Pieper's Concept of Leisure

7/23/2019 Pieper's Concept of Leisure

1/26

Part I

1. The etymology of leisureIn the frst part o his essay, Jose Pieper retraces the

etymology o the word leisure. The Greek word or

leisure (!"#$% is the origin o &atin scola, German

Schule, 'nglish school. The name or the institutions o

education and learning means leisure.)

2. The oblivion of leisure and the exaggeration

of work

*e continues +y writing that the original meaning o

the concept o leisure has practically +een orgotten in

todays leisure-less culture o total work in order to

win our way to a real understanding o leisure, we must

conront the contradiction that rises rom ouro/eremphasis on the world o work0. To pro/e his point,

he 1uotes 2ikolaus &udwig /on 3in4endor in the

writings o 5a6 7e+er8s The Protestant Ethic and the

Spirit of Capitalism that one does not only work in

order to li/e, +ut one li/es or the sake o ones work9.

3. Aristotelian concet on leisure and work

1 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culture, South Bend Indiana, 1998,

pp. 25-26.

2 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 26.

3 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 26 in Weber, M., The

protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, e! "or#, 1958, p.

26$, note 2$.


2/26

*e proceeds +y penning :ristotelian adage we work

in order to +e at leisure;. :ccording to Pieper and not only to indicate its hustle and +ustle, +ut

the work itsel. The Greek language had only this

negati/e term or it (? @ !"#AB%, as did &atin (neg-otium,

not-leisure%.CThus, the Greeks would pro+a+ly not

ha/e understood our ma6ims a+out work or the sake o

workD. Pieper then reEecti/ely asks Fould this also

imply that people in our day no longer ha/e direct access

to the original meaning o leisureH

!. "ervile and #iberal arts

In continuation, Pieper states that the Fhristian

concept o the contemplati/e lie (the vita

contemplative% was +uilt on the :ristotelian concept o

leisure. =urther, the distinction +etween the &i+eral

:rts and er/ile :rts has its origin precisely here.

*e also says 7ell, at least one side o the distinction

comes to the ore in e/eryday lie, when the issue o

$ Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 26

5 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 26

6Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 2%.

% Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 2%.

8 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 2%.


3/26

ser/ile work arises, the kind o acti/ity that is deemed

inappropriate or the holy rest o the a++ath,

undays, or *olidaysK

. =or this reason, he asks *owmany are aware that the e6pression ser/ile work

cannot +e ully understood without contrasting it with

the &i+eral :rtsH)L

Part II

1. #eisure is relaxed looking

The researcher presented in the frst part o Pieper8s

essay the diMerences +etween leisure and work. Though

it is tautological, it is important to underline that leisure

is not work and work is not leisure. The researcher puts

here some words o Pieper to understand the nature oleisure

7hat happens when our eyes sees a roseH 7hat do

we dowhen that happensH Nur mind does

something, to +e sure, in the mere act o taking in

the o+Oect, grasping its color, its shape, and so on.

7e ha/e to +e awake and acti/e. ut all the same,

it is a rela6ed looking, so long as we are merelylooking at it and not observingor studying it,

counting or measuring its eatures. uch

o+ser/ation would not+e a rela6ed action it

would +e what 'rnst JQnger termed an act o

aggression.)) ut simply looking at something,

ga4ing at it, taking it in, is merely to open our

9 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 2%.

1& Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 2%.


4/26

eyes to recei/e the things that present themsel/es

to us, that come to us without any need or eMort

on our part to possess them.)0

2. $ant%s denial of the ossibility of &leisured'

looking'knowledge(

The acts o+ser/ed +y Pieper are denied +y some

modern thinkers such as Rant. :s Pieper notices>

To Rant, or instance, the human act o knowing ise6clusi/ely dis-cursi/e, which means not merelylookingShuman knowing con-sists essentially inthe act o in/estigating, articulating, Ooining, com-paring, distinguishing, a+stracting, deducing,pro/ing - all o which a re s o ma ny ty pesand methods o acti/e mental e'ortS

k no wi ng ( intellectual knowing, t h a t i s , + ythe human +eing% is activity, and nothing +utacti/ity.)9

Jose Pieper then comments that it is no wonder

that, starting rom this +asis, Rant was a+le to

conclude that all knowing, e/en philosophy itsel (since

philosophy is at the greatest remo/e rom sense

perception%, should +e understood as a orm

o work);.

