Letter to a Priest

by Simone Weil

Letter to a Priest encapsulates the sharp wit and questioning nature of Simone Weil. Regarded by Susan Sontag as 'one of the most uncompromising and troubling witnesses to the modern travail of the spirit', Weil grips the moral imagination as few others before or since. She was only thirty four when she died in 1943, yet despite her short life she left behind an incredible body of literature. Letter to a Priest , addressed to Father Joseph-Marie Perrin, a Catholic priest who Weil met in Marseilles, is one of her most powerful pieces. Written at a time when those who knew her considered her to be 'like a soul in torment whose thinking had all the signs of a deep inner conflict', it contains thirty five powerful expressions of opinion on matters concerning Catholic faith, dogma and institutions. Vehement and controversial, yet eloquent and moving, it is essential reading for anyone who has questions about faith and belief.

Genres: Philosophy, Religion, Nonfiction, Theology, Christianity, Spirituality, Mysticism

91 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1951

About the author

Simone Weil was a French philosopher, Christian mystic, and social activist. Weil was born in Paris to Alsatian agnostic Jewish parents who fled the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine to Germany. Her brilliance, ascetic lifestyle, introversion, and eccentricity limited her ability to mix with others, but not to teach and participate in political movements of her time. She wrote extensively with both insight and breadth about political movements of which she was a part and later about spiritual mysticism. Weil biographer Gabriella Fiori writes that Weil was "a moral genius in the orbit of ethics, a genius of immense revolutionary range".

Reviews

[Justin Evans · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's hard not to like a book that starts with the idea of a "painful spiritual state" that the author "would like to make... not less painful, only clearer. Any pain whatsoever is acceptable where there is clarity." It is hard to like a book filled with such history-of-religion cliches as the cruel God of Israel, the idolatry of the Jews, and the (usually praiseworthy) wish to compare religions that aren't really comparable at all; Weill compares Christianity, which she sees as centered on beliefs, to other religions, which are arguably centered on practices instead, and finds all kinds of parallels to Christian doctrine that are no such thing. This is particularly silly when combined with Weil's philohellenism, leading to claims like "Christ... recognized himself in the proportional mean of Greek geometry" and "Heraclitus recognized a Trinity." Weil searches hard for similarities in religions, with the best of intentions, and unfortunately is smart enough to find similarities everywhere.

Her good will works better when she makes the arguments that the 'saved' must be those who are truly charitable, not those who believe the right things; that dogmas should not be affirmed, but meditated upon; that 'miracle' should be applied only to morality, not to physical oddities; that "The idea of God going in quest of man is something unfathomably beautiful and profound. Decadence is shown as soon as it is replaced by the idea of man going in quest of God."

Unfortunately, the letter ends with ridiculous conspiracy-theorising based on historical nonsense. But, of course, it wasn't necessarily meant to be published.

[César · Rating 4 out of 5]

La carta que Simone Weil, en las postrimerías de su vida, escribe a un religioso, en espera de que éste responda sobre la posible colusión de lo declarado como convicciones irrenunciables con la doctrina de la Iglesia Católica, contiene, a buen seguro, media docena, como poco, de herejías. Buena señal. Es, como todo en Weil, riguroso, cándido e incendiario en su ardor intelectual. Está convencida de que ha existido y existen santos fuera de la Iglesia, entre los ateos incluso, salvos en Cristo fuera del cristianismo. Que el cristianismo quedó amputado al dar la mano a hebreos y romanos. Weil intuye un cristianismo más allá del cristianismo, desgajado del judaísmo y de Roma, manando de la misma fuente que cierta parte de la filosofía griega.

Es la carta de una persona comprometida hasta extremos excepcionales con la probidad intelectual. Alguien que se toma de la manera más seria concebible la salvación del alma.

[Dhanaraj Rajan · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Four Stars speak of my impatience and incomprehension. Weil certainly deserves full Five stars. But my impatience to read slowly and to comprehend the ideas to the full reduced it to four. The fault is mine. But then, I will be going back to it when I have more time.

But whatever I understood of her arguments and ideas, they are all crowned with five star crowns.

In simple terms, we can say that Simone Weil was a forerunner in the field of Theology of Religious Pluralism. This is the present trend in the missiological discussions. If God had chosen to save the world through Christ's Passion and Resurrection (as believed by Christianity) and a person can participate in such salvation by one's faith in Christ, how are we to explain the presence of many religions? Are they not paths leading people to salvation? Is Christianity alone the bearer of divine revelation?

