“To be or not to be that is the question, whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune or to take arms against a sea of troubles” ( Hamlet)
“If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well it was done quickly, if the assassination could trammel up the consequences and catch with his surcease success – that but this blow might be the be-all and end all here – but here, upon this bank and shoal of time we’d jump the life to come”(Macbeth)
These are quotations from but two of the many soliloquies offered by Shakespeare. They are by definition, “utterances or discourse by a person who is talking to himself, oblivious to any hearer present “(OED). The word comes from the Latin soliloquim: solus-alone; loqui – to speak. Thus it means to speak alone, to one’s self.
The word is a common word in English today but it was not so in the Latin until Augustine, the philosopher, coined it in the 4th Century. One of his first works was entitled “Soliliquia”. He thought it necessary to note that this was a new word, since prior to that time most philosophical writings were conversations in the form of ‘dialogues”. Augustine’s work was a written conversation between himself, his mind, and Reason. He capitalized ‘Reason’ to give it a personality. Dialogues were common beginning with Plato and even down to Cicero. The other common “logue” was and is one we use still today namely, a monologue. But Augustine contrary to Plato and others wanted to make it a matter of the mind and its use of reason. Like the classics before and since he ( his mind) presented to Reason a question. It was Reason’s obligation to then explain and give the mind an answer. So the pattern was created that we now see in Hamlet and Macbeth, they consider both sides of the issue. In one whether suicide is better than suffering, or murder for a good cause can be excused. In both the decision against the action is due to the ‘life to come’. They would, they believed, suffer eternal punishment and thus decide against the action.
All this came to mind while I was reading a memoir of a Swiss theologian, Hans Kung, entitled “My Struggle For Freedom”. In it he has what could be called a ‘soliloquy. He reviews questions asked of him by an artist in Berlin named Moabit. He found he could not answer them. They were, “What is the meaning of my life?; Why am I as I am? ; What is the meaning of my freedom”, and the likes. So he begins his soliloquy, his mind asking his reason these questions. His ultimate answer is that reason alone cannot solve these riddles. He tries Sarte, the existentialist, Descartes the mathematician and philosopher, Catholic and Protestant Theology– but cannot find “an Archimedean point from which I can fundamentally determine, move, understand, change, my reality”. It is not my intent to offer his reasoning to convince anyone, but to note how the style of a soliloquy is still practiced in 2004 A.D. as it was created in 300 A.D. It still has a dramatic and moving effect on the reader and listener. I agree that in its use by Shakespeare the dramatic effect is lot easier to perceive than in a metaphysic mode. What Kung ultimately decides is “…that an elementary choice is being asked of me, a venture of trust”. He compares it to the idea of swimming in a lake. It cannot be experienced by a swimming course on dry land. It can only be experienced while he is swimming. It is like the basic experiences of love or hope, i.e., they cannot be proven in advance by argument, nor after the event.
I did enjoy his treatment of Descartes and his quote from C.G.Jung. He dismisses Descartes’ classic “Cogito ergo sum” (I think therefore I am”) with questions like: “Is my self really accessible? Am I not equipped with mind and will, disposition and structure, head and heart, conscious and unconscious?” It had me musing, what about those people whom we categorize as not “thinking”, are the not here? His quote from C.G.Jung was enlightening. It read: “In reality, being simple is the supreme art and thus accepting oneself is the embodiment of the moral problem and core of a whole world view.”
