God of my fathers, Lord of mercy,
you who have made all things by your word
And in your wisdom have established man
to rule the creatures produced by you,
To govern the world in holiness and justice,
and to render judgment in integrity of heart:
Give me Wisdom, the attendant at your throne,
and reject me not from among your children;
For I am your servant, the son of your handmaid,
a man weak and short-lived
and lacking in comprehension of judgment and of laws.
Indeed, though one be perfect among the sons of men,
if Wisdom, who comes through you, be not with him,
he shall be held in no esteem.
You have chosen me king over your people
and magistrate for your sons and daughters.
You have bid me build a temple on your holy mountain
and an altar in the city that is your dwelling place,
a copy of the holy tabernacle which you had established from of old.
Now with you is Wisdom, who knows your works
and was present when you made the world;
Who understands what is pleasing in your eyes
and what is conformable in your commands.
Send her forth from your holy heavens
and from your glorious throne dispatch her
That she may be with me and work with me,
that I may know what is your pleasure.
For she knows and understands all things,
and will guide me discreetly in my affairs
and safeguard me by her glory;
Thus my deeds will be acceptable,
and I shall judge your people justly
and be worthy of my father's throne.
For what man knows God's counsel,
or who can conceive what the Lord intends?
For the deliberations of mortals are timid,
and unsure are our plans.
For the corruptible body burdens the soul
and the earthen shelter weighs down the mind
that has many concerns.
And scarce do we guess the things on earth,
and what is within our grasp we find with difficulty;
but when things are in heaven, who can search them out?
Or who ever knew your counsel, except you had given Wisdom
and sent your holy spirit from on high?
And thus were the paths of those on earth made straight,
and men learned what was your pleasure,
and were saved by Wisdom.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Bible Reading: Psalm 127
Unless the Lord build the house,
they labor in vain who build.
Unless the Lord guard the city,
in vain does the guard keep watch.
It is vain for you to rise early
and put off your rest at night,
To eat bread earned by hard toil-
all this God gives to his beloved in sleep.
Children too are a gift from the Lord,
the fruit of the womb, a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior
are the children born in one's youth.
Blessed are they whose quivers are full.
They will never be shamed
contending with foes at the gate.
they labor in vain who build.
Unless the Lord guard the city,
in vain does the guard keep watch.
It is vain for you to rise early
and put off your rest at night,
To eat bread earned by hard toil-
all this God gives to his beloved in sleep.
Children too are a gift from the Lord,
the fruit of the womb, a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior
are the children born in one's youth.
Blessed are they whose quivers are full.
They will never be shamed
contending with foes at the gate.
Why God manifests himself as masculine
This is an important topic, and essential to understanding God's true nature. I've addressed this topic before but I use different approaches to help humans to understand a complex topic. Actually, it's not complex-it is very straightforward-but it is one of God's mysteries. By mystery I do not mean it is unknown or hidden, but rather, it is one of the things that are of the divine that humans find difficult to understand. So here is another discussion of this topic.
Notice that I say that God "manifests" himself as masculine. When I say "manifest" I mean that God chooses to present himself as masculine to humans because that is the most consistent with his nature, even though God is, as Pope Benedict has explained, all things in one, unable to be characterized as being "male" or "female" because he has both the maternal and paternal qualities, being all things and all complete. However, God has consistently presented himself as masculine and "The Father" in Jewish, Christian and Muslim holy books. God always appears in a masculine form and presents masculine characteristics, so one cannot say that it is "sexist" authors or culture to "blame." In fact, this is refuted in the Old Testament where the Holy Spirit is often presented as feminine Wisdom (see the Book of Wisdom). So if God chose to be presented as a female he would have done so, and done so consistently in all the monotheistic books.
