I have been reflecting on Our Lord's hidden life: that period between His infancy and His public ministry, with help (naturally) from Frank Sheed's To Know Christ Jesus.
Apart from the Finding in the Temple, we know almost nothing, of course. But almost is the operative word.
We do know a little, and can deduce a little more, and even speculate a bit beyond that.
What we know is that 'He went home and was subject to them.'
We also know where home was, a village called Nazareth, and that He was raised there by the Blessed Virgin and St Joseph. We know that they will have taught Him, by word and example, as He grew up; and we can assume that He went to the village school, probably in the synagogue (or perhaps outside in hot weather) where the curriculum would have been reading, writing and knowledge of sacred Scripture.
As a good Jewish family, they would certainly have observed the Sabbath, and heard the Shema read at the start of each synagogue service: three passages of scripture that they would also have recited twice a day at home (two from Deuteronomy, and one from Numbers).
We can safely assume that He worked with St Joseph, the Carpenter. After all, He remained at home till the age of thirty.
And I think we can speculate a little, too. For example, it is unthinkable to me that these carpenters of Nazareth would have turned out anything less than the very best they could. He would necessarily have been skilled at, and I surmise would have loved, his craft.
Likewise, they will have sold fairly; in that culture, that would have necessitated bargaining - for that is the process by which fair deals were reached.
We can also deduce that He did nothing spectacular: His neighbours were astonished when He suddenly came to prominence.
And He did not marry. Sheed points out how unusual that would have been for a man of His age, to be still a bachelor: but He had a different vocation.
So what light do we gain from this? I think it valuable. A certain type of Christian will often say 'What would Jesus do?' I am generally wary of that approach; apart from anything else, what He did was always the action of God Incarnate. Moreover, His public life is so different from the situation in which we normally find ourselves.
However, in the Hidden Life, there may well be things to apply to our daily lives: fair dealing, doing the very best we can in our work, commitment to prayer, obedience to our lawful superiors, and fidelity to our vocation. And the fact that He chose to spend thirty years living a very ordinary life in a village, but always ready to turn His hand to God's work, is a wonderful reminder of the value of the everyday - when offered to God.
Showing posts with label Sheed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sheed. Show all posts
Saturday, 19 July 2014
Saturday, 5 July 2014
Our Lord as Yokel
I have been re-reading Sheed's superb To Know Christ Jesus, and have just been struck afresh by his point about Our Lord having been raised in Galilee, and therefore (doubtless) having a local accent.
Sheed writes: Provincial accents vary; some we admire, some we smile at. The Galilean was of this latter sort. The men of Juda mocked it, very much as St Augustine's African accent caused his Italian friends to mock his speaking of the Latin which he wrote so superbly. In synagogue services, it was customary for a member of the congregation to give an explanation of one of the Scripture passages just read: in Judea, Galileans were discouraged from giving it: to have the congregation giggling would not have been seemly.
In other words, Our Lord is likely to have spoken with the kind of provincial accent which we tend to laugh at.
At first, that seems almost an irreverent thought, Our Lord talking Mummerset... But on further reflection, it is perhaps typical. Not only did he descend from the Heavenly Heights to become Man, but he became Man in poverty, in a stable; and not only that, but chose to be male, rather than female ( Sts Augustine and Thomas Aquinas both saw the female as God's masterpiece). And not only that, but he chose to present as a rustic...
All of which led me to reflect on how quick I am to judge people by how they talk rather than by what they say. And who does that remind me of: 'Can anything good come out of Galilee?...'
Sheed writes: Provincial accents vary; some we admire, some we smile at. The Galilean was of this latter sort. The men of Juda mocked it, very much as St Augustine's African accent caused his Italian friends to mock his speaking of the Latin which he wrote so superbly. In synagogue services, it was customary for a member of the congregation to give an explanation of one of the Scripture passages just read: in Judea, Galileans were discouraged from giving it: to have the congregation giggling would not have been seemly.
In other words, Our Lord is likely to have spoken with the kind of provincial accent which we tend to laugh at.
At first, that seems almost an irreverent thought, Our Lord talking Mummerset... But on further reflection, it is perhaps typical. Not only did he descend from the Heavenly Heights to become Man, but he became Man in poverty, in a stable; and not only that, but chose to be male, rather than female ( Sts Augustine and Thomas Aquinas both saw the female as God's masterpiece). And not only that, but he chose to present as a rustic...
All of which led me to reflect on how quick I am to judge people by how they talk rather than by what they say. And who does that remind me of: 'Can anything good come out of Galilee?...'
Sunday, 17 February 2013
Learning from the past
As a traditionally-minded sort of chap, I am interested in learning from the past; indeed it strikes me as the height of folly not do so. A mind that declares 'History is bunk' is only revealing its own paucity of understanding.
