Ads


David Bentley Hart

view all featured authors »

The Abbot and Aunt Susie

In the August/September issue of First Things , Matthew Milliner gave a delightful account of his visit to the Eastern Orthodox Monastery of St Anthony in Arizona’s Sonora Desert. At least, I quite enjoyed it—though, truth be told, I would have enjoyed it considerably more had it not included a brief exchange Milliner had with the monastery’s abbot:


“Is holiness possible outside the Orthodox Church?” I inquired. [The abbot] responded with tired eyes: “A measure of virtue perhaps, but holiness is not possible.” The Orthodoxy on offer at St. Anthony’s does not mince words.

No, apparently not. Jesus, of course, rather mysteriously asserted that the Holy Spirit goes wherever he will, so it’s good of the abbot to provide a clarification on this point: the Holy Spirit may go wherever he likes, it seems, so long as he confines himself to the right neighborhoods.

This is not, incidentally, the official teaching of the Orthodox Church (so few things are), and most Orthodox Christians would tend to regard it as the embarrassingly silly twaddle it is; but it is something that certain hardliners like to say. And, to be fair, I’ve heard something similar from one or two Tridentinist Catholics I’ve tripped over in a dark alley now and again.

Most of us know the rules here, of course: When some hoary-headed old mammal in monastic garb starts spouting nonsense of this sort, no matter how offensive we find it, we’re supposed to shrug patiently and smile a gently ironic smile, reminding ourselves that a dash of curmudgeonly sectarian insularity is frequently the inevitable concomitant of deep piety. But I don’t want to play along.

The wonderful thing about holiness, when you really encounter it, is that it testifies to itself. This is not to say one can never be deceived; it’s easy to mistake personal charisma for genuine grace, or to be misled by plausible charlatans—until, that is, one comes across the real thing, at a moment when one is open to it. Then one knows it for what it is: a quality of such lucid and incandescent simplicity and of such moral beauty that one feels simultaneously deeply happy in its presence and ashamed of one’s own failure to have realized it within oneself.

At any rate, I’m quite convinced I’ve met a small number of truly holy persons in my life. Some were indeed Orthodox; some were even Orthodox monks. Others were Christians of other communions. And still others were not Christians at all. And, if I were to try to say who the first person was who made me aware of what genuine sanctity is, I think I would have to point to a woman who probably never even set foot in an Orthodox church.

Her name was Mrs. Estelle Hayes, though in my childhood I only ever knew her as Aunt Susie, which was how my brothers spoke of her. She was a black woman who helped make ends meet by cleaning the homes of middle-class white people; having been born a little before the turn of the last century into the rigid caste system of segregated Maryland, she grew up without any opportunity for a more rewarding occupation than that.

The name Susie had displaced her proper name when she was still a baby. She had been born at the southern end of Maryland’s Eastern Shore, where the whistles of the steam ships that sailed down the Chesapeake Bay from Havre de Grace and other ports were audible day and night. She had, it seems, a powerful set of lungs, and so her family started calling her after the ship with the loudest whistle of all, The Susie.

She entered my family’s life well before I was born, and by the time I came along she had largely departed from it, so my own contact with her was as fleeting as it was moving. She had helped my father’s mother keep house before my parents were married, and later began coming to help my mother once a week as well. She was still keeping things in order in the years when both my brothers were born, neither of whom ever had reason to suspect that she was not, in a strictly technical sense, one of their aunts.

I never met her husband, Al Hayes, who was a professional gardener among other things, but my father often described him to me as a fine gentleman with a great salt-and-pepper beard and impeccable sense in clothes (including a fondness for spats); and once I overheard my father remark that Mr. Hayes’s beard made him look a little like God. As I was about four at the time, I took this rather more literally than my father intended, no doubt, and for the next few years my mental picture of God was pretty firmly fixed as one of an older black man with a flowing white beard.

Aunt Susie had a strong and somewhat conservative personality, and a deeply generous nature; she was, most importantly, a fervent Christian who spoke of her faith with a great and convincing clarity. She had worked to earn registration as a practical nurse, and in the time she had free after cleaning houses and doing laundry she devoted herself to the care of others, visiting elderly shut-ins, preparing meals for the hungry, and generally bringing food and basic medical assistance to those most in need.

She was a physically strong woman, and seemingly indefatigable at the chores by which she earned her pay; but she was even more tireless at the end of the working day in performing works of Christian love. In her church, she was regarded as something of a saint.

There was something about her, moreover, that convinced one that her prayers were of a more powerful variety than most. When my parents lived in a house on a hill above Ellicott City in Howard County, my father used to pick her up from and then take her back to the streetcar in Catonsville just over the line in Baltimore County; and one evening, during a winter storm, the car went into a violent skid towards the tree line, and then just as suddenly straightened itself back into its lane before my father really had control of the wheel.

Over the rapid beating of his heart, my father politely inquired of Aunt Susie whether she had just been praying, to which she calmly replied that she had indeed, and that the Lord had taken over from there. Coming from her, it seemed simply a plain statement of fact.

In any event, that was all a little before my time. During my childhood, I heard a great deal about Aunt Susie, but I did not meet her until she came to dinner when I was about ten. I was deeply impressed by the warmth and forthrightness of her character, and naturally addressed her—as I had always heard was correct—as Aunt Susie. But, thereafter, I saw little of her.

My last encounter with her—one of the more indelible memories of my life—came a few years later, when she was dying in a somewhat dilapidated wing of the Women’s Hospital in Baltimore. We went to visit her in her room, and found her in her bed, lying on one side, much frailer and much smaller than she had been in previous years.

