Beautiful Autumn Bike Riding Images & Smooth Jazz Chillout Lounge

• 🚴 Cycling in Autumn is Awesome

• 🦤 The last Bird migration to East Africa from Europe – No visa, no COVID test!

_______________

አህዛብ አፍ አላቸው አይናገሩምም፤ ዓይን አላቸው አያዩምም፤ ጆሮ አላቸው አይሰሙምም፤ አፍንጫ አላቸው አያሸትቱምም፤

👉 የአሕዛብ አምልኮታቸው ከወርቅና ከብር፣ ከነሐስና ከመዳብ፣ ክድንጋይና ከእንጨት፣ ከኒኬልና ከሸክላ በሰው እጅ የተሠሩ ናቸው። አፍ እያላቸው አይናገሩም ዓይን እያላቸው አያዩም፣ ጆሮ እያላቸው አይሰሙም፣ አፍንጫ እያላቸው አያሸቱም፣ እጅ እያላቸው አይዳስሱም፣ እግር እያላቸው አይራመዱም/አይሄዱም፣ በጉሮሮአቸው አይናገሩም፣ በአፋቸውም ውስጥ ትንፋሽ የላቸውም። እንግዲህ ሠሪዎቻቸውና የሚያምኑባቸው ሁሉ እንደሱው ይሁኑ በዕውነት ለዘላለሙ አሜን።

✞✞✞[መዝሙረ ዳዊት ምዕራፍ ፻፴፪]✞✞✞

፩ ወንድሞች በኅብረት ቢቀመጡ፥ እነሆ፥ መልካም ነው፥ እነሆም፥ ያማረ ነው።

፪ ከራስ እስከ ጢም እንደሚፈስስ፥ እስከ አሮን ጢም፥ በልብሱ መደረቢያ እንደሚወርድ ሽቱ ነው።

፫ በጽዮን ተራሮች እንደሚወርድ እንደ አርሞንዔም ጠል ነው፤ በዚያ እግዚአብሔር በረከቱን ሕይወትንም እስከ ዘላለም አዝዞአልና።

አዎ! ዛሬ ወንድሞች በኅብረት ሊቀመጡ አልቻሉም፤ እንዲያውም ቃኤል ተነስቶና ከእግዚአብሔር ጠላቶችም ጋር አብሮ አቤልን በማሳደድና በመግደል ላይ ይገኛል። ለምን? ምክኒያቱም፤ ለጊዜውም ቢሆን አለመታደል ህኖ፤ ኢትዮጵያን በዚህ ወቅት እያስተዳደሯት ያሉት የሰይጣን ጭፍሮች የሆኑት የዋቄዮ-አላህ ‘ነገስታት’ ጠላቶቿ ናቸውና ነው!

💭 አታላዩና አምታቹ ቁራ ነፃነትና ሕይወት አፍቃሪዎቹን ድመቶች እርስበርስ ሲያባላቸው

👉 ቁራው(ጋላው/ጋላማራው ግራኝ) ሁለቱን ወንድማማች ድመቶች(አማራ እና ትግሬን)ገደል እየከተተ አባላቸው፤ ከዚያ የተቀሩትም እርስበርስ እንዲባሉ ቪዲዮ አንስቶ ለቀቀው፤ የወረራ ህልሙ በጋላማራ ድጋፍ ለጊዜው ተሳካላት!

❖ [መጽሐፈ ምሳሌ ምዕራፍ ፮] ❖

፲፮ እግዚአብሔር የሚጠላቸው ስድስት ነገሮች ናቸው፥ ሰባትንም ነፍሱ አጥብቃ ትጸየፈዋለች፤ በሐሰት የሚናገር ሐሰተኛ ምስክር በወንድማማች መካከልም ጠብን የሚዘራ

