The Catholic Book Club discussion
This topic is about
Loss and Gain
Loss & Gain - Dec. 2022
>
1. Along the way
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Manuel
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Dec 03, 2022 11:49AM
Mod
reply
|
flag
When i read the part of Charles Reding with his sister. I feel a lot of sadness i can not give up thinking the relationship of Newman with his sisters. He brought up to all his family he looked for a job to his brothers and he converted to the Catholic Religion all sisters splited up with him. I reminded when Mishkhin got angry when he discovered that his tutor Pavlichev in the "Idiot" was catholic. Jesus warned that chose him would be cause of division in the case of Newman was a big sacrifice only for it he was worth of saintness. The Tolkien's Mother Mabel lost all for converting to the Catholic Religion for Tolkien she was a martyr.
Another great convert from Anglicanism is, of course, that son of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Monsgr. Robert Hugh Benson. I have read his Confessions of a Convert. His journey was quite different; as I recall it was in part due to his travels "on the continent". Newman's seems to have been a conversion by logic.
Mod
But in his novel By What Authority? Benson suggests (even through the title) that the way of his conversion was not accidental, but due to the fact that he came to the conclusion that the authority about the Scriptures belongs only to the Catholic Church.
It is true in the Benson's case is because he looked for authorithy. Benson is one of my favorite writers you must read his historical novels are very good. My favorite is By what Authority? Although the People preffer "Come Rack, come rope". However the novel which he is more well known is "The Lord of World".I think that Reding looks for Authority a part he gives up beliving in the Prayer Book and the 39 articles. The state described by Newman is a Police station. I think that the protestantism is a nationalist matter, and they attack the behaviour of some religious in the Theological they can not atack. There is another thing a lot of People especial the left wing feel comfortable that the state control the religion because this thing would convert the secularism and the State in God for me is a Backsstep as the Roman Empire. It is to come back to the Servile State described by Belloc. In my opinion we have never been less free than nowadays.
Ladies and gentlemen here is my review of "Loss and Gain" regretted not having been able to dedicate it to the Club this time, but I felt it was better to dedicate it to the late Ian Ker, whom the good Lord has in his glory https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...
Mod
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
In my case was the third ocassion. I have risen a bit the rating 😉.
I enjoyed both Fonch and Manuel's comments. I've read the books you both mentioned by Benson. Yes, I had forgotten that authority was a major factor in both Benson and Newman's conversions. This is my first time reading Loss and Gain. The logic in the conversational debates is really delightful. I love how he probes the reasoning of his classmates until he exposes the sand at the foundation. This book is a real pleasure to read. Benson must have seen the same tendency towards state totalitarianism in Protestantism that Fonch points out, as in The Lord of the World with the worship of 'ideals'. The modern world has replaced the Catholic feast days with Mothers Day, Labor Day, Founding Fathers (ie, presidents day), statue of liberty, etc. We don't realize how creepy it is!
SUSAN wrote: "I enjoyed both Fonch and Manuel's comments. I've read the books you both mentioned by Benson. Yes, I had forgotten that authority was a major factor in both Benson and Newman's conversions. This is..."Chesterton said that nine of out 10 new things are old mistakes.
I'm not making much sense of the arguments and conversations among all these young men. Especially obnoxious is Willis' insistence that Charles become Catholic immediately without any reason other than his assertion that it's the truth.I certainly don't think we retreat from poetry as we advance in reason and philosophy!
I admit that the conversations I don't think are typical of college students, and that they are somewhat specialized, but we live in a secularized, irreligious, century. But I don't think it's wrong that Willis wants Reding to be a Catholic. I also want my school friends, and people far from the faith, to profess it again. To convert are necessary three things: reason, and knowledge of the Catholic religion, faith, and grace that is bestowed by God. Because of the conversations that take place in this book, Reding is prepared to take the second step, and Willis' wishes don't seem far-fetched at all.It should also be remembered that Reding wishes that Willis would stop being Catholic, and does not give him any convincing reason to return. Nor in "Brideshead Revisited" does anyone do anything to convert Charles Ryder perhaps Lady Marchmain, and Cordelia, who prays for his conversion. But no one gives him a reason to believe either, even Brideshead's arguments dissuade him from otherwise, and Julia, and Sebastian don't want him to believe either. In fact, Sebastian is angry when Charles signs himself with the holy water imitating him. It will be his own life experience that makes him a Catholic. As well as grace. Frossard the Frenchman never heard of religion, and he converted as soon as he entered a Church. In this case reason, or philosophy, had no weight. If it were only for reason, and philosophy White would be Catholic.
