Reverence of the Cross

     Bernard's poem "The Sacred Head" reminds me of a lot of the classic hymns. I feel like songs nowadays speak of the cross only for what happened because of Christ's death and often forget what Christ actually went through in order for us to have salvation. It's easy for me to skip over the terrible suffering Christ experienced and just dwell on Him rising. Bernard vividly describing the piercings and blood in the same stanzas as describing the joy he experiences because of that pain really puts the term "sacrifice" into perspective. This could be just a me thing, and it could be just a me being a new Christian thing, but either way, reading this poem renewed my reverence for the cross.

I commented on Nathanael and Alex's posts.

Praise in Death

Be praised, my Lord, through our sister Bodily Death, from whose embrace no living person can escape. Woe to those who die in mortal sin! Happy those she finds doing Your most holy will. The second death can do no harm to them. This excerpt from Francis's "Canticle of the Sun" stuck out to me due to its mention of death in such a joyous manner. The idea that God may be praised through death is a rare thought in our modern culture but one that, I think, should be brought up more often. No person can escape death. Period. The End. No-one. This, to the modern mind, seems a dark and looming wall in every man's life, but it should not be so. Can Christians truly praise God in their dying--YES. As a matter of fact, it is in dying that the Christian should find the most joy, for "the second death can do harm to them." There is no punishment awaiting them, just peace. Bodily death, so often feared, and at the least deemed a tragedy is more of a comedy (in the classical sense). I personally hope more people will adopt this mindset, or at least find peace in it. For death is not to be feared; on the contrary, it is an opportunity to raise God in dependance and trust. I commented on Natalie and Darby's posts.

How being faithful to God can be rewarding

What I noticed in these writings are that it demonstrates how rewarding it can be to be faithful to and serve the Lord. For example: Before St. Francis confronted the wolf, it had to violently kill for food. But when it accepted the Lord, it was no longer violent. People were even generous enough to donate the food to it. It shows how rewarding it can be to renounce one's evil ways and learn to become a loving member of society by following in the Lord. In addition, I thought that Sacred Head is about the unconditional love of the Lord, as the narrator is grateful for the love and grace that God has given to him and wants to always stand by his belief in Him.

Extra Credit Blog

While reading Sacred Heart by Bernard of Clairvaux, my heart was opened to the absolute beauty that comes from Jesus dying on the cross. Bernard's heart was torn open by this realization as well. He seems to finally understand what it actually meant for Jesus to die on the cross and the pain that he went through. I love reading him go through this revelation. His astounding new understanding is beautiful to read about and "walk" through with him.

Beowulf

Alright, so this is a nugget of gold that I missed out on in high school. I had AP so and my amazing teacher taught us Beloved by Toni Morrison and the regular Honors class read Beowulf.
I quite enjoyed it. Yes it was weird but not in a bad way. Like we discussed in class, it was very reminiscent of C.S Lewis and J.R.R Tolkien. I thought that the idea of Grendel being cursed because he was a descendant of the Abel's kin was brilliant. I also don't think that this has to be a strictly Christian novel. I rather miss my AP days when we analyzed the rhetoric and literary credibility of a work rather than just tossing around the applied theology of it. My AP teacher also said that if anyone ever asked her what book they absolutely should ever read she would tell them the Bible. But not for reasons that you might think. She said this because of the countless allusions made to it in literary masterpieces. Anyway, I enjoyed Beowulf and I'm glad that I finally got the chance to read it. 

The First Crusade and the Story of Job

Sorry I'm late for this, but better late than never.

When I was reading The First Crusade, I noticed that parts of it reminded me of the story of Job from the Bible, where God took away all of Job's possessions to test his faith and then gave back twice of what he had. In the First Crusade, the soldiers are frequently struck by famines, but they place their faith in God that they will survive. In the end, they always find plenty of food and supplies for believing that God would take care of them.

I commented on Dallas' and Wendy's posts.

