Showing posts with label Charles Williams. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charles Williams. Show all posts

Friday, March 7, 2014

The Metalogikon




The Medieval period represents, for Western man, a kind of germinal gestation of the Spirit in the form of an actualized Christian civilization, one which was fully in accord with Tradition, as far as it was able to go. We know this because, for the neo-pagans, it is too “Christian” & for the neo-Christians, it is too “pagan”. Something with this many enemies has to have more going for it than meets the eye, & when one begins to dig in its archives, or leave through its holy books, or experience its ghosts in an old castle, you get a cold breath of fresh air that refreshes the heart.
I wrote in an earlier post:
Cologero’s translations have provided this gem, from de Giorgio:
“We could also call it “intuition” although no psychological quality is given to this term: the psyche in fact is below the spirit, the intellect, the heart—these three terms denoting, under three aspects, the same type of integrative activity of the divine. The spirit expresses the direct integration whose absolute type is the divine breath, the intellect expresses the cognitive permeation, the heart expresses radiant receptivity: by means of the first, one is elevated, with the second, absorbed, in the third, one is welcomed and realizes himself. Representing here a vertical axis, the spirit is the peak, the intellect the base, the heart the center that gathers the two extreme points and extends them, prolonging them horizontally, hence the Cross as radiant symbol of universality and unifying centrality.”
The intellect, the heart, and the spirit are One...
John of Salisbury was a minor church official in England, & yet he ably defended the classical ideal (expressed in Seneca and Cicero) of the philosopher: the lover of wisdom has to live as if these things (the Tao) were actually true, subordinating earthly desires and concerns to a higher goal. To this end, one studied grammar as the foundation, proceeded to logic-dialectic to pursue the ends of what was begun, and summarized this rhetorically in the “living flame” of a common chase after the Logos. Errors in grammar (mixing categories of speech) are analogous to conflating Spirit & matter, or of admixing them (eg., “race” = the spirit). Errors in logic are analogous to perverse twisting of the Logos inside one’s self (eg., it’s some one else’s fault). Errors in rhetoric are analogous to not being able to judge the spirits, following will’o'the’wisps (eg., Equality as God).  Therefore, the educated man pursues a formal calling (for which he is more harshly held to account) in learning to tell what is true from what is false, & what is good from what is better or Best. The uneducated man has to look to his betters for guidance (as indeed does the educated man, as sainthood or herodom actualizes liberal studies in real freedom).

Where is anyone of John’s stature today? If he exists, he is certainly not holding an official post: that is the difference between then & now.

Because of the chiasm formed by earth and heaven, in which the material world becomes the divine drama or staging ground for salvation, and in which whatever you bind will be bound, whatever loosed, loosed, the Hermetic method is to continue the medieval project of christening earth and humanizing heaven: that is, earth must be baptized, & heaven taken by storm. Rather than effacing human nature, personality, and the Logos as it sustains the “shields of the earth”, it overcomes General Law by drawing the entire human person up into the Divine order, simultaneously actualizing and drawing down the celestial powers, as was the original intent of God.

One only has to compare Eastern Orthodox icons to the Book of Kells to appreciate the difference in Western spirituality, which very early on committed itself to a playful acknowledgement and sublimation of the natural order. It was no accident that Pelagius hailed from Ireland, or that the Irish monks “saved Western classical civilization”. Whereas the East has been more heavily influenced by the idea of breaking out of the charmed, magic circle of the Fall, the West has been more willing to run the risk of damnation by insisting on a full recognition of the Logos in the material Creation. This does not mean that Eastern Orthodoxy is opposed to the Western Church, far from it. It is simply to point out that they are, in the end, returning to the same place, from a different point, like radii back to the center of the circle. The French hermetic tradition which inspired Tomberg openly admits and acknowledges the importance of co-inherence of the two worlds, which are One. Charles Williams (who drew attention to the term) was influenced by some of the same circles as Tomberg was.

