Spiritual Exercise: Consider How Much You Suck

Ignatius of Loyola, Spiritual Exercises (Week 1, Second Exercise)

“Third, I should consider who I am by diminishing myself with examples. First, how small I am in comparison with all people; second, what people are in comparison with all of the Angels and Saints of Paradise; third, to consider what are all created things in comparison with God: now, what could I alone amount to? In the fourth place, to consider all of my corruption and bodily hideousness; fifth, to consider that I am like an ulcer or an abscess, from which shoot forth so many sins, so much vileness, and such disgusting poison.”


“Tertium, inspicere [considerare] quis sim ego, minuendo me ipsum per exempla: primo, quantus sim ego in comparatione omnium hominum: secundo quid sint homines in comparatione omnium Angelorum et Sanctorum Paradisi: tertio, inspicere [considerare] quid sint omnia creata, in comparatione Dei: jam ego solus quid esse possim? Quarto inspicere [considerare] omnem meam corruptionem et foeditatem corpoream: quinto, inspicere [considerare] me quasi ulcus quoddam et apostema, unde pullularunt tot peccata et tot nequitiae, ac venenum tam turpissimum.”

The Effect of the Classics on Young and Old

John Henry Newman, An Essay in Aid of a Grammar of Assent:

“Let us consider, too, how differently young and old are affected by the words of some classic author, such as Homer or Horace. Passages, which to a boy are but rhetorical common-places, neither better nor worse than a hundred others which any clever writer might supply, which he gets by heart and thinks very fine, and imitates, as he thinks, successfully, in his own flowing versification, at length come home to him, when long years have passed, and he has had experience of life, and pierce him, as if he had never before known them, with their sad earnestness and vivid exactness. Then he comes to understand how it is that lines, the birth of some chance morning or evening at an Ionian festival, or among the Sabine hills, have lasted generation after generation, for thousands of years, with a power over the mind, and a charm, which the current literature of his own day, with all its obvious advantages, is utterly unable to rival.”

Image result for j.h. newman

Intense Thinking Makes Him a Prometheus

Herman Melville, Moby Dick:

“But as the mind does not exist unless leagued with the soul, therefore it must have been that, in Ahab’s case, yielding up all his thoughts and fancies to his one supreme purpose; that purpose, by its own sheer inveteracy of will, forced itself against gods and devils into a kind of self-assumed, independent being of its own. Nay, could grimly live and burn, while the common vitality to which it was conjoined, fled horror-stricken from the unbidden and unfathered birth. Therefore, the tormented spirit that glared out of bodily eyes, when what seemed Ahab rushed from his room, was for the time but a vacated thing, a formless somnambulistic being, a ray of living light, to be sure, but without an object to colour, and therefore a blankness in itself. God help thee, old man, thy thoughts have created a creature in thee; and he whose intense thinking thus makes him a Prometheus; a vulture feeds upon that heart for ever; that vulture the very creature he creates.”

Theodoor Rombouts, Prometheus

Healthy Contempt for the Intangible

E.M. Forster, The Longest Journey:

“‘What does philosophy do?’ the propper continued. ‘Does it make a man happier in life? Does it make him die more peacefully? I fancy that in the long-run Herbert Spencer will get no further than the rest of us. Ah, Rickie! I wish you could move among the school boys, and see their healthy contempt for all they cannot touch!’ Here he was going too far, and had to add, ‘Their spiritual capacities, of course, are another matter.’ Then he remembered the Greeks, and said, ‘Which proves my original statement.’

Submissive signs, as of one propped, appeared in Rickie’s face. Mr. Pembroke then questioned him about the men who found Plato not difficult. But here he kept silence, patting the school chapel gently, and presently the conversation turned to topics with which they were both more competent to deal.

‘Does Agnes take much interest in the school?’

‘Not as much as she did. It is the result of her engagement. If our naughty soldier had not carried her off, she might have made an ideal schoolmaster’s wife. I often chaff him about it, for he a little despises the intellectual professions. Natural, perfectly natural. How can a man who faces death feel as we do towards mensa or tupto?’

‘Perfectly true. Absolutely true.’

Mr. Pembroke remarked to himself that Frederick was improving.”

Image result for e.m. forster

AP Latin Week: Pious Aeneas… The Priest?

Ezra Pound, The ABC of Reading:

“A plain sailor man took a notion to study Latin, and his teacher tried him with Virgil; after many lessons he asked him something about the hero.

