it is not my job
to fix christianity
or to prop it up
it is enough
to sit in the presence
of God
- i think i know who wrote this
but i'm not saying
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Blog Archive
-
▼
2011
(61)
-
▼
November
(13)
- gift horse
- political crystalization
- reason does the cosmic reel with faith
- at least someone has looked at the problem or the ...
- reminiscence
- prayer of st. gertrude
- try this on
- a farmer strolls down the urban boulevard
- accidentals and art
- tracking the downturn
- back to where you once belonged
- that men would lady chivalry once again entertain
- ok dostoyevsky
-
▼
November
(13)
24 comments:
You sure seem friendly with Olson.
Is Olson's cheezy, sentimental conservatism Christianity, jh?
Hint--not at all. Like his odd U of Chi. crony JAckaL he's not even a credible jew
i think kirbeez real religion is surrealism
funny
you'd think just about everything has a place in that realm
i've never personally met olson
not even sure if he really exists
i may for all i know be mucking it up with a mainframe with a name somewhere
i think kirby knows at least i'd liek to think i know he knows that life is essentially sort of crazy and it's important to be humorous about all that life isn't all that interesting the more it's take seriously the less intereesting it becomes no try levity try simple irony try odd humour these are all very useful rhetorical devices
kirby uses them well
he's a teacher in that regard
i'd like to think i could be friendly with anyone who shows up or on any blog i go to
you seem J to want to fight it out like a hyped up computer political wargame or something
i'd just as soon babble almost meaninglessly
i like this quote for instance
it calls for radical acceptance by doing nothing...a dance of faith and reason
jh
J,
FYI, JADL has no association with the University of Chicago, and never has so far as I know. What I know about him is that he was a graduate student with Kirby at the University of Washington. He later worked at Hillsdale College, a religiously conservative College in Michigan. He's left there, and in Nova Scotia, where one or both of him and Emmy are working.
KO, fighting for Surrealism, like Dali, Breton, et al.???? Nyet. Breton would send some Anubis- headed thugs out to Poughkeepsie--or whereever KO.com lives--to take care of it.
JADL has written some things praising the Uni.of Chi. school of economics--you know, gold standard, slash taxes and all govt. programs, allow brokers free rein,and replace the US Constitution with Ayn Rand, etc. KO the teaparty surrealist approves.
J,
I don't doubt that JADL finds much to like in the UChicago economics department, which consists largely of monetarist descendants of Milton Friedman. But that doesn't make him of the University. At most, he's a syncophant of the majority voice within a single (albeit, influential) department.
The Univerity of Chicago has a diverse set of views represented by its students and faculty. On one hand, this is the University at which Barach Obama taught, at which his wife worked as VP for Community Medicine, and at which Austan Goolsbee (BHO's earliest economic advisor, and an important member of his administrative team until recently) worked and works. On the other, we have prominent conservatives like Robert Lucas, Richard Posner, and Eugene Fama in Economics, and Richard Epstein in Law, to name but a few.
I've been a member of the faculty of the University of Chicago for more than thirty years, and I'm going to resist drive-by pigeonholing of my institution, especially when it tends to equate me with JADL. I don't consider that to be a reasonable confusion.
"Sycophantic"
Did I equate you to JADL, Doc Stu? No. Id like to think there are some moderate professors at Uni. of Chi.--(but the default view seems to be Greenspamism.) A possible world as it were. It's also amusing that ..hermano jh just brushes off KO's routine catholic bashing (perhaps has subsided--but IIRC he was calling catholics communists a few months back. Along with all demos, or those who don't worship Foxnews, Sarah Palin and the TP< etc)
J,
I don't want to pursue this much further, but I would like to reach some sort of cordial understanding.
Did I equate you to JADL, Doc Stu?
No, but you have essentially equated UChicago with JADL. There is a grain of truth to this as regards the Econ Department, Business School, and Law School, but they're hardly the entire institution, nor representative thereof. And even within those departments, there are folks that don't hew to the conservative line. I think you'd be better served taking individuals as they are. JADL is responsible for his own views, and neither the University nor its Economics Department are.
Id like to think there are some moderate professors at Uni. of Chi
There are plenty of moderates, plenty of liberals, and plenty of conservatives. Chicago is a place that people come to because they want to argue against the best, it's not a place to go if you want to ride with a like-minded herd.