፲፯ ትዕቢተኛ ዓይን፥ ሐሰተኛ ምላስ፥ ንጹሕን ደም የምታፈስስ እጅ፥

፲፰ ክፉ አሳብን የሚያበቅል ልብ፥ ወደ ክፉ የምትሮጥ እግር፥

፲፱ በሐሰት የሚናገር ሐሰተኛ ምስክር በወንድማማች መካከልም ጠብን የሚዘራ።

❖ ታላላቅ ነገሥታትን የመታ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

❖ ብርቱዎችንም ነገሥታት የገደለ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

❖ እኛን በመዋረዳችን አስቦናልና፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

❖ ከጠላቶቻችንም እጅ አድኖናልና፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

❖ ለሥጋ ሁሉ ምግብን የሚሰጥ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና።

❖ የሰማይን አምላክ አመስግኑ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና።

✞✞✞[መዝሙረ ዳዊት ምዕራፍ ፻፴፫]✞✞✞

፩ እነሆ፥ እግዚአብሔርን ባርኩ፥ በአምላካችን ቤት አደባባዬች የምትቆሙ እናንተ የእግዚአብሔር ባሪያዎች ሁላችሁ።

፪ በሌሊት በቤተ መቅደስ ውስጥ እጆቻችሁን አንሡ፥ እግዚአብሔርንም ባርኩ።

፫ ሰማይንና ምድርን የሠራ እግዚአብሔር ከጽዮን ይባርክህ።

✞✞✞[መዝሙረ ዳዊት ምዕራፍ ፻፴፭]✞✞✞

፩ እግዚአብሔርን አመስግኑ፤ ቸር ነውና፥ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና።

፪ የአማልክትን አምላክ አመስግኑ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና።

፫ የጌቶችን ጌታ አመስግኑ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፬ እርሱ ብቻውን ታላቅ ተኣምራትን ያደረገ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፭ ሰማያትን በብልሃት የሠራ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፮ ምድርን በውኃ ላይ ያጸና፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፯ ብቻውን ታላላቅ ብርሃናትን የሠራ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፰ ለፀሐይ ቀንን ያስገዛው፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፱ ለጨረቃና ለከዋክብትም ሌሊትን ያስገዛቸው፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፲ ከበኵራቸው ጋር ግብጽን የመታ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፲፩ እስራኤልንም ከመካከላቸው ያወጣ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፲፪ በጸናች እጅ በተዘረጋችም ክንድ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፲፫ የኤርትራን ባሕር በየክፍሉ የከፈለ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፲፬ እስራኤልን በመካከሉ ያሳለፈ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፲፭ ፈርዖንንና ሠራዊቱን በኤርትራ ባሕር የጣለ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፲፮ ሕዝቡን በምድረ በዳ የመራ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፲፯ ታላላቅ ነገሥታትን የመታ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፲፰ ብርቱዎችንም ነገሥታት የገደለ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፲፱ የአሞራውያንን ንጉሥ ሴዎንን፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፳ የባሳንን ንጉሥ ዐግን፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፳፩ ምድራቸውን ርስት አድርጎ የሰጠ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፳፪ ለባሪያው ለእስራኤል ርስት፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና።

፳፫ እኛን በመዋረዳችን አስቦናልና፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፳፬ ከጠላቶቻችንም እጅ አድኖናልና፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና፤

፳፭ ለሥጋ ሁሉ ምግብን የሚሰጥ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና።

፳፮ የሰማይን አምላክ አመስግኑ፤ ምሕረቱ ለዘላለም ነውና።

___________________________________

Ethiopia’s Ancient Monastery That Canadian Television (CTV) Visited Was ‘Looted & Bombed’

✞ Monks on ደብረ ዳሞ Cliff Top:

“Our languages are different – but our origins are the same – we’re all brothers!” 👏

“ቋንቋዎቻችን የተለያዩ ናቸው ፥ ግን መነሻችን አንድ ነው ፥ ሁላችንም ወንድማማቾች ነን!” 👏

👉 „ጠሪጥኩም‘ዶ?! ሳብ…ጣጥ! ሳብ…ጣጥ!”😂 እንደው በጣም ደስ የሚሉ ደግና የዋሕ አባት፤ ከአምስት ዓመታት በፊት በቀድሞው ቻነሌ አቅርቤው ነበር፤ ልክ ዛሬ በአቡነ አረጋዊ ዕለት ቪዲዮውን ሳገኘው በጣም ደስ አለኝ። እግዚአብሔር እና ቅዱሳኑ እነ አቡነ አረጋዊ ከእናንተ ጋር ናቸው! አባቶቻችን ጸሎታችሁ አይለየን!