11 J(n)er, *., Bltter und Steine, +abur), 193$, p. 2&2.

12 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 3&.


1$ Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 31.


5/26

9. )atio and intellectus

J. Pieper +ril liantly recalls a medie/al distinction

+etween ratio and intellectus The medie/alsdistinguished +etween the intellect as ratio and the

intellect as intellectus. Ratio is the power o

discursi/e thought, o searching and re-searching,

a+stracting, refning, and concluding Ucf &atin dis-

currere, to run to and roV, whereas intellectus

reers to the a+ility o simply looking (simple!

intuitus"#%, to which the truth presents itsel as a

landscape presents itsel to the eye.)D ut this

ratio and intellectus as Pieper points out are /erymuch related. The spiritual knowing power o the

human mind, as the ancients understood it, is

really two things in one ratio and intellectus, all

knowing in/ol/es +oth. The path o discursi/e

reasoning is accompanied and penetrated +y the

intellectus$ untiring /ision, which is not acti/e +ut

passi/e, or +etter, receptive- a recepti/ely

operating power o the intellect.

)

:ccording to t. Thomas :1uinas as cited +y Pieper

:lthough human knowing real ly takes place in

t he m od e o ratio, ne/ertheless i t is a kind o

participation in that simple knowing which takes

place in higher natures, and we can thus conclude

that human +eings possess a power o intellectual

/ision). Thus, This s t a t em en t m ea n s t h a t

h u m a n k n o w i n g i s a p a r t a k i n g i n t h e n o n -d i s c u r s i / e p o w e r o / i s i o n e n O o y e d + y t h e

an gel s , to who m i t h as +een granted to take

15 ordin) to St. /hoa0 uina0 Contemplation i0


1% Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 32.

18 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 33 in St. /hoa0

uina0, Disputed Questions on Truth, .4, 1.


6/26

in the immater ia l as eas i ly as our eyes take

i n l i g h t o r o u r e a r s s o u n d ) K . Jo s e P i e p e r

t h e n r e a l i 4 e s t h a t

h u m a n k n o w i n g h a s a n e l e m e n t o t h enon-acti/e, purely recept i/e seeing, which i s

not there in /irtue o our humanity as such, +ut

in /irtue o a transcendence o/er what is human,

+ut which is really the highest ulfllment o what it

is to +e human, and is thus truly human ater all

( in the same way, again according to Thomas

:1uinas, the vita contemplativa as the h igh-est

orm o human li/ing is not properly human, +ut

superhuman non proprie humana, sed

superhumana %0L.

!. )atio as leisure and intellectus as work

7hat in conse1uence is the relationship among ratio,

intellectus and workH Pieper says =or the ancient

and medie/al philosophers the la+oring nature othe human ratio was likewise a mark o its

humanness. The operation o the ratio, its

discursi/e thinking process, really is work and a

dicult acti/ity0). The researcher, in that case,

interprets Pieper8s words as ratio pertaining to work and

intellectus reerring to leisure.

*. The reference on +ercules as a symbol ofwork

2owadays, the appreciation o leisure is taken or

granted. It seems that there is more attention in work.


2& Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 33 in St. /hoa0

uina0, Quaestio disputata de virtutibus cardinalibus 1.



