#time truly does heal all wounds i have gained so much perspective and peace after everything | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

the-blue-fairie · 3 years

Text

On the Subject of Aporia

I guess I disagree with the notion that Show Yourself is Let it Go done “the right way.”

Much can be made of the fact that, in Let it Go, Elsa doesn’t truly work through her issues. But the thing is... she doesn’t really work through her issues in Show Yourself either. She doesn’t confront the roots of her trauma. She isn’t able to meditate on the roots of her trauma. She doesn’t get true catharsis and she doesn’t get true relief. In fact, Show Yourself goes some ways to sweep the roots of Elsa’s trauma under the rug.

And here I have to discuss how Frozen 2 frames Agnarr and Iduna. Because Frozen 2 never dwells upon the part Agnarr and Iduna played in Elsa’s trauma. It idealizes them, ignoring the fact that they were the ones to initiate the separation of the sisters in the first place, they were the ones who taught Elsa that she had to hide.

In the past, I’ve seen people put the blame on Elsa for the separation - saying that her fear after the accident instigated it and pointing to the fact that Elsa herself continues the separation after her parents’ death.

This reading is disingenuous, to say the least. While the accident scarred Elsa as a child, the separation (which was instigated by her parents, with the affirmation and complicity of the trolls) was what cemented the self-hatred in her heart. Elsa continued the separation after her parents’ death because she learned it well throughout her childhood.

I don’t like the fact that certain people place the blame for the childhood separation on Elsa, who was a terrified child at the time. A terrified child listening to the adults around her, adults in positions of authority. Adults who chose to close the gates, reduce the staff, limit her contact with people, and keep her powers secret from everyone, including Anna.

You can’t blame a child in an extreme situation the same as you blame an adult - but I’ve seen people in the fandom do it - and it frustrates me.

And again, as I’ve always said, Agnarr and Iduna are in an extreme situation too - and they are working under the guidance of the trolls. Agnarr and Iduna are good people - but their choices still contributed to their daughters’ pain.

And neither the films nor the shorts show the sisters processing their parents’ actions and how those actions hurt them.

Not even Dangerous Secrets does that - because Dangerous Secrets focuses on Iduna’s and Agnarr’s perspective. It’s not about the sisters processing what their parents did to them.

And again, “processing” doesn’t mean “condemnation.” I’m not advocating that the sisters condemn or hate their parents. Processing can also mean realizing that their parents were in a painful situation and forgiving them, accepting what happened.

But neither the films, nor the shorts, nor Dangerous Secrets do any of that. Even though coming to terms with the past is a key theme in Frozen 2 and a theme that centers on Agnarr and Iduna, Frozen 2 ignores their part in the childhood separation altogether.

It could have brought it up and, in bringing it up, it could have beautifully paralleled Iduna having to hide being Northuldra with Elsa having to hide her powers. It could have the sisters, as they are forced to make tough choices, sympathize with the tough choices their parents had to make. It could have truly confronted the roots of Elsa’s trauma by referencing the separation when Elsa meets her mother in Ahtohallan, giving the scene greater emotional weight. Or, the film could have highlighted that the True Evil comes from people like Runeard - whose fear causes him to kill, whereas Iduna and Agnarr’s fear for their children’s safety caused them to try and protect, even in an imperfect way.

The possibilities that present themselves are limitless - but only if Frozen 2 had the courage to address Agnarr’s and Iduna’s part in the childhood separation - and it didn’t. It had multiple opportunities to. It simply made the deliberate choice not to do so - to brush those actions essentially under the rug.

It’s like the movie thinks that, if it references Agnarr and Iduna’s part in the separation, that will make Agnarr and Iduna seem bad. But actually, the opposite would be true. If the film directly addressed Agnarr’s and Iduna’s part in the separation, they would become even more sympathetic because viewers would get a clearer understanding of what they were going through and see clearly how they were good people. On top of that, both Elsa and Anna could get a chance at true closure with them.

But the film goes out of its way not to bring that topic up. Even when Olaf recaps the first film, it’s like this: “[as Elsa] Anna, no too high! Blast! [as Anna] Ohhh! [as Elsa] Mama Papa Help! Slam, doors shutting everywhere, sisters torn apart. Well, at least they have their parents. [beat] Their parents are dead.” “Doors shutting everywhere” and “sisters torn apart” describes the event passively. It’s just “something that happened.” The problem is, within the context of the first film, it’s not just “something that happened.” It’s something that happened as a direct result of the trolls’ choices and Agnarr’s and Iduna’s choices. And I stress their choices over Elsa’s because she was a child in this situation and they are the adults in authority.

Thus, in a film that’s supposedly all about coming to terms with the mistakes of the past, a film where Agnarr and Iduna play a crucial role, this aspect of the past is actively ignored. Even though not ignoring this aspect of the past would enrich both films and clarify things more fully for people who are on the fence about Agnarr and Iduna (also, hopefully it could address the trolls’ part in all this, because no piece of Frozen media even begins to grapple with the trolls’ part in all this.)

And I know you might say, “Well, Dangerous Secrets addresses the parents’ part in the children’s separation!” And that’s good that it does so. But that still doesn’t get to my central point: that no piece of Frozen media shows Elsa and Anna coming to terms with what their parents and the trolls did to them, and how that influenced Elsa’s actions in the future.

Now, some people have argued that the films and shorts do address the sisters coming to terms with what their parents did to them, because through their parents’ portrayal in OFA and F2 it is implicitly suggested that Elsa and Anna have no ill feelings towards their parents.

But I’ve addressed this before in the past:

“Having ‘no ill feelings’ is the culmination of an emotional journey that we don’t get to see. We get to see the sisters dealing with the emotional ramifications of their childhoods and what it means for themselves, yes. We get to see them reconnect during Frozen Fever. But we don’t get to see them processing feelings for their parents (and the trolls) that must be complicated for them.