As for Kirby, I find little to like in his political views, but as a person, it seems to me that he's generally good natured and humorous. I suppose that my experience at Chicago has conditioned me to distinguish between political views and personal character. One of my mentors here is a by-the-book establishment Republican, who thinks it's a good thing that Bush crashed the economy, because otherwise Obama'd have money to spend and there'd be no stopping him. But he's also generous with his time and talent, a friend who can be counted on under any circumstances, and someone whose character and integrity is beyond question.
This isn't to say that I'm naive about character, although I'd say that I'm more charitable than you are. There are some real jerks here, too. But I can't say that I've seen an observable correlation between political views and small/self-mindedness.
jh,
I'd like to return to the original post, because I think it is a great starting point in exploring the gap -- if you have any interest in doing so -- between Catholic spiritual intuition and Lutheran spiritual intuition.
Because Lutherans, while fully recognizing the futility of completing the task of fixing up Christianity, have an instinctive desire to make progress on the project anyway. This instinct works itself out by discarding the broken and unnecessary theological pieces, which it seems Catholics are bound by tradition and character to continue to cherish.
it was said i think by one timothy radcliffe OP that he saw the benedictine presence in the church the charism of being that within the context of a regular and chanted daily round of prayer there was this understanding amongst the monks that its' just OK to Be being and praying on any given day are enough one needn't do much more o maybe read some and garden some and help out here or there but really to sit to stand to kneel and pray for long hours is not an uncommon thing to see in my world....there is the applied meditation tradition as well stemming from van ruuysbock and julian of norwich a way of constant prayer
the no holds barred approach to liturgy takes a lot of time especially getting things right and setting them in good form this is all very labor intensive devotions to saints these are interesting
i take it lutherans are happy doers they don't scoff at doing
there are lots of catholics who master the art of being...with whatever purpose their main thing is to be and pray
but drama too
i think the reform churches squelched natural drama like the stations of the cross and processions
but i know so little of the lutheran church
i went to a lutheran funeral last year it was OK...heavy on the eulogie...more than the lady would have wanted
even i today will on occasion sit before the blessed sacrament and "space out" for a long while just BEING
yes catholics have these wild characters called archivists and librarians these cats stow everything away....adn then there's the romantic historians like these cats get hooked on eras
but stu
what unnecessary theological pieces
the broken ill appropriated things that catholics might do well to throw away
if you bring up the popes red shoes i will be so PISSED ;-)
jh
yo
i think the author of the statement experienced a rare moment of solidarity or sobernoszt
where an insight into the kaleidescope of christianity posed no problem whatsoever...i've been wrong before but i think that's it
jh,
There is no Lutheran objection to the idea that one should simply "sit in the presence of God." Jesus himself had a pattern in which engagement alternated with retreat and contemplation. Our objection comes from the notion that sitting in the presence of God suffices. It's important, we believe, that the preparation afforded by sitting in the presence of God should not end there, but it should be carried out into the world.
i take it lutherans are happy doers they don't scoff at doing there are lots of catholics who master the art of being...with whatever purpose their main thing is to be and pray
I think this is not quite right. There are, for example, many a good Lutheran hospital out there, but were outnumbered 20-to-1 by good Catholic hospitals. Clearly, many Catholics work, while some devote themselves to spiritual matters. This is true as well in the Lutheran Church, but our doctrine encourages a balance: we should all do some of both. Theologically, this works itself out through a de-emphasis on orders, which I might try to explain to a Catholic mind as having to less with "bringing the clergy down" than with "lifting the laity up." But in fairness, there is some of both.
but drama too
i think the reform churches squelched natural drama like the stations of the cross and processions
This is much more true of the radical reformation than the Lutherans. We don't do stations of the cross, but we do do processions. Even, on occasion, the full "bells and smells" :-). And strange though it may seem, the LCMS church in which my daughter was married had a full set of stations of the cross, built out of driftwood by a Catholic monk. These were more objects of art than ritual devotion, but ritual devotion was not absent.
Lutheran sanctuaries tend to be plainer than Catholic sanctuaries, out of particular Lutheran piety that worries more about idolatry and the necessity for humility before God, but they're hardly denuded of art, just restrained.
i went to a lutheran funeral last year it was OK...heavy on the eulogie
It would not surprise me if Lutheran eulogies are a bit heavier than Catholic, but I suspect that variation within groups is much larger than variation between groups.
what unnecessary theological pieces
the broken ill appropriated things that catholics might do well to throw away
if you bring up the popes red shoes i will be so PISSED ;-)
Lutherans are far more inclined to throw out the pope than his shoes :-). We have this very useful notion of adiaphora -- matters of indifference. The shoes would be adiaphora.