While we were there, a group of her parishioners from her church dropped in—to show their respect, dressed as though for services—and she insisted that we all pray together and join in some songs of praise. Since the charismatic movement had wafted through the icy halls of the Episcopal Church a few years before, my family actually knew the Pentecostal hymns that she wanted to hear, so we all joined hands around her and did as she asked.

It would be quite impossible for me to explain what the hour we spent there was like, or what effect it had on me. I can only say that Aunt Susie spoke about her love of Christ in a very clear and confident way, with a power that the weakness of her voice did nothing to diminish. From that day to this I have never heard another profession of Christian faith that seized me with such irresistible force. I am not a very emotional person, as it happens, but I was almost overwhelmed by the unutterable beauty that emanated from her.

Just as we were about to leave, Aunt Susie said that the Lord was telling her she would not see us again. We assured her that this was not so, and that we would be back before long, but she was quite certain that she was right, and so her last words to us had something of the quality of a valedictory blessing. And, of course, she was right; she died before we could make another visit to her bedside.

Anyway, I don’t really imagine I can convey what I would like to about her in a short column of this sort. I only want to make clear why I cannot listen to remarks of the sort made by the abbot of St Anthony’s with quite the seemly equanimity I probably should, and why I see them as being a little blasphemous.

To put the matter very simply, I am absolutely sure that Aunt Susie was a great woman, who probably did more good on many days of her life than most of us ever will really accomplish over the courses of our lives. But, more than that, I am convinced that she was genuinely a woman of resplendent sanctity, and one from whom the good abbot—had he had the good fortune to have known her—might have learned a very great deal indeed about what true holiness is.

David B. Hart is a contributing writer of First Things. His most recent book is Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies (Yale University Press). His previous “On the Square” articles can be found here.

Comments:

12.3.2010 | 2:43am
Amen, amen, and AMEN! I almost levitated out of my chair when I read the affirmation that the Spirit moves where it will. (No, actually, I'm not advanced enough in sainthood to levitate yet.) No-one has the exclusive franchise...no-one and no earthly organization can bottle and dispense it, despite opinions to the contrary that I've read on occasion even in this publication. Thank you, David, for this truly inspiring essay, and may blessings and peace be upon Aunt Susie.
12.3.2010 | 4:34am
Bret Lythgoe says:
What a beautiful essay. We should never be suprised to find holy people, in any walk, or corner of life. I believe Martin Buber, that great and wise Jewish Philosopher's "I, Thou'' approach, to every human we encounter, can help us detect the holiness that exists in them. As God's children, we all have at least some of the manifestations of our creator in us.
12.3.2010 | 4:37am
sanpietrini says:
Amen. (I'd like to say more - but can't; and besides, this is a case of "less is more," anyway. Thanks for sharing.)
12.3.2010 | 6:08am
While reading Aunt Susie's story,I began to think of people I have known who seemed like her. Like her, that is, until I saw the words, "resplendent sanctity." That description changes things. I have not been privileged to meet such a person.

I have known a woman from Bolivia, Gregoria. She and I exchanged only a few words as I unfortunately do not speak Spanish. She and other members of her family were employed by my daughter to help at home. Her presence was more a quiet blessing, a grace. Her forebearance, her faithful courage and hope, were a source of strength to me. She had so much to give.
12.3.2010 | 7:46am
TB says:
This is something Flannery O'Connor would have delighted in.
12.3.2010 | 9:16am
Dan Moloney says:
I don't think that holiness is as obvious as David thinks it is: "The wonderful thing about holiness, when you really encounter it, is that it testifies to itself... it is a quality of such lucid and incandescent simplicity and of such moral beauty that one feels simultaneously deeply happy in its presence and ashamed of one’s own failure to have realized it within oneself." Well, that's not always true. It depends in part on the spiritual sensitivity of the observer. Not everyone had the reaction to St. Jerome, for instance, that David describes.
I think David should have used the word "piety" rather than "holiness"--only the former is compatible with doctrinal error and a lack of full of communion with the Church. Deep and sincere piety usually does manifest itself. It is an aspect of holiness, and a note of holiness, though not its entirety.
12.3.2010 | 10:32am
Kelso says:
Yes, I've known people like Aunt Susie. My deepest regret is that when I was in touch with a few of them as a young man that I did not ask them to become Catholic. How could a Catholic say that he loves Jesus and refrain from inviting good Protestants into the Church so that they could receive Him in Holy Communion? How could a Catholic who loves Mary not want to rave about her with good Protestants and try to convince them that the Angelic Prayer "Hail Mary" did not end on the day of the Incarnation in Nazareth. Our Faith is a challenge or it is no Faith at all. The orthodox priest was, of course, wrong in what he told Mr. Hart. After all, it is not a holy thing to deny the authority of the Vicar of Christ. Yet, it seems Mr. Hart is thinking with his emotions and leaving truth behind as something secondary -- if not totally irrelevant. If my words upset you, Mr. Hart, they should. I do not pretend to be self-righteous. I wish I were more holy. But I do know where holiness is to be found. Grace is a gift. Charity is a gift of grace. And, as Saint Paul says, "charity rejoices in the truth." Let us truly be charitable and give the gift of True Religion to poor ignorant souls who are waiting for us to be more generous.
12.3.2010 | 10:40am
Paige says:
@ Dan Maloney
Not everyone found St Jerome holy, true; that's because he wasn't. He was pious, though. I suppose you think holiness=canonization, but the official list of saints in the Catholic and Orthodox churches incldes a lot of persons who weren't that much holier than Genghis Khan (unless you thaink "St." Constantine was really a saint because he got canonized).
And which "Church" do you mean, incidentally? Catholic or Orthodox?
But let me see if I can make a judgment here: woman of fervent piety who also labors throughout her life in the Christlike service of others, whose life of prayer can reach out to move and change others, who is able to communicate her faith with transformative power, and who lives in close constant communion with her Lord... Hmmm, yes, I'd have to say that looks like real sanctity to me. Any doctrine or institution that wuld say otherwise is almost certainly a false doctrine or institution.
But maybe you're right--she would have been holy if she'd only been lucky enough to be born Irish.
12.3.2010 | 10:44am
@Kelso and Dan Moloney,

Well, since Dr Hart (or, as DM calls him, David--have you ever been formally introduced?) is not a Roman Catholic, i doubt he would take anything you say very seriously.

