First Conference

Nature and Grace – Exodus, 5:1-9

My dear brothers and sisters,

Last evening, during the Homily/Conference, I said that we would be comparing our Spiritual Journey of Faith to the journey of the Israelites in the desert toward the Promised Land. But now in this conference, I am going to talk about something that preceded the journey in the desert. As the reading suggests, it is something that took place while the Israelites were still in Egypt. It is the struggle that occurred between Moses and Pharaoh. It was a drawn out affair, but ultimately Pharaoh was obliged to concede defeat, and he did let all the people go. I will attempt to compare the struggle between Pharaoh and Moses to the struggle that goes on between nature and Grace, before grace finally wins and a definitive lasting conversion takes place. One then is able to surrender to God completely. We have to admit that the journey in Faith that leads to holiness cannot begin until that definitive conversion has occurred.

In order to keep the analogy as close as possible, we have to try to understand to the best of our ability what it is about Nature that we are identifying with Pharaoh. I think the opening reading gives us a valuable hint: This reading begins the account of the struggle, (this account continues on for several chapters). Pharaoh says: Who is Yahweh that I should listen to Him and let Israel go? I know nothing of Yahweh, and I will not let Israel go. We would therefore have to understand by the word “nature” all those aspects of our humanity, which cannot perceive what is spiritual. It would be that aspect of human nature, which St. Paul in his epistles calls “the Flesh”. I think this makes sense because, like Pharaoh, the Flesh exercises a “tyranny” over our entire humanity that only grace can overcome.

Nature, or the Flesh, would include all that pertains to the material component of our being, and better yet, everything we have in common with the beasts. That includes of course, the sense and the sensory appetites, the passions, but also certain types of awareness that is found in the beasts: awareness of physical condition; a kind of social awareness, namely that the individual beast is one among many of the same species, and also an awareness of rank or position among the many. Now these sound like they are spiritual entities, and in a certain sense they are because we do speak of an “animal soul”. But they are not truly spiritual souls that the beasts have while alive because at death the animal soul ceases to exist. Since the soul of a beast is not a rational soul, not endowed with intellect and free will, it is incapable of perceiving what is truly spiritual. Thus, the flesh, or nature, that is in opposition to grace includes all the most basic instincts that we share with the beasts. The most powerful instinct in the beasts is the instinct of self-preservation, that is, the instinct to preserve bodily life.

We spoke of the different awarenesses a minute ago, and there would be an instinct that goes with each “awareness”. Another animal instinct would be the instinct to dominate over the other individuals of the species yet we know the instinct to preserve life is stronger and the instinct to dominate yields to it. We are very well aware that we as humans have our instinct to rank as high as possible among our fellow human beings.

Grace, then, which we wish to analogize to Moses, would represent all those aspects of our humanity, which do perceive what is truly spiritual. It would have to correspond to everything about us that we have in common with pure spirits, angels, obviously, and God Himself. Thus, the use of the word grace in this context does not mean either “sanctifying grace”, a created share in the life of God, nor “actual grace”, a special divine help given to us by God in service of sanctifying grace within us: its preservation and development. Grace in this context would mean those purely spiritual faculties we have in common with the angels – intellect, the spiritual component of our memory, and our free wills. In other words, those faculties of our souls, which make us the image and likeness of God.

Now we humans have only one soul, and this soul is the seat of the instinct we have in common with the beasts. And they, our animal instincts, “co-exist in” our souls along with “spiritual” instincts. I believe it is possible to speak of an instinct of “spiritual” self-preservation. Our souls can only “survive” if they are in touch with truth, beauty and goodness, all of which are spiritual entities. So really, the warfare that takes place in the human soul that precedes a definitive conversion experience is between the “animal” instincts and the “spiritual” instincts of our soul.

