Cafeteria Catholicism

[AlanFromWichita]

(continued)
Feanaro's Wife:

When you go up to receive Holy Communion, what do you see yourself in communion with?

All of God’s created souls. It is absolutely awesome. I knew of the “real presence” thing but never thought about it much. I just knew that ever since Jesus, all over the world, every single day, many millions of Catholics, sinners like us all, are sharing in this feast, in mystical Communion with Him. I’m not too worried what I do or do not knkow about it; it is awesome and I’m thankful for it, and I would never stop taking it like I did a couople times. Once a couple years ago I was very severely bipolar, and I told a priest I honestly didn’t know if I was recevine the Lord or if it was just a warer and we are all deceived, but that I wanted to go to Communion becuase it would be conspicuous if I didn’t (I was organist and everyboey saw me every week take communion). He told me that what he knwew of me (and he knwew me well) that he thinks I should keep going.

Also I think of how this feast united us with all the Saints of the past and present and future, for that matter. Occasionally I’ll play a little piano solo from some classical music several hundreds of years old while they are getting the hosts ready and handed out to the ministers, and then I get up and get communion and shudder in awe at the fact that this music and this Bread has been around for hundreds of years and still moves souls. I played some Beethoven after the Communion hymn the other day as a meditation, in honor of an article I read that the Holy Father plays Beethoven.

For me, my whole Church life is tied up in music. When I was in grade school, I played for Sunday Mass, for kids’ Mass, and for Wednesday stations.
Feanaro's Wife:

And once again, I think you need to see the difference between doubting a teaching, and flat out disagreeing with it. You seem to be having some sincere issues with your faith, and to me, that does not make you a non-Catholic. It makes you seem pretty much like the rest of us.

All the rhetoric aside, that is the kindest thing I believe you can say to another Catholic, and that is, “we are alike.” Even if we are not exactly alike, we share some of the Best Things, like the Real Presence.
Feanaro's Wife:

When I think of the term cafeteria Catholic, I automatically think of someone who professes to be very faithful, but is pro-choice, or pro-gay marriage, or chooses to ignore other Church teachings because they are sure they know better…they are not simply doubting. They are actively working against the Church.

Malia

Yeah, right now I’m not even interested in considering them. I think it’s time to wrap up this reply.

Thank you very much for the kind and thought provoking questions and comments.

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

shannon e:

Alan,

FWIW, I think that converts would be far more understanding and compassionate to anyone having struggles with their faith.

Converts know all too well what it’s like to turn your life upside down, and to turn your soul inside out.

Peace

In fact, most converts I’ve known personally are excited about their faith (or they wouldn’t have converted) and they do not in any way treat me less as a “cradle.” The attitude I took was probably based on a very few that posted here, who claimed any CC is a hypocrite, why are they in this church anyway when she teaching you must believe things, and even one even went so far as to say they don’t think I have a claim to call myself a member of “their” Church.

Maybe such posters are intentionally striking up a characature; I don’t know. Let it be known, though, my personal experience with converts has been nothing but pleasant.

Alan

 

[buffalo]

AlanFromWichita:

I

A few week ago when the forum was down I actually read some of the tracts (very enjoyable) but one e-letter from Karl showed he, either satirically or for real (I dfon’t know hiim that well but it looked serious) endorsed the same attitude.

You are missing the point of this attitiude. It is basically saying that there is intense pressure by Cafeteria Catholics to change Christ’s teachings to suit them. If the Church doesn’t many will leave and who would want that. So capitulate to these demands.

The Church is saying it will not change Christ’s teachings and if many leave they will be saddened, but the Church will go on.

 

[Brad]

AlanFromWichita:

I have limited computer access this evening, so I’ll try to be brief (at least by my standards lol).

Papal infallibilty as in the whole thing about the keys and how that makes us infallible on faith and morals. In a nutshell that is my biggest probhlem. I have practical reasons other than theological, so there are many ways to approach this issue.

