Von Speyr - Death of a loved one as "the breaking off of a dialogue"

The most compelling consequence of death is not merely separation but a growing limitation of understanding, the breaking off of a dialogue, a rapport, a love which had thought it was wider and bigger. My friend is dead, but this death tears holes in my own existence.

Adrienne von Speyr, The Mystery of Death (1953) 

It has occurred to me that the moments when I find myself most noticeably missing Mum tend be those when I have the impulse to "converse" with her, whether figuratively or literally (either "Mum would have said this about what just happened" or "I would say this to Mum right now"). I think there really is something to the idea that relationships with those we love are like life-long conversations where we share ourselves with each other, and that one metaphor for the loss of a loved one is a conversation interrupted, seemingly before it was finished.

O'Brien - Jesus suffers with us

The passage below is from Michael D. O'Brien's novel The Father's Tale. In it, the protagonist of the story has been subjected to torture in an unknown foreign prison, and is near death. (Note: Alyosha is a Russian diminutive for Alexander, which is Alex's full name.)

When consciousness returned, he was alone. The bag was gone from his head. There was no noise, no light, but his senses told him he was alive. His flesh was one single wound, with blood running from his nostrils and ears. A floor beneath his body. It was ice, and blood was crystallizing on it. He was naked. He was deathly cold. His body contracted into the fetal position, shaking violently. 

His groans slid into weeping, and the weeping slid back into groans until it was all the same. Time was the skewer on which he turned, burning, burning. 

Iisus! 

He felt that he was dying and that he had only a few moments left in which to pray. He tried to speak to God, but his mind was incapable of thoughts. His lungs breathed the name of Jesus over and over, though at the root of this utterance was no thought, no fervor. The name was in his breath, and his breath was becoming the name. As long as he did not move, the breathing remained. And the name. 

Iisus! 

Slowly, slowly his heart beat—a drum, a pause, and a drum. 

Then his mind rose still further, and he sensed a presence with him. The darkness was total, but it was broken by breathing that was not his own. He now realized that someone was lying close beside him. From time to time low groans came from the other’s throat. Using the dregs of his strength, Alex moved an arm. It screamed in protest. He moved it still farther, and his fingers brushed against something. It was a hand. A hand covered with blood. 

It cost everything to roll onto his side. He gasped, cried out, then put his own hand on the arm of the other prisoner. 

For a time he rested. It was strange comfort to know that another human being was with him in that place of absolute dark. A flicker of life stirred within him, a moment of pity for the suffering of the other. He felt that he might try to encourage him somehow, to offer solace—the fraternity of the absolutely dispossessed. 

The arm of the other man moved. The man’s hand reached for his. The grip that held Alex was mangled flesh, horrible to touch. With his other hand, Alex touched the face of the prisoner. It too was covered with blood. The man’s chin and cheeks were bearded, his nose large, his eyes deep-set, pools of blood collecting in the sockets. His face was lacerated with many small cuts, and his lips were split, dry, parted. Blood ran from the corners of his mouth. 

“Who are you?” Alex breathed. 

“Alyosha”, the lips whispered in reply. 

“We are suffering, Alyosha”, Alex sobbed, placing the palm of his hand on the man’s forehead. “But we are not alone.” 

The flesh of the forehead was riddled with holes. “You”, said the prisoner, “are Alyosha.” 

“I?” Alex breathed. 

The prisoner reached up and took Alex’s right hand in both of his. He drew Alex’s hand downward across his face, over the collarbone, over the chest that was sliced in every direction, the flesh slippery with blood. He pulled Alex’s hand around the side of his chest and pressed the tips of his fingers to a large gash between two ribs. 

Alex flinched and tried to draw back, but the other’s hands gently held him. 

“My son”, said the prisoner, and drew the fingers deep into the wound beneath his heart. 

Then Alex saw a flash of light and fell into oblivion.

Later he has a similar encounter in another cell, with the one he now calls the Muchenik, or martyr. (Note: kingfisher is a name Alex uses figuratively for himself. It refers to the Gerard Manley Hopkins poem As Kingfishers Catch Fire.) 

The Muchenik took the kingfisher’s hand and drew it gently to the wound in his side, beneath his heart. And the kingfisher’s heart hammered with horror and worship, and the dissolving of every language save the language of love.

