Your last two posts brought me back, I’m just not that interested in UFO type stuff, mostly because I agree with Musk, I doubt there is life on other planets, I do agree there is much in the material world that we can’t see, but these are the types of posts where you really thrive, I know it’s a tough balance, because on platforms like X, engagement may be off the charts with things like drones, and I’ve read your stuff there, it’s interesting but doesn’t really do it for me, obviously you can’t make decisions based on one reader, but this stuff is real world to me, and very interesting and worth the money imo
I am not trying to be condescending. Please forgive me in advance if I appear so.
I think the best way to discover God is by His teachings. Look at the Beatitudes. Dwell on them. What do they actually mean? I can’t express things like you, but I know the Catholic Faith is the True Faith through its two teachings of loving God and Our Neighbour. It is so very simple and sublime, and yes, very difficult. No other religion asks for this!
If someone hurts us, God wants us to forgive. Even if you can only do this with the highest faculty of your brain, and your lower body is protesting. We have to love. If we all really and truly aimed for this, the world would change.
I think we should not look at how the people in the Church act, but how we are supposed to act. We all fail, but we must keep trying. The saints are heroic because they practiced the two teachings. They loved God first and then sought out their neighbors, and they always forgave those that persecuted them.
My mind spins if I try to work out God, so I concentrate on the two things necessary. Or at least try to!
Hmm. On loving God and neighbor, Jesus was simply citing the Torah, as one would expect since he was asked what the most important commandment of the Torah was (Mt 22:34-40, to which he responded by citing two Torah commands: "Therefore, you shall love the Lord, your God, with your whole heart, and with your whole being, and with your whole strength." (Deut. 6:5) and "Take no revenge and cherish no grudge against your own people. You shall love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord" (Lev. 19:18).
It's fair to say that the emphasis placed here by Jesus on Lev 19:18 may have surprised the Pharisees who were questioning him, but it certainly was a commandment of the Torah that pre-dated Christ, and it also finds its way into the Talmud, the "oral Torah" of rabbinical Judaism.
No doubt these are core principles for both religions, but the idea many Christians seem to have that these are uniquely Christian isn't accurate.
Thank you for letting me know that, Brendan. I did not realize.
What about some of the teachings, when Our Lord says, no longer will it be an eye for an eye? We really must love and forgive, and turn the other cheek.the Catholic Church also loves its neighbors by sending out Missionaries, as Our Lord commanded. May I ask you if the Jewish religion also does this?
I was in Israel the month before the war started. I went to the historical museum, and I was amazed to see that there was a Jewish settlement in India. Do you suppose it was some attempt to convert people?
Catholics pray for the conversion of Jews . When I returned from Israel I had a Mass said for this intention, because I could see, particularly with the Orthodox Jews, their lives were not easy and they truly believe what they were doing was right. I could also see they were not overly fond of Christians! But again, I am judging individuals and should only look at the teaching.
Sorry, my thoughts tend to go everywhere, but do you suppose that the Jews obviously had this teaching, as you pointed out, but Our Lord expanded on it, and taught us more by word and action?
I think Jesus's emphasis on the teaching in Lev 19 surprised the Pharisees who were questioning him, but his answer was hard for them to refute because it was already in the Torah. It definitely was an emphasis that the Pharisees would not have placed at that level, however.
I agree that there are other material differences between Judaism and Christianity, clearly -- including the fact that Judaism does not seek converts (it accepts them, but only after a difficult process) and a great number of teachings, including the concept of turning the other cheek. My point was that the love your neighbor as yourself teaching is not uniquely Christian, as is often supposed.
Judaism's lack of proselytism has to do with its conception of Jews as "chosen" by God for the mission intended of them by God. Jews do not see Judaism as the sole means of salvation, and so would not see the lack of proselytism as being unloving towards others. Jews will normally tell you that non-Jews who are righteous and moral (under the Noahide laws and otherwise) will be saved, not only Jews.
