BIG (not small) 1.a.

Malcolm Muggeridge’s observation: "Every happening, great and small, is a parable whereby God speaks to us and the art of life is to get the message."

I suppose that our first parents kicked themselves for the losses they imposed on themselves in ignoring God’s clearly-enunciated command, just so that they could "play God" themselves. You know, that happened so long ago and the whole debacle has been written and talked about for centuries; so wouldn’t you think everyone, now, would be conscious of the pitfalls of personal pride? But it doesn’t work that way. Some foolishly conjure wordly gains for themselves by bending God’s rules, whatever it takes.

In the Old Testament, sometimes dispersed, are God’s commands to his human creatures, the greatest commandment of which is for them to love God continuously and diligently (my words). In Matthew 22: 34-40 Jesus states this commandment emphatically, adds to it the second greatest commandment: to love our neighbor as ourself and poses the two of them as the foundation of all our commanded obligations. Please see the short, cited text.

You know, God’s commandments, as the cited text shows, are quite direct and clearly explicit, but so were the stipulations God voiced to Adam and Spouse. It’s interesting that the commandments are directed to and mandatory for human beings only. Little puppy dogs might get a bit of a reprimand by their human owner or timeout restrained in a compound or by chain; but once trained they seem to behave predictably well. Without either the inclination or prideful deviousness to think up sophisticated disobediences that, properly obfuscated, likely, will reap both material and psychical payback to the human disobeyer while shielding him from forseeable, legal penalty, puppies’ goodwill is pretty well expected and, usually, forthcoming.

It’s true: puppies will try to get away with what they can, but they don’t know any better. To them a digression is a digression, without the gradations human beings recognize, say, between using the wrong fork at a formal dinner and committing brutal homicide. (Besides, a self-respecting puppy wouldn't do the latter on a bet!)  And the puppies can’t factor in the meterial or psychic rewards that might accrue to them in relation to their commission of a higher degree of digression, along with the liklihood of shielding the commission from detection. I guess what I’m talking about is free will gone amuck. Pope JP II clearly taught that we have been given freedom to do what we ought to do not freedom to do whatever we wish to do.

And that gets us back to God’s commandments: First Love God with all diligence and Love your neighbor as yourself. 

That’s what we ought to do; God gave us the freedom to so do. He also gave us a freedom by which we can disobey His commandments, at our peril. Some don’t seem to realize He, besides being creator and giver of all we have and enjoy, also is both the maker of the "ground rules" and the official scorekeeper.

Peace,

JR

Thanks for your comments, pouliot and fishman.

I’ll not argue that "indifference" is the "only opposite" there is to love. I’ll say, though, that if one is indifferent to the dignity inherent in another human being (or group of them) in circumstances wherein he is capable of some degree of caring help BUT AVOIDS OFFERING ANY; then he abridges God’s Greatest Commandments.

Both of God’s Greatest Commandments? Sure, both of them because he was indifferent to the plight of God’s creature and, in doing so, was indifferent to the Dignity of The Loving Creator, Who, after all, had Commanded Love, not indifference be extended to that particular creature, that neighbor.

But, suppose, in this busy world one is not well aware of another’s difficulties. Well, that certainly is possible, even likely in particular circumstances, and all the more likely when one selfishly or slothfully keeps blinders on so as not to "become involved".

But let’s start with the existence of God’s Two Greatest Commandments. Doesn’t "their being there" mandate a disposition on every Christian’s part to be alert for some person, among all one meets, who might have a need one could help address, at least in some small way? OK, we can’t all be "Do-gooders". But, after all, there do exist for all Christians God’s Two Greatest Commandments, not God’s Two Options. Nor did these commandments spring up with Christianity, as they exist in the Old Testament.

And for many good people who would prefer not to be classified "religious" the Golden Rule is quite pertinent, respected and employed: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". (An imperative sentence, that - remember from English grammar?)

And you don’t even have to tell anyone about the Golden Rule's connection with Deuteronomy, if you're not so inclined.

Enough.

Peace,

Jakes

Thanks, Alvinal.

Most are familiar with Jesus’s parable about the good Samaritan: who cared about, ministered to and - at his personal expense - arranged continuing care for a stranger he had happened upon, who had been assailed, robbed and left near death at the side of a road. Previously the paths of a priest and a Levite had given each of them opportunities to have helped that same victim but, separately, these witnesses chose (as we say these days) to "avoid eye contact" with "the problem", even though their law required love of neighbor.

