Saturday, 22 October 2016

St. Jerome, The Tender Old Grump


'Saint Jerome and the Lion,' (detail), Liberale da Verona, 15th century.
  
Biographical Overview

St. Jerome was born in c.347 in what was then part of north-eastern Italy. As a student in Rome, he traversed the boundaries of wantonness and piety. Later he spent time living in Gaul, during which he is believed to have taken up his first theological studies.

At about the age of 26 he set out on a journey through Thrace and Asia Minor, residing for the most part at Antioch. There, during an illness, he had a vision that “led him to lay aside his secular studies and devote himself to God. He seems to have abstained for a considerable time from the study of the classics and to have plunged deeply into that of the Bible”.[1] However, he never forsook the seeds of truth, goodness and beauty he had gleaned from the ancient classics. Since throughout his letters, even in his old age, he continued to quote from them – above all from Virgil.[2]

Jan Hovaert, 1665-1668.
Following his conversion of heart, Jerome started to live an ascetic life in the desert of Chalcis. In 378 or 379 he returned to Antioch, and against his preference was ordained a priest by Bishop Paulinus. He then went to Constantinople, studying for two years under St. Gregory Nazianzus, followed by three years in Rome as Pope St. Damascus’ protégé and secretary.

While in Rome Jerome was surrounded by a circle of notable and well-educated Roman women who through his influence, longed for the monastic life. The most well-known of these, are Saints Lea, Marcella and Paula. Due to such acquaintances, in addition to a false allegation concerning improper relations with the widow named Paula, and his unsparing criticism of the worldliness of the clergy in Rome, he was soon compelled to leave Rome.

From Rome he went to Antioch, and then to Bethlehem. There he ended up as the head of a small monastery, with an adjacent convent where a group of women lived under St. Paula. Bethlehem remained Jerome’s home for the next thirty-four years of his life and here he wrote the majority of his works. Guiding numerous souls through his correspondences, and rebuffing critics. With his letters enjoying a wide circulation in a crumbling Roman Empire.

'Funeral of St. Jerome,' Filippo Lippi, 1452-1460.
Yet it would be a mistake to think he lived all of these final days in peace. For several years before his death, an angry mob raided his monastic sanctuary, incumbent on exacting violence on Jerome for his writings against the Pelagian heresy. In their wake they burnt the monastic buildings and killed a deacon, but he himself was able to take refuge in a nearby fortress, escaping unharmed. Four years later, in c.420 he died at the age of 70.

Jerome’s Legacy

Since his death, Jerome has been recognised as an eminent Church Father and as a Doctor of the Church. He is considered the patron of archeologists, archivists, biblical scholars, libraries, librarians, school children, students and translators. One can understand his patronages, since Jerome is responsible for translating most of the texts of the Bible from Hebrew and Greek into Latin, in a translation which was to be called the Vulgate. Even in his own day, he was noted for his mastery of the scriptures, for his scriptural commentaries – on various books of the Old and New Testaments; and for his numerous letters. St. Augustine, who despite his at times rocky relationship of correspondence with Jerome, referred to him in such titles as, “My Holy Brother” and “Fellow-Presbyter”, and stated that “What Jerome is ignorant of, no mortal has ever known.”[3]

However, on the flip side of Jerome’s intellectual prowess, linguistic eloquence, robust asceticism, spiritual mastery in matters both abstract and practical, and his unwavering zeal for the faith, is the portrait painted in regards to his personality: a stern, uncompromising man. Considered at times to be excessive and exacting, who was a vehement satirist against his doctrinal foes, and who had a boisterous temper.

Jerome’s Tempestuous Side

Such negative depictions are not unfounded in the least, for his correspondences prove he had a temper and a sharp pen. Although, arguably, these ‘outbursts’ never seem to be totally unfounded or unprovoked. Nor are they without their humour. A humour which it seems at times has been mistaken by commentators for outright aggression.[4] Indeed, as Andrew Cain points out, Jerome’s Letters are often read out of context. For Jerome is writing in a time where letter-etiquette was perhaps even more sensitive as swift replies to texts are today, and where reproach and a certain theatricality were rhetorical devices utilised in ancient Greco-Roman correspondence, beyond what is perceived today as outright ‘meanness’ and arrogant ‘show-man ship’.[5] Nevertheless, in his letters there is ample evidence of his tempestuous side which is impossible to deny.

