Light On Dark Water

A Christmas Caryll (9)

If I were you I should not worry with de Caussade and his ilk. Most books of that sort are written by and for religious (monks and nuns), and once they have made a clean break from their family and the world, they have not got the same kind of troubles that we have. It is much easier to be "abandoned" when you are not tied up and twisted and rooted into those you love; and if you are a married woman with a family, you must love your family and you must mind what happens, and whether you can pay the rent, and whether there is anything in the larder, and so on. Your sanctity comes from putting your trust in God for yourself and your family, and you are not expected (by God) to be indifferent to those whom He has given to you to be loved by you! If you try to apply (as many do) ideas which even in a monastery are difficult to practice, to life in the world, it will end in depression.

It's not wrong to worry or fear, but it is wrong not to accept worry and fear if they are your personal cross. Only hand out the worry and fear to Our Lord; ask Him to bear it with you.

–Caryll Houselander, Letters

Jean Pierre de Caussade, in case you are not aware of him, was an 18th century French Jesuit who for a time was spiritual director to a congregation of nuns, and wrote (for them, I assume) Abandonment to Divine Providence.

Maclin Horton
, ,

11 responses to “A Christmas Caryll (9)”

  1. Janet

    Much as I love CH, and as right as I think she is most of the time, I don’t think that she understands either JPdC, or the life of monks and nuns, or what is meant in this context by indifference. Does she not think that those monks and nuns were given to each other to love?
    I have only read bits and snatches of Abandonment, but I don’t think he means at all that we shouldn’t be diligent in the duties that our state in life demand, such as providing for our families. It means more that when all our efforts seem to fail, we see whatever comes in our lives as coming from God’s hand.
    Also, there is a difference between worrying about those we love and suffering for those we love and I think that we are called to do the latter and to learn to let go of the former. Worry is debilitating. It keeps us from being able to do what God is calling us to do in any given situation.
    This is an insufficient explanation of what I mean, but I have insufficient time.
    AMDG

    Reply
  2. Mac

    I sort of thought someone might object to what she says here. The reason I picked it is that I suspect lay people often have this kind of problem with the language and general approach of writers like de Caussade. You’re probably right, and I haven’t read much of him, either, but the use of words like “detachment” tends to give the impression of something very different from the intense love that spouses and parents feel, and feel that they ought to feel.

    Reply
  3. Janet

    Oh darn, I won’t even be able to respond at lunch, but later–probably much later.
    AMDG

    Reply
  4. Mac

    Also, I just really found the phrase “de Caussade and his ilk” funny.

    Reply
  5. Anne-Marie

    I don’t know anything about de Caussade, but I do like the general sense of what I take CH to be saying here. For people who are responsible for others, especially parents who are responsible for their children, the care of those people is not something from which they have to detach themselves in order to devote themselves to Christ–it is how they devote themselves to Christ. Monks and nuns are to love their brothers/sisters, but that’s not the primary reason for monastic life.
    That said, I agree with Janet that worrying is wrong. We should “mind what happens” in the sense of managing it, but not in the sense of fretting when it doesn’t go well.

    Reply
  6. Janet

    I notice we have moved from the word “disinterested” to “detached.”
    AMDG

    Reply
  7. Marianne

    tied up and twisted and rooted into those you love
    I guess a take on “the ties that bind,” but it comes across as pretty negative to me. Perhaps it was due to her own difficult childhood?

    Reply
  8. Mac

    Heh–I liked that, and it seemed more positive than negative to me. Maybe it says something about me, too, but I thought it was a good description of the often difficult love within a family.
    I don’t see “disinterested”, Janet. Is that a word deC uses?

    Reply
  9. janet

    Sorry, I meant indifferent.
    Shouldn’t post when I’m rushed.
    AMDG

    Reply
  10. Janet

    “tied-up and twisted and rooted”
    I didn’t think of that as negative either. I was thinking more like “entwined.”
    AMDG

    Reply
  11. Mac

    I meant to reply to this yesterday: I thought of it as slightly negative, in that it suggests to me a certain amount of stress. But still more positive than negative.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Instagram / TikTok / X

Designed with WordPress