We have to acknowledge, too, that the “animal instinct” of self-preservation finds an ally in the “spiritual instinct” of self-preservation because the only access our spiritual faculties have to truth, beauty and goodness in this life is through the body and its senses. And so it is in the best interest of the “Flesh” to keep the “Spirit”, the spiritual faculties of the soul thinking that there is no other truth, goodness and beauty except that which is found in the material universe through the mediation of the body. So, given the tyranny of the Flesh, caused by the sin of our First Parents, those movements of the spiritual faculties toward what sustains and nourishes its life: truth, beauty and goodness, which the senses of the Body cannot perceive, are effectively kept in check until, of course, grace in the true sense, a share in God’s life, given at Baptism, and nourished and developed through actual graces and the Sacraments, grows strong enough completely to overcome the tyranny of the Flesh. Egypt therefore would be that set of circumstances which aids and abets the tyranny of the Flesh. It would include all those things we identify with life-style: activities, friendships, amusements and diversion, particularly reading materials and their equivalent: movies, TV dramas, etc. Grace would be that set of circumstances which would aid and abet the spiritual interests of the soul to be in touch with and in possession of eternal truth, beauty and goodness, namely with God, the true and eternal life of the soul. In the case of the struggle between Moses and Pharaoh, Moses was trying to get the people beyond the physical confines of Egypt. It is not the purpose of Grace, in its struggle against the Flesh (nature) to get us out of this world into eternity. That is why I’ve defined Egypt and Grace as a set of circumstances or life-style, because until God Himself decides to take us out of this world, He wants us to be “in it”, but not “of it.”

With all that as a background, now we can begin to consider some of the confrontations between Moses and Pharaoh, and try to learn from them some of the characteristics of the struggle between nature and grace that take place in the depths of our souls.

I would like to try to relate the experience of Moses when he saw the burning bush that was not consumed to the initiation of the struggle between grace and nature that precedes a definitive conversion to God. What is it that sparks the notion in a person that it is time to stop being “of this world”? Until Moses was commissioned by God to lead the Israelites out of Egypt, the people there did not ever consider, apparently, an attempt to escape the condition of their lives as slaves to Pharaoh. They certainly did not like the fact of servitude, because as Yahweh said to Moses in Exodus, 3:7, “I have seen the miserable state of my people in Egypt. I have heard their appeal to be free of their slave drivers. Yes, I am well aware of their suffering.” It had apparently never occurred to them that the solution lay in leaving the country. Perhaps they thought that Pharaoh would change and release them from servitude. But the answer to my question is given in the next sentence: (Ex. 3:8), “I mean to deliver them out of the hands of the Egyptians.” What sparks the idea to surrender totally to God is a grace that proceeds from Him directly. It is an invitation that He directs to our “instinct” of spiritual self-preservation. Up until that time, grace given an individual Catholic might cause him to deplore, resent and cry out against the fact that he is “in and of” this world, but the idea of changing his life completely around from a state which fosters the reign of sin in his members never seems to occur to him “naturally”. Perhaps he seems to think, “well, things will change, and I will no longer feel the burden of trying to be a faithful Catholic living in a sinful world.”

It seems then, that God cannot give the grace to undergo a permanent conversion unless a person really begins to find the tyranny of the flesh burdensome. A person has to be dissatisfied with the state of slavery to sin. Perhaps as in the case of Moses, who had to flee Egypt because he had killed an Egyptian, one discovers that his sins are leading him to the brink of tragedy. Then, having fled to God – being with God in the “desert” by means of earnest prayers and novenas, reading Scripture, listening attentively to sermons, God in His mercy decides to grant him the grace to “desire” to devote his entire life to God, or better, to reorganize his life around those things that serve the needs of his spirit at the expense of those things that hitherto had served the demands of the Flesh.

It is then, that the struggle begins. Nature is not going to make it easy to carry out that resolution.

Pharaoh responded to Moses’ request to lead out the people (which represent all the faculties of our humanity) out into the wilderness to celebrate a feast for Yahweh, by making the work harder for the people. Then when the work was not getting done, the foremen of the people were flogged by the exactors, the Egyptians they were answerable to, and they complained to Moses that he had made them look bad to Pharaoh. Nature, the Flesh seems to respond in the same way to initial attempts at the definitive conversion. Nature finds allies among the friends and relatives of whoever wants to respond to the grace of conversion: it finds allies in our daily routine and habits. “Spend time apart to attend to God and the needs of your soul? You can’t do that? You’re too busy. You have too many things to do! Often friends and relatives of such a person do not want anything to change in the relationship, and if these same friends and relatives manifest anger or displeasure at the attempt to follow the promptings of the grace of conversion, the individual might even begin to resent the fact of being called to holiness of life.

