"One headline why believe it?"

So many thoughts, so many threads, so much going on. I am glad I returned to blogging because I can't take the pace of other social media platforms these daze. What is happening is nothing short of a media blitzkrieg. This is deliberate and done in the service of a far from transparent agenda.

Claims, counterclaims, counter-counterclaims, and so it goes into an infinite regress. "The common good" is just a phrase invoked on occasion. It seems to me that little is done in service of our common good.

Taken from Together for the Common Good, a U.K. Charity

What is the common good? The common good is that which seeks to enable and facilitate the flourishing of everyone. As such it is opposed to some socially Darwinistic society of winners and losers. The common good is the opposite of narrow and self-serving. It is the genuine ordo amoris as opposed to a narrow conception of this concept, which urges one to narrow rather than expand what might be called one's circle of concern. Especially if you're someone who's relatively well-off and comfortable, seeking the common good requires you look beyond your own interests and take account of the interests of those less well-off, especially those who are uncomfortable and struggling.

A few days ago, I listened to an episode of The Russell Moore Show featuring Robert Putnam ("Beyond Bowling Alone: Finding Community in an Isolated Age"). This is a vital conversation. Polarization has become the very nature of our politics. It is eating away at society and eroding our civilization.

Politics don't seem to any longer be about achieving ends that will enable flourishing. The means used to achieve desired ends, even when those ends aren't bad in and of themselves, seem to me aimed at creating further polarization, at winning and making losers. According to Putnam, whose body of work is worth enaging with, the answer is to connect with others and not primarily (or even secondarily) for political purposes. You may want to watch a recent film about Putnam, now showing on Netflix: Join or Die.

I love the old slogan of The Christopers: "It's better to light a candle than curse the darkness." While it is certainly better to light a candle, it is often easier and I would say sometimes necessary, to curse the darkness. But then, I don't want to promote the very thing I am arguing against. I was reminded this morning of a passage from the second chapter of Ephesians, the summary of which is verse 14:

For he [Jesus Christ] is our peace, he who made both one and broke down the dividing wall of enmity, through his flesh

I also want to point to something from Pope Francis' his recent letter to the U.S. Bishops, g that has been overlooked and that applies more broadly than to immigration. Found in section 7 of his letter, the Holy Father warns about the imposition of "the will of the strongest as the criterion of truth." Introducing the will of the strongest as the criterion of truth obliterates any authentic conception of the ordo amoris and, hence, the common good. It's hard to think of anything less Christian.

Please join me in praying for Pope Francis, who remains in hospital. He's battling pneumonia and a respiratory infection. When it comes to matters of the common good, to abiding by a proper conception of the ordo amoris, one rooted directly in the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ, I believe we need his witness right now.

While it certainly lacks subtlety, our Friday traditio, sticking with my distinctly '80s vibe during this early part of 2025, our traditio is Tears for Fears, "Everybody Wants to Rule the World."

Year C Sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time

Readings: Jeremiah 17:5-8; Psalm 1:1-4.6; 1 Corinthians 15:12.16-20; Luke 6:17.20-26

When giving blessings, priests and deacons often begin by quoting Psalm 124: “Our help is in the name of the Lord.” To which the one(s) receiving the blessing, along with everyone else present, responds with, “Who made heaven and earth.”¹ More than a throwaway line, this is meant to acknowledge God’s goodness and power before conveying His blessing.

This is a gentler way of saying what the prophet Jeremiah, says in our first reading, when he insists that the person who puts his trust human beings is cursed while calling blessed the one who puts her trust in God. It is so easy to get caught up in human affairs that the Kingdom of God, which Jesus came to inaugurate and will return to fully establish, becomes something of an abstract idea instead of the concrete reality it should be for Christians. Our mission is to make the Kingdom present in the here and now even as we wait in joyful hope for Christ's return.

Our Gospel today, taking its name from the part of the passage that tells us Jesus “stood on a stretch of level ground,” is Luke’s Sermon on the Plain.² Quite obviously, this is a parallel passage to Saint Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount. Not only is the ground more level, what Jesus teaches in Luke is a bit more plain.

