The Elucidation of Plato’s Allegory

In the “Allegory of the Cave” Plato makes the argument that ordinary men are blind to the existence of higher realities. He states common men are like chained “cavernous” (64) people, who can perceive only “shadows of artefacts”(65) on the wall of their provincial world. To become aware of what a thing truly is, or to belong to the world of truth, Plato believes it behooves man to break away from the conventional thoughts and perceptions of the average person; for man is unaware of his own ignorance until he seeks to break free from the shackles of widely assumed ideas of reality. The intellectual eye, once it enters into the world of truth through reason, will see with great clarity things in the perfect sense and ponder how he formerly existed without this truth. Plato warns, however, that man will only continue in this state if he remains outside of conventional society. To go back is to give up one’s self-dignity. Anyone who has seen truth and reverts to his former life of ignorance is only worthy of ridicule and pity. The argument Plato presents then is to reject representations of reality so as to find truth through one’s own reason and a personal pursuit of the divine realities.
The significance of Plato’s allegory of the cave for literary scholars is truly vast. Plato brought up an argument that made the literary and philosophical world think long and hard about the idea of man’s ability to find truth and asked whether literature inhibits that process or whether it assists it. Take, for example, the text which discusses the shadows of objects upon the wall in the cave and the people who see them. “[T]he shadows of artefacts would constitute the only reality people in this situation would recognize. […S]omeone tells him that what he’s been seeing all this time has no substance, and that he’s now [after leaving the cave] closer to reality and is seeing more accurately, because of the greater reality of the things before his eyes” (65). Plato makes the point that what man sees through representation is empty, meaningless. Man, therefore, must deny his own previous understanding of things if he wishes to come closer to possessing truth and to recognizing divine realities. Reason must be the way towards the divine, not representation, or literature. Literature is among the shadow world and desists one from aspiring towards “the sight of the character of goodness” (66) which “is a prerequisite for intellectual conduct” (66). Plato affirms that without the knowledge of truth, man will be corrupt, or at the very best, incomplete. This idea later inspired philosophers to consider whether or not this assertion bears validity. Is literature one of the “shadows of artefacts” (65) that blinds those in pursuit of truth? Are those who belong to the world of divine realities the only people who can have the “sight of the character of goodness?” (66) These questions and others made Plato’s writings instrumental in influencing future ideas regarding writing and whether literature, or representation, is a conduit or an obstacle in leading people closer to divine truth and reality. Plato’s contribution to literary studies could appropriately be called one of the cornerstones that laid the foundation for the construction of literary criticism and theory. Thus, his role among classical literary theory cannot be ignored due to the controversy his arguments engendered during that time.
Although Plato’s ideas on representation and reality were significant in impacting literary thought and criticism, they do, however, contain inaccuracies. First, Plato does not recognize that he himself uses a form of representation to convey his beliefs. He uses literature to clarify his ideas though rebukes those who look to them for truth. Plato clearly contradicts himself in this regard. He cannot be against something and then use that something to his own advantage. Secondly, human nature needs a channel through which it can come to find truth. Abstractions are not enough for people; they need a material form to associate with. To find truth, Plato states man must leave behind his senses and come into the world of reason; however, reason, the senses and reality cannot be segregated. When one brings them together they can come to find truth. Plato is blinded by this fact due to his rigid conviction that reason alone is necessary, but this is not so. Thirdly, representation, though it is a lesser form of reality does not mean it is an invalid means to communicate truth. Religion and literature, for example, have worked collectively together for millennia. Written words, representative images, oral traditions etc. keep intact the beliefs of others and instruct followers in coming to find the higher realities or the “realm of the knowledge of goodness” (66).
Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” impacted the world of literature and the understanding of complex concepts in ways never before witnessed in literature and for this it deserves credit. It challenged the minds of men to reflect deeply upon the idea of how it was one could find reality and truth. Plato was correct in highlighting the necessity for man to attain truth and to not take what one sees at face value. Furthermore, he was wise to challenge the reader to want to know more and to ask himself where it is he dwells and whether he possesses reality. Thus, Plato’s work can be looked upon as a valuable source that lead the classical world of literature towards a new understanding the significance of literature and its significance on the human persons.