The initial response of Pharaoh was countered by the Lord instructing Moses and Aaron to show a sign to Pharaoh. Aaron was given to Moses to be his spokesman, because Moses had a speech impediment. Aaron was to throw down his staff, which turned into a serpent. Pharaoh called in his magicians and sorcerers and they were able to do the same thing, but Aaron’s staff devoured the staffs of the sorcerers. Perhaps this signifies how a person who has tried to respond faithfully to the grace of conversion also has to find a way to prove to those who resent his determination to draw closer to God that this will rid his life of all those faults and imperfections that flow from his relationships with families, friends and co-workers. Then perhaps those who oppose his conversions tell him and give evidence of the fact that one does not have to appeal to God or to a spiritual life style to be rid of these sins, faults and imperfections. They will say there are purely natural, non-religious means that one can resort to: “You can get all you desire, in effect, without ceasing to be ‘of this world’.” And so the impasse continues.

After that, the strategy shifts. The Lord, Yahweh, decides to send plagues upon Egypt that will finally force Pharaoh to relent and permit the Israelites to leave. Here it is very difficult to sustain the analogy, because the soul itself becomes the battleground. There is in its depths the animal component of the one soul that contends with the spiritual component for control. One would have to imagine that the “animal” component enters into dialogue with the spiritual component. The first two plagues that Yahweh sent, changing water into blood and causing frogs to overrun the land could be induced also by the magicians and sorcerers of Pharaoh. If dialogue between the lower and higher parts of our soul were possible this might represent the fact that the lower part refuses to acknowledge that (because it can’t perceive it), there is a world of pure spirits that have a just claim to the total devotion of the higher part, and by reproducing the same effects allegedly caused by the Lord of the Realm of pure spirits, its refusal to hand over control of the entire humanity, by permitting a change of life style, would be justified.

Next, because the plague of mosquitoes could not be reproduced by the sorcerers and magicians of Pharaoh, they told him at last, “this is the finger of God”, we would have to imagine how the lower part of the soul is finally forced to admit that there does exist that world of spirits ruled over by God, which is perceived by and which gives life to the higher part of the soul. But as Pharaoh stubbornly refused to yield to this new datum, likewise the lower part of the soul representing the “animal instincts” we all have refused to yield control to the “spiritual instincts”.

As the narrative continues, we notice how Pharaoh’s heart continues to be hardened, increasingly so, as the severity of the plagues increased. This seems to suggest that every rejection of a grace sent by God makes it more difficult to respond to the next grace. “If today you hear his voice, harden not your hearts,” say Sacred Scripture. Tomorrow, even though the call is louder, you may still be unable to respond. As in the case of Pharaoh to finally get our attention and our compliance, God may have to deliver some pretty hard knocks, all of which could have been avoided if we had accepted the first grace. We simply have to thank God for His Marcy in not giving up on us and leaving us to our own devices.

In any event, Pharaoh next resorts to the bargaining table. We can suppose that the lower part of the soul finally realizes that its ultimate interests require that it yield control to the higher part. It begins to see that it can rely upon the access the spiritual part has to God to overcome things that inflict pain upon it. It promises to yield control in return for the removal of that pain, but when the pain is gone, the promise to yield is broken. This is what Pharaoh did, too. He promised to let the people go if Moses prayed for and obtained the termination of the plague of gadflies, but when the gadflies departed, he broke his promise.

The next step on the part of Pharaoh was to try to negotiate a settlement in which Moses would get substantially all he was asking for (Yahweh was asking for) and yet Pharaoh would not lose his control. He suggested: OK, you can sacrifice and celebrate a feast of God, but do it in this country.