I'll step back from claiming that there are pieces of theology that Catholics should throw out, and instead address a few things that Lutherans have.
We repect Mary, and consider her to be the Mother of our Lord, but there is no Lutheran tradition of venerating Mary apart from Christ. We would not see the veneration of Mary as broken, but rather as unnecessary.
From the Lutheran perspective, a celebate clergy is an unnecessary innovation that has a very late historical date, c. 1000 in Italy, and c. 1400 in Germany. I'll note that Orthodox clergy are not celebate, by way of pointing out that this means that the tradition of clergy celebacy in the Western church necessarily post-dates the great schism.
There's also a Lutheran bias against monastic orders, which I understand is something you might be inclined to take personally. Let me leaven this by noting that the Lutheran objection focussed largely on having novices take orders prior to puberty, i.e., at an age when there was not an informed consent w.r.t. accepting a celebate life. There was no such objection when orders were accepted by adults, and indeed, there is are Lutheran monks, although they're comparatively few in number. It is not an issue for a Lutheran if a person feels an authentic call to a celebate life -- we get piety. It is an issue if there is a sense of obligation or coercion.
i cannot apologize for the chaotic frenzy into which the medieval church cast itself in regards to celibacy...the constricting legalism was a result of widespread abuses in marriage in spending money on mistresses on multiple families etc etc etc probably even to some degree on perversity i can't imagine why not
however
from the beginning there have always been men and women who saw that there vocation in life was singular and i would offer that the vast majority of these people have been good righteous and virtuous all monastic orders required it franciscans dominicans jesuits all the missionary orders all went along with the requirement because in brief it made sense...the theology was bolstered and understood in terms of sacrifice and a way of personal freedom in service...and again i would argue that for the most part and for the vast majority who chose such a life it was fruitful and good...one might argue further that the self sacrifice and immediate identity with christ allowed for forms of service that married life would not allow easily
and the evidence is that for women it was an enormous freedom with excitement and challenge galore and so many of them were up to the challenge the list of women saints with heroic narratives is hardly exhaustive just in the last two hundred years it is an amazing tale simply amazing
these days the arguments are that it is a level playing field married unmarried these are vocational decisions nobody gets to sit higher on the holiness chair-that being said i discern a widespread resurgence in dedication on the part of lay people to be supportive and honoring of priesthood and religious life
the defining of sacraments meant the elevation of vocational commitment
orthodox bishops must be unmarried
orthodox clergy make a decision while in seminary if by year 2 the continuation is in the married state well that is fine if it is to be celibate it is a life commitment at that point a celibate orthodox priest who chooses to marry steps down from the priesthood - i think they permit a deacon role to continue
the blessed mother is the devotional object of prayer for courage and continuity in chastity
we speak more of chastity
celibacy is merely the unmarried state
one could be celibate and sexually active and remain celibate
chastity is incumbent upon all christians
my sense is that the ordering of life vocations was working itself out in the first christian communities there were some who were completely dedicated to christ with their very lives men and women who made total time consuming commitments - even in the 12 century most priests were unmarried
.
that being said i believe wholeheartedly that married life as a sacrament carries with it the very essence of practical riches we can know from god...the daily application of love mercy forgiveness...the married couple as a 'sign" of god's love in the world has never been as important as it is today...i dare say
given the state of sexual mayhem in our culture it would seem to me that the challenge to live a completely singular and chaste life would find some excitement from interested disciples
when young men and women get to the age that they are taking christ and his words to heart the option for total commitment must ring in the heart....somewhat...i would think
anyway
the vocation is as old as the church
it is not without its perils however
lord lord
no
not without its perils
all the saint adulation is christocentric
our mariology has come around to a very well focussed christocentrism
i think in desperate times people leaned on mary heavily much like children will run to their mother
and this created a devotional imbalance...but very little was ever harmed by overemphasizing mary
nobody ever went astray for praying the hail mary
you bring up good points stu
our consciousness will always have to be directed to the table of eucharist
it is there we will work out our shared communion
it seems far more hopeful today than it did say 50 years ago
your wonderful requiem is testament to that
thanks
i will comment later
right now i'm off a travellin again
but i will blog when i can
you and J just kill me sometimes
and kirby
sheesh what a bunch of goofballs
knuckleheads even
jh
jh,
I'm really enjoying this.
