Metanoia Magazine Vol 3 No. 3

metanoia

CONTRIBUTORS

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF & CREATIVE DIRECTOR

Maghee Fleischer

DESIGNERS

Amelie Garnand

Juliette Halisky

Meg Meehan

Evelyn Polley

Sophia Zamoyta

EDITORS

Amelia Coleman

Madeline Davis

Samuel Schirra

Thomas Stanford

ADVISORY BOARD

Kathleen Sullivan, PhD

Daniel McInerny, PhD

Eric Jenislawski, PhD

Niall O’Donnell

Daniel Spiotta

Lianna Youngman

ART

Halyna Charba

Bernadette Eidem

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

Dear Reader,

MISSION STATEMENT: 9

Metanoia is a student magazine that showcases the height of Christendom College excellence in the areas of journalism, art, and design. It is meant to inspire thoughtful conversation among the student body and the broader Christendom community. Metanoia articles address issues concerning society, our immediate surroundings, and ourselves. Metanoia allows promising students the opportunity to develop their talents so that they can use contemporary media to “Restore All Things in Christ.”

In the words of St. John Paul II, each of us is “entrusted with the task of crafting their own life…to make it a work of art, a masterpiece.” This is one of the aims of Christendom College: to teach students not only how to live but also how to live well. Hence, the theme for this issue: the art of life. From the art of true masculinity, to the art of suffering, to the art of goodbyes, this issue seeks to highlight key lessons for life at Christendom and beyond. I would like to dedicate this issue to our beloved Dr. O’Donnell, President of 32 years, who has cultivated Christendom College to be the masterpiece that it is and who is an exemplar of living well.

This issue of Metanoia in particular is a work of art, a labor of love, and I would like to thank the many people who made it possible. Life is a work of art: go live it and live it well. Create your masterpiece. I wish you all a very fond farewell.

In Christ, Editor-in-Chief Maghee Fleischer

"So fill to me the parting glass And drink a health whate'er befalls Then gently rise and softly call Good night and joy be to you all!"

Maghee Fleischer, Editor-in-Chief and Creative Director

THE ART OF GOODBYES the

parting glass

by ANNIE CHAVEZ '24

“So fill to me the parting glass And drink a health whate'er befalls Then gently rise and softly call Good night and joy be to you all!”

ART by HALYNA CHARBA '24

When I first came to Christendom as a fresh man, I had never heard an Irish song in my life. Now, having graduated this December and be coming an official “alumna”, I can’t listen to them without a flood of memories crashing in and feel ing an overwhelming sense of gratitude.

The Parting Glass I will carry with me for the rest of my days, and I have noth ing other than Christendom to thank for my introduction to it. The song ultimately en capsulates the relationship between the concept of “goodbyes” and the tem poral world.

Now, to get a little Christendom-y here for a second, the etymology of goodbye is that it is a contraction of "God be with ye," which ultimately expresses an act of entrustment to the Father. This means that when we say good bye we are acknowledging the beauty of a shared moment and are wishing the other well to the Father.

In this sense, goodbyes can remind us that we are not made for the temporal world, but for eternity with God. Every time we say goodbye, the heartache, the joy for what was, and the excitement for what’s next are reminders that this world is finite and that we must make the most of it in God’s eyes.

Throughout my last semester, I found myself reflecting on my time at Christendom, from the friendships that I have gained and lost, to a myriad of experiences and classes that have shaped the person I have come to be. While time did fly by, it was also beautiful to see how far I had come. I’m sure many seniors are feeling those same waves of nostalgia as they go through this spring. Christendom was a home for the last four years. Granted, it may have been a small home, but it was within this time and place, a multitude of experiences folded. Nevertheless, the simple reality is,

Christendom offered us a great theological foundation and a powerful Catholic community, and for these I am forever grateful.

Next, JPII says to live in the present with enthusiasm. Here, Pope John Paul II emphasizes the importance of making the most of the opportunities and experiences that are happening right now. Certainly, we can think about the past and the future, but don’t dwell on them. We can’t spend the rest of our days wishing something in our life had gone differently or worrying about

more important.

I will never forget how fast my final days on campus came and went. It felt like a whirlwind and I could barely keep up. I had just turned in my thesis, given my presentation and defense,

ter the other kept happening, but taking the time to appreciate all the little things had never been

Little instances that brought me such joy like end-of-the-day Chapel visits, watching the sunset over the Shenandoah River, spotting Luke on your trip for office hours, driving down Happy Creek and blasting music, weekly trips to The Apple House, or even getting called “baby” by Ms. Debbie at lunchtime. It’s these moments we often take for granted, and it’s these little moments that we will miss the most.

So yes, we should do what we can, and genuinely experience all the little things, but also we should be going to that senior pub night, going to that Quodlibet, and making memories that we will cherish for years to come. Then, when it’s time to say goodbye, we can recognize that we’re acknowledging the end of a shared moment between ourselves and those around us.

By living with enthusiasm for life, we cultivate a better sense of joy and purpose, making our goodbyes worth so much more.

Finally, JPII says to look forward to the future with confidence. Each day always brings some sort of unknown and effectively begins a new chapter in the story of our lives.

It’s easy to feel anxious or uncertain about what lies ahead (trust me, been there, and done that, and still do that sometimes), but the effective way to deal with it? Go to God. We are called to cast all our worries and anxieties onto Him (1 Peter 5:7) because, at the end of the day, He is the only one who truly knows us and how our story is meant to play out. By embracing the future with confidence in God, we can maintain a sense of optimism and readiness to seize new opportunities that come our way, pursue our goals, and continue growing in His love.

To my fellow seniors, we’ve seen classes before us leave and begin the next phase of their lives. If you’ve ever worked graduation before,

Christians

this transitional period with a sense of purpose, gratitude, and readiness to take on whatever gets thrown our way.

