Today’s riddle:
Why (1) is Pope Ben to theology as Tiger is to golf?
Why (2) is there jubilation when they both tank?
This Just In: CNN's news blog
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/08/tiger-keeps-tailing-plays-worst-tourney-ever/?hpt=T2
Tiger keeps tailing – plays worst tourney ever
Tiger Woods shot a 7 over par 77 on Sunday in the final round of the World Golf Championships - Bridgestone Invitational to complete his worst tournament as a professional at 18 over par.
"I don't see how it can be fun shooting 18 over especially since my handicap is supposed to be zero," Woods said after the round in which he carded six bogeys and two double bogeys. It was his worst round of the four day tournament and tied his worst final round as a pro.
"It's nice that the tournament's over and we can focus on next week," the world's No. 1 golfer - at least for the moment - said.
* * * * * * * * * * *
Now, I really LIKE Tiger, and I also like Pope Ben, which is why I am glad to see both of them sloughing off the phoney-baloney in which each, respectively, has been so grippingly ensheathed. Judging from the drift of the comments currently posted on CNN’s blog, Tiger-watchers are beginning to get the point; hopefully I will be able to indicate why “mutatis mutandi” the same applies re the gentleman of the cloth.
Find the following article at:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1009257/index.htm
Copyright © 2007 CNN/Sports Illustrated.
It was ordinary. It was oh so ordinary. It was a salad, a dinner roll, a steak, a half potato, a slice of cake, a clinking fork, a podium joke, a ballroom full of white-linen-tablecloth conversation. Then a thick man with tufts of white hair rose from the head table. His voice trembled and his eyes teared and his throat gulped down sobs between words, and everything ordinary was cast out of the room.
He said, "Please forgive me...but sometimes I get very emotional...when I talk about my son.... I know that I was personally selected by God himself...to nurture this young man...and bring him to the point where he can make his contribution to humanity.... "Tiger will do more than any other man in history to change the course of humanity," Earl says….
Anyone, Mr. Woods? Your son will have more impact than Nelson Mandela, more than Gandhi, more than Buddha?
"Yes, because he has a larger forum than any of them. Because he's playing a sport that's international. Because he's qualified through his ethnicity to accomplish miracles. He's the bridge between the East and the West. He is the Chosen One. He'll have the power to impact nations. Not people. Nations. The world is just getting a taste of his power."…
Maybe Pop is onto something without quite seeing what it is. Maybe it has to do with timing: the appearance of his son when America is turning the corner to a century in which the country's faces of color will nearly equal those that are white. Maybe, every now and then, a man gets swallowed by the machine, but the machine is changed more than he is.
For when we swallow Tiger Woods, the yellow-black-red-white man, we swallow something much more significant than Jordan or Charles Barkley. We swallow hope in the American experiment… We swallow the belief that the face of the future … might even, one day, be something like Tiger Woods' face: handsome and smiling and ready to kick all comers' asses.
We see a woman, 50-ish and Caucasian, well-coiffed and tailored—the woman we see at every country club—walk up to Tiger Woods before he receives the Haskins Award and say, "When I watch you taking on all those other players, Tiger, I feel like I'm watching my own son"...and we feel the quivering of the cosmic compass that occurs when human beings look into the eyes of someone of another color and see their own flesh and blood.
* * * * * * * * * * *
I’m not really convinced that pulling even with ‘the woman we see at every country club, 50-ish and Caucasian, well-coiffed and tailored’ is the best way to bestir the quivering of the cosmic compass that occurs when human beings look into the eyes of someone of another color and see their own flesh and blood. I mean, how would this play in Afghanistan, for instance?
Yet, mutatis mutandi, it’s all dead on the nose as regards the reigning Pope. Out of the horrendous cesspool of theological controversy generated in the western church throughout the century just closed it was my remarkable good fortune to have retrieved for this memo the following relatively sane account, lured by the incredibly on-the-mark-statement: “Neither fear nor panic [the choice of terminology already signals what we are up against] should characterize the bishop's ministry, but a ‘believing deliberateness’, because of the One who is in the boat whom even the wind and the rain obey.”