7/26

:ccording to Jose Pieper :ntisthenes00, one o Plato8s

riends and a ellow disciple o ocratesS was

responsi+le or the frst paradigm o the

worker - or rather, he represented it himsel. *enot only came up with the e1uat ion o e'ort

with g oodne ss, h e als o e6 tolled *ercules as the

:ccomplisher o uperhuman :ctions09. 2ow, this is an

image that sti ll (or, once moreH% has a certain

compelling attraction rom the motto o 'rasmus0;to

the philosophy o Rant, who used the word *erculean

to praise the heroism o philosophers, and on to Thomas

Farlyle, the prophet o the

rel igion o 7ork


8/26

are ordered to some utility to +e attained through

action are called servile arts.0 To +ack up this

point o t. Thomas :1uinas, Pieper recalls that

si6 hundred years later, John *enry 2ewman saidas ollows I know well, 2ewman says, that

knowledge may resol/e itsel into an art, and

seminate in a mechanical process and in tangi+le

ruit> +ut it may also all +ack upon that Weason

which inorms it, and resol/e itsel into Philosophy.

=or one case it is called Xseul Rnowledge> in the

other, &i+eral0 .0K

Pieper +eautiully concludes &i+eral arts,thereore, are ways o human action which ha/e

their Oustifcation in themsel/es> ser/ile arts are

ways o human action that ha/e a purpose outside

o themsel/es, a purpose, to +e more e6act, which

consists in a useul eMect that can +e reali4ed

through pra!is. The li+erality or reedom o

the li+eral arts consists in their not +eing

disposa+le or purposes, that they do not need to

+e legitimated +y a social unction, +y +eing

work.9L

Part III

1. #eisure is not idleness

2% Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. $1.

28 B


9/26

In this part o the essay, Jose Pieper

introduces the words acedia and idleness. To

+egin with, he says 2ow the code o lie o the

*igh 5iddle :ges saidSthat it was precisely lacko leisure, an ina+ility to +e at leisure that went

together with idleness> that the restlessness o

work-or-work8s sake arose rom nothing other than

idleness. There is a curious connection in the act

that the restlessness o a sel-destructi/e work-

anaticism should take its rise rom the a+sence o

a will to accomplish something.9) Pieper then

retraces the meaning o idleness and acedia.

:nd so, what is idlenessH :ccording to Pieper

Idleness, or the older code o +eha/ior, meant

especially this that the human +eing had gi/en up

on the /ery responsi+ility that comes with dignity

that he does not want to +e what God wants him to

+e, and that means that he does not want to +e

what he really, and in the ultimate sense, is90 .

7hat is acediaH In the words o Pieper %cedia is

the despair o weakness, o which Rierkegaard

said that it consists in someone despairingly not

wanting to +e onesel99.

:naly4ing acedia, Pieper says The opposite o

acedia is not the industrious spirit o the daily

eMort to make a li/ing, +ut rather the cheerul

aMirmation +y man o his own e6istence, o the

world as a whole, and o God @ o &o/e, that is,rom which arises that special reshness o action,

which would ne/er +e conused, +y anyone with

31 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. $%.

32 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturepp. $%-$8.

33 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. $8 in Gier#e)aard, S.,

-ier&egaard*s ritings, Ho


10/26

any e6perience, with the narrow acti/ity o the

workaholic9; .

Pieper wonderully reali4es that we would get thisall wrong, i we hadn8t +een e6pressly told Thomas

:1uinas understood acedia as a sin against the

Third Fommandment. o ar rom seeing in

idleness the opposite o the work-ethic, he

understands it as a sin against the a++ath,

against The soul8s resting in God9C .

Idleness then is not leisure. In the ipsissima verba

o Pieper Idleness in the old sense, then, has solittle in common with leisure, that it is the /ery

inner disposition to non-leisure, that it is really

lack o leisure. There can only +e leisure, when

man is at one with himsel, when he is in accord

with his own +eing. %cedia , thereore, is

disagreement with onesel. Idleness and lack o

leisure +elong with each other> leisure is opposed

to both.9D

2. The three asects of work

J. Pieper enumerates three aspects o work i.e.

acti/ity, eMort and social unction. &eisure, then,

as a condition o the soul @ (and we must frmlykeep to this assumption, since leisure is not

necessarily present in all the e6ternal things like

3$ Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. $9.

35 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. $9. /he itation on St.

