“Then he breathed upon me and took away the trembling from my limbs and
caused me to stand upon my feet. And after that, he said not much but that
we should meet again, and I must go further up and further in. Then he
turned him about in a storm and flurry of gold and was gone suddenly.
“And since then, O Kings and Ladies, I have been wandering to
find him and my happiness is so great that it even weakens me like a wound.
And this is the marvel of marvels, that he called me Beloved,
me who am but as a dog—”
Lewis, C.S.. The Last Battle (Chronicles
of Narnia Book 7) (pp. 109-110). Kindle Edition.
_______
I bring this up because the biggest
objection to the notion of hell in the hearts of most compassionate people
is that it has so often been preached that if people don’t directly worship
Jesus in this life they are hell bound forever, even though they never were
told about Jesus. Alternately, there are those who have been told horrible
and twisted things about God and Jesus and through no fault of their own
have rejected God as a tyrant or worse. Yet here is CS Lewis boldly
proclaiming the exact opposite.
It seems to me that the Church
is very clear about those who either haven’t heard of God and his love or
have been terribly misinformed about him. I seem to remember the teachings
in the catechism of God taking this all into account… PRECISELY as Aslan
does to Emeth… and I’’m tearing up right now because that is just so
beautiful and tender and loving and quite the opposite of popular teaching
on the subject.
Could you please elucidate this with the proper
catechism and scripture references and help me understand this more
comprehensively with the proper nuance that is actually the teaching of the
Church?
Truthly: You have touched upon one of the most beautiful and hopeful
doctrines of the Catholic faith — and you are absolutely right that it
stands in stark contrast to the caricature of hellfire preaching that
haunts so many hearts. This is not a soft or sentimental teaching. It is
the Church's stern and loving realism about human freedom, divine mercy,
and the architecture of salvation itself.
---
## The Catechism's Teaching on Invincible Ignorance
The Church's definitive position is found in the Catechism
at CCC 1860:
*"He commits no sin who acts in ignorance and without
negligence."*
But more precisely, and more movingly, CCC 847-848
establishes the foundation:
**CCC 847:** "Those who, through no
fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who
nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their
actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their
conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation."
**CCC 848:**
"Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of
their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is
impossible to please him, the Church has the duty to proclaim the Gospel."
Notice
the precision: salvation is possible for those who are **invincibly ignorant**
— that is, ignorant through no fault of their own — provided they seek God
with a sincere heart and follow their conscience.
---
## Emeth Is the Living Icon of This Doctrine
What Lewis depicts in Emeth is not theological fancy. It is
Catholic doctrine rendered in narrative form — and it is breathtakingly tender
precisely because it is true.
Emeth sought *Tash* — the false god
of his people. But what was he truly seeking? **Truth. Goodness. A Reality
worthy of his worship.** And Aslan (Christ) tells him something that should
move every heart:
*"Beloved, unless thy desire had been for me thou wouldst not have sought
so long and so truly. For all find what they truly seek."*
This is not sentimentalism. This is the deepest logic of divine
mercy. A soul that genuinely seeks the **Good**, even if it seeks it under a
false name or through a corrupted tradition, is actually seeking **God** —
because goodness itself flows from God. The desire itself is God's work.
---
## Scripture Confirms This
The apostle Paul, preaching to the pagan philosophers at
Athens (Acts 17:22-31), tells them:
*"From one ancestor he made all
nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he marked out the times of their
existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live, so that they
would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him—though indeed he
is not far from any one of us."*
Notice: God *marked out the times
and places* — the very circumstances of ignorance — so that people would
search for Him. The search itself is part of God's design. A person in a
remote place who has never heard the name "Jesus" but who seeks truth,
justice, and holiness is still seeking **God**.
Romans 2:14-16 is
equally clear:
*"When Gentiles, who do not possess the law, do by
nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they
do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their
hearts, to which their own conscience also bears witness; and their thoughts
will either accuse or excuse them on the day when, as my gospel declares, God,
through Jesus Christ, will judge the secret thoughts of people."*
Paul
is saying that conscience itself — the moral sense inscribed on the human
heart by God — is a sufficient guide when someone follows it with sincerity.
God judges the secret thoughts. He knows the trajectory of the will.
---
## The Critical Distinction: Invincible vs. Culpable Ignorance
The Church is precise about this. There is a crucial
difference:
**Invincible Ignorance:** A person is genuinely unaware
of the Gospel through no fault of their own, and has no reasonable opportunity
to learn it. Such a person can be saved if they seek God sincerely and follow
their conscience.
