Today after Mass, I went into the church hall to have a cup of tea and to talk to our organist Brenda. I showed her a book I was reading, The Inklings by Humphrey Carpenter, (I have read it before, but I like to read interesting books again, this will be the third or fourth reading I think) and she seemed interested, particularly in the list of signatures in the front of the book after a Ham Feast they all had in 1948. Among the signatories were, of course, J.R.R Tolkien, Christopher Tolkien, C.S Lewis, Lord David Cecil etc; Charles Williams was dead by 1948, so he is obviously not on the list. The Inklings was an informal literary ''society,'' a group of mature and intelligent men who met on occasion, in the pub (The Eagle and Child) or in Lewis' halls at Magdalen. They would discuss various fascinating topics (hardly anything contemporary) such as English literature, history, art, music, theology, apologetics, not seldom the works of eachother. Tolkien read many chapters of his ''new Hobbit'' (The Lord of the Rings) out to them in manuscript - but was often put off by the snorting of Hugo Dyson, who one day blurted out ''Oh not another sodding Fairy!'' All these meetings entailed a lot of beer and smoking (not so much during the War years, for obvious reasons). None of them were vegetarians, they were all politically and theologically conservative (they were mostly either Catholic or High Church Anglican), they were a fascinating group.
The subject of ''societies'' (in the formal sense) came up during our chat today. I am not a member of any society (anymore), not even a Library (although I still carry two library cards, I only use the University Library) or any ''movement.'' I was for a while a member of The National Autistic Society, but failed to renew my membership this year because I do not believe in the senseless appraisal of Autism as something inherently good itself; certainly autistic children and adults have extraordinary abilities, but these are at the expense of other fundamentally important human qualities. Some autistic people are unable even to communicate. Now, certainly raising ''awareness'' about the needs of autistic children is a good and charitable thing, but they are still incurably disabled.
I had once thought about joining The Latin Mass Society, but failed to do so because they officially champion the 1962 Liturgical books, and I can buy their magazine anyway. I understand that many current members joined years ago when the magazine wasn't readily available. I am not interested in the ''Faith Movement'' as I am not that interested in Science. Plus, I believe that the Genesis Creation story portrays an accurate theological picture of what actually happened. The complex business of ''days'' and there having been no light before the Sun and Moon etc may present logical difficulties, but who can fathom the immensity of Creation anyway, or who can tell the counsels of God that He has not revealed? I do not believe that human beings (created ''Good'' - in the profound theological sense - by God) ''evolved'' from an ''inferior'' state; and I do not believe that God would ''conceal'' something (behind a veil of allegory or whatever) so fundamentally important as the origin of the World and of Men. I think that the Genesis Creation story is treated somewhat unfairly by people today, very often sincere Christians, almost as unfashionable or out-of-date curtains or wall-paper!
I am also not a member of The Tolkien Society, since I do not approve of it.
Am I too ''negative'' or disparaging about societies? I would join something like a ''Latin'' society of some sort, or a Dante society (Tolkien and C.S Lewis were in fact members of the Oxford Dante Society) or an informal Tolkien society (so long as the readers were all Catholic) but they would have to be small and informal for me to be interested. But as Brenda reminded me, I am in fact already a member of a supreme society, and the best of them all - the Catholic Church!
The above photo depicts The Eagle and Child (or ''Bird & Baby'' as it was almost exclusively called) where the Inklings would meet on Thursdays. I wanted to go there when I was in Oxford a few months ago, but I wasn't sure exactly where it was at the time, or how to get there; plus Jonathan wasn't sure whether it would still be a decent pub! It would have been for Tolkien to drink there though, at least 60 years ago.
I used to work with autistic children,only at assistant level.The key to connecting, for me anyway,was to wait to be invited into their world view/perception and not insist on their becoming part of mine.
ReplyDeleteShadowlands, I am glad that you find my posts interesting. I too find your blog interesting.
ReplyDeleteI find Autism/Asperger Syndrome a fascinating topic, but I don't know enough about the subject (save personal musings) to post much on it. I did begin a post a little while back on ''perfectionism'' but when I read it, it just sounded self-important and rather arrogant.
What you say about being invited into their worlds I wholeheartedly agree with. I do not wish to be alone, but rather to be left alone (when it suits me that is). I enjoy good company (I have a lot of it at church), so long as the conversation is civilised, intelligent etc. Naturally, when I am sad or grieved or angry, I do not wish to be disturbed by someone no-doubt sincere, but would rather them keep a more understanding silence. My dogs are like that; they understand how I feel. In many ways, dogs are more important than some people.
Do recall that faith and reason are not contrary to each other - I write as one with degrees in both science (double major in maths and physics, honours in astronomy) and theology (major in philosophy). There is something staggeringly beautiful about Genesis, and about what scientists have uncovered about the workings of Creation, and the wondrous mysteries of deep time.
ReplyDeleteI find your attitudes toward science & scripture a little worrying. Some of the comments you make are the sort which contribute to driving an unneccesary wedge between science and Christianity in public perception (thus making Christianity look pretty silly in the eyes of unbelievers).
ReplyDeleteYou don't seem to do enough justice to reason, which the Catholic tradition, unlike some other Christian traditions, takes very seriously.
You reject any sort of evolution, yet you admit to not being interested in science which makes me wonder if your conclusions are based on the fact that you are poorly informed.
