My Spiritual Journey

Sunday, June 13, AD 2010

The spiritual journey that I have been experiencing these many years all started with a prayer to our Holy Mother of God.  Because of her I have had the great fortune of living the beauty of our Catholic faith and the joy of knowing Jesus our Lord and Savior.

Continue reading...

Works of Penance, Frequent Confession, Mortification, Almsgiving

Wednesday, February 17, AD 2010

Works of Penance, Frequent Confession, Mortification, Almsgiving is by Father Francis Fernandez Carvajal from his series on meditations In Conversation with GodDaily Meditations Volume Two: Lent and Eastertide, 1.2:

True conversion is shown by the way we behave.  We show that we really want to improve by the way we do our work or our study.  We show it by the way we behave towards our family; by offering up to God, in the course of the day, little mortifications which make life for those around us more pleasant, and which make our work more effective.  We can also show it by making a careful preparation for and going frequently to Confession.

Today God asks us also for a rather special mortification, which we offer up cheerfully: it is fasting and abstinence, which strengthens our spirit as it mortifies our flesh and our sensuality.  It raises our soul to God.  It gets rid of concupiscence by giving us the strength to overcome and to mortify our passions, and it disposes our heart that it may seek for nothing except to please God in everything.9

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Works of Penance, Frequent Confession, Mortification, Almsgiving

  • A friend who belongs to Opus Dei turned me onto these books during Advent at an Opus Dei Men’s reflection. I can’t say that I have read them everyday, perhaps 85% of the time since.

    Amazing. That’s all I can say. I take them to Mass with me and read them after the after Mass prayers. What a fantastic help. The insights and lessons are inspired. What a great place to get perspective from the Communion of Saints, the Popes and the Magestirium.

    I recommend In Conversation with God to anyone and everyone who wants to increase their faith and understanding (in that order).

    We are dust but if you own these books they won’t get any dust on them.

  • AK,

    I agree.

    The In Conversation With God series has brought me ever closer to God. It is worth someones while to pick up the book and start reading.

    A great way to do something for Lent!

  • Tito,

    I never thought about the statement from your last sentence until this Lent. We all give something up and when we think of it or desire it we turn to God; however, I don’t know too many people who DO SOMETHING for Lent as opposed to NOT doing something. Sure, we may give the money we save from our habit, whether it be beer, chocolate or whatever, but that is not necessarily the same as DOING something.

    I think it is helpful, and these books are great for it, to add something to our spiritual life during Lent and God willing it will become part of us in Easter and beyond.

  • AK,

    I remember the “spirit of Vatican II” rage of “doing” something for Lent instead of “giving” something up.

    In the end I decided to do both (just to be safe!)


Cardinal Newman on Fasting

Wednesday, February 17, AD 2010

“And when He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He was afterward an hungered.” Matt. iv. 2.

{1} THE season of humiliation, which precedes Easter, lasts for forty days, in memory of our Lord’s long fast in the wilderness. Accordingly on this day, the first Sunday in Lent, we read the Gospel which gives an account of it; and in the Collect we pray Him, who for our sakes fasted forty days and forty nights, to bless our abstinence to the good of our souls and bodies.

We fast by way of penitence, and in order to subdue the flesh. Our Saviour had no need of fasting for either purpose. His fasting was unlike ours, as in its intensity, so in its object. And yet when we begin to fast, His pattern is set before us; and we continue the time of fasting till, in number of days, we have equalled His.

There is a reason for this;—in truth, we must do nothing except with Him in our eye. As He it is, through whom alone we have the power to do any good {2} thing, so unless we do it for Him it is not good. From Him our obedience comes, towards Him it must look. He says, “Without Me ye can do nothing.” [John xv. 5.] No work is good without grace and without love.

Continue reading...

God is Here, Not "Out There"!