In Letter 8 addressed to the sub-deacon Niceas Jerome almost whinges about his failure to respond to his letters. He writes:

You, however, who have but just left me, have not merely unknit our new-made friendship; you have torn it asunder… Can it be that the East is so hateful to you that you dread the thought of even your letters coming hither? Wake up, wake up, arouse yourself from sleep, give to affection at least one sheet of paper.[6]

Elsewhere we see Jerome’s sharp pen at work again. In c.396, he responds to Vigilantius who has accused him of the heresy of Origenism:

Christian modesty holds me back and I do not wish to lay open the retirement of my poor cell with biting words. [Que the biting words:] Otherwise I should soon show up all your bravery and your parade of triumph… for my own part as a Christian speaking to a Christian I beseech you my brother not to pretend to know more than you do... the stench of the bilge water has affected your head... If you wish to exercise your mind… learn logic, have yourself instructed in the schools of the philosophers; and when you have learned all these things you will perhaps begin to hold your tongue… Accordingly I may seem to have been somewhat more acrid in this latter part of my letter than I declared I would be at the outset. Yet… it is extremely foolish in you again to commit a sin for which you must anew do penance. [7]

Angry-Jerome: A Popular Portrait

A rather ‘lovely’ synopsis of Jerome’s character is provided in volume six of the Prolegomena to Hendrickson Publisher’s Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, drawing from William Smith’s Dictionary of Christian Biography:

He was vain and unable to bear rivals, extremely sensitive as to the estimation in which he was held by his contemporaries, and especially by the Bishops; passionate and resentful, but at times becoming suddenly placable; scornful and violent in controversy; kind to the weak and the poor; respectful in his dealings with women; entirely without avarice; extraordinarily diligent in work… There was, however, something of monkish cowardice in his asceticism…[8]

'St. Jerome in Penitence,' Bernardino Luini, ~1525.
And perhaps it suffices to end there, for despite some unvarnished truths, it would do well to spare ourselves from some of the additional nonsense written thereafter (concerning anti-middle age polemic in reference to Jerome’s medieval legacy). But from this slightly biased portrait, we can see the sort of portrait that is painted of Jerome. A portrait – one shade the less here, one shade the more there – which is by far the most common, and which has been perpetuated throughout the centuries, even until today, helped along in recent times by J. N. D Kelly’s biography on Jerome.[9]

However, it is his apparent humility grounded in self-awareness, and in his instance, manifested in a monastic life of penance and prayer, that has generally been presented as his saving grace – the seal of which is his sound, rich and scripturally charged doctrine. A saving grace which we might say can be symbolised by a stone. For, Pope Sixtus V (1585-90) having stopped before a painting of the penitent Jerome striking his breast with a stone, is said to have wryly remarked, “You do well to carry that stone, for without it the Church would never have canonized you”.[10]

What’s So Appealing About this Grumpy Old Man?

It is often refreshing to hear of the human imperfections that plagued the saints – a reminder that sanctity isn’t synonymous with middle-class respectability, and that God can work with the most unworkable clay. As Paul says, “Moreover we have this treasure [of Christ and His glory] in earthen vessels, to show that the surpassing power and ableness belongs to God and not to us.” (2 Cor 4:7).[11] This is among the reasons why the narrative of Jerome’s imperfections, above all the trait of his temper, has been passed down to us until this day.
'Jerome,' Lucas Cranach the Elder, 16th Century.

It’s also uncommon for glimpses of the raw humanity of the saints to be had – especially if they lived so long ago. Indeed, the legacy of the saints might be said to generally become more polished as the ages tick by. For in the absence of written evidence, or the lack thereof, of their unpolished side, in combination with a historical separation from the oral traditions surrounding the lives and characters of such saints – first furnished in their earliest devoted following, but which frequently wanes indefinitely, or periodically in subsequent generations – it seems only reasonable that accounts pertaining to their imperfections might easily be lost through the sift of time. Especially when pious consciousness typically favours the grand and glorious deeds of the saints.

However, because of the Letters of Jerome, we have a rare and honest insight into a man who’s not shy to showcase his views and personality – warts and all – in his various correspondences. Hence, having abounding evidence of Jerome’s ‘unpolished side’, his fragility is almost championed, at once frowned upon – to the extent that his sainthood has been questioned – and found amusing, exaggerated and frequently taken out of context.[12] Meanwhile Jerome serves as a kind of archetype of the ordinary humanity of the saints – and that the God of holiness can flourish in the midst of our imperfection. Not so much in spite of it, but to some extent because of it.

'St. Jerome,' Jan van Hemessen, 1543.
Not that imperfection in and of itself necessarily begets God’s favour; but that faith and trust in God in the face of our imperfection, in the context of our sincere struggle to live the spiritual life, causes our imperfections to turn from things that work against us, to things that work in our favour (Rom 8:28). Just as the wounds of a sick man almost endear the doctor’s attention towards him, by which he wins not only medical assistance, but personal contact. Or as the smelly nappy of an infant draws its mother to lovingly tend to it – to clean and freshen it, and to end by caressing and hugging it. Shows of affection which the smelly nappy incidentally caused!

Likewise, our imperfections – those minor but persistent blemishes in our personality and habits, which no matter what, seem to cling to us like skin to a skinny face – surrendered to God with repentance, and borne in happy trust that God loves us and will deliver us; cease to work against our sanctification and start to work for it. Even to the point of edifying our neighbours, in some mysterious and roundabout way! After all, Jerome’s temper is edifying us over fifteen hundred years later in regards to the goodness and mercy of God!