You've brought up some perspectives regarding clergy celebacy which balance my earlier remarks. I did not know that Orthodox bishops are celebate, and it surprises me, in as much as 1 Tim 3:2 specifies "married only once" among the qualification for bishops, and Titus 1:7 occurs in a context in which the behavior of the candidate's children is an important part of the discernment process for church leadership.
There is no Lutheran objection regarding those who are called to and chose a celebate life. As I've noted, there are Lutheran monastic orders, and there are Lutheran clergy who have chosen a celebate life. But it is not something we encourage or discourage, except perhaps at the level of little old ladies who persist in introducing their Pastor to unattached women of an appropriate age.
I'm aware of some of the abuses that lead the medieval church to emphasize and ultimately insist on clergy celebacy, in particular, that in some places, that bishops had become a de facto hereditary princes. The Lutheran criticism was that the "cure" was itself an evil (in breaking up existing marriages) and in tying one kind of call (to the priesthood) to another (to a celebate life), and so creating a coercive pressure to accept the obligations of a call that is not felt, in order to accept the obligations of another that is; and even more sharply that the "cure" had not been successful, in that the abuses of office that happened before continued afterwards. Having said this, it is our sense (as outsiders) that common medieval abuses of ecclesiastical offices are uncommon today.
celibacy is merely the unmarried state
one could be celibate and sexually active and remain celibate
chastity is incumbent upon all christians
Interesting. This is not how Lutherans understand the term celebate. We understand it as a state of refraining from sexual activity; and that celebates are unmarried because sexual activity is integral to marriage. As for chastity, this is a word whose primary meaning for us has moved from abstemious to staying faithfully within the bounds of appropriate sexual behavior, i.e., not at all, or within marriage, with marriage taken seriously as a lifetime estate. So I think we use the word chaste with essentially the same meaning as you do.
Let me suggest that you're using singular and celebate as synonyms, which seems inefficient, whereas I'm using celebate to mean singular and chaste, so that the three words (singular, celebate, and chaste) have three distinct meanings.
given the state of sexual mayhem in our culture it would seem to me that the challenge to live a completely singular and chaste life would find some excitement from interested disciples
Yes, and I think it does. One of my lawyer's daughters recently became a nun. She's my daughter's age, brimming with intelligence, energy, and commitment. Her choice means that her gifts will be dedicated to the work of the church, entirely rather than in part.
But I think it is even more important today that chaste married witnesses be visible as such. The married chaste are a witness that a life of faith and faithfulness is life-giving, and this is an estate that is accessible to the many, and not just to the few.
our consciousness will always have to be directed to the table of eucharist
it is there we will work out our shared communion
it seems far more hopeful today than it did say 50 years ago
Amen. And it does seem more hopeful. That said, it's a sharp question for my wife and me today. Will she be permitted to commune at her own mother's funeral? It is an open question. We know my brother-in-law would say "no," as he has before. But the question is not for him to answer, but for the priest.
What does it mean if the priest says "yes"? What does it mean if he says "no"?
wow this has been
a really interesting discussion
as always
i learn a lot
when jh and stu get going
i didn't see the quote
as having anything to do
with catholic or lutheran
sensibilities
i took it more as indicating
that it is God's job
to defend christianity
to its detractors
my role is simply to be
a faithful christian
but i've sure enjoyed
listening in on this
catholic-lutheran dialog
thanks
and happy thanksgiving to all
the Lutheran objection focussed largely on having novices take orders prior to puberty, i.e., at an age when there was not an informed consent w.r.t. accepting a celebate life.
According to legend didnt Herr Luther..take some novice-nuns supposedly---and administer the Sacrament like right in front of the congregation? Voonderbar.
Actually I find the protestant hatred of monasticism somewhat interesting--both lutherans and calvinists often smashed up monasteries, convents .etc. Catholics circa 1600 in England were more or less enemies of the State (tho' granted...cats detested protestant-loyalists as well--still do in Eire).
Happy feast of the Guajolotes y'all.
