Skip to main content

Most At Home

I feel most at home in the Bible. That's not an odd thing for a Christian to say, I hope. And this is not to say that I have some great training or special insight into it, though I do have some training. Nor is it to say that I am this great prayer warrior, who always applies the Scripture to my life in the proper way, at the proper time.

It is to say that I'm continually thankful for the Magisterium. We Catholics don't have to sit around arguing about what the Bible says. We can start getting into its spiritual meaning, and really letting God speak to us personally, without doubting anything about its literal sense.

I tell people all the time how lucky we are, because we are freed up to be doers of the word, and not only hearers. Then again, that freedom is in the context of widespread ignorance concerning the Scriptures among American Catholics.

Certain clergy have probably been responsible for this ignorance of Scripture, and perhaps some lapses in morality and piety have contributed. Yet we have the option to read the Sacred Scriptures anytime. I'm reading lots of things, but why not the Scriptures? You can't memorize it or cite it unless you read it in the first place.

It is altogether true to say that we get to hear more of the Scriptures that almost all other Christians, in the liturgy. It is also true that if we don't individually and personally invest time in reading the Scriptures, we will forget them. And we cannot love what we do not know.

I also take this as a personal challenge to myself, as much as I'm giving it to you. Let's read the Scriptures. Let's get to know Jesus, whether we read about him directly in the New Testament, or indirectly in the Old Testament. All of it is our story, and it is for us, and to us.

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...