Monday, January 4, AD 2010

Here in the midst of the Christmas season our awareness of the meaning of the Incarnation is particularly heightened. In reflecting on this mystery, we commonly speak about Jesus “leaving Heaven” or “leaving the Father” to become one of us, to take on human nature. I submit that while there is certainly some truth in such formulas, they are potentially more dangerous than they are useful, in that they unintentionally reinforce erroneous understandings of Heaven and of God’s transcendence, understandings which unwittingly lead us towards a deistic conception of God “out there” which is manifestly false and contrary to Christianity.

Continue reading...

17 Responses to God is Here, Not "Out There"!

  • Actually, it is a place. I would refer you to 326 and 1029-1033 in the Catechism.

  • DB, please note that CCC 326 puts quotation marks around “place,” indicating its metaphorical usage. Your other citations refer mostly to purgatory. In any case, I cited 1024 and 1025, which explicitly refer to heaven as a state. What specific passages do you have in mind?

    Stepping back for a moment, though… I didn’t make another evident point in my post, that is that heaven *can’t* be a place, given that God is spirit, not matter. My concern was with the *implications* of a view of heaven as a place, not with the view itself, as my post indicates, but I should have made this point nonetheless at the outset.

  • Chris, it is clear to me that Heaven is the total ecstasy of the Beatific Vision, and that this is union with God and that God is pure Spirit. But it is not clear to me that for humans, this spiritual reality does not also have a physical place. In the end of time there will be the Resurrection of the Dead, and those with God in Heaven will be reunited with their bodies. These bodies have to occupy some space, as Christ’s did when he appeared to the apostles in the upper room. Given that this is the case, is it not fair to say that Heaven is both a spiritual reality (union with God in the beatific vision) and also a material reality, in our resurrected bodies and our friendship with Christ? The Bible often speaks of Heaven as another world. I think this is commonly understood as a rejuvenated and perfect Earth or new Eden… am I way off base here?

  • But I see your point about putting unnecessary distance between us and God. We should not do this! God is indeed immanent and we need to recognize this. Ought we ought not also recognize that his transcendence is not perfectly revealed to us because of the limitations of human nature? I think this is what is met by the “No one has seen God” verses found throughout the Bible.

    But yes, God is always with us, even here on this strange blog!

  • Your right, Zach, in that those in Heaven will occupy a place; my point is that heaven is not a specific place, though. Using a silly example, let’s say that after the final judgment and the renewal/glorification of creation, we’re able to travel the universe… regardless of our physical location in the universe, we’ll be in heaven.

    Does that make sense?

  • Yes, actually a lot of sense. Very helpful. Thanks!

  • Heaven is a place and a state…to imply that it isn’t a place is nonsense, because where did Jesus go when he Ascended? Your clarification is noted, and your point well taken.

  • DB, according to that logic, love must be a place, because I’m in love with my wife, and I’m somewhere.

    Again, body-soul persons in heaven are obviously somewhere, but the “somewhere” isn’t what makes heaven heaven, but rather the state of their existence *anywhere* makes heaven heaven.

    If you want to insist that heaven is defined as a place, what’s its address?

  • If you want to insist that heaven is defined as a place, what’s its address?

    To listen to my neighbors talk, Heaven is in Texas, but I haven’t found it yet.

    Not surprising, Hell is in Michigan.

    Somewhat fittingly, Purgatory is in Rhode Island.

  • 🙂 And let’s not forget: Minnesota is the Promised Land. 🙂

  • As support for what Chris rightfully states, one might also want to look at this address of Pope John Paul II on hell, which of course the news took out of context:

  • To listen to my neighbors talk, Heaven is in Texas, but I haven’t found it yet.

    Not surprising, Hell is in Michigan.

    As a native Texan and Michigan lover, I must object. Michigan in the winter is hell, and Texas in the summer is hell.

    Aside from the absurd farm subsudies, from which the government directly funds the corn that helps to make us unhealthy, the Midwest rocks.

    And so as not to derail the thread, thinking heaven and hell as actual places makes my head hurt.