Apostasy

The apostasy of Rainald reminded me of when we read Silence. Rodrigues apostatized because he thought he would be saving other Christians from death. Rainald did it out of fear of death. When reading of how he turned on his own people, one has to wonder if he ever had faith. "He shrank from suffering martyrdom and renounced profession of the Christian faith despite being in good shape, on horseback, and armed" (86). He had some things working in his favor, yet he already had his mind made up. He valued his life more than he valued his profession of faith or the lives of others. The true Christians suffered death and would not renounce their faith.

I commented on Dallas and Sierra's.

Consider it Joy

I liked the way that the martyrdom of the priest on page 87 was described. He considers him fortunate because he was taken to Heaven with Christ. It reminded me of James 1:2. It says, "Consider it pure joy, my brothers, when you encounter trials of many kinds." This includes when in the face of death. All persecution brings us closer to Christ, whether by death or spiritual growth. It is very easy to dread and fear death, but we should look forward to being with Christ for eternity as believers.

I commented on Jacob and Hannah's posts.

Deus Vult!! God Wills It! (Sponsored by: Pope Urban II and the Council of Clermont)

Alright. I cannot stand stupid people!! This is probably why I never learned about the Crusades because I cannot wrap my mind around this level of continental (literally), stupidity. As I was telling Ethan, I was Youtubing the First Crusades because I was having trouble understanding the book and so I needed some context. This by no means makes me an expert but I do feel somewhat enlightened definitely have a better understanding of the book now.
For instance, I love how Pope Urban sets all this up. He doesn't even necessarily have the authority to do all this but he does anyway because, not really sure why. . ? People apparently liked to do stupid, stupid things back then. You know, things like go to war for hundreds of years, massacre thousands of civilians, commit acts of genocide, rape, pillage, and plunder, then go home, call it a day, and be like, "Yeah man, I'm totally goin to Heaven."
This one line pretty much sets up the entire screw up that is the Crusades and it comes from the big number two himself, "So seize on this road to obtain the remission of your sins, sure in the indestructible glory of the Heavenly Kingdom." pg. 81.

I commented on Ethan's and Sierra's

I do not know much of anything about the Crusades. So, reading this book has enlightened me a little bit. But, I am still lost and confused and convicted about the whole entirety of the Crusades. To me, even though these men were fighting for God, it seems like their actions and their beliefs do not reflect that. I know it was war, so fighting and killing was expected, but how does that make sense when one of the Commandments is "Thou shalt not murder"? I understand in the Old Testament that God called people to war to defend Him and his kingdom, but does Jesus tell us to do the same in the New Testament? He tells us in Matthew 5 during his Sermon on the Mount, that we should give someone our other cheek if they slap you. So, should we have gone to war with those people? Or instead of fighting, should we have taken that time to disciple the lost instead of brutally slay and kill them?
I just feel very conflicted and convicted about the Crusades, and even war today.

I commented on Sierra's and Hannah's!

Could we do the same?

Reading about the First Crusade challenges me to reflect on my own heart. Am I willing to sacrifice my bodily safety and comforts for the sake of my beliefs and faith in God? Do I genuinely believe that He is worth the cost? These reflections have come from reading some of the details of the intense persecution described on page 81, "pull out the end of their intestines" and "shoot arrows at others tied to stakes" and so on. I do not want to be like Rainald who is described as "lukewarm" in his "fight for the Heavenly King and Heavenly Kingdom" (86). He renounced his faith, and therefore deserved "to lose God's grace" (86). What do we make of this leader's example, other than to do everything we can to avoid making that same mistake? We must learn from the history of the Christians who come before us, and make the decision to either commit to faith, or choose to save our  own lives.

I commented on Hannah and Jacob's posts!

God Wills It!! ?? All of it?

            As I read through the different books and sections, I noticed a common trend. Almost every action that is taken by the Christians in this account is all willed by God. I am by no means voicing my opposition of the Crusades. I am just seeing a biased viewpoint. There seems to be a bias even in the way they interpret scripture. When the pilgrims start flooding in to avenge the deaths of the Christians who crossed the Arm of George, it is taken as a fulfillment of Scripture from the book of the prophet Isaiah.