Alan

Thanks for clarifying (I think). You use an exhaustively large number of words to convey something that seems rather simple.

You disagree that the Church is infallible on all issues of faith and morals. You want others to have the freedom to also disagree and still be Catholics.

I have good news for you. Infallibility is much more restricted than you may imagine. Look it up in a Catholic encyclopedia. It is not as broad as you think. Further, even if you disagree with this definition, you are still a Catholic.

Not that your mind may be a bit more rested, I urge you to do the following:

1. Read the CCC where it discusses “religious assent” and how issues of faith and morals, even if not infallible, are to be held to with this assent.
2. Ask yourself how we can all be in communion with each other and Jesus Christ if we all believe different things.
3. Ask yourself of what benefit does the Church gain for deriving moral and faith teachings for which she is continually persecuted.
4. Ask yourself if there isn’t a particular moral teaching that you disagree with (i.e. contraception, same-sex marriage etc.) that may be holding you back from “buying” papal infallibility.
5. Ask yourself if Mary (the Immaculate one) is not the model of all of us to live up to and if she every questioned or was disobedient to God. Ask yourself if she knew the ramifications of her obedience or if she simply obeyed without knowing them.
6. Ask yourself if you can receive more grace from Jesus and more mercy from Mary by being less obedient to Christ’s Church.
7. Ask yourself if it would be better to have more grace and mercy or less grace and mercy.
8. Ask yourself if God would want you to be confused and unsure about what was separating you from Him or if He would want you to know what was separating you so that you could eliminate it and ultimately obtain full communion with the Divine.
9. Ask yourself if you will ever be capable of knowing all in this lifetime.
10. Ask yourself if heaven is the goal and, if so, it will be necessary to follow Christ in all ways, love and truth, and that this may require carrying a cross like He did (i.e it will be difficult in this life). Ask God if He will take the pain away but if He does not is it not still His will?

 

[Catholic_Heart]

<<<Back on topic: To call one’s self a Catholic, yet not obey one of the Church’s teachings, is like being married but choosing to disobey the “forsaking all others” part. (Or any other part. DH gets sooo whiny and demanding when he’s sick, I sometimes wish I could forget the “in sickness or in health” part…)>>>

Hi Ruthie…Sorry I have taken so long to answer your post. Time has just flown by the last few days…Work, grandkids, etc…

I don’t just call myself a Cathoilc, I AM a Catholic, and I deeply resent the implication that I am not.simply because I dare to question one of the Church’s “rules”…A rule that,. by the way, never beeen declared to be an infalible teaching.

Jesus himself had the good sense to “bend” the rules when he deemed the circumstances to warrant it… He both healed and fed (his disciples) on the Sabbath…Clearly breaking the Sabbath “rules”…Luke 7:37 tell us not to judge others lest we ourselves be judged.

Every Sunday I recite the Creed, and renew my committment to Christ’s Church…I do my best to live by her teachings…I know I fail miserably, and regularly ask for forgiveness. My faith is strong, but not perfect…I pray sincerely that God will help my “unbelief”…, and know, as I say at each Mass, that I am not worthy…

I am not saying that I believe artificial birth control to be a good thing…It obviously is, on the whole not…I have read Humae Vitae, and believe it to be a good explanation of the Church’s position on the matter. I am saying that if my daughter’s life were at stake, I would want her to be as safe as possible…She has three little boys to raise, and I want them to have a mother.

NFP might be just as good as any other form of birth control…I don’t know, because to tell the truth, I don’t know that much about it…If that is truly the case, and a couple can actually discipline themselves well enough, I am all for it. I am very much against women putting drugs or anyting else into their bodies that they do not need…The long-term affects of “the pill” are horrendous.