  • Where did Jesus go when he Ascended, if Heaven isn’t a place?

  • DB, for Jesus & Mary, anywhere & everywhere is heaven. I don’t know where they are geographically, but it’s really irrelevant, in that they are resting in the Father’s embrace.

  • D.B.

    How can Jesus be at the “right hand of the Father” if the Father has no hands?

  • That would be a cute observation, except for one thing….People actually watched Jesus enter the sky. Now I am not saying that Heaven has boundaries like the state of Montana or any other piece of Geography, but to imply that Heaven is merely a state of being would be in error..from the Catholic Encyclopedia:
    “Where is heaven, the dwelling of God and the blessed?

    Some are of opinion that heaven is everywhere, as God is everywhere. According to this view the blessed can move about freely in every part of the universe, and still remain with God and see everywhere. Everywhere, too, they remain with Christ (in His sacred Humanity) and with the saints and the angels. For, according to the advocates of this opinion, the spatial distances of this world must no longer impede the mutual intercourse of blessed.

    In general, however, theologians deem more appropriate that there should be a special and glorious abode, in which the blessed have their peculiar home and where they usually abide, even though they be free to go about in this world. For the surroundings in the midst of which the blessed have their dwelling must be in accordance with their happy state; and the internal union of charity which joins them in affection must find its outward expression in community of habitation. At the end of the world, the earth together with the celestial bodies will be gloriously transformed into a part of the dwelling-place of the blessed (Revelation 21). Hence there seems to be no sufficient reason for attributing a metaphorical sense to those numerous utterances of the Bible which suggest a definite dwelling-place of the blessed. Theologians, therefore, generally hold that the heaven of the blessed is a special place with definite limits. Naturally, this place is held to exist, not within the earth, but, in accordance with the expressions of Scripture, without and beyond its limits. All further details regarding its locality are quite uncertain. The Church has decided nothing on this subject.”

  • My final comment on the matter is this: Perhaps we are merely arguing semantics and terminology here. I see no reason why an either/or argument should be the case.

    God Bless.

Jesus is Not My Pal

Wednesday, August 26, AD 2009

One of the elements of modern (often Evangelical, but sometimes Catholic) spirituality that I find most foreign is when people talk about Christ as being “my best friend.” It seems an even more familiar form of the relationship suggested by hopeful missionaries, “Do you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ?”

It’s possible to err in either direction on these things, and I make no representation that I am a perfect Christian, but I don’t think of myself having a “personal relationship” with Christ, certainly in a “best friends” kind of way. The ways in which I would normally envision Christ are not guy-next-door, my-buddy-the-savior kind of images. Christ the King, enthroned in eternal splendor into union with whom all Christians wish to enter for life everlasting. Christ Crucified, pouring out his blood for the sins of the whole world. Christ Risen, triumphing over the reign of death which had doomed humanity since the Fall. Christ in the Eucharist, kneeling before the glittering monstrance in which the Body of Christ forms the center of a sunburst of golden rays, with the crucifix above and the tabernacle behind.

Continue reading...

41 Responses to Jesus is Not My Pal

  • Henry Karlson:

    I don’t suppose you’ll also provide us a link showing an ancient desert father wearing a “What Would Jesus Do” bracelet, no?

  • I believe the correct title for that book is Buddy Jesus and the Early Church: A Historical Study. More seriously, while I find the image interesting, I’m curious about why Henry linked to it. I think there are a wide variety of plausible interpretations for what that image says about the Christian’s relationship to Jesus.

  • No longer do I call you servants, for the servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you.

    John 15:15

    And that icon is an ancient one, btw.

  • John Henry

    I pointed to it because years ago, one of my Coptic friends pointed out how it was an icon of Jesus as our friend.

  • One is urged not to judge a book by its cover, but with a cover that bad, it’s sure tempting… Wow.

  • Henry Karlson,

    The icon may be an ancient one; however, the modernist interpretation you place on it to advance your liberal views concerning it, isn’t.