These are the discussions presently very vibrant in missiological debates. The challenge of other religions in the modern times (in the medieval and colonial times, the Church had full authority and power and so it turned a deaf ear to the cries of other religions) had necessitated such discussions. This was also taken up by the Second Vatican Council. The declaration issued by the Second Vatican Council on Church's relationship to other religions (Nostra Aetate) dealt the same theme in relatively a liberal manner.

In that sense, Simone Weil in this book comes out as a Theologian answering such questions and she is inclusive in nature. She says that the "Seeds of Truth" or "Rays of Light" can also be found in the other religions. And they can be saved through his/her own religion. There is no need for mission, in the sense of converting people to Christian Faith.

[Amir Azad · Rating 5 out of 5]

تا پیش از این فقط اسم سیمون وی را شنیده بودم. معلم و متاله فرانسوی یهودی‌زاده که بعدا مسیحی شد اما با نظام کلیسایی کنار نیامد. این کتاب در واقع نقدهای او به اندیشه رایج مسیحیت است. بسیار عالی است.

بخش‌هاییش عینا با تغییر چند اسم درباره اسلام رایج مصداق دارد

[Oziel Bispo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Simone Weil(1909-1943), mística e filósofa judia cristã francesa, meses antes de morrer de tuberculose com apenas 34 anos, escreveu uma carta com várias perguntas e considerações, 35 no total, endereçadas a P. Jean Couturier, um religioso Dominicano que residia em Paris, onde apresenta várias dúvidas em relação a igreja e ao cristianismo diz ela : " Vou enumerar alguns pensamentos que me habitam há anos (ou pelo menos alguns) [...] peço uma resposta firme sobre a compatibilidade ou incompatibilidade de cada uma dessas opiniões com a membresia na Igreja".


Não são dúvidas em relação à sua fé, mas uma busca para extrair a verdade como forma de consolidar as suas crenças.
Simone Weil indaga sobre a idolatria na igreja, comenta que mesmo antes de Cristo já havia conteúdos do cristianismo entre os caldeus, gregos e egípcios.
Observa também que há muitas semelhanças entre mitos egípcios e gregos com textos das escrituras e o paralelismo entre Prometeu e Cristo, entre Atena e Hèstia e o Espírito santo. Ela relata também a semelhança entre as runas de Odín com a crucificação : "Eu sei que eu pendurei
Em uma árvore ventosa,
Pendurado lá por nove noites inteiras;
Com a lança eu fui ferido,
E eu foi oferecido
Para Odin, eu mesmo,
Na árvore que ninguém
Jamais pode conhecer
Como sua raiz funciona.
Ninguém me fez feliz
Com pão ou chifre,
E lá embaixo eu olhei;
Eu peguei as runas,
Gritando, eu tomei-as,
E imediatamente caí de costas.”

Critica os teólogos dizendo que Cristo mandou pregar as boas novas, não criar um sistema religioso.

Há muitas outras considerações de Simone Weil ao longo do livro. Ela era muito culta, pena que morreu tão nova. Esta obra foi publicada depois da sua morte, graças ao esforço do seu grande amigo Albert Camus.
Pelo que consta esta carta nunca foi respondida, mas debatida tem sido até hoje.
"A carta ainda hoje tem um valor excepcional. Não apenas como um testemunho do rigor intelectual e moral de Simone e seu inabalável compromisso com a verdade, mas também como uma expressão da tensão que confronta a autenticidade de uma fé vivida radicalmente com a esclerose do dogma."
Uma leitura muito deliciosa de um livro que recomendo a todos.

[Lej]

RIP Simone Weil, you could’ve been a sister.
This book is comprised of two essays: Letter to a Priest and Human Personality.

Letter to a Priest often felt like sitting down at a table with people and realising that they’re deep into a conversation topic and you’re trying to catch up the entire time. This is by no means reflection of Weil or her writing, but rather my realisation that i’m still grossly uninformed and also impatient(it is that damn phone). Weil draws examples from Roman and Greek mythology, christianity, hinduism and many more. However, she does make a good argument for her case - that a person will not automatically be denied salvation just because they’re not christian. That God’s mercy and wisdom cannot be simplified as such.

