At daybreak, Jesus left and went to a deserted place. The crowds went looking for him, and when they came to him, they tried to prevent him from leaving them. But he said to them, "To the other towns also I must proclaim the good news of the Kingdom of God, because for this purpose I have been sent."
Jesus went to a deserted place. It was time to get away.
Where do you go? Where is your deserted place? For the Lord, He would often get away early in the morning. He would go alone. He would often go to the mountains. Being alone is an important part of getting away. Doing it early in the morning is essential. Seeing things above sea level is a good idea.
Do you have a place to go. If not, then start thinking about one. I know some families that have built a chapel in their closet! Interesting...
But if it were up to me, I would build a small "observatory" on my roof. I would have a bed, a chair, a desk, and, of course, a telescope up there. If I had children, I would allow them to spend the night up there; one person at a time, to reflect on the heavens and to mediate on life. I guarantee you they would finally learn how to think and how to pray. I am certain the child that came down from there would be different from the one that went up there. They would be transfigured. A beautiful glow would surround them. Their eyes would be awakened to the enormity and complexity of life. Their wisdom would go beyond their age. Their young faces would disguise their adulthood.
Find a place today. It's so important to get away.
Proclaim the Good News. The Good News is the Truth, the Truth of Jesus Christ. The mystery of our existence has been revealed to us by Jesus Christ. We were created in the image and likeness of God who is Love. Is there any wonder why our greatest desire is to love and be loved? Not anymore! Now it is time for us to go deeper in this Truth.
The Lord is waiting to be discovered. He's made it so easy for us to find Him. Like the stars at night, He is the light in the midst of our darkness. He is standing in our way, waiting for us to take notice of Him in the presence of our friends, neighbors and even strangers.
Let's take some time out of our busy schedule to get away, to be alone, and to meditate on the stars in the heavens that are a dim reflection of his children on earth.
You are dust and into dust you shall return.
ReplyDeleteI have often thought about 'human-dust' and stardust. In learning of the discoveries of the millions of galaxies which make up our universe, I wonder if this is where heaven is… if there could be such a physical place. I imagine the stars are a reflection of all the saints, our friends, beautifying the night, only to help us realize our own potential beauty if we remain in Him Alone.
I couldn’t agree with you more, Father. We all need time 'alone'.
Beautiful Meditation.
The "observatory" on the roof of the house reminds me of when kids built tree houses in their backyards. Sadly I don't think this is much in fashion now a days...unless the tree house has satellite tv and an Xbox inside.....
ReplyDeleteIt's tough to be completely alone and silent in such a noisy, overcrowded world. I'm quite a morning person enjoying solitude and quiet when many others are still slumbering. First thing in the morning I read in the bed with a cup of coffee in one hand and my little dachshund snuggled up next to me. Just thirty minutes with the "Magnificat" or my Liturgy of the Hours apps really helps prepare me for the day. Ideally I'd love to transfer this ritual to a seaside location. Listening to the crashing of waves and calling of seagulls reminds me of the beauty of God's creations.
I look forward to attending a Montserrat Silent retreat in a couple of weeks! Since I tend to "talk" a lot, four days of silence and alone time with God will be rejuvenating.
-Jennifer
I've been wanting to do a Montserrat "silent" too sometime, in fact was just poking around their website yesterday.
DeleteDavid J.
I just read that Ariel Castro was found dead in his prison cell. He apparently hung himself. Unfortunately for him, his prison cell may have become a place of torment, rather than a place to reflect and meditate on God's mercy and forgiveness.
ReplyDeleteReflecting on one's life (and one's sins) can be dangerous if God is not a part of it. It can easily lead to despair rather than conversion.
Let's keep Ariel Castro in our prayers. I may be wrong, but I am quite sure very few are.
I may be wrong, but I am quite sure very few are.
Delete???
Very few people are.
DeleteI'm just wondering what very few people are. It is not clear to me from the context of your statement. It sounds like very few people are wrong.
Delete"Let's keep Ariel Castro in our prayers. I may be wrong, but I am quite sure very few are."
DeleteAre what? Are wrong? or Are keeping him in their prayers?
In the context of everything he wrote, which one do you think makes more sense.