/hoa0 uina0 i0 in Summa theologiaeII-II, . 35, 3, ad 1u: De

malo. 11, 3 ad 2u. /he atehi0 o7 the atho


11/26

+reaks, time oM, weekend, /acation, and so

on @ it is a condition o the soul% @ leisure is

precisely the counterpoise to the image o the

worker, and we can see how this pertains to allthree aspectsSwork as acti/ity, work as eMort,

work as social unction.9

'" )ork as an activity

The researcher then treats the frst aspect o work,

an activity, in Pieper8s perspecti/e. *e says

:gainst the e6clusi/eness o the paradigm o workas activity, frst o all, there is leisure as non-

acti/ity @ an inner a+sence o preoccupation, a

calm, an a+ility to let things go, to +e 1uiet 9 .

:nd he continues &eisure is a orm o that

sti llness that is the necessary preparation or

accepting reality> only the person who is still can

hear, and whoe/er is not still, cannot hear. uch

stillness as this is not mere soundlessness or adead muteness> it means, rather, that the soul8s

power, as real, o responding to the real @ a co-

respondence, eternally esta+lished in nature @ has

not yet descended into words. &eisure is the

disposition o recepti/e understanding, o

contemplati/e +eholding, and immersion @ in

real9K .

The researcher almost reproduce e/erything o theama4ing reali4ations o Pieper &eisure is not the

attitude o the one who inter/enes +ut o the one

who opens himsel> not o someone who sei4es +ut

o one who lets go, who lets himself go, and go

3% Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 5&.




12/26

under, almost as someone who alls asleep must

let himsel go (you cannot sleep, unless you do so%.

:nd in act, Oust as sleeplessness and restlessness

are in a special way mutually related, Oust so theman at leisure is related to someone sleeping> as

*eraclitus;Lsaid o those who sleep, that they are

acti/e and cooperati/e in the +usiness o the

world. The surge o new lie that Eows out to us

when we gi/e oursel/es to the contemplation o a

+lossoming rose, a sleeping child, or o a di/ine

mystery @ is this not l ike the surge o l ie that

comes rom deep, dreamless sleepH;)

0.0. )ork as an e*ort

The researcher treats now the second aspect o

work in Pieper8s paradigm, as an e*ort.

econd, against the e6clusi/eness o the paradigm owork as eMort, leisure is the condition o consideringthings in a cele+rating spirit. The inner Ooyulness othe person who is cele+rating U+er eierndeV +elongs tothe /ery core o what we mean +y leisure Uas does thatincompara+le German word or 1uitting time oresti/al-e/ening, eierabendV. &eisure is onlypossi+le in the assumption that man is not only inharmony with himsel Uwhereas idleness is rooted in thedenial o this harmonyV, +ut also that he is in agreementwith the world and its meaning. &eisure li/es on

aMirmation. It is not the same as the a+sence oacti/ity> it is not the same as 1uiet, or e/en as an inner1uiet. It is rather like the stillness in the con/ersationo lo/ers, which is ed +y their oneness.;0

$& ragment%5 ;ie.

$1 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 51.



13/26

Thus, leisure is a esti/al. :nd a esti/al is a

cele+ration. The highest orm o aMirmation is

the esti/al> and according to Rarl RerYnyi, the

historian o religion, to esti/al +elong peace,intensity o lie, and contemplation all at once ;9.

The holding o a esti/al means an aMirmation o

the +asic meaning o the world, and an agreement

with it, and in act it means to li/e out and ulfll

one8s inclusion in the world, in an e6traordinary

manner, diMerent rom the e/eryday.;;

=esti/al then is the origin o leisure. 7ithout

esti/als there is no leisure. :nd the researcherspeculates that without leisure there are no

esti/als. The esti/al is the origin o leisure, its

inmost and e/er-central source. :nd this esti/e

character is what makes leisure not only

eMortless +ut the /ery opposite o eMort or

toil;C.