So why does God present himself as masculine? Remember that humans are created in God's image, so you can think about the obvious difference between men and women regarding God's primary role, which is the creator of life. God is the creator of life, not the bearer of life. The Bible explains that God is all powerful and whatever God wills is instantly manifest. In other words, when God wishes to do something he does not have to "chant a spell" (follow a formulaic process) or "wait" while his will is gestated (such as the pregnancy of a woman, who bears a growing and changing organism). When God wills something, whether it is the initial creation of the entire universe (think Big Bang, for those of you who like the science connections where possible) or to the small things of communication with humans, it instantly "becomes" done. Jesus taught "God's will be done." This is not a gestation, peculating, waiting process. Whatever God wills is instantly done. That is obvious everywhere and in every way, and is explained over and over in the holy books. That is why Jesus is called "The Word," because God only "speaks the word" (wills something to happen) and it does, such as the conception of Jesus.
God therefore is the "masculine" principle in action, which is the seed from which all comes without waiting, bearing, gestating, working formulas and processes, or being the inert or co-operative container of life. God in his fullness is not compatible with a human perception of him being female because there is nothing about God that is gestating: his will at all times is instantaneous and complete.
Thus feminists and their pussy whipped male enablers have it all wrong when they try to force God's "nature" to be identified as being sexual in nature at all AND in forcing a partial or complete "feminine" ideology on him. God has consistently and always chosen to manifest as a masculine and Fatherly presence in the entire faith history from Adam to Jesus Christ, and also in communication with the Prophet (PBUH) through the Qur'an. This was abundantly clear as not being "sexism" to thousands of years of humans, and it is only this occult and narcissistic ego tainted past several modern generations that willfully do not understand and obey God's obvious strictures about how he manifests to humans. This is not a diminishing of the human female role at all. In fact it highlights the virtue of patience and the slowness of true growth when one looks at feminine biology as a parallel for spiritual growth and maturity. God "creates," God does not "grow." God wills, God does not "bear." God is the seed, and Jesus is the shepherd of the flock, while humans are the ones who are obedient to time, who change and grow in body and mind, from embryo to maturity and hopefully, old age. God is eternal and unchanging, and thus God the Father cannot be linked to the feminine principle of gestation, containment and bearing. God has maternal feelings, as God is the source of all love, of all goodness, of all emotions that humans can aspire to as best as they can. So God is the fullness of all of reality and all of the possibilities, but he does not "nest" them and he does not "bear" them; God wills creation and action and it takes place in the instant of his intention, not over a period of time. Humans take time to fulfill God's will because they are the ones who must grow and change, under the pulse of time, in order to live.
This is why Catholic priests will always emulate Jesus Christ and will always be celibate men. Catholic priests are the vocation of giving their entire lives over to the will of God and emulating Jesus Christ, God's first Christian priest. This is why there is no dishonor in the many other holy offices and vocations available to women. The road of Catholic priest is the one that is taken by those permitted by God to most emulate his will and word with their very lives. Many men do not take that path, obviously, so it is not for everyone. It is a special and sacred calling and it has nothing to do with being "able to live without a family or sex." It has everything to do with being the ultimate narrow path that only a few men among all men will choose.
It also has nothing to do with diminishing the "spirituality" of women. Remember, as I've pointed out, the Holy Spirit, often appearing as a white dove, is often described with feminine nature. This is because the Holy Spirit, who is the breath of God among humans, operates and works "within time" in order to inspire, correct and fortify humans in both their faith and their bearing of life's burdens and joys. So the Holy Spirit, being of the nature of God, has the qualities of God but is manifest in constant interaction among humans, and thus can be thought of as a "bearing" and "gestating" manifestation of God. For example, the Holy Spirit may have to work an entire lifetime on a lost man or woman of the faith, or even of a nation, as we saw with the former USSR, and now we see in the People's Republic of China. The Holy Spirit moves among humans with qualities of patience and love that can be thought of as very feminine and of a spiritual gestation in individual humans and also among their communities. This is also the reason that the Church is described as the bride of Jesus Christ, in Christianity, and in the Old Testament, the faithful as the beloved of God. The body of the faithful, the groups of believing humans, are inspired and connected by the Holy Spirit. Thus there is a valid identification of journey, of child "bearing," of gestation, of "planting a tree" of a church, of being like how ships are often called feminine, because humans are always on a constant individual or communal journey toward God, and that is consistent with such notions and analogous examples. God himself, however, as the Father, is unchanging, complete as is, infinite and unknowable in all his eternal capacity, and instantaneous in his will and his use of his word to manifest anything and everything that he wishes. Thus one cannot think of God in any other way without distorting his nature, thwarting his will of how he presents himself to humans and, in fact, lying about God.