J,
According to legend didnt Herr Luther..take some novice-nuns supposedly---and administer the Sacrament like right in front of the congregation? Voonderbar.
I have no knowledge of any story that fits even an approximation of this framing.
The closest match that I'm aware of is that after the split, he married a former nun.
Legend holds Luther
consummated his marriage to his nun-fraulein in front of the congregation (whether consensually or not, who knows..and he had other brides, probably--an anabaptist thang--like proto-mormons). Luther's essays are quite interesting. At one point he says Turks are preferable to catholics, does he not (and refused to help the catholics fighting the Turk in Vienna--in fact ordered the saxon princes not to, right). And some virulent anti-semitism. ML also supported the execution of anabaptist rebels, and decorating the city gates--Aachen?-- with their heads. He generally sounds like a 15th century Jerry Falwell, IMO.
J,
Legend holds Luther consummated his marriage to his nun-fraulein in front of the congregation
Let me note that you have a remarkable gift for tracking down invective, as well as remarkable gullibility regarding the veracity thereof, and a singular lack of discernment as to whether and how to introduce/sustain the contentions thereof in debate.
I believe I've already made as clear as possible that I do not believe that this "legend" has the slightest veracity. As such, you add nothing to the discussion by simply repeating the claim. You need to bring some evidence to the discussion.
I'm perfectly willing to discuss in an honest and open manner both Luther's theological strengths and his occasional human failings. I'm not willing to play whack-a-mole with lies.
jh, et. al.,
What does it mean if the priest says "yes"? What does it mean if he says "no"?
This didn't play out either of the ways I'd have expected. We didn't get a chance to speak with the priest before the funeral mass -- he spoke during it. And what he said was no less than an invitation: "If you are admitted to communion in your church, you're welcome to commune with us here today." We are, and we did. [Let me tweak jh here just a bit by noting that I do not believe that the priest intended to make a distinction between churches and ecclesical communions ;-).]
This, I felt, was pitch perfect, as well as singular. None of my friends or family had every heard anything like this from a Catholic priest before. It was taken, as I believe it was offered, as a one-time dispensation; as if the Catholic Church, having accepted the responsibility of performing the funeral for my mother-in-law, also accepted that the obligations of hospitality entailed a unusually broad definition of fellowship.
I am grateful.
Jeez Stu. A bit farcical but actually based on the truth--and you ducked the issue with the execution of the Anabapists--Luther's..militaristic tendencies displayed in living color (as that songwriting team Engels & Marx thought --Im not exactly approving of their product..but worth considering for a few nano-seconds).
stu
i'm glad to hear
how things worked out
at your mother-in-laws funeral
praise God
for this moment of charity
great conversation
succinct confession giving rise
to bright insight
i noticed at mass today that
the linguistic changes
a return to a more literal latin sort of english
has forced me to be more cognizant of what i am actually saying
stu your insights into eucharist sound very 'catholic'
jh
jh,
Welcome back from your travels!
noticed at mass today that
the linguistic changes
a return to a more literal latin sort of english
has forced me to be more cognizant of what i am actually saying
We should change up liturgical language more often, but whenever possible, we should do it together. There's a value to getting comfortable in liturgy, and in letting familiar words wash over us and put our minds at peace. But there's also a value to shaking things up a bit. It's funny that the very thing that can lead to healing can also lead to complacency, while the very thing that gets our attention also causes stress.
stu your insights into eucharist sound very 'catholic'
There's not much difference between the Lutheran theology of the Eucharist and the Catholic one. Both confessions teach that Christ is truly present in the elements. Both confessions view communion as sacramental, as a means of grace. Lutherans explicitly tie communion to baptism (in that the baptismal promises are renewed through communion). I don't know if this is a Lutheran innovation, something that is more natural for us to do because for us they're the only sacraments, or part of our common heritage. Catholics insist on transubstantiation, Lutherans don't, and to the extent that we speculate over the meaning of "real presence," we tend towards consubstantiation, but without doctrinal constraint. There are transubstantiationists among us.
The agreement over essentials makes me optimistic about ecumenical efforts between the Lutherans and the Catholics. We don't lack for compatibility, only for wisdom.
Lutherans....catholics
Yes push 'em and one notes they both agree on the greatness of that old manichean tyrant Augustine (regardless of Aquinas's occasional...stoical lapses, IMO).
:|
Post a Comment