A prime example of a heartfelt goodbye is one straight from Dr. O’Donnell himself, who is con cluding his presidency of Christendom College this academic year.

“One of my favorite Pontiffs, Pius XII, once told a close friend ‘Life is nothing but a series of goodbyes.’ There is truth in that but to avoid melan cholia—let us recall also that C.S. Lewis said, ‘Christians never say goodbye.’ We, of course, as Catholics, pray for and look forward to a glorious reunion within the Heart of God in Heaven. My time here as President has been filled with count less graces and joys. I look forward, in my future status, to continue to teach and to contribute to the great adventure called Christendom College!”

I look forward, in my future status, to continue to teach and to contribute to the great adventure called Christendom College!"

Wisdom from my grandfather

MASTERING THE OF SUFFERING

By MEG MEEHAN

The kitchens of the mid-twentieth century were given new life and flavor with the publication of Julia Child’s MasteringtheArtofFrenchCooking in 1961: a work that bestowed upon every domicile a clear roadmap to gastronomic gratification—a great boon for the hitherto desolate palates of postwar America.1 Unfortunately for us gourmets, though Julia left behind detailed instructions for a sumptuous Boeuf Bourguignon, life equips us with no obvious recipe to overcome the universal problem of suffering. This dreary reality is a fact of life and a marker of the human condition: a tedious balancing act in which we too often find ourselves stumbling, our lives lacking richness and layered nuance as we pathetically masticate on what remains of our fate’s canned creamof-mushroom soup, longing for the messianic advent of the analogy’s Julia Child. Grieving the passing of a loved one certainly renders the tragedy of a soufflé collapsing in the oven trivial, yet by approaching both the trough of our deepest suffering and the peak of culinary artistic achievement with a common attitude, we can do more than just get through it: we can rise victo rious from even our most grievous defeats.

Perhaps the link between the joyful energy radiating from every facet of Child’s creative endeav ors—from French Cooking television career—to as gloomy a topic as suf fering may seem nebulous, yet the two are related insofar as both exercises demand tremendous skill of the practitioner. Look no further for a model than a man by the name of Bill Peff ley, my grandfather and father of Christendom alumni (Fr. Francis Peffley and Natia Meehan). Familiar with struggle and hardship him self, Bill dedicated his life to Our Lady and devoted his heart to her Son. His personal faith life was an inspiration for many

and, despite his passing, his legacy survives through his poetry, music, and wisdom that he so lovingly passed on to his family. Although Bill did not study at the Le Cordon Bleu with Julia, he approached suffering the same way she approached cooking: as an art. In fact, “ART” is itself the guide for his method. It is a trifold experience that requires one to Accept, Receive, and Thank. Think of this approach as a recipe to unite our suffering with God’s will; sanctifying it while positively transforming ourselves simultaneously.

Accept

Acceptance is the first step in the reframing of one’s suffering. Though generally defined as a person’s recognition or acknowledgment of a situation, the kind of acceptance particular to one’s suffering moves beyond simple realization (i.e., the knowledge that you are experiencing something). In this age of online sharing and social updates, we are all too often willing to acknowledge inconveniences and stagnate in complaining. At other times, we are unwilling to admit our wound and reject the recognition of pain, fooling ourselves into thinking that if we pretend our pain does not exist, then we get the better of it. These two extremes help to distinguish superficial, experiential pain from true suffering. We ought to acknowledge our pain without indulging or ignoring it. We cannot rush the ending of our pain (just as we cannot rush the rising of sourdough!). There must be acknowledgment of the process and the care to create an environment that allows for growth. The difference between recognizing a painful situation and accepting the pain of a situation lies in the disposition of the heart. More often than not, suffering is an internal condition of solitary hurt. True acceptance calls us to enter into our experience with trust and without attempts to protest it. Recognition is a good start, and our acceptance of suffering moves us beyond mere acknowledgment and toward a spiritual synchronization between ourselves and God. It is

only once we accept pain for the sake of participating in God’s will that our suffering is properly ordered. It calls for personal consent to the pain God has laid before us. Acceptance, therefore, is most truly an assent of the heart.

Receive

Receiving one’s suffering is the second transformative element for our pain to become sanctified. “Reception” usually implies “getting,” but the reception of suffering in which we are called to partake goes beyond possession. Receiving can also entail a physical or mental experience that we go through—not under, over, or around. The greatest example of this dichotomy of reception is found in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. As Catholics, we “receive” the Eucharist rather than “eat” or “consume,” as a reminder that the physical action is fused with a spiritual and metamorphosed reality of our internal state. We do not simply “get” the host, we receive The Lord. He is a guest hosted by our hearts. This is the kind of reception needed when encountering suffering. Just as others receive company in their homes, we ought to receive suffering; welcoming the experience despite the difficulty. However, suffering is usually an unexpected guest, and more often than not, we dislike people showing up unannounced for fear of their interrupting our day, or worse, their staying too long. After all, guests usually require food and entertainment. Luckily, just as charcuterie is excellent for last-minute dinner parties, the holy Eucharist is the ideal nourishment for suffering.

Finally, with a heart accepting and receptive to God’s will, give thanks. Gratitude is perhaps the hardest step in coming to terms with suffering, but it is the most vital for spiritual growth. Thankfulness goes beyond appreciation in that it is necessarily an expressive state born from the consciousness that we have received some kind of benefit. Gratitude gives our deliberate acceptance and reception of suffering a clear, and meaningful direction, otherwise, we are no better than Île Flotantes, only rather than floating islands of

meringue in a creme anglaise, we risk becoming listless souls that suffer without purpose. The struggle is, however, that thanking God for the good in our lives is easy, but thanking Him for our difficulties is daunting. Much depends on our ability to cast aside our expectations for our lives and plunge ourselves wholeheartedly into the depths of God’s design. If we accept and receive our suffering, our hearts will be “proven” enough to glorify Him through thanks. With this understanding, our thanks to God are motivated by the recognition of the graces He bestows on us through our suffering, and by thinking in terms of “ART,” our suffering can fortify our spiritual lives. Just like Julia Child transformed the bland platters of dining rooms across the country with her artistic approach to cuisine, you and I can transform our daily sufferings through Christ and His cross into something rich and tasteful via acceptance, reception, and thanksgiving.