✞✞✞[መዝሙረ ዳዊት ምዕራፍ ፸፩]✞✞✞

፩ አቤቱ፥ ፍርድህን ለንጉሥ ስጥ፥ ጽድቅህንም ለንጉሥ ልጅ፥

፪ ሕዝብህን በጽድቅ፥ ችግረኞችህንም በፍርድ ይዳኝ ዘንድ።

፫ ተራሮችና ኰረብቶች ለሕዝብህ ሰላምን ይቀበሉ።

፬ ለችግረኞች ሕዝብ በጽድቅ ትፈርዳለህ የድሆችንም ልጆች ታድናለህ፤ ክፉውንም ታዋርደዋለህ።

፭ ፀሐይ በሚኖርበት ዘመን ሁሉ፥ በጨረቃም ፊት ለፊት ለልጅ ልጅ ይኖራል።

፮ እንደ ዝናብ በታጨደ መስክ ላይ፥ በምድርም ላይ እንደሚንጠባጠብ ጠብታ ይወርዳል።

፯ በዘመኑም ጽድቅ ያብባል፥ ጨረቃም እስኪያልፍ ድረስ ሰላም ብዙ ነው።

፰ ከባሕር እስከ ባሕር ድረስ፥ ከወንዝም እስከ ምድር ዳርቻ ድረስ ይገዛል።

፱ በፊቱም ኢትዮጵያ ይሰግዳሉ፥ ጠላቶቹም አፈር ይልሳሉ።

👉 ለኢትዮጵያ መጥፎ ዕድልን፣ ሃዘንን፣ ባርነትን፣ በሽታን፣ ረሃብንና ሞትን ይዘው የመጡት፣ ከሞትና ባርነት አፈር የተገኙት የግራኝ ኦሮሞ አህዛብ እና ጭፍሮቹ የትግራይን ሕዝብ ከምድረ ገጽ ለማጥፋት በአክሱም ጽዮን ላይ እያካሄዱት ያሉትን የጭፍጨፋ ጂሃድ፤ እግዚአብሔር ኢትዮጵያዊ አድርጎ የፈጠራቸው ከነፃነትና ከሕይወት አፈር የተገኙት ደገኞቹ ኢትዮጵያውያን አምላካቸው በኃላፊነት ያስረከባቸውን ሃገር ነፃነት ለማስጠበቅ እና የሕይወትንም ዛፍ ከዲያብሎስ ጠላት ለመከላከል በተፈጥሮ የተሰጣቸውን የተዋጊነት መንፈስ ዛሬ በትግራይ ቀስቅሰውታልና መስቀላቸውን ይዘው ስልጣን ላይ ያሉትን ቆለኛማዎችን የዋቄዮ-አላህ ጭፍሮችን አንድ በአንድ በመጠራረግ ላይ ይገኛሉ። ይህ ከዚህ ከአቡነ አረጋዊ ዕለት ጀምሮ እየተከሰተ ለመምጣቱ ምስጋና የሚገባቸው ሥላሴ፣ ጽዮን ማርያም፣ ቅዱሳኑ እነ አቡረ አረጋዊ እና አባቶቻችን ናቸው። ስለዚህ ዛሬ የትግራይ ኢትዮጵያውያን ለሌላ ለማንም ኃይል፣ ለማንም ቡድን፣ ለማንም ፖለቲከኛ፣ ለየትኛውም ምልክትና ባንዲራ በይበልጥ ምስጋና ከመስጠት መቆጠብ አለብን ፤ እንደ እስራኤል ዘ-ስጋ ፈጥሪያችንን አስቀይመን ቅጣታችንና ስቃያችን እንዳይቀጥል መጠንቀቅ ይኖርብናል።

👉 ታች የቀረበውንና በዛሬው ዕለት የሚነበበውን የሥላሴን ተዓምር በተለይ ኢ–አማንያን ለሆኑት የትግራይ ወገኖች ትልቅ ትምህርት ነውና ይህን ተቀብለው ወደ እግዚአብሔር ይመለሱ፤ ከትግራይ/ኢትዮጵያ አፈር የተገኘ ሰው ኢ–አማኒ ሊሆን በጭራሽ አይገባውምና።