My only worry is this…I have seen that NFP often does not work, because married couples are unable to always abstain when necessary…A human failing, but a normal one, considering the strong sex drive God gave us…

Do I think couples should use artificial birth control? Probably not. Do I think those who do are bound for Hell? No…Am I a Catholic? Yes…

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Brad,

There could not have been a better list of questions to ask for this discussion.

It goes back to what I was saying earlier. Christ did not want us floundering around trying to figure things out on our own. He instituted a Church and that Church is to help us to form our conscience on matters of faith and morals.

To assent, especially in the absence of understanding, is precisely what the BVM modeled, along with humility. “Fiat mihi secundum verbum tuum.” - “Let it be done unto me according to your word.”

Thank God for all of us, she didn’t choose to wait to give her assent until she understood the details.

Brad:

Thanks for clarifying (I think). You use an exhaustively large number of words to convey something that seems rather simple.

You disagree that the Church is infallible on all issues of faith and morals. You want others to have the freedom to also disagree and still be Catholics.

I have good news for you. Infallibility is much more restricted than you may imagine. Look it up in a Catholic encyclopedia. It is not as broad as you think. Further, even if you disagree with this definition, you are still a Catholic.

Not that your mind may be a bit more rested, I urge you to do the following:

1. Read the CCC where it discusses “religious assent” and how issues of faith and morals, even if not infallible, are to be held to with this assent.
2. Ask yourself how we can all be in communion with each other and Jesus Christ if we all believe different things.
3. Ask yourself of what benefit does the Church gain for deriving moral and faith teachings for which she is continually persecuted.
4. Ask yourself if there isn’t a particular moral teaching that you disagree with (i.e. contraception, same-sex marriage etc.) that may be holding you back from “buying” papal infallibility.
5. Ask yourself if Mary (the Immaculate one) is not the model of all of us to live up to and if she every questioned or was disobedient to God. Ask yourself if she knew the ramifications of her obedience or if she simply obeyed without knowing them.
6. Ask yourself if you can receive more grace from Jesus and more mercy from Mary by being less obedient to Christ’s Church.
7. Ask yourself if it would be better to have more grace and mercy or less grace and mercy.
8. Ask yourself if God would want you to be confused and unsure about what was separating you from Him or if He would want you to know what was separating you so that you could eliminate it and ultimately obtain full communion with the Divine.
9. Ask yourself if you will ever be capable of knowing all in this lifetime.
10. Ask yourself if heaven is the goal and, if so, it will be necessary to follow Christ in all ways, love and truth, and that this may require carrying a cross like He did (i.e it will be difficult in this life). Ask God if He will take the pain away but if He does not is it not still His will?

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Brad:

Thanks for clarifying (I think). You use an exhaustively large number of words to convey something that seems rather simple.

Sigh, your observations are true.

Probably my heritage as teacher, private tutor, and a person too paranoid about being misunderstood.

Then again when I was young my wonderful (late) dad said, “Alan, you just talk to hear your head rattle.”

To this day I cannot remember his ever telling me a lie.

Alan

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

All,

Please see a thread I started that is relevant to this discussion, but I wanted to ensure other posters could get a fresh glimpse. Sometimes when a thread goes on for a while, not everyone stays in tune and others may not come in at all.

Here it is:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=848636#post848636

 

[mark_a]

John of Woking:

Why is that most cafeteria catholics only reject magisterial teaching on moral issues?

Because living the moral teachings is truly the hardest part.

 

[Podo2005]

Feanaro's Wife:

You are not a slave to Catholicism, you have the free will to make the choice to leave it if you wish. Just as I exercised my free will to leave the faith I was baptized into.

The Pope and Magesterium do not equal God, I agree. But they are representatives of Him and act to see that His will is done. Do you know much about the Holy Spirit? Incredible, to say the least.

And I fully questioned the Catholic faith (for about 5 years), before I decided that it was indeed the Truth and it was where God was leading me. To not question would be foolish, I agree, again. No one should just “swallow what they are told” and take the “easy way out”. That would be very lazy and foolish indeed.

