More Rohr

Post Reply New Topic

And no, I see no real need to interpret, Paul. Them what got their ears on, good buddy ...

"Many of the "cultured despisers of religion" are therefore right in what they are suspicious of, which is usually the immature form of religion, a form that is largely dominant today. They are attacking the "what" that we claim to know, whereas the mature believer is primarily claiming a different way of knowing - the "how" that allows her to see many more things. True God experience is a compelling Presence and an Inner Aliveness that serves for better seeing...This is deeper than what the critics of religion attack, deeper than any mere psychological state or childhood religious conditioning, which tend to be rigid and fragile."

Bollocks!

ruveyn

Indeed. Christianity is not a set of recited truths; Christianity is an ongoing encounter with the Person who gave us those truths. And standing on the beach staring at the surface of the water is different from walking in and swimming (and both are different again from diving beneath the surface).

I have Fr. Rohr's book 'Everything Belongs' on my shelf, staring at me from among those books yet to be read - this week, maybe.. After I finish Augustine's writings on the Psalms.

Not sure which book these were from - we got a couple pages xeroxed in the mail from my frater-in-law, which were very relevant to some things going on.

I think ruveyn provided an almost perfect illustration. Do Americans not influenced by Angleterre actually SAY bollucks? Never heard it over here.

nailed it, ruveyn.

philologos: i say "bollocks," from time to time. it's fun to use different words. how dreary, the world would be, if no one ever deviated from the tongue to which they were born? bollocks to that!

My Christian learning for the longest time was based only on the sermons I sat through and the same recycled Sunday School lessons. My own views now were shaped by reading the Bible through one good time, reading the commentary in the Bible I use, and otherwise reading and discussing it. I'd love to get deep into apologetics, but I just lack any capacity to be convincing. I'm really considering doing some good reading and study in philosophy as well as other writings and Biblical commentary. That you are actually reading Augustine is something I find totally hard-core in learning more about the faith. I envy this.

For the time being, though, I'm just going to stick with my Bible! I'm afraid my head would explode if I tried to go deeper at this point.

It is a matter of timing and the call. I've been through a few phases, including a long stretch of going through everything in Schaff's Creeds of Christendom, a phase of the patristic lit including some of Augustine [mostly the Apology and the City of God], and about a year where I was immersed in the Desert Fathers.

It is very hologram - all the fragments come up with the same image.

But every so often I will receive a new assignment, a reading program that will highlight one facet.

Being in scripture translation - working with a few ancient texts and familiar with a range of modern versions - gives a surprising range of nuances.

But I have never understood the people who read a book once and never come back. Pretty much any serious book - certainly La Bibbia - reveals flashes of new facets every time you visit. Like talking to a friend - never the same twice.

@Angel - No, I'm just your typical liberal arts major. The diploma gathers dust, the job gained involves boxing up customers' leftovers, and the books are to boost my wounded self-esteem. Kempis' Imitation of Christ is *a* good starting point, if you do want to do any more reading - it's clearly written and broken into fairly self-contained sections of 1/2-2 pages, so not that much to take in at a time.