However, a quick tour of the commentaries (LINK) --- the easiest brief reference I can find--- shows a rough consensus that the "issue" with Michal was David's display, not of indecency, but of humility. Her derisive words show, I think, a terrible jealousy, which is not surprising when you're married to a National Savior, Warrior Hero, Rock Star of whom the women have been chanting his praises from Day One ("Saul has killed his thousands, David his ten-thousands")--- that same deadly jealousy that drove her father the King out of his mind.
Yes, I think Michal judged wrongly. My interpretation from the peanut gallery.
I don't know, dsc, maybe what little Sr. Cristina is doing is perilous. But I just don't see how we can claim so often to love people when we don't even want to know them, don't want to be where they are, don't want to be seen with them, and don't want to speak their language. What kind of missionary is that?
The point of this "The Voice" TV program is that the young aspiring talents get to choose one of the judges as their mentor in the competition. The idea is, the chosen judge is supposed to coach the young gifted n00bie. (That's what all that "choose me, choose me" stuff was all about.) So the presumption is that Sr. Cristina wants an entree into the rap-pop-rock'n'roll world for evangelizing purposes --- which is what she said, and I am not immediately inclined to call her a liar.
We shall see. I hope to see her putting out great videos full of the love of the Lord, love and truth; and I hope to see that J-AX --- clearly smitten, isn't he? --- coming over to the Catholic side.
Let's pray for this little sister, hey?
Hope all things.
“I am no a Biblical scholar, I am only a peanut in the peanut gallery. I quote sources I can hardly be said to have mastered. I can’t even read Hebrew or Greek”
Then I would say we are peers, except that I happen to know that you are more of a scholar than I.
“rough consensus that the “issue” with Michal was David’s display, not of indecency, but of humility.”
You will pardon me if my initial response to the words “rough consensus” is skepticism. That doesn’t mean I can’t be persuaded, but we’ve had some bad experiences with the notion of “consensus” in recent decades.
“Her derisive words show, I think, a terrible jealousy, which is not surprising when you’re married to a National Savior, Warrior Hero”
It has not been my experience during this past 6.3 decades that wives are jealous of their husbands’ success. Maybe I just missed it, but I don’t think so.
“My interpretation from the peanut gallery.”
And mine.
“But I just don’t see how we can claim so often to love people when we don’t even want to know them, don’t want to be where they are, don’t want to be seen with them, and don’t want to speak their language.”
Our Lord requires us to perform the deeds of love, not to feel the emotion in our hearts. That said, if we are to know them, we must know them on His terms.
If we are to go where they are, we must go on His terms. Our Lord dined with women of ill repute, but is there any indication that He did anything more than that? He was without sin. I’m not, and I think most Christians would agree that I, as husband and father, have an obligation to avoid the society of naughty ladies of the evening.
Those of us who are not divine have an obligation not to give scandal. If we are to be seen with them, it must be on His terms.
If we are to speak with them, it must be on His terms. Hipster slang is not a language; it is merely a corruption of English. It does not create a language barrier, as even the slimiest gangster can communicate in English. Using their slang implies approval of their immoral conduct.
“What kind of missionary is that?”
One who evangelizes without participating in the sins of those he seeks to convert.
“So the presumption is that Sr. Cristina wants an entree into the rap-pop-rock’n’roll world for evangelizing purposes -— which is what she said, and I am not immediately inclined to call her a liar.”
I did not call her a liar either. I think she is misguided, as are all who think that evangelization requires participation in the sins of those they would convert. I could be wrong, but, you know, I’m not.
“We shall see. I hope to see her putting out great videos full of the love of the Lord, love and truth; and I hope to see that J-AX -— clearly smitten, isn’t he? -— coming over to the Catholic side.”
The Lord can work anything for good. The problem is that making those noises evokes a human response that is morally degrading, depending partly on the listener but also on what is heard.
“Let’s pray for this little sister, hey?”
Okay. I hope prayers from me don’t backfire.
“Hope all things.”
But I know that God is not going to do some of the things I would like him to, because I am so often wrong, and He never is. I just have faith that whatever He does will be the right thing, even if I end up a piece of burnt toast.