The New Camaldoli Audio Archive | New Camaldoli Hermitage

Contemplative Prayer

Given by Bruno Barnhart at New Camaldoli Hermitage on August 9th, 1994 -- (10 of 11)

00:00

Audio loading...

Welcome! You can log in or create an account to save favorites, edit keywords, transcripts, and more.

Serial:

NC-01100

Keywords:

OSB Cam

Description:

Contemplative Prayer Class

AI Summary:

Photos:

Notes:

#set-contemplative-prayer-class-1994

Transcript:

You Before we get started, next time will be our last session. So next time we'll try to do some better. I'm sorry, we'll do some better talks. We'll cover the Russians' section 8, the last section. I've been talking to you for a few minutes now. It's called Protestant Peace. However, the position on this is not ideal.

[01:05]

Because actually, today's section number 7 runs into section 8. And so, if you're leaving for today, you may miss the next section. I'm sure you'll see that everywhere. I'm not going to mention the Russians. I'm not going to mention them. In the final section, I want to give a draft of the content of this speech. But I need to tell you that it's always important to have a historical context. And it's very helpful to have a fact that it tends to be a historical context. I hope that at the end, I'll be able to thank you for having this talk. The last time we were here at the Space Center, we were talking to each other. Not quite that similar, but at the beginning of the last session. Okay, here we are. That's the Space Center. We were here at the beginning of the session.

[02:19]

We came to something that I'm sure you've probably seen or heard me say before. That is, the errors of liberty and the freedom of the thought constitute an important notion. The number of persons who have developed empathy for human beings, especially if they've done it by themselves, or the persuasion that the kind of ideology of spiritual experience is to take up a limited experience and make the effort to excel in the other, and ignore the great success of others, especially if it can be disassociated from the great success of others. That's why I think it's a very big technical issue. But it's not that we're not able to discuss it. The key thing is that if you put a person in a certain position, or a person in a certain field of what you think is called innovation, the best way to do it is to feel it. It's got nothing to do with the past, it's got nothing to do with the present, it's got nothing to do with the future. There's a different part of the truth, and I think this part is a little bit of the truth.

[03:22]

I think there's a little bit of truth in the fact that there's always something that has to be told to you, and it has to have to be told to you, whether it's to a person, whether it's to somebody else, whether it's to a race, whether it's to a class, whether it's to a nationality. And this is why I think there are a lot of questions that I'm not going to seem to answer, but I'm going to try to answer a few of them. It's been a while since I've spoken, and it's probably been a very busy month, but it's been a very busy month.

[04:25]

It's been a very busy month. It's been a very busy month. And I've essentially come to terms with the fact that I've come to terms with the fact that I've come to terms with the fact that I've come to terms with the fact that But where is the tragedy?

[05:42]

We've been missing it for a long time. We've been mistaken. And we're trying to go after it better than we can. And of course, I didn't know it was very much better than it was. And there's no way to know it was very much better than it was. And I'm sure we'll never be able to get it to where it's at. But it's possible. And it's a tragedy. I mean, I was told about it. I was told it was a tragedy. I mean, people, I can't wait to see it. I'm sure it's a tragedy. I want to see where everybody knows about it.

[06:44]

And that's the story. And why is it written in Joseph Marx's book? Because it's very hard to prevent self-reliance. And I think that's why I'm so proud. Because it's such a great book. It's very complicated. It's really in the back of the book. And it doesn't have to be. Marx isn't in the back of the book. It's all in the back of the book. Thank you.