As for a split in the future, it is already here. As far as the Catholic Church can be split, anyway. The split is in people who want to see their own will imposed instead of practicing the virtues of obedience and humility.

But the Church can never truly “split”. It is promised that the Church will endure until the end of days… if it doesn’t, then none of this matters because it would prove that the Church is not what it is supposed to be and would be false anyway.

Yes there are some who think the Church already split when they “ditched the latin mass”. But do you see the common thread here? Human opinion.

The Church has never, and will never change her teachings on faith and morals. It is not possible. The Pope and the Magesterium are guardians of that Truth. They are not the creators so they have no power to change it.

If you are indeed a “thinking Catholic” as you claim, I do hope that you will expand your knowledge of our beautiful faith and pray for the wisdom and understanding to accept it fully, as God wills.

Peace to you mumto5. I will add you to my prayers,

Malia

One thing for sure though, the Church is composed of Men led by the will of God. But as much as we try to follow God, we are still sinners and not perfect! Therefore the church can make mistakes( I’m not saying the church is all wrong because it isn’t, but there might be a few errors in it) Look at our history, we came up with some mass where alot of things contrary to Jesus’ teaching (A.k.a. the tridentine mass)

1. The priest faced the altar instead of delivering the word to the people face to face.
2. The eucharistic adoration became more important than the word
   etc etc…
   (Note: That is just an example)
   So sometimes we are required to use our brains when it comes to church teachings. They have to be in line with the Lord’s word. It can’t be just Church teachings or like where protestants failed, just the bible.
   Podo

 

[OriginalJS]

I have read a lot of posts here. Some people think they can pick and choose what they want to believe; others think that it is necessary to believe everything the way the Church lays it down. Examples abound.

My simple question is this: If cafeteria catholicism is wrong what has the Church done to stop it?

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Podo2005:

One thing for sure though, the Church is composed of Men led by the will of God. But as much as we try to follow God, we are still sinners and not perfect! Therefore the church can make mistakes( I’m not saying the church is all wrong because it isn’t, but there might be a few errors in it) Look at our history, we came up with some mass where alot of things contrary to Jesus’ teaching (A.k.a. the tridentine mass)

1. The priest faced the altar instead of delivering the word to the people face to face.
2. The eucharistic adoration became more important than the word
   etc etc…
   (Note: That is just an example)
   So sometimes we are required to use our brains when it comes to church teachings. They have to be in line with the Lord’s word. It can’t be just Church teachings or like where protestants failed, just the bible.
   Podo

Podo, the Tridentine Mass is not an error. That would invalidate hundreds of years worth of Masses. The position of the priest with his back to the people, ad orientem, is truly misunderstood by most people. The priest faces east with the people. He leads them in worship of God and the people follow. The Eucharistic Prayer, or Canon of the Mass is aimed fully toward’s God, not the people - that is in the old Mass and the new Mass. That part has not changed, just how the priest orients himself. When the New Mass came out, some priests lost focus and bring attention to themselves when all attention is to be on God at that point of the Mass. Read the Eucharistic Prayer and you will see it is all addressed to God, except when we shake hands. It would be wise to read what Pope Benedict has to say about ad orientem, among other current Church leaders. Also, the old Latin Mass is still being said now that there is an Indult. These are valid Masses.

Secondly, Eucharistic Adoration has not been a problem. It is a problem now because so few Catholics understand and believe the Real Presence. The Catholic Church cannot be limited to the Word.

You may be interested in this document, Instrumentum Laboris, a working document for the upcoming synod of bishops. It is long, but tells you of the problems the Church sees within herself right now.

vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20050707_instrlabor-xi-assembly_en.html

 

[Penny_Plain]

2) Ask yourself how we can all be in communion with each other and Jesus Christ if we all believe different things.

