Skip to main content

Man Of Sorrows

I do not understand this mystery: the Father's love envelops us and surrounds us, but He does not (usually) take away the Cross. In my limited way, this might seem like a contradiction, but it's not. I long to understand its meaning, but all I have is to love God in the midst of it.

At other times, it has seemed like grief was a deep hole or chasm from which I would never emerge. Now, it seems like an alternate reality. It's not denial, but it's close, like a bewildered confusion. The world makes no sense now. It goes on, just as it did before, but I go on, with effort.

There have been moments where I said, "I don't think I can do this," and Jesus answered, "Yes, you can." Jesus the great high priest is exalted, of course, but he is our brother. I can see him weeping with us, and holding us near.

We need the hope of the resurrection, but sometimes, not yet. You can't look at the sorrow and tragedy in the world and go, "Well, that's enough of that." We need to live there, to sorrow and to weep. Jesus wept, and he knew he would raise Lazarus from the dead. He knew! What is the weight of that sorrow?

Yet I know one thing as the oddest comfort: I'm alive. Not just my body, but my spirit. No one who is dead inside is able to feel sorrow. We are the oddest creatures: we start here in this sad world, all the while knowing we are more. We might hide it, or deny it, but we know.

All the loves end up the same. If they are good, they are eternal, and they are one. I don't quite understand this, either, but I know it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...