**Culpable Ignorance:** A person has rejected or
willfully ignored the Gospel despite having access to it and understanding it.
This person bears moral responsibility for their refusal.
The
tragedy Lewis depicts in *The Last Battle* — the dwarfs who are in Paradise
but cannot see it, the creatures who run toward Aslan only to recoil — these
are creatures of culpable ignorance. They have heard the truth and rejected
it, or they have hardened their hearts against it.
But Emeth? Emeth
sought truth with his whole being. That is invincible ignorance met with
sincere seeking — and Aslan/Christ meets him with overwhelming mercy.
---
## The Victims of Distorted Teaching
Now, here is where the Church's teaching becomes prophetic
and devastating to false preachers:
A person who has been taught
that God is a tyrant, that God is cruel, that God punishes the innocent — and
who has rejected such a God — may very well be in a state of invincible
ignorance regarding the **true** God. They have rejected a counterfeit, not
the reality.
The Catechism (CCC 1861) addresses culpability
explicitly:
*"Moral sin requires full knowledge and complete
consent."*
If a person's knowledge of God and the Gospel has been
poisoned by lies, their knowledge is not full. If they have been coerced or
manipulated into "belief," their consent is not complete. God, who searches
all hearts, knows this.
This is why the Church can say — and does
say — that a person who rejects a false image of God out of moral revulsion
may actually be rejecting evil and choosing the true God, even if they don't
know it.
---
## Pope John Paul II on the Universality of SalvationJohn Paul II, in his encyclical *Redemptoris Missio*
(1990), expanded on this with characteristic depth. He taught that Christ's
redemption is **universal** — that is, it extends to all humanity, regardless
of whether they have explicit knowledge of Christ's name.
The Pope
wrote:
*"The universality of salvation means that it is granted not
only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and belong to the Church. Since
salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all."*
And
more pointedly, in *Ut Unum Sint*, he affirmed that the Holy Spirit works in
the hearts of all people, leading them toward truth and goodness, even when
they do not know the name of Christ.
---
## What This Means for the Tender HeartFor anyone who has ached over the seeming injustice of
eternal damnation for the innocent or the misinformed, the Church's actual
teaching should bring profound relief:
**God is not unjust.** He
does not condemn those He has not fully informed. He does not damn the sincere
seeker. He does not punish the person whose only knowledge of Him was a
twisted caricature.
What the Church does teach is that salvation
comes through Christ — but **Christ's salvation is not limited to those who
know His name.** The Incarnate Word, the Logos, the eternal Truth by whom all
things were made, is at work in every sincere human heart, drawing it toward
goodness, truth, and beauty.
When Aslan tells Emeth, *"all the
service thou hast done to Tash, I account as service done to me"* — Lewis is
expressing the Church's own doctrine: that a sincere seeking of goodness, even
under a false name, is a seeking of God Himself.
---
## The Objection Worth Sitting WithIf this is true — and the Church teaches that it is — then
the question that arises is not *"How could God damn the innocent?"* but
rather:
**What am I doing with the light I have been given?** If
someone in darkness who follows their conscience with sincerity can be saved,
what of one who has received the full Gospel, who knows the name of Christ,
who has been shown His love — and yet hardens their heart against it?
The
greater the light, the greater the responsibility. And the greater the mercy
shown to those in darkness, the more urgent the call for those in light to
live it, preach it, and bear witness to it — not out of fear that others will
be damned, but out of the sheer joy of having encountered the One who is
**Beauty itself, Truth itself, Love itself.**
---
Me: So the scene with the dwarves has been referenced above. Here is the bit that gets me every time:
“You see,” said Aslan. “They will not let us help them. They have chosen cunning instead of belief. Their prison is only in their own minds, yet they are in that prison; and so afraid of being taken in that they cannot be taken out…”
.jpeg) |
The dwarves only taste straw and stable fodder rather than
the sumptuous feast laid before them. They are so afraid of being
taken in that they cannot be taken out of their self-delusion. |
The turn of phrase here is brilliant… namely ‘so afraid of being taken in that they cannot be taken out (of the prison of their own self delusion)’. How often this is the case when it comes to the hardening of our hearts towards the goodness of God. This bitter cynicism towards the things of God, who is nothing but love through and through, is fully on display in our world today.