The Muchenik put his fingers into the wounds of the kingfisher—the heart wounds and the mind wounds—though he asked permission before doing so and did not use force. And the kingfisher replied yes, yes, yes . For both acts cleansed the degradation. And the nyet, nyet, nyet that had seized him during the torture withdrew for a time.

A third and final meeting is described here:

As before, he was stretched out on the ice, seeking the tormented one, reaching across the void.

“We are suffering, Muchenik,” he groaned, “but we are not alone.”

He touched the holes in the hands and feet of the prisoner. He lightly touched the face that a rifle butt had shattered. The hands of the prisoner drew his fingers to the wound in his heart, and his heart was a fountain.

I consider these to be some of the finest passages in all of literature, Christian or otherwise. They express the reality that the worse our sufferings are, the more real is the presence of Jesus with us. Alex, at the very limit of human suffering, is even privileged to experience a physical manifestation of that Presence. 

Thomas à Kempis has said, "When you suffer tribulation and your heart is filled with sorrow, you are with Jesus on the Cross." This is true literally (not usually physically, of course) because the Crucifixion, like all of Jesus's life on earth, happened both in time and outside of time. Because He is eternally crucified, and because His crucifixion contains all human suffering, Jesus literally suffers with us. This is the beginning of the answer God provides to the mystery of our suffering: He is with us in it.

Barron - The Divinization of One’s Passivities (God works through suffering)

As I lay on my back in [the hospital], a phrase kept coming unbidden into my mind: “the divinization of one’s passivities.” This is a line from one of the great spiritual works of the twentieth century, The Divine Milieu by the French Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. In that seminal text, Teilhard famously distinguished between the divinization of one’s activities and the divinization of one’s passivities. The former is a noble spiritual move, consisting in the handing over of one’s achievements and accomplishments to the purposes of God. A convinced Jesuit, Teilhard desired to devote all that he did (and he did a lot) ad majorem Dei gloriam (to the greater glory of God).  But this attitude, Teilhard felt, came nowhere near the spiritual power of divinizing one’s passivities. By this he meant the handing over of one’s suffering to God, the surrendering to the Lord of those things that are done to us, those things over which we have no control. We become sick; a loved one dies suddenly; we lose a job; a much-desired position goes to someone else; we are unfairly criticized; we find ourselves, unexpectedly, in the valley of the shadow of death. These experiences lead some people to despair, but the spiritually alert person should see them as a particularly powerful way to come to union with God. A Christian would readily speak here of participating in the cross of Christ. Indeed how strange that the central icon of the Christian faith is not of some great achievement or activity, but rather of something rather horrible being done to a person. The point is that suffering, offered to God, allows the Lord to work his purpose out with unsurpassed power. 

In some ways, Teilhard’s distinction is an echo of St. John of the Cross’s distinction between the “active” and “passive” nights of the soul. For the great Spanish master, the dark night has nothing to do with psychological depression, but rather with a pruning away of attachments that keep one from complete union with God. This pruning can take a conscious and intentional form (the active night) or it can be something endured. In a word, we can rid ourselves of attachments—or God can do it for us. The latter, St. John thinks, is far more powerful and cleansing than the former. 

Bishop Robert Barron, Hospitalland and the Divinization of One's Passivities (blog post May 26, 2015)

The word "passive" is one we try to avoid these days, at least with reference to ourselves. To admit that situations arise where we can simply be acted upon, as opposed to being active (or even better, proactive) is to admit our own limitations in a way that is decidedly anti-modern. But Bishop Barron, citing Teilhard, makes the point here that it is often those very moments of passivity forced upon us by our human condition that God uses to purge us of dross and prepare us to enter the Kingdom.


Balthasar - Good works in this world limited, but transformed and integrated into the Kingdom