Because some things matter and some things don’t. I believe that Jesus is the son of God. So does my husband. I believe that bobotie is the best food in the world. My husband believes it tastes like something you’d find on the side of the road.

One matters. One doesn’t. Same with the Church’s teachings. Some matter; some are matters in which the Church has overreached.

[Penny, dear, that’s not what the Church says. I know. The fact that the Church essentially does not believe itself capable of overreaching is one of the areas in which I believe it has overreached.]

 

[fix]

a) The denial of the binding force of the Magisterium on conscience, whereby the faithful (which includes theologians) “are obliged to submit to their Bishops’ decision made in the name of Christ, in matters of faith and morals”, and that “[t]his submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra…” (Lumen Gentium, n. 25; cf. CCC, nn. 2032-2040).** Behind this denial is the wrongful assumption that the Church’s teachings are to be accepted only to the extent one can accept the reasons given for them, thus reducing the Church’s teaching to one opinion among others, to be taken into consideration but not binding in conscience. ***This places one’s subjective judgment above that of the Church *(see 10e below).

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=848636#post848636

 

[Brad]

Penny Plain:

Because some things matter and some things don’t. I believe that Jesus is the son of God. So does my husband. I believe that bobotie is the best food in the world. My husband believes it tastes like something you’d find on the side of the road.

One matters. One doesn’t. Same with the Church’s teachings. Some matter; some are matters in which the Church has overreached.

[Penny, dear, that’s not what the Church says. I know. The fact that the Church essentially does not believe itself capable of overreaching is one of the areas in which I believe it has overreached.]

And who gets to decide what matters and what doesn’t? Is it Penny Plain? Did Jesus say some things that matter and some that do not? Also, I suggest you address the remaining questions as they are related (don’t have to do it publically if you don’t want).

 

[Feanaro]

Podo2005:

Therefore the church can make mistakes

Individual Catholics, including priests or bishops, can. However, the Church is incapable of error when expounding doctrine on faith or morals.

Look at our history, we came up with some mass where alot of things contrary to Jesus’ teaching (A.k.a. the tridentine mass)

There was nothing “wrong” with the tridentine mass. In fact, I would like to ask you exactly how the tridentine mass was contrary to Jesus’ teaching? Even though I have never been to one I’m sure it was more reverent in many respects compared to some of the masses I’ve been to. Do not quote me on this but I’m sure one of the reasons for the change was because of the use of Latin in the mass. Now for many centuries, Latin was kind of an international language in Europe that many people understood apart from their native tongue. Therefore, it made more sense to have the mass in Latin, not to mention that it was and still is the official language of the church. Over the course of time however, Latin became less used and outside the church eventually became a dead language. So I could see many people losing touch with what was going on at mass when they didn’t understand it. Therefore, to change the mass to the vernacular (native language) made sense to involve the people more in the liturgical worship. That being said, I remember when I was young growing up in Quebec and going to a French church. I did not understand the words but was still taught what was going on by my mom and what was the most important part or summit of the mass. This brings me to my next point.

The eucharistic adoration became more important than the word

The Eucharist is more important than the liturgy of the word. The Eucharist is the summit of our worship and adoring it is a good thing. You need to understand that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. If you downplay the Eucharist or put more emphasis on the word than you risk slipping into Protestantism. Many Protestants (and poorly catechized Catholics) I have met do not even attend church because they say they can read the bible at home. Now if you take the Eucharist or it’s importance out of mass, then in a way they have a point. In this day and age with our ability to access information so easily there is no reason why we couldn’t study the bible on our own at home, maybe even better than at mass. However, what makes the mass so important is the Eucharist and presence of Christ himself within it.

The priest faced the altar instead of delivering the word to the people face to face.

Diane addressed this well, I hope you read the link she posted.

So sometimes we are required to use our brains when it comes to church teachings. They have to be in line with the Lord’s word.

