tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-383799937922468215.post7354611380377069008..comments2024-03-11T14:29:24.363-06:00Comments on A Canadian Catholic: 20 Mysteries: The Institution of the EucharistChristopher Snaithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10624198794050884711noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-383799937922468215.post-89886868159384768612016-07-04T17:15:29.349-06:002016-07-04T17:15:29.349-06:00Very nice observation, Len. Of course, the passage...Very nice observation, Len. Of course, the passage you reference has really important parallels to Peter's denials. Jesus asks Peter the first time, "Simon son of John, [do you] agapas me more than these?" Peter responds, "Yea, Lord, thou knowest that [I] philo thee."<br /><br />You see, in English, we translate various kinds of love with just the one word: love. But Jesus asks Peter if he has agape-love for Him, and Peter responds that he has philo-love for Him.<br /><br />The difference is this, agape is the kind of love that one has, which we might describe as "unconditional" and this is the kind of love that makes one ready to die for the beloved. Philo is the kind of love, which we might call "brotherly" which speaks about a certain kind of affectionate love that one has for a friend.<br /><br />Peter is willing to admit his great admiration and affection for Jesus, but realizing his own weakness, is unable to say that he has agape-love for Him, because he has already denied Jesus when the time came when he should have been willing to die for Him. Peter denied knowing Jesus because he was afraid for his own life.<br /><br />But Jesus presses him, "Simon, son of John, [do you] agapas me?" Again, Peter responds, "Yea, Lord, thou knowest that [I] philo thee." Peter still can't say it, he knows his weakness, and his shame.<br /><br />And this is why the following makes so much sense. Jesus asks Peter a third time, "Simon, son of John, [do you] phileis me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: [Do you] phileis me?"<br /><br />Peter is grieved because Jesus, on His third time asking about Peter's disposition toward Him, didn't ask Peter if he would lay down his life for Him, as he had done so twice already, but rather asked him if he at least had affection for him, as he had twice already admitted. Jesus accepted Peter where he was at, acknowledging Peter's weakness and Peter's recognition of his weakness. It is an important lesson for us, because it is about humility, and being able to recognize where we are spiritually, and understanding that Jesus wants us to have the eye of inner discernment, and is okay if we aren't yet perfect, but to recognize that we are not yet perfect. With that heart, He can work.<br /><br />So, Peter responds, "Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that [I] philo thee."<br /><br />I won't go into detail here, because this response is long enough, but with each admission of weakness, each recognition of Peter's own spiritual disposition, Jesus commits Peter to a new level of authority and responsibility, in the form of the command "feed my lambs," "feed my lambs," "feed my sheep."<br /><br />Remember, this is all in reference to John 13:36-38: "Simon Peter saith to him: Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered: Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow hereafter. Peter saith to him: Why cannot I follow thee now? I will lay down my life for thee. Jesus answered him: Wilt thou lay down thy life for me? Amen, amen I say to thee, the cock shall not crow, till thou deny me thrice."<br /><br />Jesus know Peter's disposition even then, that Peter did not have agape-love for Him, which would move him to lay down his life for Jesus. It was the fall after the boast which taught Peter this humble inner discernment. <br /><br />This is how Jesus tests us, not with the stuff we're great at, but with the things we struggle with, and after the struggle, the test continues: what have you learned?<br />Christopher Snaithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10624198794050884711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-383799937922468215.post-86077252420420008662016-07-02T09:10:50.696-06:002016-07-02T09:10:50.696-06:00One thing I would add to this regarding Judas and ...One thing I would add to this regarding Judas and damnation, is the contrast between him and St. Peter. Both betray Jesus (Peter denies Him three times) but Peter is repentant and is reconciled when Jesus asks him "do you love me more than these" three times. Whereas Judas doesnt seek reconciliation but instead takes his own life. Just some more to think about Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04442335319994165835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-383799937922468215.post-54445405015344873422016-06-27T18:08:57.907-06:002016-06-27T18:08:57.907-06:00The first thing to say about this is that the Chur...The first thing to say about this is that the Church does not have the capacity to judge hearts. Therefore, She does not have the authority to state that anyone in particular has been condemned. Therefore, speculating on Judas' eternal destiny is just that, speculation, and we should be careful about placing ourselves above the Church by deciding for ourselves that he is either in heaven or hell.<br /><br />Even though we can't make this judgement, we can certainly discuss what we know about the situation, and perhaps glean some good information for ourselves and how we can approach repentance and forgiveness.<br /><br />Judas Iscariot was very clearly sorrowful over the betrayal of Jesus. That's a good thing. Guilt and sorrow are good when they move us toward reconciliation and repentance. But therein lies the problem. Though sorrow is key, it is, itself, not repentance, nor reconciliation. Repentance requires that we turn back to God, to seek His forgiveness, and to receive it when it is offered. Repentance also requires a desire to make amends for the wrong committed, in an effort to repair the relationship.<br /><br />On the one hand, it might be argued that Judas may have supposed that the only way to make such amends for his crime, a crime that resulting in Jesus losing His life, was for he, himself, to lose his own life. He may have thought that it was the only suitable punishment for his sin. In this sense, we might say that Judas did have a desire to make amends, to offer just recompense for the offence he had committed.<br /><br />On the other hand, it might also be argued that Judas did not believe his sin could be forgiven, that it was too great a crime, and decided he could not live with the guilt of such a thing. In this way, he could not be said to have turned back to God, to seek His forgiveness, to try to repair the relationship. This, we call despair, having lost hope in God's beneficence. It renders his sin unforgivable, because it is left unrepentant, which is the only kind of sin that is unforgivable, since forgiveness can only be granted if it is sought. It doesn't matter that God is absolutely willing to forgive, He does not force His forgiveness upon us.<br /><br />Nevertheless, we cannot say Judas is in hell. We must note three sins that he appears to commit in the end. The first is his betrayal of Jesus. The second is his despair. The third is his suicide. <br /><br />His sorrow at betraying Jesus may have afforded him the opportunity to repent, even possibly in the last moments of his life.<br /><br />The complex psychological and emotional turmoil that he was in would have likely rendered his suicide venial, despite being a gravely immoral act.<br /><br />If anything would appear to condemn him, it must then be his despair. But again, even this he may have been afforded an opportunity of repentance in his dying moments. The mercy of God is inestimable, and surely, having selected Judas specifically to be one of His Apostles, Jesus must at one time have been able to say "I know you, friend." And this, we can hope, granted him a final opportunity for repentance, after a manner known only to God, an opportunity that the Church allows for, though She does not declare as certain.<br /><br />So, at the very least, we ought to take the possibility that he was, indeed, condemned as a strict warning to always, and as swiftly as possible, seek forgiveness for our many sins, our many betrayals of Jesus. For, though we may not take our own lives, we do not know when our lives will be taken from us. We must seek reconciliation now, while we have the power to do so.Christopher Snaithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10624198794050884711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-383799937922468215.post-46037884711208972332016-06-23T21:11:52.983-06:002016-06-23T21:11:52.983-06:00"The Mistery of our Faith". It's dif..."The Mistery of our Faith". It's difficult to grasp the enormity of this Sacrament!<br />The article also triggers something I'm puzzled about: Judas -right or wrong- was instrumental in Jesus' Passion, which led to his death and Resurrection. Did he really repent of betraying Jesus? (Thus, may his soul be saved?) Or was he condemned due to his desperation? (He ended up killing himself) Such a complex subject!Leonardo Gomez Garciahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06818955766016125521noreply@blogger.com