| <<<Home | Maxims Directory |
Continuation of Commentaries
on the Maxims on Love of St. John of the Cross
by Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, ocd
Maxim 46.
Detached from the exterior, dispossessed
of the interior, disappropriated of the things of God - neither will prosperity
detain you, nor adversity hinder you.
Part I
In
order to come to a complete and accurate understanding of what St. John of the
Cross means by this maxim, we would have to know exactly what he means by all
the important and key words in the maxim.
We can never be absolutely sure, for example, what meaning he has in mind
for any one of them, although he has used one or more of these key words in
other maxims or words related or similar to them in other
maxims.
For
example, in Maxim 17 he advises: Be
interiorly detached... In
Maxim 36 he tells us: Love
consists...in having great detachment... In Maxim 43 he mentions: some small unconquered
attachment.... These
are the only maxims we've considered thus far that can offer help in knowing the
meaning St. John of the Cross has for the word detached in this Maxim
46.
A
further example of similar words:
In Maxim 8, St. John of the Cross uses the expression:
...possess your soul in patience. In Maxim 29: All of the goodness we
possess... Maxim
39: ...makes [the soul]
the possessor of great virtues. And in Maxim 44: ...we cannot know
whether we possess the gifts that make us pleasing in God's
sight. These should help us
know what St. John of the Cross means in the Maxim 46 by the word
dispossessed.
We
could do the same for words like interior and
exterior or inwardly and outwardly
(Maxims 8 and 13) and for the word hinder (Maxim 40 &
43). The way St. John uses those
words in those Maxims should help us to understand what those constituent
elements of the interior and exterior are that he has in mind, as well as what
he means by the things of God.
However, we meet the word disappropriated
for the first time in these Maxims here in Maxim 46. And although we can identify words and
ideas in the preceding 45 maxims that would be included in the common
understanding of the words prosperity and adversity, these
two words also appear for the first time in this Maxim 46.
It
seems that it will be to our advantage to learn all the possible meanings
of these key words: detached,
dispossessed, disappropriated, exterior, interior, things-of-God, prosperity,
adversity, detain and hinder.
And I now apologize if what follows sounds like an English Class. We'll consider them one by
one.
Detached. The first
things we have to note is that St. John of the Cross does not mean detached
in the physical or material sense of the word. Two things are attached physically and
materially when the two are fastened together and or connected to one another
by a bonding agent of some kind, such as by an adhesive, or by a hook, a nail
or a clasp of some kind. We can
speak of each being detached from the other when the bonding agent breaks
down and fails. And, usually,
when we think of two objects physically held together in this way, one of
them is more important than the other, and it is the lesser of the two that
we think of as detached. For
example, if we think of a commemorative plaque as being fastened
Now
even though we are not going to give a physical meaning to the word
detached in this Maxim, what we have just said can be applied by analogy
to a non-physical or spiritual detachment.
Namely, there has to be a bonding agent involved, and one of the two
entities attached by some spiritual fastener is usually greater and more
important than the other.
Having said that, let us now go to the American Heritage
dictionary and see how it defines the word detached. I reproduce here what that entry
states:
1. standing apart from others;
disconnected; separate: (example) a detached house.
2. free from emotional, intellectual, social
or other involvement; disinterested. - see synonyms at cool, indifferent.
In
that entry we see that meaning 1. does imply the notion of physical
connectedness, but we see, too, that the word detached is used as a pure
adjective, rather than as a past-participle, a verb form. Its use as an adjective is evident from
the synonym separate in the case of physical detachment, and from the
synonym indifferent in the case of spiritual detachment. It appears, also, that the notion of one
of the two entities that are spiritually detached being greater and more
important than the other is contained implicitly in the second meaning given in
the dictionary. Namely, of a person
involved in a cause and the cause involving him, one would be greater than the
other.
Dispossessed. On
looking up this word in the American Heritage Dictionary, I find that it does
not appear as a separate entry, as does the word detached, although
both are past-participles in form.