Fr. Alfonse I think Ariel Castro was metally sick but let's pray for him. We need to put God first in our daily life.
ReplyDeleteI find it ironic Ariel Castro escaped the death penalty yet he decided to take his own life anyway. Was killing himself a way to escape the shame and guilt? Or was it a way out of a sense of loss: he would no longer have those women in his possession to abuse? We will never really know what went on in this monster's head. I'm sure many people are cheering for joy that he is no longer on this earth. (Tax payer funds won't support his incarceration anymore.) But, all in all it's still really sad.
ReplyDelete-J.
Love the idea of having a desert place to pray and meditate and most of all to get Transfigured ,I think that's what we're called for, thanks Father, beautiful meditation.
ReplyDeleteGina F
'To be Transfigured' that's what we're called for, isn't Father?God Bless you.
ReplyDeleteGina F
Gazing at the Stars: trust me, spend some time in the canyonlands of southern Utah for some silence and sublime beauty. And see www.astropics for some amazing star shots (milky way) which were taken in these places. The authentic ancient indian ruins out there will get ya thinkin' too about the passage of time, etc...
ReplyDeleteDavid J.
What I find amazing about the night skies is how small, yet significant, the earth is. How short man's time on earth is, yet how meaningful it is, for if man did not exist, then the Universe and our solar system would be a perfect waste of existence. No one would know. No one would be able to appreciate the sun rise or the sun set. No one would be able to say, "What a beautiful day it is today."
ReplyDeleteThe atheist Carl Sagan would often call our planet just a "pale blue dot". Like a good atheist, he ignored the obvious: that we are so different from all the other planets, especially those in our very own solar system. When it comes to size, one must have to be legally blind or a lunatic to not distinguish between a man and a redwood. When it comes to understanding, one must have to be an atheist to not be able to distinguish between a man and a redwood. Size matters little in significance.
-J.R.
"Like a good atheist, he ignored the obvious: that we are so different from all the other planets, especially those in our very own solar system."
DeleteConsidering there are only 8 planets in our solar system and if you take the 100 billion or so galaxies, each with 100 billion or so stars, each with an unknown number of planets, saying ALL the other planets is a bit off.
"When it comes to size, one must have to be legally blind or a lunatic to not distinguish between a man and a redwood."
There are maybe 50 orders of magnitude from quarks to the diameter of the visible universe. In terms of size, the difference between man and redwoods is of no significance. Do you propose that the rest of the universe has ANY notion of either? To the universe, we are insignificant.
You're obviously unfamiliar with Drake's equation or Fermi's paradox. Why talk about something when you're not an expert in it?
ReplyDelete"100 billion or so stars" So each star is the same? Each star is capable of supporting life? What majority of stars are out there? Are they mostly G2 Dwarf main sequence stars?
"Unknown number of planets." So we know the number of stars but not of planets? Funny. Again, every planet the same?
Apparently they are, since you whimsically put everything in the same basket of nonsense.
Good job, anonymous. How convenient.
P.S. To something or someone that does not think clearly, you're right: we are insignificant, but you're wrong, because some of us can (and do) think clearly.
I am familiar with both, I was trying to keep my post short.
DeleteYou said Sagan "...ignored the obvious: that we are so different from ALL the other planets..." How do you make that claim? About 3-4 thousand planets have been merely detected, out of possibly billions of billions of planets. You know that earth is different from EVERY SINGLE one? Yes, not every star could support life, not every planet is habitable, but with such a large number of possibilities, even minute fractions of chances could potentially mean multitudes of planets with life.
"So we know the number of stars but not of planets? Funny."
Could you provide me the exact count of either please? And where do you read or even imply that I think every star or planet would be the same?
P.S. What does Sagan's atheism have to do with his statement?
P.P.S. Can you show how the other 99.9999999...999% of the universe does not consider us insignificant?
"I am familiar with both, I was trying to keep my post short."
Delete>>What??? Sorry, I don't buy it. I think you are unfamiliar with both because you keep making the same claims over and over again.
>>Drake's equation estimates that the number of habitable planets with intelligent life on them (in our galaxy) is one. Coincidentally, it's probably our very own.