And saying that emotional journey is implicit or is addressed subtly because we see that the sisters bear their parents no ill will... I’m sorry, but that just isn’t good enough for me. The sisters bearing their parents no ill will is an endpoint. It’s not the emotional journey itself. We don’t get to SEE that journey addressed directly. We just have to be content with... implication.”

And the fact we just have to be content with implication when Frozen 2 is so much about the sisters’ relationship with their parents and Frozen 2 offers every chance to go beyond implication is... troubling to me.

It’s more than just an oversight on F2′s part. It’s a deliberate choice.

And it weakens the emotional impact of Show Yourself.

Show Yourself is framed as Elsa gaining closure regarding her mother, her trauma, her sense of self. But, regardless of that framing, it... doesn’t exactly give Elsa that closure.

Because Frozen media, outside of Dangerous Secrets, seems bent on glossing over the part Elsa’s and Anna’s parents and the trolls had in the sisters’ traumas in childhood. Because Frozen media doesn’t give the sisters a chance to talk together or reflect together on their parents’ and the trolls’ actions and come to terms with them. Even Dangerous Secrets, which does better in exploring the nuances and complexities of Agnarr and Iduna, can’t do that because the book is telling the parents’ story, not Elsa’s and Anna’s.

So parts of Show Yourself feel like... going through the motions of catharsis with no actual catharsis - because there are still open wounds that Show Yourself doesn’t even try to heal because the film won’t openly admit they exist. Because, as with Let it Go before it, there is still work to be done.

But at least Let it Go let Elsa be frustrated with her parents’ poor choices. At least it allowed Elsa to repudiate the strictures placed upon her:

Don't let them in, don't let them see Be the good girl you always have to be Conceal, don't feel, don't let them know Well, now they know

There’s more reflection on her parents’ part in her pain in those few lines than in the whole of Frozen 2 - even though much of Frozen 2 is directly about her parents.

I’ve seen people describe the transition from Let it Go to Show Yourself as a transition from reckless defiance to acceptance and peace... but this framing doesn’t work with the film’s portrayal of Elsa’s relationship with Iduna. Because for that framing to work, we’d actually have to see Elsa’s transition towards acceptance of her mother’s actions. We’d actually have to see the emotional process of Elsa making peace with her parents’ choices.

And we don’t.

And that’s tragic because, especially with the backstory Frozen 2 gives Iduna, there’s so much you could have done with Elsa’s relationship with her mother. So many parallels Elsa herself could have made as we see her truly going through the process of healing.

(Also, this last note isn’t related to Let it Go or Show Yourself, but, How does Anna feel about the trolls modifying her memories in childhood? I’m sure it has come up in the intervening years in-universe, but we’ve never seen it addressed... and that speaks to the larger issue I’ve been discussing.)

EDIT: Kristanna and Greatqueenanna have informed me that Anna’s missing memories are the subject of Memory and Magic, the second book in the Sisterhood is the Strongest Magic series - and, while I’m glad of that, I still am a bit bummed that they are relegated to an obscure book that not everyone will read and may be of dubious canonicity at this point instead of being addressed in the feature film that centers on addressing the past and coming to terms with it. While Dangerous Secrets is much more high-profile, I have similar reservations about it as well - because not as many people are going to find it as find Frozen 2. Moreover, Dangerous Secrets is meant to be a supplement to Frozen 2 and it doesn’t focus on Elsa’s and Anna’s emotional journey regarding their parents. I guess Frozen 2 is supposed to be that emotional journey in a way, but because Frozen 2 refuses to touch the childhood separation and Agnarr’s and Iduna’s accountability for it, that leaves a... gap in the text... so that the emotional journey feels incomplete.

#frozen #frozen 2 #elsa #iduna #agnarr

118 notes · View notes

raptured-night · 4 years

Note

7&34?

Oh, yay! Thanks for the ask @snapeling!

7. What is your most self-indulgent Snape headcanon? No, your MOST self-indulgent headcanon. That one

I’ve read so many imaginative answers to this one, even a really lovely short about Snape surviving the Battle of Hogwarts to become a bee-keeper. I absolutely adored that one because I have long nursed a little headcanon about Snape as a retired teacher turned bee-keeper in the style of Sherlock Holmes.

That being said, my most self-indulgent Snape headcanon has long been that the man who once spoke so mesmerizingly about being able to “put a stopper in death” to a class of rapt first-years was also able to have the foresight to be able to survive Nagini’s attack. Rowling laid the foundation for it to be possible and there was enough vagueness surrounding his death in the book that one could easily imagine scenarios where Snape survives and carves a better place for himself in the wizarding world post-war or he succeeds in faking his own death and quietly leaves the wizarding community of the UK behind for a fresh start elsewhere. In the latter scenario, everyone (or mostly everyone depending on if I’m feeling the idea of someone helping him fake his death or him managing it on his own) assumes he died and that his portrait didn’t just appear among the other Hogwarts’ headmasters because they believe he had “abandoned his post” but when his portrait (assuming Harry had one installed in his honor) suddenly comes to life and begins talking many decades later they realize the truth --the real reason that it had not appeared that night is because Severus Snape had not yet died.

I often go back-and-forth between what life he might make for himself in a scenario where he survives and the wizarding community of the UK is aware of it and the ones in which he survives and fakes his death. In AUs were Snape remains in the wizarding world of the UK and people know he survived I tend to see his life as more fraught with challenges but eventually stabilizing into something better than what he had before. I suspect the people’s views of him would be something similar to what we see of the fandom, in the sense, it might be a varied mix of public acceptance, hatred, and so on. There would be people who overly romanticize him and his role during the war and, to Snape’s own chagrin, seek to make him out to be far more of a tragic victim of circumstance than he would care to be seen as (he might balk at the odd marriage offer he gets from witches in the mail, expressions of sympathy bordering more pity, and even embarrassing assumptions about his sex life and offers, should he wish it, to “lose his virginity” or find comfort in willing arms). There would be others who might urge the Ministry to bring him up on charges and revile him even in the face of Harry’s or other people’s public defense because they just refuse to believe that the man who killed Dumbledore and usurped his position as Headmaster for over a year is anything other than a villain who managed to save his own skin and pull the wool over people’s eyes.