MATER CHRISTIANORUM

By BILL PEFFLEY

For her, with her, in and through her, All our life we live, All we are is offered to her, All we have we give

Ours to face the Adversary Self to combat hurled; Faith in Christ and trust in Mary Overcome the world!

For the good of Church and Nation Faithful shall we stand Keeping vigil at our station For God's ev'ry command.

Truth-filled mind our lance for error Thrusted firm and sure, One bright sword for Evil's terror: Heart courageous and pure,

When the battles all have ended And her heart has won, With her may we reign ascended In her glorious Son!

Maria! Maria! O Mater Christianorum

Not all are called to be artists in the specific sense of the term. Yet, as Genesis has it, all men and women are entrusted with the task of crafting their own life: in a certain sense, they are to make of it a work of art, a masterpiece."

ST. JOHN PAUL II letter to artists

PERPETUAL ADOLESCENCE and Masculinity

by JOHN PAUL VANDER WOUDE '24

n the past few years, I have heard friends, family, mentors, and speakers say we are seeing a decline in masculinity.

I have read that fatherhood is falling apart, boyhood is skyrocketing, and that men struggle to find meaning in today’s world. In short, there is a crisis of masculinity. I would like to offer a few thoughts on this crisis and outline two different responses to it. Nothing that I have to say is a new discovery and all that I say has been learned from my father or my father figures. Nonetheless, I hope to pass along some of the pearls that I have learned from those wiser than me.

As I said, those who have eyes can see that there is a crisis amongst men today. I call this crisis perpetual adolescence. An adolescent desires responsibility, but does not possess the maturity, self-control, and capacity for self-gift to live responsibly. In short, a male adolescent is a boy who desires to be a man but does not act like a man. Certain cultural factors cause this perpetual adolescence, which (in man-fashion) I have listed:

I. INSIGNIFICANT RESPONSIBILITIES & LOW EXPECTATIONS IN THE HOME

II. PASSIVE CONSUMPTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL ENTERTAINMENT

III. DIVORCE CULTURE

First, boys today are often given little responsibility and have low expectations set by their parents. The typical 10-year-old boy’s day consists of being woken up by his mom, eating the breakfast his mom made him, getting picked up by the bus, sitting in school from 8:00 AM-3:00 PM, getting dropped off at home by the bus, doing homework while watching TV, eating dinner, going to soccer practice, coming home, doing homework while playing video games, maybe sweep the floor, going to bed. Unfortunately, this description also closely fits the typical 17-year-old boy’s daily routine. There is not much that a typical boy is respon sible for from the ages of 10-17. I think back to stories like Farmer Boy or Father and I Were Ranchers and realize how much boys used to fulfill serious and necessary functions upon which life depended. My grandfather lived on a farm in South Dakota, and his father relied on him and his three siblings to help take care of the animals and the crops so that they could survive. There even had to be a serious discussion between him and his father about whether he could play football at the local high school, because doing so would mean extra milking, feeding, plowing, and reaping for the rest of the family. As a boy growing up in the 21st century, it is hard to imagine having such weighty responsibilities that would directly impact those around me.

II.

Second, technology is emasculating boys and men. I would like to highlight three “services” that technology provides to boys today: video games, social media, and pornography. Video games suck the time out of boys' days. They provide an outlet for boys to think that they are accomplishing something, but in re ality, they are an addictive mirage. Social media, too, is consuming boys and their time. Something is deadening about a 17-year-old lounging on a couch while swiping his thumb up and down with his eyes locked on a gaudy screen, occasionally grinning or snickering to himself. Social media absorbs a boy’s time by making him sit back and be entertained passively when he could be filling that time by taking initiative and chasing dreams. Finally, pornography is obliterating manhood before our very eyes, quite literally. Its addictive allure traps boys in a mindset of exploitation, taking, and self-gratification. Such a self-centered, adolescent attitude is the antithesis of the protector, provider, and self-giver identity that men should em body.

The third factor causing perpetual adolescence is divorce culture. There are three "relationship cultures" that make up divorce culture as a whole: feel ing-centered dating culture, hookup culture, and divorce culture proper. Dating culture amongst teens and college students today is largely centered on feelings. Now feelings do play a role, but are not nearly as important as commitment, communication, and self-giving. Many guys will break up with their girlfriends as soon as they “lose feelings for them.” Such emotional and often rash decisions grooms the guy to leave a woman as soon as he is not “feeling it.” A more extreme part of divorce culture is hookup culture. Rampant in college especially, guys will seek one-night stands with girls to satisfy their sexual longings. Two years ago, I was told a female perspective on hookup culture by a friend of mine at another college. My friend knew a girl who had been convinced by a boy to stay the night in his room and have sex. The next day, the girl walked over to greet the boy while he was standing with his friends, and he pretended that he did not know her. The girl was absolutely crushed because she thought they had established an emotional connection, but the boy could not have cared less. Hookup culture does not stop in college; it continues into marriages and directly leads to divorce. Lastly, divorce culture proper is where many of the factors I have mentioned come to a head. Ever since boyhood, men are accustomed to not having responsibility, passively being entertained by technology, and breaking girls' hearts. It is no wonder that many men do not have the responsibility, initiative, and commitment to sustain a marriage when life gets tough. The solution has been drilled into them since a young age: “I’m not feeling it, so I’m moving on.”