We can only guess why this is so, and my guess is that detached is
commonly used as a pure adjective, whereas dispossessed is only seldom
used as a pure adjective, and most often as a verb form. That is too bad, I think, because in
this Maxim 46, St. John of the Cross does use the word dispossessed as a
pure adjective. So, we go instead
to the transitive verb to dispossess in the dictionary. There it is given but one meaning: to deprive (someone) of the possession
of something, such as real property.
We have already had occasion to speak of the possession of real property
when we commented on the word possess in the 29th of these Maxims. In the Commentary on that Maxim we gave
the word more than one meaning, and so we can look for more help in
understanding the word dispossessed by looking up the verb possess
in the A. H. dictionary. This is
what we encounter at that entry:
1. to have as property, to
own
2. to have as a quality, characteristic or
other attribute
3. to acquire mastery of, or have knowledge
of: (example) possess valuable
data
4. to gain or exert influence or control
over; dominate: (example) fury
possessed him.
5. to control or maintain
(one's nature) in a particular state or condition: (example) He possessed his temper despite
the insult.
6. To cause to own, hold or master
something, such as property or knowledge.
Used with
of.
7. To cause to be influenced or controlled
as by an idea or an emotion. Used
with
with.
These final meanings, 6 & 7, refer the reader to the
usage note at the end of the entry possessed. There it is said to be an adjective,
although a past participle in form.
This is of interest to us because, as we have seen, St. John of the Cross
does use dispossessed as an adjective, also.
Here are the three meanings assigned to the word
possessed:
1. owning or
having
2. controlled by, or as if
by, a spirit or other force
3. calm, collected: (example) be possessed in time of
trial
Looking back at the way St. John of the Cross used the
word possess in the previous maxims, it seems that only three of
the seven meanings given above apply:
In Maxim 8, the 5th meaning occurs:
to maintain one's nature in a particular state or condition, i.e., to
possess your soul in patience.
In Maxims 29 & 42, the second meaning occurs: to have as a quality, characteristic
or other attribute: goodness we
possess (29) and traits of the contemplative soul (42). The third of the 7 meanings he gives the
word possess is possibly #1:
to have as property or to own, as in Maxims 39 and 44: to make the soul possessor or
great virtues (39), and to possess the gifts that make one pleasing
in the sight of God. (44) As we saw
in a previous Maxim (I do believe) we implicitly used meaning #1 when we spoke
of giving a gift as transferring ownership and custody of
something.
Let
us now go on to consider the meanings of disappropriated. Amazingly, neither the past-participle
form, dis-appropriated nor the infinitive form: to dis-appropriate, appears in the A.H.
dictionary. So we have to go to the
word appropriate. There we see that
there are two entries for this spelling of the word. One is an adjective, the other a
transitive verb, and they are pronounced differently. As an adjective, appropriate
means: suitable for a particular
person, condition, occasion or
place; proper, fitting. As a
transitive verb, to appropriate means;
1. to set apart for a specific
use
2. to take possession of, or
make use of [something] exclusively for oneself, often without permission.
That these two words, because pronounced differently,
are really distinct and unrelated,
is evident from the fact that the adjective meaning the opposite of
appropriate is in-appropriate, whereas the past-participle, the opposite
of appropriated, is dis-appropriated.
Since past-participles are used as adjectives, we must not exclude the
possibility that St. John of the Cross wants us to interpret
disappropriated as a quality or characteristic inhering in one's
soul.
Now
then, let us consider the rest of the key words listed above, but now let us
take them in pairs, wherever possible.
We continue with the pair:
Exterior
and Interior. I do
think that St. John of the Cross gives meanings to these words that makes them
mutually exclusive. The Maxim that
helps us to understand what is meant by exterior is Maxim 43. There St. John speaks of unconquered
attachments and gives examples:
Talking, persons, clothing, a room, a book, food, satisfactions of sense,
conversations. Therefore, though we
might be tempted to say that exterior things are all material objects that have
a separate existence apart from the human person, we have to extend that notion
of exterior to all and everything that is perceived by the senses, as, of
course, are all material objects.