In the aftermath of the war, and with so much recent loss and fear, Snape would bear the brunt of their outcry for more vengeance (some with the thinly veiled prejudice that didn’t completely die with Voldemort that an “ugly half-blood who came from nothing” could have killed a great wizard like Dumbledore and fooled so many) under the guise of justice and they would project their collective trauma onto him. There would also be survivors of the war who came from families of Death Eaters and said Death Eaters who again slip away from justice that view Snape as either a traitor of the most extreme kind or as a curiosity. Was this man truly so capable an Occlumens that he could conceal from everyone, including Voldemort, his true beliefs and loyalties for so long, or had he successfully managed to play both sides of the war to secure himself a place with whichever side proved to be the victor? Ultimately, I see where his detractors would also be convinced, as many Snaters are, that whatever connection he had to Harry’s mother was something seedy and Snape would have to contend with their hatred.

Oddly, I see him finding those who revile him easier to reconcile (aside from their assumptions about Lily and what relationship he had with her) than his “fans” who might send him love letters and cast him as some Byronic hero. Largely because he has had to contend with being loathed for much of his life and it’s familiar territory. Being made into a romantic figure or even earning the respect of some people would be new territory he would have to learn to cope with. Learning how to tell the difference between admiration and romanticization, sympathy and pity, etc., would be a rocky course to navigate. I also see a tense and uncomfortable post-war relationship with many of his colleagues at Hogwarts. Their guilt over not trusting him would be difficult for him to contend with; they only believed what he and Dumbledore intended for them to believe. I think a bitter part of him might even privately feel that the guilt some of them felt for believing the worst of him came too little too late and would have been better served during his youth when so many of them seemed to have written him off and turned a blind eye to the Marauder’s bullying. He might be more inclined to avoid those of his colleagues who insist on dwelling on their guilt and rehashing his time as Headmaster.

For that reason, I have never seen him returning to Hogwarts as very likely. I do indulge in some thought of him and McGonagall eventually coming to an understanding after a few difficult conversations, some of which might be carried out in person over uncomfortable tea or stiffer drinks and some of which might occur through initially tense correspondences that eventually begin to veer off into more comfortable territory and lengthy discussions of topics that have nothing at all to do with the war as time passes. I also like the thought of Snape returning long enough to speak his peace to Dumbledore’s portrait. He would learn Dumbledore had tried to lay the groundwork for him to survive (he intended him to gain possession of the Elder Wand to offer him some protection and not to single him out to be killed but things did not go according to his best-laid plans); he wasn’t just a spy tossed out into the cold with no hope of being saved by a man who didn’t see him as more than a pawn in a much bigger game. Still, there are conversations that need to be had (such as why, from his perspective, Dumbledore once looked at a young Sirius Black and saw a boy who could still be saved even after his attempt at murder but could see nothing more in him than a lost cause to give up on) that Snape was unable to have with Dumbledore while he was still alive when they were still in the middle of a looming war other concerns, by necessity, took priority.

Those conversations would be difficult and painful but Snape would find that there was still catharsis to be found in the opening of old wounds when they had been left to fester so they could properly begin to heal. In such an AU, my most self-indulgent headcanon is one where Snape learns to take the reigns on his life and become his own master; he makes peace with his demons (for the most part) and allows the ghosts of his past to finally rest. Most importantly, he begins to plan for a future that is his own and reflect on what that means for him. I imagine a Snape that becomes better adjusted (as we see in Cursed Child) in terms of how he copes with his trauma. He would retire from Hogwarts and, finally, relocate from Spinner’s End to make a quiet but contended living for himself in a more comfortable flat or cottage home full of walls lined by shelves of books by applying the knowledge he has acquired over the course of many years not as an over-worked and frustrated teacher who doesn’t enjoy directly working with a classroom but as a prolific writer of educational textbooks on everything from Potions brewing for novice to advance brewers to treaties on defenses against Dark Arts so undeniably valuable they become standard syllabus at Hogwarts and amongst would-be Aurors at the Ministry.

In AUs where Snape leaves wizarding Britain behind him and fakes his death, the catharsis does not come easily. It’s a process of learning to accept leaving his past behind him, even if parts of it remain unresolved and open-ended, and finding peace in the new life he forges for himself. I like the idea of him leading a private life in another country. Often I imagine him in places like Tangier in Morroco, or Turkey, or Thebes in Egypt, Ethiopia, or Sudan, etc., places steeped in history or at the very cradle of civilization or in places lush with potentially useful and undiscovered species of flora, fauna, or species of magical creature that could be used in potions brewing, such as Indonesia, Malaysia, or Brunei (which share access to the rain forest in Borneo) or Brazil. In this headcanon, Snape would spend his days conducting research into obscure or ancient magical texts, studying potential new magical ingredients for potions, or even rediscovering old ways of brewing lost to many, and making a new name for himself as a talented Potioneer writing under an assumed name.

I like to imagine this Snape as benefiting from his time outside of the UK; his skin would pick up some color from his time spent outdoors in a warmer climate and if he always remained more on the side of slender he would not be so thin as to seem malnourished. He would gain a healthy bit of mass from his ventures and while he would always be a “substance over beauty” sort, the positive benefits of this new life would be evident through the changes in his appearance and overall demeanor. Enough so that when he came across a person from his past unexpectedly while they were on vacation his appearance and general baring were so altered that they would look right past him and wouldn’t realize until many decades later (by which time Snape would have lived to a ripe old age for a wizard and they too would have begun to feel the evidence of their own advancing years), when Snape’s portrait suddenly came to life among the Hogwarts’ Headmasters and began talking, as a sudden shocking afterthought that the person they had seen had been none other than Severus Snape --wrongly presumed dead after the Battle of Hogwarts and remembered by many witches and wizards, particularly The Boy Who Lived, as the bravest man any of them had ever known.