These three factors (insignificant domestic responsibilities, technology, and divorce culture) are sucking the authentic masculine spirit from boys. Instead, boys are finding themselves frozen in perpetual adolescence for decades because they have not been given the tools to remove themselves from their self-centered ways. So, put simply, we have a big problem. And because men are inclined to solve problems, I would like to propose a solution to this problem. It is a two-step solution:

Step #1: TAKE CHARGE OF MY LIFE

Step #2: LIVE FOR OTHERS

Take charge of my life. The reason for this is simple: I should first put my life in order before I try to put other people’s lives in order. Below are six ways to take charge of our lives. These will help us exceed low expectations, escape the shackles of technology, and enhance our capacity to commit.

6.

Find a Mufasa. Seek out a wise mentor who can guide you as a man. This can be through reading, personal interaction, or podcasts.

5.

Change Oil & Grill Dogs. Learn hands-on life skills like car work, grilling, lawn care, gardening, and carpentry. Competency breeds confidence.

1.

Pray for Grace. Ask God to give you the grace to take responsibility for your life.

2.

Grab a Pen. Write down your short-term, midterm, and long-term goals. Be specific and create deadlines. Challenge yourself.

3.

Game Plan. Make a detailed plan for how you will achieve each of your goals. Be practical and prudent but also ambitious.

4.

Do Not Disturb. Do not get dis tracted. Relentlessly execute your game plan with discipline and con sistency. Put your phone in grayscale mode, disable addictive apps, and leave it where you cannot see it while you grind.

Live for others. This is the most important step. I have achieved manhood when I can live and lay down my life for those around me. To live for others, I must detach myself from myself to better focus on God, family, friends, and all people. Another way of saying this is “self-gift.” Giving of myself necessarily requires greater responsibilities; it eliminates time wasted on technology, and it deepens my sense of commitment to rise above the muck of divorce culture. Self-gift helps me shake off the handcuffs of perpetual adolescence, thus preparing me to step into mature manhood. Here are five ways to live for others.

The crisis of perpetual adolescence is running rampant. Boys are being sedated by low expectations. They are enslaved by technology. Divorce culture is devouring their capacity for commitment. Yet, there is a way out. Men can reclaim themselves by taking charge of their lives and living for others. By taking these two steps, boys can emerge from adolescence and cross the threshold into manhood.

5.

Get Married and Raise a Family. There is no “me” in marriage. It is a united “we.” Your mission is to love, protect, defend, and provide for your spouse. This requires a total gift of self. Becoming a father is the ultimate call to responsibility for a man. Do not simply assent to this call; seize it. Getting married and raising a family presents the occasion to die to yourself, live for others, and become the man that you and God want you to be.

1.

Morning Offering. Offering your day up to Christ is a way to say, “Jesus, my life is not my own. I do everything today through you and for you.”

2.

Wash the Dishes. Do your required daily duties especially when you don’t want to. This is a sacrifice. Whether it is cleaning your room, cleaning the toilet, or sweeping the floor, performing these tasks is a way of living for others.

3.

Take Your Little Sister Out for Lunch. Impart your wisdom charitably to those who look up to you. This takes a generous heart. Offering to take mentees out for meals provides a great context for such conversations.

4.

Give Up Your Seat. A man should look for opportunities to help those in need. If a mother and her baby get on a bus, offer her your seat. If an old lady drops her groceries, pick them up. If only two people are cleaning up from an event, lend a hand.

A DEFENSE OF MIMETIC ART

by WILLIAM CONNOR '24

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is a commonly used expression in our highly relativistic post-modern world. It is an expression that is often bandied about in post-modern man’s appraisal of art. The expression means beauty is subjective and has no real standard. It means what one person finds beautiful another may find repulsive. While there is certainly room for personal taste in art, there still remains an objectivity to artistic beauty. St. Thomas Aquinas defines beauty in the following way: “for beautiful things are those which please when seen” (id quod visum placet).1 For a thing to be considered beautiful St.

Thomas requires three things to be present in a subject, namely, proportion (consonantia), integrity (integritas), and clarity (claritas). If one or more of the three are lacking in a work of art, the piece cannot be considered beautiful. Furthermore, according to the Aristotelian-Thomistic tradition beautiful art must also be mimetic. This means true art must re-present reality in a way that is pleasing, recognizable, and beneficial to man and the culture he inhabits. Not only is this mimetic quality of re-presenting reality in works of art often lacking in modern and post-modern art movements, but modern art is also missing

one, or more often, all of the three requirements for objective beauty laid out by St. Thomas. For these reasons, modern “art” cannot be considered beautiful and cannot even be considered art because modern art, by and large, lacks these qualities that make a thing true good and beautiful.

What I would like to focus on here is the art movement known as Surrealism. Surrealism presents reality as illogical and unknowable. In the movement man is often depicted as an absurd, dead, complex machine; he is depicted as matter-in-motion that is destined for the void.

-dominated cultures. The movement sacrifices and replaces mimetic re-presentation for an inward turn, as it were, into modern man’s damaged and dark soul; and it is this dark and damaged soul that is re-presented in Surrealism.

Some of the defining characteristics that are common in the movement are as follows: fear, agony, despair, absurdity, erotic symbolism, irrationality, and dark humor.2 The art historian and philosopher Hans Rookmaaker makes clear that Surrealist artists were against “personality, conscience, beauty as an aim, talent, artistry, even the very will to live…their aim was a liberation of life, in every respect, to free man from this strange world that holds him in a thousand ways…

Take for example, Pable Picasso’s 1935 Surrealist painting, Head of a Woman (Olga Picasso). It depicts Picasso’s partner, Olga Khokhlova, in an abstract and distorted style. This piece does not re-present reality, it distorts and skews it. It is not mimetic, but anti-mimetic, and therefore not art. The piece lacks the characteristic proportion, integrity, and clarity and thus cannot be considered beautiful based on the guidelines given to us by the Aristotelian-Thomistic tradition.