There is no way to get around the difficulty of either our reading from Jeremiah or our Gospel. God’s kingdom as taught by Jesus seems like something of a bizarro world to us, that is a backwards world, the world turned upside down. Blessedness, according to Jesus, has nothing to do with worldly success. Rather, worldly success often endangers blessedness.

Who were the false prophets to whom Jesus referred? These were the ones who were the opposite of Jeremiah and the true prophets. False prophets told the people and those in power what they wanted to hear, not what they needed to hear. “All is well,” they said, while insisting nothing needed to change, embracing the status quo.

Jeremiah in the Sistine Chapel, by Michelangelo. Yorck Project, 2002. Public domain Wikipedia Commons.

Prophets called Israel back to fidelity to its covenant with God. As you might imagine, this often did not go down well. Jeremiah, born into a priestly family, was called by God to his prophetic ministry at a young age. His prophetic career spanned five decades. Over the course of that time, he was repeatedly persecuted.

Jeremiah’s prophetic message centered around calling out Israel’s idolatry, social injustices, and moral decay. It was part and parcel of the message of every true prophet to stand up for the poor and powerless to the rich and powerful. Jeremiah learned from a young age to trust in God, not in man. He learned this through many trials.

Members of Jeremiah’s family tried to kill him because he prophesied against idolatrous shrines. When he complained to God, the Lord told him, "Don't worry, it will get worse." As a result of resistance to his message and persecution, more than once, Jeremiah threatened to quit being a prophet. He was also beaten, imprisoned, and put in the stockade. Finally, Jeremiah was exiled to Egypt against his own will, where he likely spent the rest of his life.

Jesus himself was arrested, subjected to a sham trial, stripped, beaten, and crucified. In other words, being the prophet par excellence, Jesus experienced the treatment of a prophet, of one who challenged human power not only in the name of God but as true God from true God. His message is consistent with that of the Old Testament prophets, both major and minor, who challenged the status quo and the misplaced priorities of religious and political leaders.

What is the takeaway for us from all this? As Christians, we serve the poor and dispossessed and are committed to helping end their destitution. We feed the hungry, which is one of the corporal works of mercy. We both suffer with (that is what the word compassion means) and comfort those who weep, those who are scared, suffering, distraught.

While, according to Jesus, being despised on account of God’s Kingdom is a cause for rejoicing, if we read a bit further on in the same chapter of Luke, several verses beyond our Gospel passage, Jesus nonetheless teaches: “love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.”³

We’ve heard a lot bit lately about the so-called ordo amoris, the order of love, which is set forth by Saint Augustine.⁴ In his recent letter to the U.S. bishops, rather than getting bogged down in a precise interpretation of an extra-biblical theological concept, Pope Francis insisted: “The true ordo amoris that must be promoted is that which we discover by meditating constantly on the parable of the ‘Good Samaritan,’ which is also found in Luke, “that is,” the Holy Father continues, “by meditating on the love that builds a fraternity open to all, without exception.”⁵

In a world torn by strife and rife with human division, this remains a prophetic message. The Parable of the Good Samaritan is a masterclass in love of neighbor. The man beaten, robbed, and left for dead is presumably a devout Jew, though this is not made explicit. It is safe to say that Jews despised Samaritans more than Samaritans despised Jews. Yet, Jesus made a Samaritan, who he sets in opposition to very devout Jews, perhaps only concerned with their own ritual purity, who cross the road to avoid the man beaten bloody, the protagonist.

Jesus taught this parable in answer to the question, “Who is my neighbor?” He ends this teaching by saying, “Go and do likewise," saying in effect, “Go and do like this Samaritan.” I think it's hard for us to imagine how humbling, perhaps even humiliating, this would sound to Jesus’ interlocutors. Hence, meditating deeply on this parable is precisely what will guide you to a rightly ordered love of neighbor, which, in the end, according to Jesus, is what truly matters.

