No Rabies in Spain Peter? (I like your website by the way) hhmm .. doesn't feel like that when you meet the anti-pilgrim dog though does it...
All true and to the point - excellent stuff - though I did think I might have opened a can of worms with the diet of worms (yes, I know, not original)
... and, yes, I think feast year as well. And the thing is ... well, the thing is, if we thought it would work in that way we'd do it on our knees wouldn't we - and I include those who call themselves atheists in that. So, intentions. True. Think of the Jesuits, later works of Augustine - apart from utterly abandoning his partner and children, never to mention them or see them again, also the first man to logically prove why it was a good idea to burn a heretic. The vegetarian Austrian house-painter with the one testicle and the mad moustache who thought he was protecting Germany and Western Europe and civilisation itself ... oh dear ...born in the same year and week as Charlie Chaplin too ...
I meant by intentions exactly what you just wrote Rosu, ones acts done with humility ... but then, I agree .. we have to be so careful we don't end up being proud about how humble we are .....
It is is very tricky thing to prefer your own interpretation to that of church tradition. Too much of a need to "free thought" and independence can lead to pride in oneself, and that is lethal. I'd rather patiently and quietly jump through possibly meaningless hoops, if only to learn obedience and humility. I have only to gain and nothing to lose, whereas if I rely on myself, my chances of going astray are much, much higher (been there sooo many times).
Well absolutely. and protestants and calvinists and all others could get in the ring here - what we have I think is that we are all basically on the same side, so, as a friend of mine says "lets keep it fluffy". ...So. But Christianity didn't just appear fully fledged and nor is it unchangeable now. Thousands of people have had strong views, theological arguments abound/ed. Many schools of thought ... out of that came the Catholic church as we know it so, all accepted thoughts, theological positions, and beliefs once started as the dangerous heresies of small and initially rather nervous voices. Societies change from the fringes inwards.
So, if you are driven to see something in a certain way that seems at variance with the commonly held view what should you do? Wycliffe was burnt because he believed that the Bible should be in languages readable by all, yet now it is ... If you have spent years seriously examining documents, interpretations - and you love Christianity and the Church and God and the miracle of Being Here and you are an academic and God has given you the intellect to question .. then what do you do? What do you do?
What you do is to wrestle for years. What you do is to test yourself constantly to try and see if this is ego or direction ...I'm not talking here of shallow thought, blase ideas, fashions, but deep yearning anguish, deep longing for certainty. But, look, after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 74 Jewish Christianity disappeared, gone. This left a few scattered churches desperately expecting the imminent coming of the new world order and a small handful of preachers. Out of that has come this - now how astounding is that? If you were a betting person in the first or second century where would you put your money? On a handful of 'obsessional cultists' or the Emperor worshipping religion of the most powerful military empire the world had ever seen? Crikey!
So how do we know which theological idea is a ball we should run with because it will be needed in, say, 200 years, or is a heretical nonsense that we should banish from our minds?
This is not easy. This has never been easy.
For me, a Unitarian Christian, (God singular and Jesus as Paul names him at the beginnings of Romans - "a man chosen by God") and an ordained minister too - this has been a lifelong problem. I 'know' things from academic research that seem to be at variance with the given story ... but Amaris, I think, is mainly right here for if you read the words put into the mouth of Jesus what you find is a personality emerging. This is not a fake, not a ruse written by a team of clever people - it doesn't read that way, it isn't glib, correct, in order - no conmen in the world would write the Gospels the way they are written ... what comes over if you really let go is that, although it is all written from memory, 2nd, 3rd - even 4th hand - the person comes through, this is no fraud - this is deepest reality revealed within a person - which is stunning. Then, if this is so (and I cannot see it any other way) should I do what Amaris suggests and use the whole Catholic given as a vehicle of surrender into true humility and love - for there is nothing to lose, nothing ..... which would mean, for me, accepting certain things that I just do not believe are true or do I go for the compromise?
One of the main problems of course, is that the documents come from another time. We read them now and can't help saying "is this true, can I believe this?" whereas 1900 years ago they said "what does this mean, what can I learn from this?".
HHmm... if push comes to shove, regardless of my 'fine' thoughts, I'm in the foxhole with Amaris.
Just a note here - I have no wish to try and convert anyone to my point of view - believers or non-believers, I am only sharing my viewpoints, in friendship, in peace - anyway, I shall see most of you on the Camino this summer!