| <<<Home | Maxims Directory |
Continuation of Commentaries
on the Maxims on Love of St. John of the Cross
by Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, ocd
Maxim 57.
Walk
in solitude with God; act according to the just measure;
This
maxim is really composed of three distinct shorter maxims.
It enjoins three things: Walk,
act, and hide. Let us try to identify what is included in
those three verbs, together with what is included by the other ideas in each
Maxim, to help us understand why they are helpful (the Maxim) in our pursuit
of Union with God.
The
idea of walking evokes the image of someone taking one step at a time in a
forward direction. Walking produces forward progress at a leisurely
rate, although we also do speak of walking slowly and walking fast.
Either way, walking short distances is not tiring for a person in good
health, and the notion of urgency is not included in the idea of walking.
Usually, we walk because we want to go from one place to another, not
too far distant. On occasion, we walk
for exercise or for diversion, i.e., a psychological break. Perhaps, all of these considerations will be
useful in helping us reflect further on the first of these three short Maxims
in Maxim 57.
Well,
already, we've identified the place we are headed for as we walk.
We are in pursuit of Union with God.
The whole idea of pursuit includes haste and urgency, rather than a
leisurely journey. A pursuit can also
take one a long, long distance. So
surely, the first thing this Maxim teaches us is to SLOW DOWN. That is, don't try to go too far at each stage of our journey.
We are to aim at a little bit of progress each time we resume our walk.
Also, because urgency usually also means a state of stress and/or
excitement, we are to try to proceed toward union with God with calm and peace
in our souls. And since the purpose
of the walk is to get closer to perfect union with God, this would exclude
doing the walking for diversion or as a psychological break. The walk enjoined by the first one third of
this maxim is serious business.
As
we reflect further, though we encounter an apparent contradiction,
we are to walk in solitude, which suggests we are to walk alone, and
yet we are to walk with God. But this
is no contradiction because we often speak of two people being alone together. Each is the only one in the company
of the other. Thus to walk in solitude
with God is to have God alone as our companion on the journey. Since our goal is Union with Him, it
is consoling to know that He can and does want to be with us as we make progress
toward that destination. Indeed, if
He were not with us to help and guide us, we would never make it to the destination.
Wonderful
as it is to think of ourselves as having no one else as a companion on our
walk toward holiness of life, is it really possible for individuals to have
no one but God as a companion? It
doesn't seem to be possible for married persons.
That would be because the Sacrament of Matrimony makes of husband and
wife One Flesh, a single moral entity. Once
the grace of the Sacrament has achieved its effect, the two are inseparably
linked until death dissolves the Marriage.
They are, until then, as inseparable as Jesus, the Head and Bridegroom,
and the Church, His Body and His Bride. So
it seems that this Maxim does not apply to couples united in the Sacrament
of Matrimony. It would seem to apply
only to the Religious and perhaps the single lay persons for whom St. John
of the Cross principally wrote these Maxims.
But
even in the case of Friars and Nuns, who take the vow or promise of celibacy,
and in the case of Catholic priests who embrace celibacy, it seems they cannot
be entirely alone on their walk as required by this Maxim.
Community is the necessary matrix or environment without which it is
next to impossible for Friars and Nuns to be faithful to their vows, and priests
are obliged to be available constantly to the souls entrusted to their care,
as parents are obliged always to be there for their growing children.
And even walking in solitude with God is not limited to one person
alone, with only one other person.
God is a Trinity of Divine Persons, so the human wayfarer is walking
with all Three, since They, Themselves, are inseparable in the Unity of the
Divine Nature.
But
to get back to the question of whether married people are able to walk in
solitude with God, it is helpful to know that the Unity we call One Flesh
does not take place on the level of person-hood.
Because the persons, together with their human faculties of intellect,
memory and will remain distinct, it remains possible for both husband and
wife to enter into a uniquely personal relationship with God, with each of
the Three Divine Persons. As a case in point, Mary and Joseph were truly
married and were truly One Flesh, even though they chose to keep theirs a
celibate marriage. Yet each of them
could relate to God Father, God Jesus, and God the Holy Spirit differently
because each had a distinct, and therefore different, role to play within
the spousal oneness that held such an important place in the economy of salvation,
namely, God's plan for introducing His Incarnate Son into the human race to
be our Redeemer. I guess that is another
way of saying that each had a different, unique role to play within the Holy
Family, so that each could take God as their sole companion as they journeyed
toward the greatest possible union with God in progressing toward a perfect
fulfillment of their distinct vocations.
Now
I don't think anyone knows whether or to what extent Mary or Joseph shared
with each other knowledge about their uniquely personal relationship with
God. Perhaps being so holy, they did
not want to violate or intrude upon the other's relationship with God.
