The Strange Happenings at the Unreal Hotel

hotel

Many are the strange things going on in the Unreal Hotel.

In Room 101, a man and woman are lying together, and in more ways than one.

In Room 102, it is a man and a man.

In Room 103, a fellow named George, who has grown weary of his life, is meeting surreptitiously with his physician, Dr. Felix, to determine what will be the best medicine for him to take to bring his days to an appropriate end.

In Room 104, two teenagers, drunk with terror and glee, spin the nearly empty chamber of a revolver, while their friends look on and place bets.

In Room 105, a young girl, her boyfriend looking on from the corner, dials the nearest women’s health center to make an appointment to snuff out the life they have begotten.

In Room 106, Mr. and Mrs. Mobile sit anxiously by the telephone, waiting to hear whether their boy, whose ultrasound image they have seen, possesses a certain chromosomal anomaly which will instantly transform him from the prospective Michael, Junior, to an unfortunate object to be discarded.

In Room 107, a caseworker from an adoption agency writes “approved” below the application of two women for a baby boy, and “disapproved” below the application of a married couple, adding the explanation, “too fat.”

In Room 108, a lobbyist hunkers over his desk, writing up new regulations for his employer’s industry, regulations which will effectually drive many of his employer’s competitors out of business.  When he finishes with this, he takes from his briefcase a speech on economic freedom, to correct the grammar and add incendiary flourishes.

In Room 109, an Education Czar chats with his colleagues about the need to center education upon the personal needs of the child, and also to ensure safety in schools whose students number more than a thousand.

In Room 110 – but I need not go on.

It is common for me to hear that the moral teachings of the Catholic Church, whereof I am a grateful member, are “unrealistic.”  By this opprobrious term is meant, I gather, “absolutely impossible to abide by.”  It is, then, considered impossible for John, or Mary, to remain chaste.  It is impossible for Roy to refrain from abusing himself with another man.  It is impossible for George to live out his days.  It is impossible for teenagers to find enjoyment in what is true and good and beautiful.  It is impossible for Dr. Felix to concentrate on healing rather than on destruction.  It is impossible to bear a child.  It is impossible to be honest.  It is impossible to treat children as human beings.  Beneath all these impossibles is the bald insistence of a spoiled soul: “What I do not want to do, that I cannot do.”

And yet realism is precisely what the Church’s teachings presuppose, and upon which they build.  Consider the case of John and Mary in Room 101.  They are not married, but they have removed their clothes.  In doing so, they have quite literally divested themselves; their being naked to one another says, “There is nothing I withhold from you.  I am entirely yours.”  When they “make love,” as they call it, what is actually happening?  Each body possesses within itself precious strands of human history: all the generations that have resulted in their physical beings are, as it were, ready to emerge again to the shores of light.  They are doing the baby-making thing.  They are doing what no human being can do on his own, nor can two members of the same sex do it.  They are forming “one flesh,” organs cooperating in the complex interplay that is oriented towards the future.  The seed of the man is being sown in the field of the woman’s womb, where it may well bring forth fruit.  That is what is going on in Room 101.

John and Mary may object, “But we have taken a precaution.  We have sown the field with salt beforehand.  We have set a plastic guard under the soil.”  All that does is to complicate the lie.  It does not change the nature of the act itself.  John and Mary, with their very bodies, are saying, “I give myself wholly,” and the organs are responding as if the gift were entire, yet the pleasure they experience is shot through with the self-contradiction.  “I can rely on her,” John considers.  “She’ll know better than to make too much of this.”  Meanwhile a wave of sweat washes over Mary as her eye lights upon a white pill on the nightstand.

The core of all Catholic moral teaching is that good and bad are determined by the real nature of what we do.  Our guiltiness – that subjective evil that dwells in the heart, which only God can see perfectly – is another matter.  No Catholic can claim to know how God will judge John and Mary, or the teenagers at their roulette, or the blind educationist.  But not all the lying in the world, not all the shrugs and ducks, not all the evasions, not all the precious intellectual pirouettes, can alter what is real.