But thank-you for reminding me why I can't stand the sort of piety your words represent. Arid dogmatism that blinds you to the testimony of living souls.

Oh, and as for the 'Vicar of Christ' business, mediaeval inventions of that sort oughtn't to be treated like serious religious concerns. Grow up and out of such nonsense. Then you might discover holiness.
12.3.2010 | 10:55am
gdp says:
I can't help but think that it's too bad that Jesus didn't have Prof. Hart and Andrew Lyttle and some of the other commenters available to explain to him that he didn't need to found a church. What a pinhead huh? I wonder where Jesus ever got the idea to do such a silly, unnecessary thing.
12.3.2010 | 11:24am
Aime Cerf says:
gdp,

Umm, exactly how do you get that ridiculous reading out of this piece? As I read it, it says that the grace of the Holy Spirit operates both inside and outside the visible boundaries of the church, creating sanctity everywhere. The Roman Catholic Catechism and the documents of Vatican II seem to agree with that, for anxious Catholics (not that I know what you are).

But which church exactly do you mean? The Orthodox Church? The Catholic? The "church of all believers"? I mean there are so many different accounts of what the church is. If you mean the RC communion, well I think the claim that it is the Church as such, and that the Bishop of Rome is the binding center of the true church, is indefensible as a historical proposition. At least the Orthodox version is compatible with the history we have in hand. But, really, almost all versions of the story of how the church was founded are historically dubious.
12.3.2010 | 11:26am
Albert says:
I'm sorry to say that the majority of comments so far merely serve to undermine their respective "positions," including those favoring Dr. Hart's. This is disheartening, considering everyone has just read this essay right before commenting.
12.3.2010 | 11:35am
Beth says:
I was afraid this lovely story would provoke an argument about who has the "true church", and sure enough it did. As for me, I thank Mr. Hart, and found it an inspiring story of one of God's saints.
12.3.2010 | 11:36am
Jim Daley says:
You know, when Dr. Hart said he'd run across Catholics who say similar things, I thought he was exaggerating. I guess I'm a fairly sheltered kind of Catholic, though, because Dan Moloney and Kelso and this gdp fellow (gross domestic product?) come along right on cue to show me the error of my ways.

As a Catholic, I apologize for such nonsense and want to affirm that I agree with Pope John Paul II that real holiness is found outside the Catholic Church, just as real evil is often found within it. I'm sticking with the magisterium here: the true inhabitants of the church are not necessarily those who are visibly united to it in this world.
12.3.2010 | 11:46am
Beth,

That's because some people think sanctity is the same thing as sanctimony, and that faith is the same thing as brutal dogmatism.

As someone who drifts back and forth, towards and away from Christian faith, I have to say it's the Aunt Susies I've met who make me able perhaps to believe, and the fellows like Kelso and Dan who make me think that maybe it's all a lot of rubbish after all. I suppose I should learn to look at the saints and not to listen to the others.
12.3.2010 | 11:54am
pdn Michael says:
The Good Samaritan, the "harlot" Rahab (or Rechab) who happens to be listed as an ancestor of our Lord by Matthew (although some disagree with this reading), and the Roman Centurion come to mind. So does the the Methodist kid who showed up long ago just after I was involved in an auto accident: his quick action in the days before cellphones probably saved me from bleeding to death. I think I'm with Mr. Hart on this one while disagreeing with him on the inferiority of the oblong game. :))
12.3.2010 | 11:57am
Don says:
What a thoughtful article on holiness. One thing though - I'm not sure that Prof Hart is being completely fair to the Abbott of St. Anthony's. The Abbott provided a pat, short answer to a very involved question, and probably if Milliner had the opportunity to continue with the conversation the response would have been deeper and more illuminating. For starters, what did Milliner mean by "holiness" and what did the Abbott mean? Are they giving the word the same meaning? Also, does the Abbott actually believe that Padre Pio or Blessed Mother Teresa were simply "virtuous" and not "holy", or that they did not find "holiness"? I somehow doubt it.
I also have to admit that although I've never met the Abbott, I have met and talked with someone who grew up with him in Canada and remains friends with him - from these conversations I have to say that the Abbott has done much good work and is a pious man. Ergo my thinking that the Abbott's thinking on the matter is probably much deeper than the quote in Hartman's article gives him credit for.
12.3.2010 | 12:14pm
Robert Hart says:
Kelso writes: "My deepest regret is that when I was in touch with a few of them as a young man that I did not ask them to become Catholic."

To which she might have replied, "Do you know Jesus?"

By the way, Mr. One-True-Church, the question stands.
12.3.2010 | 12:21pm
A Lyttle says:
@ Don,

Yes, the abbot provides a pat short answer to an involved question, but it's a stupid and graceless answer nonetheless. It's pretty clear what he means. And I think you haven't met enough Ultra-Orthodox in your time quite to appreciate his perspective. He would indeed tell you that Mother Teresa was not a holy person, and could not be, because she wasn't Orthodox. He would also tell you that the Orthodox Church is the only 'ark of salvation'.