I juxtapose Pablo Picasso’s Head of a Woman (Olga Picasso) with Jan van Eyck’s 1434-36 painting, Virgin and Child with Canon Van der Paele. The piece is widely considered van Eyck’s most realized and ambitious work. The painting is oil-on-oak panel and depicts the Madona and Child enthroned and flanked by Saints Donatian and George. The painting's donor, Joris van der Paele, is re-presented kneeling before the apparition of the saints. Jan van Eyck had a remarkable talent for capturing and mimetically re-presenting human nature with oil paint and brush. The piece possesses the characteristic integrity, clarity, and proportion that is indicative of an Aristotelian-Thomistic understanding of objective aesthetic beauty. What van Eyck shows us is man qua man. The painting, instead of distorting reality, shows the viewer reality par excellence

St. Thomas says, “beauty consists in due proportion; for the senses delight in things duly proportioned, as in what is after their own kind.”4 The key to understanding what St. Thomas means

here is understanding the phrase “as in what is after their own kind.” The senses delight in mimetic re-presentation because we see something of ourselves, or something we readily recognize that exists in nature, and this elicits delight in us. When we behold Picasso’s piece, we see a vague, crude, distorted, and disproportionate re-presentation of human nature on display. On the other hand, when we behold van Eyck’s piece, we see something of ourselves re-presented in a proportionate and pleasing way. Everything in van Eyck’s piece is recognizable, or what is after our own kind. The proportionate quality of Jan van Ey ck’s work lends itself to transcendent contemplation, the end of art, while Picasso’s piece does not.

St. Thomas’ second re quirement, integrity, re quires that nothing be lack ing in what is due to the nature of being.5 Integrity in Thomistic-Aristotelian aesthetics refers to a certain completeness or wholeness that is necessary in the perfection of beauty. Aquinas says the following concerning integ rity: "'integrity" or 'perfection,' since those things which are im paired are by the very fact ugly.”

qua color. St. Thomas says, “for we call things beautiful when they are brightly colored.”7 Elsewhere Thomas says, “beauty or handsomeness arises when clarity and due proportion run together…So, beauty of body consists in this, that a person has well-proportioned limbs, together with a certain requisite clarity of col-

His re-presentation is deficient in the necessary qualities that make up an integrated human face. Whereas van Eyck brilliantly depicts

The third and final requirement for beauty is clarity or splendor of form (splendor formae). St. Thomas seems to mainly associate claritas with beauty

The color in a work of art helps give rise to the piece’s compositional form. In Picasso’s piece the vague form of a person can be discerned but the colors he chooses does not help one come to that realization. His choices in this regard seem random and illogical. Conversely, van Eyck’s color choice not only makes sense, but also adds to the brilliance of the piece’s compositional form.

You may be asking yourself, “so what if Surrealist art cannot be considered beautiful in an objective sense?” Or, “after all, it’s just a painting, what does it really matter in the grand scheme of things?” I argue that all art has a moral character because it is created by man, a moral actor, who is subject to the natural law. And the art he produces is vitally important for the flourishing of man and the culture he inhabits. Good art, beautiful art, is necessary for man’s well-being. The art we create and expose ourselves to is powerful and has great ramifications for our moral life and the culture at large. Not only is a culture’s art a mirror into the philosophi-

cal and theological beliefs that culture holds, but it is also serves as an opportunity for moral growth. This moral growth can be understood through Aristotle’s notion of Katharsis 9 Catharsis means a “cleansing”, or “clearing up” of our affective knowledge, namely, our emotions and feelings aroused in the contemplation of mimetic art.

To put it simply, mimetic artistic beauty has the potential to make man a more moral and rational creature. The fine arts accomplish this end through catharsis. Ideally, catharsis accomplishes a right alignment, as it were, of man’s emotions; through this process man becomes a more rational and moral actor. The emotions, or our affective knowledge, come under the sway of reason. This process is not immediate or even readily noticeable but requires long-term and continued exposure to mimetic art. This continued habitual exposure to beautiful art will create patterns in the way we think, view, and act in the world. This complex process happens all the time in our daily lives without it being readily apparent. The art we expose ourselves to matters a great deal. The arts draw us out of ourselves and into a virtual world, as it were, where we can partake in a simulated realm of moral decisions. It allows us to enter into this simulated realm where we can make moral decisions in an environment where the decisions will not necessarily bear any weight in reality. The importance of mimetic art ought not be underestimated.

The aesthetic experience is ultimately a stepping out of the commonplace workaday world and into the realm of the divine. Surrealist art does not aid man in this noble endeavor. Man is built for and desires the transcendent, and mimetic art helps us "taste" this transcendence in our experience of artistic beauty in the midst of our day-to-day life. This is why beautiful, mimetic art is so important for the individual man and the culture he inhabits.

"Humanity in every age, and even today, looks to works of art to shed light upon its path and its destiny..."

st. john paul ii | letter to artists

MAN'SSTAGENEXT THE FILM 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY

by MARK CERMAK '24

One joy of childhood that I cherish very dearly is the experience of opening a good novel and being pulled into it like it’s a portal to another world. One of the most recent times I had this pleasure was when I read Arthur C. Clarke’s famous novel 2001: A Space Odyssey. Both the film and the book push the imagination further than it may go in some of our most exotic dreams. Like Bowman, I was pulled into a world where my imagination worked hard to comprehend the astronomical wonders described to me. The movie, broken up into four parts, is eccentric. I shall summarize each of the four parts here, and then offer some thoughts on the movie, the questions it asks, and what a Catholic might take from it.

