Tag Archives: Culture

The Folly of Mind Over Matter

Culture, Sin, , , , , , ,

In Book I of Paradise Lost, Satan, examining his situation in hell, remarks that “the mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven.” On its face, this line expresses a profound truth about the nature of the mind. Often when someone has a totally different worldview than us, one might say that “they live in a different reality.” The truth is that we all are tempted by this sentiment in the same way that many naive readers, such as Saul Alinsky, are tempted to read Satan as the heroic figure in Paradise Lost. After all, perhaps we are like gods, and perhaps, therefore, we do have the right to define heaven and hell for ourselves. It seems to be the conclusion that many have reached, so we should at least spend some time giving it thought.

What we will examine in this article is not just the idea that our minds can help us cope with or even heal suffering, as seen in the placebo effect, but, instead, the philosophy behind the saying “mind over matter.” Namely, the idea that by becoming arbiters of our own experience we can become arbiters of reality.

Giving the Devil His Due

In the spirit of intellectual honesty, we will begin by looking at the truth of “mind over matter.” When faced with extreme circumstances a man’s attitude towards those circumstances makes a world of difference. As Viktor Frankl observes in Man’s Search for Meaning, one’s attitude towards the brutality of the camps were what made the difference between a saint and a monster. It is rather astonishing that the same set of circumstances produced saints such as St. Maximilian Kolbe, and monsters such as the kapos1 who were often crueler than the guards themselves. For Kolbe and the countless other heroes and saints of the concentration camps, the suffering was seen as something that could be received with courage and could even be sanctifying. However, for the prisoners who became cruel, the suffering became a justification for them to behave as they pleased. While their minds did not change the reality of the circumstances they found themselves in, for the heroes of the camps it was their mindset which changed their experience from tragic to sanctifying.

The Limits

There is, however, a limit to this power. One’s mind can determine attitude and experience, but it cannot change the reality itself. There is tremendous danger in thinking so. Modern thinking has become infected with this idea. Take for example the use of the term “manifesting”. While this term is often used in an ironic way, there are, unfortunately, far too many examples of people who take it seriously. On a more serious note, the contraceptive pill represents a far more established version of this same fatal idea. It is “medicine” that no longer attempts to restore the body to its natural function, but instead is man’s attempt to determine how the body ought to work for himself. The debates over gay marriage and transgenderism suffer from the same problem. Oftentimes, those who oppose either of these are called bigots, but that misunderstands the argument. We are not arguing that we would prefer gay marriage, and transgenderism to not exist, but that the terms do not describe reality. Marriage is the exclusive, permanent, and procreative union of a man and woman regardless of what anyone says, and we simply wish to recognize that. Similarly, transgenderism is not a word that describes a real phenomenon, because transgender is not a real category. This does not mean that people who claim to be transgender do not exist as activists will often say we are claiming, but that these people are, sadly, mistaken about who they are.

Reality Reasserts Itself

These attempts to alter reality with one’s mind do not just affect the individual either. They have real consequences. Babies are sold to “married” men to grow up without mothers. Women alter their hormones to such a degree that it changes who they are attracted to. Children are handed over to butchers, otherwise known as gender-affirmation surgeons, to affirm the delusions of adults. Language itself is no longer a means of communication, but is simply a vehicle for imposing one’s own mind. I do not mean to point these realities out in a hyperbolic way, but far too often we euphemize grave evils away.

Returning now to Paradise Lost, one may be tempted to think that Satan’s words in Book I represent the triumphant spirit of a rebel, but that would require neglecting his tragic observation later in the poem. In Book IV he realizes that the mind cannot make hell into heaven, and that hell now follows him wherever he goes: “Me miserable! which way shall I fly Infinite wrath, and infinite despair? Which way I fly is Hell; myself am Hell.” In many ways, this is the tragedy of human history. Since the beginning, man has tried to set himself up as a god, and the consequences have always been disastrous. The truth is that God is God, and we are not. There is no amount of technology, wealth, or power that will change that fact. Reality must be accepted, or it will impose itself. It is not optional. The mind that thinks it can impose itself on reality is driven to madness, as is evident from the paragraph above. God bestowed a beautiful gift and dignity on humanity by giving us minds, but if we wish to usurp Him with those minds we will not find enlightenment and intellectual freedom. Instead we will find madness and despair.

