A pair of today's Christmas Angels as pure in their prayer as the original Christmas angels.Welcome to the real meaning of Christmas
Dec. 23, 2009 An NCR editorial
Those who knew Benedictine Fr. Godfrey Diekmann (1908-2002) will forgive his Teutonic exuberance regarding the centrality of the Incarnation. His friend, colleague and biographer, Sacred Heart Sr. Kathleen Hughes, tells the story of a dinner conversation in the student dining room at St. John’s University in Collegeville, Minn., where Godfrey got worked up about the key to Christian theology and life: “He startled and silenced a good number of tables around us when he shouted, ‘It’s not the Resurrection, dammit! It’s the Incarnation!’ Then, as students slipped away, he continued, ‘But we don’t believe it. We don’t believe we are invited to become the very life of God!’ ” (I think it's both, but, not really understanding or believing in the Incarnation precludes understanding the implications of the Resurrection.)
Dec. 23, 2009 An NCR editorial
Those who knew Benedictine Fr. Godfrey Diekmann (1908-2002) will forgive his Teutonic exuberance regarding the centrality of the Incarnation. His friend, colleague and biographer, Sacred Heart Sr. Kathleen Hughes, tells the story of a dinner conversation in the student dining room at St. John’s University in Collegeville, Minn., where Godfrey got worked up about the key to Christian theology and life: “He startled and silenced a good number of tables around us when he shouted, ‘It’s not the Resurrection, dammit! It’s the Incarnation!’ Then, as students slipped away, he continued, ‘But we don’t believe it. We don’t believe we are invited to become the very life of God!’ ” (I think it's both, but, not really understanding or believing in the Incarnation precludes understanding the implications of the Resurrection.)
Diekmann’s lifelong passion, inspired by his mentor, Virgil Michel, founder of the American pastoral liturgical movement as forerunner to the Second Vatican Council, was to unfold the startling implications of what he called “the Gospel of divine life.” Salvation is first revealed not in Christ’s death on the cross or his resurrection, Diekmann believed, but in his conception and birth. Christmas, not Easter, is the moment of salvation. God’s entry into time and history as human revealed human destiny for all of us. Our existence is an invitation to friendship with God; our future is life with God. For Christians, baptism articulates this transformation, but the potential is universal, anthropological. To be human is to be offered divine life. What Jesus had in essence we are given as gift. The Word is made flesh, and from that moment, nature is being perfected by grace toward life in God.
Why should such theological table talk impress us? And why, as Diekmann lamented, is it so hard to believe? Because as Christian doctrine emerged, especially in the West, redemption was emphasized as the result of Jesus’ death on the cross. If such a terrible sacrifice was the price of our salvation, then human sin must have been terrible indeed, a state of degradation so pervasive and hopeless that only a life of penance and vigilance could keep us safe. The church’s role was to channel grace to sinners through the sacraments. A fearful laity lived at the edge of damnation, dependent on the parish priest, who held ultimate power. A loving God receded into the distant heavens, while his divine Son sat sternly atop a hierarchy of clergy with the power to grant or withhold forgiveness. Outside the church there was no salvation, so millions of people were consigned automatically to hell.
If this sounds familiar, you are a Catholic of certain age and generation. If the invitation to friendship with God seems too good to believe, even heretical, you might be hearing the Gospel for the first time. If such an adjustment of theological emphasis seems refreshing, even liberating, then now you know why Vatican II was so necessary. Welcome to the real meaning of Christmas. Step out of the shadows into the light. The mystery is here, all of it, and it is not just for Jesus, but, through him, for all of us.
*******************************************************
Jesus was not born in order to bring fear of damnation or fear of His Father. He was not born to bring fear at all. He came to bring knowledge of our true state as children of His Father all sharing in His life. He came to bring peace, and the security of knowing each and everyone of us was loved and cared for because we were all seen as worthy of the love of His Father. It was our destiny to find the relationship, to share in that life, and to live that life to bring forth the Kingdom on Earth---"Thy Kingdom come, the will be done, on earth as it is in heaven."
Jesus was born from that incredible Font of Love to show us the way, the truth, and that Life.
Catholicism can not be drug back into denying these truths just because these truths don't support the current form of male corporate clericalism. The real message of Christmas is far too important to be subordinate to the Crucifixion. We are our Father's children.
Merry Christmas one and all, and may all your celebrations be safe and free of incidents.
Thank you for this and for all you do Colleen. Merry Christmas! Joy and blessings to you and for your witness!