What has to be brought together today is the justified concern for the future of mankind, which has more than ever been entrusted to human capacity and responsibility, and the inalienable demand that every individual think here and now of his relation to God and his eternal salvation. Man must give himself completely in two directions: the horizontal “forward” and the vertical “upward ”. And this should be accomplished in such a way that each direction does not hinder the other but on the contrary furthers it.
But how is this possible? How could a person such as the marxist [sic], who is absorbed completely in the service of future mankind’s well-being, have the time and desire to pray and to collect himself in God? On the other hand, how could someone who practices Eastern meditation and submerges himself in the Absolute dedicate himself completely to his earthly task?
The vertical and the horizontal cross only in the Cross of Christ: only in him is the dedication to mankind perfectly one with the immediate contact with the Father’s will. Why? Because the will of God for which Christ listens in prayer sends him always anew into the world and its distress, not with merely human programs, but with a plan of salvation that can be thought and realized only by God. Action alone is not enough; even in Jesus’ life on earth it did not reach its goal. Prayer is not enough; it points at first always to action but finally to the third thing which alone leads to the breakthrough, the great suffering that is like the synthesis of action and contemplation: the bearing of the unbearable guilt of the world which had barred the access to God forward as well as upward. The door is now open in both directions.
Forward: what good are the marxist [sic] plans for the future if humanity cannot be essentially changed and if the innumerable past generations remain unredeemed? The Christian works for change in the world in the hope, initiated by Christ, of his return, the hope of the coming of the kingdom of God which will transform everything and integrate into itself every effort for the good.
Upward: what good are all the ecstasies and submersions practiced in Eastern techniques if they do not encounter the living Heart of God, the absolute love that proved itself in the Cross of Christ, a love with which we never become identical but which gives us a share in itself in the Holy Spirit?
Man remains stretched between heaven and earth without ever bringing the two dimensions of his existence to a final harmony by his own power. Does this not show that from his creation he has been designed for the Crucified and Risen One in whom his restless heart finds rest?
The same point can be expressed even more simply with the gospel: the two main commandments, the love of God and the love of neighbor, become one only in the One who is at the same time God and man. This incomparable fact is and remains the center of Christian apologetics.


Hans Urs von Balthasar, A Short Primer for Unsettled Laymen (1980) - in chapter titled Why Still Christianity

In his discussion of the "horizontal" and "vertical" dimensions of faith—that is, service of humanity and worship of God, Balthasar concludes that they can only be brought together in the person of Jesus and his Cross. In the course of sketching his larger argument, he makes this wonderful point about both the limits and the potential of the "horizontal". 

Kierkegaard - No certainty regarding eternal destiny

In my life I have never got farther, nor will I get farther, than ‘fear and trembling’, that point at which I am literally quite certain that everyone else will easily attain the bliss of heaven, and only I shall not. . . . Telling other people. . . ‘You are eternally lost’ is something I cannot do. As far as I am concerned, the situation is that all the others will, of course, go to heaven; the only doubt is whether I shall get there. 

Soren Kierkegaard, quoted in Hans Urs von Balthasar, Dare We Hope "That All Men Be Saved"? 2nd edition (2014) chapter 5

Dare We Hope is mainly about our knowledge—or more precisely our certainty—regarding the eternal destiny of human souls, whether our own or those of others. This is something about which Christians widely disagree, but the Catholic position (and therefore mine) is that we cannot have complete assurance either that we are saved or that any other particular person is damned. Regarding the latter, one recent catechism puts it as follows: 

Neither Holy Scripture nor the Church’s Tradition of faith asserts with certainty of any man that he is actually in hell. Hell is always held before our eyes as a real possibility, one connected with the offer of conversion and life.

The Church’s Confession of Faith: A Catholic Catechism for Adults, published by the German Bishops’ Conference, English edition (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1987), p. 346

Irenaeus - Learning in Heaven

What ground is there for complaint if. . . we are able by the grace of God to explain some [things in Scripture], while we must leave others in the hands of God. . . not only in the present world, but also in that which is to come, so that God should for ever teach, and man should for ever learn the things taught him by God? As the apostle has said on this point, that, when other things have been done away, then these three, “faith, hope, and charity, shall endure.” For faith, which has respect to our Master, endures unchangeably, assuring us that there is but one true God, and that we should truly love Him for ever, seeing that He alone is our Father; while we hope ever to be receiving more and more from God, and to learn from Him, because He is good, and possesses boundless riches, a kingdom without end, and instruction that can never be exhausted.

St. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adv. Haer. II, 28, 3 - quoted in Hans Urs von Balthasar, Dare We Hope "That All Men Be Saved"? 2nd edition (2014) chapter 8

This is a wonderful idea concerning the Beatific Vision, and a response to the often-raised (or at least often-thought) issue of "boredom in Heaven". Although we will no longer be in time, could it be that the acquisition of the knowledge of God, given its boundlessness, could entail a kind of eternal learning, that God could be forever pouring this knowledge into us? Like everything regarding eternity, we can only try our best to produce metaphors, but this one has particular appeal, I think, to those who love learning, and may on some level not understand how Heaven could really be paradise without it.