  1. Prisoners who collaborated with the guards ↩︎

The Death of Leisure and the Rise of Utilitarianism

Culture, Leisure, Work, , , ,

A familiar feeling for many is the anxiety that comes at the end of the weekend. Believe it or not there is a sociological term for this phenomenon: “The Sunday Scaries”. As silly as it might sound, it is, unfortunately, an all to real phenomenon that many people identify with. A simple Google search reveals dozens of articles written on the subject. One article goes so far as to suggest that they may be a connection between suicide and “Sunday Scaries”. This problem, trivial though it may be, is symptomatic of a deeper sickness in our society. It is symptomatic of a society that does not know how to rest. By rest, I do not mean the absence of work. Rest is not, as talked about in a previous post, lying in front of the TV while mindlessly consuming the newest show. It is also not catching up on chores that we did not quite have time to get to during the week. Rest is leisure. The latin word for leisure is otium, and the word that is used for business is negotium, literally, “not leisure”. Negotium is where we get the word negotiate from. So in antiquity, leisure was not the absence of work, but work was the absence of leisure. Leisure, especially contemplation, was seen as necessary for a good life as I point out in another post on the nature of happiness. Aquinas even states that leisure and contemplation are necessary for the perfection of society. So what happens to a society when leisure is thrown aside? Isn’t it just a luxury?

The Utility of Life

Leisure is an activity sought as an end in it of itself. It is differentiated from work which is a means to an end. While work is productive, leisure is creative. It is certainly no accident that a society which has forgotten leisure, has also forgotten the goodness of having and raising children: man’s most creative act. Without leisure man’s life just becomes a series of means to an end. Even the time he does spend resting is spent so that he may be rested for work. Academia becomes glorified job training. Entertainment becomes advertisement. Life itself becomes all about efficiency.

Such a society will find that even its morality is infected with this spirit. An act is no longer right or wrong on its own merit, but instead is judged by the goal of the intention. Every act is judged by its usefulness in reaching the desired end. In a sense, morality itself becomes a game of efficiency. Ultimately, morality becomes utilitarian. And the ends themselves will only remain good for so long, because without leisure man forgets his nature and purpose. Worse still, people become justified to a society based on their usefulness. The unborn become discardable, and the elderly become a burden. John Paul II makes the same observation when he speaks about the culture of death in Evangelium Vitae when he says, “This culture [the culture of death] is actively fostered by powerful cultural, economic and political currents which encourage an idea of society excessively concerned with efficiency… a life which would require greater acceptance, love and care is considered useless, or held to be an intolerable burden.” A society which forgets leisure is doomed to utilitarianism.

Reclaiming Leisure

Leisure is a preparation for the eternal. It is a preparation for Heaven. It is as Jesus tells Martha, “the better part” (Luke 10:42). Leisure is a fundamentally human activity because it is an abstraction from the day to day tasks of our lives. So how can we return to it again? First, it is necessary to take the 3rd commandment seriously again. When God rested on the seventh day, it was not just a lack of work. As John Paul II points out in Dies Domini,

It would be banal to interpret God’s “rest” as a kind of divine “inactivity”. By its nature, the creative act which founds the world is unceasing and God is always at work… The divine rest of the seventh day does not allude to an inactive God, but emphasizes the fullness of what has been accomplished. It speaks, as it were, of God’s lingering before the “very good” work (Gn 1:31) which his hand has wrought, in order to cast upon it a gaze full of joyous delight. This is a “contemplative” gaze which does not look to new accomplishments but enjoys the beauty of what has already been achieved

Thus, Sunday should be a day spent in “joyous delight”. First, in the sacrifice of the Mass, and then in the truth, beauty, and goodness of creation. There will of course be those for whom it is not possible to make Sunday a day of leisure because of extenuating circumstances, but this is the exception and not the rule. Sunday should not be a day to catch up on work, instead it should be a day dedicated to becoming human again.

Second, to reclaim leisure, we must be intentional. This is all the more necessary in the age of laptops and smartphones which mean that our work can follow us everywhere. Leisure must be a priority, and not just another item on a to-do list. On the other hand, we must also be mindful of our free time as we live in an age with seemingly endless distractions. While leisure need not be productive and perhaps ought not be, it is not just a distraction from life. It is the place where we can see meaning and beauty in life. So, as we move into 2025, let us struggle to reclaim leisure in a culture that is constantly demanding our attention.

