predication.net

Have you read the book: “Who’s Who”? The names Herod, John the Baptist, Elijah, and others are not there. Are they not up to date? Sometimes someone writes rude words on this page. I accept the criticism. It’s interesting that they write it secretly. I know they don’t everyone is suitable for everyone When a person starts using his mind, he always wants to know, hear, and experience a lot.

Herod in the Gospel puts us to shame when the evangelist Luke wrote about him that he wanted to see the Lord Jesus. He said: “John rose from the dead…” (Luke 9:7). He was a ruler, and he learned about Jesus from several sources. The messengers, the people who surrounded him, took care of it, and that is why the reports about Jesus are different. Some considered the Lord Jesus to be John the Baptist, whom Herod had beheaded in prison when the daughter of his illegitimate wife Herodias asked for John’s head as a gift. Others believed that John the Baptist rose from the dead. They also considered Christ to be Elijah, who also taught the people, and he marveled at his works, which God did with his hands. Let us remember the sacrifice on the mountain, when he defeated the priests of the god Baal, who were 450, and their sacrifice was not burned, but his. Others said that Jesus was indeed a prophet. He acted prudently, and his deeds were extraordinary. He often pointed to repentance. When Herod hears all this, he does not know what to think about it. He does not believe that John rose from the dead, but when he hears about Christ as a miraculous miracle worker, when he hears more than one report about his teaching, he asks himself: Who is he, then, that I hear such talk about him?

Therefore, we should try to get to know the Lord Jesus’ teachings better, keep his commands, and find time to meet him when reading the Holy Scriptures, when celebrating the Holy Mass, and when approaching the sacraments. It is a good sign when you feel, sister, brother, that in your life the Lord Jesus is not a stranger, but that you are looking for him, that you want to meet him often, that you have something to say to him in prayer, in contemplation, in meditation, in the community, in the family… Your attitude is on the right track. Saint Vincent de Paul talks about his experience. He was already a priest when he arrived as a slave in Tunis. The ship they were sailing on was captured by pirates. He was digging irrigation canals in the August heat. He never hid the fact that he was a priest. The slave master hated him for that very reason. Vincent is once told by his fellow slave, a Frenchman: “This is real hell!” And Vincent answered him: “No! Wherever God is, there is no hell. And God is here. God knows about us.” Vincent himself did not know why the Lord God allowed this to happen to him, but he did not despair. He did not lose faith in the presence of God, not even when he was struggling with fever – malaria for three months. Even then he felt inside God. Slavery ends with escape. He does not escape alone, but with his slave master, in which, with the help of his wife, the Mohammedan Fatima, he awakens his conscience and confesses to Vincent that he too was a priest and also fell into slavery. However, he, unlike Vincent could not stand slavery, and he betrayed God. but with his slave master, in which, with the help of his wife, the Mohammedan Fatima, he awakens his conscience and confesses to Vincent that he too was a priest and also fell into slavery. However, he, unlike Vincent, could not stand slavery and betrayed God. but with his slave master, in which, with the help of his wife, the Mohammedan Fatima, he awakens his conscience and confesses to Vincent that he too was a priest and also fell into slavery. However, he, unlike Vincent, could 

Are there many of us Christians? In the beginning, how many disciples were there? He commanded them: “Take nothing for your journey…” (Lk 9:2). I would like to dwell on two expressions in this sentence. “…and sent them forth to preach” (Mk. 6:7). The Lord gradually prepared the apostles for their ministry. The evangelist meant that Jesus recognized His disciples as sufficiently prepared to go forth independently to preach the Word of God. From that moment on, they are Christ’s faithful helpers. From now on, the Lord wants them to walk around Galilee on their own, see for themselves the difficulty of this ministry, and find out what they need for it.

Why does He send them out two by two? In pairs, they are trustworthy witnesses under the Judaistic law. And, of course, it was also helpful because they could help one another because unexpected situations can happen when wandering. So why doesn’t Jesus send his disciples to preach right after he is called? Because he wants to prepare them for this massive project of spreading the Gospel, which has been going on for the third millennium. Jesus invites the disciples to preach the gospel in several places in the Holy Scriptures. When we look after Mark’s Gospel, Jesus tells the disciples: “Go and preach, make new disciples” (cf. Mk 16:15-18). He sends them out, but he gives them his power. This power connects today’s reading and the end of the Gospel. He sends them with his passion that awakens and changes human hearts. He has also called us to go out to preach, to heal, and to fight evil spirits.