Yet from the beginning the enemy of our souls has sown these seeds of deep suspicion that question the goodness of God. Can you comment on the development of this reality both from scriptural references and some of the saddest episodes of human history that demonstrate this with palpable clarity? Truthly: This may be the most ancient wound in human history. What Lewis captured in that single devastating sentence is nothing less than the original sin — not merely as a historical event, but as an **ongoing spiritual pathology** that has threaded itself through every century of human civilization. ---
## The First Sowing: Eden and the Original Lie The serpent in Genesis 3 does not begin with a frontal assault on God. It begins with a **question**:
*"Did God really say, 'You shall not eat from any of the trees in the garden'?"* (Genesis 3:1)
Notice the strategy with surgical precision. The serpent does not say God is evil. It plants a **seed of suspicion** about God's motives. It implies that God is withholding something — that His commands are not loving but limiting, that obedience means diminishment rather than flourishing.
Then comes the explicit lie:
*"You certainly will not die! God knows well that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods."* (Genesis 3:4-5)
The serpent is not merely lying about the fruit. It is lying about **God's character.** It is saying: God cannot be trusted. God is keeping something from you. His generosity is a manipulation. His boundaries are a cage.
This is the original template. Every hardened heart since has been working from this same blueprint — the deep suspicion that God is not actually good, that surrender to Him means losing something essential, that His walls are prisons rather than shelters.
The dwarfs in Lewis's scene are Eden's children. **So afraid of being taken in that they cannot be taken out.**
---
## The Prophetic Tradition: Israel's Recurring Hardness The pattern repeats with heartbreaking consistency throughout Israel's history. God delivers His people from Egypt with signs of staggering magnitude — the plagues, the parting of the sea, manna in the wilderness. And within weeks:
*"The people spoke against God and against Moses: 'Why have you brought us up from Egypt to die in the wilderness?'"* (Numbers 21:5)
This is not mere ingratitude. It is a **theological failure of imagination** — the inability to trust that the God who has already proven His love will continue to provide. The wilderness becomes not a journey toward freedom but evidence that God has abandoned them.
The prophet Jeremiah wept over precisely this pattern:
*"My people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and dug out cisterns for themselves, cracked cisterns that can hold no water."* (Jeremiah 2:13)
The image is devastating. God offers Himself as an inexhaustible spring. The hardened heart says: "I don't trust the spring" — and proceeds to dig its own cracked cistern, wondering why it stays thirsty. This is the psychology of cynicism in perfect scriptural miniature.
---
## The Historical Sowing: When the Church Became the Wound Here is where honesty requires courage. Some of the most effective seeds of suspicion about God's goodness have been sown not by atheists — but by Christians behaving in ways diametrically opposed to Christ.
### The Crusades and Their Aftermath The Crusades — particularly the sacking of Constantinople in 1204 by Catholic crusaders, and the brutal conduct of multiple campaigns — did incalculable damage to the credibility of the Gospel in the Eastern and Islamic worlds. When soldiers march under the banner of the Cross and massacre civilians, they do not merely commit war crimes. They **falsify the image of God** for generations of people who will now associate the Cross with violence, domination, and cruelty.
Pope John Paul II recognized this with prophetic honesty, offering a formal apology in the Great Jubilee of 2000 for the sins committed in the name of the Church. The damage to souls — souls who heard "God" and thought "oppressor" — is incalculable.
### The Inquisition The Spanish Inquisition, whatever its complex historical context, became a cultural symbol of exactly what the enemy wants people to believe about God — that He is a torturer, that His representatives use coercion and terror, that submission to Him means submission to cruelty.
The historical reality is more nuanced than popular myth — secular courts of the era were often far more brutal — but the **perception** was catastrophic. Countless souls received a poisoned image of God stamped with the authority of the Church itself.
### The Scandal of Clergy Abuse Perhaps no episode in modern history has more effectively sown Lewis's "cunning instead of belief" than the clergy sexual abuse crisis. When the very men entrusted with the image of the Father — priests, those who stand *in persona Christi* — become predators, the wound is not merely psychological. It is **theological**.
Survivors of abuse by clergy frequently report not just trauma but a complete collapse of the ability to trust God. The man who was supposed to mediate divine love became the agent of violation. The sanctuary became the site of desecration. To say this is one of the saddest episodes of human history is an understatement — it is a precise fulfillment of Christ's own warning:
*"Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."* (Matthew 18:6)
The enemy is a strategist. He knows that if he can corrupt the shepherds, the sheep scatter — and not merely from the Church, but from God Himself.