    Not only is it flawed; it is also anachronistic.

  • E.

    What’s anachronistic about what I said? The idea that Jesus can be our friend is anachronistic? Really? Seriously??! So I guess John 15:15 is a modernist scripture which was sent back in time?

    And as I pointed out, I was told the interpretation by a Coptic friend of mine, one who was I believe a deacon at the time (might have only been sub-deacon) and was, before moving to the Americas, active in Cairo at one of the churches (and this one a monastery-church) which is built upon a site the Holy Family hid at. I wouldn’t call him a “modernist” either.

  • Well, look, I see no reason to say that anyone is ‘wrong’ here. What we have here are different images to explain something that is basically indescribable: the soul’s relationship with God. Darwin thinks that some of this imagery – the “my pal Jesus” kind – is not to his taste because while it may convey familiarity (one aspect of the relationship between the individual soul and God), it is very misleading when considered as a description of the equality (or lack thereof) between the soul and God. Henry is pointing out that Jesus used the language of friendship to describe His relationship with His disciples, and so it is perhaps a richer analogy than the post acknowledges.
    This is not a serious disagreement, I don’t think.

  • To Jesus, Our Friend
    St. Claude de la Colombière

    O Jesus! Thou art my true Friend, my only Friend. Thou doth take a part in all my misfortunes; Thou doth take them on Thyself; thou doth know how to change them into blessings. Thou doth listen to me with the greatest kindness when I relate my troubles to Thee, and thou hast always balm to pour on my wounds. I find Thee at all times; I find Thee everywhere; Thou never goest away; if I have to change my dwelling, I find Thee wherever I go.

    Thou art never weary of listening to me; Thou art never tired of doing me good. I am certain of being beloved by Thee if I love Thee; my goods are nothing to Thee and by bestowing Thine on me, Thou never growest poor. However miserable I may be, no one more noble or learned or even holier can come between Thee and me, and deprive me of Thy friendship; and death which tears us away from all other friends, will unite me for ever to Thee.

    All the humiliations attached to old age or to the loss of honor, will never detach Thee from me. On the contrary, I shall never enjoy Thee more fully, and Thou will never be closer to me than when everything seems to conspire against me, to overwhelm me and to cast me down. Thou doth bear with all my faults with extreme patience.

    Even my want of fidelity and my ingratitude do not wound Thee to such a degree as to make Thee unwilling to receive me back when I return to Thee.

    O Jesus! Grant that I may die praising Thee, that I may die loving Thee, that I may die for the love of Thee. Amen.

  • John Henry

    Right, I am just wanting people to appreciate the great spiritual tradition which does look at Jesus as our friend, and realize it is not all sub-par, but that there is a richness to it that has inspired, and continues to inspire, saints.

  • The modern (perhaps, more precisely, the “Protestant”) interpretation of “personal relationship with Jesus” has often been, as even in our current day, the kind not unlike that which rappers and R&B singers notoriously demonstrate & subscribe to, which even large congregations of Protestant churches themselves as well as youth groups nurture even still; where one can be so buddy, buddy with our homey, Jesus, that a supposed Christian can even cuss the hell’outta him and talk to him as if he were some 21 JumpStreet gangsta.

    Apologies, but the kind of “friendship” that I subscribe to as concerning Christ is not unlike the original kind espoused in the ancient Fathers of the Church, where it acknowledges and pays due homage to one divine aspect of him that the notorious modern interpretation so often neglects and, worse, deplorably disrespects: that He happens to be not only Lord & Saviour but also God, deserving of such due homage and utmost respect.

    So, go tell yo homeys, “e.” don’t play dat.