✞✞✞የሰኞ ሰይፈ ሥላሴ ተአምር✞✞✞

ጢሮአዳ በሚባል አገር የፋርስ ንጉስ ጭፍራ የሆ አንድ ሰው ነበረ፡፡ ይህም ሰው ከእለታት በአንድ ቀን የክርስቲያንን አገር ለማጥፋት ሰንጋ ፈረሱን ጭኖ ከቤቱ ወጣ፡፡ በዚህም አገር ውስጥ የአብ የወልድ የመንፈስ ቅዱስ ስዕል ያለበት የተቀደሰ ቦታ ነበር፡፡ ከዚያም ንዋያተ ቅድሳቱን ለመመዝበር አማረውና ወደ ተጌጠው አዳራሽ በገባ ጊዜ የስሉስ ቅዱስ ስዕል ካለበት ቦታ ደረሰ፡፡ ይህም ወታደር የስላሴን ስዕል በእሳት ሰይፍ ታጥሮ ባየው ጊዜ በዚያ የነበሩትን ሰዎች “ወንድሞቼ ሆይ ይህ እንደ ነደ እሳት የሚያንፀባርቅ ስዕል ምንድነው? አርአያው እጅግ አስፈራኝ ወደ እሱ ቀርቤም ሁኔታውን ለመረዳት ተሳነኝ” አላቸው፡፡ እነዚያም የክርስቲያን ወገኖች “አንተ ወታደር ፈጥነህ በምድር ወድቀህ ስገድ ይህ የስላሴ ስዕል የስላሴ አርአያ ገፅ ነውና” አሉት፡፡ በዚያን ጊዜ ፈጥኖ በጉልበቱ ተንበርክኮ ሰገደ እጁንም ወደ ሰማይ በመዘርጋት “እኔ ለጌቶቼ ለስላሴ ስዕል እሰግዳለሁ” እያለ ማለደ፡፡ “ከአረማውያን አገር አውጥታችሁ ከክርስቲያኖች አገር አድርሳችሁኛልና ስለዚህም ምስጋና ላቀርብላችሁ እገደዳለሁ” አለ፡፡ እንዲህም እያለ ሲፀልይ የእግዚአብሔር የጌትነቱ ብርሃን በዚያ ቤት ውስጥ መላ፡፡ በዚህም ጊዜ “አንተ የንጉስ ወታደር ሆይ መንግስተ ሰማያት ትገባ ዘንድ ስሉስ ቅዱስ ጠርተውሃል” የሚል ቃል ከሰማይ መጣ፡፡ ይህንንም ከመስማቱ የእግዚአብሔር መልአክ መጋቤ ብርሃናት ራጉኤል በፍጥነት ወደርሱ መጥቶ ወደ ሰማይ አሳረገውና በስላሴ ፊት አቆመው፡፡ ስላሴም “ከሌሎቹ የንጉስ ሰራዊት ተመርጠሸ ወደዚህ የመጣሽ አንቺ ምርጥ ነፍስ ሆይ ወልድ በአባቱ ጌትነትና በመንፈስ ቅዱስ ክብር እስኪመጣ ድረስ በህያዋን አገር ገብተሸ በዚያ ትቀመጪ ዘንድ ፈቅደንልሻል” አሏት፡፡ ይህንንም ካሏት በኋላ ወደዚያ አስገቧትና በዚያ ተቀመጠች፡፡

👉 Back in 2015 the Canadian Crew was there not only for adventure, but somehow also to live and witness the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo faith, to discover the central element of Orthodox Christian belief and theology — The Love of Christ, The Love of Jesus Christ for humanity, The Love of Christians for Jesus Christ, and The Love of Christians for others. These aspects are distinct in Orthodox Christian teachings—the love for Christ is a reflection of his love for all. That’s what these Canadian Television crew members got climbing on a rope to reach the top of Mount Zion where this marvelous 6^th century Debre Damo / St. Abuna Aregewai Monastery is located.

This made the devil mad. We know Satan hates love, and gets angry when good things happen – so a coalition Army of Satan consisting of the Gog/Magog armies of the Muslim-Protestant Oromo Abiy Ahmed Ali (ENDF), Eritrean Army (EDF), Amhara Militias, Somali Soldiers and army of drones from the United Arab Emirates decided to blow up this 6th-century Christian Monastery. We still don’t know regarding loss and damage. Until today, medias and teams who try to investigate the bombardment of the Monastery were denied entry. But, in this Jihad some Monks were killed and injured.

_________________________________

The Amazing Myanmar Nun | የምያንማሯ ድንቅ ክርስቲያን መነኩሴ፤ “ወገኖቼን ከምትገድሏቸው እባካችሁ እኔን ግደሉኝ!”

👉 በቡድሂስቶች ሃገር በምያንማር/በርማ አመጹና ግድያው ቀጥሏል፤ ፖሊሶችና ወራሪ ሮሂንጋ ሙስሊሞች የዜጋውን ሕይወት ይቀጥፋሉ ክርስቲያኗ ሴት መነኩሴ ግን እራሳቸውን በመሰዋዕት አሳልፈው በመስጠት ለመላው ዓለም እንዲህ አርአያ ለመሆን በቅተዋል።