Human Personality was much more up my alley. It describes beautifully the difference between justice and rights, where she argues that the concept of rights is something much more greedy and perverse in nature as opposed to justice. Namely she argues that justice asks the question “Why is harm being done to me?” which is a universal question one asks when faced with adversity. On the other hand the concept of rights asks a question “Why does someone else have more than me?”. I am simplifying this of course, she does a much better job at explaining it. Anyways, great read. My brain is fried.

[Erika · Rating 4 out of 5]

Once upon a time, Simone Weil was a huge influence on my religious development. I felt that I had found a soul mate when I stumbled upon Waiting for God, and this book was an obvious next step.
Her struggle with God and Catholicism is almost as desperate as her struggle with food and with corporations.
This letter is much like a treatise Martin Luther would have written, but her issues with Christianity are more pronounced in our worldly society. She studied more than most of her age, and we are now familiar with the cultural clashes of religion, and the differences she spells out.
She and Karen Armstrong might have gotten along well. That is a dinner party I would love to throw!

[Raquel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Uma carta profunda, dialética e profundamente sincera. Sintetiza brilhantemente os anseios e reservas de Weil em relação ao Divino.

[Sophia Villanueva · Rating 4 out of 5]

Esta mujer nació para cuestionar para analizar críticamente y su potencial para hacerlo es evidente.
Reconozco que leerla representó todo un reto para mí por las muchas referencias teóricas, históricas y filosóficas, pero a pesar de esto es claro el sentido de su escritura.
En Carta a un religioso expo e sus inquietudes respecto al cristianismo, las dudas, incongruencias, sesgos, etc.
Me encantaría escuchar una discusión sobre este libro de expertos en el tema.

[Antônio Xerxenesky · Rating 2 out of 5]

As boas ideias são sabotadas por um antissemitismo recorrente que deriva da sua ignorância (e recusa em investigar). Culpa, quiçá, dos pais, os judeus étnicos radicalmente agnósticos. Mas aí é muita especulação.

[Ade Bailey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Revisiting. Sort of 35 theses from Weil. I am reading it concurrently with one of Bonhoeffer's prison letters; interested in the concept of 'religionless Christianity' and looking at what the two thinkers reveal about themselves psychologically (I am interested in how the 'psychological self' shapes the rest, be it metaphysical, ideological, moral or whatever.
Reading Weil is like having a curry with a wasp. But worth it.

[pdepaulix · Rating 3 out of 5]

Adoro a Simone Weil, el libro está tan bien escrito como todas sus obras, pero al final en mi opinión acaba por ser repetitivo, muchas de sus reflexiones llevan a sitios similares. Aún así si te gusta Weil vas a disfrutar la lectura seguro.

[Aaron · Rating 3 out of 5]

The balls on this lady sending a letter to a Dominican priest and just blasting St. Thomas Aquinas. No wonder she never got a reply.

[Aaron Jacob · Rating 5 out of 5]

Weil's letter, to which it is thought that she received no reply, is wondrously paradoxical in that each point seems to lead Weil—and the reader, rather significantly—ever closer and closer to Christianity, yet ever further and further from the Church and its exoteric tradition. Hers is perhaps the best articulation in the available literature of a Christianity which does not accord any privilege to Israel or to Rome. She notes such striking likenesses between the ethical and aesthetical themes of Christian and pre-Christian religious thought that it is, for her, impossible to deny their common parentage. Why, then, she asks, is faith defined by the Church not only in exclusive and literal terms, but in terms which connect it explicitly, as she puts it, to the nationalism of the Hebrews and the totalitarianism of Rome? By Weil's understanding, Christianity should teach us about God that He is good first and foremost, and only then powerful—a lesson which the Hebrews and the Romans seem to have been glad to disregard.

This double view of Christianity—on the one hand, the efforts of clergymen and missionaries to establish and spread exoteric doctrines betray, for Weil, a misunderstanding of Christ's teaching, which is a severe impugnment upon the Church; on the other, Weil sees Christianity as having far more in common with the morality and symbolism of the Greeks and the Egyptians than with the substance of the Old Testament (to this she makes certain exceptions, among them, notably, the Book of Job, whose hero is a gentile), and as possessing a powerful beauty which would move the hearts of men far more easily if only its institutions did not require the rejection of one's ancestral spiritual, cosmological, moral, and aesthetical views of the world, but rather complemented and invigorated them, just as many Neoplatonists saw the ideas and practices of the gymnosophists and Chaldeans strengthening their own tradition—leads Weil to a fascinating spiritual place, from which we have much to learn, as we would from the wisdom of the saints—a kind of wisdom, a kind of genius, which T.S. Eliot rightly ascribes her.