On Inculturation

Anthropology, Church Authority, Culture, Defending the Faith, Devils, Natural Law, Pope Francis, , , , , , , ,

In his new Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Querida Amazonia, Pope Francis mentioned the process of inculturation as a starting point for the conversion of the region.  The Holy Father most certainly had the Pachamama controversy in mind when he exhorted the Faithful to “not be quick to describe as superstition or paganism certain religious practices that arise spontaneously from the life of peoples. Rather, we ought to know how to distinguish the wheat growing alongside the tares, for ‘popular piety can enable us to see how the faith, once received, becomes embodied in a culture and is constantly passed on.’ It is possible to take up an indigenous symbol in some way, without necessarily considering it as idolatry. A myth charged with spiritual meaning can be used to advantage and not always considered a pagan error. Some religious festivals have a sacred meaning and are occasions for gathering and fraternity, albeit in need of a gradual process of purification or maturation” (QA 78-79).  Setting aside the fact that all false religions are by definition superstitions, the Holy Father’s remarks call for a deeper understanding of what the Church means when she uses the term Inculturation. 

Understanding authentic inculturation begins by grasping what we mean when we use the term culture.  Culture is the soil in which the human person grows.  As the Second Vatican Council put it, “Man comes to a true and full humanity only through culture, that is through the cultivation of the goods and values of nature…. The word ‘culture’ in its general sense indicates everything whereby man develops and perfects his many bodily and spiritual qualities” (GS, 53).

Against Cultural Relativism

When viewed in relation to “goods and values of nature,” it becomes evident that cultures are not ends in themselves, but instead means for human growth.  Likewise because there are objective “goods and values of nature,” we can also evaluate cultures objectively in terms of good and bad.  Good cultures are those that cultivate authentic human flourishing and bad cultures are those that do harm to true human goods.  Authentic culture must always be, according to the International Theological Commission, that which “reveals and strengthens the nature of man.”

In short, there is no such thing as a neutral culture nor can anything like cultural relativism be tolerated.  We must evaluate and judge cultures by the objective criterion of whether true human goods are protected and promoted.  It is the Church’s role to be judgmental towards cultures in three specific ways.  Those values that are true human values, even if expressed in “local” terms are adopted as part of the vernacular of the Church and are the means by which the Gospel takes root.  If they point to true human values, but are deficient in some way then the Church purifies them.  Finally, if they are irreconcilable then the Church condemns them.  This process of promoting, purifying and purging is what the Church calls inculturation.

The point of reference for the Church is not the culture itself, but as in all things, the transmission of the Gospel.  The culture is simply the means by which the message takes root.  This is why it is disingenuous to speak of inculturation as a two-way street.  The Church has the fullness of truth and thus has no new facts to learn from the various cultures.  The culture gives to the Church what is for its own benefit—a language that speaks the truths of salvation.  What she does gain is a fuller manifestation of her catholicity.  It becomes proof positive that the Gospel can be put in terms that are intelligible to men of every age and place and answer the deepest longings of all human hearts.

Because he was the most traveled Pope in the history of the Church, St. John Paul II constantly emphasized the connection between inculturation and evangelization.  In an address to the People of Asia while he was visiting the Philippines he reminded the Church that  “Wherever she is, the Church must sink her roots deeply into the spiritual and cultural soil of the country, assimilate all genuine values, enriching them also with the insights that she has received from Jesus. Given the mission entrusted to it by our Lord, the Church’s priority is always the evangelization of all peoples and therefore of all cultures. Inculturation is a means of evangelization, being at the same time its consequence.”

With all of this laid as a foundation, we can see what role, if any, Pachamama would play in legitimate inculturation.  Those who defended it treated it as something that could simply be taken up (literally) as an authentic human value.  But worship of a false god, however seemingly benign or how “spontaneously” it arises (how do we know if something arises spontaneously or at the prompting of demons?), is not a true human value.  Nor is that something that can be purified but instead must be something that is rejected.  Pachamama may have crossed the Tiber after it was tossed in the Tiber, but it was only because certain churchmen lacked both the faith and charity towards the Amazonian people to give them the saving truth of Jesus Christ.  As St. John Paul II, who was not immune to failures in authentic inculturation, told the people of Cameroon, “the Gospel message does not come simply to consolidate human things, just as they are; it takes on a prophetic and critical role. Everywhere, in Europe as in Africa, it comes to overturn criteria of judgment and modes of life; it is a call to conversion.”  Never once was the call to conversion issued to the worshipper of Pachamama.

The great missionary saints, whether it was St. Paul, St. Patrick, St. Francis Xavier, or St. Isaac Jogues, were all masters of inculturation not because they were clever but because theirs was a call to conversion even if they translated them into colloquialisms.  It was because they were holy men that they were up to the task.  As John Paul II put it, “Only those who truly know Christ, and truly know their own cultural inheritance, can discern how the divine Word may be fittingly presented through the medium of that culture. It follows that there can be no authentic inculturation which does not proceed from contemplating the Word of God and from growing in likeness to him through holiness of life”.