I really hope you find this helpful. The erroneous propaganda is only damaging and demeaning to humans and it really must stop as it takes you away from understanding God, rather than moving you toward him. The propaganda also lowers self esteem rather than raises it, because humans start to think of vocations as "career ladders" with mean religious people "thwarting them," rather than understanding the incredible heights that all humans have in understanding the true nature of God.
Notice that I say that God "manifests" himself as masculine. When I say "manifest" I mean that God chooses to present himself as masculine to humans because that is the most consistent with his nature, even though God is, as Pope Benedict has explained, all things in one, unable to be characterized as being "male" or "female" because he has both the maternal and paternal qualities, being all things and all complete. However, God has consistently presented himself as masculine and "The Father" in Jewish, Christian and Muslim holy books. God always appears in a masculine form and presents masculine characteristics, so one cannot say that it is "sexist" authors or culture to "blame." In fact, this is refuted in the Old Testament where the Holy Spirit is often presented as feminine Wisdom (see the Book of Wisdom). So if God chose to be presented as a female he would have done so, and done so consistently in all the monotheistic books.
So why does God present himself as masculine? Remember that humans are created in God's image, so you can think about the obvious difference between men and women regarding God's primary role, which is the creator of life. God is the creator of life, not the bearer of life. The Bible explains that God is all powerful and whatever God wills is instantly manifest. In other words, when God wishes to do something he does not have to "chant a spell" (follow a formulaic process) or "wait" while his will is gestated (such as the pregnancy of a woman, who bears a growing and changing organism). When God wills something, whether it is the initial creation of the entire universe (think Big Bang, for those of you who like the science connections where possible) or to the small things of communication with humans, it instantly "becomes" done. Jesus taught "God's will be done." This is not a gestation, peculating, waiting process. Whatever God wills is instantly done. That is obvious everywhere and in every way, and is explained over and over in the holy books. That is why Jesus is called "The Word," because God only "speaks the word" (wills something to happen) and it does, such as the conception of Jesus.
God therefore is the "masculine" principle in action, which is the seed from which all comes without waiting, bearing, gestating, working formulas and processes, or being the inert or co-operative container of life. God in his fullness is not compatible with a human perception of him being female because there is nothing about God that is gestating: his will at all times is instantaneous and complete.
Thus feminists and their pussy whipped male enablers have it all wrong when they try to force God's "nature" to be identified as being sexual in nature at all AND in forcing a partial or complete "feminine" ideology on him. God has consistently and always chosen to manifest as a masculine and Fatherly presence in the entire faith history from Adam to Jesus Christ, and also in communication with the Prophet (PBUH) through the Qur'an. This was abundantly clear as not being "sexism" to thousands of years of humans, and it is only this occult and narcissistic ego tainted past several modern generations that willfully do not understand and obey God's obvious strictures about how he manifests to humans. This is not a diminishing of the human female role at all. In fact it highlights the virtue of patience and the slowness of true growth when one looks at feminine biology as a parallel for spiritual growth and maturity. God "creates," God does not "grow." God wills, God does not "bear." God is the seed, and Jesus is the shepherd of the flock, while humans are the ones who are obedient to time, who change and grow in body and mind, from embryo to maturity and hopefully, old age. God is eternal and unchanging, and thus God the Father cannot be linked to the feminine principle of gestation, containment and bearing. God has maternal feelings, as God is the source of all love, of all goodness, of all emotions that humans can aspire to as best as they can. So God is the fullness of all of reality and all of the possibilities, but he does not "nest" them and he does not "bear" them; God wills creation and action and it takes place in the instant of his intention, not over a period of time. Humans take time to fulfill God's will because they are the ones who must grow and change, under the pulse of time, in order to live.
