The Catholic Book Club discussion
This topic is about
The Diary of a Country Priest
Country Priest - Feb 2024
>
1. Along the Way
message 1:
by
John
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Feb 01, 2024 12:13PM
Mod
reply
|
flag
“How little we know what a human life really is—even our own. To judge us by what we call our actions is probably as futile as to judge us by our dreams. God’s justice chooses from this dark conglomeration of thought and act, and that which is raised towards the Father shines with a sudden burst of light, displayed in glory like a sun.”I was somewhat moved by this quote when I first read it but after pondering on it I am both puzzled and mystified.
Just got my book. First publish date: 1937. “My Parish is bored stiff”
I thought, “what’s happening in 1937 France?”
Interesting link for current events 1937
http://www.arthurchandler.com/paris-1...
Mod
“My Parish is bored stiff”
I thought, “what’s happening in 1937 France?”"
The correct date for this novel is 1936. 1937 must be the date its English translation was published.
I was surprised when I found this in the first chapter:
Do I prevent you to calculate the precession of equinoxes or to disintegrate the atom? (my translation).
When I read that, I thought: this book has been written after 1945. When I found it had been written in 1936, I eliminated the atomic bomb. Then I eliminated atomic fission, as it was discovered in 1938 by Otto Hahn and colleagues. Finally I came to the conclusion that Bernanos was referring to spontaneous atomic disintegration, I mean alpha and beta decay, which were discovered by Ernest Rutherford in 1899.
Bernanos could have known scientists were working in areas like this without them necessarily having achieved their objective before the book was published. His point is well taken, that those who dismiss philosophy/theology in favor of "hard" science are incredibly short-sighted. As he puts it, what good does it do to be able to create life (which seems frighteningly near in our day, or at least to be able to tamper with it) when you have no idea about the meaning/purpose of life.
This all seems so contemporary, e.g. the leprosy of boredom, the terrible epidemic of loneliness.
Mod
I agree, Jill. It strikes me as speaking very much to today.
Mod
This interpretation could be correct if those scientists were looking for the "disintegration of the atom," but they were trying to do the opposite: they were trying to make the atoms heavier by bombarding their nuclei with neutrons, and atomic fission was a completely unexpected result. Bernanos couldn't know anything about that result, for the scientists themselves didn't.
"For instance, that famous encyclical of Leo XIII, "Rerum Novarum", you can read that without turning a hair, like any instruction for keeping Lent. But when it was published, sonny, it was like an earthquake. The enthusiasm! (...) The simple notion that a man's work is not a commodity, subject to the law of supply and demand, that you have no right to speculate on wages, on the lives on men, as you do on grain, sugar of coffee - why it set people's consciences upside-down!"
In Chapter 3, in the discussion with the Dean of Blangermont, there is a page missing in my English version. In the original French, the Dean is saying “God preserve us from the saints!” and then explaining what he means. He mentions the saint Curé of Ars as an exception that normal priests cannot hope to attain.
Thank you for pointing that out! Interesting point, that saints are often an embarrassment and challenge for the Church during their lifetimes.Unfortunately, my French version has no chapter divisions, so it's tricky to find passages.
My French book also doesn't have chapter divisions. When I mentioned Chapter 3, I meant in the English version.
Mod
Mod
Years ago I watched on the Spanish TV his play "Dialogues des Carmelites" (translated into English as "The fearless heart"), about a convent of martyr nuns during the French Revolution, and liked it a lot.
I'm having a really hard time understanding what's going on, who the people are and what they're actually talking about, perhaps because the "journal" format leaves so much unsaid/unclear.What is Mlle. Chantal's issue, for example, and why does she seek out the priest in the first place? How does the governess factor in?
Mod
This will be made clear later, in the second conversation of the narrator with Mlle. Chantal.
Hi John, I read a couple years back “Dialogues des Carmelites” not bad, better than Country Priest, I reckon, but not as good as I expected. It’s a short book also.
Mod
That would make it pretty extraordinary, as I think Country Priest is pretty darn good.