34. Pick out a chapstick/lipstick for Snape.

I may be breaking the rules a bit with this one but I have two answers, one serious and more thoughtful and one that just amuses me.

The serious answer is that I could headcanon Snape using a chapstick made from beeswax. It would be colorless (and if it had any flavor then he might indulge in a honey flavor or even a honey lemon flavor, which has the added bonus of being comforting and settling the stomach against any nausea) and protect his lips against chapping as a result of alternating between the colder temperatures of the dungeons and the heat of cauldron flames. This also ties into my favored headcanon of a Snape who keeps bees and finds economical uses for beeswax and honey.

As an aside, I like using the Burt’s Bees products myself (the company does aim to be cruelty-free and doesn’t test on animals which is a deciding factor in all of the cosmetic products I purchase, although their subsidiary company Clorox, which bought them out in 2007, does do animal testing with some of their products so it’s a bit of a murky territory where you have to debate if supporting one company’s cruelty-free policies balances against the fact their parent company does do animal testing or not; additionally many of the ingredients in their products are also naturally sourced, if not vegan for those who prefer cosmetic products that are both cruelty-free and vegan) and I occasionally indulge when I can afford the extra expense, so there’s that as well.

The funny answer is there is a brand of lipstick by Jeffree Star Cosmetics called Unicorn Blood and another by Too Faced called Unicorn Tears. Either of those sound as if they could be ingredients in a potion, so I could easily imagine our favorite Potions Master getting a sardonic kick out of using them.

#severus snape #pro snape #snape meta #snapedom #snape community

30 notes · View notes

pamphletstoinspire · 6 years

Photo

Catholic Physics - Reflections of a Catholic Scientist - Part 90

Suffering--Our Great Gift from God*

Story with image:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/catholic-physics-reflections-scientist-part-90-harold-baines-1/?published=t

The Sufferings of Job, William Blake from Wikimedia Commons

"In a sense, everything that happens to me is a gift from God. I may resent disappointments, rebel against a series of misfortunes which I regard as unmerited punishment. Yet in time I may come to understand that these can be considered gifts of enlightenment." -- One Day at a Time in Al-Anon, May 4

"The witnesses of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ have handed on to the Church and to mankind a specific Gospel of suffering. The Redeemer himself wrote this Gospel, above all by his own suffering accepted in love, so that man 'should not perish but have eternal life.' This suffering, together with the living word of his teaching, became a rich source for all those who shared in Jesus’ sufferings among the first generation of his disciples and confessors and among those who have come after them down the centuries" -- Pope St. John Paul II (Salvifici Doloris, VI:25).

INTRODUCTION

Al-Anon is a Twelve Step group for family members and friends of alcoholics and addicts. Some twenty-five years ago I went regularly to Twelve Step group meetings for several years and then stopped because it seemed that I might get more meaningful support from a deeper religious faith. A "Higher Power" just didn't cut it then. A month ago I came back to Twelve Steps and started to attend a men's Al-Anon group, not because of family circumstances, but because I wanted support for self-examination and from group interactions that would complement and supplement my Catholic faith.

At a meeting two weeks ago a guy new to the group whose son had just hit bottom -- been arrested with drugs, needles and other stuff -- wondered why this had to happen to his family. Another member brought up the quote given at the beginning of this post and there was then, shall we say, a heated exchange of views. I didn't participate, but I did recall a talk given early on by a priest, recovering from alcoholism, in which he made the same point as the quote: the alcoholic and his family have been given a gift from God, a gift that will enable them to grow in faith and spirituality.

I've been thinking about this problem since then. It's one piece of the general problem of theodicy, why does God allow evil to exist. As for myself, the suffering I endured 20 to 30 years ago did serve a good purpose: it led me to my Catholic faith, after I had realized that belief in an amorphous "Higher Power" could not by itself sustain me. What I will attempt to show in this post is how our Catholic faith does indeed show that suffering may serve purposes we do not perceive, and that we may transform that suffering into -- not joy exactly -- peace.

SUFFERING DOES NOT DISPROVE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

A common argument atheists use in attempting to disprove the existence of an all-good, all-powerful God, is that such a God would not allow the existence of suffering. There are variations on this argument (one in Sean O'Carrol's recent apologetic for atheistic naturalism, "The Big Picture," relies on Bayesian probability analysis). I'm not going to discuss such propositions in this post. The counter-arguments to atheists have been given by better theologists and philosophers than I -- see, for example, Professor Peter Kreeft's audiobook "Faith and Reason", and his CERC chapter, "Faith and Reason")

We, as Catholics, accept the dogmas and doctrines of the Magisterium, and thus have a rational basis to understand (at least partially) why "bad things happen to good people". As Catholics we must believe in Free Will and Original Sin, that Man is flawed, and that we inflict evil on ourselves. We also believe, as in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, that if bad things happen to us in this life, there is another life in heaven that will overshadow present misfortune.

THE SAINTS TELL US TO SEEK SUFFERING WITH CHRIST

There is a special Catholic perspective on suffering: that by our own suffering we share Christ's salvific suffering for us. We should, therefore, not try to avoid suffering but to welcome it. Quotes from the saints attest to this:

St. Augustine of Hippo:

"Trials and tribulations offer us a chance to make reparation for our past faults and sins. On such occasions the Lord comes to us like a physician to heal the wounds left by our sins. Tribulation is the divine medicine."

St. Francis of Assisi

"... our Lord Jesus, whose footsteps we ought to follow, called his betrayer “friend,” and offered himself willingly to his executioners. Therefore all those who unjustly inflict upon us tribulations, anguish, shame and injuries, sorrows and torments, martyrdom and death, are our friends whom we ought to love much, because we shall gain eternal life by those things which they make us suffer. And let us hate our body with its vices and sins, because by living in pleasures it wishes to rob us of the love of our Lord Jesus Christ and eternal life, and to lose itself with everything else in hell.”

