<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>A New Manna</title>
		<description>Comments for A New Manna at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 16 out of 16 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 08:17:10 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6190</link>
			<description>Dear Mr. Grump, It is certainly difficult to imagine life without animals, isn't it.  I don't know the answer to your question.  We have a small flock of Shetland sheep that have brought us more joy and fun and reasons for getting up the the morning than almost anything else in the world in our retirement years.  We have not replaced dog or cats in the last couple of years because we don't want' to leave our children with the burden or  responsibility of caring for them and they would most likely outlive us.  Surely there is hardly anything that is as heartbreakingly tender as a dog's eyes.   They tell us that heaven will be complete and utter joy.  What that consists of, &quot;eye has not seen nor ear heard&quot;, so we will just have to trust. - Louise</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 13:50:19 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6189</link>
			<description>Thanks, Louise...Hope to see you in the Elysian Fields...But I only want to go to heaven if dogs are allowed. BTW, Scripture seems silent on this. Any passages that enlighten? What does the Church teach about the &quot;souls&quot; of animals? If Francis of Assisi had his way, the entire ark and their progeny would be welcomed, no? - Grump</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 11:52:24 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6182</link>
			<description>&quot;How do you know that I know or don't know&quot;

 &quot;A good excuse to remember next thing we screw up.  Thank you, Jesus.&quot;

That was the implication of your statement.  Otherwise, why would you be thanking Jesus for giving you an excuse?  There was no judgement intended, only a logical conclusion.  If erroneous, I apologize.

Jesus will always forgive you and me if our contrition is sincere and maybe, even, if only the desire for sincerity is all we can manage.

I wish you God's speed on your journey. - Louise</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 03:35:17 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6178</link>
			<description>Louise...How do you know that I know or don't know what I am doing? You can't know what is in my heart any more than I can know what is in yours. Judge not lest ye be judged. I'm taking Pascal's Wager after all and if I'm wrong I've lost nothing. If I'm right, maybe Jesus will forgive me.  - Grump</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:13:55 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6176</link>
			<description>Should have said, &quot;God was reconciling us all to Himself IN what Christ endured,,,&quot; Sorry. - Billy Bean</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 12:24:52 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6175</link>
			<description>Grump: I AM Barrabas, and so are you, and so is everyone else, whether Gentile or Jew. God was reconciling us all to to Himself what Christ endured, and Christ forgave each and every one of us. He commands us to likewise forgive our fellow human beings.  Nobody is saying this is easy, but why would you insist on trying to crucify the Body of Christ on the horns of a false dilemma (love EITHER Barabbas OR Christ), when the whole point of the gospel is that we CAN and indeed MUST &quot;have it both ways&quot;? - Billy Bean</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 11:20:26 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6173</link>
			<description>'They know not what they do.' A good excuse to remember next thing we screw up. Thank you, Jesus.

The difference being, Mr. Grump, that Jesus actually DID know whether they knew or whether they didn't know what they were doing.  They thought they knew what they were doing.  He knew that they didn't, so He forgave them.    

On the other hand, on the Day of Judgement, Mr. Grump can say, &quot;I didn't know what I was doing&quot; and Jesus will look Mr. Grump in the eye and His eyes He will say, &quot;Oh, yes you did.&quot; - Louise</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 09:12:29 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6168</link>
			<description>'They know not what they do.' A good excuse to remember next thing we screw up. Thank you, Jesus. - Grump</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 03:31:17 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6167</link>
			<description>Grump...you're mistaken.  Paul's admonishment &quot;Do not be yoked to unbelievers&quot; does not refer to Jews, it refers to pagans, made plain by his rhetorical question &quot;What agreement has the temple of God with idols?&quot;  Catholicism doesn't hold that Jews are pagans. - Chris in Maryland</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 21:13:14 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6166</link>
			<description>Jesus said, &quot;Father, forgive them.  They know not what they do.&quot;  If He forgave them, should not we do the same? - Louise</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:31:25 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6165</link>
			<description>Well, Bill. According to Scripture, they cried, &quot;Give us Barabbas!&quot; So, you tell me, who should Christians embrace? Christ or Barabbas? You can't have it both ways. - Grump</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:49:14 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6164</link>
			<description>If Christians treat Jews with kindness, love them as their fellow human beings and recognize their place of honor in God's drama of redemption, we are compromisers and hypocrits who don't really believe in the absolutes we preach. If we regard them as enemies and persecute them, treating them as an alien species who are somehow more guilty than anyone else for the crucifixion of Christ, we are nazi neanderthals and reactionary racists. What exactly would make you happy, Grumpy? - Billy Bean</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:59:18 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6161</link>
			<description>Mr. Miner, I haven't done scholarly reading in this arena for a long time, having read Jeremias' Eucharistic Words of Jesus and Dom Gregory Dix's The Shape of the Liturgy as my two guideposts, many years ago. Both were very good as to the Jewish roots of the Eucharist, as I recall.   It's heartening to see good Catholic historical-theological treatises. - Dave</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 05:42:59 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6160</link>
			<description>From The Gospel of Matthew:

&quot;When Pilate saw that he could not prevail, but rather that a tumult was beginning, he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, &quot;I am innocent of the blood of this just person. See ye to it.&quot; Then answered all the people and said, &quot;His blood be on us, and on our children!&quot; (KJV)

Inasmuch as the crowd consisted largely if not completely of Jews, then it appears that the &quot;blood curse,&quot; which started in the 4th Century, has continued until this day. 

The heart of anti-semitism is the rejection of Christ. Which is why, as an agnostic, I find expressions of brotherhood between Christians and Jews to be both hypocritical and contrary to the admonition: &quot;Do not be yoke with unbelievers.&quot;

Yet, here is the Catholic League's Donohue chumming it up with a rabbi every now and then, acting as if there is no great divide.

I suppose the lesson we are to draw that it's better to be half-right than completely right, if one takes the Christian view. Or, more simply, by extension, better any religion than no religion.

Christianity avers that there is &quot;neither Greek, nor Jew...&quot; and that all are supposed to be &quot;one in Christ Jesus,&quot; yet people still want to cling to their identities, which is why there can never been true brotherhood of man as long as they cannot share the fatherhood of God.

Thus, the stumbling blocks remain to those of us who try to square what was written down centuries ago to the chasms that grown wider with every passing year. - Grump</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 05:35:24 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6159</link>
			<description>Megan: I take your point. But the term &quot;blood libel&quot; has taken on a &quot;broad metaphorical meaning&quot; in culture - as Alan Dershowitz and others pointed out during the controversy over Sarah Palin's recent use of the term. - Brad Miner</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 04:07:42 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/a-new-manna.html#comment-6158</link>
			<description>That's not what blood libel means. - Megan</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 03:40:11 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