I've completed the first two chapters. I can understand the difficulties. I'm finding the novel so far very amorphous. It's hard to get a hold of. Other than the narrator, I'm finding it hard to grasp the other characters. There's little to distinguish them, even if they have a long speech. I can sense some of the themes (poverty for one) but it just seems so structureless. I'll look over some of the comments and see if they help.
Silly question perhaps, but when the narrator refers to Monsieur le Curé, is that the same person as the Curé de Torcy or are they two different people?Another question. What is the Château? I know the definition, but who's estate/mansion?
Mod
Another question. What is the Château?..."
I can't find any reference by the narrator to "Monsieur le Curé." In my French edition, in the first two parts of the book, I have found this expression ten times. These three words always refer to the narrator, and are pronounced by others.
The Château is the home of "Monsieur le comte," who with his wife, la Comtesse, his daughter Mademoiselle Chantal, and the governess (Mlle. Louise) are some of the main characters in the novel, apart from the narrator.
Mod
Another question. What is the Château? I kn..."
It varies. As Manuel noted, "Monsieur le Curé" without more is used when another person is referring to the narrator. "Monsieur le Curé de Torcy" is the parish priest in Torcy, "Monsieur le Curé de Norenfontes" is the parish priest in Norenfontes.
Thanks to both. The only reference to Monsieur le Cure I think I saw was in the early pages of chapter 1. I think it must have been referring to the narrator. I’ve realized that this is a very modernist novel in technique, so there is no way I’m going to grasp all the nuances on first read. Once I’m done I will probably have to read it a second time if I find it worthy. And so far after three chapters I am finding it very worthy.
I am assuming that the narrator’s suffering and what I believe is his eventual death must be a typology of Christ’s passion and crucifixion. This may be a perfect novel for Lent.
John wrote: "Richard wrote: "Hi John, I read a couple years back “Dialogues des Carmelites” not bad, better than Country Priest, I reckon, but not as good as I expected. It’s a short book also."That would mak..."
Good for you John, me I am finding it a hard slog. It does not help that I really don't like Monsieur le Curé and that the book shows, in my opinion a very French, very "jansenite" vision of catholicism that is certainly not mine.
Richard wrote: "John wrote: "Richard wrote: "Hi John, I read a couple years back “Dialogues des Carmelites” not bad, better than Country Priest, I reckon, but not as good as I expected. It’s a short book also."T..."
Yes this is a problem of Bernanos and some of the catholic french writers as Mauriac they were jansenistes. The final part the novel improved a bit. I did not want to participate in the discussion because i did not like Bernanos. You can continue with the discussion.
I guess I haven't been reading close enough to pick up on the nuances of theology. I'm just trying to get the story. Where are there examples of Jansenism?
Bernanos confessed that he was influenced by the jansenism. It is not only a thing of the french writers. Graham Greene was influenced by the jansenism and Graham Greene likes to everybody.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/1996/0... https://muse.jhu.edu/article/378772/pdf http://www.robert-bresson.com/Words/C... https://arrow.tudublin.ie/cgi/viewcon... Here i pass some links that are an evidence that the jansenism influenced in the novels of Bernanos. I do not say that his novels were heterodox but Richard Hannay is right.
Mod
Another one: https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...
However, this other site denies that "Bernanos is guilty of neither manicheism nor Jansenism": https://www.jstor.org/stable/40060096
Fonch: are you sure it was Graham Greene who was influenced by Jansenism? The second site I've given mentions Julian Green, not Graham Greene. And this other site says this: "he [Greene] inclined to see good and evil in the more flexible, forgiving terms of Jansen’s enemies, the Jesuits."
So the Jansenism of both Greene and Bernanos is, at least, debatable.
Don't Jansenists believe God only saves the "elect"? Then why does he pour himself out for everyone in his parish territory, even those who show little sign of being believers?
I'm appalled by how careless he is about being alone with several women (one at a time) and impressionable children.
I like his simple examination of conscience: Am I where Our Lord would have me be?
Why did he reach into the fire??
I can identify with someone who never dared to be young.
