In
the 1941 British film Pimpernel Smith, Leslie
Howard plays a seemingly-mild-mannered archeologist history professor who
secretly rescues fellow intellectuals from the clutches of the Nazis. In one
scene, at a high-society soirée, the professor refers innocently in the course
of a conversation to the fact that the ancient Greek statue of Aphrodite he
unearthed was (of course) nude. Shocked by
his frank simplicity, the prim-and-proper bystanders are a bit flustered; the
Professor, realizing their embarrassment, mildly replies; “Oh, well, to the
pure all things are pure.”
When
I saw this film for the first time, this quote fascinated me, so I determined
to look it up. As it turns out, the line originates with St. Paul , who wrote in his letter to Titus: “To the pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and
unbelieving nothing is pure; their very minds and consciences are corrupted.”
This
little line struck me so deeply because, as I recently studied in a philosophy
class on Ethics, there is a fundamental connection between the way we perceive things
and our purity of heart. During the
course, we reviewed the writings of Catholic philosopher Josef Pieper on
chastity in The Four Cardinal Virtues. Selfishness
is blinding, he argues, because it
makes one see only one’s own private good as good. Unchastity, then, is uniquely blinding because it is uniquely selfish in an area—sexuality—where man
is called to be especially unselfish.
Our purity of heart or lack thereof,
Pieper concludes, dramatically affects our moral vision. On the other side of
the coin, chastity makes you see things clearly, as they really are.
Pieper’s point makes perfect sense,
and coincides exactly with Paul’s. A
person who sees things through the lens of purity will not see indecency or
innuendo where there is none to be seen; but the man who sees all things by the
light (or darkness, rather) of unchastity will see sinfulness in all things. Adam and Eve saw each other’s nakedness with
pure eyes before the Fall; once their vision was altered by sin, they felt the
need to cover themselves. Similarly, Michelangelo’s paintings that bedeck the
Sistine Chapel have been condemned by various puritanically-minded groups and
figures throughout history who felt they were more pornographic than sacred. But
John Paul II reverently defended the artwork, calling the Sistine Chapel the
“sanctuary of the theology of the body.”
As coming across that line from Paul in the context of
the film made me realize, what Paul and Pieper say easily applies not only to
art but to daily conversations and thoughts. The first incident that came to my
mind was when I recently recommended a song to someone. “The lyrics are very
sweet,” I said, “Except for one line which implies something inappropriate.”
When my companion asked me what the line was, I told him; with a puzzled look
on his face, he replied, “Um, that doesn’t have to be something bad. That could be interpreted as something
wholesome.” I felt abashed by my
friend’s purity of heart. Where I followed the trail of innuendo, his thoughts
remained on a simpler, more innocent plane.
Impurity in our hearts can especially affect daily
conversation in the realm of gossip—when a nasty rumor spreads quickly around a
community and swiftly mushrooms completely out of proportion. One foul mind can defile a situation by its
own perception, and pass it on thus contaminated to others. Take, for instance, the story of Marian the
librarian in The Music Man. “She
was seen going and coming from his house,” the chattering ladies of town begin
whispering to each other, and the mutterings crescendo to wild misjudgments of
her character: “She made brazen overtures!”
As it turns out, Marian’s actions—paying a visit to a family friend—were
completely innocent, but the society gossipers saw her only through their own
tainted lens.
It is so easy to make similar misjudgments of others, to unfairly
project motivations or actions onto the characters of others: to assume, for
instance that the elderly lady in the back of church prays loudly for
attention, not because her hearing aid is off; or that the person who leaves
daily Mass early does so disrespectfully, and not because it is the only way he
can both attend Mass daily and make
it to work on time; or that the young woman in the supermarket dresses immodestly for deliberately sinful
reasons, rather than out of simple ignorance.
But to the pure, all things are pure. So we must strive to be supremely careful in
our judgments of others, because if we take a look at the way we see others, it
will be a reflection not of their character,
but of ours. Our sin clouds our vision of our neighbor—and that
means that ultimately it clouds our vision of God. Blessed are the pure of heart, for they shall
see God.
This is a wonderful post. It is so good to see you posting again recently.
ReplyDeleteA great post! It's so hard when one must interact in the secular world to completely guard yourself from the inappropriate comments and remarks of others, even when one tries very hard to to overhear them. Once a person grows older, it seems so hard to regain that childhood innocence. We all must remember to implore Mary to help restore that beautiful innocence that, like your friend or the history professor in the movie, does not jump to sinful conclusions but assumes pure and wholesome things instead. Thank you for this! I'm with Daniel, it's good to hear from you again!
ReplyDeleteGod Bless!
Oops! I meant to write "not to overhear them." Bad typo! Sorry! :)
ReplyDelete