Consider Room 102.  If we look upon the bodies of the two men as essentially unreal – that is, though they are possessed of a certain physical composition, we say that there is no nature to the body, nothing that makes it this sort of thing rather than that – then we can pass no moral judgments whatsoever upon what they do.  For there isn’t any “what they do”; it is only what they say they do, or what they will to do, or what they imagine they do.  And this will satisfy most people now, because most people are comfortable inhabitants of Unreal City.  Yet what is really happening to the seed?  What is happening to this or that part of the body not meant for penetration?  The Catholic teaching, frank and clear, begins with the command, “Respect reality.  Notice what this body is, and what it is for.  Notice what this masculine nature is for.”

The gun is for killing, not for a game.  The teenagers are in fact committing, in law at least, reckless endangerment of human life; in morality, murder.  But that is also what Dr. Felix is doing.  All we need to do is to call the lethal toxin a “medicine,” and we see the lie, the adamant refusal to abandon Unreal City.  For the toxin does not medicate.  It does not heal a disease, or restore an organ to proper function.  It does not even soothe pain.  It eliminates the subject of the pain.  Such “medicine” is analogous to a political program to stamp out poverty by eliminating the poor.  It does not matter, either, that George wants Dr. Felix to administer the toxin, as it would not matter if a poor man were to say, “I give up, take my life.” The teenagers in Room 104, after all, are quite full of a desire to be where they are, playing their deadly game.  Consent does not alter the act’s reality; it merely adds a conspirator to the killing.

As it turns out, the boyfriend in Room 105 has a ready answer for us.  “It is only a blob of cells right now,” says he, having picked up the phrase in health class at Unreal High.  But a blob of cells is precisely what the developing child is not.  A blob may have a more or less spherical shape, but that is not what makes it a blob.  A germinated seed may have a more or less spherical shape, yet it is certainly no blob.  A blob is an undifferentiated mass. It is lifeless, unless it comes flowing from the ball return at the bowling alley in a bad movie.  But the embryo is already a self-integrating organism.  It is a living thing.  It is human – not canine, not equine, not porcine.  It dwells within the mother’s body – and she is, eo ipso, not a mother-to-be, but already a mother.  But it is not a part of the mother’s body.  That is flat biological fact.  It possesses its own genetic makeup: neither that of the mother nor that of the father.  It has begun to exist in time, like all living creatures.  It not only has being; it is a being, and it is the sort of being that we all once were, and still are.  It is not analogous to an acorn, or a sperm cell, or a grain of pollen.  It is analogous to a seedling.  We look upon the serrated three-lobed leaf on its tiny stem, poking up from the earth, and we say, correctly, “There’s a maple tree,” though as yet it possesses neither bark nor xylem nor sap.  And the girl on the telephone knows this, because she had dearly wanted the boyfriend to say, “You’re carrying my child!”

The case of Mr. and Mrs. Mobile is fascinating.  They are dwelling in a place we might call Unreal Square: an unreality upon an unreality, an unreality in an additional dimension.  For until they hear the word from the laboratory, they can neither say “He is Michael, Junior, our son,” or “We should do away with it.”  It is bad enough to suppose that a he can be transformed into an it by an act of imaginative will.  It is bad in an altogether novel way to suppose that, until the decision is made, the developing child exists in limbo, neither child nor not-child.  It is unreal to affirm that two and two make five.  It is far more complexly unreal to affirm that one cannot know yet whether two and two will make four or five or any other sum.

The duelist says, “I was defending my honor.”  The Church says – not needing to thumb through sacred Scripture, but only to respect reality, “No, you were an aggressor, putting a bullet through your neighbor’s heart.”  The slaveowner says, “I am taking care of these people.”  Bartolomeo de las Casas says, “No, you are treating them as chattel for your own profit.”  The eugenicist says, “I am helping the poor.”  Chesterton says, “No, you are passing around devices so that there will be fewer of the poor for you to ignore.”  The polyamorist says, “I wish to love several women at once.”  Pope John Paul says, “Alas, poor ignorant man, you do not even know what married love is, or you would not have so foolishly contradicted yourself.”  The Pharisee says, “I am praying.”  Jesus says, “No, you are praising yourself.  The publican over there, who respects the reality of his sin, he is the one who is praying.”