I don't take it as condescending. I see your point, I just don't take it as proof. The Beatitudes could as easily have been dreamed up by a human philosopher as handed to us from on high by the Son of God.
Yes. I guess that is true. But we do know Jesus truly existed and rose from the dead. A clever, human philosopher could not do that. I will now leave the arguments to the scholars!
Thank you for sharing your difficulties so openly. Best wishes to you and your beautiful family.
Perhaps the old structured and ordered part of Catholicism just isn't viable in a modern context. It was created by pre-modern people that took a pre-modern view of the world for granted. The whole experience of modernity has created theological and conceptual challenges that the brighest minds of the church could hardly have imagined, so how is the church supposed to be equipped to resist them?
As evidence for this, the church (as well as other religions) tend to be strongest in countries and regions where the layer of modenity is thinnest. The old religion probably makes intuitive sense there in a way that it couldn't in a highly modern country.
Alternatively, consider the highly rigid bureaucratic structure of the church. Corruption is endemic to all such structures. In an era where everyone has access to internet and hence these institutions become transparent, why would a modern person tolerate corruption when it is visible to an extent it never could have been in the past? Even moreso, once you see the corruption, how difficult is it to believe that such an institution has moral authority?
You're on a roll. That response was spot on. For the record, padre Joe is one of the few religious people I still tune in and listen to. Whatever struggles I have with faith, I know he is sincere and genuinely cares about his flock. You can bounce stuff off that guy and he will listen, without any of that snarky eye rolling you encounter so often.
One other quick point. I find it infuriating when people claim to have direct messages from God, or private revelations that they must relay to you and then expect you to order your life around these claims that just can't be tested. I try to be cool and good natured, but as I get older my patience runs out quicker.
Steve, maybe one possible solution to your predicament is not to look at God or Jesus as exclusively Catholic. I realize all too well that’s the traditionalist bias, that “Jesus founded the Catholic Church“ and, as a result, all other Christians are second-class citizens spiritually. You are absolutely right about the cult-like nature of traditionalist Catholicism, if not Catholicism as a whole.
If you are serious about finding some sort of spiritual equilibrium in the midst of your recovery, may I suggest try reading the New Testament for yourself? Start with John’s Gospel. Don’t rely on commentaries; just read it for yourself. Remember, the earliest Christians did not have commentaries when they either read or heard the various “books“ (a.k.a. scrolls) that would comprise the New Testament, most of which was written before 70 A.D. and all of it before 100 A.D.
Once you finish with John, try Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The men who wrote these books actually witnessed Jesus in the flesh; John makes that statement numerous times in his gospel.
Try going beyond reading. Contemplate what you’ve read. It might be a good idea to keep a journal in which you write down everything you think and feel about these passages, whether positive or negative, or any questions that arise.
I can’t guarantee that any of your questions will be answered, or that any of your pain will be healed by doing this. Now might not be the right time. That’s for you to decide. But if you want any peace, you will need to confront your theological questions outside of any denominational or theological context at some point.
Please take this in the compassionate, empathetic spirit in which it’s meant.
Faith is mysterious. While the author, with great sincerity, has expressed a loss of faith in the Christian narrative, he mentions things like “spirt” (soul) which of course takes faith to believe in. We’ve yet to cut someone open and find their spirt. Most people would agree that they have an essence beyond the material, but there’s no way to prove this, as far as I know. It’s based on faith.
There's a lot more evidence of Jesus Christ's existence and truth of His teaching than of the Loch Ness monster. I find it interesting that you consistently ignore the saints, incorruptibles, Eucharistic miracles and Marian apparitions. You might say: everything about the saints (incorruptibles, Eucharistic miracles and Marian apparitions) is unverifiable. I don't think so--there are some living saints (or saints that lived in your lifetime, but are now gone). Who is a living saint right now? Probably Bishop Strictland and Cardinal Burke (who are both sort of being martyred from within the church). Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul 2nd were living saints. (Neither was perfect--I didn't like that Pope JP 2 neglected the sex scandal--he was a bit of a globe trotter--well, he was flawed, like all the saints. I don't know of any flaw in Mother Teresa, but she must have had a flaw or two, being human.)