0.9. )ork as a social function

2ow, the researcher addresses the third

aspect o work as a social function according to

Pieper. &eisure stands opposed to the

e6clusi/eness o the paradigm o work as a social

unction;D. Zis-[-/is the social unction o work,

Pieper states The simple +reak rom work @ the

kind that lasts an hour, or the kind that lasts aweek or longer @ is part and parcel o daily

working lie; . It is not leisure per se. It is

$3 Gerni, G., Die anti&e 'eligion, 0terda, 19$&, p. 66.

$$ Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturepp. 52-53.



$% Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 53.


14/26

something that has +een +uilt into the whole

working process, a part o the schedule. The

+reak is there or the sake o work. It is

supposed to pro/ide new strength or newwork, as the word rereshment indicates one is

rereshed for work through +eing rereshed rom

work.;

3. Another ersective on ratio and

intellectus

Jose Pieper understands that

@&eisure stands in a perpendicular position with respect

to the working process @ in Oust the same way as the

simple ga4e o intellectus does not consist in the

duration (so to speak% o ratio$sworking-out process,

+ut instead cuts through it at the perpendicular (the

ancients compared the ratio with time, the intellectus

with the always now o eternity%.;K 2ow leisure is not

there or the sake o work, no matter how much new

strength the one who resumes working may gain rom

it> leisure in our sense is not Oustifed +y pro/iding

+odily renewal or e/en mental rereshment to lend new

/igor to urther work @ although it does indeed +ring

such things\CL

!. #eisure as contemlation

&eisure is like contemplation. :s contemplation, so

leisure is o higher rank than the vita active (e/en

though this @ the acti/e lie @ is the truly human in a


$9 7. St. /hoa0 uina0, Summa contra gentilesII, 96.

5& Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 53.


15/26

sense%. ut the ranking cannot +e re/ersed while it is

true that the one who prays +eore going to +ed sleeps

+etter, surely no+ody would want to think o praying as a

means o going to sleep. In the same way, no+ody whowants leisure merely or the sake o rereshment will

e6perience its authentic ruit, the deep rereshment that

comes rom a deep sleep.C)

*. #eisure makes us human

The researcher puts here 1uotations rom Pieper

&eisure is not Oustifed in making the unctionary astrou+le-ree in operation as possi+le, with minimumdowntime, +ut rather in keeping the unctionaryhuman (or as 2ewman said it, so that he can stay agentleman%> and this means that the human +eing doesnot disappear into the parceled-out world o his limitedwork-a-day unction, +ut instead remains capa+le otaking himsel as a +eing who is oriented toward thewhole o e6istence.C0

,. To know how to be at leisure is a ower

Pieper highlights in his essay this conclusion This is

why the a+ility to +e at leisure is one o the +asic

powers o the human soulC9. acking up this

consideration, Pieper articulates &ike the git o

contemplati/e sel-immersion in +eing, and the a+ility touplit one8s spirits in esti/ity, the power to +e at leisure

is the power to step +eyond the working world and win

contact with those superhuman, lie-gi/ing orces that

51 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 5$.




16/26

can send us, renewed and ali/e again, into the +usy

world o workC;.

-. #eisure does not only makes us human but

also divine

=inally, in this third part o Pieper8s essay, the

researcher places the mar/elous ideas o :ristotle cited

+y Jose Pieper. 5an cannot li/e this way insoar as he

is man, +ut only insoar as something di/ine dwells in

himCC. :nd Pieper seconds :ristotle that this is the

parado6 that reigns o/er the attainment o leisure, whichis at once a human and super-human conditionCD.

Part I

1. The ga between the &leisured erson( and

the roletariat

In this part o Pieper8s essay, he does an e!cursus

on Proletariat and ]e-proletariani4ation. :t the

onset o this e6cursus, he asks ut would this not

mean, then, that the gap +etween an academic

educational le/el, which can aMord to take knowledge or

its own sake, and the proletarian, who only knows the

+reak @ +arely enough to renew him or his daily input

o la+or @ will not this gap necessarily get deeper as aresult o our thesis, no matter what our attitude or

intentionCH

5$ Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 5$.

55 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 55 in ri0tot.


5% Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 59.


