| <<<Home | Maxims Directory |
Continuation of Commentaries
on the Maxims on Love of St. John of the Cross
by Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, ocd
Maxim
- 30b (part 2)
It is great wisdom to know how to be silent and to look at neither
the remarks,
In this second part of the
Maxim, the relationship between wisdom and silence is just the opposite of what
it is in the first part. There,
silence had to prevail before wisdom could enter. Here in the second part wisdom must be
in place in order to cause silence.
Therefore, the only way to reconcile these reversed relationships is to
say that there are two different kinds of silence. The kind of silence we find in the first
part of the Maxim refers to that created by closing the senses to the “noises”
and other sense impressions from outside, as well as by ignoring the
memories of sense impressions and the stream of consciousness that is
always rising up, going on inside our souls. The kind of silence we have in the
second part is the silence created in us by putting a stop (to the best of our
ability) to the functioning of reason and logic, which processes data coming
through the senses or stored in the memory, and comes up with conclusions or
judgments. It means, in other
words, to put a stop to discursive thinking. By saying that the silence of the second
part is created by putting an end to discursive thinking or reasoning creates a
difficulty, because that exercise must be engaged in by anyone who desires to
enter upon the path to union with God in love. Discursive reasoning or meditation must
be engaged in in order to arrive at true prayer. True prayer is, as you know, an intimate
exchange and conversation with God whom we know loves us. The purpose of meditation (discursive
reasoning) is to help us become aware of and to be convinced not only
that God loves us, but how much He loves us, which is to an
infinite degree. The difficulty I
have in mind is this: If wisdom enters through silence, it cannot enter in while
I practice discursive meditation, which takes away the silence of the soul. Well, perhaps the difficulty can be
overcome in two ways.
One is to say that discursive
meditation that is the preliminary to prayer does lead to wisdom because it
leads to love, and as we have seen, wisdom enters through
love.
The other is to say that
discursive meditation which focuses on the data of Faith, that is, all that has
been revealed to us by God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit and
recorded in Sacred scripture is a form of silence. In Maxim 21, which we had occasion to
mention in the commentary on the first part of this Maxim, we read that God the
Father speaks His Word in Eternal Silence.
God Himself is indeed a Great, Unfathomable Silence to our humanity
because, being a Pure Spirit, He cannot be apprehended by the senses or the
imagination or any idea formed by the intellect on the basis of sense
perceptions. Thus, to be concerned
with God and His deeds and Words as given to us through Faith in meditation is
itself a way of being silent.
So again, either wisdom enters directly in virtue of that kind of
silence, or it enters indirectly because the fruit of that kind of silence is
love for God as we have said.
Also perhaps, Silence (outward) helps meditation leading to
LOVE.
In this second part of the
Maxim 30, we again have occasion to consider the word and, which can be
either disjunctive or conjunctive.
We must ask, therefore: Does the word and join the two phrases
before and after it so as to state they are one and the same thing, or does it
disjoin them so as to state they are separate and distinct. It seems to me that they are
disjunctive. Thus, it is one thing
to have the wisdom to be silent (putting a stop to discursive thinking) in
general, and another thing to put a stop to discursive thinking or reasoning
regarding what we perceive concerning others - namely, what we hear them saying
and observe them doing.
Fortunately, it is not necessary to pursue this latter aspect of the two
meanings, general and specific, of suspending reason and logic, because St. John
+ has already given Counsels concerning this in that Minor Work of his (minor
means shorter, not less important) called the
Precautions. He treats of
this specifically in the “Third Precaution Against the World.” Thus I refer you to that. In it St. John+ is giving us more reason
and additional incentive to fulfill that command of Jesus: “Judge not, and
you will not be judged.”
Actually, St. John+ tries to stop us before we get to the judgment
that is the fruit of discursive thinking.
As pointed out in a previous conference, sometimes judgments form so
quickly that they are made before we realize we have processed data that enters
through our perceptions of sense.
At that point, we reject the judgment in question. Here in the second part of Maxim 30, St.
John says in effect: Don’t even look at or listen to what is happening around
you, so that you forestall reasoning by cutting off the input of
data.
But we still have to consider
the silencing of our thought processes in general, and we can relate that to
what is known as contemplative prayer.
It is the highest form of prayer, as we know from the teaching of St.
Teresa and St. John. Somewhere in
her works St. Teresa says: “Prayer does not consist in thinking much
but in loving much.”
Thus the highest form of prayer would consist in no thinking and
all loving. When we spoke of
this in a previous conference by comparing contemplative prayer to children in
Church clinging to a mother or father we said the only knowledge that the
child has comes not through thinking, but through the perception of the
parents nearness by touch, sight, hearing and smell. But it is perfectly evident that the
child is united to its parent in love.
