The machine does a real good job of absorbing and regurgitating counter culture. The best examples, at least in my experience, are from American television. The first was the neutralizing of the Beats, that was finished when Bob Denver, as Maynard G. Krebs, walked into American living rooms in the sitcom Dobie Gillis.
The hippies were subsumed once the major department stores started selling tie-dyed clothing, and Hip-Hop got theirs when Snap, Krackle and Pop hip-hopped their Rice Krispies box across the breakfast table.
It does take that willingness to give all and fail for a path that the machine can not co-opt.
I need to give this essay some more thought. The machine runs to fast at this moment
But I’d gently push back at the assertion that Jack’s prescription lies outside of the Christian tradition. I think it’s its (:) ) deeply buried heart. So deeply buried that the well needs folks to drag the wretched blocking boulders away with their bare hands. Jack’s encouraging this in his take on asceticism. The deep well is Paul’s‘when I am weak, then I am strong’ ‘the Powers come to and End in weakness’ Those who die (to will to power) Live. Kenosis
A river flows or it isn’t a river
But in flowing it’s doing nothing and achieving everything
An inspired piece of writing. It brought a few things to the surface for me. Bear with me. That picture of Jesus doesn't show him in his best light. I guess he didn't like his photo being taken. Especially while he was trying to get away from it all for a few days. Talking of which, 40 days asceticism in a lifetime. Then back to hanging out with tax collectors and prostitutes and whoever, drinking wine. For me, there are two motivations behind asceticism. 1. Self-loathing, and a general loathing of humanity. An attempt to escape from the facts of incarnation. 2. To better experience connection, to put aside worldly distractions and noise for a while, to pay better attention to the connection to core self and/or the divine, and then to return to the world better able to continue living. You can probably guess which of those two I'm more aligned to. There is a personal narrative behind everyone's positioning on this, I'd wager. The story so far of our relationships with life. Perceived successes and failures. Justifications and rationalisations. Integration and transcendence vs self-denial and renunciation.
One of the best and most practically encouraging essays I have ever read. Thank you so much! This whole exchange has been really helpful. God bless you.
My guess is that what you both are writing about is what is actually happening and will increasingly be the experience. Food, water, shelter, social decencies and social interaction are necessities not options for those with responsibilities. And trying to make sense of the work involved is part of the deal, which does not leave a lot of wiggle room. The machine will not provide the sense, and no 'answer' will be an answer. There will be help along the way, but of the provisional kind, time to take a breather and be grateful. I don't see it stopping.
Some really excellent developments of the concept here - I like how you say an ideal has to be impossible to not be assimilated into the Machine.
I don't think that's entirely true, but I think that gets at something true and extremely important.
But I must disagree with your conclusion, that asceticism does not benefit the individual practicing it. Jack also says otherwise.
If our will to power is what separates us from God, understood not as some demanding autocrat in the sky but as the source of all being, wonder, and mystery, then living an ascetic life connects you to wonder, magic, and mystery in a deep way.
And this has to be tested in experience, not theory. When I strive to live more "simply", I find myself opening up to the magic and mystery of life, to a sense of wonder. And arguably, this sense of the "sacred" is what we are all after.
It is also a question of degree, and not necessarily an impossible, formless ideal - although I find that concept useful, as I said.
It is also important to point out in this connection that ascetcism that becomes "extreme" is actually an exercise in will to power - and this has always been known since ancient times in spiritual traditions.
The Buddha explicitly rejected extreme asceticism, after having tried it and excelled in it.
True ascetcism lies at the "still center", and avoids extremes. If this is true, them true ascetcism is neither formless nor impossible.
Surely, the Machine can easily assimilate extreme ascetcism and make it into a product, a fashionable lifestyle, etc, because they are both forms of will to power.
But simplicity? Inhabiting the still center, which isn't flashy or glamorous? I am not su sure!
Here is a quotation from Voillaume's book. The second half of the book, from which this quote is taken, comprises retreast notes given by Fr Voillaume to those about to take their final vows as Little Brothers.
"In order to avoid self-indulgent reversions, your offerings in immolation should be made with your eyes fixed on Jesus' Cross and not on your own. By getting away from yourselves you will lighten your own sufferings (partly by forgetting them) and you can really then offer them up with greater freedom. For, you must always remember, it is not the suffering or the trouble itself that has redemptive virtue, but the attitude of oblation in it, the love it arouses, and the degree to which it is united with the Passion of Christ. The natural flow of our life as Little Brothers, is for our inclusion, with all our personal sufferings in the great current of Jesus' Passion, and the passion of the world."
The knock out punch comes with those last words, " and the passion of the world".