>>With regards to intergalactic space, Fermi's paradox states that if intelligent life existed on other planets, then where are they? Our star may be young, but given the age of the Universe, then it is not at all farfetched to imagine another civilization one million years ahead of us (a fraction of time in galactic time), right? By this time, they would have mastered galactic travel. They would have colonized other planets. Travel would be easy. Imagine us one million years from now (if we don't end up being killed by atheists like Stalin or Kim Jung-um).
Chances are we are alone, even with trillions of stars and trillions of planets.
"Could you provide me the exact count of either please?"
>>You said "100 billion or so galaxies," "100 billion or so stars" but then you said, "each with an unknown number of planets." If you are throwing the term billions out there like there was no tomorrow, I found it funny that you didn't know the number of planets. Get it?
>>Maybe you should read your post before you publish it.
"And where do you read or even imply that I think every star or planet would be the same?"
>>Show me where in your first post you make a clear distinction between stars and planets?
"What does Sagan's atheism have to do with his statement?"
>>Everything! Either life is by chance or an invitation to dance!
"Can you show how the other 99.999999....999% of the universe does not consider us insignificant?"
>> How can non-thinking things consider something significant or insignificant?
>>Significance is a philosophical (and even psychological term). It is not necessarily measurable or scientific. If you won the lottery, someone could easily say to you, "Big deal!" If you fell in love, someone could say to you, "So what!"
LIFE is significant. Why? Because it is valued, rare, special and uncommon. Life is significant based on your philosophy and psychology. Otherwise, it could easily be considered a disease, like some atheists have called it.
>>Now even if we were to find life on another planet, we would still consider life to be significant. Why? For the same exact reasons: valued, rare, special and uncommon.
Far too many atheist consider LIFE to be no big deal. In fact, far too many have summarily ended it and worked hard to eliminate it, reduce it or even annihilate it.
"Drake's equation estimates that the number of habitable planets with intelligent life on them (in our galaxy) is one"
ReplyDeleteOK, great. In our galaxy. Now if you multiply that by the 100 billion or so galaxies, what do you get? Honestly the equation is nearly meaningless. Some of the variables (i.e. fraction of planets with life that actually go on to develop intelligent life) are complete speculation. Using varying ranges for all the variables you can get any number from essentially zero to millions, even within our own galaxy. What does it tell us? That we have no idea if there is intelligent life out there or not.
"By this time, they would have mastered galactic travel"
And you know how long it takes to master intergalactic travel?
"Imagine us one million years from now (if we don't end up being killed by atheists like Stalin or Kim Jung-um)."
Or by religious wars or fundamentalist terrorists.
"I found it funny that you didn't know the number of planets. Get it?"
No, I don't get it. You don't know the number, I don't know, NOBODY knows. Why is the exact number important anyway?
"Show me where in your first post you make a clear distinction between stars and planets?"
It should be fairly obvious if you think a little "...if you take the 100 billion or so galaxies, each (GALAXY) with 100 billion or so stars, each (STAR) with an unknown number of planets..." (CAPS added). Even without my addition, it's pretty clear.
"Either life is by chance or an invitation to dance!"
Got any proof the caller is yours or even exists?
"Honestly, the equation is nearly meaningless..."
Delete>>Honestly, the equation is not. It is based on what we know so far. This is science in general.
>>I find it interesting how you can dismiss scientific research or theories when they are not in your favor. It just goes to show that atheists are merely biased propagandists rather than unbiased scientists.
"And you know how long it takes to master intergalactic travel?"
>>I don't. It's what most scientists would agree on. It's not illogical. And when Enrico Fermi proposed this, no one blinked. Again, I find it amazing how atheists will dismiss scientific research when it doesn't "go" in their favor. Also, you sound like the skeptics of old..."we will never have wireless communication", "we will never put a man on the moon..." or "We will never put a man in deep space..." It's funny. Most scientists ever made these types of claims.
>>I said 1,000,000 years, a tiny fraction of time. I could have easily have said 5 million or 10 million or even 20 million, which still is a tiny fraction of time.
>>Honestly, and sorry to say this, but you're an intellectual fraud, anonymous!
"Got any proof the caller is yours or even exists?"