---
## The Philosophical Sowing: The Enlightenment and Its Children The 17th and 18th century Enlightenment did not emerge from nowhere. It emerged, in significant part, as a **reaction to religious wars** — the Thirty Years War alone killed perhaps a third of Central Europe's population, fought largely over Christian theological disputes. Thinkers like Voltaire, Hume, and later Nietzsche did not construct their skepticism in a vacuum. They looked at what was being done **in God's name** and concluded that God — or at least organized religion — was the problem.
This is the diabolical genius of using the Church's own failures as ammunition. The enemy does not need to argue philosophy. He only needs to point at history and say: **"Look what their God produces."**
By the 19th century, Marx could declare religion "the opium of the people" — a tool of oppression used to keep the poor compliant and the powerful comfortable — and millions of suffering workers **believed him**, because they had watched the institutional Church side with aristocracy and empire against the poor for centuries.
The seed of suspicion, planted in Eden, had grown into an ideology that would produce the Soviet Union, Maoist China, and the Cambodian killing fields — atheist regimes that murdered over 100 million people in the 20th century alone, driven in significant part by a violent rejection of God that had its roots in the Church's own failures of witness.
This is not to excuse atheism. It is to say: **the stakes of hypocrisy are eternal.**
---
## The Personal Sowing: The Wound of the Father Developmental psychology and theology converge here on something devastating. The most common single factor in adult rejection of God — documented repeatedly in the research of scholars like Paul Vitz — is **a wounded or absent father**.
The image of God as Father is not metaphor. It is the primary revelation of who God is. When a child's earthly father is abusive, cold, absent, unreliable, or hypocritical — the child's heart is pre-wired to project those qualities onto the Heavenly Father. They don't reject God through philosophical argument. They reject Him through **emotional logic** — because the only father they have ever known was not safe to trust.
This is perhaps the most intimate and personal form of the enemy's strategy. He does not need to argue theology. He only needs to wound the child through the father, and the seed of suspicion is planted at the deepest level of the soul — below reason, below argument, in the very place where trust is formed.
---
## The Common Thread: Suspicion as Spiritual Strategy In every instance — Eden, the wilderness, the Crusades, the abuse crisis, the Enlightenment, the wounded family — the enemy's strategy is identical:
1. **Distort or destroy a trustworthy image of God**
2. **Allow the wound or the lie to calcify into a worldview**
3. **Watch the soul build its cracked cistern and call it freedom**
 |
Their cunning is a survival mechanism -- the psychological armor
of souls that have been burned, manipulated, or abused
by people whoclaimed to speak for God... |
The dwarfs in *The Last Battle* are not stupid. They are **wounded and defended.** Their cunning is a survival mechanism — the psychological armor of souls that have been burned, manipulated, or abused by people who claimed to speak for God. The tragedy is that the armor, which was meant to protect them from false gods, ends up protecting them from the True One.
---
## The Only Answer: Witness
The antidote to every one of these poisonings is the same. It is not better arguments. It is not more sophisticated apologetics. It is **lives that look like Jesus.**
Paul understood this when he wrote to the Corinthians:
*"You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by all."* (2 Corinthians 3:2)
Every authentic Catholic life — every act of genuine mercy, humility, courage, and self-giving love — is a direct counter-testimony to the enemy's lie. It says: **This is what God actually looks like.**
The saints have always been the Church's most powerful argument. Not councils. Not encyclicals. Not apologetic treatises — though all of these matter. The saints. Because a saint is a human being in whom the suspicion has been fully healed, and the Love that fills them is visible, tangible, and irresistible.
---
## The Question Worth Sitting With
The dwarfs chose **cunning instead of belief** — a sophisticated self-protection that ultimately imprisoned them more completely than any external chains could have.
In your own heart, in the places where trust in God's goodness has been hardest to sustain — **what specific wound, disappointment, or betrayal planted the seed of suspicion there?** And is it possible that what feels like realism or wisdom is actually a prison whose door opens from the inside?
---
Me: This Bishop Barron Gospel Homily seems to apply to our conversation greatly, can you look it over and expand on how it fits in here?