That is all well and good. Still, we have to consider the fact that
St. John says here that it is great wisdom to know how interiorly
to be silent. He seems to be
talking about a technique. I think
we all can agree that it is extremely difficult to stop the “talking” that goes
on in our minds continually. I have
in mind the so-called “stream of consciousness”. Many years ago a dear friend told me
that if I wanted to hear God speak to me I only had to silence my own inner
voice. It is almost as if God is
too courteous to interrupt someone who is speaking. Alas, I have never been able to do
it! However, if like myself,
someone cannot stop one’s inner voice, do not be disturbed. When I read, that voice stops because
the pages of a book are speaking to me.
Thus I try to read only those things that contain the truths of Divine
revelation or which are a help to understanding and appreciating and knowing how
to translate into action the truths of divine revelation. If St. John+ meant this Maxim for
everyone who wants to surrender his/her life to God and to embrace God’s Will in
everything, then I would suggest that that would be the way to be silent before
God and let Him speak to us.
And before leaving this notion
of contemplative prayer, we have to remember that at times God Himself may so
want to speak directly to a soul that He Himself suspends the operations of
imagination and intellect by the grace of infused
contemplation.
Maxim -
31 - All for me and nothing for You.
Maxim
- 32 - All for You and nothing
for me.
I have decided to consider
these two together because we can think of them as two sides of a coin. Apparently St. John+ could not separate
them in his mind, and that is why, perhaps, he puts them one after the
other.
The first thing to notice is
that the personal pronouns me and you occur in both. Also that in each Maxim only one of them
is capitalized, and that is the personal pronoun YOU. Therefore, clearly, the word You
refers to Jesus. The word
me, not being capitalized refers to a soul that is conversing with
Jesus. One such soul is certainly
St. John+, its author, but no doubt these Maxims refer to, or ought to be on the
lips of, anyone who has a profound and fervent love for
Jesus.
The next thing we notice is
that the word all appears in both Maxims. But clearly the word all refers
to things that are different, otherwise the two statements would contradict and
cancel one another. Or rather, one
would be false and the other true.
For example, if children were deciding what to do about a bunch of
marbles they happened to find, and one of them were to say, first, “all for
me and nothing for you”, and right away say again, “all for you and
nothing for me”, the other child would be baffled.
However, both statements of the
child would make sense if he said all red marbles for me, and no red marbles for
you. And again, all blue marbles
for you and no blue marbles for me, then each statement makes perfect
sense.
Thus we ask, what are all those
specific things that a soul like St. John+ takes for himself, and does not want
Jesus to have. (Maxim
31).
Now it should not be difficult
for us to think of things St. John does not want to see belonging to
Jesus, or better St. John does not want to see happening to Jesus. Because He loved Him so much St. John
would first of all not want to see Jesus injured in the slightest way. He would not want Jesus to be
disappointed in the least way. And
therefore, whatever would cause Jesus to be hurt physically or in spirit or to
be offended or disappointed in any way, that would be among the all that
a soul would want for itself, and nothing at all of that for Jesus. I think we can say that this is what
St. John meant when he responded to
the question Jesus asked him from a painting of Himself carrying His Cross. While St. John was kneeling before that
picture Jesus said: “Joanne, Quid vis pro laboribus”, meaning, John
what [reward] would you like for your labors? (Actually, the word “labor” in Latin
means an intense and painful exertion.)
He promptly responded: “Domine, pati et contemni pro Te” meaning
“Lord to suffer and be despised for You.” And in order to be as all-embracing
as possible, we would say this particular all of the 31st Maxim
would include anything unbecoming to Jesus, and in fact, anything unbecoming to
any human being, since Jesus says: “What you do to the least of my brethren
you do to me.” So in effect, a
soul like St. John+ by this Maxim would want to take all the unpleasantness and
sorrows and sufferings and indignities heaped upon the entire human race upon
himself, rather than to see them afflict Jesus. That translates into wanting to replace
Jesus as the one who takes all the sins of the world and the punishments they
deserve upon oneself. Such a
desire, even though it is one that cannot be realized, can only spring from a
most intense, profound and most fervent love for Jesus.
So much for the all of
Maxim 31. What then is the
all of Maxim 32? That should
be easy, since it’s the other side of the coin.
This particular all
would refer then to all those things that are most becoming to Jesus. Those things that would bring joy and
delight to His Heart. The
all would certainly include the reverence, the respect, the admiration,
the gratitude and love that is His due, both as a Divine Person and as the
unique God-Man who alone was able to redeem the world. And going further, the all would include
whatever concerns the good of the souls He loves. Thus the all would include those things
that are becoming to all human beings, because again, even good things done to
the least of Jesus’ brethren, are done to Him.
