Wednesday, December 31, 2008

To glimpse His face

I have been continuing to try to follow Fr. Roberto's three rules; then today, in my reading of Is It Possible to Live This Way? Volume 2 Hope, by Father Giussani, I came across a passage, which seems to give some help in following these rules:

But when God came, who recognized Him? He was recognized by the people who, in the face of what is arduous... who were living with feelings of humility, of trust in God, of abandon to God, of continuing certainty even with their trials; those who lived thus, recognized Him. So much so that some who lived thus even went so far at a certain point -- to wait for him -- as to live in the temple, like old Simeon, Anna the prophetess ... or the Christmas shepherds; or think about the spirit of Saint Joseph, but even before that, about the spirit with which Mary lived.

Those who had those sentiments recognized Him; those who didn't have them, did not even recognize Him when he raised Lazarus...

Therefore, the big question is to return to being little children -- "If you will not be like little children..." -- the big question is to return to the origin, the big question is to return to how God made us. Really, what is morality? Morality is to live with the attitude in which God made us. Only he who has this attitude recognizes His Presence... (Is It Possible to Live This Way? Volume 2 Hope, 46-47)

1 comment:

Tu Agenda Musical said...

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2009!

“Let's resolve this year to create a peaceful presence wherever we go…”
“We are called to be “missionaries of forgiveness and reconciliation…”

Christmas time continues…

I invite you to listen a special Christmas episode of my podcast “Levántate y Sal a Caminar…”

28 minutes of Christmas carols in many languages, meditations and more…

Jesus loves you.

Luisa Veyan S.
Listen it in:

Dumbstruck by the Mystery

...our temptation is always to impose our prejudices or our measure on reality -- except when we are faced with a fact that leaves us dumbstruck, and instead of dominating the fact ourselves, we are dominated, overcome by it. If there were no moments of this kind, the Mystery could do anything, but in the end, we would reduce everything to the usual explanation. But not even a Nobel Prize winner can stop himself from being dumbstruck before an absolutely gratuitous gesture. If there were not these moments, we would find answers, explanations, and interpretations to avoid being struck by anything. It is good that some things happen that we cannot dominate, then we have to take them seriously, and this is the great question of philosophy. If the conditions for the possibility of knowledge (see Kant) impose themselves on reality or if there is something that is so powerfully disproportionate that it does not let itself be "grasped" by the conditions of possibility, then the horizon opens. If this were not the case, then we could dominate everything and be in peace, or at least without drama. Instead, not even the intelligence of a Nobel Prize winner could prevent him from coming face-to-face with a fact that made him dumbstruck -- instead of dominating, it was he who was dominated. Here begins the drama, because I am called to answer. It is the drama that unfolds between us and the Mystery, through certain facts, certain moments, in which the Mystery imposes itself with this evidence. These are facts that we cannot put in our pocket, which we cannot reduce to antecedent factors.
-- Julian Carron in "Friends, that is, Witnesses."