| <<<Home | Maxims Directory |
Continuation of Commentaries
on the Maxims on Love of St. John of the Cross
by Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, ocd
Maxim 59 .
It is
a serious evil to have more regard for God’s blessings than for God Himself:
prayer and detachment.
When St. John speaks of evil here, he is, I believe,
speaking of objective evil rather than subjective evil. Objective evil is the same as a disorder, or
a malady, a lack of integrity, a want of perfection. An object or a state of affairs is objectively evil when it is
not what God intended it to be or desires that it should be. For example, our human body experiences
objective evil when it is sick or disfigured in any way. We are familiar with the formula for the
blessing of throats on the Feast of St. Blaise. It goes: “Through the
intercession of St. Blaise, Bishop and Martyr, may the Lord deliver you from evil
of the throat and from every other evil, in the Name of the Father and of the
Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.” And having said that, a thing or situation
is also evil when it is infected with elements that ought not be present within
it. So, stated most succinctly, objective
evil is the want of due perfection.
What then, is subjective evil? Subjective evil is something that can only
exist in a rational, free creature, or agent.
A rational creature is one that has the gift or attribute or faculty of
reason and understanding. Another way
to say it is: a rational creature is an
intelligent creature. A free creature
is one that has the gift or attribute of choice; the power to choose, the power
to be self determinative. But in order
for a free creature to choose and be self-determinative, it must have options,
that is, alternative possibilities to choose from. These possibilities have to be mutually exclusive, such that the
choice of one possibility excludes all the other options or possibilities. But freedom to choose, free will, is more
than just the ability to choose from among mutually exclusive possibilities. It must also be free of force or coercion.
It ought to be evident that any subject capable of
making free choices has also got to be intelligent. That is, because it takes reason and understanding in order to
know that certain possibilities exist from which to choose, and to understand
that the possibilities are mutually exclusive.
So, knowing all that, subjective evil is any act of the will of a
rational creature which freely chooses, knowingly chooses, to introduce
disorder into a thing, a state of affairs, or a relationship. Thus all subjective evil is sin. It is sin because the person so choosing
deliberately and purposely elects to cause an objective evil, knowing that God
cannot and does not will objective evil to exist. It is in this way that the evil becomes identified with the agent
and is said to inhere in the agent. And
this is how and why a free, rational creature is self-determinative. All free choices, knowingly made, determine
what the agent becomes, or rather, makes of him/herself. Of course, the same is true of those acts by
which a free, rational creature knowingly and deliberately chooses options that
are good. Choosing the option that is
good maintains in, or introduces order and well-being into, a thing, a state of
affairs or a relationship. Often the
choice raises to a higher degree of order and well being. The goodness then is identified with the
agent and inheres in him/her. To sum
up, any agent that acts with knowledge and freedom determines him/herself. He/she makes him/herself to become good
or evil.
Now, when we talk about knowing and free choices to do
good or evil acts we are implicitly acknowledging the existence of a standard
against which the act is compared, so as to reveal to the understanding whether
an act is good, or evil, or neutral, that is, neither good nor evil. We already know what that standard is. It is the Will of God, the creator of all
things. As creator of intelligent free
agents, angels and human beings, He necessarily had to reveal to them what His
Will is for them. Also, He had to give
them the chance to be self determinative, that means letting angels and men
know both what He wanted them to become and what He did not want them to
become. It seems that Our most Dear and
Gracious God had revealed somehow (not overtly in Scripture) that He wanted the
angels freely to choose to be united to Him as His helpers in serving the human
race that He had not yet brought into existence. We do know from Scripture, the Book of Genesis, that God revealed
to Adam and Eve that He wanted them to be united to Him in obedience, and thus
to be the instruments through whom He would unfold His plans for the Human
Race. As we know from the Book of
Revelation, some angels chose not to serve and became devils. We know from the Book of Genesis that Adam and
Eve chose not to obey God. Because of
that sin of Adam and eve, God had to find other instruments, a new Adam and a
new Eve, through whom He would fulfill His plan for humanity. The devils then became the adversaries of
God, while the faithful angels became His helpers in serving the human race.
Before we go on to consider why it is a serious evil
to have more regard for God’s blessings than for God Himself, it will be well
for us to consider that there is, in addition to the Will of God as made known to
each one of us, another measuring device that helps us to discern, not simply
whether a disorderly act is subjectively evil, but to what degree the
free choice to do subjective evil is a sin.
Sin, as you know, admits of degrees of gravity, all the way from very
slight to very grievous. Slight sins
are called venial; serious sins are called mortal because they kill divine life
in the soul of the one who commits them.
The effects of both are reversible, that is, all sins can be forgiven,
but that’s beside the point, here we must identify the elements of this second
measuring device.
Summarily, a sin is most grave when (1) the disorder
is grave, (2) when the knowledge of the gravity is clearly perceived and
understood, and (3) when the choice to commit the sin is free of all force or
constraint.
From this we can again say, summarily, that whatever
diminishes the perception and knowledge of an act as evil also diminishes the
gravity of the sin proportionately. The
same is true of forces acting upon the human will that diminish the freedom
with which a person chooses to commit the sin.