Willis is in the exuberance of his honeymoon, it seems true to life. I wouldn't be surprised that conversations like these did truly occur at Oxford, especially among the top scholars. In one conversation about "parties" --"Sheffield said: 'Reding and I were disputing just now whether Nicias was a party man.' 'Of course you first defined your terms,' said Carlton." Schoolmen, or, scholars!! If I'm not mistaken, Fonch compared this book in his review, in some ways, to Plato's dialogues. But what forms a man's life more than his intellectual journey, no matter how simple or complex?
SUSAN wrote: "Willis is in the exuberance of his honeymoon, it seems true to life. I wouldn't be surprised that conversations like these did truly occur at Oxford, especially among the top scholars. In one con..."
The foreword I read of my Spanish edition said that Willis was inspired by Hurrell Froude. It is a pity that no Catholic interlocutor has come in from outside. I sorely missed an equivalent of the future Cardinal Wiseman in this account. I know that from the beginning he was communicating with Newman, and that they discussed frequently. That's why he missed that exogenous element in this novel.
He compared this novel to the Platonic Dialogues, first because it uses a mixed narrative model. Newman still does not master the technique of the narrator (or does not want to use it), according to the model of realism, and mixes the theatrical genre, and the novel itself. It uses a platonic model, because it uses dialogues to express ideas, which the characters defend. Some of the characters may be allegories. I hope I have answered your question Susan.
I believe that, for the present reader, especially if he is not very seasoned in theology, or in the history of England. This book can be very difficult for that standard audience. The two previous times I read it cost me a lot because of that issue. Besides, it is not the typical novel to use, since it uses a mixed system, as I explained in my previous comment. Apart from the fact that today's university students do not have so much culture, nor so much training, not even in humanities careers. Nor do they (unfortunately) have those theological concerns (I wish they did. Of course it speaks to you from the European point of view. Let's hope things aren't so dire in America.) Newman spoke to an audience, who was aware of his story, and was aware, but for us (the current public is difficult to follow, or at least in my particular case). Newman spoke to an audience, which was aware of his story, and was aware, but to us (the current public is difficult to follow, or at least in my particular case). The good thing is that at third reading I have become less dry. I attributed it to the fact that the passage of time has made me mature, and I have been able to see this book with much better eyes.
Mod
I am certain that these conversations were typical in Oxford at the time when Newman was there. Even almost one century later, if you read Surprised by Joy: The Shape of My Early Life by C.S. Lewis you'll see that Lewis's conversations with Owen Barfield while he was a student in Oxford were of the same style and level.
The problem is, students nowadays have no idea of history, philosophy or theology, nor of classical literature, therefore conversations like these are impossible and unintelligible today, which makes books like this very difficult to understand and to accept. But the problem is ours, not of the author.
Mod
I am certain that these conversations were typical in Oxford at the time when Newman was the..."
I agree, Manuel. We cannot imagine such conversations today because we have debased education to the lowest common denominator, rather than extend the opportunity for excellence to all.
John wrote: "Manuel wrote: "Jill wrote: "I'm not making much sense of the arguments and conversations among all these young men..."I am certain that these conversations were typical in Oxford at the time when..."
I agree with John, and with the Professor neither the circumstances nor the epochs are the same from the mid-nineteenth century to the beginning of the twenty-first century there have been many changes, and not always for the better (despite technical advances, and sanitary hygienic improvements).
All the people trying to dissuade him just before his conversion are a hoot though the specifics are bewildering. It just illustrates the truth that once you depart from the true Church in any aspect, you lose any way of determining what's true. Various Protestant denominations and movements have seized on essential aspects of Christianity but have no way of balancing and integrating them into a coherent whole.
I had no idea men and women were separated from each other at Mass. I thought that was just Puritans or Amish. Was that true everywhere? When did it change?
Jill wrote: "All the people trying to dissuade him just before his conversion are a hoot though the specifics are bewildering. It just illustrates the truth that once you depart from the true Church in any aspe..."Jill Newman's purpose with this is to demonstrate the enormous paranoia that the English suffered against Catholicism. Surely Newman would suffer something similar. I know there were people who tried to dissuade Robert Hugh Benson from his conversion. Since the Glorious of 1688 came a status quo sanctioned by John Locke in which all cults were tolerated except Catholicism, atheism, and Islam. Now the formula has been reversed, and all kinds of religions except Christianity are tolerated, and the coolest thing is to be an atheist, or agnostic indifferent to your religion. Quite possibly looking at the demographic issue Britain is Muslim as predicted by G.K. Chesterton, and Anthony Burgess in "Flying Inn", and "1985".