---

1 Psalm 124:8.^↩
2 Luke 6:17.^↩
3 Luke 6:27-28.^↩
4 Saint Augustine. City of God, Book XV, 22.^↩
5 See Luke 10:25-37; Letter of the Holy Father Francis to the Bishops of the United States of America, sec. 6.^↩

Addendum on agape

My post for yesterday was longer than intended. In thinking a bit more about agape (i.e., self-giving, self-sacrificing, kenotic love- Christlike love), which for Christians is the supreme form of love, I offer a few more thoughts.

Probably the closest human analogy to divine agape is the love of a parent for her/his child. More specifically, the love of a mother for her child. In lamenting over the inhabitants of the Holy City, Jerusalem, in Matthew, Jesus says- "how many times I yearned to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her young under her wings" (Matthew 23:37). Or, God speaking to Israel through the prophet in Isaiah: "Can a mother forget her infant, be without tenderness for the child of her womb? Even should she forget, I will never forget you" (Isaiah 49:15).

This brings me back to 1 John 4:7-16, the passage in which the phrase "God is love" appears twice. The conclusion of this is: "Beloved, if God so loved us, we also must love one another" (1 John 4:11). It is through the love of God given us in Christ, which is poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, that we become children of God (see Romans 5:5).

As God's children, we are sisters and brothers. For Christians, in light of our baptism, water is thicker than blood. As the Holy Father notes in section 7 of his letter to the U.S. bishops, it is certainly thicker than and even transcends other identifications and affiliations we may have.

Love that is agape is profuse, abundant, copious, extravagant, freely given. It is outwardly not inwardly directed. At the beginning of the Kenotic hymn found in the second chapter of Philippians, Saint Paul urges Christians - "Have among yourselves the same attitude that is also yours in Christ Jesus" (see Phil 2:5-11).

Hence, God's love is not something to be held onto merely for my own sake. Rather, as Jesus gave Himself freely, I am to give myself freely.

This post was originally longer. However, it was quite repetitive of the post for which is was written as an addendum. So, I stuck with brief a amplification of the meaning of agape.

Orders of love and the order of love

Saint Valentine's Day remains a big day in the United States. This, despite the fact that on the Roman Catholic liturgical calendar 14 February is the Memorial of Saints Cyril and Methodius. Especially on Valentine's Day love is reduced to romance and romance to sex. On social media leading up to today, I have seen a huge number of memes that issue warnings like- "In 9 months you can be fishing with your friends or home changing diapers. Choose wisely this Valentine's Day." While I appreciate, on the one hand, the connection between and procreation so often lacking today and even, on some level, the humor, this helps prove my assertion.

Even the perfectly good Greek word eros becomes the adjective "erotic" and erotic becomes synonymous with sex, despite having an original meaning that goes beyond mere physical pleasure. As I write, the title of a Walker Percy novel occurs to me: Love in the Ruins.

Additionally, Valentine's day, like all other such days, become an occasion to spend money. For this day, money is dropped on chocolates, flowers, jewelry, lavish meals, and so-called "intimate apparel." Ads frequently consist of some variation of "show how much you love her by buying..." This despite the fact that Saint Valentine was a martyr. These days don't seem to require a rationale. Most people know little and care even less about some remote figure named Valentine. The same goes for the person in whose honor the next like-minded holiday is named after: Saint Patrick.

Did you know Saint Valentine is also the patron saint for people afflicted with epilepsy, and of beekeepers?

Saint Valentine relic in the church of Santa Maria in Cosmedin, Rome, photo by Dnalor 01 - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0.

As long-time readers know, I feel much the same way about the secular Christmas season that run parallel with the liturgical season of Advent and seeks to do away with the actual season of Christmas. This has nothing to do with me being opposed to enjoyment, fun, or celebration. I am in favor of all three. It just think when the roots of what is celebrated are lost, the metaphorical tree slowly dies. This dying has a profound impact on culture and, through culture, on society.

In the Song of Songs we read "love is as strong as death" (8:6). In and through Jesus Christ, love conquered death. This conquest shows that love is not merely as strong as death but that love is stronger than death. For a Christian, like Saint Valentine, this is everything!