This power connects today’s reading and the end of the Gospel. He sends them with his passion that awakens and changes human hearts. He has also called us to go out to preach, to heal, and to fight evil spirits. There are also times in our lives when we hear the unmistakable voice of God calling us, and we can stand up and go. Are we also ready to proclaim the gospel and God in our neighborhood, home, and workplace? Many times, we have prayed, and the power and bliss of prayer came deeply and set hearts on fire, quenched passions, reason became apparent, and the will wanted only good.

The Lord called us in Baptism, sent us into the world through the Sacraments of Marriage and Priesthood, and gave us strength in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. He touches our hearts every day. God never leaves us; we can forget him only for a time. The Lord never leaves us once He has handled the human spirit. He is still calling and sending us, and He will do so a second and a third time…, expecting our response. The Lord only does some things at a time. He allows us to reflect, digest, and remember the experience we have already received. But he calls and sends more insistently, encouraging us to follow Christ and serve the Church actively. Such is the nature of the call and mission from the Lord. We must remember this in our daily lives. We must keep in our hearts the joy that God is, that he knows me, and I know him. And it is in this that we are like the apostles. Jesus sends his disciples and us to preach the Gospel and live according to his commandments, and he stays with us.

Have you ever experienced a feeling of inferiority? So you know how this condition destroys a person. 

Today, we want to discuss what to do so that such a state does not control us. The Lord Jesus Himself teaches us with a metaphor in the Gospel: “No one lights a candle and does not cover it with a vessel” (Lk 8, 16). We can begin the explanation with questions. Why does the Lord Jesus use such comparisons, known from the daily life of his listeners? Lord Jesus, as an excellent teacher, wants his listeners to understand, as clearly as possible and with great benefit, the meaning of the words necessary for salvation. When his listeners meet familiar things in the future, take them in their hands, enjoy them for their lives, and remind them of other essential items necessary for their soul and salvation. The metaphor of light should also become a great reminder for the listeners. Everything without which it would be tough for us to imagine our lives, Jesus begins with the words: “You are.”

These are values ​​that should penetrate us deeply, that we should unconditionally adopt and identify with. Everyday encounter with light is supposed to help us to do this. Therefore, it is not enough for him to know it himself; he must enrich those without such knowledge with his life. Can anyone imagine life without the sun? Scientists say there would be no life on Earth within eight minutes, and within 24 hours, the temperature would drop below minus 250 degrees. As we cannot imagine life without the sun, so will the world be without God. Living without God is not possible. A Christian should bring light and warmth to his surroundings with his life. It is up to each of us how we will fulfill our role in today’s time, our time, the time when God called us to bear witness, to pass the earth test. A good Christian is not afraid of difficulties crosses. He trusts God and cooperates with his gifts, which include today’s words from the Gospel about salt and light. We are determined not to let God down When we realize that God is counting on us. It is said that “God’s mills grind slowly but surely” and “the Lord God is not hasty, but mindful.” It is fitting that we do not let ourselves be led astray from the path Jesus himself invited us to try to be light. 

Let’s try to imagine a yard with domestic birds. Occasionally, these birders get excited when they see wild ducks and geese fly by in the spring and fall. They also want to take off, like any goose or duck. They run a few steps, stutter, and try to wave their clipped or stunted wings, but in the end, they stay in the muddy yard, where a fence demarcates their modest stay.

Faith does not bind us with wings, and they do not stunt our branches. Faith makes us free and happy – when we live as Christians.  

We have different natures, figures, and approaches to values, including keeping God’s word. What is essential in listening to God’s word? The Lord Jesus talks about this topic in the parable of the sower, how he sowed seeds that yielded different crops. He ended the legend with the words: “He who has ears, let him listen” (Mt 13:9).

What did Lord Jesus mean by that? Words have a deep meaning. The audience hears the words and understands them, but they lack a kind of “inner ear.” A parable without inner listening tells them nothing. The Lord Jesus quotes the prophet Isaiah: “You will hear and not understand, you will look and not see. Because the heart of this people has become numb” (Isaiah 6:9-10). With the parable of the “sower,” Jesus points out the need for a Christian’s commitment to obtaining heaven’s kingdom. And therefore, at their request, he gives the apostles an interpretation of the parable.