In Defense of the Sabboth

Many young Catholics in the 21st century have begun asking themselves what it means to be Catholic in modern times. Does one still have to keep the Sabbath? Can one still be a good Catholic and miss mass regularly? In the minds of many young Catholics, no, they don’t and yes, they can. In a 2005 National Catholic Reporter survey, ninety-five percent of young adults between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five stated they believed one can be a good Catholic and not go to mass (D’Antonio). The survey also stated that only fifteen percent of young Catholics go to mass regularly and that only thirty-three percent confessed they would never leave the Church. What these statistics reveal is the urgent need to reeducate young Catholics who hold such opinions because they are not Catholic. Too many of today’s young adults are redefining what it means to be a good Catholic. This crisis needs to be addressed post haste before other people begin losing the right understanding of orthodox Catholicism. The intention of this paper, therefore, is to shed light upon the erring perspective of many young Catholics in this country who believe you can be a faithful Catholic and not attend mass. I will explain, using logic, Scripture and Church teaching, why one must follow the command to keep holy the Sabbath and why it is impossible to be a good Catholic and not attend mass weekly if one wishes to be a faithful follower of Christ.
Catholics must keep the Sabbath day holy if they wish to be Catholic. “Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day. Six days shalt thou labour, and shalt do all thy works. But on the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God” (Exodus 20:8-10). These words, given to us by God Himself are not to be taken half-heartedly. God created a covenant with man, and man, in gratitude for this covenant, should say thank you by giving God the worship and adoration He deserves. Catholics tend to forget that the covenant between God and man meant so much to God that He sent His only beloved Son to suffer and die in order to save us from our sins and bring us to eternal life. Because this concept seems alien to most young adults, it helps to compare this idea with something on a purely natural level. For example, if someone were to save our life from death through CPR, we would thank them profoundly. So too should we be with God. We should want to thank God who saved not only our bodies, but also our immortal souls from everlasting death, since He really did save us by bringing us back into friendship with Him. Thus, to give God one day a week is the least we can do in gratitude for all He did and continues to do for us.
Next comes the issue relating to the filial obedience we owe God. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that the “third commandment of the Decalogue recalls the holiness of the Sabbath: ‘The seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest’" (2168). Thus, Sunday is a day to rest. Why? Because God said so and if we love God we will keep His commandments. Christ stated at the Last Supper “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them; he it is that loveth Me. And he that loveth Me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him, and will manifest Myself to him” (John 14:21). If one wants to work on saving their soul and gaining salvation, one must always do what God says. To do otherwise is to not obey God, to sin, and hence grow farther away from God. Is this something people really want to do? Perhaps not, but they do not consider that God loves obedience and especially loves those who follow His commands. Whom does a mother have greater affection for, her obedient child or her disobedient child? The answer is obviously the obedient one, but God is the same way. Obedience is, therefore, the proof of your love for God and the key to starting an intimate friendship with Him. “If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; as I also have kept my Father's commandments, and do abide in his love” (John 15:10). If we will want this love, we must show Him our love.
Furthermore, if one wanted to look at the Ten Commandments on a scale of importance from top to bottom, it says something having keeping the Sabbath number three on the “top ten” list of things you must do to be saved. This obviously reveals that God Himself sees this as something of utmost importance to us, since it is to Him. He knows that if we are to be His children we need to give Him our time. As with any relationship, there needs to be time together and time spent getting to know the other person. God, knowing man better than he knows himself, wants to have an intimate relationship with him so that he can come to know, love, serve, obey and please God which will only increase the chances of his being happy with Him forever in eternity. Why would we want to go to heaven and spend time with someone we didn’t want to spend time with while on Earth? As Christ says “If any man minister to me, let him follow me; and where I am, there also shall my minister be” (John 12: 26). If we are to be His friends in Heaven, we must start by doing so now.