We can see in this attempt on the part of nature to say to Grace: “You can have control provided all my needs are served”. In other words, find a way to serve God and our lower nature at the same time. The response of Moses to Pharaoh is analogous to the response of St. Paul: to the above proposition “that would not be right: ‘The Spirit’, he says in Galatians 5, lusts against the flesh, and the flesh lusts against the spirit. The one is clean contrary to the other”. In effect this offer of Pharaoh to Moses amounts to nature saying to Grace: you can take over, but don’t let me suffer pain. You can do God’s will, but don’t go contrary to the wishes of your family, don’t do anything that makes you or your family look foolish or weak in the eyes of other people, don’t jeopardize your possessions or your creature comforts. Grace simply cannot accept that kind of a compromise.

As the plagues continued, Pharaoh stated his willingness to compromise – “go, but don’t go far”. That is what nature is next willing to concede: “I’m willing to suffer pain, and to let you put God above your family and let you be thought of as weak and foolish, and let you give up possessions and comforts, but only a little”. As Moses found Pharaoh’s proposal unacceptable, so does Grace of a definitive conversion reject that kind of compromise.

You can probably guess that Pharaoh’s next proposals were. First, he said that he would let the men go, but not the women and children. Then he said, all right, women and children can go, but not your herds and livestock. In these proposals, Pharaoh wanted to guarantee that those who went into the wilderness to sacrifice to Yahweh would come back to Egypt. And you can surely guess what Nature’s proposal to grace would be that is analogous to that. It would be: “change this or that aspect of your life-style; sever this or that tie or attachment to your present life-style, but leave this one intact”. But grace is quick to respond: “Thou shalt love the Lord your God with your whole heart and with your whole mind and with your whole soul and with all your strength”, and “you shall love your neighbor as yourself”, or better, “Love one another as I have loved you.” As St. Teresa of Jesus reminds us: God surrenders Himself completely only to those who surrender themselves completely to Him.

Earlier in the conference we asked, “What is it that causes an individual Catholic to desire to undergo a complete and definitive conversion?” Now we can ask, “what is it that causes him to carry out that desire?” Whatever it is, it would have to be analogous to what induced Pharaoh to let the people go: The death of the First born of man and beast. And whatever it is, it too, is inflicted by God. So it must have something to do with survival. Perhaps the higher part of the soul, as a result of some providential event they both experience, is able to say to the lower part: You and I are inseparable. We both want to live. If we decide to live where you feel at home, then when all matter perishes, so do we. But if we decide to live where I am at home, in the purely spiritual realm, in the incorruptible homeland that is God Himself, then we both live forever. Besides, one day the body we both depend on now in time will be restored as a glorified, spiritual body, and then you, too, lower nature, will experience bliss that you never dreamed could exist.

One final point. The book of Exodus in this narrative (Exodus 3 through Exodus 12:42) twice refers to the “plundering” of Egypt. The Lord instructed Moses to instruct the people to ask their Egyptian neighbors for silver and gold ornaments and clothing. Exodus 12:36 says: Yahweh gave the people such prestige in the eyes of the Egyptians that they gave them what they asked. So they plundered the Egyptians.

It seems to me we can relate this event to the fallacy that a life devoted entirely to God is a life devoid of joy and delight and excitement and of a sense of fulfillment. That is said because it is alleged that all the rich gifts of talent and ability that reside in our souls are denied full scope for their activity and development when one withdraws them from the service of lower nature. Worldly people know no other joy and delight except those that come through the senses. But when, despite that lie that is so prevalent in the world today, one does surrender completely to God by the grace of a definitive conversion, one discovers that there are spiritual joys and delights and excitement and sense fulfillment that make those of the order of sense seem utterly worthless. Lower nature may be impoverished but the higher part of the soul if almost infinitely, really, divinely enriched.

<<<Journey index

>>>next conference

MISSION STATEMENT: This web site was created for the purpose of completing the work of Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, O.C.D These conferences may be reproduced for private use only. Publication of this material is forbidden without permission of the Father Provincial for the Discalced Carmelites, Holy Hill, 1525 Carmel Rd., Hubertus, WI 53033-9770.