In John 15:15 Jesus calls his disciples (there are not apostles in John's Gospel) philous, that is, friends. With eros, philia is another Greek word for love. Philia is friendship. For Aristotle, friendship was love's highest form. Elsewhere in the Johannine corpus, however, we read twice in the space of eight verses that "God is love" (see 1 John 4:8-16). Agape is the Greek word for love in this passage.

Agape refers to self-giving, self-sacrificing, self-emptying (kenotic) love. For Christians, therefore, agape is the highest form of love. It is important to note that "God is love" is not logically reversible. The inverse property of multiplication, which holds that 5x4=20 and 4x5=20, doesn't apply. Love is not God. God is love.

Agape does not obliterate or conquer eros and/or philia. Rather, agape enfolds them and deepens them. Dare I say agape "sanctifies" the other forms of love? When considered in a Christian way, because it is a sacramental sign of Christ's love for His Bride, the Church (errant spouse she may sometimes be), Christian marriages should show this. After all, sacraments are visible and tangible signs of Christ's presence in and for the world, n'est ce pas?

Any saint's day or, as with today, any saints' day, is a celebration of the God who is love and of the friendship we have with God through Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. Understanding God as a Trinity of divine persons implies God is love. What is the Holy Spirit if not the love between the Father and the Son personified? This, in a nutshell, is why I am an unabashed double processionist. To be baptized is to be immersed, plunged, into the life of God.

__________________________________________________

Since love is today's theme, it is fitting to mention the recently revived ordo amoris. I have been more than a little bemused reading several criticisms of the Holy Father's letter to the U.S. bishops with regard to his treatment of the ordo amoris. The ordo amoris was brought into recent public discourse by the Vice President. He seems to have invoked is as a justification for a lot what the present administration is doing (or seeking to no longer do) with regard to immigration and foreign aid. In any case, these criticisms were basically how the Pontiff got Saint Augustine's theology wrong.

In his letter, I don't think Pope was attempting a precise theological exposition of Saint Augustine's ordo amoris. To me, he seems to attempt something of a corrective to it, at least to a lazy use of it in a political and self-justifying way. His corrective is an appeal directly to the teaching of Jesus Christ to whom, apart perhaps from the just love of self (which is maybe the cornerstone of the ordo amoris properly understood), as in "love your neighbor as yourself," such a construct would be foreign.

Specifically, the Holy Father points to the parable of the Good Samaritan, which was told in response to the question "Who is my neighbor?" He noted:

The true ordo amoris that must be promoted is that which we discover by meditating constantly on the parable of the "Good Samaritan" (cf. Lk 10:25-37), that is, by meditating on the love that builds a fraternity open to all, without exception" (Letter of the Holy Father to the Bishops of the United States of America, sec. 6)

Without a doubt, what Jesus teaches is hard to live, which is why a lot of theological effort is put into explaining it away, reducing His teaching to nothing but our own status quo in which conversion is neither desired nor needed. It is of this essence of Christianity to overcome an us-vs-them view of things.

__________________________________________________

Loving is difficult for many reasons, not least among which is that it requires understanding. It certainly requires understanding who is my neighbor. As the same passage from 1 John, cited above, notes, we can love because we have first been loved. Hence, I am to love in the same way Christ loves me. The love of Christ is an experience, the result of an encounter (see the first section of Pope Benedict XVI's first encylical letter, Deus caritas est, which letter also contains a wonderful exposition on eros, philia, and agape).

Our Friday traditio is HoJo asking "What Is Love?"

Memorial of Saint Scholastica, Virgin

Option to use readings for the Monday of the Fifth Week in Ordinary Time
Readings: Genesis 1:1-19; Psalm 104:1-2.5-6.10.12.24.35; Mark 6:53-56

Whenever I read the first creation account from Genesis 1, I am struck by two things. First, I am struck by the beauty of the poetry, which translates well into English. Given that, even as a Catholic, albeit a convert who grew up reading it exclusively, I think the King James Version brings this out best.

Secondly, I am struck by the evolutionary structure of this poem about creation. In it we hear of life evolving from its simplest to its most complex form, culminating in the creation of human beings, an event that happens beyond the end of our first reading.