In the quoted material from here on, I borrow randomly from the quoted text, in line with my own logic. I suggest that you google Card. Walter Kasper if you don’t know who he is. I myself did not know he had ever gone head to head with Ratzinger, but matters fell into place as I probed the texts, inasmuch as Card. Kasper was the one who at long last brought a sane and reasonable Vatican perspective to bear on their dealings with the Moscow Patriarch in the course of the past several years.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6404/is_4_63/ai_n28962899/
“Walter Kasper on the theology and the praxis of the bishops office”Theological Studies, Dec, 2002 by Kilian McDonnell
Although the public theological debate between the two cardinals [Ratzinger and Kasper] focused on [Ratzinger’s] claim of the universal Church's ontological priority [I mean, spare me!!! but I plugged stolidly on, buoyed by the aforementioned statement], Kasper had raised a series of issues touching the bishop's office. Of interest is not only his position but his manner of doing theology:
True to his credentials as a conservative man of the center open to the future, [Kasper] begins his theology of the bishop's office with a look at its source in Scripture and tradition, and then provides an extensive section on the teaching of Thomas Aquinas (amounting to one-third of his whole discussion). Kasper looks to Aquinas not for the definitive statement, but as a pointer, reminding us of how frequently Aquinas surprises, showing himself free of determinations of age and culture, able to reflect the broad ancient tradition. For instance, Aquinas teaches that the bishop's office belongs "to the ecclesiastical order of beauty," a concept that seems to fascinate Aquinas. The interpretation of Scripture is the bishop's "principal office carried to the highest degree (principalissimum)."
Only out of the need of love, that is the need of the Church, should one assume the office of bishop, and it is the need of the Church which does not allow a man to refuse the office when asked to assume it. The office belongs to the status perfectionis, meaning it is an objective ministry directed to making others holy. [Did anybody else out there ever hear that definition of the “STATE OF PERFECTION” to which CATHOLIC clerics and religious lay claim all over the place?!?!?!] The assumption of the bishop's office must be a sign of readiness for martyrdom. For Aquinas episcopus means superintendens, but not in the sense of watching over in the managerial sense, but of watchful care in the pastoral sense.
Neither fear nor panic should characterize the bishop's ministry, but a "believing deliberateness," because of the One who is in the boat whom even the wind and the rain obey.
* * * * * (end pf quote) * * * * *
Watchful care in the pastoral sense characterized by a believing deliberateness is precisely what we will experience when bishops, parents -- and in general all whose vocation is as superintendens -- are through and through imbued with the loving certainty that GOD BECAME MAN SO THAT MEN MIGHT BECOME GOD.
God Who IS LOVE is the final end and purpose of all that is – it is the theologians who reason from this axiomatic point of departure who conclude that in the very end – even the devil will become reconciled to God and be saved. Surely the relationship of Satan to God depicted in the Book of Job points in this direction.
Even more crucially, such an approach will demarcate our understanding of the role of the Mother of God in God’s Providence concerning our lives.
Her role is described in the Old Testament Wisdom literature, notably Proverbs, Ch 8:
The LORD begot me, the first-born of his ways, the forerunner of his prodigies of long ago;
From of old I was poured forth, at the first, before the earth.
When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no fountains or springs of water;
Before the mountains were settled into place, before the hills, I was brought forth;
While as yet the earth and the fields were not made, nor the first clods of the world.
When he established the heavens I was there, when he marked out the vault over the face of the deep;
When he made firm the skies above, when he fixed fast the foundations of the earth;
When he set for the sea its limit, so that the waters should not transgress his command;
Then was I beside him as his craftsman, and I was his delight day by day, playing before him all the while,
playing on the surface of his earth; and MY delight WAS in the sons of men.