If we would but adopt the Catholic position, that of acknowledging the being and the goodness and the integrity of what is, then we might find ourselves doing more than elementary moral reasoning.  For it is pretty elementary, to determine that a healer is supposed to heal, and the baby-making act makes babies, and a male cannot mate with another male.  We might, with toddling steps, come round to treating more subtle questions involving prudential judgments.  We would not hold forth about education, until we had asked about realities.  What is a child?  What does it mean to know the truth?  Why should we love the truth?  We would not hold forth about economics, until we had asked about realities.  Where are true riches to be found?  For whom, and for what, do we work?  What is a household?  What makes for happiness in that household?  We would not hold forth about politics, until we had asked about realities.  What are people for?  What is a community, anyway?  What does the common good look like?

The faith I treasure in my heart has meditated upon these things for two thousand years, and its teachings are tender and subtle, rich and glorious.  But one cannot begin to breathe that good air, unless one has taken those first stumbling steps out of the lies and the fog of Unreal City.

Anthony Esolen

By

Professor Esolen teaches Renaissance English Literature and the Development of Western Civilization at Providence College. He is a senior editor for Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity, and a regular contributor to Crisis Magazine. His most recent books are The Politically Incorrect Guide to Western Civilization (Regnery Press, 2008); Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child (ISI Press, 2010) and, most recently, Reflections on the Christian Life (Sophia Institute Press, 2013). Professor Esolen has also translated Dante.

  • Peter Freeman

    (In case readers are curious, the image at the top of the page is from the video game “Limbo”…just sayin’.)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5BNFBGQOGNBYE3LFDM73X7I2AI Joe Shmoe

    In Room 110 a catholic priest is encouraging illegal aliens to import more of their families illegally into the United States.  He, and his superiors, believe that it is morally proper to encourage illegal immigration – driving overpopulation, lower wages and lost jobs, and placing an economic burden on citizens to support the illegal invaders with all sorts of entitlements and health care.

    In Room 110 the church leaders don’t mind being in collusion with corrupt politicians, who want illegal immigration in order to dillute the voice of citizens, since the illegal immigrants are predominately catholic. and serve to “fill the pews” during a time when citizen catholics are turning away from the catholic church due to perceived/real hypocrisy in matters of child abuse, and the pervasive collusion with government in importing illegal aliens, which put real citizens,  and the nation as a whole, in economic and physical peril. 

    The church is working WITH ‘Caesar’ rather than maintaining a distinction.  The catholic chuch does not “give unto the Lord that which is the Lord’s, and give unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s”.  Instead the catholic church gives that which is the Lord’s to Caesar, and that which is Caesar’s to the church; as long as there is a common ‘profit motive’.

    The catholic church needs to heed Matthew’s admonition –
    “why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but
    considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?”

    Therein lies the rub …

    • fuelrod

      In room 111–a very large room whose occupancy seems to be increasing–are people like Joe Schmoe (see comment #1 above) whose hearts have turned to stone with all the hatred they contain, and whose remarks illustrate precisely the opposite of Christ’s teachings.   

      • OldSchool

         I think your remarks are very unfair, and that the previous commenter has a very valid point.  I fail to understand why the Catholic Church aids and abets illegal aliens. It is against the law to do so, and this is contradictory to rendering to Caesar what is Caesar’s (which refers not only to paying one’s taxes but to obeying the laws of one’s country). And, pew fillers or  no, are these people supporting the churches?

      • Lloyd

        so common of that ilk

      • Brian A. Cook

        Thank you very much.  I have been trying to sound the alarm-bell over radical right-wing ideas.  I actually suspect that the real occupant of Room 110 is a white-nationalist pundit who is writing another screed against the mixing of cultures.   I could go on a rant on other right-wing occupants of this so-called Unreal Hotel, but I don’t want to go too far, certainly not during Lent. 

    • silverback

      Hi Joe, as a member of a parish finance committee with well over 50% illegal aliens in SoCal, I can assure you there is no profit motive.  They do not have the means to contribute money,but they love the Lord and fill the pews and we love them back.  They contribute witness to humility and faith.  These are riches they bring to our coffers.

    • ForsythiaTheMariner

      Well, as Dorothy Day is believed to have said at some point: “If we rendered unto God all the things that belong to God, there would be nothing left for Caesar.”

      Also, I really don’t see any evidence for swarms of Catholic priests encouraging illegal immigration? I don’t think illegal immigration is really the problem anyways. We’re certainly not “overpopulated” The problem lies in handouts and entitlements, this places the burden on American citizens. 