So it is not merely a matter of all Westerners re-converting to the Eastern Church (although perhaps this is how God shall choose to re-unify?), but rather of rediscovering that one’s lines have “fallen in pleasant places & that I have a goodly heritage” (Psalms). In re-reading works such as John Cardinal Newman’s The Idea of the University, or John of Salisbury’s Metalogicon, or perhaps Boethius’ Consolations, we can see the Western, classical yearning for the order of the City, for Tradition, for the true & original religion, which pre-existed the Christ, but was re-energized by the appearance of its crown prince.
I have pointed out that Grammar corresponds to Spirit, Logic to Logos, and rhetoric to the archetype or Father. This is how liberal learning can again be brought into a right relationship not merely with right Reason, but with the embodied and personal Good, which is a super-Person:
If we were relating this to a knowledge of castes and Order (including internal order) we would say that the Spirit correlates to Fact, the Heart to Logic, and the Intellect to Rhetoric (for true self-consciousness is consciousness of the Master inside, allowing domination of both Self and Destiny). The Spirit initiates, or factualizes the supernatural; the Heart has its inner logic that we must learn to listen to; the Intellect realizes and epitomizes the power of the Invisible made Visible, the fruit of what has gone before.
In this way (surprisingly) the Spirit “chiasms” (or inverts by crossing a boundary in a creative way, the opposite of revolution, which is not fecundate) with “Fact” (which we tend to identify somewhat strangely with pure matter, the Son who is “matter incarnate” is seen as the heart of the worlds with a logic that transcends analytical power alone, and the Father is not the brutal demi-God who oppresses, but rather the Archetype or “Ground”, the “infinite possibility” Himself, out of which all proceeds.
Tomberg has pointed out that pantheism, emanationism, demi-urgism, and creation ex nihilo all correspond to various aspects or levels of Being, all true, which can be properly coordinated in the One.
This is why the medievals did not mind reading the Timaeus, which frankly teaches that there is a demi-Urge, or perusing the Stoics (whose spirituality they did not share as much in common with as the theurgic tradition of Plotinus), which emphasizes the unity of the Logos in the natural world (pantheism), or in picking up Iamblichus or Plotinus (whose systems of theurgy were incorporated into the Roman mass). They held all this together with the Grammar of Dogma, which demanded that the mystery of the Spirit as it actualizes in matter is the foundation point for slowly climbing Parnassus and reaching the heights which in earlier ages may have been scaled more swiftly or dramatically by avatars and heroes who shared a small portion of the charisma of Christ.

Now that Christ has come, the real work begins! Rather than rely on being born as a “son of God” dedicate to Apollo (like Pythagoras), or being conceived by the interaction between Olympian celestials and mortals (like Hercules), we have been fully restored. But being fully restored, the work has only just begun, as it is now our calling in this darkest and brightest of all Ages to achieve on the inside, project on the outside, and re-echo the divine nuptials that have been consummated between Heaven and Earth. This is the chivalric destiny the Middle Ages glimpsed and began to achieve, & this is what each must set themselves again to do.

To that end, it is encouraging that, even in John of Salisbury’s “bright age of Faith”, he complains that false philosophers and fake Christians abounded, that learning was already turning dim, that madness was loose upon the earth in the form of institutional folly, and that corruption too often triumphed over virtue (he and Thomas Beckett were allies). Maybe the Age we live in, as Cologero has said, has its own unique advantages, and that much can be done in candlelight, away from the hustle and bustle of a world that (even at its best) was ambiguous about accepting the Lordship of the King.

Sunday, April 28, 2013

Finishing What the Inklings Started


Finishing What the Inklings Started

George MacDonald
Given the level of interest in Christian circles in the Inklings, as well as the responsive reading of articles on Tolkien or Lewis at this site, it might be helpful to pinpoint what the perennial appeal of the Inklings is, wherein the power lies, and how one might recover and extend it.

Lewis makes no bones about his debt to George MacDonald : “I fancy there is not a single work in which I did not quote from him”. Lewis claimed that the reading of Phantastes and Lilith “baptized” his imagination, which lay dormant until his reasoning faculty “caught up” to the baptism many years later, and he found out that MacDonald had been telling him the same thing the whole time.

Through MacDonald, Madeline L’Engle and Dorothy Sayers (who promoted the revival of Trivium from the Middle Ages) also came under the influence of the spirit which animated the Inklings. Mihai has addressed how the imagination can lead one astray in the religion life; it can also be put into the service of the Truth, much as Scholasticism (which Tomberg praises on this score) put Reason in the service of the faith, until William of Ockham and Jean Buridan and Duns Scotus and others abandoned their sources and created nominalism.

This was the unique project of the Inklings; Cologero has remarked how poetry, myth, and legend is the main popular manner of transmitting Tradition exoterically to the masses (and here, we may note Matthew Arnold’s insistence that religion and poetry are more akin than one might suspect). So we may see the Inklings as attempting to extend Christian mytho-poesis to the masses through something akin to religion, but different, both in focus (the Imagination) and vehicle (mythopoetic truth). This is the basis of their perennial appeal and power.

It should be unnecessary to remark that Tolkien falls from a different spiritual heredity, through the Catholic Church, but that he was linked to the other Inklings by a kindred and worshipful fascination with things “Northern”. Charles Williams, of course, came to the Inklings via the Masonic and Rosicrucian orders; however, he too knew George MacDonald’s work. It is fair also to say that all of them, more or less, were drawn towards Dante, and this is not accidental.