But I'm sure you're right about the abbot: no doubt he has, in his time, achieved 'a measure of virtues perhaps'. But I still don't think you should cut him any slack. Evil thoughts expressed by good persons are often the most dangerous falsehoods of all.
12.3.2010 | 3:02pm
Dan Deeny says:
Excellent article. Perhaps Aunt Susie is praying for the abbot of St. Anthony's Orthodox Monastery in Arizona?
12.3.2010 | 3:12pm
CKG says:
Mr. Hart's fine essay seems to have all-too-predictably rattled the cages of the One-True-Church types, of whatever flavor. . .

St. Augustine would seem to have covered similar ground when he said, "Not all those whom the Church has, does God have; and not all those whom God has, does the Church have."
12.3.2010 | 4:25pm
Bob G says:
You'd have to think that membership in the "one true Church" must give one a better shot at holiness, and probably many people in many "denominations" think they are in it. But everyone knows God is greater than our categories. I find Mr. Hart's judgments just. I knew such a person, too, a Catholic like myself, but I'm sure there are many similar in other churches. If they're not in the one true Church, it's hardly their fault.
12.3.2010 | 4:32pm
Jim says:
It all depends upon the definition of the term holiness. In any case I am quite surprised at the vilification of a person based on their answer to a question that is wide-ranging and complex. This bitter and insulting judgment is highly unbecoming.

If you don't believe that there is a true church (or more importantly a true faith), then how do you keep your faith was becoming corrupted? For one person the concept of faith in Jesus Christ is drastically and often incompatibly different from another. Are both correct? If you believe in Truth, they can't both be correct. Who is right? The person that most matches your own understanding?

Orthodoxy teaches that there is no salvation outside the Orthodox Church. If there was, why bother having the Orthodox Church? With this idea, we also have the seemingly conflicting position that we are not to judge anyone else, it is the Master's responsibility to judge. Can there be salvation even when we do not understand it, yes. But the tools to actively seek salvation are only complete in the Orthodox Church. Just as the thief on the cross did not spend his time being righteous, and did not attend a yet-to-exist church, but believed in his heart in Jesus Christ, so too can others and be saved. The tools that the Orthodox Church gives believers is not some magic guarantee, but if you wander around trying to pick the right pieces to find salvation, you are far less likely to find the narrow path.

For all of the beauty that Aunt Susie manifested in the world due to her faith, does this equal holiness, that is, does it equal the same term that the Abbot was discussing? Only the abbot can truly answer, and to deride him for his answer is to keep yourself blind to your surroundings. You are asking an Orthodox Christian if there is salvation outside of Orthodoxy. If that person thought there was, then the best they could be considered is a "cultural" Orthodox Christian. To adhere to the teachings and regulations prescribed for Orthodox Christians, even moderately, is at great cost to us, our bodies and our desires.

If the question about holiness was to sincerely find the way to holiness, then this answer would not be offensive (the abbot said nothing offensive about the questioner or any other person). The offense taken shows there was no desire to learn, but to condemn. If you are happy and fulfilled and know you are on the path to holiness and sanctity, why ask another who is clearly on another path? It is usually apparent when someone desires to ask a loaded question, or a question for which the answer will not matter. It is a common method to answer in blunt and general answers. The questioner is then free to ask more questions, probe or debate. The answerer can then gauge the level of desire to really know. If you believed the question was "pat" why not probe deeper if you really desired to understand?

One final point, beware of holiness and your judgment of it. I knew a priest, and he was very holy. Not just externally, but I knew him for quite a long time and he always exhibited the traits that Aunt Susie exhibited. It turned out badly. He had many, many "demons" lurking under the surface. He crashed out (in ways that are too ghastly to describe) of his faith to which he, himself brought many people. I can't discount his pious deeds, and by all accounts he exhibited holiness before his collapse, but if we are making a final judgment, would you consider him holy? Will G-d consider him holy? Holiness is not about the deeds we see, but the thoroughly enveloping change in a person towards being like G-d. If this man had died before his collapse, I would think differently about him?
12.3.2010 | 4:51pm
Paige says:
Dear Jim,

No one was harshly vilified, though there was a perfectly just rebuke of a foolish remark.

I hope you're rescued from your wicked foolishness someday too, just as I hope for a similar rescue of the Catholic One-True-Churchers here.

Actually, there are many very deeply devout Orthodox, not merely culturally Orthodox, who would reject your remarks absolutely. Among them would be Abba Silouan and his disciple Archimandrite Sophrony, for instance, not to mention Metropolitan Anthony and Patriarch Teoctist. But I don't want to give you too long a list. I'm sure you have your daily readings from the Pedalion and John Romanides to do.
12.3.2010 | 4:59pm
FW Ken says:
Well, I'm Catholic and the worst sort: a convert. And some of my brethren need to consider the old saw about being "more Catholic than the pope". Of course, the self-righteousness of some replies is also obnoxious. Ah! the Internet!

Enough of that. This is a wonderful essay, filled with hope and joy and an appropriate meditation for Advent. Christ comes in His Church organically, and in His saints charismatically. Grace perfected nature in this holy woman, which is a sign that all of us who have salvation to "work out with fear and trembling" can have a reasonable hope. This lady had little in life, but had everything, and at the end was surrounded by the love of family and friends.

Aunt Suzie evangelized David Hart's family; he has evangelized me with this story of grace in one soul that gives me hope for my poor soul. Jesus saves!

But one quibble: what makes anyone think that any job is more rewarding than cleaning houses? If that's where God has put you, of course. :-)
12.3.2010 | 5:29pm
jm says:
As I have gotten older, I have come to realize that determining who may be saved is beyond my pay grade. But I can judge whether there are certain people whose life story, words, actions, prayers, and examples point me in the direction of the gospel messages.