  • Mark Spearman

    This is excellent as is everything I have read of Dr. Esolen.  Most of Catholic morality can be known from Natural Law without ever referring to the Bible.  As the Apostle says, “Ever since the creation of the world, His invisible nature, namely, His eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made.  So they are without excuse; ”  On the other hand, “When [they] who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves … They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts …” 

    May God continue to bless you and your work.

    Mark Spearman
    Bryan, Texas

  • Catlaughter

    Thank you Professor! Once again you are on target and succinct!! God bless.

  • Mima

    THANK YOU for this much needed dose of REALITY!   I think this is some of what Rick Santorum is TRYING to say, although stumblingly; however, so many of us are unwilling to listen.   Thanks, again.

  • MaggieGoff

    Wow. Thank you for using the extraordinary gift that God has given to you. We benefit.

  • Nick Palmer

    I have (had?) resigned myself to simply accepting JPII’s/The Church’s Theology of the Body. I felt it was  beyond my philosophical skills and would require me to devote too much time that I simply do not have. Maybe later in life (oops, but I’m already 54…). Fortunately, my 18-year-old daughter is becoming quite literate in it, so that helps.

    Now, along comes Professor Esolen pitching complex ideas at my speed. This is a masterful piece of writing, with just enough biting wit for spice.

    Thanks!

  • Kalpakgian

    This is a great essay–so incisive, so lucid, so absolutely logical, and so eloquent. As T. S. Eliot remarked, human beings cannot “tolerate too much reality” and thus create Unreal City, Unreal Human Nature, Unreal Education, and Unreal Love.

  • Sue

    The excellence of Esolen = “Esolence”

  • http://Catholicanuck.blogspot.com/ Catholicanuck

    Room 110=illegal aliens.

    Really?

    The thought of people, made in the image and likeness of God, as aliens is the kind of thinking  that reduces an unborn life to a “blob of tissue”.

    People are not always convenient, but they are still people.

    • craig

      You have been watching too many sci-fi movies.  The original and legal meaning of  ‘alien’ is no more and no less than ‘foreigner’.  Thus, a green card holder is a resident alien, and so forth.

  • ForsythiaTheMariner

    Wow. Pretty awesome. Puts things into perspective. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tony-Esolen/1184164082 Tony Esolen

    Thanks to my commenters.  I appreciate the encouragement.

    I recently received word that one of the speakers at Yale’s annual Sex Week this year was an aged feminist who long ago spearheaded women’s self-abuse sessions.  It is beyond satire.  But there’s a deep sadness there, too.  I’ve been wondering: if the sexual revolution is so damned wonderful, why do the young people I meet seem so depressed, cynical, confused, backward, and sullen?  I don’t mean that as criticism of them, because after all they’re not responsible for the world they’ve inherited.  I’m making an observation; and I have had ample opportunity to observe many hundreds of young people — typically, about 150 freshmen every year, every day of the school week.  I like them very much, and I hope I can provide for them a vision of something infinitely superior to the secular hedonism they’ve been malnourished upon.

  • Moni

    Wow, wonderful! Thank you and God bless you for your work!

  • Pingback: Unreal Hotel in Too-Real World « The Anchoress

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1499284831 Jennifer Hartline

    Mr. Esolen, this is brilliant.  THANK YOU.

  • gerardv

    A brilliant and moving and insightful article. Thank you.

  • Steve Colby

    The case of Mr. & Mrs. Mobile reminds me of Schrodinger’s cat – you can’t say if it is (or will be) dead or alive until you examine it.   This may be ok for quantum physics thought experiments but, as you illustrate so well, a developing infant is very much alive.
    [Thanks to the Anchoress for the link]

  • Iprazhm

    One need only change ‘Catholic’ to ‘Christian’ and all who worship Jesus Christ can relate. Thank you for posting, the message is profound.

  • Schmittsam

    “The core of all Catholic moral teaching is that good and bad are determined by the real nature of
    what we do. ”

    Precisely. Catholicism is the ultimate realism. And the core of secularism is to deny that “real nature.”

  • lroy77

    Regarding Rm 102—there should be a way that two men or two women can share a room for economic reasons without thinking they are in a same-sex relationship. Sometimes, one needs to live together to share expenses.

MENU