Blog

Finding Happiness by Abbot Jamison, reflections by Tim Dendy

Finding Happiness is Abbot Jamison’s follow up to Finding Sanctuary. In this book he contrasts happiness as defined by society, with how it is understood by the monastic. In so doing Abbot Jamison examines the limiting ‘8 Thoughts’ identified by the desert fathers and the necessary virtues we are called to practice in their place. These being: Spiritual Carelessness – Spiritual Awareness; Gluttony – Sufficiency; Lust – Chaste Love; Greed – Generosity, Anger -Patience; Sadness – Hope; Vanity – Magnanimity; Pride – Humility.

As with Finding Sanctuary, the Abbot challenges his reader with a wise, non-judgemental insight into the human condition, and provides powerful tools for the pursuit of interior freedom and peace.

Currently in Moot we are in the process of developing postures and practices based on the virtues Abbot Jamison has outlined. Ian has therefore purchased several copies of Finding Happiness which are presently doing the rounds in the community. I therefore recommend that you either contact info@moot.uk.net to track one of these down, or buy your own copy (following this link generates 10% income for Moot) click here for UK and here for US

POSTED 26.05.10 BY: ianmobsby | Comments (9)

9 Responses to “Finding Happiness by Abbot Jamison, reflections by Tim Dendy”

  1. On May 27th, 2010 at 10:50 am artbizness said:

    Hi Tim

    thanks for writing this. i have read about 2 thirds of the books so far, and it is very good. I thought the chapter on Acedia was particularly helpful.

    Really hope lots of people read this book. Even if you don’t agree with it, it still makes you think.

  2. On May 28th, 2010 at 7:54 am Nicolas said:

    The book is very interesting and – like many other books – a basis for personal growth. The challenge, I find, is not so much to grasp the ’8 thoughts’ (although I’m still uncertain on how to fully differentiate between pride and vanity*), but it is to be able to develop a healthy approach to “tackling” those thoughts. Being aware of oneself without becoming self-absorbed and striking the balance right between a willingness to question oneself and not develop (useless) culpability are probably going to be the real difficulties for all of us. Making such a book too central to a community such as moot may lead to a build up of expectations on how people should behave (“I think such and such has an issue with pride and vanity – he ought to deal with it”; sorry, I left evangelical churches for a good reason). Let’s hope we’ll be wise enough not to fall into that trap. As Mike said (thank you Mike!), we don’t have to agree with everything said in the book. (*) let us not forget that these 8 thoughts are human/social constructions, imperfect, and they have kept changing over time…

  3. On May 28th, 2010 at 11:19 am ianmobsby said:

    In the discussion at Moot on wednesday we stressed the fact that Moot’s take on this is as a tool – to understand how the ego and our choices about thinking can bring us life or distortion, being aware that this then not only impacts us but those we live with and amongst. As a tool, it needs to be broad, and based on the Christian faith which is about invitation and inspiration, not guilt or control.

    As a construct, it is broad, and helps us understand the gospel in application to the details of our lives. Being broad, (and by the way, a tradition in Christianity that far outlasts most church traditions given its beginning in the deserts of the 4th century), it recognises that we are all different, with differing personalities, sensibilities and attitudes, and aims to assist us to be more fully ourselves rather than conforming to anything – the mistake of courses, dogma and conformity. So Nic – I would be careful about thinking of it as a construct requiring conformity – as that it is not its basis – rather – it opens up the spiritual landscape in Christian gospel language aiming to be a guide to help us find inner spiritual freedom.

  4. On May 29th, 2010 at 7:40 am Nicolas said:

    Thanks Ian for your input – it’s not always easy to see and appreciate these things from a distance.

  5. On May 29th, 2010 at 3:30 pm artbizness said:

    I think that it’s quite common for people to assume that because we’re reading a book together that the book is somehow “moot policy” and to be slavishly followed. We had this when we read “Affluenza” together a couple of years ago. Nic, you need to know that moot would never be that heavy-handed in recommending a book. It is just that many of us have found it helpful, and think it is worth at least a discussion, he not implementation. I for one would love it he you wanted us to read a book together as a group later on in the year. (Got any Derrida mate?!)

  6. On May 30th, 2010 at 10:19 am Nicolas said:

    I guess it might be better to leave deconstructionism in the sacristy. I would not be in a position to recommend any book at the moment, although Tutu would be a nice “easy” read. I fear Küng might be too systematical in his approach for people to feel ‘inspired’ by his writings. Mike, if your French is good enough, I would recommend Henri Laborit’s “Éloge de la fuite” (unfortunately not available in English). It is a strong critique of human constructions (politics, family, church, …) and staunchly deterministic. The challenge (worthwhile but I find all too often misunderstood by others) after reading this book is to reconstruct a belief system that takes into account not only human failure, but seeks to prevent the repetition of past mistakes (e.g. power structures in the Church).

  7. On May 30th, 2010 at 12:09 pm artbizness said:

    Ah, sadly I have no French (just Spanish).

    Without getting into too heavy or deep and wordy concepts, I would suggest that actually decontructionism is different to post-structuralism, which is a useful tool for avoiding dualisms. I would say that the point is not to break everything down for the sake of it, but to find a clearer way forward that avoids too-easy over-generalisations – which takes us back to the Richard Rohr stuff (I happen to think that Richard Rohr and Post-structuralism have a lot in common).

    Have you read any Richard Rohr? I would recommend him.

  8. On May 30th, 2010 at 12:24 pm Nicolas said:

    Thanks – I haven’t (yet). He’s coming over here in August to lead a retreat on contemplation (http://www.lassalle-haus.org/docs/EP_2010/Contemplation_rohr_en.pdf) – can’t make it and way too expensive but he’s giving a public lecture on his new book. Will try to go see that at least.

  9. On May 30th, 2010 at 1:55 pm artbizness said:

    He’s actually written loads of stuff online, which would get a good sense of him. :-)