This is why Catholic priests will always emulate Jesus Christ and will always be celibate men. Catholic priests are the vocation of giving their entire lives over to the will of God and emulating Jesus Christ, God's first Christian priest. This is why there is no dishonor in the many other holy offices and vocations available to women. The road of Catholic priest is the one that is taken by those permitted by God to most emulate his will and word with their very lives. Many men do not take that path, obviously, so it is not for everyone. It is a special and sacred calling and it has nothing to do with being "able to live without a family or sex." It has everything to do with being the ultimate narrow path that only a few men among all men will choose.
It also has nothing to do with diminishing the "spirituality" of women. Remember, as I've pointed out, the Holy Spirit, often appearing as a white dove, is often described with feminine nature. This is because the Holy Spirit, who is the breath of God among humans, operates and works "within time" in order to inspire, correct and fortify humans in both their faith and their bearing of life's burdens and joys. So the Holy Spirit, being of the nature of God, has the qualities of God but is manifest in constant interaction among humans, and thus can be thought of as a "bearing" and "gestating" manifestation of God. For example, the Holy Spirit may have to work an entire lifetime on a lost man or woman of the faith, or even of a nation, as we saw with the former USSR, and now we see in the People's Republic of China. The Holy Spirit moves among humans with qualities of patience and love that can be thought of as very feminine and of a spiritual gestation in individual humans and also among their communities. This is also the reason that the Church is described as the bride of Jesus Christ, in Christianity, and in the Old Testament, the faithful as the beloved of God. The body of the faithful, the groups of believing humans, are inspired and connected by the Holy Spirit. Thus there is a valid identification of journey, of child "bearing," of gestation, of "planting a tree" of a church, of being like how ships are often called feminine, because humans are always on a constant individual or communal journey toward God, and that is consistent with such notions and analogous examples. God himself, however, as the Father, is unchanging, complete as is, infinite and unknowable in all his eternal capacity, and instantaneous in his will and his use of his word to manifest anything and everything that he wishes. Thus one cannot think of God in any other way without distorting his nature, thwarting his will of how he presents himself to humans and, in fact, lying about God.
I really hope you find this helpful. The erroneous propaganda is only damaging and demeaning to humans and it really must stop as it takes you away from understanding God, rather than moving you toward him. The propaganda also lowers self esteem rather than raises it, because humans start to think of vocations as "career ladders" with mean religious people "thwarting them," rather than understanding the incredible heights that all humans have in understanding the true nature of God.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Bible Reading: Psalm 8, for the leader
A psalm of David.
O Lord, our Lord,
how awesome is your name through all the earth!
You have set your majesty above the heavens!
Out of the mouths of babes and infants
you have drawn a defense against your foes,
to silence enemy and avenger.
When I see your heavens, the work of your fingers,
the moon and stars that you set in place-
What are humans that you are mindful of them,
mere mortals that you care for them?
Yet you have made them little less than a god,
crowned them with glory and honor.
You have given them rule over the works of your hands,
put things at their feet:
All sheep and oxen,
even the beasts of the field,
The birds of the air, the fish of the sea,
and whatever swims the paths of the seas.
O Lord, our Lord,
how awesome is your name through all the earth!
O Lord, our Lord,
how awesome is your name through all the earth!
You have set your majesty above the heavens!
Out of the mouths of babes and infants
you have drawn a defense against your foes,
to silence enemy and avenger.
When I see your heavens, the work of your fingers,
the moon and stars that you set in place-
What are humans that you are mindful of them,
mere mortals that you care for them?
Yet you have made them little less than a god,
crowned them with glory and honor.
You have given them rule over the works of your hands,
put things at their feet:
All sheep and oxen,
even the beasts of the field,
The birds of the air, the fish of the sea,
and whatever swims the paths of the seas.
O Lord, our Lord,
how awesome is your name through all the earth!