We see from this that the Mother of God is - and this from all pre-eternity - the exemplar of the entire created order. She is, moreover, and this according to God’s pre-eternal divine plan, the WAY God the Creator actually entered into His own creation – and this as a creature: the God/man, Jesus the Christ, the Messiah.
In my effort to indicate how fundamental a sound grasp of this important truth is to our understanding of how the Church – and indeed the entire social order, since these are ultimately co-extensive - functions, I found the following study of Fr. Sergei Bulgakov’s exploration of these same points of value:
http://community.livejournal.com/sbulgakov/62756.html
Sophia Compton on “The Burning Bush and Bulgakov”
The following new writing by Madonna Sophia Compton is placed here by kind permission of the author.
The fountain of power is the Father, and the Power of the Father is the Son, and the Spirit of that Power is the Holy Spirit; and Creation entirely, in all of its visible and spiritual extent, is the finished work of that Divine power.” (On the Holy Spirit, Against the Macedonians. Gregory Nyssa. Online source: New Advent translation; newadvent.org.)
IN The Old Testament texts, the Spirit was the Breath of God and the Immanent connection between Yahweh and the Hebrew nation. It was identified with several vivid images; for example, the Cloud or the “pillar of cloud” was the vision of God’s Spirit which dwelt with Moses on the mountain (Ex. 24: 15-18). The Cloud in the form of a column would stand at the entrance of the tent and speak to Moses (Ex. 40:34); it would rise and lead the Israelites on their journey toward the promised land (Ex. 40:36); it was the symbol of God’s abiding Presence with Israel (Ex. 13:22).
As a manifestation of God’s Presence and Glory, the image of the Cloud was present at the dedication of Solomon’s temple (1 Kings 8: 10-12) when it filled the temple with such power and force that the priests could no longer minister there. It is precisely here, in these images of the epiphany of God’s presence through the Cloud, that the inference is made which links the power which “overshadows” the tent of meeting with the Holy Spirit which “overshadows” the Virgin Mary.
In Jewish Targums and midrash, it was the Shekinah-Spirit that manifested the Glory or Presence of God through the pillar of cloud (Ex. 13: 21-22); or pillar of fire (Ex. 13:22) or cloudy pillar (Ex. 33: 9-10) or cloud of the Lord (Num. 10:34); or cloud in the wilderness (Ex. 16: 10); or the cloud overshadowing the tabernacle (Num. 16: 42; Num. 9:15; Ex. 40: 35). As the immanent dimension of God, it refers to the presence of God that can be felt in the world. Yves Congar has explained that, in the Jewish parts of the Bible, the Breath-Spirit of God is the same as God’s action, which animates and gives life “at the level of what we call nature.” (35 Congar, Yves. I Believe in the Holy Spirit. Translated by David Smith. N.Y.: Seabury Press; London: Geoffrey Chapman. 1983. Vol 1. p. 12..)
God’s Presence was visible through the Shekinah on Mt. Sinai (Ex. 24:16) and it became the Voice of God (Ps. 99:7). It is associated with the Spirit of prophecy (Num. 11:25; Ex 19:9). The Shekinah regulated the movements of Israel and became its guide (Ex. 13: 21-22; Ex. 40: 36-37; Neh. 9:19). The Shekinah-cloud hovered over the mercy-seat (Lev. 16:2;) and the temple of Solomon (1 Kings 8:10-11; 2 Chron 5:13; Ez. 10:4). After the destruction of the temple, the midrash tells us that when Yahweh had withdrawn to heaven, “the shekinah remained on earth, directly accessible to her people.”
The Talmud, and later the Zohar, records the legend that the Shekinah-Spirit descended to earth 10 times, including during the theophany of the Burning Bush…. In rabbinical literature, it was believed that, since the thorn-bush is used for a hedge, it is the symbol of protection. The fire which engulfed it was a ‘heavenly fire’: a theophany signaling that God would protect and deliver the Israelites from bondage. Fire, which is normally destructive, is here rendered harmless. It is also a symbol of the purity or holiness of God and the need for the Israelites to maintain their own purity in order to continue in their covenant with Yahweh. We will return to this image of the Burning Bush when we examine the icon named: Mother of God, Burning Bush.
