JenellYB

Paul, we all have different lives, different circumstance of birth and life. We all have different lessons to learn in different ways in our lives. One's on the road to Omaha, One's on the road to Melbourne. not one a better or less good journey, just different. I do not understand why some must suffer so terribly. Beating myself up about my being better placed doesn't help them a bit. You could sell everything you have, and give to the poor, it wouldn't be a drop in the bucket, and you'd just be one more poor to add to the number.

I do remember something about the final scene in the movie "Schindler's List." It impacted me strongly. But what's odd is that the one that concerned himself with remorse, realizing he could have saved more, was the one that had actually done a lot to save some. When the little girl had to give up gathering up the starfish on the beach to throw back into the ocean, for that it has become to dark to see and she is just too tired to pick up and throw another one, will she agonize over those she has to leave behind? And will the old man that laughed at her foolishness for even bothering, sleep well that night, or will he think, too, of the stafish he didn't try to save?

But perhaps we are so placed in different lives so that we can help in different ways. Someone more well placed marerially, financially, may be able to do things to work on a bigger scale or just differently than one with less. Of those given more, more is expected. In that movie, Schindler's List, is was becasue Schindler was placed as he was, a wealthy businessman, that he was able to help those he did, and one in a different life place could not have had opportunity to do. And in that story, Schindler didn't start out with that intent, to help anyone, those people. Something in him changed in the course of the story, the events. It was his drive down the road to...wherever....compassion?

Jenell

Paul, I agree with you in that. And it is something many people of conscious struggle with. And each has to do that on their own, i suppose.

I can't boast of having done that better. I've never really been in a condition of relative wealth. My 'frivolities' have been neccesarily modest. One example you mention, should one go to Hawaii for vacation, or to Ethiopia to volunteer? I've heard people actualy make such choices....yet in that I have to wonder, well if your intent was to do the most good for those people in Ethiopia, why didn't you just send all that money the trip would cost to someone already over there helping people in Ethiopia, and spend youre vacation backing by your pool and bar-b-que?

But I can say I've done things at times, to help another, that practical good sense might say were foolish, because I really couldn't afford it, was doing without in some ways myself. Nut it wasn't because I thought it out, wieghed my conscience, is this what I SHOULD do, or in the common slogan is this what Jesus would do, or want me to do? No, actually, it was just that somehow I was moved, my heart was moved, to reach out. And if I could have done otherwise, it would have been hard to, and would have left me feeling, in my own self, I'd not done what was right by my own conscience. Sometimes, I'd like to help, and really can't, in a material way needed, there still may be a way to reach out to just let them know I care.

Perhaps that I did go through some really hard times myself, especially early in my adult life, and know how that feels, not just to have a need, a lack of something, but for someone to just show me they noticed, and cared. Some of the things i remember done for me that bring tears to my eyes were not big things, worth a lot of money, but that someone noticed, and cared, and responded to let me know that.

I remember, for example, I was 19, trying to take care of two babies by myself, even my own parents determined to not help me, because they didn't understand, didn't want to try to understand, my divorce, thought if I found out how tough things really are, Id 'do the right thing' and go back to my husband. there was no going back. they didn't get that. I was working at an open fronted convenience store, driving to work in an ancient car I'd bought for $50 (even in 1969, that was a CHEAP car!), a 2 door coupe. Neither door would open or close and latch, They were tied closed with wire. The passenger side window wouldn't roll down. The driver's side window was broken out, missing. I taped plastic sheeting over it. I came to work one day, it was cold, cold cold! All I had was a thin jacket. That's all I had. I was required to wear a skirt at work. I was so cold. My legs were goose-bumped and blotchy blue. I climbed out my dirver's side window and went in to relieve the pevious shift. I was so cold i could hardly talk. A customer, a man, I didn't remember seeing him before, didn't know him, a stranger.came out, smiled and asked "aren't you COLD?!" I smiled, lied...."oh, no, I LOVE this cold weather." I was embarrassed, ashamed to say otherwise. Then his expression changed, concerned, "you've GOT to be cold!" Again, i lied, denied it, laughed it off, "no, really, "I'm ok," shivering of course. He left. Thirty minutes later, the man came back...handed me a beautiful thick fake fur car coat, and an unopened pair of thick panty-tights. Said his wife said she didn't need these, would i like them...I accepted, still trying to pretend I was wasn't freezing...I was trying to not 'break', to maintian the pride, I'd been hard raised not to try to make people to feel sorry for me, to buck up when things got tough, you know, the 'when the going gets tough the tough get going' kind of attitude, but of course tears popped in my eyes...and he made it easy, quickly told me to have a good evening, and turned and left. I will ALWAYS remember that. Someone noticed, cared, and responded. Those ARE the kinds of things that stand out most in my memories of someone noticing, responding, letting me know they cared.