-Said the sailor: ‘What hero?’

-Said the teacher: ‘What hero, why, Aeneas, the hero.’

-Said the sailor: ‘Ach, a hero, him a hero? Bigob, I t’ought he waz a priest.’ ”

[According to Pound, this was W.B. Yeats’ favorite anecdote.]

Image result for aeneas

(AP Latin Week) Humanizing a Monster: The Saddest Scene in Latin Literature

As a high-school Latin teacher, I am tasked with guiding young minds through the world’s finest piece of propaganda literature, Vergil’s Aeneid. We read through substantial portions of the text in preparation for the AP Latin exam, but this reading is largely dictated by a syllabus of readings which do not include the part of the poem which I regard as the most emotionally affecting scene in all of Latin literature. This is the scene in which Aeneas describes his first glimpse of the cyclops Polyphemus:

“Hardly had he spoken, when we saw the pastor Polyphemus moving himself in a great mass among his flocks and seeking the well-known beach – a horrible monster, deformed, huge, whose eye had been taken. A broken pine guided his hand and firmed his step, while his woolly sheep kept him company; that was his one pleasure, the one solace in his suffering.” (Aeneid 3.655-661)

Vix ea fatus erat summo cum monte videmus
ipsum inter pecudes vasta se mole moventem
pastorem Polyphemum et litora nota petentem,
monstrum horrendum, informe, ingens, cui lumen ademptum.
trunca manum pinus regit et vestigia firmat;
lanigerae comitantur oves; ea sola voluptas
solamenque mali.

To be sure, Polyphemus is described as an object of horror, but lines 660-1 (ea sola voluptas solamenque mali) turn Polyphemus into an object of pity rather than revulsion. [Indeed, I think that this is intentional; throughout the poem, Ulysses is portrayed as an unequivocal villain, and Polyphemus can be read as one of his many victims here.] I made sure to include this scene on my class syllabus (though not required for the course), because I think that it is an excellent example of subtle psychological complexity on Vergil’s part. Yet, as I was discussing the scene with my students, it occurred to me that this complexity was not Vergil’s invention it all – Homer had already built this into the character of Polyphemus! In Odyssey Book IX, Odysseus is attempting to escape from Polyphemus’ cave by hiding on the underside of a ram, which is moving slowly in response to the burden. Polyphemus then addresses the ram:

“Oh gentle ram, why do you come from the cave behind the rest of the flock? You never before tarried behind the other skeep, but striding far before the others you snatched the mild blossoms, you came first to the banks of the rivers, and you ever desired first to return home in the evening. But now you are last by far. Are you worried about my eye, which that rotten bastard Noone and his awful friends took from me after wrecking my mind with wine – I do not say that he has escaped death. Would that you could be of one mind with me, and could tell me where that man has fled from my wrath. Once slain, his brain would drip through my cave here and there to the ground, and it would ease my heart from those troubles which that worthless bastard Noone gave me.” (Odyssey 9.446-460)

κριὲ πέπον, τί μοι ὧδε διὰ σπέος ἔσσυο μήλων
ὕστατος; οὔ τι πάρος γε λελειμμένος ἔρχεαι οἰῶν,
ἀλλὰ πολὺ πρῶτος νέμεαι τέρεν᾽ ἄνθεα ποίης
μακρὰ βιβάς, πρῶτος δὲ ῥοὰς ποταμῶν ἀφικάνεις,
πρῶτος δὲ σταθμόνδε λιλαίεαι ἀπονέεσθαι
ἑσπέριος: νῦν αὖτε πανύστατος. ἦ σύ γ᾽ ἄνακτος
ὀφθαλμὸν ποθέεις, τὸν ἀνὴρ κακὸς ἐξαλάωσε
σὺν λυγροῖς ἑτάροισι δαμασσάμενος φρένας οἴνῳ,
Οὖτις, ὃν οὔ πώ φημι πεφυγμένον εἶναι ὄλεθρον.
εἰ δὴ ὁμοφρονέοις ποτιφωνήεις τε γένοιο
εἰπεῖν ὅππῃ κεῖνος ἐμὸν μένος ἠλασκάζει:
τῷ κέ οἱ ἐγκέφαλός γε διὰ σπέος ἄλλυδις ἄλλῃ
θεινομένου ῥαίοιτο πρὸς οὔδεϊ, κὰδ δέ κ᾽ ἐμὸν κῆρ
λωφήσειε κακῶν, τά μοι οὐτιδανὸς πόρεν Οὖτις.