The story of 2001: A Space Odyssey literally millions of years ago, in a barren Af rican landscape where an advanced species of apes live their lives in fear of vicious leopards and solely focus on survival. One morning, the apes find an object, a non-natural black monolith in a perfect rectangular solid shape. In a later scene, one ape is squatting over a pile of bones, then looks at the monolith again. As it looks, something changes in its brain, or maybe even its soul, and the famous theme music comes in quietly. The ape picks up a bone and learns how to use it as a tool. In the next scene, its group is fighting the other group of apes at the watering hole again. This time, that ape uses the bone to kill one of the ene my apes, and the other enemy apes retreat in fear.

For the second part, the movie skips forward into the science fiction world you expect from such a movie. This film takes its time, playing classical music as you watch spacecraft drift through the silent world of outer space, while Dr. Floyd makes his way to the moon to investigate something bizarre found there—a black monolith. The discovery of the monolith on the moon unveils the eyes of man to a reality that has only existed in their imaginations so far: that ex

traterrestrial, intelligent, advanced beings do or did exist, and they left behind something to be found by humans, for some reason, good or evil. In a scene that mimics the appearance of the monolith to the apes, the astronauts look in wonder at the monolith on the moon, and the viewer is struck with suspense, amazement, and fear.

The next stage of the movie involves the solitary spaceship Discovery, traveling to Jupiter on a mysterious mission that even the crew knows little about. Crewmembers Poole and Bowman-are kept company by HAL, the supercomputer that runs the ship, an artificial intelligence. HAL starts acting abnormally. I will not give more detail here, so as not to spoil the movie. Instead, I will now move on to the fourth part, when the reaches its destination.

The last part of the movie in volves Bowman’s trip through the Star Gate, where the story seems to break through the walls of what film can do. It is hard to describe what Bowman finds without spoil ing, but I shall try to express what the end of the movie is all about. As the term “odyssey” would suggest, Bowman does come back to Earth, but when he does, he is changed profoundly. Somehow, through his adventure that boggles our imagination, driven somehow by an alien intelligence, Bowman becomes something that transcends man, the Star-Child. With a powerful flourish of music, the viewer is left wondering: what now?

The last part encourages the viewer to stretch his mind to accept things we may write off as impossible. " "

There are many aspects of the movie I could discuss. The music plays a profound role in the movie, especially in the first and last parts where there is no dialogue. With the music, we are told without words that the development of man from merely an advanced ape into a worker, a builder, and an artist has begun. For better or for worse, man now can make tools and expand his technology. Man will use this to achieve great things and to commit great

sins, and it all begins in a primitive wasteland. The scenes involving Poole, Bowman, and HAL are delightfully suspenseful; they commanded my attention as I watched the depths of outer space, the mystery of the mission, and the fear of just what HAL is capable of. This movie asks a question that is very important today: Because man, the rational animal, was created from the dust of the earth, can he make another being endowed with rationality as well, with the ability to think…and to will? What can an artificial intelligence achieve, and can it turn against men it is meant to serve?

Dream big, my fellow human!

The last part encourages the viewer to stretch his mind to accept things we may write off as impossible. Could wormhole travel be possible? Could there be aliens out there who influence us? If they do influence us, is it for good or for evil? Bowman becomes a Star-Child; can we become Star-Children ourselves?

This is one of my favorite movies now, and I want to address briefly some concerns Catholics might have with this movie. The idea that mankind came from apes, and the force that brought the apes to the level of humanity came from aliens, may be offensive to Catholics who know that man was created by God. Likewise, the idea that man could create a computer that seems to be a rational being with an intellect and a will may seem blasphemous as well,

though I think our modern world of AI shows that man can create something that at least seems rational. Whether or not HAL actually has free will is left ambiguous. The idea of man transcending his nature ought to concern people. Man should not try to remake himself, thinking he can do better than God. However, man can become something more than what he is now, since God’s grace can instill in us the theological virtues, and bring us to Heaven. Furthermore, at the end of time, our glorified bodies will manifest our having become something more than the thinking animals that we are. Remember when you read or watch it, 2001: A Space Odyssey is not a theological work. It is a work of imagination.

I personally recommend reading the book before watching the movie if you have the time, not because of a lack of justice done to the story by its director Stanley Kubrick, but because the story’s context and millions of years-long story with its confusing climax are much better understood when you have Arthur C. Clarke’s explication of it in your mind. My parents loved the movie, but they were bewildered by the last half hour of it, having not read the book. I believe we should indulge Kubrick and Clarke in their amazing work of art, and let them have the artistic license to lead us to ask great questions. Dream big, my fellow human!

THE ART OF TOLERANCE THE ART OF TOLERANCE

by TOM SULLIVAN '24

truth of Christ

Tmanded of the individual living in modern society. As is the case regarding all virtues, tolerance is a mean between extremes. Modern society has slipped into the practice of extreme tolerance, which is rooted in moral relativism and individualistic philosophies. In this article, I will distinguish between Thomistic tolerance and modern tolerance, explaining throughout why the Thomistic view is better for a moral society.

St. Thomas Aquinas never offers his own definition of tolerance but uses it synonymously with patience and endurance. To truly tolerate something means to endure it for the sake of the good. It is the proper response to immoral behavior and is one of permission, not of approval. This distinction fundamentally separates the two notions of tolerance. St. Thomas recognizes the immorality of prostitution but argues we ought to tolerate the practice because at the state and governmental level, prohibiting prostitution would be a logistical nightmare, requiring a coercive and heavily policed state. This type of state, argues St. Thomas, is a greater evil than prostitution itself. But at the individual level, addressing evil is quite necessary. Christ demonstrates this in the New Testament. Christ tolerated the behavior of Mary Magdalene. He did not scold or reprimand her but treated her with love and patience. He told her to sin no more, rectifying her behavior so that she could make strides in becoming a more virtuous person. He bears himself with generous warmth toward those who repent, and with compassionate

correction toward those who do not. Tolerance, explained by Aquinas and exercised by Christ, is the simple lesson we learned as children: love the sinner but hate the sin.