Last month I talked about “Letters” and their use by historians for more insight into the period being considered. I noticed almost within a week that there is another volume of letters up for sale entitled “Posterity”. The editor is the daughter of historian John McCullough, author of best sellers like “John Adams” and “Truman”. It is a collection of letters by famous and historical Americans to the their children, i.e., their posterity. I was reminded also of the fact that I have in my possession letters of my brother, Bishop Frank, written while he attended Vatican II. The originals are with my nephew James Allen, Esq. who was helping my brother, Dick SJ, now deceased write a biography of Frank. I know at one time, in the year 2000, he had hopes of continuing the task. The letters are interesting. They possess a lot of personal information since they were written to my Dad but the references to the council and the Pope’s conduct get a prime treatment. As my nephew Jim noted they also speak of his interest in playing golf, something my nephew never knew his famous Uncle was into. He regrets the council’s failure to really get into funding mission work, which was his endeavor as the bishop of the Sulu Islands. He has a classic about when the Pope goes to New York to speak to the United Nations. His visit is in all the papers of course. He waits anxiously for his return and his appearance before the Council. The day comes and he writes on October 6,1965:
“Then for an hour and half we were led to believe that any minute the Pope would arrive…while some poor fellows continued with the speeches on the economics of the world and the abolition of the idea of a ‘perfect society’, an idea once very much revered by Thomistic Philosophy. The television lights went on…the guards came from the tombs of the Vatican..the presiding body of Cardinals started for the door –and soon it was five minutes of one –and the Pope (Paul VI) was coming for the great doors were thrown open and in he came to receive a standing ovation. He led the retinue down the aisle while the bishops stood, sang and clapped his arrival. The diplomatic Corp had a place and he went to greet them separately and thence to the temporary throne. …he pulled out a speech and read for about seven minutes exhorting all men to seek peace based on justice. Until then it had been a thrilling experience..but now it was back to the old staid and fixed Roman way of not making a mistake ! Not a word about the trip…a terrible let down. But who am I to criticize the Pope who had just made history and so Adios!”
He did participate and help in the restoration of the married diaconate. He speaks of that on and off in his letters. Now my son-in-law Thomas Baker is a recipient of that change having become a deacon now some years ago. He also noted rather prophetically that it would probably take 50 years before any of the major changes would be accepted. How true it was. Even today there are certain places where the Latin Mass is still recited and attended; where married deacons are not created or allowed; and where the ‘open window’ of ecumenism is covered with blinds, I.E., no light shines in nor eyes peer out on the rest of the Christian world. Hans Kung was teaching Theology during Vatican II. He was offered positions on commissions but decided not to accept. It left him the opportunity to analyses and criticizes from the classroom via the press. His main one, which I am aware of was the failure to reach out in an ecumenical fashion to the Protestant and non-Catholic brethren. He noted that there was an attempt to open the windows of the Vatican as John XXIII had promised but no one touched the doors. He felt that should have been one of the objects and he has written extensively on the need for ecumenism in today’s world. (See, “Theology for the Third Millennium: An Ecumenical View”) Bishop Frank was years ahead of most in this regard in that his schools in the Sulus allowed the Moslem attendees to hold classes and prayers on the grounds of the school at the end of the class day. This was in the ’60’s even before Vatican II. He died in the Sulus in 1970. No one was appointed to replace him. He was so loved by the people that they built a mausoleum in the Cathedral he had built where he was laid to rest. His Oblate brothers attempted to prepare for him to be buried in the Philippine islands in Cotabato in the Oblate Seminary, but the people said “No way” They even threatened armed action if anyone tried to do so. The failure to replace him for over five years resulted in the rise of the fanatic Moslems who today rule the Sulu Islands. Christians and Christianity were driven out.
The last two weeks of June we spent one up in Philadelphia area, the other at the Beach with Mary, Ron and the three guys, Alex, Aidan (twin 7 year olds) and Owen (age 5). The week in Philly was to take part in two graduation parties and one graduation ceremony. One graduate was Linda McSorley from the 8th grade; the other was Kelly Golden from High School. We attended her graduation service, which included some nearly 600 others. The guest speaker was the present Governor of Pennsylvania, Edward G. Rendell. It brought back memories of the 70’s when I defended by appointment charges of murder by a gang member who was prosecuted by the then Assistant District Attorney, Edward Rendell. He went on to be District Attorney, Mayor and then last year Governor. His short remarks were good and with a bit of humor. His main message was they have right and duty to keep us free by being sure to vote.
That week also saw Mary Lou get another procedure with a new specialist and she went back to eating real food, after 3 months of intravenous feeding. The parties also provided June and I an opportunity to catch up with most of children. June got to see them all. I got to see most of mine. The week with the guys at St.Pete’s Beach on the Gulf was l relaxing and lots of fun. The guys loved the water, whether the pool or the gulf, so much so that on return to Yardley, PA. their hometown, they had their Swimmer’s ears corrected! Until next time, Pax Tecum!