The second creation account, which begins with the fourth verse of Genesis 2, is more primitive. According to “the Documentary Hypothesis” widely accepted by Old Testament scholars, the first five books of the Bible, that Christians call the Pentateuch, are a synthesis or, in more scholarly language, a redaction, of four distinct sources. This redaction, scholars posit, was likely carried out during reigns of David and Solomon around BC 1000.

The four sources are designated J, P, E, & D. These are the first letters of Jahwist, Priestly, Elohist, and Deuteronomic respectively. According to this hypothesis, the first creation narrative is P and the second is J. Given the stark contrast between the two, J would be the most opposite of P.

I think the poetry and precision of P account, the latter resulting in its evolutionary structure, give us some hint as to how faith and reason work together. Poetry represents beauty and evolutionary structure truth. Therefore, we have two of the three transcendentals: truth and beauty. Along with the good, the three transcendentals, while distinct, are inseparable and overlap in various ways.

In his seminal book, The Religious Sense, the Servant of God, Msgr. Luigi Giussani sought to show that

the nature of reason expresses itself in the ultimate need for truth, goodness, and beauty. These needs constitute the fabric of the religious sense, which is evident in every human being everywhere and in all times. So strong is this sense that it leads one to desire that the answer to life's mystery might reveal itself in some way (The Religious Sense, i)

Later in this book, Giussani notes that the human being is the point at which nature becomes conscious of itself (The Religious Sense, 25).

If human being is the point at which nature realizes itself, then Jesus Christ is the One in and through whom the human being realizes herself. As the Second Vatican Council’s Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World states it:

The truth is that only in the mystery of the incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light. For Adam, the first man, was a figure of Him Who was to come, namely Christ the Lord. Christ, the final Adam, by the revelation of the mystery of the Father and His love, fully reveals man to man himself and makes his supreme calling clear (sec. 22)

In our Gospel, as Jesus and His disciples cross the Sea of Galilee, tying up at Gennesaret, we read that the people there “immediately recognized [Jesus]” (Mark 6:54). Their recognition caused them to bring all their sick to be healed by Him. Being healed certainly makes you feel more yourself.

While I don’t want to dismiss or dispute the reality of Jesus’ physical healings as set forth in this passage from Mark, I think it’s important to have some insight into their meaning, especially because those healed would still die someday. The meaning, I believe, is found in Mark 2, in the pericope of Jesus healing the paralyzed man.

Seeing the long line of people outside the house in which Jesus was performing physical healings, the man’s friends went up on the roof of the house. They somehow got the paralyzed man, who was on a stretcher, on the roof with them. They then lowered him down through the roof until he was right in front of Jesus.

Seeing the man, Jesus’ first words to him were “Child, your sins are forgiven.” Without a doubt, this caused dismay not only among the murmuring scribes, but the man and his friends. There was no empirical sign that anything was different. Knowing their thoughts, Jesus rebuked them. He then asked, “Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, pick up your mat and walk’?” He continued, “’But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins on earth’— he said to the paralytic, ‘I say to you, rise, pick up your mat, and go home.’” At which point, the man does just that (See Mark 2:1-12).

Jesus Christ doesn’t only reveal man to himself, He seeks to renew and restore, to revitalize, you by making you truly yourself- who God made and redeems you to be. In so doing, He renews nature by His goodness, restoring its truth and beauty as set forth in Genesis.

Saint Scholastica, who we venerate today, was the sister of Saint Benedict. Like him, she was a monastic. Cenobitic, or community-based, monasticism, of which Benedict and Scholastica are held to be the founders, is an intense way to live a fully human life, a Christlike life. Like Christ’s life, monastic life is eschatological, meaning it points beyond itself to the full realization of God’s kingdom. You, too, need to seek to be like Christ and to make Him present wherever you are. For where He is, there is the Kingdom, which is nature perfected by grace.