Unfortunately, modern society has taken this charitable and corrective understanding of tolerance and turned it into a harmful practice that fails to foster healthy behavioral growth in society. In recent years, tolerance has shifted in meaning to acceptance, losing its essential aspect of endurance. Modern tolerance means to accept, approve, or be indifferent to the behavior of others, regardless of the morality of the behavior. It is a negligent, live-and-let-live approach. Because of our radically individualistic and relativistic society, people no longer recognize evil as evil. The common ethical standards that bind us together have been abandoned. Abortion becomes a human right; homosexual unions are considered just as valid and licit as traditional marriage. This is what we’re told to tolerate, and by tolerate, I mean approve of and accept. This is not tolerance as St. Thomas understands it, for there is no acknowledgment of immorality. Today, people accept and approve of these practices either because they do not consider them evil or are utterly indifferent. But this is not how Christ interact ed with Mary Magdalene. Christ helped Mary Magdalene grow in virtue; He did

not let her continue in her sin. For a moral society to flourish, its people must acknowledge and address evil when it manifests itself. This starts with a recognition of evil as evil, something today’s society has seemingly lost.

Another contemporary example of how modern tolerance hinders a society can be seen in our culture's response to transgenderism. In the mainstream, if you are caught saying a man cannot become a woman, you’ve put yourself in danger of extreme public scrutiny, job termination, or even imprisonment. At the individual level, people are forbidden from speaking out against the cultural insanity that is transgenderism. Our culture demands that people accept and approve of all types of behavior, no matter how immoral they are. This is modern tolerance at work. It truly handicaps people in their efforts to offer correction and ethical direction as Christ did with Mary Magdalene.

Exercising true tolerance toward people is crucial to Catholic living. We, as Catholics, have an obligation to lead people to Christ, and this means being willing to speak up when necessary. Living in a diverse society means encountering people with

a wide variety of beliefs and practices, many of which are immoral. A common example pertinent to young Catholics is modern hookup culture. Many of us have friends, family, or relatives who engage in such behavior. It can be difficult to speak up against these things when it pertains to people you know and love. But speaking out is exactly what Christ did and what Catholics today must do. Admonishing the sinner is a spiritual work of mercy. Correction is not punishment. God judges and punishes people according to their actions; it is our duty to encourage good behavior in people. Thomistic tolerance seeks the good of the individual through charity and patience. We will always encounter immoral behavior given man’s fallen condition, but a true Catholic tolerance must be exercised to encourage virtuous living.

We cannot fall into the modern habit of being indifferent or approving of immoral behavior simply because we don’t want to offend. Catholics must be willing to share the truth of Christ and the goodness of virtue to enact real societal change. It takes courage to take a stand in the truth and confront immorality face to face, but it is destructive and negligent to watch people diminish in sin and do nothing.

Thomistic tolerance seeks the good of the individual through charity and patience."

GOING TO THE SOURCES

AD FONTES

The variety and accessibility of media outlets today means that news sources are channeled into a bewildering labyrinth of distributaries, most of which end in stagnant swamps. This network of YouTube channels, Instagram accounts, and mainstream news articles is both attractive and dangerous. Attractive because it is convenient, and sometimes entertaining, to get a soundbite on current news from a trusted Catholic influencer or media outlet. Dangerous because man is fallible and mass media is predominantly corrupt. The recent controversial document Fiducia Supplicans has elicited a vehement but varying response in recent news—a sensationalist reaction that provides not only a striking example of the corruption of modern media but also a grave warning to Catholics everywhere: Go to the sources,

especially when it comes to Vatican documents. It is common knowledge that the media thrives on clickbait, conflict, and controversy. Shocking or terrible news attracts the most viewers, and more viewers equals more money. Thus, it is only effective marketing to purport a scandalous headline and honesty is not always a primary concern. Here are some examples of misleading headlines from media across the political spectrum that were posted shortly after the release of Fiducia Supplicans. My hometown broadcasting station, TMJ4 News, released an article entitled “Pope Francis allows priests to bless same-sex unions.”1 Yet even a cursory reading of Fiducia Supplicans shows that the authors were at great pains to emphasize that samesex unions may never be blessed— only individuals who struggle with same-sex attraction who desire God's assistance in order to live better, ideally seeking the grace to

BY MIA COLEMAN '24

repent. Again, from CBS Chicago: “Pope Francis approves ritual blessings for same-sex couples that don't resemble marriage.”2 This headline appears not only on the CBS website, but on YouTube and Yahoo News, as well. While the headline is accurate insofar as these blessings may in no way resemble marriage, it is incorrect to say that these blessings can be ritualized, as Fiducia Supplicans makes clear in paragraph 31: “the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage.”3 These headlines were posted right away, but misleading headlines continue to be posted over

a month after the publication of Fiducia Supplicans. On January 28, The Daily Beast published an article entitled, “How Pope Francis’ Acceptance of Gay Marriage Rocked Africa.”4 Obviously, any educated Catholic would know that the Pope did not and could never accept gay marriage. Unfortunately, not only does secular media sometimes distort the truth, but even conservative Catholic news agencies can be confused can get it wrong. One site released a video titled “BREAKING: Pope Francis publishes norms for clergy to ‘bless’ homosexual unions.”5 Its first sentence reads, “Pope Francis’ new document allows clergy to bless any homosexual couple, in contradiction to the unchangeable Catholic teaching that the Church cannot bless sinful relationships.”6 In reality, even if the Pope could teach something that contradicts unchangeable Church teaching (we know by faith that this is impossible), the document he signed states that “the Church does not have the power to impart blessings on unions of persons of the same sex.”7 In a similar vein, a Catholic podcast released an episode entitled “The Danger Bishops Face From Francis’ Satanic Decree,”8 while a headline from The Washington Times newspaper reads, “Pope Francis, same-sex couple blessings and an imploding Catholic traditional theology.”9 To refer to a Vatican document as “Satanic” or to Catholic