As horrifying as his earlier behavior had been, and as menacing as his threats to repaint his walls with Odysseus’ blood may sound, this speech is nevertheless given in the context of a much more deeply humanizing emotion: Polyphemus’ solicitous concern for his ram. He knows these animals, and evinces a tender regard for their well-being even in the midst of his own suffering. Indeed, this affectionate concern for his ram serves as a stark counterpoint to the actions of Odysseus, who throughout the poem shows no apparent serious regard for his companions. At no point in the poem does Odysseus show any outward emotional attachment to his men, and it is notable that even in his own tale of his sufferings, the loss of his men is primarily framed as something which happened to him. Polyphemus is thus portrayed as being, despite his monstrous qualities, a more compassionate figure than Odysseus.

Yet, putting Odyssean knavery aside, I think that the lines in the Aeneid reflect a very close reading of the Odyssey. Polyphemus tells his ram that murdering Odysseus would alleviate the sufferings in his heart (κὰδ δέ κ᾽ ἐμὸν κῆρ λωφήσειε κακῶν), but once the ram has left the cave, he is deprived of his chance at attaining this relief. Consequently, it is literally true that his flocks are now his only comfort. So, while it may appear that the phrase “that was his one pleasure, his one solace in his suffering” (ea sola voluptas solamenque mali) is included simply to heighten the pathos of the scene and underscore the humanity of even a monster like Polyphemus, it turns out that this brilliant psychological conceit is deeply rooted in a few lines of Homer.

AP Latin Week: Fate, Flight, and Falsehood

Servius, Commentary on Vergil’s Aeneid (1.2)

“The phrase ‘by fate’ (fato profugus) pertains both to the fact that Aeneas is fleeing, and to the fact that he comes to Italy. Vergil was right to add ‘by fate,’ lest Aeneas seem to have deserted his fatherland on account either of some crime, or of desire for a new country to command. The word ‘fugitive’ (profugus) is properly used of one who wanders from his own land, as if driven far away. Many, however, define ‘fugitives’ as those who wander from their own land after being driven away by necessity; as soon as they have found new lands, they are no longer called ‘fugitives,’ but ‘exiles.’ But both of these are false. For the word ‘fugitive’ has even been read of one who has established himself in a new country, as in Lucan’s ‘Fugitives from the ancient race of the Gauls, the Celts mixing their name with the Iberians.’ And the term ‘exile’ is used even of one who is still wandering, as in Sallust’s ‘those who wander in no certain exile.’ To be sure, Vergil does not just idly call Aeneas ‘fato profugus’- he derives this from the learning of the Etruscans. Indeed, there is a book about the letter of Etruscan law written in the speech of Tages, in which is written ‘he who descends from perjurers should be banished by fate, and should be a fugitive (profugus)’. Further, Aeneas derives his lineage from the perjurer Laomedon, and indeed says in another passage ‘long ago we paid with our blood for the perjury of Laomedon’s Troy.'”

fato profugus ‘fato’ ad utrumque pertinet, et quod fugit, et quod ad Italiam venit. et bene addidit ‘fato’, ne videatur aut causa criminis patriam deseruisse, aut novi imperii cupiditate. profugus autem proprie dicitur qui procul a sedibus suis vagatur, quasi porro fugatus. multi tamen ita definiunt, ut profugos eos dicant qui exclusi necessitate de suis sedibus adhuc vagantur, et simul atque invenerint sedes, non dicantur profugi, sed exules. sed utrumque falsum est. nam et profugus lectus est qui iam sedes locavit, ut in Lucano “profugique a gente vetusta Gallorum Celtae miscentes nomen Hiberis” (4.9), et exul qui adhuc vagatur, ut in Sallustio “qui nullo certo exilio vagabantur” : adeo exilium est ipsa vagatio. quidam hic ‘profugus’ participium volunt. sane non otiose fato profugum dicit Aeneam, verum ex disciplina Etruscorum. est enim in libro qui inscribitur litterae iuris Etruriae scriptum vocibus Tagae, “eum qui genus a periuris duceret, fato extorrem et profugum esse debere” . porro a Laomedonte periuro genus ducit Aeneas, siquidem alibi ait “satis iam pridem sanguine nostro Laomedonteae luimus periuria Troiae” .

%d bloggers like this: