Ticked off...

  • Thread starter Thread starter reen12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

reen12

Guest
Please have patience, while I vent :o
You know, I, for one, am fed up to my eyeballs with the seeming denigration of “emotion” as part of the life of faith, [an attitude that occassionally pops up, on various threads, IMHO.]

Christ wept over Jerusalem.

He experienced emotional agony in the Garden.

He counseled us not to “be anxious”…thereby
acknowledging that a human being is created
*with *emotions - as part of his/her make-up.

He experienced anger, at both the sellers in
the Temple and those who waited to “catch”
Him, in the act of curing the man with the
withered hand, on the Sabbath.

It reminds me of Joe Friday’s “Just the facts, ma’am.”
Well, life is made up of more than just “facts,” in
the intellectual sense…the life of faith is
more than just an exercise of deductive and inductive
reasoning.

Jesus did not merely “think” about how His coming
Passion was going to ransom sinners, He sweat
blood over the coming ordeal.

[It is precisely this attitude, “let us be *rational about
such matters of faith”, IMHO, that have driven some
former Catholics into more ‘emotive’ denominations.]

And don’t anybody give me that mind/emotion razzle-
dazzle.
I have a degree in philosophy, which subject* stresses*
intellect over emotion, and I have a healthy respect
for same.

But for anyone to suggest that discussions of faith
are the private preserve of “intellect”, fills me with
disgust…a hard word, but one reflective of my response
to same.
What’s this all about?
I “felt” :mad: it was more prudent to express my frustration
and disgust, in a separate thread, rather than direct
it toward a particular poster.
Boy, am I ticked.]
There, I “feel” better, now. 🤓
Does anyone, out there in cyberland, share my
perspective?

Hopefully,

reen12
 
40.png
reen12:
Please have patience, while I vent :o
You know, I, for one, am fed up to my eyeballs with the seeming denigration of “emotion” as part of the life of faith, [an attitude that occassionally pops up, on various threads, IMHO.]

Christ wept over Jerusalem.

He experienced emotional agony in the Garden.

He counseled us not to “be anxious”…thereby
acknowledging that a human being is created
*with *emotions - as part of his/her make-up.

He experienced anger, at both the sellers in
the Temple and those who waited to “catch”
Him, in the act of curing the man with the
withered hand, on the Sabbath.

It reminds me of Joe Friday’s “Just the facts, ma’am.”
Well, life is made up of more than just “facts,” in
the intellectual sense…the life of faith is
more than just an exercise of deductive and inductive
reasoning.

Jesus did not merely “think” about how His coming
Passion was going to ransom sinners, He sweat
blood over the coming ordeal.

[It is precisely this attitude, "let us be *rational
Click to expand...
about
such matters of faith", IMHO, that have driven some
former Catholics into more ‘emotive’ denominations.]

And don’t anybody give me that mind/emotion razzle-
dazzle.
I have a degree in philosophy, which subject* stresses*
intellect over emotion, and I have a healthy respect
for same.

But for anyone to suggest that discussions of faith
are the private preserve of “intellect”, fills me with
disgust…a hard word, but one reflective of my response
to same.
What’s this all about?
I “felt” :mad: it was more prudent to express my frustration
and disgust, in a separate thread, rather than direct
it toward a particular poster.
Boy, am I ticked.]
There, I “feel” better, now. 🤓
Does anyone, out there in cyberland, share my
perspective?

Hopefully,

reen12

I agree !
While the Truth is the Truth.
I t is also true that we are human and we have very true emotions, and I don’t think we should down play them.

Trick
 
40.png
reen12:
Please have patience, while I vent :o
You know, I, for one, am fed up to my eyeballs with the seeming denigration of “emotion” as part of the life of faith, [an attitude that occassionally pops up, on various threads, IMHO.]

Christ wept over Jerusalem.

He experienced emotional agony in the Garden.

He counseled us not to “be anxious”…thereby
acknowledging that a human being is created
*with *emotions - as part of his/her make-up.

He experienced anger, at both the sellers in
the Temple and those who waited to “catch”
Him, in the act of curing the man with the
withered hand, on the Sabbath.

It reminds me of Joe Friday’s “Just the facts, ma’am.”
Well, life is made up of more than just “facts,” in
the intellectual sense…the life of faith is
more than just an exercise of deductive and inductive
reasoning.

Jesus did not merely “think” about how His coming
Passion was going to ransom sinners, He sweat
blood over the coming ordeal.

[It is precisely this attitude, "let us be *rational
Click to expand...
about
such matters of faith", IMHO, that have driven some
former Catholics into more ‘emotive’ denominations.]

And don’t anybody give me that mind/emotion razzle-
dazzle.
I have a degree in philosophy, which subject* stresses*
intellect over emotion, and I have a healthy respect
for same.

But for anyone to suggest that discussions of faith
are the private preserve of “intellect”, fills me with
disgust…a hard word, but one reflective of my response
to same.
What’s this all about?
I “felt” :mad: it was more prudent to express my frustration
and disgust, in a separate thread, rather than direct
it toward a particular poster.
Boy, am I ticked.]
There, I “feel” better, now. 🤓
Does anyone, out there in cyberland, share my
perspective?

Hopefully,

reen12reen12, St. Ignatius of Loyola built a spiritual powerhouse (both for individuals and for the Society of Jesus and the Church) by harnessing both the heart and the mind for Christ. Check out The Spiritual Exercises.

Although we should not function out of pure emotion, because emotions are so unreliable, if you harness the emotions to the intellect and hitch that team to the wagon of faith, you will have an unbeatable combination!
 
Thanks, Trick.

I came back to delete this post, thinking it wouldn’t
even get any replies, or wouldn’t be understood,
and was happy to see that you had a thought on the
subject, and did reply.

Many thanks,

reen12
 
40.png
mercygate:
Although we should not function out of pure emotion, because emotions are so unreliable, if you harness the emotions to the intellect and hitch that team to the wagon of faith, you will have an unbeatable combination!
Click to expand...
I think this is my take on it as well. I would be the first to affirm that we are not called to be stoic automatons in our lives of faith, but at the same time warning against making it the basis or motor of our faith. When I hear that someone is so sad or angry or frustrated, that they have lost their faith in God, it annoys me just as much as when someone “reasons” themselves right out of the Faith.
 
Hi, mercygate,

quote: mercygate
Although we should not function out of pure emotion, because emotions are so unreliable, if you harness the emotions to the intellect and hitch that team to the wagon of faith, you will have an unbeatable combination
Click to expand...
A fine point, I think. One scenario that leaps to mind,
is when a person doesn’t “feel” God’s presence -
the knowledge, born of faith, is to be relied on.

The thing is, I was “all intellect”, for decades, and that
may be why I have such strong “feelings” on what I
see as the denigration of the emotive element, in faith.

I’m put in mind of the French expression:
“The heart hath reasons, which reason knoweth not.” 🤓

Best regards, mercygate,

reen
 
40.png
reen12:
Hi, mercygate,

quote: mercygate

A fine point, I think. One scenario that leaps to mind,
is when a person doesn’t “feel” God’s presence -
the knowledge, born of faith, is to be relied on.

The thing is, I was “all intellect”, for decades, and that
may be why I have such strong “feelings” on what I
see as the denigration of the emotive element, in faith.

I’m put in mind of the French expression:
“The heart hath reasons, which reason knoweth not.” 🤓

Best regards, mercygate,

reen
Click to expand...
Thanks, reen. You really should check out the Ignatian *Exercises. *The first of the four weeks is all about emotion: How the entire universe stands poised to support the redemptive act and how I have contributed to the suffering of Jesus . . . appropriating one’s own responsibility for one’s sin and comprehending the depth of Christ’s mercy in redeeming me personally: this sinner.

After that you develop your emotional foundtion through greater exercise of the intellect and will as you build to the point where (hopefully) you have some ability to commit your entire life to “God Our Lord.”
 
Remember that in some denominations, an emotional reaction is supposed to be proof of something, like the Mormons hava a “burning in the nosom”. So many people get all caught up in the emotions of an experience and mistake it for some kind of a sign of faith. Ever watch Benny Hinn? Then when the emotional feeling goes away, so does the “faith”. I don’t know the thread you were referring to, but this might have been what someone meant if he/she denigrated human emotions. :twocents:

Peace,
Linda
 
The life of faith encompasses all we are as human beings: our minds, our hearts, our souls, and our spirits. Of course, we have to have a proper balance of all those things.

For example, if we are puzzled by a doctrine, we don’t ask ourselves how we feel about it, but rather consult our priest or the CCC or some other reliable source of information.

Feelings are fine things to have and ought to be excited towards love and devotion for God and charity towards our neighbor.

Truth tells us what we are to believe and feelings help us put into practice acts of faith, hope, and charity.

The person who commented that feelings aren’t as essential as truth is correct, though. Too many people decide matters of truth based on their changeable feelings. C. S. Lewis said that such feelings aren’t to be trusted because they can deceive us, but we are definitely supposed to have feelings, it’s just that we ought to be in command of our feelings and put them in their proper place.
 
Hello, Fidelis
quote: Fidelis
I think this is my take on it as well. I would be the first to affirm that we are not called to be stoic automatons in our lives of faith, but at the same time warning against making it the basis or motor of our faith. When I hear that someone is so sad or angry or frustrated, that they have lost their faith in God, it annoys me just as much as when someone “reasons” themselves right out of the Faith.
Click to expand...
Oh, well said! I particulary appreciate:
…but at the same time warning against making it the basis or motor of our faith.
Click to expand...
I often wonder, whether those who *do *make the emotive
the “basis or motor” of faith, run into trouble, in terms
of their relation with God, when the going gets rough in
life.

Thanks for your thought,

reen12
 
Hi, LindaS

quote: LindaS
Then when the emotional feeling goes away, so does the “faith”.
Click to expand...
No challenge to that, from me. 🙂

That’s why I offered:
quote: reen12
I often wonder, whether those who *do *make the emotive
the “basis or motor” of faith, run into trouble, in terms
of their relation with God, when the going gets rough in
life.
Click to expand...
Sometimes, when I read, elsewhere, what some say
about “faith”, I feel like I’ve dropped onto the
“Planet Cute”, as Count Duckla said, in one of those
cartoons. 😃

I do think, based on my own experiece of listening to
other people -for nearly 60 years:eek: - that there are those,
in life, who use doctrine- as a shield, of sorts - to keep
Jesus at arms length - and who seem to hector others,
and say demeaning and dismissive things, to those who
hold that the emotive has a solid place, in the life of faith.

Does this make sense to you?
Best,

reen12*
 
Hi, Della,

quote: Della
Feelings are fine things to have and ought to be excited towards love and devotion for God and charity towards our neighbor
Click to expand...
That’s a good point.

I wonder how many realize, that the function of emotions,
in our lives, is to literally “get us into motion”…
to address injustice, to be indignant over same, where
called for…and then to act, prudently, on that just indignation.

[Jesus wasn’t just angry over the sellers in the Temple,
He took His cord, and *drove them out of the Temple
precincts.]

That the emotion, called “joy”, is a gift from God…He
gave us emotions for a purpose. They are not “secondary”
to intellect, but “move us” [emotive] to act on the
conclusions of intellect.

That I am “concerned” about getting the bills paid on time,
is a useful emotion…it gets me moving to write the checks.

I’ve come to a real appreciation of what emotions are,
and why God endowed us with same.

Best,

reen12
 
One additional thought:

One of the finest functions of emotions, is to alert us
to when we, ourselves, have been injured, by another…
most often by speech.

Anger, irritation or frustration, for instance, can let me
know that something that someone has said, has been
received, by me, as a wound, or injury. I can then choose
to respond, or, human nature being what it is, run a mile
in tight shoes to get away from- and then keep my distance
from- such a person… if the given person regularly employs
dismissive or demeaning speech, or an “in your face”
attitude.😦

Emotions are not “infallible.” I can feel “injured,” where
no injury was intended. In that case, reconciliation
can take place, in terms of a continued relationship.

As I said, emotions are not “secondary” to intellect,
but a solid partner, in both daily life - and in the life of
faith.

That’s my assessment, and I’m stickin’ with it. 😃

reen
  • do* feel better, having had an opportunity to vent.
    Thanks to all who had the patience to listen to same,
    and to those who were kind enough to respond.] :tiphat:
 
Hello, my friend,
Glad to see that you unburdened yourself. Of course, you know I had to put my :twocents: in.
I have never, and I mean never, been emotional. I have always used reason before feelings.
I know emotion can be good, and, sure, I get angry or experience happiness and joy, but always after reason.
My wife, now, is a different story. She is blessed with the “gift of tears,” and has a firecracker temper. She’s also the most loving and generous person I’ve ever known.
Obviously, our modes of spirituality are different. Hers is much more mystical (I don’t get John of the Cross and the others, she loves them), and mine is much more analytic. But, as you know, Maureen, that’s okay. The Catholic Church is a big tent, as long as one follows the Magesterium.
I just want to add one more thing: In some of the jobs I’ve had, emotions can get one killed, or prevent one from assisting another. E-room doctors, police officers & fire fighters have to tuck their emotions away so they can do their jobs. Maybe that’s why I’m the way I am.
No criticsm of emotion from me, unless that’s all there is.
Regards & hang in.
 