Quick abortion history lesson
I've had this on my mind for a few days to share. One inevitable assumption that the younger people have today is that in the 1960's and the 1970's that there must have been a "women's liberation" movement to gain the "right" to an abortion. That's actually not true. There was not a grassroots, cohesive or extensive effort or even a demand for abortion by women. Several small independent advocates for abortion worked to promote it as a "right" and once they got the right they worked on "marketing abortion" to mainstream girls and women.
The first fans of abortion were socialists and communist sympathizers. This is because the USSR (now Russia) legalized abortion before the USA and were thus held up as the darlings of modern "rights" for women and sophisticated attitudes toward "sexuality." If you knew how miserable the average Soviet citizen, including women, were then even with their "prized" abortion "rights" you'd never fall for the propaganda. But the extreme left, especially women, lionized the "advanced" attitudes the USSR had toward women, while actually abortion was just another sign that the opposite was true, since socialism and communism are against the family unit as the foundation of a healthy society (instead, the "state" is the foundation).
The second fans of abortion were middle class and wealthy women, precisely the ones who could most afford to actually have a child and give it up for adoption, but chose not to do so. Today it is understandable that many think that the pro-aborts were advocating on behalf of poor women. Not true. In fact, poor people were not demanding abortion at all. They were more concerned with regional poverty (such as Appalachia) and Civil Rights. Poor people wanted families and children and worried about feeding, clothing and housing them, not aborting them. I watched one wealthy or "well to do" girl or woman after the other have an abortion simply because the baby was an inconvenience. You would not believe the excuses when one was offered. One young married couple aborted their first baby after discussion with her father (a doctor) because "she might be at a high cancer risk because she regularly gets cysts in her ear lobe." I could not make this up if I tried. A few years later they had a baby when it was convenient to them. So in the early 1970's, trust me, it was girls from wealthy and liberal families and women who could support a child but did not want to be "burdened" in their careers and dating lives who aborted like crazy, hiding behind the skirts of poor women who were not seeking abortions at all, or at least no where near on that scale.
And, sadly, reform Jewish women led the way for abortion rights. It's something that grieved me very much and I still do not understand. I really can't say much about this because I guess that's what "reform" means, which is to lose one's core faith. That's why to this day I do not consider reform Jews to be followers of Judaism. But even if one is not a devout Jew, would one not have a slight shudder at pushing abortion for historic and cultural reasons? You would think. But, young people, this is how the seculars worked on tempting reform Jewish men and women. They explained that a genetic disorder, Tay Sachs disease, which is predominant among Jewish genetic profiles, can be identified in the womb and the baby aborted. The temptation was that it's not birth control, it's eliminating a birth defect. But it took off like paper on fire and of course became one of the most enshrined "rights" of the liberal cultural Jews. Orthodox Jews responded differently. Some adopted screening before marriage in order to not marry a partner who would together create a mutual high risk profile and thus avoid the temptation of abortion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_Sachs-Disease
So I hope this helps you to see that various small enfranchised interests pushed for abortion, and this was not one of those great "glass ceiling" "barriers" to "women's equal rights" that "all women" were "advocating for." Special interest groups pushed abortion for their own agenda and then coalesced to push it (like a drug) as a tool against "inequality" and "poverty."
They corrupted agencies and organizations that started out as good intentioned. Planned Parenthood USED to be about planning families, not preventing families. I fully supported Planned Parenthood when they were about managing one's birth spacing and creation of a family. Back then they freely discussed even that Catholic approved method of "rhythm" and research was being done with thermometers and so forth to try to refine the predictability of women's natural cycles. But then they got hooked on the drug of abortion and they now should be ashamed of keeping the "Planned Parenthood" trademark.
