Skip to main content

Surprising Conversion

As many of my friends will know, I became a Catholic on Tuesday, the 22 of June, converting from Anglicanism.  I had been an Anglican since the age of eighteen.  I have long been an admirer of Catholic thinkers, poets, and saints, not least Graham Greene, my favourite prose writer of the 20th century.  Lowell is one of my favourite poets, as is FT Prince.  My vision of the Church is a broad and open one, and while I am aware of its many actual and perceived faults - many the result of the humanity at the heart of any organisation of global-historical reach - I am also aware of the rich, various and deeply-felt spiritual life that many Catholics live.  I hope to be a part of the Church's ongoing struggle for relevance and renewal in a time of high science and secularism - also a time of environmental and capitalist crisis, when no other world organisation speaks so powerfully against war, pollution, or capitalism's faults.

Yes, I know that some of the official positions of the Church are difficult.  Many Catholics struggle with them.  I also know that the existence of God is open to debate.  I am no stranger to dark nights of the soul.  But the point is, however dark, those nights are of the soul.  I have always sensed the real presence of souls within persons.  I have sensed transcendent possibilities, higher realms.  This idealism, and belief that love is the single most important virtue and gift, made me attentive to the Sermon on the Mount.  Christ is the wisest teacher of all.  And more.  This is my faith, my belief - and it is not one I would ever want to compel another to follow.  But should anyone wonder how to navigate this difficult passage known as life, I would suggest that faith offers as much or more, than abject nihilism.  Despair tastes good on the cynic's tongue for a few hours, but stales in time.

Comments

Congratulations Todd! As Chesterton put it: "The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried." It is a road of great courage and great humility, but I'll wager from your words, it makes all the difference :)
Diane Tucker said…
Blessings on your step of faith, Todd! Keep walking with and toward Jesus Christ. The Sermon on the Mount is subversive amazing-ism. May the Kingdom of God continue to spread into you as you walk farther into it.

diane tucker

Popular posts from this blog

CLIVE WILMER'S THOM GUNN SELECTED POEMS IS A MUST-READ

THAT HANDSOME MAN  A PERSONAL BRIEF REVIEW BY TODD SWIFT I could lie and claim Larkin, Yeats , or Dylan Thomas most excited me as a young poet, or even Pound or FT Prince - but the truth be told, it was Thom Gunn I first and most loved when I was young. Precisely, I fell in love with his first two collections, written under a formalist, Elizabethan ( Fulke Greville mainly), Yvor Winters triad of influences - uniquely fused with an interest in homerotica, pop culture ( Brando, Elvis , motorcycles). His best poem 'On The Move' is oddly presented here without the quote that began it usually - Man, you gotta go - which I loved. Gunn was - and remains - so thrilling, to me at least, because so odd. His elegance, poise, and intelligence is all about display, about surface - but the surface of a panther, who ripples with strength beneath the skin. With Gunn, you dressed to have sex. Or so I thought.  Because I was queer (I maintain the right to lay claim to that

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se.  What do I mean by smart?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".