I have a habit of expressing myself in a short-hand that is unhelpful. I apologise. With respect to Paul Kingsnorth I meant, simply, to suggest that the notion of 'disordered desires' seems to sit at the heart of his thought. Such being the case it seemed but a small step to imagine how something called 'ascetic practice' might be conceived of as means of ridding one's 'self' of that kind of burden.
I keep reading these pieces and sensing that, without realising it, I’ve been orienting slightly towards the concepts described.
But, what I then notice is that I’m slightly afraid of exploring them (in public) from the perspective of personal experience because they have already been so articulately described.
(1) Unlike you, I think this argument is close to that offered by Paul Kingsnorth with respect to his analysis of the roots of our contemporary crises; at least insofar as these are traced to the desire to sack God and appoint ourselves as the Arbiter of All Desire.
(2) Like you. although for different reasons, I am a little uncomfortable with idea of the 'will to power'.
(3) I think that although there is nothing wrong with 'asceticism' in theory or in practice, it is an unfortunate choice, here.
(4) It would have been useful, in a Christian sense, to ground the argument in Christ's kenosis; and to proceed, from there to talk in terms of 'self-emptying' in the pursuit of humility.
(5) I can only recommend St Charles de Foucauld as a model. And to suggest that a slim book by the first superior of the Little Brothers of Jesus, (based on the life of the saint), The Seeds of the Desert, as worth reading in this regard.
Many thanks, from an (almost) loyal, (somewhat) critical, (more-or-less) conventional Roman Catholic Yorkshire Man
The church I serve at is made of the homeless and former homeless and the addicted and formerly addicted, the criminal and former criminal with a few that don’t fit those categories. It serves those of similar ilk and provides material and spiritual help to the “least, the last, and the lost” The pastor looks like a bearded, bald, tattooed, big bellied viking. He has a horrendous past of prison, violence and crime, and yet has gained the ear of our mayor and the city council. This essay and Leahy’s essay for me is an erudite spiritual intellectualism, an empty soup of no value or nutrition to me and my fellow knowers of God.
The machine does a real good job of absorbing and regurgitating counter culture. The best examples, at least in my experience, are from American television. The first was the neutralizing of the Beats, that was finished when Bob Denver, as Maynard G. Krebs, walked into American living rooms in the sitcom Dobie Gillis.
The hippies were subsumed once the major department stores started selling tie-dyed clothing, and Hip-Hop got theirs when Snap, Krackle and Pop hip-hopped their Rice Krispies box across the breakfast table.
It does take that willingness to give all and fail for a path that the machine can not co-opt.
I need to give this essay some more thought. The machine runs to fast at this moment
But I’d gently push back at the assertion that Jack’s prescription lies outside of the Christian tradition. I think it’s its (:) ) deeply buried heart. So deeply buried that the well needs folks to drag the wretched blocking boulders away with their bare hands. Jack’s encouraging this in his take on asceticism. The deep well is Paul’s‘when I am weak, then I am strong’ ‘the Powers come to and End in weakness’ Those who die (to will to power) Live. Kenosis
A river flows or it isn’t a river
But in flowing it’s doing nothing and achieving everything
Ramble
Ramble
Thanks FFlatcaps
God Bless the White Rose
An inspired piece of writing. It brought a few things to the surface for me. Bear with me. That picture of Jesus doesn't show him in his best light. I guess he didn't like his photo being taken. Especially while he was trying to get away from it all for a few days. Talking of which, 40 days asceticism in a lifetime. Then back to hanging out with tax collectors and prostitutes and whoever, drinking wine. For me, there are two motivations behind asceticism. 1. Self-loathing, and a general loathing of humanity. An attempt to escape from the facts of incarnation. 2. To better experience connection, to put aside worldly distractions and noise for a while, to pay better attention to the connection to core self and/or the divine, and then to return to the world better able to continue living. You can probably guess which of those two I'm more aligned to. There is a personal narrative behind everyone's positioning on this, I'd wager. The story so far of our relationships with life. Perceived successes and failures. Justifications and rationalisations. Integration and transcendence vs self-denial and renunciation.
One of the best and most practically encouraging essays I have ever read. Thank you so much! This whole exchange has been really helpful. God bless you.
My guess is that what you both are writing about is what is actually happening and will increasingly be the experience. Food, water, shelter, social decencies and social interaction are necessities not options for those with responsibilities. And trying to make sense of the work involved is part of the deal, which does not leave a lot of wiggle room. The machine will not provide the sense, and no 'answer' will be an answer. There will be help along the way, but of the provisional kind, time to take a breather and be grateful. I don't see it stopping.
