What should strike us is Jesus’ initial refusal [in John 9] to make the blind man’s condition a proof of anything - divine justice or injustice, human sin or innocence. We who call ourselves Christians have every reason to say no to any system that uses suffering to prove things: to prove the sufferer’s guilt as a sinner being punishes, or - perhaps more frequently in our world - to prove the sufferer’s innocence as a martyr whose heroism must never be forgotten or betrayed. If this man’s condition is to have a symbolic value - and in some sense it clearly does in the text - it is as the place where a communication from God occurs - the opening up of something that is not part of the competing systems operated by human beings.
Rowan Williams, Writing In the Dust
27 notes
-
closerthanthetinythoughts reblogged this from invisibleforeigner
-
prolepticvison likes this
-
puritanporn likes this
-
shortbreadsh likes this
-
mshedden reblogged this from michaelfunderburk
-
hours likes this
-
michaelfunderburk reblogged this from mshedden
-
companion-to-owls likes this
-
threeacresandacrow reblogged this from invisibleforeigner
-
chasingtailfeathers likes this
-
sethwieck likes this
-
journeyingfrog reblogged this from mumbledtheology
-
ribbitz likes this
-
mumbledtheology reblogged this from invisibleforeigner
-
dimathiel reblogged this from invisibleforeigner
-
mattersofconcern reblogged this from invisibleforeigner
-
honor-not-honors likes this
-
invisibleforeigner reblogged this from invisibleforeigner
-
theafterswarm reblogged this from invisibleforeigner
-
schizophreniatic likes this
-
facinghome reblogged this from invisibleforeigner
-
iowasomeday reblogged this from invisibleforeigner
-
tiffanyjane likes this
-
invisibleforeigner posted this