17/26

2. The leisured erson is a hilosoher

To de/elop the in1uiry recently mentioned, Piepercomes up with ancient philosophy especially with Plato.

*e aMirms that Plato, in act, in one passage opposes

the type o the philosopher to the type o the banausos

Uhand-workerVC. The philosophers according to Plato,

cited +y Pieper are those>

Swho ha/e +een +rought up, not like sla/es, +ut in theopposite way. :nd this, N Theodoros, is the way o eacho them the one, who has +een raised truly in reedomand leisure, whom you call a philosopher and who canget away with appearing /ery simple and good ornothing, when it comes to practical accomplishments,so that he seems not to know how to tie a knot, toasten up a +undle to +e carried, or how to cook up atasty dishS > the other is the way o the one who knowshow to do all these things nim+ly and neatly, +ut doesnot know how to wear his cloak like a ree man, and

much less, how to praise with worthy accent the truelie o gods and menSCK

3. /hat is a roletarian0

2ow that we are in the e!cursus on proletariat and

]e-proletariani4ation, it is good to ask +ut what do

such word really mean @ proletariat, proletarian, de-

proletarianieDLH Pieper synthesi4es that being a

proletarian is being bound to the working processD).


59 P


18/26

Pieper connects the idea o work with the concept

o .bonum utile/. 7ork is meant as useful acti/ity,

which means that +y defnition, work does not ha/e its

meaning in itsel, +ut is directed toward somethingsocially ad/antageous, a bonum utile, the reali4ation o

practical /alues and needsD0.

Pieper makes some three e6planations with

regards to what is it to +e a proletarian, really, what is

proletariat and de-proletarianiationD9H =irstly, +eing

proletarianis not the same as being poor. Nne can +e

poor without +eing proletarian the +eggar in the class

structured medie/al society was not a proletarian. Nnthe other hand, one can +e proletarian, without +eing

poor the engineer, the specialist in the total-work state

is, certainly, proletarian.D;

econdly, one must still state the o+/ious the negati/e

aspect o the proletariat, the aspect we need to remo/e

rom it, does not consist in the act that the condition is

limited to a certain social class, so that the only way to

eliminate the negati/e would to ha/e e/eryoneproletarian\ Proletarianism, then, clearly cannot +e

o/ercome +y proletariani4ing e/eryone.DC

Thirdly, the +inding to the working-process can ha/e its

roots in the inner po/erty o the person the proletarian

is one whose lie is ully satisfed +y the working-process

itsel +ecause this space has +een shrunken rom within,

and +ecause meaningul action that is not work is no

longer possi+le or e/en imagina+leDD.



6$ Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 61.




19/26

!. To be only roletarian is to be slave

There is a concept o being bounded in

Proletarianism. To +e +ound to the working process isto +e +ound to the whole process o useulness, and

moreo/er, to +e +ound in such a way that the whole lie

o the working human +eing is consumedD. Pieper

continues

This +inding can ha/e /arious causes. The cause may+e lack o ownership, or the proletariat is the wage-

earner without property, who has nothing +ut his work,and thus he is constantly orced to sell his working-power. (^: D9% ut such +inding to the workingprocess can also +e caused +y dictate o the total-working state. The proletarian is one who, whether ornot he owns property, is constantly on the mo/e,+ecause o the practical necessities o the a+solutelyrational production o goods. (^: ))K%D

*. Proletarianism servile and liberal arts and

de'roletariation

Fonnecting proletarianism with artes serviles, Pieper

e6presses that proletarianism would conse1uently +e

e1ui/alent to the narrowing o e6istence and acti/ity to

the realm o artes serviles@ whether this narrowness +e

conditioned through lack o ownership, compulsion o

the state, or spiritual po/ertyDK. It is now the time to

portray the idea o +e-proletariation. It would

conse1uently +e the widening o ones e6istence +eyond

the realm o the merely useul, ser/ile work, and the

6% Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturepp. 61-62.




20/26

restriction o the area o the artes serviles, to +eneft the

arts liberalesL. To concreti4e+e-proletariation, three

things would +e necessary +uilding up property rom

wages, limiting the power o the state, and o/ercominginternal po/erty).