Jenell

I think it is important to look at the context of Jesus' words so often excised from that context and used in ways other than it was said, even contrary to how it was said. Even here, some are using (misusing?) it to try to instil guilt upon those that haven't given perhaps as much as they could to help the desperately needy. But that itsn't how Jesus said it. It is also commonly used in religious practice to manuipilate by guilt, more tithe or donation to the church or some charity, even from those that are themselves poor, suggesting Jesus meant the poor were less important that "Him/God?AKA THE CHURCH." (since of course God doesn't have a bank account!)

But look at it in context. Jesus KNEW what was just ahead, he KNEW he was in in final hours, about to endure somethng terrible....and all around him people are making merry...and in comes this woman, breaking open the seal on an extemely expensive albaster box to pour out upon his head very expensive and precious ointment.....in the eyes of the others, his own disciples that supposedly loved him, a waste, a total waste, of what could have been sold for 300 pence, and enormous sum, that could have been given to the poor, the needy. And Jesus rebukes them, defends her, glorifies her, with his words, the poor are always out there, but I AM HERE! I AM HURTING! And GRIEVED! And probably scared! I am facing something AWFUL! Don't you see me hurting? And all you, that claim to love me, can do is make merry and think about what could be done with that money? I NEED YOU NOW! i NEED YOU TO CARE, TO SHOW ME YOU LOVE ME AND CARE!

And what they didn't see, couldn't see it seems, this woman DID see, his pain, his grief, and it was immediate, now, and she RESPONDED to it. It doesn't say, or even suggest, she "knew he was God", that she did it becasue he was holy or divine. It wasn't an annointing of oil as done to crown a king, applied by a high priest...it was ointment, medicine, or precious ointment for annointing the body of the dead, poured out by an ordinary, nameless woman.

So yes, that 300 pence could have been used to feed the poor, do a lot more practical "good" than being wasted, poured out over the head of one that sat at meat with them, well fed. But he was HURTING, and NEEDED to be shown he was loved! And they missed it...SHE saw it. She acted, she poured out something precious just out of pure love and compassion for his pain she saw.

Now maybe that hundred bucks you were going to send to a big charity might have fed some really hungry people somewhere....but there is someone, a family member, a neighbor, sitting right next to you, that is hurting, needing someone to show them they are loved, cared about, and you aren't seeing it, aren't recognizing it, you are too busy eating and making merry and feeling good about that hundred bucks you sent to feed starving people somewhere. THAT is for what Jesus defended her, glorified her, and said, whereever this gospel, this message, this truth in these words are told, throughout the world, this act of hers shall be spoken as a memorial to her. To her LOVE, her seeing, noticing, and responding, to love one that was hurting and needing to know he was loved. Quite the oppostite of his disciples' view....who thought as some present his words...but just look how much more good this money can do somewhere far off over what it can do to this hurting, needy person right beside me.

Mark ch14:3 And being in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat, there came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very precious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head.

4 And there were some that had indignation within themselves, and said, Why was this waste of the ointment made?

5 For it might have been sold for more than three hundred pence, and have been given to the POOR. And they murmured against her.

6 And Jesus said, Let her alone; why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work on me.

7 For ye have the POOR with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.

8 She hath done what she could: she is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying.

9 Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.

Yvonne wrote: Growing up Catholic, I learned the "corporal works of mercy", and the "spiritual works of mercy. Included in these are visiting the sick and giving comfort and instruction. (here are the links if you're interested: http://catholicmessa...and-crowds.html, http://www.secondexo...orksofmercy.htm)

Perhaps an aside, even off topic here, but...while i was not raised Catholic, actually raised in an environment very negative and hostile toward Catholic, and myself can find many issues in which I differ and even might criticise anything about the Catholic church....something I did realize many years ago, is that Catholic teaching and PRACTICE has tradtionally been, still is, much more concerned with matters of charity, caring for the poor, the sick, taking in and taking care of the desperate, the orphaned, the abandoned, as well as upon the effort by the faithful at developing within themselves such as are called 'virtus' of character and kindness and humility and service, that anything I've ever encountered elswhere.

Jenell

Yvonne wrote : I do not think money is always the answer, either. Do we act like Jesus when we write a check for the poor but ignore our elderly neighbor who may need his lawn cut or the lady down the street who just wants somebody to visit? I think too many times we focus on the "big" things (like extreme poverty) and forget about the little things we can do right in our own neighborhoods. Again, I'm not saying we shoudn't write the check, just that money is not always answer.

and

Since I have seldom had a lot of surplus, I used to feel wretched and guilty whenever I saw an ad of starving children. I have always given from what little surplus I had, but i always felt I should do more. At some point in the last year or so, I finally stopped feeling guilty. I believe that what Jesus asked others to do is to "embody God" to one another - no matter what that means.

I think you are right on it here. I've often considered, that neither did Jesus promote gathering up charity contributions to send off to help starving people in distant foreign lands! I think it is about connecting and responding to people, not a cause. Though causes of course have their place, too. But different.

As you observe, how many people have we seen that give generously to causes like feeding the poor someplace else, while ignoring, even criticizing and looking down on, the needy right around them? In their own communities, neighborhoods, churches, and even families? Are they not just getting a selfish 'feel good' out of their giving, and thinking themselves generous and charitable, rather than having to actually BE compassionate in a personal context? Or condition who/when they help another on how much they like them or not personally?

And I think 'true giving' is not only giving on a personal level, and of oneself but also according to the balance of another's needs and our own resources in any particualr instance. Like you point out, the "need" is sometimes money, but often not. And sometime, for some, their own resources held in sufficient abundance to share is money, but also sometimes not. Should the financially and materially poor themsleves be made to feel shame and guilt for not giving away money and material goods what they need for their own well-being? And yet even such a one, with scarcely enough to get by themselves, encounter one actually about to starve to death, wiith no other to help, actually do without a meal themselves to give it to the other, to save their life? Some would.

But often what we have in abundance to give and what another needs isn't money. Often its just some time, some show of caring, some little way in which one CAN do for them something to help. Yes, mow the grass, maybe repair the rotted porch steps for the poor elderly or disabled neighbor, or even just take time to go sit on their porch with them a few minutes in the morning. Maybe make a point to check on one living alone at least once or twice daily, to make sure they are ok.

I don't think it is in "what" or "how much" is given, that matters, but the heart, the spirit in it.

Jenell

I think this question might miss something kind of along the line of missing the "Spirit of the Law" in the "Letter of the Law."

To use Jesus' outward life as the ideal, the model, for any or everyone else, misses that the principles He expressed were being manifested in the particular circumstances and conditions into which the man Jesus was born and lived out his life.

In the story of Jesus' life, we are told he never married. Never had to consider the responsiblities of having and caring for a family. Is it 'wrong' or 'less perfect' to marry, have a family? Of course not. Jesus wandered around teaching and preaching, we are not shown him doing much of any kind of productive work that contributed to society in a material way. Even the idea he was a carpenter by trade is not 'biblical.' He is not described or presented as a carpenter, but as being the son (foster/adopted son, actually, if the conception narrative is considered) of a carpenter. It is the ideal to wander around teaching and preaching and mentoring a bevy of aparantly equally idle disciples that had left their trades to follow him around?

As others note here, things would be pretty much a mess if no one was attending the business matters of life. Many are presented in the NT narratives as plying trades, having productive working lives. When Paul solicited contributions for the poor saints at Jeruselum from those in churches elsewhere, he only asked they contribute willingly what they would. Not give everything they had, or under any obligations to do so. On an incident in which a man supposedly fell down dead for having not given everything he had to a communal fund, having held back some for himself, it was not that he hadn't given everything, had held some back, but that he had CLAIMED to have given everything, and had lied, having secretly held back some.

Another, related matter affecting growth from within, that has come out of such studies, are how different groups, non-Christian, Atheist, Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, and that particular large evangical denomination, what is rates of non-biologically related adoptions....Evangelicals overall, that denomination in particular, scored rather poorly, with Catholics and Athiests actually coming in that in the lead.

That would be quite consistent with early church history, and much of Catholic church history, where there has always been a signficant focus on taking in and caring for orphaned and abandoned children. I have read the practice of early Christians actively seeking out and rescuing unwanted babies, to be raised as Christians, of course, that in Greek and Roman culture were commonly left out into isolated wilderness and abandoned to die of exposure, contributed signficantly to swelling the ranks of Christians in the early church.

Jenell

Well, that does make a certain kind of sense, doesn't it? But I don't know I'd limit to Catholics.....Protestants, Evangelicals. they may be a good deal more conflicted about that idea, particularly the Protestant prosperity ethic, in which reality collides with that the idea of what having lots of children do to one's material prosperity and comforts in real life...it may have once been prosoperous to have a lot of kids to provide lots of farm hands, but certainly that has changed...

Yet, I recall a study by Barna group a few years ago, have seen several others along the same line, where a study of a large well known evangelical denomination was conducted over several regions, about "church growth." Even within the churches showing most growth, and claiming to be seeker oriented, or evangelistic focused, the percentage of new membership by new conversion was only about 1.5%. And further broken down, those by new conversion of people with NOT Christian family/childhood background was less than .05%. The overwhelming number of "new members" were either transfers from other churches, biological growth (baptisms of children of members), and "re-commitments." The number/percentage of ADULT baptisms that were first time baptisms were so small as to hardly be measuable, most adult baptisms were re-baptisms of those first baptized as children or young adults. The facts of those statistics don't line up well at all with the evangelical perception of themselves as effectively reaching and bringing in the non-religious non-believers! That old thing that we really don't want to go fishing, we just want to find the ones already caught, cleaned, and ready for the skillet is aparantly all too true.

Jenell

Btw, for anybody anywhere near, or even occasionally passing through, the little town of Cleveland, Texas, just north of Houston, there is the most AMAZING resale/thrift store there, that have a steady supply of shelves and shelves of books, at cheap cheap cheap. I don't know where/how thet get them all, but seem to have some kind of steady deals going on to get large numbers of discarded library books, including many fairly recent best selling fiction, as well as recent college books, not only text books, but also many of the sort that are commonly assigned as secondary required reading by college course instructors, everythhig from literature, creative writing and other English, to historical, philosophical, and whatever.

Jenell

I have so, so many books stored away, that I read years ago, boxes and crates in attic and storage room...I really should pull them out, take something of an inventory, and offer them to others that would enjoy them. Or even set them out in a yard book sale or something. I recently did pass along my set of V.C. Andrew's 'Flowers in the Attic' series, as well as "Clan of the Cave Bear" and "Valley of Horses." I went through a fantasy/sci-fi reading phase quite a few years back, a bunch of that stuff here somewhere, too, even an old boxed set of Tolkien. That's not even to get into such things as classic works of philosophy and other non-fiction! And only God knows what else is around here somewhere!

Jenell

There's is also Terry Brookes much shorter, less complex, "Landover" series....for those seeking the experience of moving from this ordinary reality of the life we are familiar with, to step across into another realm that is magical...

Jenell

what an impotent god that mere humans can prevent his will.....

Omnipotence neccessitates God's Will will be done. If God hadn't willed that human kind develop knowledge and means to a choice in limiting procreation, He wouldn't have allowed it to happen.

At least, so it seems to me.

Jenell

Neon, but still they might have some insights into what it means in the Catholic doctrines, where it comes from....the why of it...as well as maybe how they recieved that teaching, processed it, to come to reject it.

Jenell

Good point, I think, Soma.

I've never been much for formalized prayer, or even those that might be set forth as useful for any to make use of. Even when they are quite beautiful, even poetic. I'm not much for flowery language and lengthy expressions of adoration and flattery to God's infinite benevolence and power. Nor much for groveling, as in I know I'm just a worm, unworthy of Your holy notice.....I'm more like, "Ok, God, here it is. Got this on my mind, just need to talk to You about it a bit....Yes, i "assume" much...a "real" presence that I'm talking to, and that I am accepted by and into that presence, and that there will be a reponse, without having to go through a bunch of rig-a-ma-ro and to-do about it. For me, to me, this is what "assurance" is about.

For me, prayer has just alwas been more a personal communicatiom, interaction. As such, I've tended to pray in what I'd call 'plain language,' conversational, much as i'd talk to/with another person I feel comfortable with.

But I have at times given considerable thought, even study, and mediation upon such matter as what is/is not "right prayer", and what might be to "pray amiss." I mean, to pray in things, about things, for things, that might have less than pure, honest, and loving motives or intent. Those things would include selfishness, espeically at the expense of others or in special advantage over others, depreciatory prayer, praying for harm against another, thought I might pray for restraint upon someone or something doing harm and injury, and even the wisdom, courage, for myself or others toward countering that. I don't believe in prayer, asking for, personal or selfish advantage, aganst/over others....such as maybe in context of competition, for 'help' in stomping, overcoming the other. I'm comforatble in such as that praying that I or another do their best, but not for their competitor to mess up, fail.

I am also wary of getting into areas i which I may be tryiing to impose my own will, my own wants, upon and for others, and how they act, what they might do. I may really think I know what is best for someone else, to do, or change in some way, or get, but I try to not let that direct my prayer focus, from recognition my opinion isn't what really matters, there is much involved I don't know. Again, just try to pray the best,as god knows that to be. that can be real hard when its people you care about, love, and really fear for them, their well-being. And I'm human, i can't say I can always keep that focus pure.

I take prayer very seriously. and it does bother me when I encounter someone 'using' it in ways intended to influence, manipulate, even hurt or insult someone else. Such as someone telling another, "Ih, I am so concerned about your soul, I'm i prayer to the Lord daily that you might see the error of your wicked ways and get straight and right with God...(often with 'in time', or 'before it's too late, ie before you die and go to hell) Ie, see the truth (agree with me, come around to my way of thinking, do what I say you should or want you too).

Jenell

Well, Neon, no, not quite.

Jenell

http://www.alltruebible.com/genesis_38-06.shtml

Then why allow the rhythm method?

 

George

To encourage the character virtue of self-control, self-restraint, self-denial, self-deprivation of pleasure?

Jenell

I feel a bit bad for having spoken in this so brashly about the history of the Catholic church...from what is a perspective apart ffrom the experience of those of Catholic back ground...they may see it differently, and I meant to offense to them. That the Church has done such things does not confer guilt by association upon any that have been brought up in or themselves Catholic. Catholics, too, have surely had to wrestle with these questions.

Yes, some insight from a perspective closer to Catholicism would help.

Jenell

So often the words are just not there for the Spirit speaks in matters for which we have no words...

Jenell

rhanks, Paul...from your list , there are a couple later ones I've missed....I used to read a lot more fiction than now....in some ways, 6 yrs of college experience severely damaged some of my reading enjoyment. Kind of like years ago I took up pet grooming because I loved working with animalsm spent nearly 30 yrs at it...still love my animals, but my dog's shaggy coats and long toenails are shameful.

Jenell

Yvonne....for REAL?

Jenell

On a very personal level, yes. I do take my concerns, feelings, for others, and the difficult times they may be going through, may be suffering. Often as much for as much just offerring up my compassion for them to God, the universe, the ground of being, my sincere want to help draw peace to the matter....perhaps even send out my own 'energy' in thought to offer toward them my love, my caring, toward a hope for their peace, comfort, and in all, what only God knows is best for them, that I cannot. And at times, share a prayer time with them, in their presence, in the same focus...

Often that is just a few minutes of quiet time, privately, in meditation...but occasionally, in a more intentional and intensely focused way...sometimes setting a setting, perhaps a candle, a photo or other meaningful objects I connect to them, even toward moving into a meditative 'visualization', that may be of some light or energy of peace and healing directed upon them, even a few times, a very intimate visualization, of my being present with them, laying my hands upon, stroking their pain, or passing my hands over their body as in the actual motions of administering a Reiki session were they in my physical presence..seeking to draw off pain and negative energies, transmit more postive ones..a form of 'spiritual or energy distance healing' ritual. But that is something I've had to learn to be careful with, and do not engage as often or as quickly and easily as I once did at another time in my life, for I am a too empathetic person, I too easily take onto/into myself, the pain of others. I was told by a couple of my instructors in psychology, who either were or had been active in clinical and therapy applications, these are gifts that at once can make one a most insightful and effective counselor or therapist, but also at once, that is usualy not a good direction for them, that many such are fast burned out, their own lives troubled, for that very same reason....just as we cannot give to others what we do not have ourselves, neither can we really help others rise up out of the depths if we are instead by it pulled down into those depths with them.

and yes, as bobv2, I try to seek what I might be able to do, in any practical sense, that would serve as intermediary in taking to them anything within my own abilities and resouces to give.

Jenell

Terry Brookes, especially his Shannara series, did that for me....after Tolkien, anyway....

Jenell

But, couldn't this be extended to medical non-intervention in any situation; let nature/God take its course.

George

Actually, George, throughout much of Catholic church histroy, it was. the whole fabrication of what witches were was constructed by the church in its enmity toward those that practices 'healing arts', mostly women, that used such things as herbs and compounds of other natural ingredients, as well as physical practices such as manipulating broken bones back into place, even attempts at sterilization through cleanliness, to help heal. Midwives were especially targeted, for their work involved not only helping to releive the pain and trauma of women giving birth, which was interfering with God's intended suffering upon them, but interfering in ways such as re-positioning the infant to save the lives of both mothers and infants, that in the church view, God had intended to die.

The practice of male physicians attending women's labor and delivery actually arose out of a history in the church of requiring the presence of a priest at delivery and birth, whose functionn and role wasn't anything involving assisting the birth, but merely making sure there was no assisitance given, that nature took its God willed course, and to be on hand to administer last rghts were things to go badly.

Later medical advance met similar objection from the church...medicine and other interventions that helped prevented and helped survival of diseases were preventing God's will. Early development of proceedures that treated the deaf, allowed them to hear, was terribly blasphemous in light of scripture that says salvation comes first by HEARING the gospel, the Word, and God had not intended those deaf people to HEAR it and therefore be 'saved."

Jenell

Is the prohibition against birth control also a remnant of the "sex is only for procreation not pleasure" attitude?

Dutch

I think this might be closest to the truth root of it. Pleasure, most especially physical please, is bad, wrong, evil.

But, also, perhaps to take a step further, sexual pleasure, to its connection to the idea of sex as being "the orginal sin.' And that woman's punishment for that being her suffering in childbirth. Which of course, proceeds to the pain and risk of pregnancy and childbirth, as well as the burden for care of the child, a "punishment" in itself, both for woman being woman, and for having sex to begin with. and darned if God intended people be so "punished" for having sex, we shouldn't be trying to interfere with, prevent, the carrying out of God's punishment!

Perhaps the allowance for "natural rythym method" is some measure of God's merciful reward for it's merit as inducing humans to exercise at least some effort at controlling how often they engage in that sinful sex act. and of course, since its the woman's responsiblity and burden to keep yp with all that monthly cycle thing, she can also take the blame for the burden and hardship she brings upon her poor husband for having yet another hungry mouth to feed.

In all the poilical/social flap about it right now, I think some of that is still there, you play, you pay, but also, that it is less about convictions about birth control than about people feeling they have little control over their lives, and it is just one more thing to set up as how government is somehow trying to control their lives and curtail their freedoms.

yeah. I know. cynical.

Jenell

Is Jean Auel's Earth's Children seriies the same as, by another name, Clan of the Cave Bear, Valley of Horses...? Or different?

Jenell