Rose, don't go anywhere, I love reading your writing. This is great art criticism. And that you've actually written this after that is, well, pretty miraculous.
This is a phenomenal piece, I absolutely loved it! Your thoughtful analysis of art, reflections of Christ as Our Redeemer and the reality of the ressurection are all topics which I have been deeply resonated in and are core to how I have always understood my faith, especially, now as a postulant in an order dedicated to Christ the Redeemer, the Redemptorists.
I love this. I love the wrestling with the incarnation as well, and understand and feel it too. After a couple of years actually reading and praying I can honestly say I believe in the resurrection, body and all. He was human - and all that entails (except sin). He was God. When He died… I don’t know. I guess I kind of assume it’s the Incarnation that died, but God experienced it through the Incarnation? The Son always lived on, and always has, and always will as the Word. This is a late night train of thought - I love reading others musings and thoughts on this stuff!
Despite having abandoned Chalcedonian-Niceneian orthodoxy, I have arrived in a place similar to yours regarding my faith in the resurrection. I used to passionately argue for a non-literal (non-physical) understanding of the resurrection event - I still do if the opportunity presents itself. However, I have lately become less passionate about doing so. I have concluded that intellectual debate about the nature of Christ’s resurrection distracts from its true meaning. One affirms that meaning not in consenting or dissenting from particular beliefs about the nature of that event 2,000 years ago but by how we live today.
I have found the Death of God theologians to be very profound regarding this question.
When Peter Rollins was accused of denying the resurrection, he responded that,
“Without equivocation or hesitation I fully and completely admit that I deny the resurrection of Christ. This is something that anyone who knows me could tell you, and I am not afraid to say it publicly, no matter what some people may think…
“I deny the resurrection of Christ every time I do not serve at the feet of the oppressed, each day that I turn my back on the poor; I deny the resurrection of Christ when I close my ears to the cries of the downtrodden and lend my support to an unjust and corrupt system.
“However there are moments when I affirm that resurrection, few and far between as they are. I affirm it when I stand up for those who are forced to live on their knees, when I speak for those who have had their tongues torn out, when I cry for those who have no more tears left to shed.”
Christianity would be so much better if, rather than endlessly subjecting it to intellectual debate, we spent more time discussing how we treasure the resurrection in our hearts and how we respond to it with our actions
That was lovely. I think my faith is best defined by hymns and creeds. In the Bleak Midwinter, Dear Lord and Father of Mankind, My Song is Love Unknown.
My understanding of the two natures is that there is one person, Christ, who is both God and Man, in two natures. The person has a mother, hence Mary is the mother of God, and the person died, hence I would say that God died on the Cross. God the Son, not the Father or the Spirit. It's all a mystery though.
I'm always struck by the difference between the disciples before Easter and after. Before Easter they were afraid, after Easter they had no fear. It really is the most remarkable change. As you said, I think they understood what it meant for death to be defeated. I don't think I do, certainly not all the time. At times I'm brave, but at times I'm still afraid.
Rose, don't go anywhere, I love reading your writing. This is great art criticism. And that you've actually written this after that is, well, pretty miraculous.
This is a phenomenal piece, I absolutely loved it! Your thoughtful analysis of art, reflections of Christ as Our Redeemer and the reality of the ressurection are all topics which I have been deeply resonated in and are core to how I have always understood my faith, especially, now as a postulant in an order dedicated to Christ the Redeemer, the Redemptorists.
I love this. I love the wrestling with the incarnation as well, and understand and feel it too. After a couple of years actually reading and praying I can honestly say I believe in the resurrection, body and all. He was human - and all that entails (except sin). He was God. When He died… I don’t know. I guess I kind of assume it’s the Incarnation that died, but God experienced it through the Incarnation? The Son always lived on, and always has, and always will as the Word. This is a late night train of thought - I love reading others musings and thoughts on this stuff!
Despite having abandoned Chalcedonian-Niceneian orthodoxy, I have arrived in a place similar to yours regarding my faith in the resurrection. I used to passionately argue for a non-literal (non-physical) understanding of the resurrection event - I still do if the opportunity presents itself. However, I have lately become less passionate about doing so. I have concluded that intellectual debate about the nature of Christ’s resurrection distracts from its true meaning. One affirms that meaning not in consenting or dissenting from particular beliefs about the nature of that event 2,000 years ago but by how we live today.
I have found the Death of God theologians to be very profound regarding this question.
When Peter Rollins was accused of denying the resurrection, he responded that,
“Without equivocation or hesitation I fully and completely admit that I deny the resurrection of Christ. This is something that anyone who knows me could tell you, and I am not afraid to say it publicly, no matter what some people may think…
“I deny the resurrection of Christ every time I do not serve at the feet of the oppressed, each day that I turn my back on the poor; I deny the resurrection of Christ when I close my ears to the cries of the downtrodden and lend my support to an unjust and corrupt system.
“However there are moments when I affirm that resurrection, few and far between as they are. I affirm it when I stand up for those who are forced to live on their knees, when I speak for those who have had their tongues torn out, when I cry for those who have no more tears left to shed.”
Christianity would be so much better if, rather than endlessly subjecting it to intellectual debate, we spent more time discussing how we treasure the resurrection in our hearts and how we respond to it with our actions
That was lovely. I think my faith is best defined by hymns and creeds. In the Bleak Midwinter, Dear Lord and Father of Mankind, My Song is Love Unknown.
My understanding of the two natures is that there is one person, Christ, who is both God and Man, in two natures. The person has a mother, hence Mary is the mother of God, and the person died, hence I would say that God died on the Cross. God the Son, not the Father or the Spirit. It's all a mystery though.
I'm always struck by the difference between the disciples before Easter and after. Before Easter they were afraid, after Easter they had no fear. It really is the most remarkable change. As you said, I think they understood what it meant for death to be defeated. I don't think I do, certainly not all the time. At times I'm brave, but at times I'm still afraid.