I judged, correctly, that you were not entirely in earnest in what you wrote and were looking to rustle feathers. I judged, apparently incorrectly, from what you wrote, that you deemed Armel’s behavior to be “outrageous” and “crazy” in your own estimation. But that is what your own writing led me to believe. I also thought that your secondary motivation (to rile us) excluded your serious desire to find out the truth of the matter.

That’s about all the more I have to say on the subject.

I judged, correctly, that you were not entirely in earnest in what you wrote and were looking to rustle feathers. I judged, apparently incorrectly, from what you wrote, that you deemed Armel’s behavior to be “outrageous” and “crazy” in your own estimation. But that is what your own writing led me to believe.

That’s about all the more I have to say on the subject.

Look, someone’s doing something great here. I’d be alot more willing to engage in a debate for debate’s sake, with all the requisite smack-downs, etc., if someone’s reputation weren’t the topic. We’re “bickermongers” because your ambiguous remarks could be read as calling a man’s virtue in to question for less than serious motives.

“I hope you all don’t get pernicious ideas about me not including this in my first post…”

Look, now you’ve admitted that you purposely wrote the first post the way you did with a “smile” on your face. I’ve had that smile myself, so I know that it is a pernicious smile indeed. Got me?

Well, thanks for admitting your apparent sin of hasty judgement; although I would also consider a double standard, perhaps. Case in point see JSP’s provocation that I am a not a Catholic since “only a Catholic can understand these types of crazy things” vis a vis my questions that, as you yourself put it, “in and of themselves have worth”.

So you “purposely” set out to provide an occasion of sin (of hasty judgment, I suppose) for the rest of us. How edifying. I wonder if this sort of needlessly provocative behavior is among the vices that poor Armel is cleansing himself of via (pun intended) his sojourn.

Thank you for this. But I think Armel has you beat for long-distance walking, and I rather think he is less smug about it.

As for my motives…I was serious but phrased it purposely in a manner such that it could be taken either way; and I did this with a certain grin. I guess I do this often.

PS- I do have at least one track record last I checked. It was junior high (7th & 8th grade) long jump (17′3/4″).

He is toying with the idea of being a politician in his small village back home. He realizes many people will call him a crazy reactionary Catholic, but he has an impressive spirit and will, maybe he can pull it off.

As for his motives - like I said earlier, he is trying to discipline his mind and body from bad habits and make reparation for sin.

If you should ask me the same questions, if and when I should go on such a pilgrimage, then I would be able to answer them, since then I would actually know. If you should happen to meet this Armel some day, would you say to his face, “What possessed you to do this crazy, outrageous thing? Didn’t you think of family, the army, etc.?” In other words, would you be so bold in his physical presence, or were just trying to “stir the pot” for us? My inquiring mind wants to know.

“This is indeed outrageous; crazy.

And why abandon one’s work? Does the soul have any plans when he gets to Jerusalem? Will he walk back to France? What about his family? What on earth does he plan to do when he gets back to France?”

I might get quite a backlash…

(I edited an earlier, intemperate version of this post.)

My questions were serious. Evidently no else thinks so.

As for it being outrageous & crazy–perhaps you can take it any way you want.

Bickermongers…

PS–I was being hypothetical, Joe Six Pack, when I said “he is single so he is not skirting God’s will” etc.

Whiners…

And Clara: Yes, there are still anachoretes on the Egyptian desert. Desert fathers did not vanish… (Yay!)

So, if you know he’s single what of you question “what about his family?”

Well, Johnboy, traditional Catholic men don’t ask their mommies and daddies for permission before making decisions. His job is to save his immortal soul. This is a monumental task. Our Lord said it’s as hard as a camel going through the eye of a needle. Nay, in the Novus Ordo world of today, saving one’s soul is like a humpback whale going through the eye of a needle. So, I certainly wouldn’t let a weeping mother or grandmother (which I’d surely expect would occur if a young man decided to go on such a pilgrimage) stand in the way of my eternal salvation.

In your first post you said:

“But what on earth prompted him to do such a thing?”

And then after Tobias Petrus’ gives a response, you say -

“No duh on the dude’s inspiration which is made obvious in Joe Six Pack’s post.

“Thanks for another — how shall I put this — “silly” response.”

Well, if it was so obvious in my original post, why ask the question in your post?

“Seriously, I understand the intent of Joe Six Pack and other Pharisees — to put it directly — but my point was did he have plans, what did his family think, etc. A proper answer would be something like this:

“No he did not have plans; his family was shocked but he is single so he’s not skirting God’s will; he will walk back to France and find a job - but he does not have any specific work in mind.”

I stated clearly in the original story that

1) he had no plans and he was relying totally on God’s providence and the charity of strangers.

2) he was single and recently resigned his commission as a military officer

So, why did you need me to restate this?

In your original response to the story you said:

“This is indeed outrageous; crazy.

“But what on earth prompted him to do such a thing?

“And why abandon one’s work..

Frankly, these questions, to me, sound like they come from a protestant or what I thought would be the Novus Ordo reaction.

What on earth prompted him? ummmm, God.

Why abandon one’s work? This sounds totally protestant to me.

The protestants are the ones who shut down all the convents and monasteries in the newly protestantized countries of Europe. “What’s the point of these institutions,” they would say. Their Calvinist minds thought it was a waste of time and manpower.

You came off like a protestant when you gave your original response. Don’t play bait and switch with me, sir. If you form your words to sound like a nutty protestant, don’t blame me for presuming you as such. Even respecting the fact that blogs and the written word in general can be misunderstood, your writing invited criticism — not just from me but others as well chimed in.