Call and response

Readings: Isa 6:1-2a.3-8; Ps 138:1-5.7-8; 1 Cor 15:1-11; Luke 5:1-11

Taken together, our readings for this Fifth Sunday of Ordinary Time in Year C of the Sunday cycle are about vocation, being called by God. Vocare is a Latin verb best translated as to call. Audire in Latin means "to hear" whereas obedire, from which derive the word "obedience," means to listen to, to heed, to hearken unto, if you want sound traditionally "biblical" in English.

To be realized, a call needs a response. You can hear something and not respond. At least in terms of Christian vocation, choosing not to respond is always a possibility. Forcing you to do His will goes against God's very nature. No vocation is inevitable.

In our first reading from Isaiah, the prophet's call is mystically and dramatically set forth. Note that the call is given in the form of two questions: "Whom shall I send? Who will go for us?" The response? "Here I am... send me!" In the NABRE translation, note the exclamation point at end of the response.

As this passage from Isaiah shows, prior to that, the one who responds is not worthy of the call. Hence the Christian cliche, "God doesn't call the qualified. He qualifies the called." As a wise mentor once said to me, "You're not worthy. Get over it."

In our reading from 1 Corinthians, in addition to containing what we can call the earliest known creed, Paul writes obliquely about his own call and response, including his own unworthiness to be called as an apostle. Now, keep in mind, an apostolos is one who is sent. Again, in Christian terms, it means one who is sent by Christ to bear witness to what s/he has seen and/or heard.

I write "s/he" because, for scriptural reasons, Saint Mary Magdalene is revered as "the apostle to the apostles." Paul felt he was unworthy of his call because, as we know from the Acts of the Apostles, he was a zealous persecutor of the Church. He even had blood on his hands.

Our Gospel is Jesus' call of his first followers. Apparently, Jesus had convinced Peter, James, and John to let him use their boat to teach the people. It seems equally as apparent that, according to the inspired author of Luke, these fishermen not only heard, but listened to Jesus' message. After teaching, Jesus told them to put out into the deep water, a command they obey. After protesting that they had fished all night and caught not a fish, these fisherman also acquiesced when he told them to lower their nets into the water.

Used under Creative Commons License courtesy of Gospel Images

After hauling in their massive "catch," Peter realized that this was no ordinary man, not even the extraordinary man to whose teaching they listened, but someone to be heeded, hearkened unto, followed. According to this inspired account, "they left everything and followed him." Peter follows the pattern of heeding the call despite his declared unworthiness.

While Catholics don't generally use these categories, when it comes to salvation, there are what might be characterized as three movements: redemption, justification, and sanctification. Simplistically, all are redeemed by Christ. All who accept the redemption he wrought are justified. Those who are justified are now being sanctified, made holy, becoming more and more like Christ. At root, this is the basic Christian vocation: to be made holy through cooperation with God's grace, using the ordinary means of grace to become more like Christ through the ordinary circumstances of your life.

My calling is to be a deacon. What does it mean for me to be a "better" deacon? Is it even possible? Because I am a deacon by ordination, I am a deacon by God's grace. So, this is God's doing, not mine. Hence, my call is a call to serve others.

Unsurprisingly, when I look at the late Cardinal Avery Dulles' Models of Church, I am most drawn to the servant model. Like justification theories and even Balthasar's eccelsiology, it isn't about picking the "best" model. The Church, the Body of Christ, is an irreducibly complex, multifaceted, reality. And so, each "model" has its place and the Church can't be reduced to one. This is also why ecclesia semper reformanda is perennial.

Elsewhere in Luke's Gospel, Jesus tells the Tweleve "I am among you as one who serves" (Luke 22:27). One who serves in Koine Greek is a diaknon. And so, translated literally, Jesus says, "I am among you as a deacon."

Diakonia is not only for deacons. The call to service is inherent being a Christian. As I have written before, just as there is a priesthood of the baptized, there is also a diaconate of the baptized. In his first encyclical letter Deus Caritas Est, Pope Benedict XVI insisted:

The Church's deepest nature is expressed in her three-fold responsibility: of proclaiming the word of God (kerygma-martyria), celebrating the sacraments (leitourgia), and exercising the ministry of charity (diakonia). These duties presuppose each other and are inseparable. For the Church, charity is not a kind of welfare activity which could equally well be left to others, but is a part of her nature, an indispensable expression of her very being (sec. 25a)

This call to be charitable, that is, the call to self-sacrificing service, is not subject to political changes or governmental whim. It is a call to serve the least among us, to care for those who are most vulnerable to oft-changing winds.