With regard to the former, perception and knowledge,
it is ignorance and doubt which diminish them.
With regard to the latter, freedom of the will, it is fear, coercion and
passion which diminish it. Total
ignorance, all by itself, nullifies subjective evil. Fear, coercion and passion can, at times, be so great that each
one can also nullify the subjective evil, that is, sin. Fear and coercion are closely related. They are the same in the way a person
experiences them, but they differ as to cause.
Fear is caused by threatening, harmful circumstances that are beyond a
person’s control. Coercion is the
threat of harm imposed by other free, rational persons. Passion, if strong enough, becomes an
uncontrollable desire, so that the will no longer enjoys the freedom, that is
the power, to choose anything else than the disorderly, but apparently good,
pleasure that arouses the desire. And
now that we’ve spent enough time speaking of evil, we can consider the rest of
this Maxim 59.
We ask, then, what does it mean “to have more
regard for.” Generally, it means to
perceive that one thing, be it an object, person, activity or experience, has
greater value and importance in the scheme of things than some other. As a perception of the intellect and the
understanding, it has no moral dimension.
It is neither good nor evil. It
can be compared to the perception that one object is colder or warmer than
another, or that one object is lighter or heavier than another. But since St. John of the Cross in this
Maxim states that the “greater regard” he has in mind is a serious evil, it
goes beyond the neutral, “automatic” perception of greater value and importance
I just spoke of. To be an evil, “to
have more regard for” must involve the free action of the will which somehow deliberately
commands the intellect to perceive one thing as having greater value
or importance than another. As it
applies to this maxim, the will freely chooses to assign greater value and
importance upon the blessings of God, all of which are in some way
perceptible to one or more of our appetitive faculties, and which provide the
particular pleasure they hunger for, rather than to choose to assign greater
value and importance to God, Who cannot be directly perceived by any of our
appetitive faculties, and therefore cannot give the appetites the pleasure
which they crave. Since God is
experienced as darkness to all our appetitive faculties, it is not surprising
that the will “naturally” tends to have more regard for the things of God
rather than for God Himself. But
because it ought to be clear to any thinking person that the giver of a gift is
a greater value and importance than a gift he creates and bestows, it truly
becomes a subjective evil when that person prefers the gift to the giver. This is especially true of the Friars, Nuns
and Lay directees to whom St. John of the Cross addressed this Maxim. They had supernatural Faith to help them
believe in the supreme, transcendent Goodness and value of God over all the
good things He created and bestowed upon them.
They also had the benefit of his teaching that to grant the appetitive
faculties the objects of their desire is an obstacle to union with God in
love. So for them to have more regard
for the blessings of God than for God Himself would be a serious evil
[disorder], certainly. We can only hope
they were not fully aware that they were doing that, if they did.
Now we can ask:
“What are the blessings of God?”
In reflecting upon previous Maxims 46 and 55, we have had occasion to
speak of the meaning of the phrase: “the things of God.” In each of them we came up with slightly
different meanings based upon the different contexts in which it was used. Now we can ask whether or not it is true
that “the things of God” are or are not identical with the “blessings
of God.” Well, if we say that a
“blessing” of God is anything that has its origin in Him and which directly
benefits our souls, that is, confers an increase of spiritual well-being upon
our souls, then it seems we do have to say yes the “things of God” are
necessarily the same as the “blessings of God.” So, all the things we mentioned in the reflections on those Maxims
46 and 55 are to be included among the blessings of God. Allow me to enumerate them here:
From Maxim 46:
The gift of
faith in: God’s existence, His
Trinitarian Nature, His Divine attributes, notably His Infinite Wisdom, Power,
and Mercy, His revealed Divine Will for us.
Also: Jesus’
Sacred Humanity, His Doctrine, His merits, the Church, the Holy Spirit,
Sanctifying Grace, actual graces, the Gifts of the Holy Spirit.
Then: Prayer, acts of adoration, worship, praise,
thanksgiving, petition, repentance and contrition; acts of Faith, Hope and
Charity and of all other virtues; the corporal and spiritual works of mercy;
acts of self-denial and penance. None of these can we possibly do without the
help of God.
From
Maxim 55:
All the things that help us acquire virtue, develop
and use our talents, abilities and gifts; and all the things that increase our
willingness to serve and to surrender ourselves to God and to others for love
of Him. These certainly are included in this Maxim because although they help
us to remain united to God and to deepen and strengthen our union with Him in
love, they are distinct from God, and so are capable of competing with God for
our esteem and our regard. And it is
because our humanity, or rather, the faculties and the senses of our humanity,
are able to find pleasure and satisfaction in them, that they tend to compete
with God for our esteem and regard.
To see how this is so, let me quote from a Vietnamese
Bishop who was a prisoner of the Communists for 13 years before being released
and exiled. He was speaking of the
thoughts, sentiments and emotions he felt in his imprisonment. He had this to say:
....“I was a young Bishop with 8 years of pastoral
experience. I couldn’t sleep. I was tormented by the thought of having to
forsake the Diocese, to let all the work I had done for God be lost. I felt a kind of revolt inside me.