Sure, some might use Jerome to justify bad habits, and others might miss the point completely by snarling at him as ‘a saint who just got through the door’. But this isn’t what pointing out his temper is supposed to do. It supposed to encourage us, and console us, that whilst we remain as imperfect as we are despite our efforts and our surrendering to God – who alone can make us holy – there is still hope for us. Not the wishful and watered down hope thrown around by the world, which is simply doubt disguised as positive-thinking – but the kind of hope that is sure and certain in the Person of Christ. A hope which is the means of possessing what is believed. The very kind of hope the Holy Spirit awakens in us, whenever we read the words of Paul in faith: “When I am weak, I am strong.” (2 Cor 12:10); and before this, in the same chapter, where Paul relates the words God said to him in the midst of struggling with his ineptness to actualise his ideal of sanctity: “My power is made manifest in weakness.” (2 Cor 12:8).

God’s Tenderness and Jerome’s Temper

It's ironic that I started writing this article with the intention of revealing the tender side to Jerome, and here I’ve written around two thousand words, the majority of which revolve around his temper, without really denying it, and without mentioning the word tender or its variants once within the body of the text.

Indeed, God’s Providence never fails. For although it would seem that in order to make a case for Jerome’s tenderness would lie in setting up arguments against Jerome’s temper, or at least by arguing he was less tempestuous than is claimed – which on one level was partially my initial intention – through the eyes of faith I cannot help but notice God is reminding me as I write that “My power is made manifest in weakness”. Ergo, that God’s tenderness, is made manifest in Jerome’s temper.

'St. Jerome in Penitence,' Titian, 1575.
Sure, as our Lord said, “God alone is good” (Mk 10:18) and therefore, anything within us which is good, is ultimately attributable to God, whilst anything bad, to our fallen will. Thus God’s tenderness – on loan to Jerome, as Jerome’s tenderness – which is clearly discernible in his writings, and is testified by his saintly status, clearly coexisted with his temper which as far as we’re aware, remained with him until the grave. Serving him during his lifetime, in similitude to St. Paul, as a kind of humbling thorn in his side, perhaps permitted by God to endure for his sake “of not becoming too exalted by the abundance of” his knowledge and the severity of his asceticism (2 Cor 12:7).

Yet the coexistence of God’s tenderness and Jerome’s own temper, within the same single man, wasn’t in spite of his temper, it was somewhat because of it. As we have said, God’s tenderness dwelt and was made manifest in Jerome’s temper. For Jerome’s temper being like a thorn in his side, would have, after it’s fuse was lit, brought about sorrow, contrition and self-knowledge, and therefore humility and the fruit of its authenticity: greater trust in God. We know this, because this is how a saint becomes a saint. Not that they become perfect in the infallible sense; but that they know how to carry their false-self with all its failings to the peak of Calvary, in the confident joy of salvation in Christ their Groom – never flagging in zeal for the truth, and never abandoning prayer, nor the hope of beatitude. Even when everything inside and outside of them, in the midst of their sincere but imperfect efforts, is screaming at them “It’s hopeless.”

Jerome’s Temper: From A Source of Curse to A Source of Blessing

As we read in the Scriptures “A just man sins seven times a day.” (Prov 24:16). Yet in keeping with Teresa of Avila’s understanding: with the saints, having being sanctified to a considerable extent during their life, their figurative seven sins, we might generalise to say, are either imperfections, distinct from sin, or involuntary venial sins. The wounds of imperfection or venial sin (almost certainly involuntary at least in his latter years), caused by his moments of immoderate or unnecessary anger, would, following his sorrow, acts of humility etc., thus have turned from wounds causing harm to his soul, or at least as obstacles to greater sanctity, into vessels in which God’s Power could dwell. In this instance, as such a wound would have been caused by his temper, by means of the reversing principle of sanctification, it would have become a vessel for God’s Tenderness.

This process would not have been wrought abstractly, but through a spiritual union with the wounds of Christ – whose wounds were, are, and ever will be, vessels of every grace and heavenly virtue. Such is the seeming paradox of Christianity – wounds caused by violence and sin, in Christ and by the Holy Spirit, become vessels of peace wherein abides the balm of redemption.

'Saint Jerome in His Study,' Caravaggio, 1605-1606
Hence Jerome’s temper, when it formed little wounds on his soul, like pot holes on a road, became – through grace – the secondary means by which he came to bear God’s tenderness within. With such grace likened to rain when it fills pot holes and turns them into puddles. Puddles that reflect the sun above when it glistens on their surface. Just as Jerome’s wounds caused by anger, became through contrition and faith, like puddles for the Divine tenderness, reflecting the light of God’s glory back unto Himself.