With regard to my recurring theme of the need for Apologetics, (and here) that means, as Ttony has pointed out, considering the example of the Catholic Evidence Guild. I have been doing this mainly in the introduction to the CEG Training Outlines, but also reports such as this.
I am not quite clear if the CEG is still active anywhere: recent links seem harder to find. Further, I am not sure that their particular approach to the apostolate is now the best one: outdoor talks seem to me less and less likely to attract listeners.
However, I do think that their approach to training apologists is something from which we can learn a great deal.
To give some idea of that, here is a quick sketch of how volunteers were expected to prepare to talk about just one aspect of the Faith: The Visible Church.
First, they were given a reading list:
Tixeront: Apologetical studies (most important)
Sheehan: Apologetics (Ch ix)
Knox: Essentials of Spiritual Unity
Sertillanges: The Church (Chapters l, ll and V)
Adam: Spirit of Catholicism
Hughes: History of the Church (Vol l, Ch ii)
Rousselot: Life of the Church
(For the Mystical Body)
Sheed: Map of Life (Ch vi)
Benson: Christ in the Church.
They were also expected to be thoroughly familiar with relevant passages of Scripture, such as:
Matthew: xvi, xxviii; Mark iv 11; John, xvii 11, 20 -23; xxi; Acts: viii 17-19; xiii; xv etc 1 Timothy, iii 5 and 15, iv 14; Titus i 5, iii 10 etc; Ephesians iv 11-3; 1 Corinthians xi 34; and Galatians i 9.
They would then attend a talk by an experienced speaker and trainer on the topic, and ask questions. They would also present on the topic themselves and be asked questions. Sample questions that might be thrown at them included:
1) If visibility is an outstanding feature of the Church, why is the Church so difficult to find among all the conflicting sects? and how is it that so few find the Church?
2) The Kingdom of God is within you.
3) Why do we need an organisation to teach us Christ's Gospel?
4) Where two or three are gathered in My Name - nothing about a Church there.
5) The visibility of the Church is a mere political development
6) Visibility is but an ideal to be worked and prayed for
7) The Salvation Army is as much a visible body as your Church
8) I have the voice of God within telling me that I am right. What more do I need?
9) St John says: 'You need not that any man should teach you.'
10) Churches are only a means to an end: why do you worry so much about the means, when it is the end that matters?
11) Christ said: 'I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life." Why the Church?
(and so on - another six are listed, and speakers in training were encouraged to think up the hardest, most realistic questions they could think of - so in our times that would doubtless include issues of abuse, cover-up, corruption, dissent and so on).
Only when they were able to answer all questions quickly, succinctly and accurately were they put forward to be tested by a priest, and only then allowed to speak for the CEG.
Moreover, they were also offered spiritual formation, and instructed that for every hour they intended to practice their apostolate, they should spend an hour in front of the Blessed Sacrament.
They were expected to attend two training sessions every week, as well as the actual commitment to speak...
As I said above, I am not seeking to recreate this, but to learn from it.
I suspect that I am not alone in recognising that faced with the questions listed above in the pub or the workplace, I might not have good answers to offer on the tip of my tongue (backed up by appropriate quotations from Scripture, and examples from the lives of the saints of the lived reality...). And I feel that I should. The CEG were clear that their task was not to convert people: that is God's responsibility; but rather to be able and willing to give a clear, comprehensive, accurate, positive and compelling account of the Faith. To plough the soil, as it were, and scatter the seed: the miracle of germination is God's to work...
So the question I keep returning to, is how do we accomplish that, given (on the one hand) the difficulties of modern life (eg as highlighted by Joseph Shaw here) and (on the other) the opportunity presented by the social media?
Keep praying about this throughout Lent, please, and contribute any ideas.
With regard to my recurring theme of the need for Apologetics, (and here) that means, as Ttony has pointed out, considering the example of the Catholic Evidence Guild. I have been doing this mainly in the introduction to the CEG Training Outlines, but also reports such as this.
I am not quite clear if the CEG is still active anywhere: recent links seem harder to find. Further, I am not sure that their particular approach to the apostolate is now the best one: outdoor talks seem to me less and less likely to attract listeners.
However, I do think that their approach to training apologists is something from which we can learn a great deal.
To give some idea of that, here is a quick sketch of how volunteers were expected to prepare to talk about just one aspect of the Faith: The Visible Church.
First, they were given a reading list:
Tixeront: Apologetical studies (most important)
Sheehan: Apologetics (Ch ix)
Knox: Essentials of Spiritual Unity
Sertillanges: The Church (Chapters l, ll and V)
Adam: Spirit of Catholicism
Hughes: History of the Church (Vol l, Ch ii)
Rousselot: Life of the Church
(For the Mystical Body)
Sheed: Map of Life (Ch vi)
Benson: Christ in the Church.