Reading the story of Aunt Susie has inspired me to reflect on how I might live my life better and to think about my relationship with God.

Will she meet criteria for salvation within the guidlines of this or that organization's creed? Members of each organization can decide. But only God, the Creator, knows for sure. Not the abbot, not I. (But I do have a strong suspicion that she rests in the comfort of Jesus, smiling down on us as we think about her life's example.)
12.3.2010 | 6:35pm
Donghee says:
As a young and recent Christian (2 years), I am glad to say that this resplendent essay was a much-needed slap to the face. I've been so caught up these last few months in what A.Lyttle termed blinding "arid dogmatism" that I failed to realize that Christianity is just as much, if not more, about what one does than what one believes.
12.3.2010 | 7:57pm
David B Hart says:
Excuse me for dropping in with a minor correction. My mother informs me that, during their years in Ellicott City, my father used to drive Aunt Susie not to the streetcar in the evening, but back to her house, as he wouldn't have wanted her to have to walk home and as he wanted to enjoy the pleasure of her company longer. Not the most significant fact, I suppose, but it's always worthwhile to try to get all the details right.
12.3.2010 | 8:16pm
The embodiment of true holiness was in the incarnate one, Jesus. Yet how often he was deemed unholy by those who so much wanted to be known for their holiness. Like all other divine attributes, we are surprised by the multifaceted and unexpected nature of the appearances of holiness. Did Peter encounter some deeper measure of unveiled holiness when after submitting to the wisdom of his Lord and experiencing an unexpected providential supply of fish, he "fell at Jesus’ knees and said, 'Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!'?" (Luke 5:8). Boat-side holiness outside the walls of the Orthodox Church--imagine?
12.3.2010 | 10:28pm
Since I have known Mr. Hart for many years, I feel justified in calling him " David" ( But not"Ben"-inside joke.)Let me just say that this latest piece y David is a masterpiece. It is a beautifully written tribute to a remarkable woman, who evidently exemplified waht Samuel Eliot Morrison called "The supreme beauty which is the beauty of holiness."Bravo.
12.3.2010 | 11:34pm
Andrew lyttle writes:
"Oh, and as for the 'Vicar of Christ' business, mediaeval inventions of that sort oughtn't to be treated like serious religious concerns. Grow up and out of such nonsense. Then you might discover holiness. "

Or at least punkiness.
12.4.2010 | 7:45am
Fr Avraamy says:
I try to be Orthodox, because I do believe that wilful clinging to heresy separates one from God, as does any sin. I will not argue with Abbot Anthony; I am content to work on my own repentance. Each one of us, and all of us, will learn where we stand at the Last Judgment.

I was moved by this beautiful story. I reminds me of a passage in C S Lewis's "The Great Divorce" in which the souls which are transported from the edges of Hell to the foothills of Heaven, are met by the just who have come to encourage them on the last stage to Beatitude. At one stage a glorious procession advances, with a woman surrounded by the glorious light and singing angels, and our hero is speechless with awe, stuttering: "Is that... is that....?" and receives the answer:" No, it is Mrs Green who all her life made the lives of others lighter and happier for meeting her."

I quote from failing memory, but the idea is so similar to Aunt Susie's life that I thought it worth mentioning in this context.
Thank you again for telling us about Aunt Susie, and showing how an ordinary, even disadvantaged, person, can be extraordinary and, humbly regaining the image and likeness of God by their faithfulness, have heroic sanctity.
12.4.2010 | 9:31am
Maureen says:
"The only tragedy is not to become a saint."
12.4.2010 | 9:54am
Dennis says:
Mr. Hart's essay reminds me of a Christmas Card I saw last night at WalMart. On the face of the card was a picture of a manger; nothing and no one else. The words "Simply Jesus," appeared under the manger. Aunt Susie reminds all of us of the holiness that comes from simply knowing Jesus. I mean nothing irreverent or even literally when I say, "I think I'll put that in my Catholic pipe and smoke on that for a while."
12.4.2010 | 11:09am
David - Your beautiful essays are a joy to read.

Aunt Susie, pray for us!
12.4.2010 | 11:51am
Hen says:
Mr Hart doesn't say where Suzy is buried. Knowing of documented stories of faithful, good, and (holy?) domestics having their gravesites right in the employing family's plot, I just wondered if visiting and paying respects to her is so possible with the Harts.
12.4.2010 | 2:58pm
@ Hen
You're thinking of a somewhat different cultural reality. Mrs. Hayes was not a "domestic" working in a great manorial house. She was an independent woman with her own family whose day job was helping to keep houses in middle class families. That was a common situation in those days, just as many Hispanic women today make ends meet by cleaning houses. She is buried in the graveyard of her church, where many old folks who knew her well still visit her grave (including me). She was (and is) a saint.
12.4.2010 | 3:50pm
Eric says:
Nice piece. I once met a man who radiated holiness; Br. Roger Shutz of Taize. He was thought to have converted to Catholicism from Reformed, but did not ever publicly declare this to be so. He was first to receive communion at John Paul II's funeral.

I shared a table with him and his brothers a few time at Taize and he emanated a sense of love and holiness. It is a wonderful and consoling thing to behold.

