“Father Lord of heaven and earth, to you I offer praise. For what
you have hidden from the clever and the learned, you have revealed to the merest children.”
I wonder when I think of all the learned and also clever people here on the forum, has anything been hidden from them, lost in their vast knowledge of scripture and dogma, that has been revealed to little children?
Or has much been revealed because they remain as little children despite their vast knowledge and clever words?
The other one that struck me today was the lion eating the straw in Isaiah. For some reason, I can imagine the wild animals being at peace with gentle animals and children, but I can’t imagine the lion eating straw. If the lion could ever eat straw, then I guess I could be a vegetarian. I wonder what countries or leaders these animals might represent?
Does that include the lost now and found later.? You could be describing a mass movement.
It would seem we can ask this from the comfort of an attained vantage point or from a milestone. If it is true that we are always at some point in Faith (maturing Faith,Cor), then we can look in any direction in our vehicle and find some receding now, then moving ahead later, only to fall back.
I too have found great delight in them, and made them almost
the first words of my morning prayers. I used to feel so happy
about the things “revealed” to me that I never knew when I was
so “smart”. But lately, I feel like I’m missing something that is
very, very simple and near, but I don’t know what.
No, it doesn’t include “the lost” or “the found”, just things revealed by God to anyone, anywhere. I’m really not describing
a mass movement, just random revelations, and wondering if
knowledge, cleverness, or maturity can hamper true knowledge
of God. We know St. Paul says, “When I was a man, I put
childish things aside”. It seems like almost everything possible was revealed to St. Paul, but, was there anything that was not
revealed to him that was revealed to a little child?
My take on it: little children are not filled with pride. We who consider ourselves learned and somewhat clever tend to resist that which we do not want to believe.
Look at morality - how many of us revolt against the Church’s teachings? Rather than open our minds to a new way of thinking, we look at something unpleasant and think the Church (and probably God too) got it wrong.
Therefore revolting equates to being one who is likely to be withheld from knowledge. Yet revolting is also one stumbling block of many for those who are in a movement in Faith(maturing). At an instance in time warranting the same crticism, St. Augustine doesn’t qualify has one who should have been blessed, and neither does St. Paul come to think of it.
My point is that we are either describing a norm in that everyone is most likely to go through this/these, or it is unusual. This is why we should be cautious in flailing our critiques in all directions.
Knowing what is typical is also to our benefit. If we are to marathon with our brothers, reason suggests we are allowed some stimulus and perspective.
This is why it is of primary importance to identify he who is critical. Either he has run the marathon and made it himself and gained the gold, and that he shares this with thousands who have done it which is what we would expect has a society, or, he is running along with us and the statement is premature, or, he is in the bleachers and hasn’t got a clue on what it is to struggle with Faith.
We can stand in the vestibule of some grand learning institution and criticize the students for not having attained full knowledge, but would that be fair.?
Having said that, a bit of moderation and more on revolt and it’s sisters. The Church understands that we are in a process.
Radio Replies Ans. 607,611,(Card. FJ Sheen,Frs Carty,Rumble)
“The strangling of reason is left to people who are ready to believe anything they hear about the Catholic Church. But the Church herself asks no man to strangle his reason, and says it is heresy to say that it ought to be strangled. Nor must Catholics accept anything, however unlikely. If a thing seems unlikely, they should suspend their judgment until they secure evidence of it’s truth or falsity, and then decide accordingly.”
“…but I may investigate as much as I wish. The more I find out about the Catholic Church the better the Church is pleased. It is one thing to deny a doctrine; quite another to investigate it’s full significance.”
So where do we draw the line?. From the point where a thing seems unlikely until it is clarified, are we to be scolded, reject the possibility that this may be a milestone.? We know that revolt is typical has we have evidence of St. Augustine and in St. Paul the epitome.
How should our attitude be if we were to inspire?. There is a danger in taking on the role of taskmaster whip in hand, or we can do it kindly in fraternal familiarity not pretending we don’t relate to another’s struggles.
Revolting does not necessarily equate to being one who is likely to be withheld from knowledge. Sure it can, but isn’t questioning also part of being childlike, as much as innocent acceptance?
Instead of identifying he who is critical, why not just enjoy exploring what it means to be childlike? Now you’ve got me
thinking – children can be very critical too. They have not the
time of day for anyone who isn’t friendly and kind.
We can’t actually relate to another’s struggles unless we know
what they are. Even then, sometimes we still can’t. Now you’ve
got me thinking again – children don’t relate very well to the
struggles of adults do they?
I think what I was communicating and what you read are 2 different things.
The Church says we are to suspend judgment - but many people don’t. Most of my Catholic and former Catholic friends categorically refuse the teachings of the Church due to ‘conscience’, never having been told that conscience must be developed with the thinking of the Church.
I was an atheist for 25 years, and reverted back to the faith about 2 years ago. It’s almost easier for me to accept, or suspend judgment when necessary, the teachings than nearly anyone I know.
Why? Because I was SOOO wrong for 25 years. Not only that, I tried to argue people out of their faith. Once I realized that I could be wrong about such a big thing for so long, it made it easy to accept that I could be wrong about some of the “smaller” things. I no longer have that pride.
When I said pre-judge, I meant pre-judging the teachings of the Church.