In defining neighbor, my dictionariy cites the idea of nearness and brings in the idea of kindliness. In the instant parable nearness to the victim occurred by sheer chance to alll three: the priest, Levite and Samaritan, only the last of whom practiced neighborly kindliness while the other two showed common (in several connotations of the word) indifference to the crucial needs of their fellow man, near death.

Today, there’s an expansion of nearness to others by virtue of world-spanning communication able to make us aware; authoritatively and very rapidly, of the existence of particularly dire needs of peoples often very remote from ourselves, but here, at home, too. Often, thankfully, there are, as well, bonafide organizers of needed assistance, oftentimes operating under valid Catholic, or other reliable, moral guidelines.

Regretfully, other organizations - with deficits in their understanding or acceptance of what Scripture and Jesus, particularly, defined as God’s Command to all to love all - that either willfully or by just a dullness of mind and spirit, promote initiatives that kill rather than cure, whether it be killing the body, the spirit or both.

If, somehow, we were able to fill each of two groups with the first 1000 persons selected by validated criterion that they practice God’s commandment of love of neighbor, Group 1, or that that criterion does not guide them, Group 2, what might we find?

I think we would find Group 1 members tending, personally, to be happier, more composed, less stressed out and possessing truer friends. Instances of recrimination voiced by Group 2 members against Group 1 members - particularly that Group 1’ers are narrow and prejudiced - would far exceed such charges toward Group 2’ers.

Pretty subjective assessment? Well, perhaps.

Peace,

Jakes

Some critical considerations

1. God created us and enunciated certain ways for us to conduct our lives.

2. "Love God" is God’s First and Greatest Commandment: our first responsibility..

3.. "Love your neighbor as yourself " is the second. Not to do so affronts the Creator.

4. Validly fullfilling these two commandments fulfills all God requires of us.

5. That we are commanded at all, reveals our latitude to obey or disobey a commandment.

6. Obeying has an eternal reward; disobeying, without forgiveness, an eternal penalty.

7. The Inerrant Scorekeeper of our abiding or not by God’s commanded ways, is God.

Some Random Thoughts on Love of Neighbor

1. Truly loving others, constantly and well, betters oneself; influences the other positively

2. True Love compliments the other; declares respect, caring.and support where needed.

3. Opportunities to convey respect, caring and support abound prolifically and constantly.

4. Love of those neighbors within families, if only starting by quelling impatience is essential.

5. Progress in the practice of love of neighbor, particularly in the family, snowballs.

6. Pro-choicers do not love neighbor as God has commanded.   See St.Paul about doing no harm to others.

Two particular neighbors

1. What neighbor could be closer to anyone than the tiny human being in the womb?

2. What neighbor is more innocently in need of care?

3. What neighbor had less to do with fashioning people and circumstances surrounding her?

4. What neighbor would have less intent than she to harm anyone, particulary in family?

5. What neighbor has greater potential for becoming "best friend and comforter" of Mother?

6. Whom have the courts given a more sinister "right" to impose death than to mothers of unborn human beings?

7. Who is more apt to be pressured by opportunistic males to get rid of "that hindrance" than mothers of the yet unborn?

8. Why is an earlier abortion preferable to a later one, other than fuller physical evidence of what we already know: "She's a baby, a little human being"? Isn’t that child more fragile and needful of caring? Is that child less human than an older person?  Such rubbish!

9 Haven’t mothers of the unborn been doublecrossed into a Catch 22 dead end?

10 Who more than politicians and culture of death organization are the doublecrossers?  You say judges? Concentrate on those who installed them: Abortion advocating groups, politicians they support and voters.

11. When politicians have been dealt with, won’t the courts straighten out?  Sure!

12. Shouldn’t everyone of the electorate correct the plight of these two neighbors, NOW. Wouldn't that accord with God's Greatest Commandments?  Of course!   (NOW wasn't capitalized as a pun - just emphasis!)

13. Is there anything simpler and more powerful than casting a ballot in the USA?

14. How can a voter who did so before, support again a politician’s placing these two neighbors in jeopardy?

15. How can one enfranchised to vote deny love to these two neighbos by not voting?

16. As 50% of eligibles regularly do not vote, isn’t their participation all we need for justice?

17. If those 50%’ers had ever inclined toward pro-abortion wouldn’t they have rushed to past polls? 

18. What excuse for their indifference to these two neighbors do non-voters have?

19. And about NOW; aren’t they among "the many doublecrossers on pathways to the bank"?  That's where the robber barons are - in the "pro-choice" movement.

Peace,     Jakes