>>This is the kicker! You're willing to believe in the existence of little aliens on other planets without any “proof” (you should know by now that the only “proofs” are mathematical proofs, right?)
>>Anonymous, throughout this entire discussion you've made something very clear to me. Atheists are not against God for scientific reasons. They may actually be against God for psychological reasons. You're all over the place on this debate.
"Or by religious wars or fundamentalist terrorists."
>>Now when you say “fundamentalists” I assume you mean religious, not fundamentalist atheists.
>>Well, I won't believe it until I see it. How’s that for irony!!! :) Most influential religious people are peaceful. The most influential atheists have been hate-filled bigots and murderers, and they could only accomplish their atrocities with the help of millions of faithful followers. Don't forget that, anonymous. Don't gloss over it, anonymous. We don’t have to speculate. History books are full of them. You know that. Open your eyes.
I'm done here.
"It is based on what we know so far. This is science in general"
ReplyDeleteAnd again, when half the terms are complete speculation, the equation can't tell us much. Once we can start accurately determining what some of those values are, it will be of much more use. Even if I were to concede that 1 is an accurate value, you still haven't addressed the fact that it is 1 in our galaxy with billions of galaxies out there. Unless you have something that suggests our galaxy is special?
"I find it interesting how you can dismiss scientific research or theories when they are not in your favor"
This certainly isn't a theory and I don't see any research in your favour either. As I said, the equation gives values from almost zero to millions depending on what values you use. There is no clear consensus on what each of these values is.
"You're willing to believe in the existence of little aliens on other planets without any “proof” "
I'm willing to believe life on other planets is possible, if not probable, considering we already have proof life actually exists. I also do not entirely dismiss the idea of a god, although nobody has been able to offer any undeniable evidence that their version of a god exists.
"Atheists are not against God for scientific reasons"
I am not "against" God any more than you are probably "against" bigfoot, Santa and shoe-making elves. It's just that there are no scientific reasons for God.
"Now when you say “fundamentalists” I assume you mean religious, not fundamentalist atheists."
Define atheism. Now define fundamental atheism. What is the difference? It is difficult to have a fundamental version of something that is essentially a yes/no question.
"The most influential atheists have been hate-filled bigots and murderers..."
Who did not do what they did in the name of atheism nor do they represent most atheists.
"...and they could only accomplish their atrocities with the help of millions of faithful followers."
And of course, nothing bad has EVER been done in the name of religion and their millions of faithful. Whether or not you believe in what those religious people believed in or consider them to be "true" followers, religion has done more than its fair share of harm to the world. Don't forget that JR. Don't gloss over it. We don’t have to speculate. History books are full of them.
You waited two days to respond? Where you hoping that I had turned my back for a moment? It seems like you need to get the last word. It won’t happen.
ReplyDelete"when half the terms are complete speculation, the equation can't tell us much."
>>I hate to break it to you, anonymous (aka Ludwig), but Drake's equation is actually your speculations in mathematical form. What do you think you keep doing? You're speculating! But, unlike Drake, you're taking wild guesses. Drake takes educated estimates based on planetary observations. He takes your “100 billion” stars and “100 billion” galaxies (even if some of these no longer exist) and "unknown" (I still find this funny!) planets, and he also includes the conditions necessary for intelligent life.
The Harvard educated astronomer takes scientific observations and estimates and builds from that. This isn’t what you do. You take wild guesses. He doesn’t.
Do you believe that what you saying is more valid than what he is saying? Or that what he is saying is just as useless as what you are saying? Hmmmm.... Are you more scientific than he is? Are you more exacting than he is? Hardly, anonymous. What Drake is is much more scientific than you are.
Statically speaking, the odds of having one civilization per galaxy is nearly the same as having none. Which brings me to Enrico Fermi’s paradox.
>>What about the great physicist's (Enrico Fermi) paradox???? You seem to be glossing over that in your conclusions on the various galaxies. Do you prefer to ignore it? Okay, go ahead. I'll keep reminding you of it. Apparently, his logic is not useful, but yours is.
"I also do not entirely dismiss the idea of a god, although nobody has been able to offer any undeniable evidence that their version of a god exists."
