Eat Life

“You eat life or life eats you.” This is one of those eminently true and appealing apothegms that sum up the whole predicament of human being. It sounds like something Zorba would have said, or any good pagan. At first it would seem to have little to do with Christianity, but a moment’s reflection reveals that it is also a succinct summation of the whole of Christian moral theology: either you eat Life, the Living Bread, or in repudiating it you repudiate your own Logos, the Logos of the world, and in so doing set yourself at odds with existence itself – a battle which you can only lose.

We express the same relation another way, likewise apparently merely pagan, when we truly say, “it’s not nice to fool with Mother Nature.”

4 thoughts on “Eat Life

    • 53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

      54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

      55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

      56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

      57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

      58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

      — John 6:53-58

      Christianity is both far wilder and more extravagant in its doctrines than any of the versions or intimations thereof found in other religions, and at the same time more balanced, reasonable, comprehensive, variegated and concrete than any of its competitors. Is there some broadly appealing doctrine of paganism, or Hinduism, or Taoism, or Sufism? It may be found in Christianity, a fortiori and a meliori (albeit fitly qualified, thanks be to God).

      • Eloquently stated. I think a man in Christ who applies himself to wisdom can find it in any place. Everything becomes a lesson for him and living and is translated into edifying experience or edible food for life. He can draw sweetness and honey from the eater.
        Judges 14:14. I am with you.

  1. As delightful as these reactionary posts are, I am wondering if the authors of multiple related blogs, like this one, have taken sides in the unfolding traditionalist Catholic dramas of sedevacantism, SSPX, Byzantine, etc. At the risk of sounding like a “tradcumenist”, I truly don’t see clearly one side that has proven their point, and can appreciate most of the varied Catholic positions on the crisis in Catholicism today. However, as relates to this post, the New Mass had a strange consecration formula which some trads claimed meant that no transsubstantiation takes place. Hence, in reading some of these different posts, I get the impression that some of these reactionary Catholics are still coming at Catholicism from a very ecumenical modernist liberal standpoint which they mostly likely grew up in or were first exposed to when experiencing Catholicism.

    Just stating that this is a problem to grapple with: the place of the New Mass, Vatican 2, and all the subsequent novelties, and how they fit in to the reactionary Catholic puzzle today.

    I am sympathetic to the sedevacantists, but to be on the safe side am switching rites to the Byzantine Catholic (and also go to a local diocesan latin mass said by a true priest who was ordained before the new ordination rite was created).


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s