Thank God.
12.4.2010 | 8:40pm
Teresa says:
This is the ARIZONA desert, in the state of Arizona, United States.
Sonora is a state in the republic of Mexico.
12.4.2010 | 10:41pm
Billy Bean says:
Triumphalism and elitism are not the exclusive estate of any particular sect or denomination. That being said, I am not sure that David Bentley Hart would entirely agree with those who seem all to eager to seize upon his words as a warrant for latitudinarian views of the Church. The one holy catholic and apostolic church is what it is, and belief in it remains an article of the Creed. Whether one accepts the usual Protestant "Invisible Church" understanding or the Catholic/Orthodox view of apostolic succession and historical continuity, we must get beyond the habit of judging the eternal destiny of individual men and women on the basis of church affiliation. If our Lord's Parable of the Good Samaritan means anything, it means this.
12.4.2010 | 10:48pm
Mark VA says:
As a Traditionalist Roman Catholic, I find myself in full agreement with the gentle point Mr. Hart is making. God does indeed call every one of us to holiness.

To me, the life of Janusz Korczak is one of the prime examples of heroic virtue, ultimate sacrifice, and true holiness. He truly deserves to be better known, because both his life and his death were full of grace. My mind always associates Janusz Korczak with St. Maximilian Kolbe.

As an aside note, someone once said of Janusz Korczak:

"In Israel he should be spoken of as being a Pole, in Poland he should be spoken of as being Jewish".
12.5.2010 | 6:24am
NPSmith says:
Where is the shame? You write that Aunt Susie cleaned the "homes of middle-class white people," unable to obtain any "more rewarding occupation than that."

Is it inherently unrewarding to clean people's homes? Is it not honorable work? Would it have been better if the homes were upper-class, or if the home-owners were of a different pigmentation?

One thing about cleaning people's homes: You leave that bit of the world much better and more beautiful than you found it.
12.5.2010 | 9:39am
@ NPSmith

I don't think anyone was talking about shame. The point is that a black woman born in MD or anywhere in the US in the 1890s had no chance of going to college and becoming, say, a fully certified nurse at a large hospital or a fully trained physician. So Mrs. Hates was destined almost from birth, by the inequities of her society, for one sort of occupation.

@ Billy Bean

I wouldn't make assumptions about Ben's (that's DBH, for those who aren't family or very old friends) view of the church. You may be right, but you may not be.
12.5.2010 | 4:57pm
Billy Bean says:
I stand corrected -- or, at least, cautioned.
12.5.2010 | 5:36pm
Beautiful icons, beautiful chants, and beautiful liturgies, but the fact is that Orthodoxy preaches hatred of western Christianity.
12.5.2010 | 6:09pm
Dianne says:
I'd like to add a short story of my own encounter. Her name was Magnolia Deese. She was an American Indian I met when she was already old and wrinkled. She was in my life from the time I was about 3 y/o til I was about 7. This was about 45 years ago, and my father had kidnapped me from my mother (which turned out to be a good thing because she had married a guy who was a pedophile), but Ms. Nole looked after me and treated me with kindness like I was her own daughter.

Later, we were finally "tracked down" and I was sent back to live with my mother, who was a Baptist Christian (with the pedophile husband). Once I was "reunited" with my mother, I was treated like trash, because they assumed that's what I was raised in. Or maybe they thought that way to feel like they had permission to abuse me.

But altho Magnolia Deese was a farmers wife (who's husband made moonshine to supplement the income - and before you get too judgmental - the Kennedy's fortune came from bootlegging), had more class in her little toe than my mother and her family who sat in the first pew at Church every time the doors opened, and then went home and hurt their children.

If it had not been for the love I had known as a child from Magnolia Deese, I might have had no chance at all.

The Holy Spirit goes where it will. You can identify yourself with whatever religious affiliation you like and call yourself whatver you want, but it doesn't ensure your salvation. Your actions and your heart speak louder than whatever religious affiliation you claim to be. Ms. Nole regularly fed and hugged children who were not her own, but came into her sphere in one way or another.

And Ms. Nole was a Christian. If anyone is in heaven, she is. And she was not a member of the Catholic Church. She was a member of God's Church.
12.5.2010 | 6:57pm
Billy Bean says:
Dianne: Your story, like that of DBH, resonates very deeply with me. I was reared Roman Catholic, converted to hedonism at the first opportunity, found Christ again in Protestant Christianity (as I had always known Him, through the same Gospels which were read at every Mass), and became Eastern Orthodox about seven years ago. Where I will end up, I do not know-- perhaps lost and damned, but hopefully not. To paraphrase Khomiakov, we know where the Church is, but we can't say for sure where it isn't. I have found true disciples of Jesus Christ, trinitarian and orthodox, in Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox camps. Even so, I have come to believe that the one holy apostolic and catholic church which is affirmed by the ancient Creed is a Body concrete and historical, however mystical, as is its Head. It is neither invisible nor indefinable, but one must leave room for mystery and surprise. I do not presume to know who is or will be in heaven. But I am quite sure that formal church affiliation will not be the criterium for that divine determination.
12.5.2010 | 7:35pm
Billy Bean says:
LET'S TRY THAT ONE MORE TIME: "CRITERION"
12.5.2010 | 7:53pm
Dianne says:
But I am quite sure that formal church affiliation will not be the criterium for that divine determination.

Billy Bean - that is the point I was trying to make. Thank you.
12.5.2010 | 10:01pm
Deacon Dana says:
A beautiful remembrance, one that should bring to mind the Aunt Susies in each of our lives and lead us to thankfulness for their presence. True holiness is, sadly, a rare commodity, but Professor Hart is correct: We know it when we encounter it and those who possess it are always a bit of a surprise. Thank you for sharing Aunt Susie with us.
12.6.2010 | 1:54am
jason taylor says:
Oh come, are we the newest recruits to the Tolerance Police? I thought that remark a rather endearing bit of crustiness. Besides having someone say frankly that other denominations(including my own) are wrong is a bit of a reprieve from the idea that niceness trumps the law of non-contradiction in Theology. Especially when people don't say that about any other discipline.
12.6.2010 | 3:13am
Timothius says:
Dr. Hart, the monastery’s abbot, Aunt Susie, most of you reading this comment string, and myself, all have something in common. We long for God. Hopefully we don't just want "to know", but we want "to know Him." I truly believe this to be the case.