St. Ignatius of Loyola:

"If God sends you many sufferings, it is a sign that He has great plans for you and certainly wants to make you a saint."

"If God gives you an abundant harvest of trials, it is a sign of great holiness which He desires you to attain. Do you want to become a great saint? Ask God to send you many sufferings. The flame of Divine Love never rises higher than when fed with the wood of the Cross, which the infinite charity of the Savior used to finish His sacrifice. All the pleasures of the world are nothing compared with the sweetness found in the gall and vinegar offered to Jesus Christ."

St. Teresa of Avila:

"Blessed be He, Who came into the world for no other purpose than to suffer."

"One must not think that a person who is suffering is not praying. He is offering up his sufferings to God, and many a time he is praying much

more truly than one who goes away by himself and meditates his head off, and, if he has squeezed out a few tears, thinks that is prayer."

St. John of the Cross:

"Whenever anything disagreeable or displeasing happens to you, remember Christ crucified and be silent."

"The purest suffering bears and carries in its train the purest understanding."

St. Rafqua Al-Rayes:

"O Christ, I unite my sufferings to yours, my pains with your pains, as I look at your head crowned with thorns."

St. John Vianney:

"Whether we will or not, we must suffer...There are two ways of suffering — to suffer with love, and to suffer without love. The saints suffered everything with joy, patience, and perseverance, because they loved. As for us, we suffer with anger, vexation, and weariness, because we do not love. If we loved God, we should love crosses, we should wish for them, we should take pleasure in them."

There are many more--just do a web-search: "quotes saints on suffering".

POPE ST. JOHN PAUL II'S "SALVIFICI DOLORIS"

"Born of the mystery of Redemption in the Cross of Christ, the Church has to try to meet man in a special way on the path of his suffering. In this meeting man 'becomes the way for the Church', and this way is one of the most important ones." Pope St. John Paul II, Salvifici Doloris.

In 1984 Pope St. John Paul II published his encyclical, Salvifici Doloris, three years after he had been shot by a would-be assassin. Although I have not found any historical accounts to validate my conjecture that he suffered great pain during his recovery, it seems likely, given that he had two sections of bowel removed. It is reasonable to assume then that his Apostolic Letter was written in the context of his physical suffering, if not as a consequence of this suffering.

Pope St. John Paul II explores the dimensions of human suffering, from its relation in the Old Testament to God's Justice and the consequences of evil, the good man who suffers (Job), to the New Testament, in which Christ tells us to carry our cross and follow Him. Pope St. John Paul II emphasizes that suffering is a mystery, but that by realizing Christ suffered, took on our sin and death, we can better understand God's purpose in allowing suffering. By joining in suffering with Christ, we can unite our human distress with Christ's salvific suffering. I do an injustice to the encyclical by this brief summary, and I urge the reader to read the letter in its entirety. Two quotes are in order:

"In the Cross of Christ not only is the Redemption accomplished through suffering, but also human suffering itself has been redeemed,. Christ, - without any fault of his own - took on himself "the total evil of sin". The experience of this evil determined the incomparable extent of Christ's suffering, which became the price of the Redemption." Salvifici Dolores 18

"Those who share in Christ's sufferings have before their eyes the Paschal Mystery of the Cross and Resurrection, in which Christ descends, in a first phase, to the ultimate limits of human weakness and impotence: indeed, he dies nailed to the Cross. But if at the same time in this weakness there is accomplished his lifting up, confirmed by the power of the Resurrection, then this means that the weaknesses of all human sufferings are capable of being infused with the same power of God manifested in Christ's Cross. In such a concept, to suffer means to become particularly susceptible, particularly open to the working of the salvific powers of God, offered to humanity in Christ. In him God has confirmed his desire to act especially through suffering, which is man's weakness and emptying of self, and he wishes to make his power known precisely in this weakness and emptying of self. " ibid. 23

THE FOURTH SORROWFUL MYSTERY, TAKE UP YOUR CROSS

It's a hard row to hoe, but I can only follow Catholic teaching. When I pray the sorrowful Rosary and come to the fourth mystery, Jesus carries His cross, I pray that I can take on my sins, my failures, my suffering, offer them up and thereby lighten the load of His cross. We can not know what God wills for us, but must assume that it is for our ultimate good. And if we suffer now, we have to look to the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, to envisage that final reward that faith promises us.

*In an earlier post I have "discussed and compared" the Jewish and Catholic theologies of suffering; see "Suffering -- A Catholic | Jewish Perspective".

From a series of articles written by: Bob Kurland - a Catholic Scientist

#catholic physics

3 notes · View notes

yogaadvise · 7 years

Text

How to Really, Really Listen

When my partner talks, I'm listening. It's usually to the voices in my head: 'Are we truly out of olive oil?' 'Why does he seem annoyed-what did I do?' 'I want he 'd quit chatting so I can inform him about that point.'

We all do this, a whole lot. In justness to us, the voices in our heads are relatively loud. It's often stated that rather of paying attention much of us are simply waiting to talk. It's really human, but not the very best formula for the intimate link as well as psychological complete satisfaction that real listening could produce. Couples therapists recognize this well. In the book Getting the Love You Want, Harville Hendrix, Ph.D., and Helen LaKelly Hunt, Ph.D., outline an approach of aware interaction developed to assist couples pay attention, and be heard, more deeply in order to cultivate a much more encouraging as well as enjoyable relationship over time.

The 'Imago Dialogue,' as they call it, is a collection of steps to promote true listening and efficient couples communication-it's component of their bigger Imago Therapy strategy. An imago is specified as an idealized psychological photo of another individual or the self, or as Hendrix has actually stated, 'Just what you're looking for in a partner but aren't conscious of.' It's the unconscious tourist attraction to companions who advise us of our childhood years carers, so we could replay as well as, at some point, heal old injuries. 'It's a device that permits people to fathom a method to be present to another person,' says Margo Steinfeld, LCSW, a Brooklyn, New York-based, qualified Imago Relationship Therapist for couples and individuals. 'It's a means making an emotional link.'