You say you "believe every word of the Genesis Creation story", by which you appear to mean you interpret it as a historical & scientific account. Since it was never meant to be such an account (and its internal features clearly indicate a mythical genre, even though, of course, it does contain historical content under this form), rather than showing fidelity, one does violence to the text in interpreting it in such a way... .(I find many people who confidently proclaim their allegiance to a fundamentalist view of scripture frequently haven't actually studied it very carefully. I don't know if this is the case with you).
Recognising the literary genre of Genesis doesn't mean we are saying God has "concealed" anything. The text very clearly and very effectively teaches the "origin of the World and of Men", i.e. God (as a piece of theological writing written for the sake of our salvation it is not concerned with scientific mechanisms). To use allegory is not an inferior form of teaching nor is it beneath God. Let's not forget that Christ taught in parables.
We must certainly be wary of the abuse of science (e.g. evolutionary theories) to undermine the faith, but we mustn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Likewise, we must be wary of those who would dismiss the texts of scripture, but, again, we mustn't throw the baby out with the bathwater - that is, we mustn't abandon appropriate interpretative methods - which are permitted by the Church - in the name (supposedly) of fidelity to scripture.
cf.
Vatican II, Dei Verbum, esp. paras 12-13
Pius XII, Humani Generis, esp. para 38;
Pius XII, Divino Afflante Spiritu, esp. paras 35-39
''Blogowner,'' many thanks for your comment. I did not intend a passing comment about science (which, as I say, I am not that interested in) to escalate into a debate. The post was, afterall, about my aversion to joining societies.
ReplyDeleteWhat you say about ''fundamentalist'' approaches to the Scriptures, despite what I said in my post, I actually agree with. I shall delete what I said about ''every word'' since my views of Genesis are a little more complex than that. Creation is a vast complexity beyond the imagination of any one man afterall.
As regards appearing silly or opposing reason, I am not quite sure what you mean. I do not doubt the validity of reason, since faith and reason are, as Pope John Paul II so eloquently put it, the two wings that elevate the Soul to the Most High. What I object to, however, is the rejection of the Genesis Creation story as a mere fairy-story, with no worth in any theological or literary sense. Unfashionable furniture, as I said.
Science very often undermines the Faith, eugenics, cloning etc; my lack of interest in science is, however, nothing to do with fundamentals like that.
Patricius Have you heard of the book,The Genesis Enigma by Andrew Parker? It uses science to confirm the order of creation that Genesis claims.
ReplyDeleteShadowlands, no I had never heard of that book, but I think that I shall look out for it. Thanks o/
ReplyDeleteJust out of curiosity, why do you disapprove of the Tolkien Society?
ReplyDeleteToo bad we live in the post-Inklings era. I would have liked to have parked myself in a corner of their table with a slab of beef and some wine (not crazy about beer), and just listened (always better to keep the trap shut when you have nothing worth contributing!).
Regarding science I'm with Patricius here. I'm not really in the slitest bit interested in it either. I have my own view of Genesis, which is much the same. I guess this is a digression from the subject of the post though.
ReplyDeleteI belong to a small lay society in our parish called Societas Sancti Gregorii Magni. We arrange traditional masses, which unfortunately are few due to the fact that we have to arrange for priests to come here to Finland from abroad. We usually have informal conferences on the traditional liturgy afterwards.
Anita, it is hard to explain but it is a complex mixture of my general disapproval of general Tolkien ''fandom'' and my general aversion of large societies.
ReplyDeleteYes it is too bad that we live in the post-Inklings era. If I could go back in time, I wish that I could sit in (invisibly of course) and listen to them. It is a shame that they kept no minutes book though, I am sure Warnie Lewis could have done as he was a good diarist, but we have only the faintest and scarecest material to ''reconstruct'' an Inklings. Sigh...
Coming back to Tolkien Societies, I may in fact do a post on it sometime soon. When I get my act together that is!
Paul Knight, I like small societies with a traditional and sensible ''agenda'' (what other word is there?). I would certainly approve of your Society of St Gregory the Great. I wish I had the sense to establish or organise some sort of small-scale ''society;'' but my attempts at organising a Mass of the Dead for J.R.R Tolkien himself yesterday met with considerable opposition.
ReplyDeleteShadowlands -
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting the details of 'The Genesis Enigma'. I have just ordered a copy, and look forward to seeing what Dr.Parker has to say: as a Catholic and a scientist, I have been wondering about this very issue for some time. I am of the opinion that as Divine Revelation is by definition truth, and science seeks the truth, there cannot ultimately be conflict between the two. Any apparent conflicts must be due to the limitations of human reason, understanding and language, and the fact that God has not yet revealed everything about himself to mankind. What I do know is that as I appreciate the elegant workings of the universe, I also grow in appreciation of God's work.
M.
Patricius,
ReplyDeleteI think it's quite sad that it didn't materialise. Do you mind saying why (just out of curiosity)?
Paul Knight, well, I spoke to Gordon (the MC at the church) and he suggested to me that we might have Requiem Masses on Ferial days, since Ferial masses are a bit boring. However, when the cantor and choir arrived, I mentioned it to one of them, who went upstairs to practice the Propers, but when one of the others arrived, he came downstairs into the Sacristy with his arms folded (after what sounded like an argument upstairs) and complained about it. He also laughed when I said who the Mass was to be for.
ReplyDeleteI can't blame them, it was short notice for them. Gordon mentioned it to me, but not to anyone else it seems. I was rather peeved about it to be honest.