Another, very good naughty that might have a bit more of a bearing on my life than rap, Slipknot, or WWE this coming year needs some kind of defense. Of course, I can only refer to the phenomenon of “nakey-time” at Saint Gregory’s Academy. Disclaimer in the interests of keeping my job: part of my job entails that I try to prevent and suppress nakey-time, and that I punish the malefactors who do it. I intend to fulfill that part of my job.

According to Jean Borella (“Love of Self and Love of God,” in The Secret of the Christian Way, 119-129), original sin is “the fall of the I into the psyche.” “The basis of the ego is remorse for the ontological fault. Remorse is even, in a certain way, a poor imitation of a perfection that has become inaccessible through an amorous returning to one’s own imperfection.” For an example, we can see poor, ridiculous Mde. Holhakov of The Brothers Karamazov. In the chapter “A Lady of Little Faith,” the elder Zossima suggests that she is being prideful in her assessment of her own imperfection. She asks:

“In active love? There’s another question—and such a question! You see, I so love humanity that—would you believe it?—I often dream of forsaking all that I have, leaving Lise, and becoming a sister of mercy. I close my eyes and think and dream, and at that moment I feel full of strength to overcome all obstacles. No wounds, no festering sores could at that moment frighten me. I would bind them up and wash them with my own hands. I would nurse the afflicted. I would be ready to kiss such wounds.”

“It is much, and well that your mind is full of such dreams and not others. Sometime, unawares, you may do a good deed in reality.”

“Yes. But could I endure such a life for long?” the lady went on fervently, almost frantically. “That’s the chief question—that’s my most agonizing question. I shut my eyes and ask myself, ‘Would you persevere long on that path? And if the patient whose wounds you are washing did not meet you with gratitude, but worried you with his whims, without valuing or remarking your charitable services, began abusing you and rudely commanding you, and complaining to the superior authorities of you (which often happens when people are in great suffering)—what then? Would you persevere in your love, or not?’ And do you know, I came with horror to the conclusion that, if anything could dissipate my love to humanity, it would be ingratitude. In short, I am a hired servant, I expect my payment at once—that is, praise, and the repayment of love with love. Otherwise I am incapable of loving any one.”

She was in a very paroxysm of self-castigation, and, concluding, she looked with defiant resolution at the elder.

“It’s just the same story as a doctor once told me,” observed the elder. “He was a man getting on in years, and undoubtedly clever. He spoke as frankly as you, though in jest, in bitter jest. ‘I love humanity,’ he said, ‘but I wonder at myself. The more I love humanity in general, the less I love man in particular. In my dreams,’ he said, ‘I have often come to making enthusiastic schemes for the service of humanity, and perhaps I might actually have faced crucifixion if it had been suddenly necessary; and yet I am incapable of living in the same room with any one for two days together, as I know by experience. As soon as any one is near me, his personality disturbs my self-complacency and restricts my freedom. In twenty-four hours I begin to hate the best of men: one because he’s too long over his dinner; another because he has a cold and keeps on blowing his nose. I become hostile to people the moment they come close to me. But it has always happened that the more I detest men individually the more ardent becomes my love for humanity.’ ”

“But what’s to be done? What can one do in such a case? Must one despair?”

“No. It is enough that you are distressed at it. Do what you can, and it will be reckoned unto you. Much is done already in you since you can so deeply and sincerely know yourself. If you have been talking to me so sincerely, simply to gain approbation for your frankness, as you did from me just now, then of course you will not attain to anything in the achievement of real love; it will all get no further than dreams, and your whole life will slip away like a phantom. In that case you will naturally cease to think of the future life too, and will of yourself grow calmer after a fashion in the end.”

“You have crushed me! Only now, as you speak, I understand that I was really only seeking your approbation for my sincerity when I told you I could not endure ingratitude. You have revealed me to myself. You have seen through me and explained me to myself!”

Anyway: for man to “renounce this imperfection, which constitutes his whole reality, is to renounce all that remains to him of himself.” “Natural love for others is a falsehood, perhaps not subjectively and intentionally, but objectively and despite all our efforts.” (It seems that such a false love for others motivates Mde. Holhakov’s desire to be a minister of the sick.) “Love of one’s neighbor can only be realized, therefore, by an interiorization of proximity. In order to become the other … one needs to become other than oneself; which means that I am not myself…. Thus, true love of self implies a conversion from natural love of self or amour-proper.” [Fritzhof Schuon: “Their existence (that of those who deny God) is condemned to a kind of divinity, or rather to a phantom of divinity, whence the appearance of superiority already mentioned, a posed and polished ease too often combined with a charity steeped in bitterness and in reality set against God” (Light on the Ancient Worlds, 40; italics mine). It is a bit disturbing to see that “The soul descends once more in bitter love” in “Love Calls Us to the Things of This World;” true love of others is “for one to give oneself not so much to the other as not to give the other to oneself.”]