When my now-husband, Brad, and I had been dating for just 4 months, we took a workshop with Hendrix and Hunt-I was covering a conference that gained us open door. (As well as he was right into it-major points for him! Which really did not freak me out-a great sign for me!) The dialogue lacks a question among the core factors we're still with each other and going strong. Below's a paraphrasing of exactly how it goes, though I motivate you to take a look at the entire thing.

Talk and listen. Two individuals take transforms talking and also paying attention. When you speak, attempt to get in touch with your vulnerable, true self. 'On the other side of paying attention is the desire to be honest and open as well as share oneself,' claims Steinfeld. 'They function as a group.' Attempt using 'I' statements, stick to one subject, and prevent blanket statements (' You constantly ...'). And do not criticize. When you listen, keep your lips sealed. No doubt, no loud 'uh-huhs.' Maintain soft, unforced eye contact. Your task below is to remain existing in your body, heart, and ears.

Mirror and summarize. When the audio speaker is done, tell her just what you've heard: 'Exactly what I heard you say is ...' Does not need to be verbatim, but do not embellish or editorialize with your tone. Be kind and respectful also if the content is disturbing you big-time. See to it you're getting it ideal: 'Did I obtain that?' Redesign it otherwise. Ask if there's even more. If so, repeat. As soon as you obtain the hang of it, mirroring could go exceptionally deep: 'It remains in the existence of the mom that a newborn really feels and understands that she exists,' states Steinfeld. 'Conscious listening permits an individual to know they exist.'

Validate. This isn't really regarding concurring yet rather acknowledging the validity of the other individual's perspective-it's real to him, even if you assume it's cuckoo-brains. As in, 'When I screamed from the other area, you seemed like I was annoyed with you. That makes good sense to me.' This is NOT the minute to include, 'However I just could not hear you over the fan! Why can not you accept that?!' This is concerning validating the individual you enjoy. Steinfeld prices estimate one more therapist that contrasts in this manner of communicating to global traveling: 'You remain in your country as well as your partner remains in his country-you need to leave your own to see him in his.'

Empathize. Now you're recognizing the other individual's sensations. Place on your own in her footwears as well as feel her being yelled at, unprovoked: 'I can visualize how that hurt for you, seeming like I was crazy for no reason.' And also if you understand a lot more, possibly delicately add something like: '... particularly considering that you had such a chaotic family maturing, with your daddy howling constantly.'

Close. Listener many thanks the speaker for sharing, audio speaker many thanks the listener for hearing. You could take turns as soon as possible or at afterward, whatever feels right for you both. After Brad and I did this procedure a number of times, we started to do it more automatically-a little awkwardly at initially, after that much more naturally. When we 'd encounter a conflict, we 'd show the various other individual's point of view before leaping in with our own, which is pretty a lot the key to globe peace. :

ME (scared and also angry, yet calm-ish sounding): 'I'm really feeling pain that you're examining your phone so commonly on our date. I'm interpreting that as you not wishing to be below.'

HIM (angry, but calm-ish sounding): 'Considering my phone is distressing you because you seem like I don't yearn for to be with you.'

ME (relieved): "Yes!"

And miracle of wonders, instead of intensifying right into a huge battle, we wound up having a much softer, much deeper conversation. I might read about his unrelenting boss texting in any way hrs without feeling dissed. After that he felt heard rather than criticized, opening the space to inspect his phone somewhat less and for me to be slightly less annoyed by it. Success! And also it created a means to at some point work out in much deeper with each other. 'Aware paying attention amounts to a healthy partnership. You can't have one without the other,' states Steinfeld. 'It's a mirror for each individual to seem like they make good sense, like they're not the only one, like the other individual has their back.'

Brad as well as I continuously deal with existing (I still often want him to shush so I could ask what took place to the olive oil). It's a technique, which maybe someday will transform into a routine. In the meantime, we journey with each other from nation to country, discovering as much as possible along the way.

#hot yoga #yoga

1 note · View note

pamphletstoinspire · 6 years

Photo

Catholic Physics - Reflections of a Catholic Scientist - Part 100

Lent: Join Our Suffering to That of Christ

Story With Image:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/catholic-physics-reflections-scientist-part-100-harold-baines/?published=t

The witnesses of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ have handed on to the Church and to mankind a specific Gospel of suffering. The Redeemer himself wrote this Gospel, above all by his own suffering accepted in love, so that man ‘should not perish but have eternal life.’ This suffering, together with the living word of his teaching, became a rich source for all those who shared in Jesus’ sufferings among the first generation of his disciples and confessors and among those who have come after them down the centuries.

–Pope St. John Paul II (Salvifici Doloris, VI:25).

INTRODUCTION

In a post four years ago (“Suffering: A Catholic|Jewish Perspective) I “discussed and compared” the Jewish and Catholic theologies of suffering. A few weeks ago I was moved to reflect on this again with a new perspective, brought on by a story told in a Twelve Step men’s group meeting I recently attended.

A guy new to the group whose son had just hit bottom–been arrested with drugs, needles and other stuff–wondered why this had to happen to his family. Another member brought up the quote below:

“In a sense, everything that happens to me is a gift from God. I may resent disappointments, rebel against a series of misfortunes which I regard as unmerited punishment. Yet in time I may come to understand that these can be considered gifts of enlightenment.”–One Day at a Time in Al-Anon, May 4

There was then, shall we say, a heated exchange of views. I didn’t participate, but I did recall a talk given early on by a priest recovering from alcoholism in which he made the same point as the quote: the alcoholic and his family have been given a gift from God, a gift that will enable them to grow in faith and spirituality.

I’ve been thinking about this problem since then. It’s one piece of the general problem of theodicy, why does God allow evil to exist. As for myself, the suffering I have undergone because of addiction/alcoholism did serve a good purpose: it led me to my Catholic faith. What I will attempt to show in this post is how our Catholic faith does indeed show that suffering may serve purposes we do not perceive, and that we may transform that suffering into–not joy exactly–peace.