This letter will prove very helpful to anyone who is genuinely interested in Christianity, or in Western religion generally, and who consults it with a pure heart; for Simone Weil reveals through the points of contention in the letter—its density and profundity are equalled by its lightness and clarity—the secret which is at the heart of all faith: love.

[LuchiLuch · Rating 4 out of 5]

Muy lúcida a lo largo de toda su carta, aunque es verdad que entra, sobre todo al final de su carta, en algunos puntos "iceberg profundo" del cristianismo. Y me parece una carta bella por resaltar el lado más humano y universal de las religiones, por llamar a la tolerancia. En el fondo, dice que si uno se considera cristiano está bien, pero no podemos negarle a otras religiones el hecho de que esté inspiradas de Espíritu Santo o de divinidad. Y, mis partes favoritas, que una religión es siempre aceptable y bella cuando es pura y aspira a una perfección, cuando no se mezcla ni mancha con motivos políticos, racistas, colonialistas, etc... Que todos tienen errores y pecan de sus propias cosas: Pablo no podía rechazar la circuncisión y a Pedro le costaba llevar el cristianismo a los gentiles (a pesar de haber visto, en principio, a Jesús). O cuando dice que no cree a Jesús por ningún milagro, sino por la belleza de sus palabras.

Sobre lo del antisemitismo... Creo que Weil solo plantea que nos preguntemos cómo es posible unir Antiguo y Nuevo Testamento en lo que llamamos Biblia. El Antiguo Testamento tiene partes bélicas y en las que Dios es una ayuda para ganar la guerra. No creo que quiera rechazarlo y odiarlo, solo le plantea al cura la pregunta de cómo esos textos pueden ser sagrados cuando hablan de violencia, en contraste con el Nuevo Testamento en el que Dios es amor y, principalmente, puro amor.















te chero titi 💖

[Harry Allagree · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the first I've read anything by Simone Weil. Written to an unnamed priest in 1942, there's no evidence that he ever responded to her before her death the next year. One thing that fairly jumps out from the quality of her questions re: the Catholic Church & its teaching is her encyclopedic grasp of literature, both secular & sacred, & history. The other very apparent fact is her deep commitment to truth & honesty in matters of religion. I realized that, as a former Roman Catholic, I've asked myself similar questions on some issues. And I found myself agreeing wholeheartedly with some of her startling observations, for which I'd potentially qualify for being called a "heretic"! I'm not familiar with later commentaries on this or her other writings, but it would be interesting to know if anyone has tackled answering her queries.

[Linards Jansons · Rating 5 out of 5]

You probably need to be in the right frame of mind to read something like this. Or, perhaps, at a certain stage of a philosophical-spiritual-religious journey that many won't ever begin. As the title suggests, Simone Weil wrote it to a Dominican friar, one of a number of Catholic thinkers with whom she explored questions of faith. The purpose of the letter, as Weil bluntly puts it, was to find out whether her ideas were compatible or not with the Roman church, whether they would bar her from baptism and communion.

As a book, it’s very short, comprising just 35 sections ranging from a single paragraph to several pages. The first 7 sections deal with what she believes are the commonalities of Christianity with the various religious/esoteric traditions that existed at the time of its inception. I’m no historian of religion, but Weil’s comparative speculations do strike me as a bit arbitrary, even fanciful. But details aside, it is her claim in general – that all religious traditions draw from a common pool of truth – that matters: “Any number of accounts drawn from mythology and folklore could be translated into Christian truths without forcing or deforming anything in them, but rather, on the contrary, thus throwing a vivid light on them. And these truths, would, in their turn, thereby take on a new clarity”.

Here we find Weil’s first main theme in her letter, the need for a religious pluralism which does not uproot adherents from their own spiritual traditions. The Holy Spirit does not compel people to abandon their faith, but grants believers true light in the midst of whatever religious tradition they belong to. In fact, for the individual a change of religion is dangerous, and on a larger scale the loss of religious traditions from the earth would be “an irreparable loss”. Having ignored this truth the mission of the church has wrought great damage over the centuries.