Dr. Hart juxtapositions Aunt Susie against the monastery abbot to make his point. His point is his working out and putting to words, part of his definition of what "true religion" is. What the "heart of the matter" is. What the heart of the Father truly is.

Perhaps a bit stale, but I have no reason to believe that the abbot too, is not a true seeker of the Lord.

I too have been blessed to know Aunt Susie, not Dr. Hart's Aunt Susie, but Aunt Susie as a type. In a way, Aunt Susie "shows us God." She shows us "what it is all about."

But think about that statement for a minute. Explore this a bit with me. Can an exuberance for love, charity, and self-sacrifice exist outside of Jesus Christ? I think it can. I've not investigated this yet, but my guess is that Aunt Susie lives in China too. By China, I mean a culture that is mostly void of Christianity.

I hope I'm not just adding "another twisted question" that only serves to cloud the clarity this article brings. The article, in and of it self, makes a great point. I'm simply exploring "beyond."

I can say this: As a Christian myself, when I encounter Aunt Susie as my sister in Christ, my heart leaps inside me, without hesitation. My heart says, "Bless you sister. You got it right."

On the other hand, if and when I encounter Aunt Susie, and she does not know Jesus Christ, I'm sure I would still be thankful to have encountered a loving, caring, safe, human being. Why would I not be?

Perhaps this Aunt Susie knows Jesus Christ, and just does not know that she knows him.

Perhaps certain acts of charity are present, and the motivation comes from a completely different spot. Perhaps it's more culturally derived, and not an act of worship.

Who knows. I just know that I love Aunt Susie, especially when she loves Jesus.

Gets me thinking about "what part" of Jesus Christ does the Lord desire for us to know? (a) The part that will "lay down our own lives for a friend?" Or (b), the part that knows every detail captured in the Holy Scriptures, and/or the traditions, doctrines, and teachings of the church?

Does not (b) lead to (a)? It is certainly intended to do so. I think it does, but we are a stubborn (read sinful) lot.

I don't know what I'm thinking, but for some reason I think (a) alone is severely handicapped.

(a) + (b) is the best.
12.6.2010 | 10:57am
kelso says:
I've been accused from my post above of being a "arid dogmatist." I've been accused of being a "one-true-churcher." If there is not one, true Church, and if it is not the Roman Catholic Church, then we believing Catholics are the most miserable of creatures. We have not a foundation to stand on. And says "My foundation is Christ" then what makes one different than the promoters of the thousand other Christian denominations with their conflicting creeds, all based mostly on denials and protests.

All I wrote was that Jesus wants us, as His disciples, to believe in everything He taught, including, most eminently, His teaching on the Holy Eucharist. I wrote that we should invite those Christians outside the Church to become Catholic and receive Him" Where the Body is there will the eagles gather." I am saying that one cannot be a Christian and snub the Blessed Virgin as irrelevant or "a sinner." If that is "dry" dogmatism then sweet Jesus make me a desert.
12.6.2010 | 4:22pm
Apparently, someone needs to inform the poor ignorant Abbot that he needs to read the Scriptures since apparently he couldn’t possibly give a reasoned response to such proof texting as the Spirit’s wanderings. (Someone tell the Pope too to rescind Dominus Iesus)

Of course it might be helpful to evaluate his remarks in the context of either Orthodox ecclesiology or how the Orthodox view the Spirit’s work in the OT in contrast to the New. If memory serves, St. Maximus, among other Fathers give helpful elucidations on this point, but it is nowhere to be found here.

If something is not the “official” teaching of the Orthodox Church, it would be nice to see some reason to think that it is not, rather than DBH’s assertion. My money is on the Abbot since we are talking about the contrary opinion of an individual layman. After all, if there is no salvation outside the church, can there be holiness in the sacramental sense? Perhaps DBH thinks that the Church is something wider than the Orthodox Church, in which case, I’d suggest persons who think such a thing find some other tradition.

As for what most Orthodox think, I’ll chalk that up to what most of any group think, which is often quite ignorant or misinformed, which often enough includes academics claiming to be spokespersons. Jesus didn’t found the academy mind you. Of course, as noted the polite thing to do is to smile when someone says something that might offend you. Somehow though I don’t think it includes doing a blog post about it, at least not to the benefit of one’s soul, let alone anyone else’s.

The rest is fairly typical of the convert who really feels bad about drawing the lines of the church so that it excludes others. The appeal is to anecdotal evidence, but unless someone is seeing the uncreated light beam off such people as “Auntie”, I can’t see that this really moves the ball down the field in Hart’s favor. After all, we need not deny that such persons have a measure of virtue. Augustine is clear for example on the real acquisition of virtues by pagans, and Hart says as much. Why draw the line at professing schismatics and heretics? Truth be told in my own experience some of the most noble people I have ever known were an OPC Calvinist family who exemplified biblical parents beyond anything I had seen or seen since. Can heterodox Calvinists have “holiness” in terms of that conveyed through the Sacraments of the Apostolic Ministry? I don’t think DBH would say yes given his hatred of Calvinism.
But here is the problem with Hart’s view. He seems to think that Christian holiness can be had by non-Christians, which is a controversial view across Christian traditions, not the least of which is that he claims as his own. Dominus Iesus anyone? Or how about Pelagius instead?
Here the framework of “holiness” seem to be drawn too large as to include the virtues of the pagans, something strictly speaking, East and West would exclude.
In any case, the piece turns on the worst kind of leveling irony-the unholy Abbot and the holy heretic. As Kierkegaard noted, such a thing is a mark of a soul sick in despair.
12.6.2010 | 4:27pm
CKG,