In Part III, Chapter II. Charles is in a bookstore when White and his bride enter. when they leave, "Charles breathed freely as they went out; a severe text of Scripture rose on his mind, but he repressed the uncharitable feeling, and turned himself to the anxious duties which lay before him."What text from Holy Writ was he thinking of, do you think? Perhaps the parable of the adding banquet?
Perhaps he was thinking in Iscariot.
I don't know what Scripture, but this passage puzzled me because Charles had already made it clear he felt called to celibacy, so why would he be jealous?
*wedding banquet (sorry!)
Jill, I don't think he was jealous at all! I thought he was thinking all the more that priests had to be free of wives. White was already tied up in pleasing a wife, distracting him from his (phoney) ministry, and on a very worldly road.
In my opinion this thinking is the fact that White is with Willis the most pro-catholic and for his wife he become to the end of the novel an anticatholic. In this case is the most close to the apostasy.
I agree that he's not jealous but rather disappointed (even disgusted) with White. I thought he might be thinking of 1 Cor. 7 -- Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
I quit this book 1/3 of the way through but got back into it after reading comments here. I'm glad I finished it even though it was rather tedious. I too am a convert from the Anglican (Episcopal) Church. As I mentioned in another post, I went to a (conservative) Episcopal seminary. The novel reminded me of how very much there is to debate when you're a Protestant, especially an Anglican, because SO much is left up to individual judgment.
Looking back on it, it's exhausting! All of this trying to reinvent the wheel -- without it looking TOO much like a wheel, because that is Papistry/idolatry, ha! But without enough of a resemblance it just doesn't work! And you end up with everyone having his unique inadequate form ....
I am very grateful to have been given the Catholic Church; I no longer have to try to figure out what I believe ... we have an objective Faith in which to believe. I hadn't appreciated this difference enough until reading Loss and Gain.
I cheer up that the novel had been useful. Newman wrote this novel with this objective and for replying struggles against his faith and conversion
Jill wrote: " Especially obnoxious is Willis' insistence that Charles become Catholic immediately ..."I thought the same when I read that scene. At that point in the book, Charles has not expressed any interest at all in becoming Catholic.
I wonder if Newman met someone like Willis, a recent convert so full of fire that wanted him to go along immediately.
Later in the novel, when it becomes apparent that everybody else is convinced that Charles in on the brink of becoming Catholic, it makes more sense to thing that Willis might have heard those rumors and believed them, and that is why he was so insistent.
Kristi wrote: "I quit this book 1/3 of the way through but got back into it after reading comments here. I'm glad I finished it even though it was rather tedious."I also found it tedious at first, but then I liked it very much.
In the foreword of the spanish edition of Loss and Gain said that Willis was inspired in his friend Hurrell Froude who has sympathy for the catholicism but he died really soon. The Last part of the novel was the most exciting.
In fact i had to read this novel four times to the novel liked me trullo (three stars it is a not a bad grade).
Part III, chapter VII, when the babblers from different sects make their way to Charles' room, I wonder if Newman was thinking of the temptations of St. Anthony of the Desert in a sort of light hearted comparison.
It is possible, although this thing serves Newman for two objectives to prove that the religion in England is a Hydra with a lot of heads without authority (this thing happens when you interprete the religion for yourself without any preparation) and the state of paranoia in England where you can everything except catholic.
One reason Queen Elizabeth II's chaplain left the Anglicans was because a passage from the Koran was read in one of their "cathedrals"! "It all started at the beginning of 2017. While he was chaplain to Queen Elisabeth II, Gavin Ashenden was scandalized by the reading of an extract from the Koran in the choir of the Saint Mary’s “cathedral” in Glasgow, Scotland. He protested in the British media, causing him to be sidelined by Buckingham Palace."
I like your allusion to the Hydra. Charles repels one of the visitors with the Crucifix!
It was commented in the discussion the risk that soon England was muslim as G.K. Chesterton and Anthony Burgess predicted in their novels. It is a phenomenon that it is happening in Europe. The abortion are the consequences of this curiously muslims, atheism were the two religions with the catholicism not tolerated by Locke in the 18th century after the Glorious in 1688.About the Hydra when somebody do not believe in God he believes in everything.
The Catholic Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
Surprised by Joy: The Shape of My Early Life (other topics)By What Authority? (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
C.S. Lewis (other topics)Owen Barfield (other topics)