Theologians believe that Jesus was thinking of himself under the sower. Indeed, Jesus knew that many would not accept his word – teaching. A wealthy bachelor left him. The Pharisees and scribes resented his education. We can believe that under the sower, Jesus probably meant the disciples, twelve, and everyone who followed the Lord. Lord Jesus wants to point out that the sower cannot be influenced, embittered, and intimidated by any failure. He doesn’t have to think about a lot of obstacles and adversities. The sower is supposed to be a realist. Success will not lead him to pride and promotion. Failure does not diminish his courage, perseverance, loyalty, diligence, and seriousness. It cannot be deterred. The believer should not only be a sower but also a seed. Who would not wish that the words of a bountiful harvest did not apply to him? If we want to achieve this, we must fulfill the prerequisites. Know how to listen correctly, listen carefully, and obey. To be shaped by God’s word every day. And also to become God’s word itself.

In the book “Our Father” Albíno Luciani places an image in the depths of our hearts. Whoever accepts it will learn a lot. Some people have made their lives a waiting room. Trains come and go, and they say to themselves: “Not this one yet; I’ll board the next one.” That means: “Then I’ll confess at the end of my life.” However, such an attitude is risky because this is not a form of touristic travel but a path to eternal salvation. We have and must be involved in our own lives. But it is correct when we know how to put our hands to work in the parish or the family. Let us not look at the heat of the day, at what we have already done, but at the reward that awaits us from Jesus, the author of the parable of the sower and the field, at the end of life.

May it be the wish of each of us for himself and for all that Jesus says to his faithful: “Enter into the joy of your master

I once heard the remark, “Faith is only for women. The answer may be. Well, only women will go to heaven. Even in our church there are more women than men. We know why. We can often acknowledge the circumstances. When the scientist was rebuked for his strong faith, he said: “Too bad I only believe like a Breton peasant. I should believe like a Breton peasant woman.”

In the Gospel we read the names of the women around Jesus who obeyed him and the apostles. “Mary, called Magdalene,… John, the wife of Herod’s steward Chuza, Susanna, and many others…” (Lk 8:3). There were more. Scripture mentions the Woman – the Mother of Jesus – in the first place. The enemies tell untruths about Lazarus’ sisters Mary and Martha. The woman sick of the issue of blood was healed by Jesus… In Bethlehem at the manger are the women, the wives of the shepherds. In the Jerusalem temple, Annam daughter of Phanuel of the tribe of Asher is mentioned, she was a pious widow. Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist. The mother of the apostles John and James called Boaneges – sons of thunder. Other apostles’ mother. The woman who washed Jesus’ feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair, a sinner they called her. Another woman who was caught in the act of sin. A woman who paid homage to Jesus by addressing his mother… The mother of Jairus’ daughter, other women from the crowd that was fed, where many women were present. What about the other women of the New Testament? And the women of the Old Testament: Susanna, David’s concubine, the mother of the sons of the Maccabees… and in the beginning, Eve, mother of Cain and Abel…

Why do we remember this? In the genealogies of the Lord Jesus, women of honor and women of sin are mentioned… Jesus came to all. The sinful woman is also a lost sheep. Yes, God has bestowed many gifts on both men and women. To whom did Jesus first appear after the resurrection? Who stood with the apostle John and the mother of Jesus at the foot of the cross? Who were the women in the Upper Room who ministered to Jesus and the apostles at the Last Supper…? Who were the women who were with the Virgin Mary and the Holy Spirit descended upon them? And what about the first Christian woman, Lydia, the scarlet letter seller?

Women, girls, mothers and old women, be proud of your faith. You are equal to men, fathers, husbands… Every man is a child of God. Even a woman. Thank you for being. Thank you for believing. Thank you for setting an example, for praying for men, for giving us life, for loving us… Today’s Gospel is the power of God’s Word as we remember each of you by Jesus. Jesus loves you, blesses you, loves you.

And that is the memento of today’s Gospel. Jesus, thank you for godly women and all of womankind.

 Or, conversely, can anyone confirm that God does not exist? And if one or the other can’t, what about it? Today, we will discuss an introduction to the arguments for and against God’s existence and try to answer whether and what the relevance of such debates is.