And indeed, even when a pothole becomes a puddle, the pothole remains, just as Jerome’s temper – a natural inclination to anger distinct from the act of anger itself – and weak moments of ‘losing it’, remained throughout his life. Yet nevertheless, like Paul, St. Jerome could rejoice in his weakness, because He knew that God’s tenderness was made manifest in his temper. For who could attribute any shows of warmth and compassion, and tender words, to a man known for his temper (and a hot temper at that!)? Especially if such tenderness was nothing short of divine. Thus Jerome was an “earthen vessel” to show the surpassing tenderness of God, for clearly it wasn’t his own! (2 Cor 4:7).

Signs of Tenderness in Jerome’s Letters

Before we conclude it seems only fair to provide some of the written evidence of such tenderness – a tenderness he is not afraid to show. Evidence which abounds in his extant Letters. We see Jerome’s tenderness especially in his letters written in the consolatoria tradition. Particularly in the letters of consolation, in the form of memoir, following the deaths of the holy women whom he instructed in Rome. Some of whom followed him to Bethlehem.

In Letter 127 addressed to Principia concerning St. Marcella who died when the Visigoths sacked Rome in c.410. He writes:

I am so anxious myself to do justice to her merits that it grieves me that you should spur me on and fancy that your entreaties are needed when I do not yield even to you in love for her.

'The sack of Rome by the Barbarians 410,' Joseph-Noël Sylvestre, 1890.
He then goes on to state that his failure to expound on Marcella’s life, for over two years, was not out of “a wish to ignore her” as Principia had supposed, but to an incredible sorrow which so overcame my mind that I judged it better to remain silent for a while than to praise her virtues in inadequate language.” Before he ends the letter we read of the tender way he handles the death of Marcella, whom died in Principia’s arms – her best friend mind you – not simply as a rhetorician, but as a friend, and above all, as a compassionate pastor who loves and cares for his spiritual children as nothing short of a father:

When she closed her eyes, it was in your arms; when she breathed her last breath, your lips received it; you shed tears but she smiled conscious of having led a good life and hoping for her reward hereafter. In one short night I have dictated this letter in honour of you, revered Marcella, and of you, my daughter Principia[13]

Elsewhere we see the divine tenderness at work. In Letter 66 Jerome writes to a Pammachius concerning the loss of his young wife: “For who can ears so dull or hearts so flinty as to hear the name of your Paulina without weeping?”.[14]

Furthermore, in his longest letter, addressed to console the son of St. Paula and expounding on her life following her death, he writes:

I have spent the labour of two nights in dictating for you this treatise; and in doing so I have felt a grief as deep as your own. I say in 'dictating' for I have not been able to write it myself. As often as I have taken up my pen and have tried to fulfil my promise; my fingers have stiffened, my hand has fallen, and my power over it has vanished. The rudeness of the diction, devoid as it is of all elegance or charm, bears witness to the feeling of the writer. And now, Paula, farewell… In this letter I have built to your memory a monument more lasting than bronze, which no lapse of time will be able to destroy.[15]

And finally, perhaps my favourite portion of text that I have come across in Jerome’s Letters, is in a letter addressed to Gaudentius (and in some sense to Gaudentius’ newborn daughter) who had asked advice on how to raise his infant daughter. In this letter we see the tender side to Jerome – the heart of a man who has clearly been touched by the Infant Christ through his meditations on the Gospels. Yet by no means is such tenderness polished and carefully courteous, as the beginning of the extract will show, which is quite amusing:

It is hard to write to a little girl who cannot understand what you say… For how can you speak of self-control to a child who is eager for cakes, who babbles on her mother's knee, and to whom honey is sweeter than any words? Will she hear the deep things of the apostle when all her delight is in nursery tales? Will she heed the dark sayings of the prophets when her nurse can frighten her by a frowning face?

He then reveals his acute grandfather-like-care:

…To induce her to repeat her lessons with her little shrill voice, hold out to her as rewards cakes and mead and sweetmeats. She will make haste to perform her task if she hopes afterwards to get some bright bunch of flowers, some glittering bauble, some enchanting doll… Then when she has finished her lessons she ought to have some recreation. At such times she may hang round her mother's neck, or snatch kisses from her relations. Reward her for singing psalms that she may love what she has to learn. Her task will then become a pleasure to her and no compulsion will be necessary.[16]

Conclusion

'Madonna and Child with Saints Jerome and Francis,' Paris Bordone, 1525.
There is no denying that Jerome had a temper, and that he often gave vent to it in less than ideal ways. Yet it is ludicrous to belittle his sainthood on this basis. For one, we do not know the man personally, we only have his letters which are written in a time different to our own, with its own nuances of etiquette and humour. Two, his temper and his moments of outburst enshrined in ink, may indeed often fall short of perfection, and there’s no denying the frequent gruffness of his manner; but as far as we know, and the Church seems to think it so, by the very fact of his canonisation, that he didn’t wilfully inculcate his temper, or cling to his temper in pride, but rather it was a thorn in his side! A wound that brought much suffering to his soul, and which drove him into the desert of humility before his God. As such, the abiding temper of Jerome, that he couldn’t seem to shake in spite of his penance and prayers, testifies to his profound humanness. Which because he carried it with such penitent humility, never wavering in his quest for God above, and in the Presence of Jesus within the poor virgins and widows that relied on him as a father, testifies to his profound saintliness. A raw and real saintliness which in Jerome’s case looked like a grumpy old man around the edges and a tender loving God in the middle.