The next argument to refute is the idea that one can both be a good Catholic and not attend mass on Sunday. First, it must be stated that this idea is doctrinally impossible. Article 2180 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church emphatically declares “On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to participate in the Mass.” Additionally, article 2181states “The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice. For this reason the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless excused for a serious reason (for example, illness, the care of infants) or dispensed by their own pastor. Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin.” To miss mass, therefore, without sufficient reason is a grave matter, which translates into mortal sin. Mortal sin means you are outside God’s grace and, should you die in that state, would go to hell. Additionally, in the gospel of St. John, Jesus says "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood you will not have life in you." (John 6:53). To not go to mass, to not receive the very body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament is to not have life in you. You are outside of Christ and hence are not being a good Catholic. Therefore to say one can miss mass and be a good Catholic is both wrong and impossible.
In conclusion, while many of today’s young adults are unaware of their error, it is nevertheless necessary that the truth be revealed so their attitudes can be corrected and so they can begin to practice and preach the true faith which Christ revealed. The people surveyed from this poll need to be told that keeping the Sabbath is an obligation which we, as Catholics, owe to Almighty God without question. For in the end, God wants nothing but our good. If we trust Him and do what He says, then we know that what we do is for our good and will lead us closer to achieving that union with God which we all crave. When we love someone we want to be with them. Because God loves us, He wants us to be with Him. We should, then, want to give Him back that same love, by following His commandments and spending time with Him at mass. To deliberately not follow His command to keep the Sabbath, is not loving God and ergo, not being a good Catholic. While it is hoped that this reality will open the minds of these young adults, one can only pray that at some point, God will touch their hearts and guide them back into full union with the Church and thus full union with Christ, by their coming to love God and observe His laws.








Works Cited
Catechism of the Catholic Church. Washington, DC. Libreria Editrice Vaticana. United States
Conference of Catholic Bishops. 1997. 31 Oct. 2006 .
D’Antonio, William. “Survey of U.S. Catholic: Generational Differences.” National
Catholic Reporter. Table 4 (2005). 20 Oct. 2005
.
The Holy Bible. Douay-Rheims Version. Rockford, Il. TAN Books, 1989. DRBO.
2003. 20 Oct. 2006 < http://www.drbo.org/>.

On Being Human

In order to define what it means to be human, one first needs to understand humanity. To be able to understand humanity, one needs to examine their actions over the course of history. To be able to examine their actions over the course of history, one needs to acquire a text that dates back as far as possible. One of the best sources man has to assess human behavior is the Bible. The Biblical accounts are a valuable source to study human behavior since they portray a vast array of personalities both male and female, spanning a period of nearly two thousand years. It well represents what men and women are like both collectively and individually. In looking at some familiar Biblical accounts such as the fall of humanity, Joseph and his twelve brothers and the life of Christ, one can determine patterns of behavior which clearly illustrate the predominant characteristics of what it means to be human. For our argument, humanity will be separated into three categories, the bad, the good and the repentant good. From these three groups, the definition of what it means to be human will unfold itself as we explore the characteristics which make up a large portion of humanity.
Before delving into this analysis, it is necessary to understand that one of the most important aspects of being human is that one must be tempted. In the book of Genesis, Adam and Eve were tempted to see if they would be faithful to God’s command. From their choosing to disobey God, original sin was born and mankind’s wills were weakened. However, the point to remember here, is that God tests His children to see if they will be faithful to Him. Throughout all of human history, men and women have been tested by God for the self-same reason. From the choices they make during these moments of temptation they become who they are as individuals, and who people are as individuals, defines what humanity is as a whole. Given this understanding, we can now begin our analysis of humanity by looking at those people who succumbed to temptation (the bad), followed by those who did not (the good) and end with those who fell but later repented (the repentant good).