This 32nd Maxim then would have
us desire that any and all of those good things be reserved for Jesus
alone. Not that we do not want to
see others experience and enjoy those things, but we want all of that to be
given to Jesus alone. What might be
some way that we could realize this desire? Well, for ourselves, it should be
relatively easy. Whenever someone
is good to us, does a favor, shows us some sign of special affection or esteem,
we can say “this is not for me, Jesus, this is for You. I do not accept any of it myself. I accept it all for you alone.” Or when we eat a tasty meal, or listen
to very beautiful music or experience any kind of delight of body, mind or
heart, we can say “all of that is for you, Jesus, I do not want any of it for
myself.” In that way all for
Him and nothing for me.
With regard to others, when we
see these pleasant, enjoyable things given to them or experienced by them, we
can always say: “I want the same for you, Jesus. And better, and to the extent I can, I
want to give them to You myself.”
After having written the
preceding two paragraphs, at which time I had to suspend writing, other nice
things that can happen to a person occurred to me, so I will mention them
now. For example, receiving little
gifts, or thank-you notes, receiving a compliment or a pat on the back,
receiving a word of encouragement or consolation, being affirmed and supported,
having sympathy or condolences extended when we are sorrowing, receiving marks
of affection, being the beneficiary of sacrifices of others, or of acts of
loyalty and so on. Whether these
things happen to us or we observe them happening to others, we can always say
“These are all for you Jesus, not for me.”, or “Oh, I do so want You to
experience these same proofs of being loved, my beloved
Jesus.”
Also, a meditation by St. Peter
Julian Eymard, the apostle of the Eucharist is the basis for another
interpretation of the meaning of the two Maxims 31 or 32. The meditation is entitled “He is
Mine, and I am His.” He
introduced it by saying: ...
“The beloved in the Blessed Sacrament belongs wholly to me by the entire and
perfect, personal and perpetual gift of Himself.” In this we can see the Maxim 31 “All
for me, and nothing for You.”
St. Peter Julian immediately follows the foregoing quote with the
conclusion: “I must belong to Him in the same manner”, in which we can
see Maxim 32: “All for You, nothing for me.”
St. Peter Julian goes on to
point out that Jesus gives us His two natures in the Eucharist and all the
graces and merits of all the states through which He has passed. To be more explicit, Jesus has given
everything of Himself and what is most dear to Him. His Body and blood, Soul and Divinity,
His Father, His Spirit, His very own Mother. He gives us all the attributes and
virtues of both His Divinity and Humanity: His Wisdom, His Power, His
Compassion, His Mercy, His Fidelity, Loyalty, Forgiveness, His Life, His
Presence, His own Sacred Heart. It
seems He keeps nothing for Himself.
For more evidence of this we have only to think of His life on
earth. Everything He did and
suffered was completely and entirely for our benefit, for our salvation. None of what He did or said or suffered
was done with the least taint of selfishness or self-seeking. He sought only our good and the glory of
His Father.
St. Peter Julian also helps us
to know what it is of ourselves we must give to Jesus, and suggests how to keep
nothing for ourselves.
He says, first of all, we must
give Jesus our “entire self,...person,...individuality, [and] ego.” This means renouncing all
self-seeking. Any esteem based upon
talents, good qualities and achievements must be passed on to Jesus, we cannot
allow them to stop or rest in ourselves.
It means renouncing any affection directed to ourselves and giving it to
Jesus. It means giving Him all the
powers of our being, those of body and soul, making Jesus the object and
beneficiary of all of them.
Faculties of sense; mind, memory and heart or will. All our interior states, whether joy or
fervor, peace or pleasure, and health must be given to Him. Most of all, we give Jesus our
liberty.
Actually, then, with regard to
this second interpretation of the two Maxims, these ideas are not new. Eucharistic devotion as summarized and
enhanced by St. Peter Julian Eymard is evidence that holy souls knew instinctively
that all of Jesus is for us, and He kept nothing for Himself. Also, St. Louis de Montfort summarized
and perfected the act of giving all of self to Jesus and keeping nothing for
self by his prayer of Consecration to Jesus through Mary. We even find an extensive paraphrase of
Maxim 31 in one of St. John of the Cross’ “Sayings of Light and Love.”
You are familiar with it. It
is a paragraph in his “Prayer of a Soul Taken with Love”: “Mine are the
heavens and mine is the earth. Mine
are the nations, the just are mine, and mine the sinners.
The angels are mine and the Mother of God, and all things are mine;
and God Himself is mine and for me, because Christ is mine and all
for me.” It is up to us to
find how to say to Him some comparable paraphrase of the 32nd Maxim.
| <<<Home | Maxims Directory |