Ultimate Battles | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J. | On Raymond Dennehy's novel, "Soldier Boy" | Ignatius Insight
Ultimate Battles | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J. | On Raymond Dennehy's novel,
Soldier Boy
http://ignatiusinsight.com/features2008/schall_ultimatebattles_aug08.asp
Raymond Dennehy, Soldier Boy: The War Between Michael
& Lucifer (Victoria, B. C.: TraffordPublishers, 2007), 124 pp. Paper.
Raymond Dennehy's new novel reflects his long career as a
teacher and philosopher, along with his suspicion that the ultimate aberrations
begin in the minds of professors. C. S. Lewis thought this same thing in his Hideous
Strength. Dennehy's book, as he acknowledges, is not unmindful of Lewis' Screwtape Letters. What is different with Dennehy is that we look not
so much into the devil's machinations about how to corrupt the human race
(though that is there) but why he would want to do so. We forget that this too
is an intellectual problem of vast significance.
Even more striking about this book is the question of what
might be called, in Thomistic terms, "angelic understanding." That is, what is
it that the angels say to one another? Logically, we might expect them to have
much more insight than we have. Dennehy's lively imagination captures well the
notion that angels too are free creatures who have to give reasons for their
choices to serve God and be friends with one another or to reject God and
corrupt their relations to one another. The gripping drama of the book, a
heritage of Milton and of Augustine's definition of pride, is that these choices
can be reduced to the diabolical choice of oneself as the cause of things, a
kind of angelic imitation of the temptation of Adam and Eve.
Contained in these riveting pages are the philosophical and
theological grounds for what we think of our souls in relation to our destiny.
This is a novel about the mind of the greatest of the angels, Lucifer himself,
and his being driven out of heaven by Michael, the Archangel. If it sounds
familiar, it is—even more familiar than we like to think. The characters of
both Michael and Lucifer, with their associate devils and angels, are very well
and vividly drawn. This book would, in fact, be a very good movie.
What Dennehy, a professor at the University of San
Francisco, has done here is to think his way through the mind of a devil. For
those of us who know him, we are not surprised at this feat! In one sense, the
context of Dennehy's novel is abortion, its deeper reasons and significance.
The fact that free and liberal societies now by law promote this right to kill
the most innocent of our kind must have more than a human explanation. No one
makes this connection better than Dennehy, who also relates its logic to the
earlier questions of contraception and modern definitions of freedom as
self-fulfillment.
Dennehy has debated and written on this topic of human life
and its threats for years. Probably no one in the country is more acute to the
mind of those who promote this killing of our kind. He suspects, as I said,
that its heinousness cannot be simply human. Thus the book is also a closely
argued position brought forth in the intense dialogue of "Soldier Boy" Michael
and Lucifer, at once the Prince of Light and Darkness. Lucifer calls Michael,
the commander of the Lord's angelic legions, simply "Soldier Boy," a derogative,
amusing term to indicate that while Lucifer in the hierarchy of the angels is a
Seraph, poor Michael is a rather dull-witted archangel. But Michael is by no
means as stupid as Lucifer makes him out to be. He is loyal in his relation to
God, something that Lucifer is constantly seeking to undermine.
As I think about this book—a book that certainly
requires us to think very closely—what we have here is one of the finest
reflections on the nature of evil as a spiritual power and temptation, both angelic
and human, that I have ever seen. The most moving context of the dialogue that
constitutes the book is whether Lucifer and Michael are friends, which Michael
would like to be the case and Lucifer at least pretends to be. But it turns out
that Lucifer corrupts every possible relation. He never enters a relation
except on terms of "what is in it for me?" There is no "friendship" with
Lucifer, as the last and surprising lines of this book indicate. This is why
Lucifer represents the very opposite of the Godhead. Yet, he is the most
splendid of God's spiritual creation. He reminds us that we should never forget
that the ultimate origin of evil is not material, but spiritual, in our
relation to what it is that causes us to be in the first place.
In taking us through the "reasoning" of Lucifer in
justifying his rebellion against God, we are presented with the classic
anti-deity arguments based on freedom, autonomy, and independence. These in
themselves noble ideas are turned inward and seen as opposed to God, not
related to him. Lucifer knows that he is not himself God. But once he has
revolted, he feels that the glory that is due to him is not acknowledged by
God, otherwise He would not have created man in the cosmos. The fact that God
could love others besides him is taken as a jealous rejection of his own glory.
The result, which is where the human race gets into this
act, is that Lucifer must do everything he can to show his revolt against God
by corrupting man. Since he cannot reject or hurt God directly, he can in
effect get back at God through God's creation and love of corporeal men. In the
background, of course, is the Incarnation, the man-God. The most contemptible
enterprise of Lucifer is thus to get human beings to kill the most innocent of
their own kind in the name of rights or liberty or autonomy, their own, not
their existence as images of God.
This book is really fascinating. Dennehy has the clearest of
minds. He writes as a man who has indeed encountered evil and knows the
personal dangers of coming to grips with it, something that Tolkien once
noted. No book will get us through our own souls and the modern mind in quite
this same way. Yet, I think, what I found most fascinating about this book,
something Chesterton said of Aquinas, is that Dennehy is struck by the relation
of angels themselves to each other. We often forget that first drama of the
Fall took place among the angels. We can think it a "myth" if we like, but it
will become very real on reading Dennehy's Soldier Boy.
Related IgnatiusInsight.com Articles, Excerpts, & Interviews:
Liberal Democracy as a Culture of Death: Why John Paul II Was Right | Raymond Dennehy
The Illusion of Freedom Separated from Moral Virtue | Raymond Dennehy
Contraception and Homosexuality: The Sterile Link of Separation | Raymond Dennehy
Peanuts and Thomists | Raymond Dennehy
The Case Against Abortion | An Interview with Dr. Francis Beckwith
Introduction to Three Approaches to Abortion | Peter Kreeft
Some Atrocities are Worse than Others | Mary Beth Bonacci
Personally Opposed--To What? | Dr. James Hitchcock
Fr.
James V. Schall, S.J., is Professor of Political Philosophy at Georgetown
University.
He is the author of numerous books on social issues, spirituality, culture,
and literature including Another
Sort of Learning, Idylls
and Rambles, A Student's Guide to Liberal Learning,
The Life of the Mind (ISI, 2006),
The Sum Total of Human
Happiness (St. Augustine's Press, 2007), and The Regensburg Lecture (St. Augustine's Press, 2007). His most recent book is
The Order of Things (Ignatius Press, 2007). Read more of his essays on his
website.
Visit
the Insight Scoop Blog and read the latest posts and comments by
IgnatiusInsight.com staff and readers about current events, controversies,
and news in the Church!