A bad tree cannot produce good fruit. The Loch Ness monster did not start the university system or preserve Western Civ by having a collection of Irish monks painstakingly copy and recopy the great works of antiquity. We are the beneficiaries of their efforts. God wanted those things preserved.
The fruit produced by the saints is verifiable, which is probably why you ignore it. A bad tree cannot produce good fruit. You're not ready, Steve. That's my perception. You are not ready for God. That's why you ignore the saints. You will hopefully become ready.
There's a famous saying: "When the student is ready, the Teacher appears." St. Augustine went through a long period of torment before he had his epiphany in the garden.
Second, you are asking faith to do something it's not designed to do: provide proof. St. Paul said (Hebrews): (I am attaching an essay on faith being the substance of things hoped for here that I cannot improve upon.
So, I don't think you'll get your proof in the way you're asking for it. Also, were you to do so, it would be a great calling--God doesn't appear to people without calling them to great sacrifice and service. ("From those to whom much is given, much is required.")
I am hopeful for your finding greater assurances, nevertheless, perhaps more subtle than you are seeking, which is why you are missing them.
You really should be writing your own Substack. You threaten to make this thing with which I have such a tortured relationship seem almost beautiful again.
And if picking up the sparkly rocks gets me there someday, then so be it. Imma do my thing, and see where it leads me.
There's an irony in the tension between "Be ready, because you know not the day nor the hour" and "I'm in the early days of this journey and I can't rush or force it."
Just have to play the hand I was dealt, I suppose.
Great. Now I’m stuck with “Nessie is the same yesterday, today and forever” in my head!
LOLOLOL
Your last two posts brought me back, I’m just not that interested in UFO type stuff, mostly because I agree with Musk, I doubt there is life on other planets, I do agree there is much in the material world that we can’t see, but these are the types of posts where you really thrive, I know it’s a tough balance, because on platforms like X, engagement may be off the charts with things like drones, and I’ve read your stuff there, it’s interesting but doesn’t really do it for me, obviously you can’t make decisions based on one reader, but this stuff is real world to me, and very interesting and worth the money imo
I am not trying to be condescending. Please forgive me in advance if I appear so.
I think the best way to discover God is by His teachings. Look at the Beatitudes. Dwell on them. What do they actually mean? I can’t express things like you, but I know the Catholic Faith is the True Faith through its two teachings of loving God and Our Neighbour. It is so very simple and sublime, and yes, very difficult. No other religion asks for this!
If someone hurts us, God wants us to forgive. Even if you can only do this with the highest faculty of your brain, and your lower body is protesting. We have to love. If we all really and truly aimed for this, the world would change.
I think we should not look at how the people in the Church act, but how we are supposed to act. We all fail, but we must keep trying. The saints are heroic because they practiced the two teachings. They loved God first and then sought out their neighbors, and they always forgave those that persecuted them.
My mind spins if I try to work out God, so I concentrate on the two things necessary. Or at least try to!
Hmm. On loving God and neighbor, Jesus was simply citing the Torah, as one would expect since he was asked what the most important commandment of the Torah was (Mt 22:34-40, to which he responded by citing two Torah commands: "Therefore, you shall love the Lord, your God, with your whole heart, and with your whole being, and with your whole strength." (Deut. 6:5) and "Take no revenge and cherish no grudge against your own people. You shall love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord" (Lev. 19:18).
It's fair to say that the emphasis placed here by Jesus on Lev 19:18 may have surprised the Pharisees who were questioning him, but it certainly was a commandment of the Torah that pre-dated Christ, and it also finds its way into the Talmud, the "oral Torah" of rabbinical Judaism.