In what is arguably Jerome’s last known letter, written to Augustine and Alypius - the date of which we are certain, c.419 – we see his unpolished side, and the tenderness of God at work. A tenderness expressed side by side with Jerome's usual gruffness. Although arguably in this instance it's more of a righteous than an unrighteous anger. He writes:

'St. Jerome,' Palma the Younger, 1595.
I call God to witness that, if it were possible, I would take the wings of a dove and fly to be folded in your embrace. Loving you, indeed, as I have always done, from a deep sense of your worth, but now especially because your co-operation and your leadership have succeeded in strangling the heresy of Celestius… As to your inquiry whether I have written in opposition to the books of Annianus, this pretended deacon of Celedæ… he flounders from beginning to end in the same mud, and, with the exception of some jingling phrases which are not original, says nothing he had not said before… your Holiness could do better than I [in refuting him], as you would relieve me from the necessity of praising my own works in writing to the heretic.[17]


This after all is the grumpy old man who can write: the stench of the bilge water has affected your head, and the tender old man who can write: she [your infant daughter] may hang round her mother's neck, or snatch kisses from her relations.

Indeed, in Jerome we see that the Scripture is truly alive: “The wolf shall dwell with the lamb” (Is 11:6). It is tempting to change ‘wolf’ to ‘lion’ to fit the popular stated but non-existent biblical phrase: “the lion shall dwell with the lamb,” because Jerome is often depicted beside a lion, based on a legend that he tamed a lion by healing its paw. Yet Jerome, the stickler for accurate biblical translation, would not approve, and we wouldn’t want to stir the lion…the wolf… I mean… the lamb who is tender (and who had a temper).






[1] Wikipedia, “Jerome,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome#Life
[2] I.e. Among the many references, see Letters of St. Jerome: 66.5, 122.12 and 125.11.
[3] In regards to titles of correspondence, see Letters of St. Augustine, 28, 82.
[4] Take for example his letter to Julian a deacon of Antioch, which might be read as a brazen reproach of his friend’s quick judgement as to why Jerome was failing to correspond with him. Yet, really Jerome seems to be joking, since after providing several excuses, he confesses the truth behind the matter of his delay – illness.
[5] Andrew Cain, “‘Vox Clamantis in Deserto’: Rhetoric, Reproach, and the Forging of Ascetic Authority in Jerome’s Letters from the Syrian Desert,” The Journal of Theological Studies 57, no. 2 (2006): 501, accessed 21 Oct 2016, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23971716. Despite personally disagreeing with aspects of his position, which argues Jerome is principally using his letters as a means of personality propaganda, it is an excellent article.
[6] Jerome, Letter 8 (VIII), in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.
[7] Jerome, Letter 61.3 (LXI.3), in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.
[8] Prolegomena to Jerome, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, vol. 6., trans. by W. H. Fremantle, G. Lewis and W. G. Martley, eds. Phillip Schaff and Henry Wace (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers Marketing, 2012), xxxiii.
[9] “The letters are approached in this way by Jerome’s four major twentieth century biographers: G. Gru¨tzmacher, Hieronymus: Eine biographische Studie zur alten Kirchengeschichte (Berlin, 1901–8), 3 vols.; F. Cavallera, Saint Je´roˆme: Sa vie et son oeuvre (Paris, 1922), 2 vols.; J. N. D. Kelly, Jerome: His Life, Writings, and Controversies (London, 1975); S. Rebenich, Hieronymus und sein Kreis: Prosopographische und sozialgeschichtliche Untersuchungen (Stuttgart, 1992).” Cain’s ninth footnote in “‘Vox Clamantis in Deserto’: Rhetoric, Reproach, and the Forging of Ascetic Authority in Jerome’s Letters from the Syrian Desert.”
[10] D. Attwater and H. Thurston eds., Butler’s Lives of the Saints, vol. 3 (New York: 1956), p. 691.
[11] δυνάμεως is often translated simply as “power” but the word also means “ability” and so the translation above incorporates this (even if some might argue ableness is not a real word!).
[12] In regards to his sainthood being questioned, see Andrew Cain, “‘Vox Clamantis in Deserto’: Rhetoric, Reproach, and the Forging of Ascetic Authority in Jerome’s Letters from the Syrian Desert,” 500.
[13] Jerome, Letter (CXXVII) 127.1 and 127.4, respectively as quoted, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.
[14] Jerome, Letter 66.1 (LXVI), in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.
[15] Jerome, Letter 108. (LXVI), in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.
[16] Jerome, Letter 128.1 (LXXVIII), in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.
[17] Jerome’s letter is found in the collection of Augustine’s Letters, number 202. The above taken from a translation by J.G. Cunningham, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 1., ed. by Philip Schaff (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1887.), revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102202.htm

Monday, 22 August 2016

Snow White: An Allegory of the Blessed Virgin Mary



Franz Jüttner (1865–1925): Illustration from Schneewittchen, Scholz' Künstler-Bilderbücher, Mainz 1910

An article exploring Snow White as an allegory of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the context of a poem titled 'Snow White' which follows. 