They were also expected to be thoroughly familiar with relevant passages of Scripture, such as:
Matthew: xvi, xxviii; Mark iv 11; John, xvii 11, 20 -23; xxi; Acts: viii 17-19; xiii; xv etc 1 Timothy, iii 5 and 15, iv 14; Titus i 5, iii 10 etc; Ephesians iv 11-3; 1 Corinthians xi 34; and Galatians i 9.
They would then attend a talk by an experienced speaker and trainer on the topic, and ask questions. They would also present on the topic themselves and be asked questions. Sample questions that might be thrown at them included:
1) If visibility is an outstanding feature of the Church, why is the Church so difficult to find among all the conflicting sects? and how is it that so few find the Church?
2) The Kingdom of God is within you.
3) Why do we need an organisation to teach us Christ's Gospel?
4) Where two or three are gathered in My Name - nothing about a Church there.
5) The visibility of the Church is a mere political development
6) Visibility is but an ideal to be worked and prayed for
7) The Salvation Army is as much a visible body as your Church
8) I have the voice of God within telling me that I am right. What more do I need?
9) St John says: 'You need not that any man should teach you.'
10) Churches are only a means to an end: why do you worry so much about the means, when it is the end that matters?
11) Christ said: 'I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life." Why the Church?
(and so on - another six are listed, and speakers in training were encouraged to think up the hardest, most realistic questions they could think of - so in our times that would doubtless include issues of abuse, cover-up, corruption, dissent and so on).
Only when they were able to answer all questions quickly, succinctly and accurately were they put forward to be tested by a priest, and only then allowed to speak for the CEG.
Moreover, they were also offered spiritual formation, and instructed that for every hour they intended to practice their apostolate, they should spend an hour in front of the Blessed Sacrament.
They were expected to attend two training sessions every week, as well as the actual commitment to speak...
As I said above, I am not seeking to recreate this, but to learn from it.
I suspect that I am not alone in recognising that faced with the questions listed above in the pub or the workplace, I might not have good answers to offer on the tip of my tongue (backed up by appropriate quotations from Scripture, and examples from the lives of the saints of the lived reality...). And I feel that I should. The CEG were clear that their task was not to convert people: that is God's responsibility; but rather to be able and willing to give a clear, comprehensive, accurate, positive and compelling account of the Faith. To plough the soil, as it were, and scatter the seed: the miracle of germination is God's to work...
So the question I keep returning to, is how do we accomplish that, given (on the one hand) the difficulties of modern life (eg as highlighted by Joseph Shaw here) and (on the other) the opportunity presented by the social media?
Keep praying about this throughout Lent, please, and contribute any ideas.
Friday, 16 December 2011
Sundays
A recent post about Mass on Saturday evenings or Sunday mornings, prompted a bit of discusion in the Comms box.
Part-time Pilgrim wrote:
We also go to Adoration and Benediction, once a month (that's all that's on offer). We also do 'Sunday Morning Religion' with the kids: typically reading and discussing a chapter of Sheed, Knox (Mons R, not the other chap) or something.
We abstain from work (and shopping of course), as best we can (though sometimes the kids remember urgent homework, and occasionally I have a work crisis that needs addressing before Monday, usually due to poor planning...) and often go for a family walk, and sometimes play games around the fire.
But other than that, we don't do a lot to differentiate. I'd be intrigued to hear what others do.
Part-time Pilgrim wrote:
What lies behind this is (I think) the idea - correct idea - that fulfilling your Sunday obligation is necessary to keep the third commandment but not sufficient. A more interesting question is: "What else should a Catholic do on Sunday to mark it as the Lord's day?"A great question!
We also go to Adoration and Benediction, once a month (that's all that's on offer). We also do 'Sunday Morning Religion' with the kids: typically reading and discussing a chapter of Sheed, Knox (Mons R, not the other chap) or something.
We abstain from work (and shopping of course), as best we can (though sometimes the kids remember urgent homework, and occasionally I have a work crisis that needs addressing before Monday, usually due to poor planning...) and often go for a family walk, and sometimes play games around the fire.
But other than that, we don't do a lot to differentiate. I'd be intrigued to hear what others do.
Monday, 12 March 2007
What are we reading?
In this sad family where we have no TV to fill our idle hours, we have to resort to reading. In fact we read a huge number of books.