>> So now it is no longer "proof" that you seek but "evidence." Well, again, like a typical atheist, you regard inconvenient evidence as insufficient evidence. But the problem is not the evidence, the problem is a lack of study regarding the evidence. You equate Zeus with Jesus, as if the evidence were all the same. Atheists pick up religion like monkeys pick up a musical instrument.
>>Again, anonymous, you're problem is not that there is a lack of evidence. It's worse than that. You're problem is that there is a refusal to believe the evidence. That's okay. A lot of people have a hard time believing in what just happened to them or what they just learned. It's all psychological.
"I am not "against" God any more than you are probably "against" bigfoot, Santa and shoe-making elves. It's just that there are no scientific reasons for God."
ReplyDelete>> Do you know why I am against these physical beings? Because if they were physical, then they should be visible, right? There’s a difference between God (a spiritual being) and bigfoot, Santa and elves (I’m surprised that you didn’t include E.T.'s and aliens.. Oh wait, you actually believe in these things! That’s right.) Good for you, anonymous. Good for you. ;)
>>"No scientific reasons for God." That's you're problem. You're looking for a spiritual being in a field of study that works in the physical world. Hate to break it to you, but God will not be discovered through a telescope or a microscope. So you can stop looking now, okay?
>>You remind me of a poor factory worker who is looking for a nut in a nut factory. [I hope you understand the pun.]
I said: "The most influential atheists have been hate-filled bigots and murderers..." YOU replied: "Who did not do what they did in the name of atheism nor do they represent most atheists."
>> Really? How can you speak in the name of atheism or most atheists? Are you the voice of atheism and of atheists? How convenient of you, anonymous. But there's a real big problem in your logic. Apparently, these professed atheists and their atheism didn't help them at all from committing their atrocities. So what you are really saying is that atheism is useless. It doesn't make people better. If anything, it makes them worse! And the most influential ones; that is, the most publicly proclaimed atheists, have been some of the worst citizens on earth. So, what's the advantage of being an atheist? Truth? The truth that lets you lash out and kill others?
>>So atheism is either useless or disastrous. It's apparently unsuccessful in uniting people but apparently highly successful in dividing them. I like that. That makes so much more sense to me. Thank you.
"It is difficult to have a fundamental version of something that is essentially a yes/no question."
>>Your premise is incorrect. Fundamentalists take a yes and turn it into more yeses. And unfortunately, the most strident atheists turn it into gases!
>> By denying the existence of murderous atheists you are denying the evidence that exists. IS THERE ANY WONDER WHY YOU DENY GOD'S EXISTENCE?
>>Thank you anonymous. You remind me of another chap that used to write comments: "Banana_slug". Poor fellow, he was another poor example of atheism.
>> Good news, maybe he wasn't speaking in the name of atheism, right? Or maybe he never represented most atheists, correct?
;)
Jonathan: Just read that Voyager I left our solar system and that At the rate it is going, it would take 40,000 years to reach the nearest star, Alpha Centauri.
DeleteThis piece of junk was built in the 1970's. After reading your comments, I find them most logical to assume that if another civilization was out there, then by now it should have traveled to us, or at least detected us and communicated to us directly or by means of a voyager.
If we can make it to another system in 40,000 years, then imagine what another civilization could do 1,000,000 years ahead of us.
Thanks for the comment. It has changed the way I see things. God bless you.
You are right Father, I have not prayed for Ariel Castro. Whatever God is going to do for him or to him has already been decided. He is dead until his judgement day, he is asleep in the Lords grace and mercy. But God will pass judgement on him for what he did to those girls. God will decide if he has any redeeming qualities that deserve eternity. I will pray for swift judgement, if he is to be destroyed in the lake of fire. Same for anyone who does what he did. I am not without sin, I have committed a grevious sin, it is between me and my Lord, he knows my heart and he must decide if I am to be forgiven and allowed into heaven. I believe in repenting, I believe God forgives a repentant heart. But I do not believe you can pull it out in the last moment of your life and expect all to be forgiven because of a quick "I'm sorry". I believe the ladies he tormented are probably glad he no longer draws breath on this earth, as they are now certain he will never get to them again, and can now go on with their lives. Pray for him, I will try to, but I admit I'd rather pray for his victims full recovery. Their journey to healing will take years and years....
ReplyDelete