 
The Immaculate Virgin Mary is the true Snow White since She is as “pure as the driven snow; [and] her blessings and graces, [are as] numerous and varied as falling snowflakes.” I have always been intrigued by the character of Snow White, and the fairy tale has long resided in my imagination. The true reason for this is because Our Lady is the archetype of all women whose greatness, beauty and purity transcends comprehensibility, and so all idealistic portraits and figures of women, in art, literature, the collective cultural imagination, and above all in Salvation History, are as sacramentals, as icons as it were, of Mary Herself – each providing a unique glimpse into the person of our Lady.

Though indeed, the primacy of biblical feminine icons must be emphasised – as these, belonging to Public Revelation, provide the clearest portrait of Mary, and serve as morsels providing the greatest depth of insight into Her. Still, this does not mean we ought to neglect and throw away the plethora of feminine characters which have occupied history, or have been molded in the imaginations of mankind throughout the ages, since these speak in diverse ways of Our Lady – even if at times certain negative aspects need to be polished and done away with – for only the positive, good and noble traits of these women bear witness to Mary the Most Blessed of All Women.

To appropriate and recognise Our Lady in these historical and mythical feminine icons, is part of a process to see the Face of God in all things, and testifies to the fact that all these feminine icons are so prominent and/or have been crafted, as a temporal response to the inner yearning that beats within the heart of every human being to be one in union with Mary the Mother of God, as was Joseph and as was Christ. Every heart longs for Mary, since this is indistinguishable from the thirst for God inherent in every man. Why? For God is so united to Mary in an indivisible bond of grace, that one cannot be one with God unless one is one with Mary, and vice versa.

Pagan peoples have fashioned women deities and have lauded them across the millennia, yet this has been out of a misguided expression of a holy desire for union with Mary, and of that innate knowledge of Her within each heart, which has been repressed through original and personal sin. Plagued with concupiscence, men so often objectify women, and women often objectify themselves, reducing themselves to totalities to be used and adored in their own right – yet all of this, among other things, is simply a misguided expression of a desire to reverence and devote oneself to the Blessed Virgin.


In regards to feminine icons of our Lady in literature, art, and folk tales – these are often imperfect representations of our Lady, yet they’re generally not misguided, but rather, are usually the result of creative bursts or moldings over time, that unintentionally reveal the feminine ideal as it exists not so much in the mind of man, but in the Mind of God. An ideal which is enfleshed in Mary the quasi-incarnation of the Holy Spirit (quasi meaning not-the-incarnation of the Holy Spirit, but after Jesus, the closest human person who manifests the Divine Personhood of the Holy Spirit).

Snow White is among the feminine icons present within the Western imagination – gathered from an existent German fairytale, and published in 1812 by the Brothers Grimm. The birth of Snow White comes about as an unexpected fulfilment to a thought her mother had, whereupon pricking her finger with a sewing needle by the window, she saw three drops of blood fall upon the snow, whereat “she thought to herself, ‘would that I had a child as white as snow, as red as blood, and as black as the wood of the window-frame.’ [And] soon after that she had a little daughter, who was as white as snow, as red as blood, and her hair was as black as ebony; and therefore she was called little Snow White.” This itself can be interpreted allegorically, as referring to how from all eternity God’s first thought ‘outside’ of Himself was of Mary in connection with the snow, the Fiat of Creation; the blood, the Fiat of Redemption, and ebony, the Fiat of Sanctification. In expected fulfillment, She was conceived and born as Snow White – predestined to be Immaculate – “as white as snow” (Ps 51:7) – in body and in soul.

The Dwarfs Warn Snow White
There are varying versions of the tale, and within this poem a snapshot of the tale is taken, along with an alternative take, partly as a result of explicitly writing it to serve as an allegory of Our Lady in general, and particularly, yet not exclusively, of Our Lady and the role She takes within the individual life of the soul. The poem is ultimately a narrative that explores the soul in relation to Mary, in a true devotion, involving the interplay of the human will, and the Divine Will – and the state of living in It. Yet it also speaks of the drama of sanctification as it plays out in the historic, universal, and particular sense. In the following poem Snow White represents Our Lady; the seven dwarfs the fecundity of Our Lady in general, the seven heavenly virtues possessed by Our Lady and by the soul who claims Hers as her own, as well as the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit; the evil Queen step-mother represents the human will and the false-self – the greatest enemy of the soul; and the prince the soul’s true self in Christ. On another level, Snow White can also represent the soul in her aspect in, with, and through Mary, and the wicked Queen a wicked soul. Without wanting to go into too much detail, certain aspects, due to the manner in which they could be misunderstood ought to be briefly explained.