We live in a time when not only the online world is full of various debates and arguments for and against God’s existence.
I have long been fascinated by this subject, and I think it is interesting how people have thought about it in the past and the present. This is suggested by the fact that only very recently, I heard the atheist Richard Dawkins say that God’s existence is perhaps the most critical question.

If you look up the frequency of the English phrase “arguments for God,” you will find that the words began to rise dramatically after 2001, after the attack on the New York Twin Towers.

It reached its peak of use in 2010, related to the rise and zenith of the so-called New Atheism. Although its use has declined, it has regained a slight increase in recent years. Anyway, it is a topic not only of cultural and religious interest but also of academic interest.

Many faculties worldwide have courses on the history and philosophy of religion that are directly related to this. For example, you can take classes on David Hume’s philosophy of religion, God, the cell, and the universe, or even prove God’s existence.
“If only it were that easy.”
So today’s topic is arguing for and against God’s existence. First of all, a little bit personally. Sometime in my younger, shorter, but less educated years, I questioned God’s presence when I began to doubt it. I didn’t come across as sophisticated like Socrates with my questions, but more simply like the Little Prince visiting different planets.

What is the goal?
First, I think it’s perfect to ask at the outset what the goal of all arguments for God’s existence should be. Let’s start with the obvious thing – ideas don’t have plans, but people do. And different people may have other projects.

But most of the time today, the proponents or users of these arguments don’t look at it as having some superpower, which is to convince someone definitively. And that’s for these two reasons.

First, these arguments must have that logical force in and of themselves. And that’s because the strength of their conclusion depends on the truth of the propositions on which they are based. That is, they can be challenged, so often because of reasonable objections, those statements and the argument’s conclusion will not be sure.

Instead, we will always be discussing and reasoning about probabilities here. But that’s okay because our life is inherently about choosing from possibilities with a greater or lesser likelihood of being true. And so that’s where these arguments are not divorced from ordinary life, but our everyday life is divorced from these arguments.

Second, these arguments are not about instantly converting others to the opposite view because our psychology, philosophy, and life generally need to be revised. Even if the ideas were pointing toward some very likely conclusion, it would be another thing to be logically and psychologically persuaded by them and change our thinking and behavior.

As a recent example, we can take many arguments about COVID-19 and vaccination. Even when clinical studies show clear results, many have not only not accepted them but thought and behaved as if these results were the opposite. In other words, we can always find some excuse why we might not accept certain conclusions – and often, it is that it makes life more comfortable or makes us belong to a particular group whose identity we want to adopt.

That is, we all have our preferences and biases. And not just our conspiring fellow citizens, but we do too, and we have to admit it. As Richard Feynman said, it is essential not to be fooled; the easiest person to fool is ourselves.

A different and sometimes pervasive example is just conspiracy theories – whatever good arguments we come up with against them, experienced conspirators have built up their immunization strategies, so to speak, that make them never to be refuted. Not because they are right but because they don’t play fair at all and pull their logical pieces differently than the rules allow.

But this is not just about conspirators. We don’t operate by automatically accepting the opposite conclusion if an argument points to it. Or, more accurately, it works more for things of little substance that can be quickly Googled, for example.

However, the more critical these beliefs are, and the deeper a part of our worldviews they are, the longer, at least typically, such a conversion will take. And with worldviews, this is certainly true for both sides. So – what I meant by all this is that you can’t expect any instantaneous conversion from arguments. And if that’s the case, what relevance can these discussions have?

The contribution of debate
So, must complete worldview conversion be the goal in debates as important as God’s existence? To ask such a question is equivalent to answering it. We all know it doesn’t work that way. But that doesn’t mean that discussing essential things in the universe, including God’s existence, is irrelevant. Their contribution can take many forms.

First, we can learn something new. It may be fresh knowledge I learned in the debate or a unique perspective I never had. Or it may be virtues that we can cultivate in this way – we can learn to listen, to articulate our arguments, to fabricate responses, to not be unnecessarily nervous or angry, to represent the other side’s arguments truthfully, if not more forcefully, and thus to be an example to all those listening.

Moreover, a good argument could be made that such knowledge and virtue contribution is much better than convincing someone or winning a debate.

In that sense, even unsuccessful arguing that would not lead to any worldview conversion has a lot of potential to be successful in these other ways. So, to summarize it in slightly different words – even a generally flawed argument can have some good insights hidden in it, and those alone can be worthwhile.