SUFFERING DOES NOT DISPROVE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

A common argument atheists use in attempting to disprove the existence of an all-good, all-powerful God, is that such a God would not allow the existence of suffering. There are variations on this argument (one in Sean O’Carrol’s recent apologetic for atheistic naturalism, “The Big Picture,” relies on Bayesian probability analysis). I’m not going to discuss such propositions in this post. The counter-arguments to atheists have been given by better theologians and philosophers than I–see, for example, Professor Peter Kreeft’s audiobook “Faith and Reason“, and his CERC chapter, “Faith and Reason”)

We, as Catholics, accept the dogmas and doctrines of the Magisterium, and thus have a rational basis to understand (at least partially) why “bad things happen to good people”. As Catholics we must believe in Free Will and Original Sin, that Man is flawed, and that we inflict evil on ourselves. We also believe, as in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, that if bad things happen to us in this life, there is another life in heaven that will overshadow present misfortune.

THE SAINTS TELL US TO SEEK SUFFERING WITH CHRIST

There is a special Catholic perspective on suffering: that by our own suffering we share Christ’s salvific suffering for us. We should, therefore, not try to avoid suffering but to welcome it. Quotes from the saints attest to this:

St. Augustine of Hippo:

Trials and tribulations offer us a chance to make reparation for our past faults and sins. On such occasions the Lord comes to us like a physician to heal the wounds left by our sins. Tribulation is the divine medicine.

St. Francis of Assisi

… our Lord Jesus, whose footsteps we ought to follow, called his betrayer “friend,” and offered himself willingly to his executioners. Therefore all those who unjustly inflict upon us tribulations, anguish, shame and injuries, sorrows and torments, martyrdom and death, are our friends whom we ought to love much, because we shall gain eternal life by those things which they make us suffer. And let us hate our body with its vices and sins, because by living in pleasures it wishes to rob us of the love of our Lord Jesus Christ and eternal life, and to lose itself with everything else in hell.

St. Ignatius of Loyola:

If God gives you an abundant harvest of trials, it is a sign of great holiness which He desires you to attain. Do you want to become a great saint? Ask God to send you many sufferings. The flame of Divine Love never rises higher than when fed with the wood of the Cross, which the infinite charity of the Savior used to finish His sacrifice. All the pleasures of the world are nothing compared with the sweetness found in the gall and vinegar offered to Jesus Christ.

St. Teresa of Avila:

One must not think that a person who is suffering is not praying. He is offering up his sufferings to God, and many a time he is praying much more truly than one who goes away by himself and meditates his head off, and, if he has squeezed out a few tears, thinks that is prayer.

St. John of the Cross:

Whenever anything disagreeable or displeasing happens to you, remember Christ crucified and be silent.

St. Rafqua Al-Rayes:

O Christ, I unite my sufferings to yours, my pains with your pains, as I look at your head crowned with thorns.

St. John Vianney:

Whether we will or not, we must suffer…There are two ways of suffering — to suffer with love, and to suffer without love. The saints suffered everything with joy, patience, and perseverance, because they loved. As for us, we suffer with anger, vexation, and weariness, because we do not love. If we loved God, we should love crosses, we should wish for them, we should take pleasure in them.

And here’s what my favorite papal saint, Pope St. John Paul II has to say about suffering as the way to salvation:

POPE ST. JOHN PAUL II’S “SALVIFICI DOLORIS”

Born of the mystery of Redemption in the Cross of Christ, the Church has to try to meet man in a special way on the path of his suffering. In this meeting man ‘becomes the way for the Church’, and this way is one of the most important ones.- Pope St. John Paul II, Salvifici Doloris.

Pope St. John Paul II explores the dimensions of human suffering, from its relation in the Old Testament to God’s Justice and the consequences of evil, the good man who suffers (Job), to the New Testament, in which Christ tells us to carry our cross and follow Him. Pope St. John Paul II emphasizes that suffering is a mystery, but that by realizing Christ suffered, took on our sin and death, we can better understand God’s purpose in allowing suffering. By joining in suffering with Christ, we can unite our human distress with Christ’s salvific suffering. I do an injustice to the encyclical by this brief summary, and I urge the reader to read the letter in its entirety. Two quotes are in order:

In the Cross of Christ not only is the Redemption accomplished through suffering, but also human suffering itself has been redeemed,. Christ, – without any fault of his own – took on himself “the total evil of sin”. The experience of this evil determined the incomparable extent of Christ’s suffering, which became the price of the Redemption. Salvifici Dolores 18

Those who share in Christ’s sufferings have before their eyes the Paschal Mystery of the Cross and Resurrection, in which Christ descends, in a first phase, to the ultimate limits of human weakness and impotence: indeed, he dies nailed to the Cross. But if at the same time in this weakness there is accomplished his lifting up, confirmed by the power of the Resurrection, then this means that the weaknesses of all human sufferings are capable of being infused with the same power of God manifested in Christ’s Cross. In such a concept, to suffer means to become particularly susceptible, particularly open to the working of the salvific powers of God, offered to humanity in Christ. In him God has confirmed his desire to act especially through suffering, which is man’s weakness and emptying of self, and he wishes to make his power known precisely in this weakness and emptying of self. ibid. 23

THE FOURTH SORROWFUL MYSTERY, TAKE UP YOUR CROSS

Not only during Lent but throughout the year, harvesting suffering is a hard row to hoe; however, I can only follow Catholic teaching. When I pray the sorrowful Rosary and come to the fourth mystery, Jesus carries His cross, I pray that I can take on my sins, my failures, my suffering, offer them up and thereby lighten the load of His cross. We can not know what God wills for us but must assume that it is for our ultimate good. And if we suffer now, we have to look to the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, to envisage the final reward that faith promises us.