Rowen Williams observes that, in Bulgakov’s Unfading Light, he expounds upon Palamite teaching and finds … “a vision of the transfiguration of the cosmos by the penetration of divine energy.” The whole thrust of Bulgakov’s theology is that God created the world not for Himself but for the world.
The Incarnation and descent of the Holy Spirit represent, in fact, “a second creation of the world in God, its deification.” (Bulgakov, S. The Bride of the Lamb. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans. 2002. p. 245)
Bulgakov continually reminds us that to identify the Spirit’s work, one must look to the unfolding world historical process.
The Holy Spirit, who previously was “sent into the world” at the Annunciation in order to accomplish the Incarnation, is “now sent into the world by the Son…[and] is now directed toward the world…and descends into the world…”
The third Hypostasis, as the Comforter, now lives and acts in the Church, but it’s Spirit of wisdom and prophecy is not confined to the Church. Paul Valliere remarks that “Bulgakov never tires of reminding the Church that the descent of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost took place in the world.”
[In light of this we can recognize what sheer bombast is the “claim of the universal Church's ontological priority” made by then Card. Ratzinger against Card. Walter Kasper who, then as now, maintains, in agreement with the constant and universal teaching of the Church, the Body of Christ Who is her Head, that “where the bishop is, there is the Church.”
What we are now in a position to most vividly recognize is how destructive of the radically foundational raison d’etre of God’s providential plan for the whole entire created order in its sum total is – or, God willing, WAS the sitting Pope’s totally baseless assertion. Period. End of discussion.]
In this sense, Bulgakov sees piety and prophecy to be a natural revelation of the Holy Spirit “which can be observed at the very beginning of the world” and therefore intimately connected to the earth from its genesis: for it is an immanent Spirit. The Spirit was revealed in history, and will be actively involved in history till its end.
It is the Spirit of God in creation that the Psalmist hymns. (Ps. 104:30)
Bulgakov quotes the messianic work of the Spirit in Job (33:4) who recognizes the creative activity of the Spirit; in Isaiah (32:15), who waits for the fruitful outpouring of the Spirit; in the “new spirit” in Ezekiel (36:26).We are meant to be ‘spirit-bearing’ people, the most perfect example of which is the personification of the Bride (Church), which is Mary herself. Bulgakov sees the descent of Shekinah-glory upon Mary, the perfected “Spirit-bearer, at the Annunciation.” The Theotokos is “the most perfect manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the image of the Spirit-bearer
Gregory of Nyssa applied many of the Old Testament metaphors to Mary, already common in homilies of the earlier Fathers. But he was the first to call her the Burning Bush, or the Unburnt Bush.
[You can view, in living color, “The Burning Bush that Does Not Burn - The icon of Mary as the Church” on my website:
http://www.mamaleh-larisa.com/yogandme.html]
Gregory of Nyssa held that at the Annunciation, Mary, in her virginity, was filled with the Holy Spirit and became the tabernacle of Wisdom, (who is, here, Christ) because the work of the Spirit at the moment of the Incarnation created the matter of Christ’s body from the flesh and blood of his mother: “where Wisdom built a house…the tabernacle formed by such an impulse was not clothed with anything of human corruption.” Mary, as the unwed Virgin, is able to contain this theophany of God and not be consumed by it.
[And this, rather than the shallowly ad hoc rationalization of Duns Scotus, is the rightful basis of the Theotokos being im-maculate in the creaturely sense, without any im-perfection, from the moment she entered the created order.]
She is “the honor of our nature, the gate of our life, the one who won salvation for us.” Gregory gave Mary the title Theotokos before it was officially made a doctrine at the Council of Ephesus in 431.