This extension is necessary because St. John of the Cross includes
talking and conversations among things one may be attached to. In this maxim 46 we are advised to be
detached from the exterior, so that it becomes clear from Maxim 43 taken with
46, that once an attachment is conquered, a person has become detached from the
object to which he had been attached.
So,
having decided that exterior refers to whatever can be perceived by the senses,
it follows that interior means whatever is not perceived by the senses,
but which can only be perceived by the interior faculties, that is, by the
intellect through its power to form ideas and to reason. Although it is true that the intellect
and reason require the data of sense perception as the raw material they process
to form ideas to arrive at understanding, the ideas themselves are not perceived
by the senses. Neither do the
senses perceive the judgments which are the product of the reasoning
intellect.
What would be some of the things that are perceived by
the spiritual faculties alone? To
begin with there are the ideas the intellect forms of qualities and
characteristics of material things, but which the sense do perceive also, such
as light, color, texture, sweetness, bitterness, harshness, pleasantness,
warmth, coldness, wetness, dryness, etc.
Then there are the qualities and attributes that the senses cannot
perceive directly, such as honesty, kindness, intelligence, diligence, various
skills, and, in a word, all virtues and spiritual powers and their
opposites. We can also include such
things as honor, prestige, power, influence, authority, fame, glory, and their
opposites. Though it is true that
the senses can perceive effects traceable to all the things just listed as
causes, these causes cannot be perceived directly by the
senses.
Now, what are we to understand by the phrase: The things of
God? We wonder, too,
whether the things of God include interior and exterior
things. We can look back to the
commentary on Maxim 40 to get some help in deciding how to answer these
questions. As you recall, we saw in
that maxim an opportunity to compare its three signs of inner recollection with
the three signs given in Book II, Chapter 13 of the Ascent of Mt.
Carmel, and with the three signs given in Book II, Chapter 9 of the
Dark night. Going
backward in order we read in those places:
Dark Night,
Book II, Ch. 9, par. 2: ...these
souls do not get satisfaction or consolation from the things of
God.
Ascent, Book
II, Ch. 13, par. 6: (a)
inability to concentrate the imagination and the sense faculties upon the
things of God ...and (b) incapable of making discursive meditation
upon the things of God.
Here it is evident that (a) and (b) go together, because without (a),
(b) would be impossible.
Maxim 40 speaks of meditations and considerations which
formerly helped the soul. Thus we
gather that the things of God are the facts and truths considered
and meditated upon for help on the road of prayer leading to greater love of
God.
Thus it becomes clear that the things of God
include any and all things, whether conveyed in word (teaching and
revelation) or by deed (events) which reveal to us the existence, nature,
attributes, will and desires of God.
Occupying the first and most prominent place among the things of God is,
of course, Jesus Himself, both as a Divine Person and as the Incarnate Word and
Son of God the Father. That is,
Jesus in His Sacred Humanity. When
we meditate upon the things mentioned, we find that they help us to deepen and
strengthen our love for God and dispose us to receive a greater participation in
God's Divine Life.
But
there are other things that help us to increase our created participation in
God's life, besides the above mentioned, and they are Sacraments, sacramentals
and prayer. Prayer here means
intimacy with God that begins after discursive meditation has caused a
soul to love God above all things and to seek happiness in Him alone. Prayer here does not mean the
petitions and requests we direct to God.