The Queen-Witch, Disney
The poisoned apple that the Queen, who is a witch, offers to Snow White, alludes to how Our Lady took on and suffered the consequences of the Fall and sin itself, throughout Her life, yet namely at Calvary. In the poem, and in the original, the apple does not go down into Snow White’s stomach, but is lodged in her throat. In a spiritual sense, Eve choked and died when she ate the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden – that is, her soul died to grace and the sanctity of the Divine Will. Now Mary, was undefiled, without original and personal sin, and yet, She the Innocent and Spotless One – She who is Snow White – in, with and through Her Son freely took on what Paul calls the wages of sin – death. This death she took upon Herself at Calvary, yet not a physical death, nor the same kind of spiritual death suffered by Eve (a death of sin), but a spiritual death that involved total self-nullification and kenosis (self-emptying) – a death of love.

Snow White, llewllaw
Hence Snow White’s death, the result of biting into the poisoned apple offered by the Queen, allegorically represents Mary’s willingness, not ignorance and naivety, to take upon Herself the evils of our sinful condition and the punishment due to our sins, which the human will offered Her on Mt. Calvary. This is a reparative co-redemptive act carried out by the New Eve, to remedy the Fall of the first Eve. Snow White’s resultant death, thus represents Mary’s mystical death beneath the Cross. The fact Snow White is laid to rest on a hill, is indicative of this. The fact the apple does not enter Snow White’s stomach represents how Mary suffered and died for us, with Christ, without it reaching her stomach – that is, without being tainted by sin. In contrast the poisoned apple descends into the stomach of the wicked Queen, and is really a parallel symbiotic occurrence and result of Snow White’s coming back to life. Thus we can understand how Mary’s coming to life in the soul, through a true devotion, brings about a death to the soul’s human will (in a non-ontological sense of course), and brings about that restoration of her soul, which is her land, into the kingdom of the Divine Will, in the unitive bliss of intimacy as between two spouses. Just as the land flourished under the Queenship of the newly wed Snow White - but now, chronologically, we're getting ahead of ourselves!

Snow White Speaks to a Little Bird, Disney
The kiss of the prince might be said to refer to the fiat (the ‘yes’) of the soul, through which Mary is born again in the soul. This fiat must be constant, and in turn, Mary will rise exponentially triumphant within the soul, bringing with Her the whole forest – the seven dwarfs of the Gifts of the Spirit and Her Virtues, and the creatures of Her sacred acts. Such a soul participates in the Festivity which is God’s Will – a festival which is embodied in the Mystery of the Resurrection and Ascension – and hence, in Mary’s Assumption.

The dancing mentioned in two places, and the allusion to rolling and round motions speaks of the rounds of Mary – the acts Mary made during Her life in union with the life and works of the Trinity – with which the soul participates, along with the rounds of the soul herself – of course, being united to Mary’s rounds and which are only able to be carried out by virtue of Mary's rounds. By means of these rounds, carried out before the soul has entered the permanent and lofty state of the Supreme Fiat, she is disposed to abide permanently in It. 

Snow White in the Coffin, and the Prince
Yet to live in God’s Will the soul must be willing to eat the poisoned fruit of her own will, which is the same as the call from our Lord to drink the bitter cup (Mt 20:22). The naivety of Snow White in biting from the apple alludes to how Mary’s focus was not on saying “no” to the human will, but on saying “yes” to the Divine Will – to such a point that there is a forgetfulness, holy indifference and a certain blasé quality that manifests in paying no heed to the human will, since there is a total mesmerisation on, and immersion in, the Divine Will. Every time the soul fuses herself with Mary, and expresses her own fiat, she is at once 'biting' her will (perhaps we might say, to the point that time after time, bite after bite, there is ‘nothing’ – in a figurative, non-ontological sense – left of this apple of her will) and thus dying to her false-self and will, grace rises her again and again in newness and fecundity of life in the sanctity of God's Will, until she comes to live in It. Leaving forever the coffin of her self-will. This high estate of living in God’s Will, which involves perfect union with Mary, is ultimately symbolized in the poem by the inhabiting of the kingdom, its flourishing, and the wedding that takes place in the castle between Snow White and the prince.

***

Snow White, Snow White,
So comely fair,
None possess
Thy beauty rare,
None, princess,
To thee compare.

She runs through the forest with skips and hums,
Her enchanting voice singing, cheeks blushing plums.
All the meek creatures of the woods come forth,
To play and dance, ‘round May Pole and her dwarf,
Named Soliday, her favourite of all,
Yet Lunday, Martday, Merday, eq’lly small,
And Joveday, Venday, Saturday alike,
Clap and sing with birds and deer whilst Snow White
Holds a hare by paws, in ringing motion –
As all faces smile in sweet devotion.