Perhaps it was enough to be aware of the secret relationship
alone and nothing else. But it seems
to me that it might be a good idea for Catholic
spouses to reveal at least some aspects of their hidden life with God
to their spouse, if for no other reason, than to prevent misunderstandings,
and to help each other to be respectful of that same hidden life with God.
To
continue reflecting upon the admonition to walk toward holiness of life with
God alone as our companion, we can ask, how, if at all, is each person's walk
toward union with God different from every other person's?
Do we go by distinct paths? Well,
one answer is NO, our paths are not distinct because Jesus is the ONLY way
to union with God the Father as He said:
"No one comes to the Father except by me." (John 14:6b). Besides, Jesus is the unique destination of
our journey because He said "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life." (Jn. 14:6a)
After all, our union with God the Father takes place when we are perfectly
in Jesus, our Life of Holiness, and we are perfect copies of Him.
Thus, we must all journey along the same path.
How is it then possible to be alone with God on this path?
You
know, of course, that I only say (ask) that because it highlights wherein
our paths are different and cannot but be unique and unrepeatable.
Each of us, as distinct persons, occupies a distinct place in the universe
and the personal circumstances of each and every one of us have to be somewhat
different from those of every other person.
Thus each of us reproduces the Life of Jesus somewhat differently. We strive to live and love and relate to others
and fulfill our duties as Jesus would if He were in our shoes, in our uniquely
particular situation in the overall plan of God for the human race.
Clearly, husband and wife cannot but reproduce the Life of Jesus differently
because they are by nature complementary within the oneness we call One Flesh. And the same would be true to a lesser degree, less striking degree,
for all who live in community as Friars
and Nuns, and for all Priests in their relationship to the Bishop, to other Priests and to the
faithful within a Diocese or Parish.
So
finally we ask, What is it St. John is asking us to do by the first third
of this Maxim? What does He mean by walking with God?
I
believe He is advising us to be in constant touch and communication with God
the Trinity as we go about responding to the duties, needs and demands of
the present moment as determined by our status in the Church and our vocation
in life. I think St. John of the Cross
is urging us to keep in step with God, which would mean living with
Him in the present moment. God is purported to have said to some saintly
soul: "Don't look for Me in
the future, I am not there. Don't
look for Me in the past, neither am I there.
Look for Me in the present moment, because I live in the ever-present
now."
For
most of us, and particularly for lay-Catholics, many of our present-moments
each day bring us into personal contact with other human beings.
We have to stay in touch with God because we need His help to relate
to all those folks as Jesus would.
There
are times, though, when we do not reproduce Jesus' life in an altogether unique
way. Those would be the times we attend Mass, pray the Office, or take
part in communal prayers and devotions. In
these instances we pray and worship in Him and with Him and through Him as
members of His Mystical Body. So,
perhaps, we could consider those moments to be moments of rest and refreshment,
and not as moments when we are walking. But the purpose of these moments would be to thereafter resume the
journey with God strengthened and nourished.
Thus
we cannot always be physically alone with God unless we are hermits.
But even though our walk with God requires being with others, we can
still think of ourselves as walking with God alone by remaining free of any
influences that do not originate with God, or which cannot be reconciled with
His Will for us at the moment.
Before
leaving this first part of Maxim 57, allow me to touch on an insight of St.
Therese into the meaning of a passage in the song of Songs which reads:
"Draw me. We will run
after Thee in the odor of Thy ointments." (Song of Songs 1:3) Here,
there is not talk of walking and no talk of being alone. But then, neither is there talk of being with
Jesus, the Beloved. There is only
talk of running to catch up with Him. As
Therese herself explains it, the very fact that she herself strives to catch
up with God and walk with Him will in some mysterious way cause all those
she holds dear to receive the grace to strive to do the same. So if trying to catch up to walk with God does
such marvelous good for others, certainly actually walking with Him will also
have as good and better effects for the souls of our dear ones, and of everyone
we meet and relate to on our walk.
We proceed now to the second of the three parts of this Maxim...,
act according to the just measure.
It
now occurs to me that this three-fold Maxim represents suggestions of St.
John of the Cross as means of complying with the previous Maxim, #56.
He must have sensed (and maybe he was asked outright) that the folks
for whom he wrote were wondering what to do in order to be unknown by themselves
and by others. Certainly walking in
solitude with God and striving to be attentive to Him at every present moment
would not give a person a chance to look at or be attentive to personal characteristics
of his own soul, and it would minimize the likelihood of others discerning
his very personal qualities of soul.