He (Greene) had a quarrel with Anthony Burgess by the free fate in "The Third man" reminded the christ of the Doctor Winkler when he said that he died by the chosen. I had read that Bernanos was jansenist this thing does not mean that his books can not be read.
More than Jansenism influenced by the jansenism also Pascal and Racine and i love the Racine's plays.
Mod
A possible answer: Only God knows who are the "elect." But don't take this as though I'm accepting Bernanos's Jansenism.
The positive of this is while we are discussing about the jansenism of Bernanos we are soeaking about the book again.
Mod
Fonch, two of these four sites don't even mention Jansenism. You can't use them to prove that Bernanos was a Jansenist.
As to the Wikipedia, the French Wikipedia doesn't mention Jansenism, either in Bernanos's page or in the page dedicated to the book we are discussing. And it doesn't mention Bernanos in the page dedicated to Jansenism.
I have a question: Do you assert that Bernanos was a Jansenist because you have detected Jansenism in his work (if so, where?), or because you have read other people say that he was a Jansenist?
Mod
Could you mention some place in the book we are reading where Jansenism is obvious?
Mod
But notice that, when he was alone with Mademoiselle Chantal, he made her go to the confessional.
We are now, perhaps, too sensitive about this because of the cases of pederastia, but at the time Bernanos wrote this novel that was not the case.
I am having a hard time with this one. I started it at the beginning of the month and only got 13 pages in and decided it was the wrong time, so I picked up something else. I started it again, from the beginning, and am still having a hard time. I am only 30 pages in but I am not sure if I will finish.
Theresa wrote: "I am having a hard time with this one. I started it at the beginning of the month and only got 13 pages in and decided it was the wrong time, so I picked up something else. I started it again, from..."Hello Theresa personally when i read the book i did not like, but i must confess that the last part the book improves and the ending is beautiful i think for this reason i did not rate with two stars.
Theresa wrote: "I am having a hard time with this one. I started it at the beginning of the month and only got 13 pages in and decided it was the wrong time, so I picked up something else. I started it again, from..."If you read reviews, a lot of them mention that the first half of the book is hard to get into, but they love the second half. Here's a brief review that's representative of many others:
"For the first fifty pages I could not remember why I had loved it so much before. And then by the end I was weeping."
Mod
I had a similar thought and then realized exactly how much our world has changed in the last several decades.
Mod
I enjoyed it from the start, not because I liked the character, or the story, but because Bernanos's writing is simply beautiful.
At the end, I too wept.
Well i did not want to follow with the discussion but the Professor Manuel sent to me a message in my another mail saying to me that i replied to his question. I had read and there are a lot of pages which say that Bernanos is influenced by the jansenisme. The easy it had been not replying because i asked for a personal favor to the Professor. This morning i was looking for the topic pages saying about the jansenist influence of jansenism in Bernanos and other. Moeller said that he was not jansenist but i found a other pages that yes. The Professor said to me that french wikipedia did not say anything but the spanish wikipedia yes. It is not only i have said the case of Mauriac, Maxence van der Meersch even Julien Green. In my opinion only wanted to defend to Mr. Hannay. If he said that he did not want to read the author for having a jansenist tendence he is in his right. I have my personal reasons for not liking me Bernanos but they are my personal reasons. I hope that after my explanation we can follow with the discussion. I want to say that except Mr. Hannay there is not any reason for i want to participate in the discussion. Some weeks i wrote to the Professor saying that i did not want to participate in this discussion. I hope that nobody think that i want to boicot the discussion. Yours sincerely. If you search Bernanos jansenism will appear pages saying that he was influenced by the jansenism other that not.
Thank you everyone for, I guess, the push to keep going? 😊 I have read on and am starting to like it more. I will continue.
Mod
Let me make clear my position: I am not denying that Bernanos may have been a Jansenist. What I'm saying is: I haven't seen convincing information that he was.
I am aware that some people say that he was (and some people say that he wasn't), but until someone says "this paragraph in such a book or text by Bernanos proves that he was a Jansenist" I don't consider that this assertion has been proved.
While reading the book we are discussing, I haven't seen any assertion that may be considered heretical. Has anyone?
