This gospel always makes me thin\k about how the people knew where Jesus was going and got there before he did. Knowing the will of God something I find so challenging. You have the key which is prayer. Sometimes I even ask his mother where her Son is going so I can be on the same page. Perseverance is always helpful. Thanks for this reflection.
with respect to the inquiry "Do we go the distance that is necessary to be close to Jesus? Or do we let obstacles get in the way of our relationship with Him?"
the notion that a Catholic might undertake a mere relationship with our God was adopted from protestantism by many Catholics evangelists and teachers beginning in the early 1960's. In the whole scheme of Heaven and in the exercise of our faith and our sainthood this corrupted concept remains wholly insufficient as a response to our one true calling, so much so in fact that the notion is frankly silly in comparison to what is the nature of our real calling. it should probably also be noted here that even the devil has a personal relationship with God. it's just all bad.
As for ""Do we go the distance that is necessary to be close to Jesus?", last I checked, God is everywhere folks. Therefore our difficulty is not one of our actual proximity to God which is absolutely permeatingly near to us, but one of our individual recognition of Him while He is that consummately near.
Choose your teachers well, and remember that with God, precision including in language is everything.
It really gets down to the question “What is the purpose of man?”
The Baltimore Catechism framed it this way: “to know, to love, and serve the Lord.”
While it’s true that I could give a theological take—I could talk about Aquinas’ Summa Contra Gentiles & the desire of man to know all things—including his creator—which is not in man’s power, it relies on God’s revelation and His grace to experience this ultimately felicity.
There is certainly analogous language, typical of reflections like the above, about ordering our darkened intellect, disordered will & desires to the goodness of God. Someone may explain it as a distance between us and the unique way to salvation—Jesus Christ (LG 14). Some describe this part of the eschaton as a pilgrimage to the Kingdom. Of course, biblically we’d have to ask ourselves—what is the kingdom? Folks like Pope Benedict XVI tend to point to the 2nd person of the Trinity as what is meant by the coming of the kingdom.
Regardless, if precision is key, as you say it is then I would certainly caution you on saying something like:
“last I checked, God is everywhere folks. Therefore our difficulty is not one of our actual proximity to God which is absolutely permeatingly near to us, but one of our individual recognition of Him while He is that consummately near.”
Because I could pick up Richard Rohr’s Universal Christ and read similar statements. Of course, Rohr is more or less the poster boy for pantheism/panentheism and not exactly orthodox. Jesus isn’t the tree in my front yard.
At the end of the day, the heart of Lexis’ reflection is how does one order the powers of the soul properly to God, but sometimes it helps folks to understand it through personable relational language.
or maybe just simple and precise language as Jesus must have employed when addressing the crowd of astute theologians and bible scholars He had assembled and surrounded himself with as He led them all into a life of homelessness. I wonder also just how many of these esteemed individuals Jesus actually saw fit to include and be counted among that first learned group. What I find interesting is that for 2000 years or so that it has consumed multitudes of our best and brightest with dissection of the wrings and convictions of bunch of social outcasts and fisherman, and don't forget the study of those who have also studied them previously. it seems to me that there is a bit of irony in all that. Surely Jesus would have sought out only the best and brightest to become His disciples and successors, not unlike the few you have named here, but I digress. How then can you account for me? i have often postulated that the greatest benefit to our Church of the vocation of a theologians is that it seems to very effectively keep them off of the streets. in any event, there will always be some who just seem to be born knowing better, but that's life isn't it? Thanks for the correction. That is what it was, or was it not? Hard to tell actually so I would say mission accomplished.
A fantastic reflection on today’s gospel. One that gives me hope.
This gospel always makes me thin\k about how the people knew where Jesus was going and got there before he did. Knowing the will of God something I find so challenging. You have the key which is prayer. Sometimes I even ask his mother where her Son is going so I can be on the same page. Perseverance is always helpful. Thanks for this reflection.
AMEN
with respect to the inquiry "Do we go the distance that is necessary to be close to Jesus? Or do we let obstacles get in the way of our relationship with Him?"
the notion that a Catholic might undertake a mere relationship with our God was adopted from protestantism by many Catholics evangelists and teachers beginning in the early 1960's. In the whole scheme of Heaven and in the exercise of our faith and our sainthood this corrupted concept remains wholly insufficient as a response to our one true calling, so much so in fact that the notion is frankly silly in comparison to what is the nature of our real calling. it should probably also be noted here that even the devil has a personal relationship with God. it's just all bad.
As for ""Do we go the distance that is necessary to be close to Jesus?", last I checked, God is everywhere folks. Therefore our difficulty is not one of our actual proximity to God which is absolutely permeatingly near to us, but one of our individual recognition of Him while He is that consummately near.
Choose your teachers well, and remember that with God, precision including in language is everything.
It really gets down to the question “What is the purpose of man?”
The Baltimore Catechism framed it this way: “to know, to love, and serve the Lord.”
While it’s true that I could give a theological take—I could talk about Aquinas’ Summa Contra Gentiles & the desire of man to know all things—including his creator—which is not in man’s power, it relies on God’s revelation and His grace to experience this ultimately felicity.
There is certainly analogous language, typical of reflections like the above, about ordering our darkened intellect, disordered will & desires to the goodness of God. Someone may explain it as a distance between us and the unique way to salvation—Jesus Christ (LG 14). Some describe this part of the eschaton as a pilgrimage to the Kingdom. Of course, biblically we’d have to ask ourselves—what is the kingdom? Folks like Pope Benedict XVI tend to point to the 2nd person of the Trinity as what is meant by the coming of the kingdom.
Regardless, if precision is key, as you say it is then I would certainly caution you on saying something like:
“last I checked, God is everywhere folks. Therefore our difficulty is not one of our actual proximity to God which is absolutely permeatingly near to us, but one of our individual recognition of Him while He is that consummately near.”
Because I could pick up Richard Rohr’s Universal Christ and read similar statements. Of course, Rohr is more or less the poster boy for pantheism/panentheism and not exactly orthodox. Jesus isn’t the tree in my front yard.
At the end of the day, the heart of Lexis’ reflection is how does one order the powers of the soul properly to God, but sometimes it helps folks to understand it through personable relational language.
or maybe just simple and precise language as Jesus must have employed when addressing the crowd of astute theologians and bible scholars He had assembled and surrounded himself with as He led them all into a life of homelessness. I wonder also just how many of these esteemed individuals Jesus actually saw fit to include and be counted among that first learned group. What I find interesting is that for 2000 years or so that it has consumed multitudes of our best and brightest with dissection of the wrings and convictions of bunch of social outcasts and fisherman, and don't forget the study of those who have also studied them previously. it seems to me that there is a bit of irony in all that. Surely Jesus would have sought out only the best and brightest to become His disciples and successors, not unlike the few you have named here, but I digress. How then can you account for me? i have often postulated that the greatest benefit to our Church of the vocation of a theologians is that it seems to very effectively keep them off of the streets. in any event, there will always be some who just seem to be born knowing better, but that's life isn't it? Thanks for the correction. That is what it was, or was it not? Hard to tell actually so I would say mission accomplished.