Both Dante and MacDonald would have rejected modern “Science’s” claim to arbitrate truths of Reason, let alone Spirit:
“Scientists/witches like Watho attempt to know nature, but are in error: “human science is but the backward undoing of the tapestry-web of God’s science” (2, 236). MacDonald does not contradict science, nor does he press a theistic interpretation onto his readers. In fact, allegorising too would come close to an “undoing the tapestry” which would be quite alien to MacDonald. Rather he replaces anthropocentric science with an ecological perspective in which nature and its “sympathetic forms” come first, whether religious/fantastic or scientific/rational.” [This is  John Pridmore commenting on MacDonald's fairy tales.] The discourse which thus speaks of nature has its own authenticity and autonomy—The theistic and non-theistic accounts of nature are neither incompatible nor is the one to be reduced to the other.” This is not synthesis or dichotomy. “Instead MacDonald’s art is to present nature in a natural form, that is, in the form of the fairy tale. The cut-up, labelled, specimen means nothing; the flower is everything: “To know a primrose is a higher thing than to know all the botany of it” (Unspoken Sermons)
Why compare George MacDonald and Dante? Besides the fact that MacDonald lived a hard life and resembled a Russian staretz, and leaving out the fact that MacDonald was not an initiate, nor did he possess a great style (as Dante did), MacDonald was known to have read Church patristics, from which he derived a great deal of his imaginative and intellectual freedom from the rough-hewn Scottish Calvinism around him. His writings, moreover, are told primarily to embody moral truths: that is, he aims to make the Good appear more Beautiful. I have pointed out elsewhere a rather strange link in time and space with an Indian Sikh and preacher, which is of interest in terms of “passing the flame”.
George MacDonald was the seminal influence (spiritually) upon most of the Inklings (although it could be said that Tolkien added something different and also better to this union). The Inklings in large part existed because of the life of denial and enchantment with “baptizing the imagination” which he initiated, without the advantages of secret doctrine or formal initiation, and really only a few old books of theology and the example of his living father to point him in the right direction. However, like Dante, he endeavored to educate the reader towards that which was Holy, to make the Good attractive, new, strange, and overpowering. He was a spiritual teacher first, a man of letters accidentally.

Lewis formally (and unfortunately) rejected Tradition (as Gornahoor has established). Nevertheless, this was not as true for either Tolkien or Williams, which accounts for Lewis’ strange affinities for both, which pulled him in different directions (due to Williams’ unorthodox spiritual ancestry). Williams’ early death and the war, as well as Lewis’ marriage, and various other events, broke up the Inkling fellowship.
In Lewis’ later work, Till We Have Faces, there is a marked return to mythology and deeper spiritual import. I have not read Leaf by Niggle, but this later work of Tolkien is also more explicitly personal and also more explicitly mythopoeic, in the sense that it virtually claims that the Imagination, if saved, can be shown to have a place in the economy of heaven that is intimately linked to the true heart’s desire.
Why have modern day Christians confined themselves to a kind of fundamentalistic admiration for the “fantasy” element within the Inkling work, almost completely ignoring the actual sources and spiritual import of the Inklings at their most complex? This is despite the fact that, in the Inklings, they do not have to contend with esoteric doctrine, except a kind of careful employment of it in some of William’s work.

This kind of avoidance indicates an almost pathological ignorance of spiritual depth. The reality is that the mission and purpose of the Inklings went far beyond what was actually manifested, and indeed, could be revived. Let us hope that men of Tradition, and Christians if possible, undertake this work, because the implications of their most mature thinking and art carry them far beyond even the fantastic shores they undoubtedly discovered.

Honoring our ancestors would undoubtedly include faithfully differing from them in light of Tradition (MacDonald was practically cut off from it, and yet managed to discover enough to ignite the only revival of Christian letters England has known), and yet laying claim and extending whatever is consistent with Tradition in them.

This time around, those doing this would be armed with real Tradition. And what might Imagination in the service of Tradition look like?
Future posts will aim to demonstrate the truth of these claims concretely, and offer suggestions for carrying on the work of the Inklings.

Source

Friday, July 27, 2012

Usury Condemned in Poetry

They had the coins before the council.
Kay, the king's steward, wise in economies, said:
"Good; these cover the years and the miles
and talk one style's dialects to London and Omsk.
Traffic can hold now and treasure be held,
streams are bridged and mountains of ridged space
tunnelled; gold dances deftly across frontiers.
The poor have choice of purchase, the rich of rents,
and events move now in a smoother control
than the swords of lords or the orisons of nuns.
Money is the medium of exchange."

Charles Williams

Saturday, February 18, 2012

Anglicanism is the Perfect Polity? Theoretic Theology

'Three main schools of traditional thought are to be distinguished.... The first school teaches that ... on these grounds... Most clearly opposed to that is the teaching... on these grounds... A doctrine between the two affirms that... The strongest Anglican tradition is to affirm that ...'

And then he would talk with his fullest emphasis on the theme that to say that a man could either believe this, or that, giving grounds for each, was totally different from saying that he could believe anything he liked, or that no one knew what he should believe.

He never tired of pointing out that to refuse extreme of belief need not be compromise but accuracy, and a more intellectually valuable state for those who operated it than to be drawn by either lodestone.

Source