Leisure, Contemplation, Solitude

These are rare commodities in a culture rich in stimulation and informed by an ethic of unceasing activity woven into American life through its Puritanical roots; but as the great Catholic philosopher Josef Pieper reminds us, in his marvelous book, Leisure: The Basis of Culture, it is crucial to understand and embrace in our search for God.

An excerpt.

“Leisure stands opposed to the exclusive ideal of work qua social function. A break in one’s work , whether of an hour, a day, or a week, is still part of the world of work. It is a link in the chain of utilitarian functions. The pause is made for the sake of work and in order to work, and a man is not only refreshed from work but for work. Leisure is an altogether different matter; it is no longer on the same plane; it runs at right angles to work—just as it could be said that intuition is not the prolongation or continuation, as it were, of the work of the ratio, but cuts right across it, vertically. Ratio, in point of fact, used to be compared to time, whereas intellectus, was compared to eternity, to the eternal now. And therefore leisure does not exist for the sake of work—however much strength it may give a man to work; the point of leisure is not to be a restorative, a pick-me-up, whether mental or physical; and though it gives new strength, mentally and physically, and spiritually too, that is not the point.

“Leisure, like contemplation, is of a higher order that the vita activa (although the active life is the proper human life in a more special sense). And order, in this sense, cannot be overturned or reversed. Thus, however true it may be that the man who says his nightly prayers sleeps the better for it, nevertheless no one could say his nightly prayers with that in mind. In the same way, no one who looks to leisure simply to restore his working powers will ever discover the fruit of leisure; he will never know the quickening that follows, almost as though from some deep sleep.

“The point and the justification of leisure are not that the functionary should function faultlessly and without a breakdown, but that the functionary should continue to be a man—and that means that he should not be wholly absorbed in the clear-cut milieu of his strictly limited function; the point is also that he should continue to be capable of seeing life as a whole and the world as a whole; that he should fulfill himself, and come to full possession of his faculties, face to face with being as a whole.” (pp. 30-31)