ReplyDeleteAmen. This is the legacy of St. Augustine's view of the world. In addition, Western Christianity emphasized the bloody and sacrificial aspects of the crucifixion beginning in the 11th century. Eastern Orthodoxy has never emphasized these aspects of the crucifixion.
ReplyDeleteGodfrey Dieckman was most certainly a heretic. May God have mercy on his soul.
ReplyDeleteThe focus on the Incarnation and the physical, totally human in all things but sin, aspect of Christ is very Franciscan. St. Francis embraced the cross, but in doing so he was embracing the babe of Bethlehem, the Word made Flesh, who brought heaven to earth.
ReplyDelete@Sebastian, that's all well and good, but the Sacrifice at Calvary hadn't been consumated yet.
ReplyDeleteThis business of elevating the Incarnation over the Crucifixion because Godfrey Dieckman doesn't like private devotions and traditional spirituality is tragic.
No wonder so many students matriculate from SJU without knowing the Catholic Faith.
Surely he was a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Tancred, it seems to me that if one of the main points, if not the main points of God Incarnating as human was the Resurrection, it is as much heretical to concentrate on the Crucifixion as it is the Incarnation.
ReplyDeletePhysical death may have been a necessary step, but I'm not sure Crucifixion was the necessary way to die. That choice was made for Jesus by men.
colcoch, nowhere did I place an emphasis on the Crucifixion at the expense of the Incarnation, or encourage it, although it is the means through which we were saved.
ReplyDeleteWhat I do object to is fly-by-night theologians who want to fire a torpedo in Catholic doctrine while selling books, claiming to have come up with some novelty or other designed to make us more integrated and happy, if self-satisfied, people.
It is most likely heretical to say that the Crucifixion need not have happened, since it was foretold in the typology of the Old Testament, that's the Hebrew Scriptures for those of you who were educated by the post-conciliar ecclesiastical mafia, and also might object to me using "Old".
I find it very interesting that when people seek for more of God's truth someone seems to inevitably pop an accusation of heresy! This was once a way to get somebody killed. Today it is an attempt to kill off someone's mind.
ReplyDeleteThe contribution of the incarnation, the thought that man could exercise the talents given him by an incarnated Christ is one of the greatest reasons for Christ to come. The resurrection and forgiveness of sins, the fact that we can start over again is another. Finally ethical evolution from the Babylonian= If a person hurts you go and do ten times the damage to him or her, to the Old Testament Tarot,- (just) and eye for an eye. to Christ's Beatitudes. These are what make us Christ-like or Christian. That Christ had to die for us was the choice of men just as were the deaths of so many other martyrs, the modern day ones being Gandhi, and Martin Luther King. Funny neither of them were even Catholic, but like Christ they were put to death by men for advocating peace!
The many theologians that are silenced for not agreeing with the Vatican are likewise an attempt to kill off the mind of another! It is a conscious decision of men and is produced by envy.
Tancred, do you want me to believe that neither Judas nor Pilate had a choice because the OT dictated their actions? That seems to me to violate free will and that too would be considered a form of heresy.
ReplyDeleteWhile the OT author may have written a very high probability in terms of prophecy, in my book it was not absolute.
God did not violate Mary's free choice. She was given the freedom to reject the pregnancy. The Resurrection was Jesus's free choice and His intent. The Crucifixion was the result of the free choice of other men and Jesus chose to accept it.
Prophets see probabilities not certainties. Which is why so many of them are wrong.
Some interesting considerations:
ReplyDelete1. when God has sent a message to humans since the time of Christ, He has usually sent Mary, the Mother of the Saviour as the messenger.
Has she ever appeared to a bishop? To a Cardinal or Pope? No. To a 'wise one', learned of Theology and.or Canon Law? Nope.
Always to the dirt poor peasant - often illiterate. Most often to women....
Hmmm........
2. When Jesus was born, He chose from Eternity to be born in poverty. He would not have had it any other way, as it is most fitting.
3. To whom did he first manifest himself? To the 'pious administrators of religion'?
No. To poor, unwashed shepherds. You know...."those people"...not usually religious at all, rumored to be homosexual and/or bestial (with at least some historic truth...). That is who He sent His angels to tell of His birth - and they were His first visitors.
The 2nd group were three non-believers. Those 'horrid pagans' who were astrologers - either literal Pagans or Atheist/Agnostics at best. Yet they knew of His prophecies & came to worship Him.
Not the 'pious ones'. Hmmm.....