"Fear not, for I am with you; I will I will bring your offspring from the east, and from the west I will gather you. I will say to the north, Give up, and the to the south, Do not withhold; bring my sons from afar and my daughters from the end of the earth," Isaiah 43:5-6.

            Not sure if the verse was quoted in context. I would love to read some other writings showing the other viewpoints of the Crusades. Once again, not voicing a stance against or for the Crusades as a whole. I don't think I can make an educated opinion just yet. I will admit I have little knowledge of the Crusades, and getting to read about the different groups of pilgrims that arose does shed light on how different groups of the Christian faith were brought in and where the conflict started.

Okay. I'm done for tonight

P.S. I commented on Jacob's and Hannah's posts!!

The Real World Epic

At the beginning, you could call this the Epic of Bohemond, from the grand sense of the Frankish lord. However, as he slips from the spotlight in later chapters, the focus comes to what this book is meant to cover: the history of our world. And through the eyes of Robert the Monk, the history of the first Crusade sounds glorious and romantic, with all the bloodshed and battle and mind games that anyone could wish for in a fictional story. It is hard to say how much of this history is embellished, from my viewpoint, but I can believe the loyalty and piety of the crusaders, the charisma of the princes leading them, as well as all the horrid acts the marching armies performed, on both the Turks and the European forces. I find myself wrapped up in the events and rooting for the crusaders, as you do for the heroes of a book series. The story of the first Crusade, at least told this way, truly is something you can enjoy as entertainment as well as learning from.

I commented on Jacob and Hannah's posts.

Why Did They Fight?

There were many reasons the men had for going to war, and they were incredibly varied. The Pope’s speech in the beginning of Book I pointed out a few of these reasons. He began by detailing the gory persecutions that the Christians faced at the hands of the Persians. Then he encouraged them to exhibit “manly courage” (81). He pointed to the courage of their forefathers, and hoped that they would draw inspiration and strength from their ancestors. On top of all of this, he appealed to the men not to avoid war for the sake of their families. After all, Jesus did say “he that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me” (81). Finally, he appealed to their sense of ownership of the “land of milk and honey” (81). These reasons, among many others, led men to fight and die. They were compelled to crusade, and I think it is really important to look at the reasons why.

I commented on Jacob and Daniel's posts.

Christianity Today

I found the crusades book to be very interesting. I never knew that some groups used to torture Christians as harshly as they did. It shows how blessed we are today that Christianity is accepted more in different areas of the world.  I feel like some Christians nowadays might renounce their faith if they knew they would have to endure what the Christians did in the book. It's almost like being a Christian has become more of a title than a faith sometimes.

I commented on Daniel and Hannah's posts.

The Prideful Philosopher

   As I read through Abelard's biography, he stands in stark contrast to Anselm, his mentor (at least, at one point). He is absolutely overflowing with arrogance. When elders and equals question his work or his opinions, he simply deems them jealous of his genius. When persecuted for what he "preaches", Abelard once again defers to a fear and jealousy of his intellect. Even when caught in an extremely passionate, and I must say explicit, affair, he blames the woman, and makes a "sacrifice" in order to marry her.
    Abelard is the student who spurns his master, who spurns his colleagues. He treats them with disrespect that is nigh upon contempt. He accepts little to no reproof or edification, instead assuring himself of his brilliance. May we not become Abelard...self-loving, self-proclaimed genius.

I commented on Brax and Francesca's posts.

Jesus: the Perfect God-Man Savior!

The pictures painted to show the validity of God's humanness and need to be of the lineage of Adam's human race are intriguing and explanatory to the weight and glory of the salvation He has bestowed upon us. I think subconsciously I grasped these pictorial concepts previously, though having it spelled brings this new enlightenment that is so wholesome! To take it a step farther, Jesus' human birth could not have been conceived between human man and woman because the embodiment of sin's affects could be considered to be carried through the man's seed, therefore explaining the God-man Jesus' sinlessness, despite the fact he was carried in the womb by a sinful virgin woman. Just another thought tangent I had that might be worth working out!

I commented on Brax and Sierra's!

God's Perfectly Designed Plan

At the end of page 60 through the first paragraph on page 61 Boso makes the point that it was the human race that came from Adam who brought sin into this world so it makes sense that Jesus also had to be a part of the human race to pay the punishment that we owed. But at the top of 61 he brings up parts that I'd never thought of before - "When the sin which was the cause of our condemnation had it's beginnings with a woman, it was fitting for the Author of our justice and savior to be born of a woman. Since the devil, when he tempted man, conquered him by the tasting of a tree, it was fitting for him to be conquered by man's bearing of suffering on a tree." I had never thought of the connections or the intricacies of whom Jesus was born of or the fact that sin was brought into this world with a tree and sin was paid for on a tree. At the end of that first paragraph Boso points out "a good many other things, when we consider them carefully, show the inexpressible beauty of our redemption thus accomplished." It makes me wonder how many other details of Jesus life, death, and resurrection I just gloss over without realizing and giving credit to the fact that not a single detail of it was left to chance, rather, every single minuscule detail was designed and planned just perfectly according to the Lord's will. This blows my mind. How have I known the story of the Gospel for as long as I can remember, how have I read it hundreds and hundreds of times and never noticed? I'm baffled at what I don't know but mostly excited for all that I have to learn.

I commented on Wendy's and Dallas' posts!

Grounded in faith

It is intriguing and important that Anselm took the time to point out that we should "first [seek] earnestly, in soundness of faith" before we begin analyzing obscure questions about the ways of God (58). Anselm adds that we must be grounded in our faith so that we will not be shaken by things we do not understand. However, it is foolish for us to not "understand what we believe" if we claim to believe certain things about God (59). Too often, I find myself having to go back and remember why I believe what I believe, so that I am not mindlessly believing things I have not wrestled with myself. Once I am grounded in faith and the truths of God, then I can appropriately dive into obscure questions about the nature and character of God.

I commented on Brax and Daniel's posts!

The Will of God

Why did God become man? Because it was the will of God. Anselm says, "The will of God should be a good enough reason for us when he does anything, even though we cannot see why He wills it. For the will of God is never irrational"(61). It was necessary for Christ to be fully human and fully God so as to only He could redeem the people. Sin came through man; therefore, life should be restored through the obedience of man. I found it interesting how he talked about Christ being born of a virgin, yet still sinless though Mary was of adam and eve. Anselm basically says that this is a mystery, but it is something to approach in awe as only God could do it. If found the section on the devil's redemption to be intriguing through the way Anselm approached it. If it were possible for the Devil to be redeemed, it would require and Angel-God, not a God-man. This was interesting because this is impossible because these angels were not made to fall or inflicted by another, so in theory they would have to rise without help as well. I had never thought of this, but it makes sense. They had no reason to fall or to turn away from God, yet did.

I commented on Brax and Hannah's.

Higher Thoughts

"What you ask from me is above me, and I am afraid to handle "the things that are too high for me."



I think this is a good reminder that we can't ever truly know the things that God knows. We should desire to know God better because of our love for him but, it would be ignorant to say that we will ever grasp the nature of God. There are many mysteries in this world that we will never understand. This is frustrating but, if we were able to know all these things what would separate us from him.

P.S.: I commented on Dallas' and Hannah's Posts.

What a Wonderful Savior

Anselm and Boso have a fantastic dialogue throughout, and I really enjoyed the point made about how great the mercy of God is. The more we meditate on it, the more we will continually realize how it was not by our own selves at all, but by grace and grace alone. It is such a humbling thought. When they discussed the rejection of the Devil being reconciled was really intriguing. Of course we know that he will not be receiving salvation, but it was cool to think of the "possible way" that an Angel/God needed to die for them. Obviously, this is impossible, but nonetheless one perspective I suppose. Still, there is no doubt that we have a loving Savior, who has given us life and shown such great love. Good reminder for today.

P.S. I commented on Francesca's and Dallas' posts.