No doubt these are core principles for both religions, but the idea many Christians seem to have that these are uniquely Christian isn't accurate.
Thank you for letting me know that, Brendan. I did not realize.
What about some of the teachings, when Our Lord says, no longer will it be an eye for an eye? We really must love and forgive, and turn the other cheek.the Catholic Church also loves its neighbors by sending out Missionaries, as Our Lord commanded. May I ask you if the Jewish religion also does this?
I was in Israel the month before the war started. I went to the historical museum, and I was amazed to see that there was a Jewish settlement in India. Do you suppose it was some attempt to convert people?
Catholics pray for the conversion of Jews . When I returned from Israel I had a Mass said for this intention, because I could see, particularly with the Orthodox Jews, their lives were not easy and they truly believe what they were doing was right. I could also see they were not overly fond of Christians! But again, I am judging individuals and should only look at the teaching.
Sorry, my thoughts tend to go everywhere, but do you suppose that the Jews obviously had this teaching, as you pointed out, but Our Lord expanded on it, and taught us more by word and action?
I think Jesus's emphasis on the teaching in Lev 19 surprised the Pharisees who were questioning him, but his answer was hard for them to refute because it was already in the Torah. It definitely was an emphasis that the Pharisees would not have placed at that level, however.
I agree that there are other material differences between Judaism and Christianity, clearly -- including the fact that Judaism does not seek converts (it accepts them, but only after a difficult process) and a great number of teachings, including the concept of turning the other cheek. My point was that the love your neighbor as yourself teaching is not uniquely Christian, as is often supposed.
Judaism's lack of proselytism has to do with its conception of Jews as "chosen" by God for the mission intended of them by God. Jews do not see Judaism as the sole means of salvation, and so would not see the lack of proselytism as being unloving towards others. Jews will normally tell you that non-Jews who are righteous and moral (under the Noahide laws and otherwise) will be saved, not only Jews.
Thank you for your kind response and explanation. Take care.
I don't take it as condescending. I see your point, I just don't take it as proof. The Beatitudes could as easily have been dreamed up by a human philosopher as handed to us from on high by the Son of God.
Yes. I guess that is true. But we do know Jesus truly existed and rose from the dead. A clever, human philosopher could not do that. I will now leave the arguments to the scholars!
Thank you for sharing your difficulties so openly. Best wishes to you and your beautiful family.
Perhaps the old structured and ordered part of Catholicism just isn't viable in a modern context. It was created by pre-modern people that took a pre-modern view of the world for granted. The whole experience of modernity has created theological and conceptual challenges that the brighest minds of the church could hardly have imagined, so how is the church supposed to be equipped to resist them?
As evidence for this, the church (as well as other religions) tend to be strongest in countries and regions where the layer of modenity is thinnest. The old religion probably makes intuitive sense there in a way that it couldn't in a highly modern country.
Alternatively, consider the highly rigid bureaucratic structure of the church. Corruption is endemic to all such structures. In an era where everyone has access to internet and hence these institutions become transparent, why would a modern person tolerate corruption when it is visible to an extent it never could have been in the past? Even moreso, once you see the corruption, how difficult is it to believe that such an institution has moral authority?
These are all excellent observations.
You're on a roll. That response was spot on. For the record, padre Joe is one of the few religious people I still tune in and listen to. Whatever struggles I have with faith, I know he is sincere and genuinely cares about his flock. You can bounce stuff off that guy and he will listen, without any of that snarky eye rolling you encounter so often.
One other quick point. I find it infuriating when people claim to have direct messages from God, or private revelations that they must relay to you and then expect you to order your life around these claims that just can't be tested. I try to be cool and good natured, but as I get older my patience runs out quicker.