Danielou - Hope for salvation of the world

Too often we think of hope in too individualistic a manner as merely our personal salvation. But hope essentially bears on the great actions of God concerning the whole of creation. It bears on the destiny of all humanity. It is the salvation of the world that we await. In reality hope bears on the salvation of all men—and it is only in the measure that I am immersed in them that it bears on me.

Jean Cardinal Daniélou, S.J. Essai sur le mystère de l’histoire (1953), p. 340 - quoted in Hans Urs von Balthasar, Dare We Hope "That All Men Be Saved"? 2nd edition (2014)

This is a really mind-blowing quote for me. It's perfect as the epigraph for Balthasar's Dare We Hope in that it encapsulates the major underlying theme of the book. On the surface, the debate is about the question of Hell—specifically whether we are certain that anyone goes there. But Balthasar's deeper interest is not in that question, but rather on how Christian hope should be focused. He, along with Danielou, contend that our hope is for the salvation of the world, of the human race as a whole, as opposed to simply ourselves as individuals.

Eulogy for Mum's Memorial Service - March 13, 2021

For years, whenever I've thought about Mum and her love for us, I've found myself thinking about Mary and Martha. One of the many layers of this story is simply that both sisters sought to show their love for Jesus, and that Mary did so more perfectly. As we remember, Jesus says about Mary "She has chosen the better part, and it shall not be taken from her."

As Christians, we often emphasize that love is an action, as opposed to a feeling. And that's true—love is an action. But on the very deepest level, we believe that love is a Person. God is love. And while He expresses His love for us constantly through actions, the most essential way He loves us is in His being—that is, by being present with us in every moment of our lives. Although we do imitate God's love when we perform acts of service, we do so most purely when we stop and take time to be present for those God has given us to love. This was Mary's love for Jesus, and it's also what I remember most vividly in Mum's love for us, her children.

The story Rachel told about planting tulips captures it perfectly. My guess is that there were a couple (likely more than a couple) weeds in the yard that day that could have used pulling, and probably some clutter on the end of the kitchen table (or maybe on the counter next to the phone). But knowing Mum, those things were not anywhere in her mind as she knelt on the grass next to Rachel. For her that moment transcended weeds and clutter and worry, and consisted only of the joy her child gave her, and the love she was making present to her child.

Jesus recognized something imperfect in Martha's love—that it had lost its focus on the beloved. Even the love of a mother for her child can be warped, very subtly, as when real concern for the child's safety becomes overbearing strictness, genuine warmth becomes smothering, or normal emotional expression becomes self-serving drama. Bethany recently said something that stuck with me. She was talking about Mum's presence in the family, using words like “quiet" and "patient." She then said that Mum was never "too much" of anything—meaning that in raising us she avoided the kinds of excesses I just described. Today we have lost the ancient principle of the Golden Mean, that the most virtuous behavior always avoids extremes, rather than pursues them. Mum's love for us was even-keeled, and so much the better for it. 

Mary's love is also purer than Martha’s because it's entirely focused on a person, and not distracted by things. Mum was like this as well. Anyone who knew her will tell you that it was almost impossible to get her to care about things—even pretty important things. One very early memory I have is from when Jeff and I were little, and the girls hadn't come along yet. We were all at the beach in Maine, and Mum lost her wedding ring when she was in the water, jumping in the waves with the two of us. Years later, when she shared the story with my wife Nancy, Mum related how losing the ring wasn't a big deal, that she simply hadn't been paying attention. She said, with a characteristic grin, "I had my two little boys with me—I just wanted to play with them." 

Almost 50 years later, those two boys (not so little any more), along with two girls (both adults and mothers by now) sat around Mum's bed as she drew her last few breaths on Earth. We know, of course, that this was not the end of her life of love, but rather the beginning of it in its fullness. The love exemplified by Mary, and lived by Mum throughout her earthly life, is nothing less than practice for Heaven. Martha's love, necessary as it is here on Earth, is no longer needed there. In the fully realized kingdom of God, there are no needs or even wants for us to fulfill for each other. We will be united with the One who is Love, or as C.S. Lewis puts it, we will literally be "in Love". I believe Mum is well on her way to this blessed goal. She truly chose the better part, and it shall not be taken from her.

Keefe - Real Presence Not Physical, Not Part of Fallen World, but Rather Restoration of it

A question over the physical presence of the risen Christ in the Eucharist has been rattling around the English-speaking Church for the past...