,. +onorarium and wages

To understand urther the diMerences +etween liberal

arts and servile arts, Pieper resort to the dissimilarities

+etween honorarium and wages.

The li+eral arts are honored> the ser/ile arts are paid inwages. The concept o the honorarium implies acertain lack o e1ui/alence +etween achie/ement andreward, that the ser/ice itsel really cannot +erewarded. 7ages, on the other hand (taken in theirpurest sense, in which they diMer rom thehonorarium%, mean payment or work as an article orcommodity the ser/ice can +e compensated throughthe wage, there is certain e1ui/alency. ut thehonorarium means something +eyond this itcontri+utes to one8s lie-support, whereas wage (again,in the strict sense% means the payment or the isolatedaccomplishment o the work, without regard or thelie-support o the working person. It is characteristic,now, o the mind that has +een ormed +y the workerideal, to deny this distinction +etween honorarium andwage there are only wages.0

-. The need for de'roletariation

Pieper o+ser/es +rilliantly that a totalitarian dictator

can say that payment or la+or must +e measured

%& Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 63.

%1 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 63.

%2 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 6$.


21/26

according to producti/ity, and not according to needs9,

while in the 'ncyclical &etter 0uadragesimo anno, (the

aim o which was de-proletariani4ation%, we read In the

frst place, the worker is entitled to a wage that shouldsuMice or the lie-support o himsel and his amily;.

In this conte6t o proletariani4ing e/erything, Pieper

1uotes a socialist, P.J. Proudhon who parado6ically talks

on the importance o leisure particularly the cele+ration

o unday, the &ord8s ]ay. Nn the a++ath day, the

ser/ants regain their human dignity or a day, and put

themsel/es on a le/el with their mastersC

Thus, mar/elously Pieper sums up that a true de-

proletarianiationwould consist in making a/aila+le or

the working person a meaningul kind o acti/ity that is

notwork, in other words, +y opening up an area o true

leisureD. ut, with what acti/ity one8s leisure is

flledH Pieper reali4es that although, to +e sure,

something necessary would +e done there+y, the

decisi/e thing would still +e missing it is not enough

merely to create the e6ternal conditions or leisure> theproOect would only come to ruition i it were possi+le or

the human +eing as such to +e-at-leisure.

%3 Sta


22/26

Part

1. The heart of leisure is religious festival

The heart o leisure is esti/al. It has three elements

i.e. ().% rela6ation, (0.% eMortlessness and (9.%The

ascendancy o +eing at leisure Udoing leisure, scholen

ageinV o/er mere unction. The esti/e character o

leisure points towards cele+ration and cele+ration aims

at worship. :ccording to Jose Pieper To e6perienceand li/e out a harmony with the world, in a manner 1uite

diMerent rom that o e/eryday lie @ this, we ha/e said,

is the meaning o esti/alK.

The most esti/e esti/al that can +e cele+rated isreligious worship, or cultL, and there is no esti/althat does not get its lie rom such worship or does not

actually deri/e its origin rom this. There is no worshipwithout the gods, whether it +e mardi gras or awedding. This is not intended to +e a prescription>rather, it is necessarily soSTo +e sure, since the =renchWe/olution, people ha/e tried o/er and o/er to createartifcial esti/als without any connection with religiousworship, or e/en against such worship, such as therutus =esti/al or &a+or ]ay, +ut they alldemonstrate, through the orced and narrow charactero their esti/ity, what religious worship pro/ides to aesti/al> scarcely nothing could +e e6perienced more

clearly than that genuine esti/ity is only to +e seenwhere there is still some li/ing relationship withreligious cult.)

%9 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. 69.

8& /he *n)


23/26

The interconnectedness +etween leisure and worship

makes the researcher theori4e that i there is no feast

there is no Eucharist and vice versa. :nd so Pieper

reasons out that the meaning o a rest rom la+or iscultic0. I worship is to time then temple is to space.