But
another reason why St. John of the Cross must have been thinking of Maxim
56 when he wrote this one is because he admonishes one to adhere to the single,
non-distinguishable standard in his/her deeds, namely, the one just
measure. The just measure is always an exact amount, neither
more nor less. In deed, the virtue
of justice is the habitual tendency and inclination to render to a person
exactly what he has a strict right to receive from other folks. The strict right in question is determined
by that person's relationship to other folks.
Each of our relationships with another person is a two way street: parent and child; husband and wife; religious
superior and subject; worker and co-worker; religious and co-religious; friend
and friend. Other relationships would
also be determinative of the just measure, although more one-sided than the
ones just mentioned: rich man and
poor man; learned and unlearned; gifted and needy; strong and weak, creditor
and debtor. This list is not exhaustive.
However,
charity is another virtue which governs our relationships with others concerning
what we must render to them. But we
also know that charity is not to be
limited in any way. As the famous
saying goes, and I don't know which Saint gave it to us:
"The measure of love is to love without measure." So
it appears that St. John of the Cross is asking us to adhere to strict justice
in all our relationships, giving neither more nor less than the exact measure. The virtues affiliated with justice that govern
some of the relationships mentioned above are: piety and loyalty in regard to parents and family members; affability
and amiability with regards to friends, co-workers, acquaintances and any
person we happen to be with; gratitude toward anyone who has shared with us
their knowledge, their expertise, their strength, their abundance; honesty
and truthfulness in all our communications with all and everyone; fidelity
in carrying out promises and commitments and obligations made to others and
to society in general; obedience to superiors; reverence, respect and courtesy
in regards to all who are inferior to us in any way; generosity to all who
need our knowledge, expertise, strength and abundance. If we were always to adhere to the just measure in all those exchanges,
a measure determined by the particular circumstances, then we would certainly
have remained unremarkable and ordinary when compared to all others who exercise
those same virtues. Thus we would
remain unknown to ourselves in the sense that we would not have tested our
ability to exceed those limits by the virtue of charity.
Therefore,
it seems we have a bit of a difficulty. Charity
is the supreme law. We are supposed to practice Charity, that is,
to love, to the upper limit of our capability. In other words, we are supposed to strive for heroic charity because
we are all supposed to strive for sanctity. In the very beginning of the process leading to beatification and
canonization, one very important step is to establish the candidate's heroicity
of virtue. So how can we justifiably
restrict ourselves to the just measure? Isn't
it a bit insulting to God-Father, Jesus-Redeemer God, and Holy Spirit Sanctifier
God to refuse to accept and make use of the superabundant powers and means
they offer us so as to enable us to achieve heroic sanctity?
Perhaps
there are two satisfactory answers to that question.
One is that there should be no limit to just one aspect of charity,
namely, the love we call benevolence.
It is the love by which we sincerely desire that everyone, not only
those we know personally, will come to possess and enjoy goodness and good
things to an unlimited degree, and thus to super-abound in happiness. Unlimited benevolence on our part causes us
to desire with all our being, therefore, that everyone come to share in God's
life to the fullest possible extent.
And
that leads into a second possible satisfactory answer:
On those occasions in which it lies within our power to change the
desires of our benevolence into reality, then we are to adhere to Our Lord's
admonition: "Don't let your left hand know what
your right hand is doing." (Matt. 6:3) Of course, still keeping in mind that this Maxim is a suggestion
as to how to comply with the one preceding it, this saying alone does not
solve the problem of how to prevent our left hand from knowing the
deeds of our right hand, and so remaining unknown to our very selves. If our Lord did explain it, it wasn't recorded
by the Evangelists. But we do have
to believe it is possible otherwise our Lord would not have advised us to
do it. Perhaps it can be done by forgetting
all our virtuous acts, especially those of Charity, when we may have
exceeded a just measure. After all,
what we have forgotten, we don't know.
And
maybe there is a third possible satisfactory answer to the question:
How reconcile the admonition to act according to the just measure with
the obligation to strive for heroic sanctity?
Jesus did say that we are to Love God with our whole being and our
neighbor as ourselves. The just measure
(exact measure) in that is totality.
Totality in loving God with all the powers of our being, and totality
in loving others exactly as we love ourselves. That appears to be the exact measure for all our acts and actions
when we relate to people who are part of our lives, or who come into our lives
each day. The reason for that would
be the identification of charity with all the virtues that govern our personal
relationships. We find it in 1 Cor.
13:1-7, where St. Paul sings his magnificent Hymn to Charity. Of special interest to us are verses 4-7: "Love is patient and kind; love is
not jealous or boastful; it is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;
it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right. Love bears all things, believes all things,
hopes all things, endures all things." (Revised Standard Version, Catholic edition). This passage from St. Paul seems to be telling
us that we seldom, if at all, are able to come up to the just measure in our
dealings with others. And further,
the more diligently and generously we strive to love without measure,
the closer we come to acting according to the just measure in all our relationships.