"'Cause in your dreams/The demon screams..."

It seems like Christmas and New Year's were eons ago. But celebrating the Presentation of the Lord in the Temple reminded me that last Sunday only marked 40 days since Christmas Day.

The past week has been calmer for me personally. I am grateful for that.

It's dawning on me now more that ever that I am really not very good at life. During my lectio yesterday morning, for which I am using Laurence Devillairs' The Philosophy Cure: Lessons on Living from the Philosophers, I contemplated matter of suffering.

I have to say, in my life most of the suffering I've endured is of my own making. And that in the big scheme of things, I have not suffered much. Nonetheless, whatever form it takes, suffering is, well, suffering. It's an unavoidable part of being human.

It has also become very clear that I have a hard time being light-hearted and just letting myself be free. It's as if I need a burden to carry, a worry to tarry. While I regret the self-absorption that depressive suffering sucks me into, I don't regret any compassion I've ever shown to anyone. Helping other people carry their burdens is something of a vocation for me. Though, these days, ministry doesn't afford much by way of this.

Something Saint Paul wrote in his Second Letter to the Corinthians has slowly become my favorite scripture passage:

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our affliction so that we will be able to comfort those who are in any affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God (1 Cor. 1:3-4, NASB)

It just so happens that this particular passage serves as the scriptural reading for Sunday, Evening Prayer II, Week I of the Psalter.

Here's what I wrote in response what I read yesterday- bear in mind these are just notes: "Suffering: a good topic for martyr's memorial [yesterday was the Memorial of St. Paul Miki & Companions, Martyrs]. Descartes philosophy was not disembodied. His whole philosophy is usually reduced to one Meditation [really, Part 1 of Meditation II in Meditations of First Philosophy]. Optimism is not hope. Hope is the cross. Optimism is denial or avoidance of the cross. God is not cruel. Hesed as lovingkindness."

Descartes' Meditation VI in his best know work, as DeVillairs reminded me, "contains another foundational experience of the self - one that is mediated by suffering." This resonates with me. I never feel more alone than when I am suffering. When suffering, I never feel more by myself and, hence, never feel more myself. Empathy helps me. I find some consolation in someone who was been through something akin to what I am experiencing sharing their own ordeal with me. Sympathy can be nice, too, as long as it doesn't become prescriptive and pietistic.

Here's what I wrote as a kind of resolution for the day yesterday: "Enjoy today- be lighthearted." Easy, right?

In reality, my life is good and I shouldn't complain, but sometimes I do. Sometimes I often complain. In his autobiography, G.K. Chesterton wrote: "I hope it is not pompous to call the chief idea of my life; I will not say the doctrine I have always taught, but the doctrine I should always have liked to teach. That is the idea of taking things with gratitude, and not taking things for granted."

So, this is not merely put on a happy face and pretend all is always well. How I feel isn't always up to me and it is, at least in part, constitutive of my person. Looking at the world through gray-tinted glases much of the time, I see a lot of beauty, a lot of grace in the grit of life. Sunflowers appearing in unexpected places is for me a miracle.

I also tend to take a lot for granted. This is especially true when it comes to people. There are people to whom I need pay far less heed and those who I need cherish and heed much more. As I spent time, years ago now, with my Dad as he lay dying on a gray, cold January day, he told me how he realized that there wasn't much in life that truly matters. It is, therefore, those things do matter that should be my focus.

Lately I have been on a Thompson Twins jag. Because it seems somewhat in tune with what I've written, "King For One Day" is our traditio for this first Friday of February:

I've heard it said
Or maybe read
Only money makes
The world go round

But all the gold
Won't heal your soul
If your world should
Tumble to the ground