And not only is violence done by compelling non-Christians to accept Christian truth, those within are often suffocated by the church’s teaching. Weil writes: “The metaphor of the ‘veil’ or the ‘reflection’ applied by the mystics to faith enables them to escape from this suffocating atmosphere. They accept the Church’s teaching, not as the truth, but as something behind which the truth is to be found”. For Weil, all forms of religion are veils, symbolic representations, behind which truth may be found.

The notion of truth brings us to the second theme of her Letter (sections 21-28): the freedom and the limitation of the intelligence in matters of faith, and its subordination to love.

Weil’s starting point is that “the mysteries of the faith are not a proper object for the intelligence considered as a faculty permitting affirmation or denial”. Weil understood that approaching matters of faith by means of the concepts ‘true’ or ‘false’ (the domain of the intelligence) are inadequate. This just ends up with having to accept or deny how others, with their limited insight or cultural lens, have condensed the mystery of existence into facts and propositions of their own making. She writes that statements like ‘Jesus Christ is God’, understood as a ‘fact’, have no meaning whatsoever, if you take a statement of fact to be something like ‘Edinburgh is the capital of Scotland’ or ‘Lemurs are a species of wet-nosed primates’. As you might imagine, if she wanted to enter the church, she wasn't making it very easy for herself.

Given this, one might imagine it would have been easier for Weil to give up the religious quest at this point, perhaps withdrawing to the safety of a non-aligned agnosticism. However, she did not do this. On the contrary, having stated “The dogmas of the faith are not things to be affirmed” she continues “They are things to be regarded from a certain distance, with attention, respect and love. They are like the bronze serpent whose virtue is such that whoever looks upon it shall live. This attention and loving gaze, by a shock on the rebound, causes a source of light to flash in the soul which illuminate all aspects of human life on this earth”.

Statements like this are what make Weil so interesting. Christian (or any religious) dogmas are not ‘facts’ to be affirmed or adhered to; they are, however, worthy of attention. And for Weil attention is more than a brief glance or nod. Attention (a cornerstone of her thought) appears to be a vigilant, respectful, silent, openness to whatever might reveal truth. As she says, a “loving gaze” that ultimately illuminates the intelligence, making it more ‘intelligent’ in the domain proper to it. A bit further on she writes: “When the intelligence, having become silent in order to let love invade the whole soul, begins once more to exercise itself, it finds it contains more light than before, a greater aptitude for grasping objects, truths that are proper to it”. Weil clearly did believe in the reality and experience of “supernatural love” and further, that when the intelligence remains silent before this, it acquired an increased capacity to see more truly the things of this world. There is an intuitive truth here: that goodness does expand the intelligence, even as evil shrinks it. Those who love more, also see more; they certainly see their fellow human, and see them as human, more deeply.

I found myself strangely arrested by this little volume. Her style is “all out”, with very little scholarly caution or looking over her academic shoulder. Everything is urgent, like she knew her life would be short and that she had to get on with it, compelling her to write with complete honesty, and thus with a kind of authority.

[LauRa Rdrgz Frnndz · Rating 2 out of 5]

Si lo hubiera leído con 17 años sería mi libro de cabecera para así ganar las discusiones con mis padres de tener que ir a misa.

Por otra parte, la tipa tiene sensibilidad en sus dudas y sus cuestiones. A mi personalmente, la mayoría se me antojan ya lejanas y jamás iría a preguntarselas a una cura. Ha sido un primer acercamiento guay y me deja con ganas de conocer realmente en profundidad sus ideas.

[Denisse Alvarez · Rating 4 out of 5]

Creo que no leí este libro en buen momento porque a pesar de que el tema me interesa, no fue lo que yo esperaba.

Digamos que no fue una carta reveladora para mí, pues ya había escuchado varios de los argumentos de esta carta con anterioridad, sin embargo reconozco que está muy bien escrita y que plantea cuestionamientos muy importantes sobre la religión.

A pesar de mi decepción personal, la recomendaría sin dudar.

[Renaud Houde · Rating 3 out of 5]

Les idées sont excellentes, Simone Weil est extrêmement bonne pour apporter ses points et les démontrer. Elle apporte un regard super intéressant sur la religion. Par contre, pour pleinement apprécier le livre, je pense qu’il faut une relativement bonne connaissance de l’ancien testament et de certaines sociétés anciennes (Les grecques et les Romains surtout), ce que je n’ai pas.