To
answer the second question: Do the
things of God include exterior and interior things? The answer it seems would have to be
yes, because the words God spoke through the prophets and events of the Old
Testament, on the one hand, and particularly through the Sacred Humanity of
Jesus in all that Jesus said and did, on the other hand, were perceived by the
senses of those who heard and observed in Old Testament times, and by the
Apostles and disciples of New Testament times. Nevertheless, the answer is no, these
are not among the exterior things that St. John of the Cross is talking about in
Maxim 46, because these can only be perceived by the gift of Faith which is
supernaturally spiritual and interior, and beyond even the understanding and the
power of reasoning. Besides, if
they were exterior, we would have to be detached from
them.
Finally, we are in a position to ask: Why does St. John of the Cross use the
word detached when speaking of exterior things, dispossessed when
speaking of interior things, and disappropriated when he
speaks of the things of God? Surely the answer to this three-fold
question will help us understand what He means by those
phrases.
As
we saw, when speaking of the meaning of detached, the idea of a bonding agent is
necessarily included. Because
exterior things are whatever can be directly perceived by the senses, the
bonding agent would have to be some affection for those things. We must have remarked in an earlier
commentary that our word affection comes from the Latin
adficere, which means: to fasten upon. Thus those exterior things for which the
soul has an affection: talking,
a person, clothes, a room, etc. of Maxim 43 are the things to which it is
attached. That this is not
good is conveyed by the fact that in attaching itself to these exterior things,
the soul degrades itself, since we saw that it is the inferior entity
that is we say is attached to, or detached from a superior entity. This notion also appeared in Maxim 37,
where we read that the entire world is not worthy of a man's
thought. Hence much less
worthy are all things perceived by the senses of a human being. St. John also speaks of the
appetites degrading and defiling the human person, and that the appetites
must be denied because they hinder union with God. And so we can say that in this Maxim 46,
detached from the exterior is the same as being already in darkness and
concealed, in darkness and secure, and going out unseen
to meet the beloved. All those
expressions occur in the poem "One Dark Night."
It
is not as easy to know what St. John of the Cross means by "dispossessed of
the interior." The reason for
that is found in considering what marvelous things we mentioned above that are
included in the meaning of interior, namely, virtues, gifts that make one
pleasing in God's sight and any other entity that bestows goodness upon
the soul, and thus causes the soul to resemble the Good God. Since we saw that the verb to
dispossess means, to deprive someone of something, apparently then, to be
dispossessed of all those good things means to be deprived of them. But clearly, that cannot be the meaning,
because Maxim 39 tells us how to become the possessor of great virtues, and of
course, good things that are related to the great virtues. So we must not think of the word
dis-possessed as a past participle, as it is when it means "to have been
deprived of something." We must
rather think of the word as a pure adjective, that is, as a quality of soul, a
characteristic, and in our case here, a disposition of
soul.
Now
what that disposition of soul is can be gathered from Maxims we've already
seen. Maxim 29, for example,
reminds us that "all the goodness we possess is lent to us." In the commentary upon that Maxim we saw
that the idea of ownership was excluded from the meaning of possess as it occurs
there. Rather possess these meant
only to have custody of and use of that goodness. This same idea is found again in Maxim
44, which reminds us that we don't possess, that is, we don't own
anything that we can glory in, and adds the further idea that we don't even
know whether our souls possess, that is have custody and use of, the gifts
which make a person pleasing in the sight of god. So, when the soul has interiorized, and
is thus penetrated with, the truths conveyed in Maxims 29 and 44, it really is
"dis-possessed of the interior" according to the meaning of this Maxim
46.
And
actually, there is a synonym for detached listed in the dictionary which can
also serve as a synonym for dis-possessed in this Maxim 46. It is the adjective indifferent.
As a synonym of detached it means there is no bonding agent such as
affection or appetite in a person for exterior things.
As a synonym for the adjective "dispossessed," indifferent means there is no bond of ownership, or
illusion of ownership, of interior things in a person. Thus far this incomplete commentary.
We'll consider dis-appropriated of the things of God,
hinder and detain, prosperity and adversity in our next
conference.
| <<<Home | Maxims Directory |