  • (seeing Henry’s comment that it’s an actual ancient icon, and not an in-the-style-of as I’d taken it):

    1) It would be appropriate to at least ask whether the arm-on-shoulder posture shown in the icon merits the “icon of Christ and his friend” title which some people apparently now give it. (Googling around, it is a 5th century Egyptian icon of Christ and Abba Menas currently hanging in the Louvre.) Gestures do not always maintain continuity of meaning across time and cultures — as with the fru-fra over medieval lord/vassal ceremonies which involved the exchange of kisses being interpreted by modern people as “gay marriage” ceremonies.

    2) Just because a piece of art is old doesn’t mean that it’s good or expresses truth well. Perhaps I’m simply bringing my modern understandings of symbol and gesture to it, but this looks to me about as egregious as a lot of the 19th century devotional paintings of Jesus which make him look like a pale, European, emaciated and somewhat effeminate youth.

    That said, I’m not trying to argue here that Christ should never be seen as a friend. As Henry points out, Christ tells his disciples that they are not merely servants but friends. In another example of close relation, we are told that we are sons of God. Clearly, if God is our Father, he is not wholly other.

    What I wrote here is not meant to describe the only way of understanding one’s relationship with Christ, not to insist that mine is the best one. If you’re looking for someone with the deepest possible understanding of and relationship with God, I’m not the person you’re going to turn to. I’m an ordinary Catholic struggling as we all must to understand the eternal and perfect.

    But at the same time, I did write it not merely because it describes my personal experience, but also because I fear that in the laudable desire to bring Christ into their lives rather than leaving Him as some distant influence that does not impact their day-to-day actions, modern Americans are particularly tempted towards a view of Christ which is essentially humanistic and horizontal — losing the vertical sense of God’s power and majesty.

    In any given age, we often need most the images which are contrary to the spirit of the times. Through much of Christian history, it was perhaps important to remind people that Christ truly came for all, and loved the peasant at least as much as the lord. But in our day, I think we’re much more in danger of losing any sense of Christ’s divinity and kingship — living as we do in a society which celebrates egalitarianism. I think we need Christ as King now more than ever.

  • I think John Henry states the correct mean.

  • DarwinCatholic:

    I, for one, happen to laud your post, which your above comments even further explains with even greater clarity and deeper meaning.

    The fact that Henry Karlson imposes his conspicuously modern interpretation on the ancient icon, to make it appear as though the current modern interpretation of “friendship with Christ” in our day is actually not unlike that of those in the early church is as seriously flawed as it is anachronistic; not to mention, self-serving.

    Indeed, such a markedly familiar notion has exactly been what has led to a rather notorious lack of respect toward Our Lord in our modern times and the many egregious profound displays of irreverence not only in our several churches but, ultimately, in modern-day Christianity as a whole.

  • The above band will be playing at Mass in a church near your — look for it!

    Coming Up in Future Performances:

    “Down wid Christ! Hell ya, mutha******”

    by Rapper, Kenya Christian

    — end sarcasm.

  • S.B.

    Didn’t you know that was an ancient hymn written by one of the Desert Fathers?

  • In the last days of her life, St. Teresa was ordered by the Lord to go found yet another convent. Traveling through the winter weather and snows of the mountains, she fell into a freezing river.
    “That’s the way I treat all my friends” said the Lord.
    “No wonder you have so few” she replied.

    And for real friends it seems to me that “Sell all you have and come follow me” is the applicable text.

  • But in our day, I think we’re much more in danger of losing any sense of Christ’s divinity and kingship — living as we do in a society which celebrates egalitarianism.

    I agree, although every individual has their own struggles. For some, the break down of traditional family and community structures as well as the peculiar forms of isolation resulting from modern technology make it difficult to conceive a loving, caring God.

  • Not to mention, those who mistake a vulgar familiarity with Christ as actually a “personal relationship” with Him due to some sordid notion of amity, prevalently fostered by Protestant churches and unfortunately imported into our own Catholic churches by certain parishoners given to such, make it very difficult to ever conceive that Christ is, in fact, “God”; instead, one would think he’s simply some homey residing on 21st street.