3. At His Presentation in the Temple of Jerusalem, was Jesus recognized for His divinity & role as the promised Messiah by the Prelates & 'Bishops' & assorted Administrators of Organized Religion?
No. Only by Simeon & Anna - who were NOT part of the Temple establishment nor its hierarchy. He an elderly pious man; she an elderly widow & prophetess. Neither was well known, connected or wealthy. They were the only ones who recognized Him for who He truly was.
Here endeth the lesson:)
"Tancred, do you want me to believe that neither Judas nor Pilate had a choice because the OT dictated their actions? That seems to me to violate free will and that too would be considered a form of heresy."
ReplyDeleteNo, that's not what I said.
"While the OT author may have written a very high probability in terms of prophecy, in my book it was not absolute."
In *your* book. Who would read it if you wrote it? Not I. Joan of Arc was prophesied as well and people didn't start to believe the prophesies were true until she started racking up more victories over the English. Her life story even made the sceptical Mark Twain reconsider his choices.
"God did not violate Mary's free choice. She was given the freedom to reject the pregnancy. The Resurrection was Jesus's free choice and His intent. The Crucifixion was the result of the free choice of other men and Jesus chose to accept it."
He foresaw her choice as Simeon and Anna foresaw the consequences of her Fiat in the life of Her divine Son.
"Prophets see probabilities not certainties. Which is why so many of them are wrong."
You have no Faith.
"The many theologians that are silenced for not agreeing with the Vatican are likewise an attempt to kill off the mind of another! It is a conscious decision of men and is produced by envy."
ReplyDeleteActually, the mind-numbing comes from your lot who tend to control the Seminaries and Colleges and expect slavish adherence to their false and Gnostic doctrines. Of course, your people are more than happy to dissmiss those of an orthodox mindset in favor of weirdos who eventually graduate to running parishes into the ground with praise and worship drivel.
Of course, Ghandi liked to inspect the bowel movements of his young female progetes, was a racist who hated blacks and MLK on the night before he was to be betrayed, beat up a white prostitute, uh, sex worker, because he enjoyed it.
Anonymous wrote:
ReplyDelete"Some interesting [sic] considerations:
1. when God has sent a message to humans since the time of Christ, He has usually sent Mary, the Mother of the Saviour as the messenger
Has she ever appeared to a bishop? To a Cardinal or Pope? No."
Yes, she appeared to Pope Liberius.
" To a 'wise one', learned of Theology and.or Canon Law? Nope."
Wrong again, she appeared to everyone at Fatima, including the sceptics. She also appeared to St. Simon Stock also and others who are "wise" and "learned" of Theology. Even a simple peasant girl can know her catechism, as St. Joan of Arc evidenced in her trial.
"Always to the dirt poor peasant - often illiterate. Most often to women...."
No, you're wrong. Not always.
"Hmmm........
2. When Jesus was born, He chose from Eternity to be born in poverty. He would not have had it any other way, as it is most fitting."
This is true, but what's your point?
"3. To whom did he first manifest himself? To the 'pious administrators of religion'?"
The three *Kings* knew the portent and the prophesies first before the star and angel appeared to them.
"No. To poor, unwashed shepherds. You know...."those people"...not usually religious at all, rumored to be homosexual and/or bestial (with at least some historic truth...)."
This is as credible as the rest of what you wrote. They were as scripture has it, men of "good will", not a pack of cruising and inhospitable men of sodom.
" That is who He sent His angels to tell of His birth - and they were His first visitors.
The 2nd group were three non-believers. Those 'horrid pagans' who were astrologers - either literal Pagans or Atheist/Agnostics at best."
The Magi were not atheists or agnostics.
" Yet they knew of His prophecies & came to worship Him.
Not the 'pious ones'. Hmmm....."
Actually, the Magi and the Shepherds were pious, that's why they came, that's why they were called.
"3. At His Presentation in the Temple of Jerusalem, was Jesus recognized for His divinity & role as the promised Messiah by the Prelates & 'Bishops' & assorted Administrators of Organized Religion?"
Yes, Caiaphas prophesied His power when he said, St. John: "You know nothing. Neither do you consider that it is expedient to you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not" So too did Simeon who was, actually, a priest. Maybe they don't teach that at St. John's University's Theology department?
"No. Only by Simeon & Anna - who were NOT part of the Temple establishment nor its hierarchy. He an elderly pious man; she an elderly widow & prophetess. Neither was well known, connected or wealthy. They were the only ones who recognized Him for who He truly was."