Hi, Strider!

Always good to hear from you.
Hello, my friend,
Glad to see that you unburdened yourself. Of course, you know I had to put my :twocents: in.
I have never, and I mean never, been emotional. I have always used reason before feelings.
I know emotion can be good, and, sure, I get angry or experience happiness and joy, but always after reason.
My wife, now, is a different story. She is blessed with the “gift of tears,” and has a firecracker temper. She’s also the most loving and generous person I’ve ever known.
Obviously, our modes of spirituality are different. Hers is much more mystical (I don’t get John of the Cross and the others, she loves them), and mine is much more analytic. But, as you know, Maureen, that’s okay. The Catholic Church is a big tent, as long as one follows the Magesterium.
I just want to add one more thing: In some of the jobs I’ve had, emotions can get one killed, or prevent one from assisting another. E-room doctors, police officers & fire fighters have to tuck their emotions away so they can do their jobs. Maybe that’s why I’m the way I am.
No criticsm of emotion from me, unless that’s all there is.
Regards & hang in.
Click to expand...
It might be of interest, that John of the Cross and
Teresa of Avila hold no place in my spiritual life.
I read them and say:
Yeah, yeah, yeah…cut to the chase, will ya?..
make… your… point! 🤓

I want a *diagram *of the Interior Castle- with Exit signs
clearly marked, well-lit stairwells, an escape route and, definitely, no poetry.

“Lemme see the building plans, before I wander in.”
about sums it up.]
My grandfather was an officer in the a fire department,
and I am, for sure, his grand-daughter. 😃

quote:Strider
I just want to add one more thing: In some of the jobs I’ve had, emotions can get one killed, or prevent one from assisting another. E-room doctors, police officers & fire fighters have to tuck their emotions away so they can do their jobs. Maybe that’s why I’m the way I am.
Click to expand...
I can well believe that, Strider.

quote: Strider
No criticsm of emotion from me, unless that’s all there is
Click to expand...
Sign me up for *that *cruise!

Seriously, it is the emotive element in biblical imagery
that sings- to this little soul

God bless you, Strider, my friend,

Maureen
 
Given your sentiments, the apologetics forum is the wrong place to be—what did you expect from an apologetics forum? There are other forums that might be more appropriate, such as the “Spirituality” forum. Coming here to vent your complaint is a bit like deciding to vacation in Minnesota in December and then, after spending a few days wondering just when you’ll get to use that new swimsuit you bought, cursing the cold and snow.
 
Agreed, and apologetics (well, at least good apologetics) must not ignore emotion. Check my signature for why.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
quote: mlchance [end of post]
Two errors: too exclude reason, and to exclude all but reason.
Click to expand...
  • Blaise Pascal. *
No argument with that. The reason [no pun] I was ticked
off, was the latter, on the part of some posters, IMO.

The conveyance of faith, without marked emphasis on
biblical sources [biblical imagery] is to give faith all
the charm of a legal brief, IMHO.

Benedict XVI has apparently urged greater reliance
on biblical imagery, in catechesis -
which fact may make some of those who have relied heavily, in
the past, on scholastic theology, ‘unhappy campers’
[to dip into emotive phraseology. :)]

It’s not a question of either/or, but of both/and, and if
the article I read accurately reflected the thought
of Benedict XVI, his papacy may emphasize
biblical imagery as a *balance - *to what I assess as
a dreary history of emphasing the scholastic
approach.

Benedict is, after all, an expert in biblical studies,
as opposed to the philosophical expertise of
John Paul II.

It’s interesting to me, that we apparently have two
giants, in succession. Benedict is considered
one of Europe’s leading intellects, and his papacy
will be very different from that of the former Pope -
because I believe that the tasks he will address, will
be different in kind [liturgical reform, a greater emphasis on
scripture, in terms of catechesis.]

These two popes are not in opposition to each other,
but rather complementary, in their approach to the
life of faith.

Just my thought.

Best regards,

reen12
 
40.png
reen12:
These two popes are not in opposition to each other,
but rather complementary, in their approach to the
life of faith.

Just my thought.

Best regards,

reen12
Click to expand...
Well said! 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top