Temple has a certain meaning (reEected also itsetymology, c. Greek temenos, rom temnein, to cut>&atin templum% a defnite physical space has +een cutoM +y enclosure or encing rom the rest o the land,whose surace was di/ided up or arming or other

uses. These sectioned-oM spaces were handed o/er tothe possession o the gods and were not inha+ited orplanted +ut were remo/ed rom all practical use. Justso, through religious esti/al, and or the sake oreligious esti/al, or cult, rom day-to-day time adefnite period was separated oM, and this period otime, no otherwise than the ground-suraces o thetemple and places o sacrifce, would not+e used, andwould likewise +e kept rom use. '/ery se/enth daywas such a time periodS2ow there can +e no unusedspace in the total world o work, neither an unused area

o ground nor an unused time> nor can there +e a spaceor worship or esti/alS9

2. #eisure humanly enriches man

There is a Wussian saying that goes this way 7ork does

not make you rich> it only makes you +ent o/er. Pieper

rationali4es this statement +y saying that there isnothing, then, to keep the world o the worker rom

+eing a poor, sterile world, e/en though flled with

material goods> thanks to the principle o utility, in /irtue

o which the world o work comes into +eing, there can

81 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. %&.

82 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. %1.

83 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. %1. Kr. /hoa0 uba

in hi0 boo#


24/26

+e no real wealth, no o/erEow. 7here/er something is

let o/er, this e6cess will +e su+Oected again to the

principles o rational utility.;

In connection to the idea recently mentioned, Pieper

comes to the conclusion that it is the nature o religious

esti/al to make a space o a+undance and wealth, e/en

in the midst o e6ternal po/erty in material thingsC.

Welationally, the concept o sacri1ce is /ery much

connected to religious esti/als. 7hat is the connectionH

The relatedness is the act that sacrifce is /oluntary, a

git that is oMered, and certainly notuseulness, +ut the

/ery opposite o useulnessD.

3. /ithout /orshi leisure is not authentic

7ith what is said, what is the signifcance o this with

regards to leisureH Pieper points out this act that when

leisure is separated rom worship, leisure +ecomes

toilsome, and work +ecomes inhuman.

7ithout cult or worship, leisure does not turn only to a

sort o idleness or acedia. 5ere time-killing and

+oredom gain ground, which are directly related to the

a+sence o leisure, or only someone who has lost the

spiritual power to +e at leisure can +e +ored. :nd then

]espair, the sister o Westlessness, rears its hideous

+ored.

8$ Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. %2.



8% Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. %2.



25/26

Pieper in his essay underlines this /ery important

conclusion Fulture li/es on worshipK. *e cites Plato

+y declaring In it, the origin o leisureKLin worship, and

the association o the 5uses with cultic esti/al aree6pressed in a magnifcent image, in esti/e consort with

the gods, man regains his true worth, and reco/ers his

upright postureK).

Pieper writes this aMirmation o great importance The

cele+ration o God8s praises cannot +e reali4ed unless it

takes place or its own sakeK0.

There are certain things which one cannot do them atall or one does them +ecause they are meaningul inthemsel/es. Fertainly the doctors are correct in sayingthat lack o leisure makes one ill. ut at the same time,it is impossi+le to +e truly at leisure merely or the sakeo health. uch logical conusion is not only unftting, itsimply cannot work. &eisure cannot +e reali4ed so longas one understands it to +e a means, e/en as a meansto the end o rescuing the culture o Fhristian

'urope.K9

:ccording to Pieper, there is only one true and fnally

/alid orm o cultic worship, which is the sacramental

sacrifce o the Fhristian FhurchK;. That is why, it is


9& /ran0


26/26

interestingly o+ser/ed +y Pieper that weekday in &atin is

called aferia. The liturgy only recogni4es esti/al-

daysKC.

95 Pieper, J., Leisure the Basis of Culturep. %% in Pa0her, J.,

Eucharistia/ !estalt und 8oli9ug, Mun0ter, 19$8, p. 266 '.

Documents

Pieper's Concept of Leisure