"In closing, we might turn the question around on the Nietzscheans. Is control over one’s anger not a prerequisite of manliness? In condemning Christian meekness as Aquinas articulates it, they seem to suggest that strength requires lashing out whenever provocation strikes."
Is this fair? The Nietzscheans are not "condemning Christian meekness as Aquinas articulates it," they are criticizing the behavior of men today that self-identify as Christians. Such men are generally, to use your words, “easily imposed upon.” It is the Catholic that needs to know the work of Aquinas and behave accordingly.
Constant appeals to prudence betray a lack of ability to confront fear, uncertainty, and intimidation. Such justifications might soothe ones conscience after a failure to act, but every outsider sees a man that is all hat and no cattle.
You must pay a man in his currency, not in yours. For Nietzscheans it is strength. The good news, as you seem to understand well, is that strength is in no way incompatible with the Catholic life.
Nietzsche had a far more nuanced view on Christianity than he is given credit for. He felt that the early Christians were more manly than the the later ones and that Christianity had degenerated. He was also of the opinion that Christianity in its terminal phase would start to resemble Buddhism.
“ Left to itself, anger is too easily set off and too easily leads us astray. It needs governing. And that is the purpose of meekness: restraining anger so that good judgment can be exercised.”
Great summary. A step above the phrase “Emotional Intelligece”
"In closing, we might turn the question around on the Nietzscheans. Is control over one’s anger not a prerequisite of manliness? In condemning Christian meekness as Aquinas articulates it, they seem to suggest that strength requires lashing out whenever provocation strikes."
Is this fair? The Nietzscheans are not "condemning Christian meekness as Aquinas articulates it," they are criticizing the behavior of men today that self-identify as Christians. Such men are generally, to use your words, “easily imposed upon.” It is the Catholic that needs to know the work of Aquinas and behave accordingly.
Constant appeals to prudence betray a lack of ability to confront fear, uncertainty, and intimidation. Such justifications might soothe ones conscience after a failure to act, but every outsider sees a man that is all hat and no cattle.
You must pay a man in his currency, not in yours. For Nietzscheans it is strength. The good news, as you seem to understand well, is that strength is in no way incompatible with the Catholic life.
Really enjoyed this analysis - I wish churches were clearer on this point.
Would meekness not in that context be the same as Josef Piepers Temperence?
Nietzsche had a far more nuanced view on Christianity than he is given credit for. He felt that the early Christians were more manly than the the later ones and that Christianity had degenerated. He was also of the opinion that Christianity in its terminal phase would start to resemble Buddhism.
Here we are.
“ Left to itself, anger is too easily set off and too easily leads us astray. It needs governing. And that is the purpose of meekness: restraining anger so that good judgment can be exercised.”
Great summary. A step above the phrase “Emotional Intelligece”
Never heard the term bugman before?