  • DarwinCatholic:
    Icons are not pieces of art. For the Eastern Christians they are sacramentals. They are meant to induce prayer and meditation and avoid anything that is too much of this earth. That is why they may look strange to Western eyes brought up with a Renaissance view of art. Friendship is a noble virtue. There is a difference in degree between “friend” and “buddy”.
    Elise B.

  • Wow, very strong reactions here, mostly to that poor man posting that Icon.

    Anyhoo…wanted to add that I agree with the post and add that I think that most Catholics of a certain age have a bit of hurdle to overcome when contemplating Jesus as our “personal savior” and “best friend” and other such Evangelical and Born Again phrasing. I think it’s because the eternal view of the Church has consistently been that of “community” and “communal salvation.” Indeed, we come to Christ, not through a personal relationship with him, but through the Church, the Body of Christ, the Communion of Saints. All the mass emphasizes our fellowship duties to salvation for ourselves and each other.

    Just my thoughts. Peace.

  • Jesus in the most classical sense is more like a mob boss than a friend, or the local cacique in Mexico that everyone wants to their kid’s padrino (godfather). He has his tender moments, he can even seem like your friend at times, but don’t piss him off, and don’t mess with him. And he can hook you up with all sorts of goodies if you do what he says. That makes the saints akin to mob captains. If you want anything done in Heaven, you gotta know somebody who knows somebody.

    At least that’s how I understand it.

  • Re: John 15:15, I realize that Christ could be speaking to all of us through the scripture, and there are probably multiple layers of meaning there, but I read it as speaking to the disciples — men who really were his friends — his natural, human friends. You know, human beings he spent a lot of time with in the flesh.

    We can’t have precisely the same kind of natural, human relationship with Jesus that these men did, even if we can look to it as a model and sign for our own, supernatural relationship with Him.

  • 1. When the Lord Jesus had commended the love which He manifested toward us in dying for us, and had said, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends,” He added, “Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.” What great condescension! when one cannot even be a good servant unless he do his lord’s commandments; the very means, which only prove men to be good servants, He wished to be those whereby His friends should be known. But the condescension, as I have termed it, is this, that the Lord condescends to call those His friends whom He knows to be His servants. For, to let us know that it is the duty of servants to yield obedience to their master’s commands, He actually in another place reproaches those who are servants, by saying, “And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things that I say?”1 Accordingly, when ye say Lord, prove what you say by doing my commandments. Is it not to the obedient servant that He is yet one day to say, “Well done, thou good servant; because thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy Lord”?2 One, therefore, who is a good servant, can be both servant and friend. (Augustin on John 85)

  • He both is abundantly and infinitely rich; and He desires and earnestly endeavors to obtain our friendship; we do not thus earnestly endeavor. What am I saying, ’do not earnestly endeavor’? We do not wish to obtain the good things as He wishes it. And what He has done shows that He wishes it more [than we]. For while, for our own sake, we with difficulty think lightly of a little gold: He, for our sake, gave even the Son who was His own. Let us make use of the love of God as we ought; let us reap the fruits of His friendship. For “ye are My friends” (he says) “if ye do what I say to you.” (Jn 15,14). How wonderful! His enemies, who were at an infinite distance from Him, whom in all respects He excels by an incomparable superiority, these He has made His friends and calls them friends. What then should not one choose to suffer for the sake of this friendship? For the friendship of men we often incur danger, but for that of God, we do not even give up money. Our [condition] does indeed call for mourning, for mourning and tears and wailings, and loud lamentation and beating of the breast. We have fallen from our hope, we are humbled from our high estate, we have shown ourselves unworthy of the honor of God even after His benefits we are become unfeeling, and ungrateful. The devil has stripped us of all our good things. We who were counted worthy to be sons; we His brethren and fellow-heirs are come to differ nothing from His enemies that insult Him. (Chrysostom He 2307)

  • I think part of the problem is that we have a rather cut-rate notion of what it means to be a “friend” today. I’m not a biblical scholar, but I have to think the term Jesus uses in the scene in John is a lot richer and more meaningful than what is usually meant by it in the Age of Facebook.