Many in the world consist of those who fall into temptation and sin; yet, this is not new to humanity. As previously mentioned, the first man and woman belonged to it. Adam and Eve knew not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, yet they did. Eve was the first to eat; however, what must be asked is what actions and what characteristics preceded the bite? The Bible tells us that she had a conversation with the serpent. But why would she talk with a serpent? Because she was idle. From idleness came the serpent, from the serpent came curiosity, from her curiosity came envy from envy came sin. Eve fell into the state of being envious, of wanting what did not belong to her to the point of putting herself before God to acquire it. Yet, Eve was not the only one culpable of sin; Adam too participated in the act. What was Adam’s blunder? First, he wasn’t there to protect Eve. He wasn’t there to guard her against this evil serpent which was his duty as Eve’s husband. This sin demonstrates man’s predominant tendency towards the sin of sloth. Between Eve’s temptation due to her idle, envious curiosity and Adam’s temptation towards slothful irresponsibility, both sinned and ate of the forbidden fruit. However, collectively they both sinned by the sin of pride. They put themselves before God by not obeying Him and by seeking to be potentially equal with Him. In evaluating Adam and Eve’s actions, it is clear that some in humanity can be slothful, envious, idle and proud.
Additional characters in the Bible fell into temptation. For example, in the Gospel of St. Mark, the Pharisees and Sadducees boasted of their great piety and righteousness, yet willingly condemned the Son of God to die. Being blinded by their own ego’s, they could not see Truth staring them dead in the face. They hated Christ because of His goodness, the attention He drew, and the truth He preached and, consequentially, had Him crucified. This idea of hatred and injustice done to innocent people because of people’s great jealousy towards them greatly reflects part of what it means to be human. Still today, there are people who want to see others treated unjustly and care less about their happiness. Instead, they seek their own happiness at the expense of another’s misery. From this observation, some in humanity can be called as malicious, jealous and hateful.
While there are many who fall into temptation, sin and thus make all of humanity look terrible, there are also many who struggle against it and practice virtue. Take, for example, the Old Testament figure, Joseph, and his great act of mercy. To forgive your enemy is a very difficult thing. To not carry a grudge towards your enemy, but to whole-heartedly forgive him for all the pain he caused you shows the potential people have in practicing great virtue. In Joseph, there is the image of a man unjustly sold into slavery by his eleven brothers. Yet, after Joseph gained power and had his brother’s groveling at his feet for help during the famine, he set aside his feelings of bitterness and forgave them for their evil deed. He took extraordinary pity on them and provided for their needs, forgiving them all they had done to him. This tender image of Joseph as the merciful brother and just lord characterizes those in the world who are virtuous and who fight the temptation to do wrong to those who rightly deserve punishment. Thus, Joseph touchingly represents those who show love and mercy towards their neighbor by practicing true charity in forgiving those who ask for pardon. Humanity, therefore, is capability of being loving, just and forgiving.
Likewise, humanity has a second category among the good. This consists of the repentant good. Saint Peter, one of Christ’s dear Apostles, belonged to this category. Saint Peter denied Christ three times when he swore he would follow Him to the death. This great act of betrayal, though a terrible sin, awakened in Peter a great sorrow, and from this sorrow, he repented with his whole heart. He begged God’s mercy and trusted in His forgiveness. He, though tempted to despair like the traitor Judas, hoped in God’s mercy and did not despair. To despair would itself have caused him to fall into greater sin which he did not do. He prayed, hoped, repented and was forgiven. Similarly, the infamous prostitute, Saint Mary Magdalene, asked for Christ’s mercy, sinner though she was. She knew she was wrong, but through her faith in Christ, she was healed from her wicked ways, became a pure woman and faithful follower of Christ. Many there are who through weakness fall into sin, but who continue to fight their evil inclinations through repeated efforts and struggle. Though sinners, they too are worthy of the name good since they strive to be better than they are. To be human, therefore also means to be weak, to be contrite, to struggle against our fallen nature and to trust in God’s love.
What now can be said from this analysis? What does it mean to be human? In a nutshell, to be human means to be tried. It means one will be tempted towards evil. It means one can fall and sin. It means one can resist and become virtuous. It means one can fall, but then ask for God’s forgiveness. Being human means we can practice great vice or it means we can practice great virtue. From the free will choices a person makes in their life, they can become truly great or truly terrible. In the end, being human means to be called unto higher things. It means we are to be like that which we were meant to be before the fall, likened unto God, perfect and holy. With God’s grace, fallen humanity, tempted and weak as it is, must strive to arrive at that eternal garden of paradise, so that with the saints and angels in Heaven, we might enjoy that which we are destined to enjoy, namely the Beatific vision of Almighty God.