All theological language is necessarily analogical, but it was singularly unfortunate that the Church, in speaking of punishment for sin, read more

All theological language is necessarily analogical, but it was singularly unfortunate that the Church, in speaking of punishment for sin, should have chosen the analogy of criminal law, for the analogy is incompatible with the Christian belief in God as the creator of Man. Criminal laws are laws, imposed on men, who are already in existence, with or without their consent, and, with the possible exception of capital punishment for murder, there is no logical relation between the nature of a crime and the penalty inflicted for committing it. If God created man, then the laws of man's spiritual nature must, like the laws of his physical nature, be laws -- laws, that is to say, which he is free to defy but no more free to break than he can break the law of gravity by jumping out of the window, or the laws of biochemistry by getting drunk -- and the consequences of defying them must be as inevitable and as intrinsically related to their nature as a broken leg or a hangover. To state spiritual laws in the imperative -- Thou shalt love God with all thy being, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself -- is simply a pedagogical technique, as when a mother says to her small son, "Stay away from the window!" because the child does not yet know what will happen if he falls out of it.

The possibility of rejection was ever present. St. Paul did not establish himself in a place and go on preaching read more

The possibility of rejection was ever present. St. Paul did not establish himself in a place and go on preaching for years to men who refused to act on his teaching. When once he had brought them to a point where decision was clear, he reminded that they should make their choice. If they rejected him, he rejected them... He did not simply "go away"; he openly rejected those who showed themselves unworthy of his teaching. It was part of the Gospel that men might "judge themselves unworthy of eternal life". It is a question which needs serious consideration whether the Gospel can be truly preached if this element is left out.

Feast of Charles Simeon, Pastor, Teacher, 1836 It is further objected that he hath left to us no example read more

Feast of Charles Simeon, Pastor, Teacher, 1836 It is further objected that he hath left to us no example of that which by many is esteemed the only religious state of life, viz. perfect retirement from the world, for the more devout serving of God and freeing us from the temptations of the world -- such as is that of monks and hermits. This perhaps may seem to some a great oversight and omission. But our Lord in great wisdom thought fit to give us a pattern of a quite different sort of life, which was, not to fly the conversation of men and to live in a monastery or a wilderness, but to do good among men, to live in the world with great freedom and with great innocence. He did indeed sometimes retire himself for the more free and private exercise of devotion, as we ought to do; but he passed his life chiefly in the conversation of men, that they might have all the benefit that was possible of his instruction and example We read that "he was carried into the wilderness to be tempted," but not that he lived there to avoid temptation. He hath given us an example of denying the world without leaving it.

Consider what two petitions Christ couples together in His prayer: when my body, which every day is hungry, can live read more

Consider what two petitions Christ couples together in His prayer: when my body, which every day is hungry, can live without God's giving it daily bread, then and no sooner shall I believe that my soul, which daily sinneth, can spiritually live without God's forgiving it its trespasses.

Too many people regard prayer as a formalized routine of words, a refuge for weaklings, or a childish petition for read more

Too many people regard prayer as a formalized routine of words, a refuge for weaklings, or a childish petition for material things. We sadly undervalue prayer when we conceive it in these terms, just as we should underestimate rain by describing it as something that fills the birdbath in our garden. Properly understood, prayer is a mature activity indispensable to the fullest development of personality -- the ultimate integration of man's highest faculties. Only in prayer do we achieve that complete and harmonious assembly of body, mind and spirit which gives the frail human reed its unshakable strengths.

Commemoration of Ignatius of Loyola, Founder of the Society of Jesus, 1556 Jesus used the term abba (which means read more

Commemoration of Ignatius of Loyola, Founder of the Society of Jesus, 1556 Jesus used the term abba (which means father or "daddy" in his Aramaic mother tongue), as an address in his prayers to God. There are no other examples of this usage in contemporary Judaism, but Jesus always addressed God in this way. The others perhaps regarded it as child's talk, a form of expression too disrespectful to be so used. But for Jesus, abba expressed the filial intimacy he felt toward his Father. As the divine Son of the Father, Jesus enjoyed a unique relationship with him, and his mission in the world consisted in opening up the blessings of sonship to those who believe.

Feast of George Herbert, Priest, Poet, 1633 It's true we cannot reach Christ's forti'th day Yet to go part of read more

Feast of George Herbert, Priest, Poet, 1633 It's true we cannot reach Christ's forti'th day Yet to go part of that religious way Is better than to rest: We cannot reach our Savior's purity; Yet we are bid, 'Be holy ev'n as He': In both let's do our best. Who goeth in the way which Christ hath gone Is much more sure to meet with Him than one That traveleth by-ways; Perhaps my God, though He be far before, May turn, and take me by the hand, and more, May strengthen my decays. Yet, Lord, instruct us to improve our fast By starving sin, and taking such repast As may our faults control; That ev'ry man may revel at his door, Not in his parlor -- banquetting the poor, And among those, his soul.

Commemoration of Samuel & Henrietta Barnett, Social Reformers, 1913 & 1936 Within the life of the church, the paths read more

Commemoration of Samuel & Henrietta Barnett, Social Reformers, 1913 & 1936 Within the life of the church, the paths of the single and the married should not be allowed to diverge. The shared life of the Christian community must become a context in which the differing gifts can be used for each other. There is much still to be learned about this. Are the homes of married Christians an added support for the single? Is the availability of the single Christian put at the disposal of his married friends, for "babysitting" duties and the like. And what is true of the mutual support of married and single needs to be true in a wider way of the care exercised by the married and the single for each other, so that nobody's home life becomes completely cut off from support and help.

Continuing a short series on forgiveness: Tout comprendre, c'est tout pardonner. ("To know all is to forgive all.") read more

Continuing a short series on forgiveness: Tout comprendre, c'est tout pardonner. ("To know all is to forgive all.") No commonplace is more untrue. Behavior, whether conditioned by an individual neurosis or by society, can be understood, that is to say, one knows exactly why such and such an individual behaves as he does. But a personal action or deed is always mysterious. When we really act, precisely because it is a matter of free choice, we can never say exactly why we do this rather than that. But it is only deeds that we are required to forgive. If someone does me an injury, the question of forgiveness only arises if I am convinced (a) that the injury he did me was a free act on his part and therefore no less mysterious to him than to me, and (b) that it was me personally whom he meant to injure. Christ does not forgive the soldiers who are nailing him to the Cross; he asks the Father to forgive them. He knows as well as they do why they are doing this -- they are a squad, detailed to execute a criminal. They do not know what they are doing, because it is not their business, as executioners, to know whom they are crucifying. If the person who does me an injury does not know what he is doing, then it is as ridiculous for me to talk about forgiving him as it would be for me to "forgive" a tile which falls on my head in a gale.