« Le zèle des missionnaires n'a pas christianisé l'Afrique, l'Asie et l'Océanie, mais a amené ces territoires sous la domination froide, cruelle et destructrice de la race blanche, qui a tout écrasé.
Il serait singulier que la parole du Christ ait produit de tels effets si elle avait été bien comprise. »

[Ignacio Castillo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Me hizo pico

[Tamara · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dos cosas:

1) Hay que cuestionarse todo.
2) Qué grande era Simone Weil!

[Isabelle Woodcock · Rating 4 out of 5]

As she wrote to a priest, I can do nothing but offer a devotional prayer, honouring her mystic ways beyond the barrier of mortality.

[Rodolfo Rodrigues · Rating 4 out of 5]

Primeiro livro que li da Weil. A questão central que norteia a carta é muito forte e ao mesmo tempo muito singela. Interessadíssimo para os próximos.

[m]

Incomprehensible to me at times but that only made it greater. Just wow. There’s no one like her..

[lucía · Rating 3 out of 5]

lo que le hace a una chica no comer

[Silvana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Weil haciendo las preguntas correctas <3

[Padmin · Rating 4 out of 5]

RISVOLTO
«Quando leggo il catechismo del Concilio di Trento, mi sembra di non aver nulla in comune con la religione che vi è esposta. Quando leggo il Nuovo Testamento, i mistici, la liturgia, quando vedo celebrare la messa, sento con una specie di certezza che questa fede è la mia, o più precisamente lo sarebbe senza la distanza che la mia imperfezione pone tra essa e me». Giunta agli ultimi anni della sua vita, Simone Weil volle esporre in una lunga lettera al padre Marie-Alain Couturier i propri convincimenti, per verificarne la compatibilità «con l’appartenenza alla Chiesa». La risposta non arrivò mai, e la Weil rimase fino all’ultimo fedele alla sua «vocazione di essere cristiana al di fuori della Chiesa». Ciò non deve meravigliare: le tesi qui proposte, nella loro cristallina, categorica chiarezza, sono in realtà una sfida alla Chiesa – forse la più alta fra le molte che ha conosciuto in questo secolo. E innanzitutto una sfida alla pretesa ecclesiale di offrire la verità ultima, rispetto alla quale ogni altra è una rudimentale prefigurazione. Non così per la Weil, che trovava in Platone, nella Bhagavad Gita o nel Tao tê ching le stesse verità, compiutamente espresse, che incontrava nei Vangeli. «Ogniqualvolta un uomo ha invocato con cuore puro Osiride, Dioniso, Krsna, Buddha, il Tao, ecc., il figlio di Dio ha risposto inviandogli lo Spirito Santo. E lo Spirito ha agito sulla sua anima, non inducendolo ad abbandonare la sua tradizione religiosa, ma dandogli la luce – e nel migliore dei casi la pienezza della luce – all’interno di tale tradizione».

[Simon Hall · Rating 3 out of 5]

Simone Weil was a contrary lady.

it's impossible to describe her in a brief review. You should read up on her life. A deeply comitted Christian who never joined a church, a highly educated woman who chose to live and work among the poor (and died for it). A friend of the existentialists and a student of spirituality. An enigma.

In her Letter to a Priest, Weil lays out all the reasons she cannot be a communicant member of the Catholic Church. Techincally, they are laid out as a question: can The Church accept these heretical beliefs? If so, I can be a member. They are mainly about her perception that God has been revealed through many religions, indeed that there may have been many Christs (including Melchizedek, who appears in the Bible).

Her erudition is exemplary, but her argument is all over the place, accepting the doctrine of transubstantiation quite easily yet dismissing almost the whole of the Old Testament as inferior to Greek and Egyptian cosmology of the same time.

Much in this very short book has challenged my own thinking, but I can't really recommend it, unless - like me - you already adore her.

[Zach · Rating 5 out of 5]

In her typical style, Weil airs out her issues with the Catholic Church’s claim to universal truth. It is important to note that at the beginning of the address, she admits that her heart belongs to the Church but she simply cannot assent to an organization that she feels fails to recognize the truth as larger than a narrow truth professed by priests at the lectern during Mass. This is a wonderful meditation on various classical understandings of the truth and the pursuit of the good life. One can easily feel and relate to Weil’s angst if for no other reason than her brash, choppy, urgent writing style.