Let
us take Jesus as our model. Did He not practice every virtue to perfection?
Of course! Well, He gave of Himself completely: His entire self: Body, Blood, Soul, Divinity. So
to the extent we strive to relate to others exactly as He related to
others, to that extent, we approach the just measure, which is perfection.
Once that happens, we have disappeared.
Jesus appears in our place. Hence,
this second part of Maxim 57 really does help us to be unknown both to ourselves
and others.
We turn our attention, now, to the third part of Maxim 57: ..., hide the blessings of God.
Let
us begin by trying to identify the various ways we hide things.
To do this, we think about some of the things people usually do hide.
One
thing is cash money. Perhaps a householder wants to hide money from
his/her spouse, or from the children, or from other folks who occasionally
have access to the various rooms of the house.
Hiding places for money are usually places difficult to gain access
to, or in secret compartments in walls or cabinets or pieces of furniture.
Another
thing most people hide is the key to the house, just in case they should accidentally
lock themselves out. It is usually
not really hidden, but just out of casual sight in the vicinity of the door
it opens.
Other
things people hide are birthday and Christmas gifts purchased for family members
prior to their being given to the intended recipient.
These are usually not really hidden, but stored in places the recipients
seldom frequent.
Besides
material things, people also try to hide personal feelings, emotions and cosmetic
defects. Feelings and emotions we hide by pretending,
or by simply not letting them show. Cosmetic
defects are usually hidden by make-up or by things we can put on. (wigs, false
teeth, padded garments.)
At
times people hide the fact that they engage in certain types of activities.
This they do by performing them when and where they cannot be observed.
In this regard, perhaps one wants to keep these activities hidden only
from certain classes of people: a spouse, parents, or an employer.
Well,
perhaps these examples are not going to be helpful after all, because we hide
money and keys to keep them out of the hands of people who would use them
wrongfully; we hide defects because we are ashamed we have them and certain
activities and emotions we hide because they are reprehensible.
The blessings of God are not things we don't want others to have access
to, nor are they reprehensible in any way, nor a cause for shame. The blessings of God are, almost always, a share in His own attributes
and virtues. We remember, too, that Jesus, when sending His apostles on mission
to preach and work miracles, said: "Freely you have received, freely
give." (Matt. 10:8). It is impossible to hide something that is openly given away.
Also,
it seems impossible to hide the blessings, that is, the graces God offers
us in abundance to enable us to draw ever closer to imitating Jesus perfectly
in all our relationships. That is, to acquire the virtues we've spoken
of above. People who benefit from
them, in whose favor they are exercised, cannot be unaware of them. And so, it seems, we have to say that these
are not the blessings of God that St. John of the Cross advises us
to hide.
In
review of what has been said, it seems that the blessings we are advised to
hide, if indeed we receive them, are those which by their very nature cannot
be shared with others, except of course, by telling others about them.
Such things would be mystical graces:
ecstasies, visions, locutions, sensible or spiritual perceptions
of God's presence, or His favor, or His Love.
These do not benefit others directly, but only indirectly, in the sense
that anyone's growth in holiness (the purpose God gives these) cannot but
indirectly benefit everybody else.
Why,
then, did St. Teresa of Jesus not hide her mystical blessings?
And why did not St. John of the Cross himself not want these
graces of hers to be kept hidden? As
you know he did write in either the Ascent or the Dark Night
that he would not explain these mystical experiences because St. Teresa had
already done so very admirably.
Very
likely, the reason neither of them wanted them to remain hidden is that the
Christian soul should know, needs to know, about them because God can and
does confer mystical graces upon many souls desirous of serving Him faithfully
and of loving Him with all their being. If
souls did not know and understand them to some extent, they would cause fear,
doubt and confusion in the recipient. Such
a one could easily think he/she is going crazy, or deceiving herself and going
astray. Besides, St. John of the Cross teaches that
these should be revealed to a trusted confessor or spiritual advisor so as
to prevent their leading astray, and to allay the fears
and doubts of the recipient.
St.
John also tells us why these are to be hidden, even from oneself, after telling
a prudent confessor or advisor. They are just the shell, or covering, of a
spiritual, non-perceptible grace that is given with them. The shell is transient, the grace resides permanently
in the soul. St. John teaches further
that to remember and desire the shell is harmful to the soul because it places
more value upon the shell than upon the extraordinary grace by which God has
enriched the soul.
| <<<Home | Maxims Directory |