The Mortal Form of God

The section God Ought to Take Manhood of Adam's Race, and from a Virgin brought up an answer to a question many wonder but I have never personally asked. Why did God take on a form birthed from the race of Adam? The answer Anslem gives is so simple: because it was Adam's line that sinned, it would be only fitting that He take on a body from the same blood, because if He made a brand new human-like being to inhabit, it wouldn't be human. That is something that I hadn't really considered, yet now seems so obvious. We often think that God should have the form of perfection, and be the example we should always strive to be. However, if he had done such a thing, then the sacrifice of Jesus Christ would mean nothing, because He would not have been human; he would have been this alien being that might look and speak as a human would, but without all the flaws and issues we have, in the physical sense. By being born of Adam's line, Jesus ensured that He felt the pains of a body stained by sin, but with a soul perfected, He ensured payment was satisfied for our sins.

I commented on Francesca and Dallas' posts.

Pride: The Preventer of Knowledge

    Abelard is clearly an intelligent man. However, his pride prevents him from furthering and cultivating his knowledge. This is seen when he deals with William and Anselm. We know because of our other reading that Anselm was a pretty solid dude, and based on what Abelard says, it's obvious that Abelard is ridiculously arrogant. Abelard spends the majority of his work pointing out how others unconvinced him, but he never admits any of it was spurred on by himself. He is like the opposite of Augustine. If he was a true intellectual, he would have accepted criticism, kept an open mind, and had thicker skin.

I commented on Hannah and Jacob's posts.

Tale of Two Trees

“Since the devil, when he tempted man, conquered him by the tasting of a tree, it was fitting for him to be conquered by man’s bearing of suffering on a tree.” (61)

This passage was such a great connector between the Old and New Testament. The fall of man and the redemption of man is tied together in two trees. I never really considered that particular connection. It was very reminiscent of our discussion last semester of Origen’s allegorical interpretation of Scripture. I love how Anselm was able to tie that connection into his explanation of Jesus’ humanity. The simplicity of this perfectly timed Redeemer is so wonderful. As I read, I could not help praising the Lord for not leaving humanity at the first tree. Instead, He laid down His life on a second tree to redeem us.

I commented on Dallas and Francesca's posts.

Human Decisions

I thought of something interesting when he talked about how death outweighs all sins no matter how terrible the sin. Specifically, when he said on page 64, that if you were given the option to kill a man to save the entire world. Would you do it? I think that I wouldn’t. Reason being that if God allowed sin to enter the world, it would be up to him to create a path out of it. And that the responsibility of it would be too great for one to handle. That is, if you knew that killing this man guaranteed the safety of every other man on earth. When Jesus was killed, his killers had no guarantee that on whether he was telling the truth or not. Mankind can only handle human decisions, not Godly decisions. We simply are not wise enough and never will be.

I commented on Daniel's post.

Ready

This overall was a good read that made me feel as though I was in the conversation. On page 62 they end the discussion of Jesus had to die and the last line is so important. "He Himself readily endured death in order to save man." Wow, our Jessu Christ was ready, it was no suprise, it was no last minute save. It was a plan made centuries before it happened. That is true love and true sacrafice. One that mankind will never see ever again. His death outweighed the infinite sins commited and to be commited. It is also said that " it was certainly neccessary for the redemption that Christ effected to benefit not only those who were alive at the time, but others as well." Mankind in its entirety was covered with mercy and forgiveness.
This makes me question if I am ready to do whatever God calls me to do. If I am to be like Christ then I am to be ready for the plans He has for me. We want to be missionaries and go out and serve the community but are we as a church ready?

Jesus Is No Victim

At the end of page 61 and beginning of 62, Boso talks about Christ as if He is a victim. I believe this is a mistake that many people, even those who claim to be Christians, make often today. I love the answer that Anselm gives on page 62. He explains how Jesus willingly gave up his life to save sinners. He chose to go to the cross and endure the wrath of God because He loves us so much. As Hebrews 12:2 says He, "For the joy that was set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God." It brought him joy to redeem us. Even though it was painful beyond our imagination, He bore our shame. Saying that Jesus is a victim paints a false picture of the incredible act that Christ performed on the cross.

I commented on Francesca and Hannah's posts.