One night, in the depth of my heart, I heard a voice
that said to me: ‘Why do you torment
yourself this way? You must discern
between God and God’s works. All that
you did and would like to continue to do:
pastoral visits; formation of seminarians, men and women religious,
laity, youth; construction of schools; missions for evangelization of
non-Christians;... all this is excellent work, but these are God’s works, not
God..’
“If
God wants you to leave all these works and entrust yourself into His hands, do
it immediately and have confidence in Him.
He will give your work to others, who are more competent than you. You have chosen God, not His works.”
This passage helps us to see that not only the things
of God spoken of above must be numbered among His blessings, but also all the
works accomplished by making use of all those things are among His
blessings. And all the faculties of our
bodies and souls, which the things of God enable and empower and elevate to a
supernatural level of operation, are also among the blessings of God.
What then, is the serious evil that St. John speaks
of? It lies in the fact that one is
operating under the illusion that the things of God are more capable of
making one perfectly happy than God; that created things, even those most
closely related to God and necessary for the fulfillment of His Will, are more
satisfying than God Himself. This is a
disorder because the Creator of something necessarily far surpasses in value
the creature He brings into being. It
is a serious disorder because all God’s creatures are drawn from nothingness,
which means giving non-being more value than the All-perfect Supreme Being.
As to the last part of this Maxim 59, we have to
understand the words: “prayer and
detachment” as St. John’s advice on how to avoid falling into the serious
evil he has just warned us about. So
let us reflect on these a bit.
Just a few moments ago we read what the Vietnamese
Bishop said: “you must discern
between God and God’s works.” I
believe that this is accomplished by prayer.
As an intimate conversation with God, whom we know loves us, we open our
minds to His lights and His inspirations.
So, first of all, prayer nourishes, increases and inflames our love for
God so that eventually we seek perfect union with Him through perfect
conformity to His Will. In communicating knowledge of Himself and His Will to
us, we are able to perceive what kinds of works and activities He either
entrusts to His human creatures, or desires His human creatures to undertake,
so that His Merciful plan for ourselves personally and for Mankind may be
realized. And as prayer leads us into
doing those deeds and engaging in those activities to the extent we can, pursuant
to our vocation in the Church, we do find that they bring peace and contentment
and a profound sense of satisfaction, a profound sense of accomplishment. Then it is that we are likely to fall
gradually into esteeming these activities, these blessings of His more than God
Himself. So, since it was through
prayer that this development came about, it stands to reason that prayer again
is necessary in order for God to enlighten us so that we know which of these
works and exercises He wants us to engage in, and which He does not. Also, in prayer we are to be enlightened by
Him as to when, where, and how He wills that we devote ourselves to them. It is in prayer that we get to understand
that these works, though good and of God in the abstract, are only good
for us and lead us to God when it is God’s Will for us that we do them.
I have been saying that it is in prayer that we
gain the discernment necessary to avoid falling into the serious evil of this
Maxim. I should say also, it is through
prayer that we can avoid that evil, because often it is the dispositions of
heart, mind and soul acquired through
prayer that we become open and sensitive to God’s ways of enlightening and
inspiring us outside the times of prayer. He does all that in virtue of what we
read, or hear, or see happening around us.
Often God instructs prayerful people through the circumstances and
situations which crop up in their daily lives.
Now then, how is detachment a remedy that prevents or
overcomes the evil of having more regard for the blessings of God than for God
Himself?
I can’t remember now what we’ve said about detachment
in previous reflections on these Maxims, but right now the thought that comes
into my mind is from the first letter of St. Paul to the Corinthians: ... “the appointed time has grown very
short: from now on let those who have
wives live as though they had none, and those who mourn as though they were not
mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those
who buy as though they had no goods, and those who deal with the world as
though they had no dealings with it.
For the form of this world is passing away.” (I Cor. 7:29-31)
It is clear from this passage that St. Paul is not
asking the individuals in question to abstain from being married, or
from weeping or rejoicing, buying and dealing with the world. Neither does he tell them to pretend they
are not doing all those things. He
seems to be telling them to place no greater value or reliance upon engaging in
those activities than they would upon not engaging in them. In other words, doing them or not doing them
have no intrinsic value. Rather, they
get their value in individual instances from something else. St. Paul suggests that their value comes
from something that does not pass away, as do these things which pertain to the
form of the world which is passing away. Thus they get their value from the Will of God. And as we saw, God’s Will is God,
because everything in God is God.
It seems to me that the detachment St. John of the
Cross enjoins upon us in this Maxim is the frame of mind that would
enable us to do exactly what St. Paul asks of everyone in the passage just
quoted, namely, being mindful at all times that the blessings of God are not
God. We could acquire that frame of
mind by memorizing and saying often the “Bookmark” of St. Teresa, with a few
minor additions, as follows:
Let nothing (or its absence) disturb
you.
Let nothing (or its absence)
frighten you.
(Let nothing or its absence be your
delight).
(Let nothing or its absence cause
you joy).
All things are passing.
God alone remains.
Who has God has everything.
God alone suffices.
| <<<Home | Maxims Directory |