Snow White, Snow White,
So comely fair,
Thy pale cheeks
Blush in morn’s air,
As dancest
Thou with white hare.

On left shoulder hers hangs a basket weaved,
Filled to the brim with blackberries retrieved,
Elderb’rries, strawb’rries, boysenberries too,
And even a dozen mushrooms with hue
So white, yet less bright indeed than her glow
Fair skin – that’s whiter than the softest snow.
She twirls – the delight of all living things –
Causing her ebony black hair, like wings,
To touch the sky, brushing fronds of willow
In glide ascent that makes its dryad show.

Snow White, Snow White,
So comely fair,
Lovely, long,
Silk black hair,
Causes all
At thee to stare.

From a distance walks the false Queen, a witch,
Who heard the pipes of dwarfs, and chorus pitch,
Masked as haggard peddler – lusting for death
Of she whose blood red lips leak sweetest breath.
In hand she holds an apple – fine to eye
But poisoned on the inside, to make die
The cause of her envy, since spake to she
Mirror on wall: “Snow White’s more fair than thee.”
So up she went to the now resting girl
And offered her apple as though a pearl.

Snow White, Snow White,
So comely fair,
That she-wolf
Doth cruelly dare,
To harm thee
With sweetful snare.

In her innocence dear Snow White took bite
And at once blood ran cold, and slumped to right.
With glee her step-mother changed to normal,
Making flight on broom, whilst woods were mournful.
When the sun was nearly set, each dwarf,
All seven, raised her up, and on heads, north,
They carried her – silently, nature still.
Betwixt the seven mounts on a green hill
They laid her down to rest, fashioning glass
Coffin, s’that all in beauty hers could bask.

Snow White, Snow White,
So comely fair,
All sorrow
Cannot compare:
What a loss! –
O living prayer.

On third day, riding horse, there comes a prince
Whom chasing bear with hunter’s bow did wince,
Since there, dead, by fate not chance, graced Snow White
He saw whose sight in heart lit chaste delight.
Dismounting horse, he walked towards her bed,
Where she lay as though fast asleep, not dead.
For three whole hours he sat beside her,
Gazing in love, when from his eye fell tear
That splashing unto glass split it in two,
Causing dwarfs to wake from sleep with knifes drew.

Snow White, Snow White,
So comely fair,
Asleepest
Thou layest there,
The object
Of princely care.

Lunday was about to yell, and Merday
To strike, but prince’s love did them allay;
And so from behind a rock they all peeped,
As now, without a veil divide, leaped
The prince’s heart, who leaning in did kiss
With peck, Snow White’s rose lips, tasting bliss –
O Fruit of life! whereat as he withdrew
Her body stirred, and gave a cough that threw
Poisoned apple into clouds, clearing throat
Wherein it lodged, thus stomach ne’er was smote.

Snow White, Snow White,
So comely fair,
Thou wert dead
In coffin square,
‘Till prince kissed
Thee on lips bare.

The maiden’s face returned to rest asleep,
As dumbstruck frozen, all stared in awe deep;
‘Till the meekest smile that ever was grew
Upon her lunar face; as eyes her blue
Did ope’ and head did raise aloft from grave.
The prince, beside himself, did lift from nave
Snow White upon his shoulder, spinning ‘round,
And ‘round, midst joyful laughter, whilst on ground
Four dwarfs rolled with joy; bouncing the rest
‘Round spinning pair, and soon all woods joined fest!

Snow White, Snow White,
So comely fair,
Thou indeed
Art sacred flair,
Whose life doth
To all, life share.

Meanwhile the evil queen was poised in pride,
Standing erect, certain Snow White had died.
Then she spoke: “Mirror, mirror, on the wall,
Who in the land is fairest of them all?”
“In past you’ve twisted my words to suit thee,
But know for sure, her hair’s black as ebn’y,
Her lips as red as blood, and skin like snow –
Ah, Snow White, is the fairest, thou shouldst know!”
At this, queen ran to window, screaming loud,
As apple piece in mouth-oped fell from cloud.

Snow White, Snow White,
So comely fair,
In whole land
Thou art most fair,
Since beauty
Thine, none doth wear.

Involunt’ry bite, no bite at all, but
Missing teeth, went straight down her pipe to gut;
And at that, that was that – she died right then,
Her limp corpse toppled, falling as did Gwen
For Lancelot; and as blood seeped from neck
‘Twas snapped, a crow her eyes did eat and peck
As pack of mutts lapped pool of blood. A dove
Brought this glad news to prince and May in love,
Glad, since queen’s death meant exile’s end, so wend
She home, in castle wed, and land anew flourishéd.

Snow White, Snow White,
So comely fair,
Now thou sits
In royal chair,
At king’s side
As one most fair.


24th June, 2016.