All official Church teachings are in line with God’s word. God speaks through both of them and cannot contradict himself. The problem arises when individuals, whether they are laymen, priests, or even bishops, misinterpret the Lord’s word for their own ends. This is how heresy starts. Martin Luther started out as a Catholic priest who eventually chose his own interpretation over that of the Church. Most heretics start out as dissenters.
Now, of course God does not want robots but wants us to love him with not only all our heart, but our entire mind also. It is natural to have doubts and to question things, that is one way we learn and grow in our faith. The big difference is the attitude we take. This is more about faith and trusting in God than anything else really. God told us he would send his Church the Holy Spirit to guide and lead it into all truth. So we should have a trusting attitude even when questioning things, not the attitude that we are right and the Church is wrong. It is this attitude that the Church is wrong and “needs to get with the times” on certain issues that is sinful, not the doubts in themselves. The attitude should be that maybe the times are wrong and we need to trust the eternal teachings of God who speaks through his Church. Which gets us back to what this thread was originally about… Do we want to carry the name “Catholic” while at the same time trying to impose our will on and transform the Church? Or do we want to practice our religion faithfully and allow God to transform us?

Podo

 

[Penny_Plain]

Brad:

And who gets to decide what matters and what doesn’t? Is it Penny Plain?

Who else, really?

As for whether Jesus said some things that matter and some things that didn’t, there’s many posts on here saying that we’re not limited to the Word. And, while we may all agree on what Jesus said, there is legitimate room for disagreement on what He meant.

As for the other questions:

1. Read it.
2. (already discussed)
3. How is the Church “persecuted” in the US?
4. Nope.
5. Not necessarily; don’t know; don’t know.
6. Not sure; don’t buy the concept that God primarily expects “obedience” from us.
7. More.
8. Don’t think God minds confusion and ambiguity; even Jesus spent time in the desert.
9. Nope.
10. Uh… Don’t agree that heaven’s the goal of life, it’s just the result of life, maybe. Have no idea what God’s criteria for entry are, doubt anyone else does, and therefore don’t spend a lot of time worrying about it.

Do I pass, oh Grand Inquisitor Brad? I’ll wait while you fetch … the Comfy Chair!!!

I don’t know why I keep getting myself sucked into these threads. I think I am too easily provoked by the implicit assumption that we Cafeteria Catholics are poorly educated, immoral, weak of will, deceived by the enemy, foolish, or part of an evil plot to undermine the Church from within.

I have no idea what to expect when I meet my God face to face. Neither do you, Brad. I know what he said were the first and second commandments and (assuming He feels the need to ask questions at all because, sheesh, what’s He really gonna learn that he doesn’t know already?) I expect I’ll hear a bunch of questions that relate to how I’ve done at those things.

I expect I’ll hear questions about what I’ve done with the gifts he gave me, the principle one being the amazing gift of life. I think He came here to show us how to live, and I think He expects each of us to develop and use the understanding He gave us to discern the right way to live.

Who’s to discern that for me but me? And who for you but you, Brad? You’ve discerned that the correct thing to do is to delegate that task to a Church that’s all too willing to take it up on your behalf. Your business, not mine, but as a child I never got very far with “But he SAID…” when I was trying to excuse conduct I knew to be wrong.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[Timidandunsure]

Wow what a thread…

 The problem I have and trip over is that the church has not been perfect over the last 2000 years. Human errors have been found and corrected. At one time I thought they could make no mistakes, I mean God guided them correct. But then I found out about Christopher Columbus and how he was excuminicated for believing the world was round. And didn't the church run around in the middle ages doing some really nasty stuff in the name of faith. And we will just leave off the last fiasco we all went through recently, it made me want to cry my church was hurt so much, and how much it must of saddened God to look down upon.

I think that is why I doubt stuff that isn’t black and white, I am no theologian (am I spelling that right) so I am a poor one to give an opinion. Being so, I have to take on faith what the church hands me as the truth, and I do. Just because I doubt doesn’t give me an excuse to ignore the message.

