But I think there still comes a point where we recognize our piecemeal progress as just unacceptably far from our deepest desires for true freedom and the life Jesus promised. Achievable goals have the advantage of being within our reach, but then also the disadvantage of being within our reach. The life Jesus described (and lived) is, to most of us, obviously unreachable. So the main part of what is desired in the following of Jesus (in my case, at least) is an impossible life, a life lived only by the grace and miraculous power of God.

And that requires a “leap of faith” (as Kierkegaard was so fond of calling it). Always a frighteningly radical move.

In fact, I agreed that living with diverse people is very difficult and should not be taken lightly, but I don't think that it isn't possible or that you have to do it from a professional standpoint. Catholic Workers have moved in this direction. Dorothy Day did this. I do have experience in this, though I look forward to growing deeper in this direction (let me repeat, since you didn't catch that in my last post. I do have experience in this, even though I wouldn't pretend to have completed my journey in this area). This has everything to do with my understanding of family in scripture, my experience with charity as dehumanizing, Christ's identification with the poor and my experience that living with people different than me has helped me begin healing and growing in my faith. I said all of this above, and never said that living with diverse (including poor and marginalized) people was “mandatory,” just that it is the direction I think we should all hope to move in, and needs to be discussed in the context of forming and living in Christian community.

Also, I never said that living with and among the poor and marginalized was for the purpose of meeting their needs. I do think counseling and treatment centers are useful, though I affirm sharing money and life together which is something that everyone needs. In fact, it sounds to me that your understanding of what it means to live with the poor is akin to a very humanist secular social justice notion of simply “helping” them.

But I think there still comes a point where we recognize our piecemeal progress as just unacceptably far from our deepest desires for true freedom and the life Jesus promised. Achievable goals have the advantage of being within our reach, but then also the disadvantage of being within our reach. The life Jesus described (and lived) is, to most of us, obviously unreachable. So the main part of what is desired in the following of Jesus (in my case, at least) is an impossible life, a life lived only by the grace and miraculous power of God.

And that requires a “leap of faith” (as Kierkegaard was so fond of calling it). Always a frighteningly radical move.

In fact, I agreed that living with diverse people is very difficult and should not be taken lightly, but I don't think that it isn't possible or that you have to do it from a professional standpoint. Catholic Workers have moved in this direction. Dorothy Day did this. I do have experience in this, though I look forward to growing deeper in this direction (let me repeat, since you didn't catch that in my last post. I do have experience in this, even though I wouldn't pretend to have completed my journey in this area). This has everything to do with my understanding of family in scripture, my experience with charity as dehumanizing, Christ's identification with the poor and my experience that living with people different than me has helped me begin healing and growing in my faith. I said all of this above, and never said that living with diverse (including poor and marginalized) people was “mandatory,” just that it is the direction I think we should all hope to move in, and needs to be discussed in the context of forming and living in Christian community.

Also, I never said that living with and among the poor and marginalized was for the purpose of meeting their needs. I do think counseling and treatment centers are useful, though I affirm sharing money and life together which is something that everyone needs. In fact, it sounds to me that your understanding of what it means to live with the poor is akin to a very humanist secular social justice notion of simply “helping” them.

I like it because it gives me 'small step' advice to bring about changes to my mindset about simplicity, rather than trying to force external changes on me and expect my heart and mind to catch up. (Ten Commandments, anyone?)

However, I fully accept that that reason alone suggests that it may just be my subconscious recognising that at the end of the day, “less radical change” often equals “easier to ignore”.

I do think it is (should be?) as simple as the article suggests, yet the fact that I don't trust or believe that enough to act only seems to indicate the weakness of my faith in God. Do I really believe that this life is one in which what I require will be given to me if I do what I am called to do? It is a question which haunts me, as my inaction every day screams the answer on my behalf.

The concept of no longer having the 'freedom' associated with 'owning' my house certainly puts me off, yet the 'freedom' of not having the responsibility of the debt is the very thing I find attractive. Unfortunately, the more I think about changing my work situation, the less giving I am, as in my mind I now need to hoard and save as much as I can.

And while I know these aren't the type of issues that advice alone will solve, I appreciate the space to speak them and the comments given in love.