From a series of articles written by: Bob Kurland - a Catholic Scientist

#catholic physics

0 notes

pamphletstoinspire · 6 years

Photo

Catholic Physics - Reflections of a Catholic Scientist - Part 21

Suffering--a Catholic|Jewish perspective*

"One must not think that a person who is suffering is not praying. He is offering up his sufferings to God, and many a time he is praying much more truly than one who goes away by himself and meditates his head off, and, if he has squeezed out a few tears, thinks that is prayer."--St. Teresa of Avila

"Our people have experienced suffering in its many forms, as a nation as well as individually. Every so often, someone suggests a reason for suffering. This is presumptuous, because while there may be various reasons for suffering, they are largely unknown to us." Rabbi Dr. Abraham Twerski, The Mystery of Suffering

Lent soon will be over, and Good Friday, which celebrates the Passion of Our Lord, will be upon us. A comment on Catholic Answers Forum to the effect that Christians and Jews have different perspectives on suffering has given me cause to ponder. Is this true, and if so, what are the differences and what are the similarities? I'll have to add that I was a cultural, not a religious Jew, so that some of my knowledge was acquired after my conversion to Catholicism (and partially through my wife, a cradle Catholic and historian of all things Judaica).

Let's start off by considering the differences. The most important, I believe, is the notion (not accepted by all Jewish faithful) stated in Rabbi Dr. Twerski's quote above, and much earlier in the book of Job: the reason for suffering is mysterious, because we cannot know the mind of G-d. To this must be added historical evidence that "Schverzer sein a Yid" (Yiddish for "It is hard to be a Jew"). Even in the happiest of occasions, a Jewish wedding, the groom smashes the glass cup under his feet as a commemoration of the destruction of the Second Temple. Historical testimony to Jewish suffering is given by the persecutions and massacres culminating in the Holocaust--indeed, the terms "ghetto", "pogrom", "holocaust" have gained a usage for more universal suffering than just Jewish. I refer readers to an article by Marc Krell, Suffering and the Problem of Evil , which gives a much better account of the history of Jewish suffering and the several theodicies engendered in response than I could in this brief post.

One point I will add to his article: no explanation other than that given in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16:19-31), namely, that the arms of Abraham await those who have greatly suffered in their earthly life, can possibly suffice to justify God's allowing the Holocaust to occur. In fact there is a strain of Jewish Talmudic teaching that does credit heaven (as a Garden of Eden) as recompense for earthly suffering:

"Rabbi Ya'akov taught: This world is compared to an ante-chamber that leads to Olam Ha-Ba, (the World-to-Come)" (Pirkei Avot 4:21). That is, while a righteous person might suffer in this lifetime, he or she will certainly be rewarded in the next world, and that reward will be much greater. In fact, in some cases, the rabbis claim that the righteous are made to suffer in this world so that their reward will be that much greater in the next (Leviticus Rabbah 27:1)." (See Heaven and Hell in Jewish Tradition)

This compensation theodicy and the notion of suffering found in the writings of Deutero-Isaiah, the hymns on The Suffering Servant, are links, a commonality between the Jewish and Catholic concepts of suffering:

" Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. ... for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken... Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin... by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities." Isaiah 53:3-11 (KJV)

A theodicy proposed by the Medieval sage, rebbe Rashi, after the massacres of the Crusades, held that the Jews, not Jesus, suffered for the sins of the world. To the extent that all of us to a degree suffer for the sins of the world, that may be true, but it omits a very important part of the suffering of Jesus: it was by this that He procured our salvation, and thus fulfilled the prophecy of Deutero-Isaiah.

And therein is one great difference between Jewish and Catholic interpretations of suffering. To discuss others I'm going to rely on the thoughts of Bl. John Paul II in his Apostolic Letter Salvici Doloris and of C.S. Lewis in The Problem of Pain. One view of suffering in the Old Testament was as a punishment for sins, but this explanation is only partially successful, and recognized thus in Job. In Salvici Doloris, John Paul acknowledges the punishment aspect of suffering, but adds another dimension:

"Suffering must serve for conversion, that is, for the rebuilding of goodness in the subject, who can recognize the divine mercy in this call to repentance. The purpose of penance is to overcome evil, which under different forms lies dormant in man. Its purpose is also to strengthen goodness both in man himself and in his relationships with others and especially with God. " Bl. John Paul II, Salvici Doloris

In more homely terms, C.S. Lewis echoes this:

"While what we call 'our own life' remains agreeable we will not surrender it to Him. What then can God do in our own interests but make 'our own life' less agreeable to us and take away the sources of false happiness (emphasis added)? It is just here, where God's providence seems at first to be most cruel, that the Divine humility...deserves most praise." C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain

On a personal note, I can testify to this: it was through suffering that I came to a Twelve-Step Program and thence to the Catholic Church.

As said in Salvici Doloris, Christ's love for us saves us from that most extreme suffering, an eternity without God, damnation. We are called therefore to participate in the suffering of the Passion, to "offer it up" continually and happily. When I recite the Fourth Sorrowful Mystery, I preface it with a prayer, offering up my sins, faults and failures that they might make the Cross less burdensome, for the Passion exists always, not just at an instant in time. St. Teresa, in the quote given above, acknowledged that suffering is a form of prayer.

Suffering is a necessary consequence of Free Will. If we are not automatons, constrained to do good only, then we must have the capacity to do evil and thereby to suffer from evil done by others. And even with inanimate non-sentient entities, God so chooses a framework of physical laws that will ultimately be for our good, but that may also entail natural catastrophe. Voltaire, when he gloated over the deaths of tens of thousands in the Lisbon earthquake (to contradict Leibniz's best of all possible worlds), did not consider that many of those dead would be eventually in heaven. It is by the vision of an eternal paradise that we are enabled to endure earthly suffering.

"In the Cross He showed us how to bear suffering. In His resurrection He showed us what we are to hope for." St. Augustine, On the Creed 9

*Note: The notation Catholic|Jewish has a special meaning for me; a conditional probability is denoted as P(B|A), that is the probability of event B given that event A occurs.

From a series of articles written by: Bob Kurland - a Catholic Scientist

#catholic physics

0 notes