Some really excellent developments of the concept here - I like how you say an ideal has to be impossible to not be assimilated into the Machine.
I don't think that's entirely true, but I think that gets at something true and extremely important.
But I must disagree with your conclusion, that asceticism does not benefit the individual practicing it. Jack also says otherwise.
If our will to power is what separates us from God, understood not as some demanding autocrat in the sky but as the source of all being, wonder, and mystery, then living an ascetic life connects you to wonder, magic, and mystery in a deep way.
And this has to be tested in experience, not theory. When I strive to live more "simply", I find myself opening up to the magic and mystery of life, to a sense of wonder. And arguably, this sense of the "sacred" is what we are all after.
It is also a question of degree, and not necessarily an impossible, formless ideal - although I find that concept useful, as I said.
It is also important to point out in this connection that ascetcism that becomes "extreme" is actually an exercise in will to power - and this has always been known since ancient times in spiritual traditions.
The Buddha explicitly rejected extreme asceticism, after having tried it and excelled in it.
True ascetcism lies at the "still center", and avoids extremes. If this is true, them true ascetcism is neither formless nor impossible.
Surely, the Machine can easily assimilate extreme ascetcism and make it into a product, a fashionable lifestyle, etc, because they are both forms of will to power.
But simplicity? Inhabiting the still center, which isn't flashy or glamorous? I am not su sure!
Remarkable article and very helpful.
Here is a quotation from Voillaume's book. The second half of the book, from which this quote is taken, comprises retreast notes given by Fr Voillaume to those about to take their final vows as Little Brothers.
"In order to avoid self-indulgent reversions, your offerings in immolation should be made with your eyes fixed on Jesus' Cross and not on your own. By getting away from yourselves you will lighten your own sufferings (partly by forgetting them) and you can really then offer them up with greater freedom. For, you must always remember, it is not the suffering or the trouble itself that has redemptive virtue, but the attitude of oblation in it, the love it arouses, and the degree to which it is united with the Passion of Christ. The natural flow of our life as Little Brothers, is for our inclusion, with all our personal sufferings in the great current of Jesus' Passion, and the passion of the world."
The knock out punch comes with those last words, " and the passion of the world".
I have a habit of expressing myself in a short-hand that is unhelpful. I apologise. With respect to Paul Kingsnorth I meant, simply, to suggest that the notion of 'disordered desires' seems to sit at the heart of his thought. Such being the case it seemed but a small step to imagine how something called 'ascetic practice' might be conceived of as means of ridding one's 'self' of that kind of burden.
I keep reading these pieces and sensing that, without realising it, I’ve been orienting slightly towards the concepts described.
But, what I then notice is that I’m slightly afraid of exploring them (in public) from the perspective of personal experience because they have already been so articulately described.
Still, I have loved this essay exchange.
Thoughtful & thought-provoking. First thoughts:
(1) Unlike you, I think this argument is close to that offered by Paul Kingsnorth with respect to his analysis of the roots of our contemporary crises; at least insofar as these are traced to the desire to sack God and appoint ourselves as the Arbiter of All Desire.
(2) Like you. although for different reasons, I am a little uncomfortable with idea of the 'will to power'.
(3) I think that although there is nothing wrong with 'asceticism' in theory or in practice, it is an unfortunate choice, here.
(4) It would have been useful, in a Christian sense, to ground the argument in Christ's kenosis; and to proceed, from there to talk in terms of 'self-emptying' in the pursuit of humility.
(5) I can only recommend St Charles de Foucauld as a model. And to suggest that a slim book by the first superior of the Little Brothers of Jesus, (based on the life of the saint), The Seeds of the Desert, as worth reading in this regard.
Many thanks, from an (almost) loyal, (somewhat) critical, (more-or-less) conventional Roman Catholic Yorkshire Man
If you've got an allergy, you eat a basic diet and then slowly re-introduce things to find out what's been poisoning you.
Br. F- I hope you don't mind my replying at length here. Thank you for your indulgence. -Jack
The church I serve at is made of the homeless and former homeless and the addicted and formerly addicted, the criminal and former criminal with a few that don’t fit those categories. It serves those of similar ilk and provides material and spiritual help to the “least, the last, and the lost” The pastor looks like a bearded, bald, tattooed, big bellied viking. He has a horrendous past of prison, violence and crime, and yet has gained the ear of our mayor and the city council. This essay and Leahy’s essay for me is an erudite spiritual intellectualism, an empty soup of no value or nutrition to me and my fellow knowers of God.
Ellul was quite a chap. I would start with, 'Meaning of the City' . An absolute stunner.