits to take their place beside them.' (This is taken from the Office of Readings for August 21st, the Feast of Pius X).

The gardener is the symbol of the transfigured man who works in harmony with nature to create something greater for the delight and good of man and for the greater glory of God. The highest aspect of what he does is the beauty that he creates. This beauty has the noblest utility, one that takes into account our supernatural end for it prepares the souls of men to be receptive to the love of God in the Sacred Liturgy.

Leo XIII said in his encyclical Rerum Novarum, that man should be encouraged to cultivate the land. I have heard this cited by some Catholics in the back-to-land movement so as to imply that it is almost a moral obligation to have chickens in your backyard, to keep bees or to grow vegetables. I say, if you enjoy those things then go ahead and do it, but I feel no such obligation myself. I for one have little interest. I am perfectly happy to buy a ready-cooked chicken for under $5, jars of honey and vegetables and fruit from all over the world year round from the local supermarket.

However, what is not so often remarked upon is that Leo says that in cultivating the land, man will, 'learn to love the very soil that yields in response to the labor of their hands, not only food to eat, but an abundance of good things for themselves and those that are dear to them [my emphasis].' I suggest we learn to love the soil especially when it yields beauty; and when it is through our own efforts that it does so. There is no need for three acres and a cow for this to happen. For some this might mean the tiniest patch of land around your house, or if you don't have that a window box; or if you can't do that some well tended plant pots inside your high-rise apartment. We don't need to head for the outback or escape from the cities or the suburbs. However, modest our resources, this can be an act for love for the glory of God and for the enjoyment of those dear to us. When this is done it can have the profoundest effect on a neighborhood, as we can read by this example in Boston.

When the garden is enjoyed for its beauty it can be a contemplation by which we are passively open to the reception of Beauty itself. This is why it is a good thing to approach a church through a cloister that looks onto a 'garden enclosed'. The garden enclosed from the Song of Songs, is seen by the Church Fathers as a reference to Mary, the Mother of God, by whom we approach the Son.

It is no accident, I suggest that today even botanical gardens and public gardens which used to be formally laid out, are now being turned into 'natural' or wild gardens, in which the aim is, it seems, is to reduce it's beauty (although they would probably argue that it is the opposite) and resemble something that is like the wilderness - base nature, unaffected by the inspired work of man. Even the lowest form of nature is beautiful, I don't deny it. But that is not a garden. When we make the standard of natural beauty its lowest form, then such a garden is a symbol of the banishing of man from the world altogether, of Unnatural Man so to speak, and an emblem of the culture of death. The next logical step after the misguided  glorification of Unnatural Man is to strive for the absence of man altogether and this is what we see through our abortion clinics.

Who would have thought that the simple cultivation of ivy, roses, lilies and violets could say so much! I would consider it the greatest compliment if someone would mistake me for the gardener.

Cristo appare a Maria Maddalena (Christ appearing to Mary Magdalene)" by Pietro da Cortona from Wiki commons 

I have written about this painting in more detail here.

— ♦—

My book the Way of Beauty is available from Angelico Press and Amazon.