I am afraid the citation from Augustine won't help you and here is why. Augustine is speaking of those who are currently outside the church, prior to baptism whom he takes to be predestined to salvation. He is not making a claim in such wise to supprt a kind of wider ecclesiastical view.
12.6.2010 | 6:02pm
Hen says:
"Catholic Matters" (the book) anyone?
12.7.2010 | 1:28am
I love this. Thank you.
12.7.2010 | 6:41pm
Billy Bean says:
Perry: Much of what you say rings true to me. Christ founded His Church (whoever it might be), and it is not to be despised. Conformity to Holy Tradition is not to be eschewed, and presumptuous sin is perhaps the most insidious. And yet, the Greatest Commandment was apparently kept by a heretic, the Good Samaritan (I know, it's a Parable). Given the standard of divine judgement in another Parable (Matthew 25:31-46), I believe DBH may still hold out some hope for Aunt Susie and many others of us who are unworthy to tie the laces of her shoes, however orthodox we might be.
12.7.2010 | 6:44pm
Billy Bean says:
DBH, are you perhaps sick in despair?
12.7.2010 | 9:46pm
Evagrius says:
Mr. Robinson is, of course, absolutely correct in a theologically "logical" way.

However, reality is not theologically logical as the Good Lord pointed out.

The parables of Matthew 25 should make anyone given to theological logic some pause, especially vs 31 and on regarding the sheeps and goats.

One will notice no reference to "church", "orthododoxy", "creedal belief" etc;.

One will notice, however, some reference to actual "concrete" human acts of caring for others, not sentimentally but in actual physical acts of caring as being the criterion for entry into the Kingdom. One will notice that the criterion seems to apply to all human beings, not just some.

Of course, theologically logical proponents such as Mr. Robinson, will always find ways to refute such "simple" parables.
12.9.2010 | 10:42am
Paige says:
Perry Robinson should always be ignored, or at most pitied. He is one of those ranting Orthodox convert extremists who, on the basis of a mediocre philosophical education and a complete incapacity for logic, regularly screams and howls against Western Christians (especially Thomists) and any Orthodox (like DBH) who reject the ultra-Orthodox fundamentalist account of Orthodoxy (which is a modern deformation). He is an arch-Palamite, by the way, as well as one of the most vicious hate-mongers in the Orthodox web-realm. His version of Orthodoxy excludes Metropolitan Philaret or all the signatories of the Balamand Agreement and countless Orthodox throughout history and throughout the world. But he feels he has a right to say who belongs in the tradition properly.

Anyway, the quality of his venom-spewing soul is obvious from his suggestion that DBH must be sick in despair in order to praise the holiness of his Aunt Susie in this way. Perry Robinson is a whole spiritual pathology in himself.

Since I know DBH, I can state confidently that he does indeed believe there are holy persons in the Calvinist tradition and Calvinist world, even though he believes Calvinism to be a defective theology. As a professional hater with a withered soul, Robinson does not seem to understand that one can disagree with another person's beliefs without despising that other person.

Anyway, as Evagrius points out, Jesus gives clear criteria for what constitutes citizenship in the kingdom in Matthew 25, and by those criteria it seems Aunt Susie was an excellent example of what the New Testament tells us about holiness.
12.9.2010 | 12:31pm
@Billy Bean

I would not presume to answer for Prof Hart, but I can honestly say that reading Perry Robinson's remarks makes *me* sick in despair.

I don't have any standing, because I'm not a practicing Christian. I'm a fellow-traveler looking to believe, but simultaneously convinced and unconvinced. But I've been to Mt Athos, I've talked to lots of spiritual teachers in the Orthodox world, I've sought spiritual counsel from Orthodox monks and nuns in Britain, America, Greece, and Romania. I have also studied the Eastern Church Fathers, mediaeval Orthodox history and theology, and modern Orthodox theology. All I can say is that chaps like Mr Robinson speak for the sort of Orthodoxy they converted to, but not for the tradition and not for the community of Orthodox throughout the world. For those interested in the views of saner, more spiritually informed, and more historically conscious Orthodox thinkers, the joint Orthodox-RC Balamand Statement is a good beginning:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/ch_orthodox_docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19930624_lebanon_en.html
12.10.2010 | 4:06pm
mcm says:
Hart's generous designation of holiness here seems rather Pelagian. Holiness, on the Christian account, is and abides in a Person, who graciously gives Himself to those who ask for it. In this regard, the abbot's precision reminds us not to make too much of holiness as the sort of isolated abstraction which might "testify to itself." I imagine that Aunt Susie might agree.
12.11.2010 | 3:45pm
@mcm
Two things:
1) There is nothing in the least Pelagian here; no one suggested that the holiness in Aunt Susie was not the work of the Holy Spirit in her rather than something she created in herself.
2) The accusation of Pelagianism is notoriously ineffective when hurled at the Orthodox, since they tend to regard Pelagius and Augustine as equally in error, and so don't find the word very frightening. Dr Hart is Orthodox.
3.2.2011 | 5:26pm
What a beautiful essay. We should never be suprised to find holy people, in any walk, or corner of life. I believe Martin Buber, that great and wise Jewish Philosopher's "I, Thou'' approach, to every human we encounter, can help us detect the holiness that exists in them. As God's children, we all have at least some of the manifestations of our creator in us. "Oh, and as for the 'Vicar of Christ' business, mediaeval inventions of that sort oughtn't to be treated like serious religious concerns. Grow up and out of such nonsense. Then you might discover holiness. "
type the text above in the box below

Links

Blogs

Find Us

Contact