Jump to content

Fred K

Member
  • Content Count

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Fred K

  • Rank
    Free Man

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://ressourcement.blogspot.com

Previous Fields

  • Occupation
    Business Development Sales
  • Favorite movies
    In America, The Road Home, Charade, Spirited Away, Willy Wonka, Young Frankenstein, The Highlander, Pirates of Silicon Valley
  • Favorite music
    Mr Johnson's Lawn, Tom Petty, Mozart's Ave Verum Corpus,
  • Favorite creative writing
    Charles Peguy, Dante, Edmund Spenser, GM Hopkins, Walker Percy, James Weldon Johnson, Confederacy of Dunces, Invisible Man, The Color Wheel by Timothy Steele, My Antonia,
  • Favorite visual art
    Rodin, Paul Manship, Henry Moore, William Congdon,
  1. Rich - the Gospels as well as historical accounts of crucifixion indicate that the condemned was naked: the humiliation was total. I believe that the earliest depictions of Jesus were as the good shepherd. It is apt that Christians cover the nakedness of Christ (unlike Lot's daughters) as well as understanding the crown of thorns and INRI in a non-ironic manner. I see that wikipedia has a useful summary of the history of the depiction of the crucifixion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion_in_the_arts It's interesting that the earliest crucifixes showed a living Christ with litt
  2. As a Catholic, I'm so accustomed to crucifixes that this reaction of horror and shame helps me to to recover the original scandal of the cross.
  3. Wow! and thanks for the link to the other thread on the place of genitals! Something to ponder, to be sure.
  4. The photo of the icon appears to be a traditional Franciscan icon of the crucified Christ. The crucifix icon of San Damiano. Below is another version of this icon: http://www.classic-c.../pics/m5001.jpg I'm struck by two things: 1. I see why folks may interpret it as a bathroom sketch of the male organ - however, I've seen many similar icons with very similar outlines contained in them but never once thought to interpret it in that way. 2. the denial of the sexuality of Christ (in infant paintings of Jesus, the nudity is a sign that Jesus is fully human...) 3. the monsignor quoted i
  5. Wow, that's a great article... Christianity as the discovery of a presence rather than an idea... God, after all, is greater than that which can be conceived (Anselm).
  6. James Allison ... I looked at a couple of his articles online which looked pretty good. I see that he draws on Girard, whom I'm familiar with at secondhand: i.e. through Balthasar and Gil Bailie. Is there something that gets at the core of Allison's approach?
  7. Stu - This talk of peace and hospitality seems a bit abstract to me. The encounter between Paul and Stephen is concrete (Saul, why are you persecuting ME?), but another encounter is also interesting: that of Monica and Augustine. Monica, the mother, urging her son toward the stability of success, marriage, and the Catholic faith; Augustine trying somewhat to pacify his mother while torturously trying to grow in understanding of the truth. Monica wrestled not just with her son, but also with God (and even his priests) - desiring her son's ultimate good but also trying to dictate the form it wou
  8. after watching the AI video essays above, I saw this ad for Advair... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfdT7le7A-E (not embeddable)
  9. Having reviewed Wikipedia: "Sociology of Religion", I see that Max Weber did propose a human need for theodicy and for soteriology, and that these needs become especially acute in Calvinism insofar as God is seen as utterly beyond human understanding. Instead, The need I'm referring to is more fundamental, a wonder in the face of what is and a sadness which Thomas Aquinas characterized as 'the desire for an absent good.'
  10. But that is pure Weber, and I am not sure how far to go with that. I never read Weber, so please explain how you're reading me. Would you say that religion has nothing to do with human needs?
  11. Some excellent points have been brought out in this discussion... so here's a bit more for the mix. The basis of any dialogue is our common human need. Religion, politics, human sciences, etc, may all propose solutions to these human needs, and I can certainly accept that adherents are sincere in their beliefs, but if different religions claim to solve the same human need, then it makes sense that some would do this better than others. Last week, for example, I switched away from the 'uber-violent' tv show Human Target to watch a little bit of the PBS show on The Buddha. I caught the p
  12. with apologies to Flannery O'Connor, I might be a 'saintly protagonist' too if I had Cancer to kill me every day of my life...
  13. Peter: I saw this in the history of this thread also. I found the vehemence of the article linked in the whosoever desires blog to be a bit excessive and one-sided. I always think it's ironic to see the theologically liberal making appeals to authority to resolve problems. There's also a certain sola scriptura approach that seems out of place. It's especially interesting to see a document on the performance of passion plays for parish or diocesan use being invoked to criticize a movie produced by an individual - although the document would be applicable insofar as parishes have organized showi
  14. yes, David. In Kansas we do about 4 stations, so I also noticed that all scripture readings were from the Gospel of Luke. Just as the passion readings of Palm Sunday and Good Friday use a single Gospel (John on Good Friday; and Luke on Palm Sunday this year). I think about this because I recently became aware of the impact of combining Gospels when presenting the passion. http://whosoeverdesires.wordpress.com/2010/03/30/some-cautions-while-watching-the-passion/ I notice that this links to a 2004 article - which has probably already been linked and discussed in this thread exhaustive
×
×
  • Create New...