Konflikt konzervativn\u00edho a liber\u00e1ln\u00edho my\u0161len\u00ed<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Jednou z dialektik, kterou Pavel p\u0159edkl\u00e1d\u00e1, je v\u011b\u010dn\u00fd konflikt, kter\u00fd dnes naz\u00fdv\u00e1me konzervativn\u00ed a liber\u00e1ln\u00ed. V Pavlov\u00fdch spisech se lid\u00e9 jeho n\u00e1roda , \u017did\u00e9, zast\u00e1vali konzervatizmu a dodr\u017eov\u00e1n\u00ed z\u00e1kona; \u0158ekov\u00e9 mu naopak poskytli p\u0159\u00edklad pro intelektu\u00e1ln\u00ed, kulturn\u00ed kritiku a pro typ lid\u00ed, kter\u00e9 bychom nazvali liber\u00e1ly. Pavel vid\u00ed, jak se \u017did\u00e9 sna\u017e\u00ed vytvo\u0159it po\u0159\u00e1dek ve sv\u011bt\u011b poslu\u0161nost\u00ed z\u00e1kona, tradice a p\u0159\u00edbuzensk\u00fdch svazk\u016f. \u0158ekov\u00e9 se zase sna\u017e\u00ed vytvo\u0159it \u0159\u00e1d rozumem, porozum\u011bn\u00edm mezi lidmi, logikou a vzd\u011bl\u00e1n\u00edm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u017d\u00e1dn\u00fd syst\u00e9m nedok\u00e1zal zapojit stinn\u00e9 str\u00e1nky \u017eivota jako klad<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Pavel vysv\u011btluje, \u017ee ani jeden z p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f nem\u016f\u017ee nakonec usp\u011bt, proto\u017ee oba syst\u00e9my nemaj\u00ed schopnost „za\u010dlenit do sebe negativn\u00ed vlivy“, kter\u00e9 jsou s n\u00e1mi v\u017edy p\u0159\u00edtomn\u00e9. Uv\u011bdomuje si, \u017ee nejv\u011bt\u0161\u00edm nep\u0159\u00edtelem oby\u010dejn\u00e9 ka\u017edodenn\u00ed dobroty a radosti nen\u00ed nedokonalost, ale je j\u00edm n\u00e1\u0161 po\u017eadavek (na\u0161e p\u0159edstava) na n\u011bjakou domn\u011blou dokonalost nebo \u0159\u00e1d.<\/em> Zd\u00e1 se, \u017ee t\u00e9m\u011b\u0159 v\u0161echno m\u00e1 svou stinnou str\u00e1nku; v\u0161echny v\u011bci podl\u00e9haj\u00ed „mocnostem a kn\u00ed\u017eat\u016fm“ (Efezsk\u00fdm 6:12). Pouze mysl, kter\u00e1 v\u0161e sjednocuje, mohu j\u00ed nazvat – nedu\u00e1ln\u00ed mysl \u2013 pouze ona m\u016f\u017ee pozitivn\u011b p\u0159ijmout i stinn\u00e9 str\u00e1nky \u017eivota a ned\u011blat z nich panicky probl\u00e9m. Naopak – ve skute\u010dnosti d\u00edky stinn\u00fdm str\u00e1nk\u00e1m \u017eivota bude mysl s\u00edlit a r\u016fst.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ani liber\u00e1ln\u00ed ani konzervativn\u00ed syst\u00e9m se nedok\u00e1\u017ee vypo\u0159\u00e1dat s nepo\u0159\u00e1dkem a b\u00eddou. Pavel v\u011b\u0159\u00ed tomu, \u017ee Je\u017e\u00ed\u0161 pro n\u00e1s na\u0161el jedinou odpov\u011b\u010f, kter\u00e1 je v\u017edy funk\u010dn\u00ed. Zjeven\u00ed k\u0159\u00ed\u017ee, \u0159\u00edk\u00e1, n\u00e1s u\u010din\u00ed nezni\u010diteln\u00fdmi, proto\u017ee skrze n\u011bj vede cesta i p\u0159es \u00faskal\u00ed ve\u0161ker\u00e9 absurdity a trag\u00e9die \u017eivota.\u00a0Pr\u00e1v\u011b p\u0159ijet\u00ed a pou\u017e\u00edv\u00e1n\u00ed absurdity a trag\u00e9die je sou\u010d\u00e1sti Bo\u017e\u00edho tajemstv\u00ed.