At present, I (in my habitual fashion) am reading several: To Know Christ Jesus (a superb book by Frank Sheed which I re-read every few years, along with his Theology and Sanity); A Long Way Down, by Nick Hornby for lighter reading; Syd Field’s Definitive Guide to Screenwriting; Self-Editing for Fiction Writers by Browne and King, and Writing a Children’s Book by Pamela Cleaver, as well as St John’s Gospel. I’ve also just finished The Heresy of Formlessness by Martin Mosebach, which I thoroughly recommend to anyone interested in the impact of the Liturgical changes of the 1960s on the Catholic Church.
Anna is reading My Family and Other Animals by Gerald Durrell, St Frances de Sales’ Introduction to the Devout Life, and Peter Ackroyd’s biography of Shakespeare (which is extravagant by her standards - she’s more inclined to read one at a time (always excluding cookery books).
Ant is away at camp with the Adventure Scouts at present, but when here is reading Benedict XVl’s A Lenten Journey and Scorpio by Anthony Horowitz. I think she may also be starting The Seventh Raven (by Peter Dickinson) and Out of the Silent Planet, bu CS Lewis, as they are on her desk - but she’s not here to ask.
Bernie is deep in Sabriel by Garth Nix - she’s very much a one book at a time girl.
Charlie is reading The Lord of the Rings, The Rotten Romans, Belloc’s Cautionary Verses and Sophie’s Tom (Dick King-Smith) and any cartoon books that come his way. He’s a bit like me - a book in progress in every room of the house - including the bathroom...
Dom has just finished Escape From Blood Castle and is wondering what to read next. No - she’s decided: it’s How to Train your Dragon
Charlie and Dom are also having the Voyage of the Dawn Treader read to them as a bedtime story.
I don’t need (I hope) to extol the benefits of reading. We find that by making sure there are plenty of good and exciting books around, and by reading to them a lot when young, they all get the reading bug in various degrees.
It's probably worth saying that we all re-read a large number of books (I work through my P G Wodehouse collection once every few years, for example...). I believe a book worth reading is normally worth re-reading - or to put it the other way round, a book only worth reading once is probably not worth reading at all. So much of our culture is instantly disposable, but literature really shouldn't be. So perhaps that's another aspect of being counter cultural - not always seeking the new pleasure, thrill or sensation, but being enriched by re-visiting old friends in the world of literature.
If you’re not interested in books, this will have been a very boring post - but then if you’re not interested in books you are probably a very boring person....
At present, I (in my habitual fashion) am reading several: To Know Christ Jesus (a superb book by Frank Sheed which I re-read every few years, along with his Theology and Sanity); A Long Way Down, by Nick Hornby for lighter reading; Syd Field’s Definitive Guide to Screenwriting; Self-Editing for Fiction Writers by Browne and King, and Writing a Children’s Book by Pamela Cleaver, as well as St John’s Gospel. I’ve also just finished The Heresy of Formlessness by Martin Mosebach, which I thoroughly recommend to anyone interested in the impact of the Liturgical changes of the 1960s on the Catholic Church.
Anna is reading My Family and Other Animals by Gerald Durrell, St Frances de Sales’ Introduction to the Devout Life, and Peter Ackroyd’s biography of Shakespeare (which is extravagant by her standards - she’s more inclined to read one at a time (always excluding cookery books).
Ant is away at camp with the Adventure Scouts at present, but when here is reading Benedict XVl’s A Lenten Journey and Scorpio by Anthony Horowitz. I think she may also be starting The Seventh Raven (by Peter Dickinson) and Out of the Silent Planet, bu CS Lewis, as they are on her desk - but she’s not here to ask.
Bernie is deep in Sabriel by Garth Nix - she’s very much a one book at a time girl.
Charlie is reading The Lord of the Rings, The Rotten Romans, Belloc’s Cautionary Verses and Sophie’s Tom (Dick King-Smith) and any cartoon books that come his way. He’s a bit like me - a book in progress in every room of the house - including the bathroom...
Dom has just finished Escape From Blood Castle and is wondering what to read next. No - she’s decided: it’s How to Train your Dragon
Charlie and Dom are also having the Voyage of the Dawn Treader read to them as a bedtime story.
I don’t need (I hope) to extol the benefits of reading. We find that by making sure there are plenty of good and exciting books around, and by reading to them a lot when young, they all get the reading bug in various degrees.
It's probably worth saying that we all re-read a large number of books (I work through my P G Wodehouse collection once every few years, for example...). I believe a book worth reading is normally worth re-reading - or to put it the other way round, a book only worth reading once is probably not worth reading at all. So much of our culture is instantly disposable, but literature really shouldn't be. So perhaps that's another aspect of being counter cultural - not always seeking the new pleasure, thrill or sensation, but being enriched by re-visiting old friends in the world of literature.
If you’re not interested in books, this will have been a very boring post - but then if you’re not interested in books you are probably a very boring person....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