Wrong, an elderly, wise and pious Priest and here is the prayer he uttered, which, for those of us who still participate at the Immemorial Mass of all Ages is not unfamiliar:
νῦν ἀπολύεις τὸν δοῦλόν σου, δέσποτα, κατὰ τὸ ῥῆμά σου ἐν εἰρήνῃ·
ὅτι εἶδον οἱ ὀφθαλμοί μου τὸ σωτήριόν σου,
ὃ ἡτοίμασας κατὰ πρόσωπον πάντων τῶν λαῶν,
φῶς εἰς αποκάλυψιν ἐθνῶν καὶ δόξαν λαοῦ σου Ἰσραήλ.
"Here endeth the lesson:)"
You must be one of Godfrey's pupils.
Know it alls don't ever really know it all Tancred. You should 'know' that. Even Mary did not 'know it all' but "pondered these things in her heart." She left the knowing to God and put her faith in God and knew that God would reveal things to her as it was needed for her to know or understand. She didn't rely on the leaders of organized religion in their various political factions to spoon feed her. She relied totally on God.
ReplyDeletePondering the scriptures is something that is healthy and not heretical in the least. Name calling and labeling people as heretics because they 'know' differently than you, defeats the use of free will and God-given intellect. It also says about such judgment for those who desire to claim they 'know it all' that they are apt to not witness the action of the Holy Spirit, and essentially dismiss the Holy Spirit. When Jesus preached to the people He did not forbid them use of their free will & intellect. Rather, He spoke to them in a manner that would free them to follow Him. He did not try to control their thinking, but indeed freed them to use their God-given intellect.
By the tone and spirit of your many comments I am completely turned off to what you supposedly "know." You seem more willing to desire to silence and restrict consciousness and faith to your level of knowledge than to give it wings with compassion and wisdom such as Jesus desired for our well-being. Your entire tone is more political than it is spiritual.
The sex pervert enablers in the Church, Pope Benedict XVI and Pope JPII have destroyed the Catholic Church. So don't be blaming the problems on liberals at universities. The University teacher to be pointing the finger of blame on now is Ratzinger.
What you have said does not bring anyone closer to Jesus. The entire point of the Gospels is to bring us closer to Him and should free us to be like Christ towards others. Your entire message is lost by your arrogance and 'know it all' attitude.
Furthermore, you seem to have more Faith in what you supposedly 'know.' But you come across as not knowing Faith or relying on Faith in God and to Jesus Christ's teachings.
Saying to someone who does have Faith that they "have no faith" is not Truth but is just meanness. One's faith in God is not destroyed because they don't agree with your view. The promises of God to those who love Him are not denied because they don't agree with you.
Sorry "butterfly", but what you've just written might pass muster at a women's spirituality retreat in the Gathering Space, but I have no idea what you're trying to say.
ReplyDeleteSurely you jest "Tancred."
ReplyDeleteBTW - I've never been to a women's spirituality retreat "Tancred." Somehow I doubt that you have either, but suppose you know all about being a woman. I am sure you just meant to be obnoxious and to put women down in general by your know it all and arrogant attitude.
I will try to make it to a retreat this new year at a Trappist Monastery. I will pray for the men in the Church that they will see and understand women in a new light and that they will be humbled by God to treat them with respect and dignity and love, demonstrating their love for Mary by accepting them as they are. I will pray that when the obvious is right in front of their noses that they will see and no longer be blind or be afraid to face the truth. I will pray that their hardened hearts will be healed by Jesus Christ and that they will turn from abuse and arrogance towards women to the Lord's light.
The biggest mistake I think feminists make is that they suppose that their hidden wisdom, once handed down, will somehow bring around Nirvana.
ReplyDeleteBut no, I haven't really said anything about women in general, have I? I thought this thread was about the pro-gay Godfrey Dieckman, but you want to talk about anything but that.
Look know it all homophobe, I am not a feminist, I am a Catholic. You want to only judge people.
ReplyDeleteI've never met a Catholic who talked like you do.
ReplyDeleteIt is an interesting point. Much of Christianity has lost sight of the Incarnation- though the concept of deification never fully slipped from view.
ReplyDeleteBut we can't neglect the Cross. The Cross is the culmination of Christ's kenosis, it is where He loves us even unto the end. The Cross is what especially makes Christianity unique, what makes it Revelation. Not only that God became man, but that he marched up Via Dolorosa. We can't talk about God being love without talking about the Cross because, above all, there we see true man and true God.