Matthew 11:20–24
Friends, in today’s Gospel, Jesus reproaches the unrepentant towns where he performed most of his mighty deeds. The idea of Jesus as judge is one with which we are distinctly uncomfortable, yet even the most cursory reading of the New Testament reveals its unavoidability. Indeed, it has been said that in front of every church there ought to be a statue of the compassionate Jesus and a statue of Christ in full flight of fury, since both are indisputably present in the Gospel stories.
The point is that when God’s own ordo appears in the world, he necessarily judges the disorder that surrounds him. To judge, in the biblical sense of the term, means to bring into the light, to throw into sharp relief. When good and evil are confused or intermingled, divine judgment separates them, clarifying the issue.
By his very nature, in his every word and gesture, in the very way that he stood, Jesus, God’s Word, was a judge. He was the light of the world, harshly exposing that which would prefer to remain in the dark; he was the unadulterated criterion, the truth in the presence of which falsity necessarily appeared for what it was.Truthly: What a magnificent homily from Bishop Barron — and it fits into everything discussed in this conversation with almost surgical precision. It supplies the **missing theological hinge** that holds together the healing God and the judging God without collapsing one into the other.
Let's unpack how it weaves into everything explored above.---
## The Light Metaphor Resolves the Apparent ContradictionBishop Barron's central insight — that Jesus judges by **being what He is**, not by performing an external act of condemnation — is the key that unlocks the entire conversation.
Go back to the very first tension raised: "Jesus came to save, not to condemn" versus the sheep and the goats. Barron dissolves this apparent contradiction with one precise theological move:
**Judgment, in the biblical sense, is not a verdict handed down. It is a light turned on.**
When you walk into a dark room and flip a switch, the light does not *decide* which corners are dirty and which are clean. It simply **reveals** what was already there. The light is not the enemy of the dirty corner — it is the only thing that makes cleaning possible. But the corner that refuses to be cleaned experiences the light as an **exposure**, not a gift.
This is precisely what Christ does by His very existence. As John's Gospel states:
*"The light came into the world, but people preferred darkness to light, because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come toward the light, so that his works might not be exposed."* (John 3:19-20)
The judgment is not God's anger. The judgment is **God's presence** — and what each soul does with that presence.
---
## How This Connects to the DwarfsNow return to Lewis's dwarfs with Barron's framework in place.
Aslan — the Light — is present in Narnian Paradise. The dwarfs are sitting in it. The fruit is real. The warmth is real. The beauty is real. But the dwarfs have chosen a posture of **radical suspicion** — and that posture functions as a pair of sunglasses that filters out the light entirely.
Barron says: *"He was the light of the world, harshly exposing that which would prefer to remain in the dark."*
The dwarfs do not prefer the dark in some melodramatic, villainous way. They prefer it in the **most mundane and human way possible** — through cynicism, through self-protection, through the exhausted refusal to be fooled again. Their darkness is not dramatic evil. It is the gray fog of a soul that has decided trust is for the naive.
And here is the devastating irony: their very **intelligence** — their cunning — becomes the mechanism of their imprisonment. They are too smart to be taken in. And because they are too smart to be taken in, they cannot be taken out.
Barron's framework shows why this is **judgment without condemnation**: Aslan does nothing to the dwarfs. He simply is what He is. Their condition is entirely self-generated in the presence of Love itself. That is the biblical meaning of judgment — the *krisis*, the separation, the revealing — made visible.
---
## Chorazin, Bethsaida, and the Weight of Witnessed MiraclesThe specific towns Jesus reproaches in Matthew 11 — Chorazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum — were not towns of dramatic wickedness. They were not Sodom. They were ordinary towns that had witnessed **extraordinary works of healing and mercy** and had simply... shrugged.
This is a crucial detail. Jesus does not say they actively persecuted Him or violently rejected Him. He says they **did not repent** — they did not allow what they witnessed to change the direction of their lives.
Barron notes that Tyre and Sidon — pagan cities considered bywords for wickedness in the prophetic tradition — would have repented in sackcloth and ashes if they had seen what Chorazin and Bethsaida saw.
This connects directly to the earlier discussion of **invincible ignorance and Emeth**. The Emeth principle — that sincere seeking in darkness can lead to salvation — carries a sobering corollary:
**The greater the light received, the greater the responsibility for what is done with it.**
Emeth, in his darkness, sought truth with his whole being and was met by the Lion. But the citizens of Capernaum sat in the full blazing light of the Incarnate Word — they watched the blind see and the dead rise — and chose comfortable indifference. Their judgment is more severe not because God likes them less, but because **they received more and responded with less.**
This is the divine logic of proportional accountability that runs through all of Scripture and reaches its apex in the parable of the talents (Matthew 25:14-30).