Also, there was a big population management push in the 1970's and at first I thought they were reasonable too. This is because to me population management means "family spacing." It means giving women, and men, the understanding to space out their births in a healthy way, rather than have continual child bearing. Islam supports family spacing (with use of birth control but not abortion) and Catholics support family spacing (if natural rhythm method is used and definitely not abortion). I always thought that family spacing could have been a more reasonable approach toward the overpopulation problem of that other darling of the communist lovers, China, back when they instituted their "one child, forced abortion otherwise" policy. I had hoped that a pro family "family spacing" movement could have mitigated and prevented abortions and also reduce suffering in impoverished areas. But abortion lovers hijacked all population management associations too, so like with Planned Parenthood, I dumped my support of them in the 1980's.
I hope this helps you, especially the young people, understand how this really was not a movement like Civil Rights, far from it, and that it came from very dubious groups with not very nice agendas, under closer examination.
The first fans of abortion were socialists and communist sympathizers. This is because the USSR (now Russia) legalized abortion before the USA and were thus held up as the darlings of modern "rights" for women and sophisticated attitudes toward "sexuality." If you knew how miserable the average Soviet citizen, including women, were then even with their "prized" abortion "rights" you'd never fall for the propaganda. But the extreme left, especially women, lionized the "advanced" attitudes the USSR had toward women, while actually abortion was just another sign that the opposite was true, since socialism and communism are against the family unit as the foundation of a healthy society (instead, the "state" is the foundation).
The second fans of abortion were middle class and wealthy women, precisely the ones who could most afford to actually have a child and give it up for adoption, but chose not to do so. Today it is understandable that many think that the pro-aborts were advocating on behalf of poor women. Not true. In fact, poor people were not demanding abortion at all. They were more concerned with regional poverty (such as Appalachia) and Civil Rights. Poor people wanted families and children and worried about feeding, clothing and housing them, not aborting them. I watched one wealthy or "well to do" girl or woman after the other have an abortion simply because the baby was an inconvenience. You would not believe the excuses when one was offered. One young married couple aborted their first baby after discussion with her father (a doctor) because "she might be at a high cancer risk because she regularly gets cysts in her ear lobe." I could not make this up if I tried. A few years later they had a baby when it was convenient to them. So in the early 1970's, trust me, it was girls from wealthy and liberal families and women who could support a child but did not want to be "burdened" in their careers and dating lives who aborted like crazy, hiding behind the skirts of poor women who were not seeking abortions at all, or at least no where near on that scale.
And, sadly, reform Jewish women led the way for abortion rights. It's something that grieved me very much and I still do not understand. I really can't say much about this because I guess that's what "reform" means, which is to lose one's core faith. That's why to this day I do not consider reform Jews to be followers of Judaism. But even if one is not a devout Jew, would one not have a slight shudder at pushing abortion for historic and cultural reasons? You would think. But, young people, this is how the seculars worked on tempting reform Jewish men and women. They explained that a genetic disorder, Tay Sachs disease, which is predominant among Jewish genetic profiles, can be identified in the womb and the baby aborted. The temptation was that it's not birth control, it's eliminating a birth defect. But it took off like paper on fire and of course became one of the most enshrined "rights" of the liberal cultural Jews. Orthodox Jews responded differently. Some adopted screening before marriage in order to not marry a partner who would together create a mutual high risk profile and thus avoid the temptation of abortion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_Sachs-Disease
So I hope this helps you to see that various small enfranchised interests pushed for abortion, and this was not one of those great "glass ceiling" "barriers" to "women's equal rights" that "all women" were "advocating for." Special interest groups pushed abortion for their own agenda and then coalesced to push it (like a drug) as a tool against "inequality" and "poverty."
They corrupted agencies and organizations that started out as good intentioned. Planned Parenthood USED to be about planning families, not preventing families. I fully supported Planned Parenthood when they were about managing one's birth spacing and creation of a family. Back then they freely discussed even that Catholic approved method of "rhythm" and research was being done with thermometers and so forth to try to refine the predictability of women's natural cycles. But then they got hooked on the drug of abortion and they now should be ashamed of keeping the "Planned Parenthood" trademark.