\u00a0<\/em>Dok\u00e1\u017eeme-li vst\u0159ebat tajemstv\u00ed k\u0159\u00ed\u017ee, neupadneme do cynismu, selh\u00e1n\u00ed, ho\u0159kosti nebo skepticismu. K\u0159\u00ed\u017e n\u00e1m poskytne z\u0159etelnou a vnit\u0159n\u00ed cestu skrze stinn\u00e9 str\u00e1nky \u017eivota a zklam\u00e1n\u00ed je\u017e ob\u010das p\u0159in\u00e1\u0161\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Pavel d\u00e1v\u00e1 svobodu konzervativc\u016fm i liber\u00e1l\u016fm, aby definovali moudrost podle sebe, ale p\u0159esto se odva\u017euje naz\u00fdvat jejich cestu neadekv\u00e1tn\u00ed se \u0161patn\u00fdm koncem. V\u011b\u0159\u00ed, \u017ee jejich sv\u011bton\u00e1zor nakonec lidi zklame. „B\u016fh uk\u00e1zal lidskou moudrost jako po\u0161etilost“ na k\u0159\u00ed\u017ei (1 Korintsk\u00fdm 1:21), a to je „p\u0159ek\u00e1\u017eka, kterou \u017did\u00e9 nemohou p\u0159ekonat“ a kterou pohan\u00e9 nebo pohan\u00e9 pova\u017euj\u00ed za bl\u00e1znivou „po\u0161etilost“ (1:23).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Pro Pavla jsou z\u00e1kladn\u00ed slova pro nedu\u00e1ln\u00ed my\u0161len\u00ed nebo pro pravou moudrost „po\u0161etilost“ a „po\u0161etilost“. V podstat\u011b \u0159\u00edk\u00e1: „Moje my\u0161len\u00ed je pro tebe po\u0161etil\u00e9, \u017ee?“ Je pravda, \u017ee ned\u00e1v\u00e1 smysl, dokud jsme nepochopili tajemstv\u00ed k\u0159\u00ed\u017ee. Utrpen\u00ed, „po\u0161etilost k\u0159\u00ed\u017ee“, bo\u0159\u00ed dualistick\u00e9 my\u0161len\u00ed. Pro\u010d? Proto\u017ee na k\u0159\u00ed\u017ei p\u0159ibil B\u016fh to nejhor\u0161\u00ed, p\u0159ipustil zab\u00edt Boha a \u010dlov\u011bka, a pak z toho ud\u011blal to nejlep\u0161\u00ed, jeho prost\u0159ednictv\u00edm vykoupil cel\u00fd sv\u011bt. Soucitn\u00e9 p\u0159ijet\u00ed z\u00e1kladn\u00ed nesmyslnosti a trag\u00e9die, jak to ud\u011blal Je\u017e\u00ed\u0161 na k\u0159\u00ed\u017ei, se stalo kone\u010dn\u00fdm a triumf\u00e1ln\u00edm \u0159e\u0161en\u00edm v\u0161ech dualism\u016f a dichotomi\u00ed, kter\u00fdm \u010del\u00edme ve sv\u00fdch vlastn\u00edch \u017eivotech. Jsme tedy „spaseni k\u0159\u00ed\u017eem“! U\u017e v\u00e1m to d\u00e1v\u00e1 smysl?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Adapted from Richard Rohr, Eager to Love: The Alternative Way of Francis of Assisi<\/u><\/a><\/em> (Cincinnati, OH: Franciscan Media, 2014), 71\u201376; and<\/p>\n\n\n\n A New Way of Seeing . . . a New Way of Being: Jesus and Paul<\/u><\/em> (Albuquerque, NM: Center for Action and Contemplation, 2007). Available as CD<\/u><\/a> and MP3 download<\/u><\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\nB\u016fh dok\u00e1zal zapojit absurditu do sv\u00e9 nab\u00eddky<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
K\u0159\u00ed\u017e Krist\u016fv je sou\u010d\u00e1st\u00ed Bo\u017e\u00edho tajemstv\u00ed<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
P\u0159ijet\u00ed k\u0159\u00ed\u017ee se stalo triumfem pro osvobozen\u00ed<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
Prameny:<\/h5>\n\n\n\n