Posted by John on November 14, 2001 at 17:08:35:
In Reply to: Re: verses- help me find one or more posted by jonvon on November 13, 2001 at 23:39:44:
: Karol Joseph Wojtyla
Yeah that's it, I was just too lazy to look it up.
Incidently I think he is probably one of the saddest and holiest people alive. Sad because I think from what i have read by him and seen in his eyes in photos, that He realizes that he is the head of this massive megalith of an organization that dictates so much power over people world-wide, and he realizes that he can't just throw off the oppression that comes inherent in it. I think he knows that he is just a man, that the church is just an organization, and yet he is in a position that will not allow him to outright declare that he is not a demi-god and that people should think for themselves rather than hang on his every word. Of course I have never talked with the man so I could be way off base. But i think he is Holy for these very reasons. His life is incredible. It still continues to be. His knowledge and experience are overwhelming.
:: i guess your argument seems to center around accepting or not accepting the authority of an institution... again for me this whole authority thing just doesn't exist much. i think i tend to think more about the truth that sparked the revolution in thought that gave birth to the movement that solidified into the institution. i don't really care about what claims the institution or denomination or whatever makes. these claims to "ultimate authority" like papal infallibility or what have you just don't really add up to anything that makes a difference in my life at all. you know? i don't sit at home worrying about it, it just doesn't affect me.
I understand this, but it does have a great impact on many people. I often listen to the Catholic radio station and they have many people who understand and who recognize things as you say, but there are many, both inside the organization and who call in that hang on the catechism and papal circulars like they are the very words of God. The way many political zealots hang on the dots and commas of the constitution. I've heard countless callers asking, "so as a Catholic am I allowed to beleive..." and, "I was just wondering what the official church teaching on ... is?" This is check-your-brain-at-the-door faith. And even though some we know may feel differently about him, i admire the Bishop of St. Pete for at least tackling these questions and in a nicely Stevesque fashion setting people straight.
Personally, I've always felt like I have a tremndous respect for people who can operate in this context of such massive history and such excellent theology that has come from the Catholic church. But like most of my heroes of faith, I am far too much of a renegade to be able to do the same.
: if you are saying here that an institution won't suffice because you have to make your own choices about things, moral choices or whatever... hm i don't really know if i'm following you here. wait, maybe you are saying that (i'll use the catholic church as an example):
: 1. the church takes a stance on some issue like marriage for instance
: 2. you make decisions based on the church's stance, like not getting divorced or something
: ...however for YOU this is bunk because you feel that your existential responsibility is to determine your own path. am i off here?
No you've got it better than I had expected. (It's so nice to not lose you at the existential remark. You've read what i've read!) sorry private moment of joy. Not that it's a superiority thing at all, just that there is too much bound up in the word "existential" to be able to explain it to anyone who hasn't studied it and you have, so I don't have to try and back up this massive train.
The only thing I would add is that I don't think there is anything wrong with using church stance as a GUIDELINE. There is no point in ignoring the study of others, it can be valuable. Plus there is a whole lot to be said for the validating power of concensus. But one can't excuse themselves from having to evaluate the situation on their own, completely and thoroughly, before determining their own path. See the value of concensus comes in here: if my path that was arrived at of my own discovery and experience conincides with the stance of the church, I can feel very secure that my path is the right one because there is this large body of concensus to verify that my experience is valid. Honestly if you look at church history this is what the founders intended. Not that papal decrees become laws for citizens in the Catholic Empire, but that each person seeking God would have a means of confirming if their revelations and discoveries were valid, or as Chip put it, just bad pizza.
: hm. i think i agree with you here, at least to some degree. i've always thought it was a little silly for anyone to claim some kind of "direct link" with the apostle peter via the laying on of hands through all the popes. historically the catholics might be totally right about that, and who knows maybe there is something to it beyond just a historical link. BUT i think that truth is eternal, transcendent and beyond the grasp of anyone to control. i am always listening for that "tremor in the force" whenever i hear anything at all, whether it is coming from a priest or a pastor or a medicine man or a professor or my wife or some guy typing madly on the message board. i don't tend to pay attention much to the "corporate voice" of any institution or company or government because people in those institutions are often just trying to cover their asses and protect corporate assets. there isn't much to learn from such pronouncements. but the priest saying mass on sunday doesn't have quite that same corporate axe to grind (hopefully) so there is a good chance that i will hear something that might change my life in some profound way. its the glimmers shining in the corners that matter. i guess what i am saying is that the claims, true or untrue, of some central governing body just really don't matter when it comes down to the practice of my faith, whether i am practising it in a big church with stained glass in the windows or in a smoke filled room with people arguing and drinking coffee and mountain dew and everyone with a bible open (i've been in both of those rooms and they were both wonderful).
Yes I firmly beleive that God reaches us instead of the other way around. All that we call "ways to experience God" i.e. worship, prayer, tongues, all of the "spiritual manifestations" are really more ways that God chooses to touch us in our foolishness. It makes no difference to Him how we get there because ultimately we are just children flying to the moon in a cardboard box. If we are going to experience him it will be because he consciously wills it and humbles himself such that we can grasp him. I remember being at church when this idea hit me. I was literally laughing at the utter silliness of everyone with their arms raised and heads to the side and eyes closed and smiles and all, then my gaze turned to myself sitting in my wild shirt doing none of those things out of obstinance and I laughed at myself as well. God doesn't care about half of the things we think he does. I am convinced of this. That's why Jesus kept blowing people's traditions and "sacred ways" out of the water. The man chose to hang out with drunks and whores instead. These people were real!
: : I guess the postulation that gave rise to this whole Refuge/ Crossover phenomenon is still very active in my heart. Steve told me once that it started with the idea: If there really was a God trying to reach out to each and every one of us personally, what would that church look like? Where God talks to the hearts and minds of the people and they respond to his leading.
: THIS is what i am talking about, exactly. i think that this can happen via the sacraments (or whatever you want to call them) where people working in and on behalf of huge institutions like the catholic church are touching peoples lives. it can happen anywhere at all.
Right on! I understand that the Eucharist may bring a sense of utter reverence and passion about in people and that many miraculous and healing things have been performed in association with it. But I defy anyone to tell me that when i sit under the oak tree with my bare feet in the dank earth I am having any less of a transcendent holy experience. I've tried to see what the whole sacred space of church was about. I've tried to meditate in the pews before the ornate statuary and all, but once the wonder at the beauty of it all wore off I found myself spritually dry as a bone, yet in the minimal natural landscape of a dirt lot with struggling weedy vegetation I can pray like a mystic! See for me the natural world expresses God best. But for others it's the pagentry of the Catholic church, for others the jibberish they recite in an agitated mental state. If any of it touches anyone it is because God did it and has nothing to do with the means.
:i have NO idea who i am right now. :-)
Good, it is in the undefined that you will best be able to be who God created you to be. Thus I will join no church, but i'll stand up with a Baptist, Catholic, Presbyterian, or Buddhist in the true sublime God's name anyday.