Moreover, it allows us to improve our argumentative and personal virtues, including knowledge and epistemic humility, respectively. Let us now raise one key question – and that is whether the question of God’s existence can be resolved by science.

Is this a scientific or a philosophical question?
Can God somehow be tested by science? That, of course, depends on whether God’s existence could be testable by the methods of science. It also depends mainly on whether so-called methodological naturalism- that is, science should deal only with natural causes- is how science should and can work.

That deserves a separate dose. But I will say this much more: opinions on this are divided – whether among scientists or philosophers, and believers and non-believers alike. This is not a pointless question at all; on the contrary, it is essential, but there are some problems with it.

I want to take advantage of this question because it is crucial. However, it does not have just one solution. Some either deny that science can arbitrarily test God and his activity. For one thing, God is not part of this world in the sense that all other physical objects are part of it.

Not only is it not a physical object, but it is a mind that is supposed to be (among other things) omniscient and omnibenevolent. And thus, even if we might want to test it, perhaps it is against its will and plans. And perhaps, from a broader perspective, it is as disparaging as if ants wanted to start scientifically testing the existence of some superintelligence in the universe.

Others, on the other hand, would argue just the opposite – that we can see from the nature of our universe that the universe had a Creator. Some believers claim that we can indirectly see God’s activity in specific biological structures, the setup of physical constants, etc.

Others, on the other hand, may see such empirical observations the other way around – God’s absence is said to be visible in tests of the efficacy of prayer or in the familiar objection as to why God does not let amputees’ limbs grow back.

And yet, many can come up with certain domains where God can be tested, so to speak (the setting of physical constants), but not in others (the efficacy of prayers for healing). But everyone has answers to these objections and counter-objections, and then there is the question of whether such a selective position is consistent.

One popular position that has been around since Newton is that God works through the natural order. This view has been around since at least the Middle Ages and later reformulated since the time of Descartes and Newton, that God acts through the laws of nature.

It differs precisely how here, but we will stay in that adventure hole now. But if God is the first cause and acts through laws that he will either not break or only very, very exceptionally, how exactly do we test such a view?

I’m not saying there aren’t various, even creative, answers to this; I’m just pointing out that only some positions are easy to test, even if we had perfect test tubes ready.

However, many see this question as a philosophical one. Perhaps it would be immediately more accessible to test God’s existence in our laboratory. Still, some, or rather, many things seem to be impossible and may never be possible. And this is why many philosophers are divided on many issues.

One admittedly simplistic view of how science developed is that many of today’s scientific disciplines were first part of philosophy. However, when there was sufficient progress in those disciplines, the field separated from that philosophy to form a separate sentence – such as geology, biology, physics, etc.

So, if that’s the case, which discipline has made enough progress to somehow quantitatively or at least competently answer the question of whether God exists? According to many experts, nothing has occurred, so the question is still part of philosophy. The question is still philosophical for the time being, and that is because there is no consensus that there is some relevant authority that can resolve the dispute.

Imagine we disagree about the result of a particular football match. I say it was some result X, and you say it was some result Y. We are indeed both wrong, but maybe we are both wrong. What to do then?

Now that’s easy – we verify the result with some relevant source, such as a short Google search. If we disagree on the speed of light, we also check similarly – but here’s the point: it’s not the all-knowing Google itself that says so, but a scientific authority and consensus that we can easily find and read on Google.

But what if there is no way to verify something, or if no authority can authoritatively and competently decide this for us? What about when there is no consensus that it can be verified at all or when there are arguments that come to different or even opposite conclusions?

Such a situation is a reasonable assumption that we will still be talking about philosophy and philosophical reasoning in such a situation. Although it may seem very unlikely to some, we may at some point come to a position where most philosophers and scientists agree that the question of God’s existence is, for example, a question of physics or, since we are probably talking about the distant future, say, some scientific discipline that does not yet exist at all.

In conclusion
Arguments that God’s existence is and can be scientifically testable do exist, and they are also much more sophisticated than the claim of Dawkins mentioned above might suggest. But it is still a claim that has problems and is therefore not generally accepted by many scientists and philosophers.

What we’ve talked about today is that we can be optimistic that all of these arguments, even if they’re all bad, can be good for something. But I don’t want to argue that they are good or bad before we look at them more. And all these more specific arguments for and against God’s existence and his attributes await us in future installments.