So maybe its doubt that has creeped into many hearts, not doubt in our lord or God or his teachings, but in some of the churches leaders over the centuries who’s actions seemed to have other intentions…

I hope God gives me the wisdom to start understand everything better, I know so little, and expect so much, sometimes it scares me.

My prayers are with you all, such as they are…

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Timidandunsure:

So maybe its doubt that has creeped into many hearts, not doubt in our lord or God or his teachings, but in some of the churches leaders over the centuries who’s actions seemed to have other intentions…

I hope God gives me the wisdom to start understand everything better, I know so little, and expect so much, sometimes it scares me.

First, I apologize for not going through all those questions yet like Penny did. My time on the forums has been reduced somewhat and I’m not keeping up with things too well.

Dear Timidandunsure,

Don’t feel bad. One of the things I find most astounding that I’ve never really heard addressed by wise and learned theologians, is the fact that Jesus made a big deal out of the fact that it wasn’t about being wise and learned. As to the pharisees, listen to them for their theological knowledge but don’t act like them because they think that knowledge will save them. Clearly this is not the case, as I’ve heard at countless weddings I’ve played for the readings about how love trumps all knowledge and prophecies. Of course the wise and learned retailate by claiming that knowledge and submission to the Church is, by definition, love.

See for yourself if you think Christ would beat you up for not being a better theologian. Remember Christ himself was not a big fancy Church official or a king, he was a measly baby in a manger. The dude that prophesied when Jesus was brought into the Church wasn’t painted as a particularly adept apologist, either. John the Baptist was seen as insane. Again and again I repeat, it’s more about the attitude and your mystical relation with Christ than it is about dogma and theology. No, those two aren’t equivalent, nor do I claim they are contradictory, but they are complimentary.
Luke 10:

23 Turning to the disciples in private he said, “Blessed are the eyes that see what you see. 24 For I say to you, many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, but did not see it, and to hear what you hear, but did not hear it.” 25 10 There was a scholar of the law 11 who stood up to test him and said, “Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 Jesus said to him, “What is written in the law? How do you read it?” 27 He said in reply, “You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your being, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” 28 He replied to him, “You have answered correctly; do this and you will live.”

Of course, that last guy then went and got intellectual, trying to justify himself, which prompted the story of the Good Samaritan, further advancing the idea that it is more your actions toward your fellow man than one’s theological prowess that makes you a “neighbor” whom we should love.

If one were to interpret this literally, it would almost sound like we are obligated to love those who are kind to us, regardless of their religious affiliations. I don’t take it that way, though, because Jesus was perhaps giving that story in retaliation for the fact that the guy might have seemed to think he could “calculate” his way into heaven more than as an excuse not to have to love theologians just because they may not walk their talk.

Alan

[edit] I messed up on the quote. I think I meant to quote this:
Matt 11:25:

At that time Jesus said in reply, "I give praise to you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for although you have hidden these things from the wise and the learned you have revealed them to the childlike.

 

[Penny_Plain]

AlanFromWichita:

I don’t take it that way, though, because Jesus was perhaps giving that story in retaliation for the fact that the guy might have seemed to think he could “calculate” his way into heaven more than as an excuse not to have to love theologians just because they may not walk their talk.

Alan, I would love to get your thoughts on this, which has been bouncing around in my head for some time.

I think we place too much emphasis on heaven. I mean, yes, we all want to go there, but we (and I include myself in this) spend so much time thinking about it and calculating how we’re going to get there that we don’t pay attention to what we are supposed to be doing, which is living.

It seems to me that what we should be striving to do is live rightly. If we do (note the ambiguity as to whether “do” means “live well” or “striving to live well”), then heaven will take care of itself.

It’s like we’re hiking through the mountains and not noticing the beautiful scenery because we’re too fixated on the hot chocolate we hope is waiting for us at the lodge.