  • I appreciate the quotes from the Fathes, Henry, but I’m not entirely sure what you’re driving at — assuming that you’re driving at something rather than just sharing some good quotes with us all.

    I’m not trying to suggest that it’s wrong or never appropriate to refer to Christ as a friend — if that’s what’s concerning you. But I am trying to argue against a certain approach to spirituality or to talking about Christ which is highly egalitarian and familiar in it’s approach. I’m thinking, for instance, of Protestant or Catholic carismatic friends I’d had who tend to talk about prayer as, “I’ve gotta go talk this over with my best friend,” or “I’ve got to run that by my buddy upstairs.”

  • Henry is just upset that there remains genuine Catholics like DarwinCatholic who uphold the Traditions of the Church rooted in both Scripture & Oral Tradition, passed onto the Ages, from the Apostles themselves.

    The modernist enterprise of nihilistic emancipation is the very core of crusade Henry Karlson et al are prominently engaged in; to make it seem that the novel Protestant interpretations that only came about in the 16th century and, even worse, the subsequent modern versions that arose from these; are exactly the kinds of interpretations (wherein the very hermaneutics employed are believed to enjoy a certain legitimacy by the likes of these) that Catholics today should likewise adopt to the point of forming a “friendship” with our Lord in the hip-hop, faddish fashion that are of the “What Would Jesus Do?” and “Hoes Down Wid Jesus” variety.

    Is it then any wonder why even in the Masses celebrated today, these days, the Greatest Prayer of the Church has become little more than merely a liturgical performance replete with irreverence and vulgarity?

    I applaud DarwinCatholic and all those who in spite of these Pop fads that come & go, nevertheless continues to heed the High Call of the Ancient Church and cherish with right fondness the precious Treasures of Tradition contained therein and give due worship to our Master, who is both Lord & King.

  • DC

    Those were quoting explaining John 15:15 for bearing.

    Can someone explain to me where I am modernist? What has been the modernism in what I’ve shown and said?

  • Did Jesus really fully identify with us in our humanity, or, didn’t he?

    Does he have a courteous and humble familiarity with every aspect of our being, or, doesn’t he?

    He asks us to believe that he is one with us, and some seem unable to bear that thought…

  • were *quotes* sorry, typo there — I’m tired today

  • markdefrancisis:

    If you should actually believe that merely because your rather vulgar interpretation of the kind of “humanity” or “friendship” with Christ is somehow accomodated by Scripture or the Ancients themselves, then, by golly, go ahead and be “buddy, buddy” with your Homey, “J.C.”, enjoy conversations replete with profanity and utterly vile colloquialism, perhaps even have the Mass celebrated at a local strip bar — hey, why not?

    Didn’t Christ identify with us in our humanity and even entertained prostitutes?

    You might even take your peeps, Henry K., and all other homeys with you that are down wid dat.

    As for me, I prefer the pristine worship of Our Lord the way He should be worshipped and reverenced; giving due respect deserving of Lord & Creator and most especially Saviour & God!

  • e,

    Let him in…

  • Henry,

    I don’t think you’re being a modernist. I’m not sure where e. is getting that.


    Please throttle it back a bit. While “Jesus is my homeboy” talk can be egregious, no one is advocating it on this thread so far as I can tell. And while we’re personalities with history, we should try not to view things through that lens too much.

  • DC,

    Thank you.

  • Etienne Gilson [GOD AND PHILOSOPHY] notes that the God of the Deists was something like “my pal”, le dieu des bonnes gens, a supremely good fellow.

    Which is also to say, a gentleman “one who never offends”.

  • If there is anyone I found who qualifies as self serving it is ” trad catholics”. e. is a prime example. They will stop at nothing to shove their ” infallible ideas down everyone’s throat!