theology as “imploding” is not only antagonistic but adds to the confusion of the faithful. Documents of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith like Fiducia Supplicans are still authoritative and require docility and charitable interpretation. When the faithful feel like they are under attack from all sides, the confusion can be frustrating and discouraging. The antidote to all of this confusion is to be as reasonable and objective as possible. Yes, there are plenty of accurate news sources and helpful internet theologians to be found. But instead of fully immersing ourselves in articles, podcasts, and videos, if we are able, we ought to begin at the beginning: the documents themselves. To examine the sources fully, within their proper contexts, and with as little personal and political bias as possible is a matter of intellectual integrity. At least, we should read these documents before hearing the commentary of others, and then think carefully and critically about them, using reason and logic to make informed decisions about the messages therein. Of course, the commentary of others can help us to come to a deeper understanding of a certain issue, to shed new light on the matter, or to share a unique perspective. However, we ought to be wary of accepting their words wholesale, especially if they do not provide clear reasoning or cite their sources.

To examine the sources fully... is a matter of intellectual integrity."

Finally, when it comes to Church issues, going to the sources takes on an eternal significance. As Catholics, we are called to know what the Church teaches in order to properly assent to it with a deep faith and humility. Because the media is so often misleading, it is our duty to seek the truth so that we might defend it, dispel confusion, and sow the seeds of faith, hope, and love in our society. Thanks to the advances in communication technology, we have easy access to a wealth of information. But we must carefully determine the accuracy of the information we receive, especially before contributing to its circulation.

a tribute to DR. O'DONNELL

by A MEMBER OF THE CHRISTENDOM COMMUNITY

For thirty-two years he’s been at the helm, Steadily navigating our Christendom realm, Keeping straight the course of Peter’s Bark, Defending the truth with faith-filled spark. He’s steered us through waters often so roiled; Never by error defeated or foiled.

Hundreds of Holy Hours and rosaries he’s led; His courses inspire, our minds have been fed. Aesthetical and Mystical our souls did enlarge; Each year the to the seniors he’s offered a charge.

Dinners and drinks at his lovely home; Tours of the Vatican and all over Rome. A dapper dresser who wears a bowtie, With always a smile and a twinkle in his eye. We’ve sung and danced in his big old barn And laughed when he’s spun an Irish yarn.

Ben Hur, St. Pat’s and Columcille:

With life and delight our hearts he does fill. He gave us our Chapel . . . actually two: First the Old and now the exquisite New.

He’s showered us with wisdom, joy and love, And kept us close to Our Father above. So we bid farewell to Dr. O’Donnell so dear, With gratitude and love and many a tear.

May the road rise up to meet you, May the wind be always at your back,

The rain fall soft upon your fields,

May the sun shine warm upon your face, And, until we meet again, May God Hold you in the palm of His Hand.

Endnotes

THE ART OF GOODBYES: THE PARTING GLASS

1. Pope John Paul II, “Novo Millennio Ineunte,” Vatican: the Holy See. Rome, 6 January. 2001.

MASTERING THE ART OF SUFFERING

1. Mastering the Art of French Cooking is a two-volume French cookbook written by Simone Beck, Louisette Bertholle, and Julia Child. The book was written for the American market and published by Knopf in 1961. It laid the groundwork for Child’s success in later years with her cooking show The French Chef.

A DEFENSE OF MIMETIC ART

1. Summa Theologiae, I, q.5, a.4, ad. 1.

2. 2H. R. Rookmaaker, Modern Art and the Death of a Culture. (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1994.), 143-144.

3. Rookmaaker, Modern Art and the Death of a Culture, 144.

4. Summa Theologiae, I, q.5, a. 4, ad. 1.

5. Charles Hart, Thomistic Metaphysics: An Inquiry into the Act of Existing (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1959.), 392.

6. Summa Theologiae, I, q.39, a. 8.

7. Ibid.

8. Summa Theologiae, II-II, q.145, a. 2.

9. Aristotle, Poetics, Bk. 1, Ch. 5, 1449b24-27.

GOING TO THE SOURCES

1.TMJ4 News, December 18, 2023, https://www.tmj4.com/news/ national/pope-says-priests-can-bless-same-sex-unions-requestsshould-not-be-subject-to-moral-analysis. Accessed 1 Feb. 2024.

2. CBS Chicago, December 18, 2023, https://www.cbsnews.com/ chicago/video/pope-francis-approves-ritual-blessings-for-same-sexcouples-that-dont-resemble-marriage/. Accessed 1 Feb. 2024.

3. Fiducia Supplicans, https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_ddf_doc_20231218_fiducia-supplicans_en.html, paragraph 31.

4. Anthony, Daniel. "How Pope Francis' Acceptance of Gay Marriage Rocked Africa," The Daily Beast, Jan 28, 2024, https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-pope-francis-acceptance-of-gay-marriage-rockedafrica. Accessed 1 February 2024.

5. LifeSite News, December 18, 2023, https://www.lifesitenews.com/ episodes/breaking-pope-francis-publishes-norms-for-clergy-tobless-homosexual-unions/

6. Ibid.

7. Fiducia Supplicans, https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_ddf_doc_20231218_fiducia-supplicans_en.html, paragraph 5.

8. Return to Tradition, "The Danger Bishops Face From Francis' Satanic Decree," Dec. 23, 2023, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwcoFlse_Os.

9. Doyle, C.J. "Pope Francis, same-sex couple blessings and an imploding Catholic traditional theology." The Washington Times, Jan. 12, 2024, https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/jan/12/ pope-francis-same-sex-couple-blessings-and-implodi/. Accessed 1 February 2023.