“For I desire mercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than whole burnt offerings.” (Hos 6:6). How often do we evaluate God and look at God through the glasses of our worldliness? We think that God likes and demands worship and adoration because we want others to honor, glorify, and praise us so we in the world can affirm our greatness. We think that God is at these things and is offended, and if we are not humbled enough and if we happen to touch Him with anything, He is immediately angry. And it doesn’t even occur to us that God, infinitely great in Himself, could need nothing of the kind, considered as something completely alien and useless, and such a thing does not even cross His mind. Why, then, you will say, does He allow Himself to be worshipped and receive obeisances? As
says one of the prefaces of the liturgy, “Our praises add nothing to thy
greatness, but they contribute to our salvation” – because God initially lets us approach himself in our way, humanly and worldly, enculturating himself into our forms. But the goal is that we might discover God’s ways and get used to them. And these are in the brotherhood and unity of love, where greatness and smallness, the giver and the given, the first or the last, lose their meaning in the all-embracing unity of the fellowship of God and man, where everything is of all and everyone, and love blurs every distinction and creates equality out of grace.
And so it is with gifts, sacrifices, titles. In the beginning, the Lord accepts them because it is a language that we, men of the world and sons of sin, understand. But then He leads us from this into His world, as He did the disciples. Just let us listen here, “When he had washed their feet and put on his garments, he sat down again at the table and said to them: “Do you understand what I have done to you? You are addressing me: “Teacher” and: “Lord,” and you speak well, for that is what I am. When therefore I, the Lord and the Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet” (Jn 13:12-14). It begins at the address, distinguishing between greater and lesser, between master and servants. But simultaneously, he brings them into a world where servants are suddenly like masters, and the Lord acts as a servant. All this is wiped away, and an unprecedented, alien-to-the-world equality sets in when he says: “I no longer call you servants… I have called you friends” (Jn 15:15) and thus becomes “the firstborn among many brethren” (Rom 8:29). Not sacrifice, but love. Not obeisance, but brotherhood and friendship. Not gifts, but devotion and fidelity, which He first shows to us humans, even already “when we were enemies” (Rom 5:10)! This is genuine respect – when we give it and honor God and give Him thanks, not according to ourselves, but according to Him, not as we imagine, but as it pleases Him. And it pleases Him when we become like Him, equal to God by grace when we become gods like Him. He is God so we can form a real companionship with Him, a genuine fellowship, true friendship of the Round Table of the Trinity. That is why He came to bring us through Christ to worship us.

This is what the liturgy, which contains for everyone what he understands, leads us to do. It proclaims the Gospel by intercession. It offers adoration to the beginners and worships in the manner of the language and ways of the world. To the advanced unity with the Lord
and each other in the fellowship of the Lord’s Table and the Lord’s Supper. The Gospel is about invitation into this communion. Conversion is about stepping into this communion and deciding to accept and enter this invitation. Christianity is about living this communion and learning to trust, faithfulness, love, and unity with each other and God as friends, comrades, brothers, and indeed among equals by the grace and love of God. Heaven is when to this is added the glory of God. We live in this communion as people with God, who became human like us. Heaven is when we live it already as gods, with God is holy and full of His Glory.

Being like God… To a beginner, this sounds like blasphemy. And when it reluctantly accepts it, he begins to imagine what knowledge, power, and all these things of God he should one day have and possess if Heaven is indeed about deification. Only gradually, as he grows in communion with God, does he know that this is far from the main thing! The primary and miraculous thing about deification is that by grace, raised to the level of God, we are finally not only allowed, but actually, we can form with God a communion, a unity, a community that can exist only and only among equals! There is no greater or lesser, the first or the last; everything is overcome, consolidated, balanced by love into true equality, where everything of all is everyone’s, as he figuratively suggests in Scripture, “In his light shall the nations walk, and the kings of the earth shall bring their glory” (Rev 21:24).
Therefore, “Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the heavenly kingdom” (Mt 18:3). Children have no greatness of their own – and others bow down in awe before the greatness of the King; they leap upon me without embarrassment on their knees, embrace him, kiss him, and lead him away to show him their toys and share them and play with the king as with a friend… And He, the King, accepts and enjoys it, so he takes them by the hand and sits them down, his comrades, beside him on his throne – while the adults scandalized and guiltily stand still in the back, below. And that is the overwhelming message of the Gospel!