[07:57]

Thank you. Thank you. is stepping across from the cultural structures

[10:39]

and taking the critical stances. In other words, both Marxism and monasticism become typical counter-cultural stances, in the language of somebody else. So the monk moves out of the world, and even out of the structures of the church, in a sense, out of the parish, for instance, into the village, into the world. And then we... Which is the problem, that we have been by this huge institutionalized Marxist regimes, as in China, and Asia, or Vietnam, or India, or Russia. And then we thought that the Marxist is kind of cultural. Now, he's fully aware of that. In fact, his book is very sharp about those things. And it's perverted in Marxism. So I don't mean to be romanticizing Marxism. But what I'm after is what Merton finds there, which I think is an interesting figure. In a sense, it has to be taken out of Marxism

[11:39]

and brought back into Christianity. What is it? In Merton's view, it's that Marxism is kind of like the Christian heresy. In other words, in a scientific, in a historical, or a steeply Marxist impression of Christianity. But there's two elements. The first one is this critical stance towards the structure. The trouble with it is that Marxism has nothing to give you, nothing to generate from any structure, nothing to generate in your body. So after it takes apart and deconstructs the old structure, it forms a monolithic murderous book that I'd say worse than the Merton procedure, in a sense. Merton's totally aware of it. But one element is this critical stance towards the structure of the fabric. And especially if you look at it, I don't know if you can see it. Thank you.

[12:57]

Thank you. Yeah. I see some weird hair coming in.

[14:53]

It's sort of the aftermath. No, it's not. It's got a little bit of it. We have time. I can't understand. I don't think how much you could here. It's coming in. We were playing two roles. What are we going to do? What are we going to do with that? I think we have to think about. I think we have to think about it. I think we have to think about it. Maybe we can finish with this. We can finish with this. I think we have to finish with this. that there is a cost to the whole story,

[18:23]

right? So the police, the violence, it's the fact that I can tell you what's going on and I can tell you what's going on and I can tell you what's going on. There's going to be a lot of big questions and I'm not going to say what it is, I'm going to say what it is. There's a climate for this, there's a climate for this. There's a climate for this.

[19:48]

This is Section 8. The first two sections of Section 8 are still about as difficult as the first. All right. So we have three minutes left. All right. All right.

[21:02]

All right. [...] and in the different aspects of life,

[28:57]

such as the mission, the city of God, the way of life, the purpose of life, the creation of spirituality, the knowledge of God's work, the vision of God, the way of life, [...] of which we see it's not even the same question.

[31:21]

But it's a good choice. And the right side, we're creeping up with these revolutions. So let's have a few more questions. Here. In the final analysis of terrorism, it's going to be perhaps a third. The state and the general community have a very powerful presence in the United States. Talking to the president of the United States, he's got to be able to get it together. He's got to be able to convince the public that he's right. And he's got to be able to convince the public that he's right. And he's got to be able to convince the public that he's right. And I think he's going to be able to convince the public that he's right. I think it's time for me to pass immediately

[32:35]

to the moments that break. I'm curious. I mean, generally in New York, what are your thoughts on some of the things that are going on in New York? I'm going to have to speak to one of them at a time.

[34:27]

And I'm going to say, what's the use of this evidence? It's made in the White House. It's just being expressed. But a very brief economy is a very brief economy. I was wondering about the potential for something like this, which is very clear, which is a human rights violation. I think it's necessary for us to do something about it. But I think the reason it's like this is it's part of the water output. It's the interest of the American public. They should have told us something about it. Maybe if I had told you, maybe after the way it was marketed, we'd get this down and see that that's what we want. How are we going to guard it?

[35:30]

What do we want to see? We're going to express immunity. If you were putting out something like this, we're going to say, no, you can't do that. That's good. It's actually fine. I have a question. You didn't get a chance to hear it. It was in 10 branches. But it was intellectually helpful. And the messages have been pretty good. And there's a lot of intellectual time that's spent in extremely short time in the United States of America. The other way to see it is they find something very important that they can speak to. And then you have a lot of questions. Right. Yeah. The reason why intellectual time is so important is what was that area that they shared with you,

[36:30]

that they seemed to share all these different things that you thought of? I guess it would be immediate. Perhaps very soon they did. All the information we have today is massive. But very quickly, the second thing is the integration of technology

[42:17]

with the human self. It's one of the metaphors that's very important. And the conventions that are assumed about human life and the culture of human life, I think is very, very important. And I think it's one of the things that's very important. I think it's very important. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.

[46:15]