“Nakedness is part of love’s destiny. To love, to commit oneself to the destiny of love, is to accept one day [the] encounter of nakedness. Now to stand naked is also to be stood naked, to offer oneself such as one is, in objectivity, and therefore somehow to renounce oneself…. In nakedness there is necessarily a moment of sacrifice and vice versa: nakedness, under one mode or another, is an integral part of sacrifice.

“It cannot happen otherwise for the love of the self. In a certain manner, we need to be exposed to ourselves, to renounce our imperfection, that is to accept it as such…. All too easily the renunciation of one’s own imperfection seems to imply a prideful desire for an inaccessible perfection, or seems to be the effect of a too scrupulous conscience. In reality, by virtue of the ego’s illusory subjectivity, to renounce one’s imperfection and to see oneself objectively, such as one is, are two faces of one and the same conversion. Humility is objectivity first. It should not be humiliation, even and above all when it is ourselves whom we humiliate. So we need to stand naked in ourselves, to strip ourselves of egoic garments, to accept no longer watching over ourselves, to lose sight of ourselves.”

[Wow! Let’s hear it for the nudist colonies! Yes, Borella says “to reject the wearing of clothes means … that one has laid a claim to purity he is incapable of sustaining and, leaving behind the mantle of mercy, has pridefully exposed himself to naked rigor.” But, Borella acknowledges at least the possibility that “an ascetic naturism, accompanied by a profound spiritual intention, is, in certain instances, Christianly acceptable” (199-200).]

But seriously: Borella is speaking of the nakedness of the ego, which obviously does not always necessitate nakedness of the body, but it seems that nakey-time corresponds with the rejection of clothing that could be Christianly acceptable.

See, I think that there are two key elements to Borella’s formulation of a naturism that could be Christianly acceptable: the term ‘asceticism’ and ‘accompaniment of a profound spiritual intention.’ It may seem difficult to apply these elements to nakey-time. I’ll try briefly now (perhaps this deserves an in depth post in itself), just giving the example of a couple righteous men for my ‘proof.’

It seems that the profound spiritual intention of a Christian naturism is in the boys’ actions, even if the boys are not fully conscious of it; but, it is there. I recall Boomer quoting from Zach Culley’s poetry to that effect at the Burns banquet last Spring. Hopkins’s “Epithalamium” might be an appropriate example of finding the unconscious spiritual intention in boys’ nakedness:

……………………………………………………
We are there, when we hear a shout
That the hanging honeysuck, the dogeared hazels in the cover
Makes dither, makes hover
And the riot of a rout
Of, it must be, boys from the town
Bathing: it is summer’s sovereign good.
By there comes a listless stranger: beckoned by the noise
He drops towards the river: unseen
Sees the bevy of them, how the boys
With dare and with downdolphinry and bellbright bodies huddling out,
Are earthworld, airworld, waterworld thorough hurled, all by turn and turn about.
This garland of their gambols flashes in his breast
Into such a sudden zest
Of summertime joys
That he hies to a pool neighbouring; sees it is the best
There; sweetest, freshest, shadowiest;
Fairyland; silk-beech, scrolled ash, packed sycamore, wild wychelm, hornbeam fretty overstood
By. Rafts and rafts of flake-leaves light, dealt so, painted on the air,
Hang as still as hawk or hawkmoth, as the stars or as the angels there,
Like the thing that never knew the earth, never off roots
Rose. Here he feasts: lovely all is! No more: off with—down he dings
His bleachèd both and woolwoven wear:
Careless these in coloured wisp
All lie tumbled-to; then with loop-locks
Forward falling, forehead frowning, lips crisp
Over finger-teasing task, his twiny boots
Fast he opens, last he offwrings
Till walk the world he can with bare his feet
And come where lies a coffer, burly all of blocks
Built of chancequarrièd, selfquainèd rocks
And the water warbles over into, filleted with glassy grassy quicksilvery shivès and shoots
And with heavenfallen freshness down from moorland still brims,
Dark or daylight on and on. Here he will then, here he will the fleet
Flinty kindcold element let break across his limbs
Long. Where we leave him, froliclavish while he looks about him, laughs, swims.
Enough now; since the sacred matter that I mean
I should be wronging longer leaving it to float
Upon this only gambolling and echoing-of-earth note—
What is … the delightful dene?
Wedlock. What the water? Spousal love….