Yeah, Padre Kruppocito is my "F you God Bless" guy. We're buds. :D
Steve, maybe one possible solution to your predicament is not to look at God or Jesus as exclusively Catholic. I realize all too well that’s the traditionalist bias, that “Jesus founded the Catholic Church“ and, as a result, all other Christians are second-class citizens spiritually. You are absolutely right about the cult-like nature of traditionalist Catholicism, if not Catholicism as a whole.
If you are serious about finding some sort of spiritual equilibrium in the midst of your recovery, may I suggest try reading the New Testament for yourself? Start with John’s Gospel. Don’t rely on commentaries; just read it for yourself. Remember, the earliest Christians did not have commentaries when they either read or heard the various “books“ (a.k.a. scrolls) that would comprise the New Testament, most of which was written before 70 A.D. and all of it before 100 A.D.
Once you finish with John, try Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The men who wrote these books actually witnessed Jesus in the flesh; John makes that statement numerous times in his gospel.
Try going beyond reading. Contemplate what you’ve read. It might be a good idea to keep a journal in which you write down everything you think and feel about these passages, whether positive or negative, or any questions that arise.
I can’t guarantee that any of your questions will be answered, or that any of your pain will be healed by doing this. Now might not be the right time. That’s for you to decide. But if you want any peace, you will need to confront your theological questions outside of any denominational or theological context at some point.
Please take this in the compassionate, empathetic spirit in which it’s meant.
Faith is mysterious. While the author, with great sincerity, has expressed a loss of faith in the Christian narrative, he mentions things like “spirt” (soul) which of course takes faith to believe in. We’ve yet to cut someone open and find their spirt. Most people would agree that they have an essence beyond the material, but there’s no way to prove this, as far as I know. It’s based on faith.
There's a lot more evidence of Jesus Christ's existence and truth of His teaching than of the Loch Ness monster. I find it interesting that you consistently ignore the saints, incorruptibles, Eucharistic miracles and Marian apparitions. You might say: everything about the saints (incorruptibles, Eucharistic miracles and Marian apparitions) is unverifiable. I don't think so--there are some living saints (or saints that lived in your lifetime, but are now gone). Who is a living saint right now? Probably Bishop Strictland and Cardinal Burke (who are both sort of being martyred from within the church). Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul 2nd were living saints. (Neither was perfect--I didn't like that Pope JP 2 neglected the sex scandal--he was a bit of a globe trotter--well, he was flawed, like all the saints. I don't know of any flaw in Mother Teresa, but she must have had a flaw or two, being human.)
A bad tree cannot produce good fruit. The Loch Ness monster did not start the university system or preserve Western Civ by having a collection of Irish monks painstakingly copy and recopy the great works of antiquity. We are the beneficiaries of their efforts. God wanted those things preserved.
The fruit produced by the saints is verifiable, which is probably why you ignore it. A bad tree cannot produce good fruit. You're not ready, Steve. That's my perception. You are not ready for God. That's why you ignore the saints. You will hopefully become ready.
There's a famous saying: "When the student is ready, the Teacher appears." St. Augustine went through a long period of torment before he had his epiphany in the garden.
Second, you are asking faith to do something it's not designed to do: provide proof. St. Paul said (Hebrews): (I am attaching an essay on faith being the substance of things hoped for here that I cannot improve upon.
https://www.gotquestions.org/faith-substance-things-hoped-for.html
So, I don't think you'll get your proof in the way you're asking for it. Also, were you to do so, it would be a great calling--God doesn't appear to people without calling them to great sacrifice and service. ("From those to whom much is given, much is required.")
I am hopeful for your finding greater assurances, nevertheless, perhaps more subtle than you are seeking, which is why you are missing them.
You really should be writing your own Substack. You threaten to make this thing with which I have such a tortured relationship seem almost beautiful again.
And if picking up the sparkly rocks gets me there someday, then so be it. Imma do my thing, and see where it leads me.
There's an irony in the tension between "Be ready, because you know not the day nor the hour" and "I'm in the early days of this journey and I can't rush or force it."
Just have to play the hand I was dealt, I suppose.