Also, there was a big population management push in the 1970's and at first I thought they were reasonable too. This is because to me population management means "family spacing." It means giving women, and men, the understanding to space out their births in a healthy way, rather than have continual child bearing. Islam supports family spacing (with use of birth control but not abortion) and Catholics support family spacing (if natural rhythm method is used and definitely not abortion). I always thought that family spacing could have been a more reasonable approach toward the overpopulation problem of that other darling of the communist lovers, China, back when they instituted their "one child, forced abortion otherwise" policy. I had hoped that a pro family "family spacing" movement could have mitigated and prevented abortions and also reduce suffering in impoverished areas. But abortion lovers hijacked all population management associations too, so like with Planned Parenthood, I dumped my support of them in the 1980's.
I hope this helps you, especially the young people, understand how this really was not a movement like Civil Rights, far from it, and that it came from very dubious groups with not very nice agendas, under closer examination.
I enjoy Billy Graham's column very much
Reverend Billy Graham has a daily column that the paper I buy most days carries and I enjoy it very much. It is called "My Answer" and each column answers one question from a reader. I really enjoy reading his answers and his linkages to scripture, and praise his pastoral wisdom.
In fact, I've started clipping each column and then inserting them in one of my Protestant bibles according to the scripture he cites in his answer. You might enjoy doing the same thing. It's yet another way that scripture and the Bible becomes alive in a real daily basis.
As a Catholic of course I might phrase and tweak a few little things in his answer differently, maybe five percent at most! *wink* But his great spirit of love for Jesus Christ and God, and his wisdom, compassion and common sense are wonderful and I fully endorse his answers.
In fact, I've started clipping each column and then inserting them in one of my Protestant bibles according to the scripture he cites in his answer. You might enjoy doing the same thing. It's yet another way that scripture and the Bible becomes alive in a real daily basis.
As a Catholic of course I might phrase and tweak a few little things in his answer differently, maybe five percent at most! *wink* But his great spirit of love for Jesus Christ and God, and his wisdom, compassion and common sense are wonderful and I fully endorse his answers.
My blogging may be sparse
It's not that I don't want to, far from it, I wish I could do more, lacking the ability to teach in person. But there are three things going on.
One is that I am a bit fatigued. Two is that when I'm fatigued and feeling arid I tend to retreat into more artistic and hobby activities. This morning I made a collage that is an Icon of Jesus over laid upon a painting of a singing sparrow (remember his parable on this subject).
The third and main reason is this is one of those "astrological times" where cultists decide that I need to have inconsistent communications to fulfill their expectations about what stupid imaginary planetary "forces" order, and so they have done their usual hassling of my connectivity and so forth. That's one reason I still run astrology charts every day; it helps me to prepare for the various tired and nasty forms of harassment that they trundle out of the closet on the same tired predictable "astrological occasions." If astrology had any truth they'd not have to do trickery, but that's always been the point of the problem, as the Bible warns and explains. Charltons claim special powers and "spirituality" but it's the same old sad tricks.
On a lighter note I've started writing a little book of memoirs about my observations of the world and society as a child. I'm writing it in longhand in a notebook to avoid Internet snoops ruining the surprise and the pleasantry of it all.
One is that I am a bit fatigued. Two is that when I'm fatigued and feeling arid I tend to retreat into more artistic and hobby activities. This morning I made a collage that is an Icon of Jesus over laid upon a painting of a singing sparrow (remember his parable on this subject).
The third and main reason is this is one of those "astrological times" where cultists decide that I need to have inconsistent communications to fulfill their expectations about what stupid imaginary planetary "forces" order, and so they have done their usual hassling of my connectivity and so forth. That's one reason I still run astrology charts every day; it helps me to prepare for the various tired and nasty forms of harassment that they trundle out of the closet on the same tired predictable "astrological occasions." If astrology had any truth they'd not have to do trickery, but that's always been the point of the problem, as the Bible warns and explains. Charltons claim special powers and "spirituality" but it's the same old sad tricks.
On a lighter note I've started writing a little book of memoirs about my observations of the world and society as a child. I'm writing it in longhand in a notebook to avoid Internet snoops ruining the surprise and the pleasantry of it all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