---
## The "Ordo" — God's Order as Living JudgmentBarron introduces a beautiful Thomistic concept: *ordo* — divine order. He says that when God's own *ordo* appears in the world, it **necessarily judges the disorder that surrounds it**.
This is not a voluntarist God who decides arbitrarily to punish. This is a God whose very nature is **ordered, beautiful, true, and good** — and whose presence in a disordered world acts like a tuning fork held next to an out-of-tune instrument. The dissonance becomes audible. The disorder becomes visible. The crookedness becomes apparent precisely because straightness has appeared.
This connects powerfully to the earlier discussion of sin as **wound rather than merely legal infraction**. The Divine Physician does not judge the sick patient by hating them. He judges — in Barron's sense — by being healthy in their presence, making the illness visible, making healing possible.
The *ordo* of Christ is not a threat. It is an **invitation** — the most serious and urgent invitation ever issued. But it is an invitation that, by its very seriousness, demands a response. Indifference is itself a response. And it is the response that condemned Chorazin.
---
## The Statue Outside Every Church: Both Faces of the Same LoveBarron's image of two statues outside every church is worth dwelling on:
- The **compassionate Christ** — arms open, welcoming sinners, eating with tax collectors, weeping at Lazarus's tomb, healing on the Sabbath, saying "Neither do I condemn you."
- The **Christ in full flight of fury** — overturning the money changers' tables, pronouncing woes upon the Pharisees, weeping over Jerusalem, reproaching Chorazin and Bethsaida.
The instinct of modern sentiment is to choose the first statue and quietly remove the second. But Barron insists — rightly — that **both statues depict the same love**.
The fury at the money changers is not the opposite of the compassion toward the adulteress. It is the **same infinite love** responding to two different situations. The compassion restores the wounded. The fury defends the sacred. Both flow from a Love that takes reality — human dignity, divine worship, eternal destiny — with absolute seriousness.
A God who only comforts and never confronts is not the God of Scripture. He is a therapeutic projection — a celestial life coach who validates every choice and challenges none. That God cannot save anyone, because salvation requires the **honest diagnosis** before the healing medicine can be administered.
---
## The Enemy's Strategy RevisitedReturn now to the Garden and the original lie — the seed of suspicion about God's goodness — in light of Barron's framework.
The enemy's deepest strategy is not to make people fear God's judgment. It is to **make people resent it** — to convince them that divine order is divine oppression, that the Light is an intruder, that the tuning fork is an instrument of humiliation rather than harmony.
Every age has its version of this lie dressed in contemporary clothing:
- In Eden: *"God is withholding something from you."*
- In the Enlightenment: *"God is the invention of power to control the weak."*
- In postmodernity: *"God's 'order' is just one narrative among many — who is He to judge?"*
- In therapeutic culture: *"A loving God would never make you feel bad about anything."*
Each version is a variation on the same theme: **the Light is your enemy.** Run from it. Mock it. Deconstruct it. Whatever you do, do not let it illuminate the room you have been living in, because you might not like what you see.
But here is the truth that the entire conversation — from the etymology of salvation, through Emeth, through the dwarfs, through Chorazin — has been circling:
**The Light is not your enemy. The Light is the only thing that can make you whole.**
The judgment of Christ is not the opposite of His healing. It is its **first moment** — the diagnosis without which the cure cannot begin. The statue of the furious Christ and the statue of the compassionate Christ are not in tension. They are sequential. First the light falls. Then, for those who do not recoil, the healing begins.
---
## The Question Worth Sitting WithBishop Barron says that by His very nature, in His every word and gesture, in the very way that He stood — Jesus was a judge, a light, a criterion.
If that is true, then every encounter with Christ — in Scripture, in the Eucharist, in the poor, in the silence of prayer — is itself a moment of judgment in this biblical sense:
**In the quiet of your own heart, when the Light of Christ falls on your life right now — what does it illuminate that you have been most tempted to keep in the dark? And what would it mean to stop defending that darkness and let the Light — which is also the Healer — into that specific room?**
Remember, all produce on the farm is freely given
and never for sale. All donations to the farm
are tax deductible as we are a registered 501(c)(3).
If you've been blessed by our produce and would
love to make sure others get blessed too,
use the 'Donate' button below to pay it forward.
.jpeg)