👉 ሴት ክርስቲያን ካቶሊክ መንኩሴዋ ‘አን ሮዛ ኑ ታውንግ‘፤

“ወገኖቼን ከምትገድሏቸው እባካችሁ እኔን ግደሉኝ!” እኔ ልንበርከክልዎት፤ የኔ እናት! 😢😢😢

ላለፉት ቀናት በብዛት በመገደል ላይ ላሉት የምያንማር አዲስ ወታደራዊ መንግስት ተቃዋሚዎች ምህረት እንዲያደርጉላቸው ሴት መንኩሴዋ‘አን ሮዛ” ለመማጸን በፖሊሶች ፊትለፊት ተንበርክከው “ወገኖቼ ሲገደሉ ማየት አልፈልግምና ነው!” በማለት ጮኸው ነበር ። መነኩሴዋ ለመሞት ተዘጋጅተውና ሌሎች እንዲኖሩም ሕይወታቸውን መስዋእት ማድረግ ፈቃደኛ እንደነበሩ በማውሳት ድርጊቱን እንዲህ ሲሉ በዝርዝር ገልጸውታል፦

“እሁድ ዕለት እኔ ክሊኒኩ ውስጥ ነበርኩ። ሌሎቹ ክሊኒኮች ዝግ ስለነበሩ በዚያ ቀን ሕክምና እሰጥ ነበር።ሰዎች ሲራመዱ አየሁ። ተቃውሞ እያሰሙ ነበር። በድንገት ሰልፈኞቹን ፖሊሶች፣ ወታደሮች እና የውሃ መድፎች ሲከተተሏቸው አየሁ። ከዚያም ተኩስ ከፍተው ሰልፈኞቹን መደብደብ ጀመሩ። ደነገጥኩኝ ዛሬ የምሞትበት ቀን ነው ብዬ አሰብኩ። ለመሞትም ወሰንኩ።

እንዳያደርጉት እየጠየኩኝ እና እየለመንኳቸው ነበር፤ እናም ሰልፈኞቹ ምንም [ወንጀል]አልፈፀሙም አልኳቸው። እንደ እብድ ሰው እያለቀስኩ ነበር። ጫጩቶቹን እንደምትጠብቅ እንደ እናት ዶሮ ነበርኩ ተቃዋሚዎችን ወደደበደቡበት እየሮጥኩ ነበር። ይህም ክሊኒኩ ፊት ለፊት ነበር ። ልክ እንደ ጦርነት ነበር። ከብዙ ሰዎች ይልቅ እኔ ብሞት ይሻላል ብዬ አሰብኩ።

ጮክ ብዬ እያለቀስኩ ነበር። ጉሮሮየም ህመም ላይ ነበር። ዓላማዬ ሰዎች እንዲያመልጡ እና የተቃውሞ ሰልፎችን እንዲያደርጉ እና የፀጥታ ኃይሎችን ለማስቆም ነበር። ሰዎችን ማሰሩን እንዳይቀጥሉ ጠየቅኳቸው። እየለምንኳቸው ነበር። በዚያን ጊዜ አልፈራሁም። እኔ ፈርቼ ብሸሽ ኖሮ ሁሉም በችግር ውስጥ ይገኙ ነበር። በጭራሽ አልፈራሁም። ቀደም ሲል ስለተገደሉት የናይፒታው ልጃገረድ እና ስለ ማንዳላይ ሴት ልጅ እያሰብኩ ነበር። ከገጠር ስለመጡትና ስለ ወደቁትን ነፍሳት ሁሉ እያሰብኩ ነበር። በሚትኪና ሰዎች ላይ ክፉ ነገር እንዳይመጣባቸው ተጨንቄ ነበር።

ወደ ባኒያን ዛፍ ሲደርሱ እኔ [ፖሊሶቹን/ባለሥልጣናቱን]እየጠራኋቸውና እየነገርኳቸው ነበር: – ‘እባካችሁ እኔን ግደሉኝ። ሰዎች ሲገደሉ ማየት አልፈልግም።” ጮክ ብዬ እያለቅስኩ ስል እነርሱ ለጥቂት ጊዜ ቆሙ።

አንደኛው ወደ እኔ መጥቶ “እማማ ፣ ብዙ አይጨነቁ ፣ እኛ በእነሱ ላይ አንተኩስባቸውም” አለኝ ።

እኔ ግን እንዲህ በማለት ነግርኩት፤ “እነሱም በሌሎች መሳሪያዎች ሊገደሉ ይችላሉ። በእነሱ ላይ አይተኩሱ። እነሱ እኮ ዝም ብለው ተቃዋሚዎች ናቸው።”

በብዙ ቦታዎች እንዳየሁት ሰዎችን በጥይት እንደገደሉ በአእምሮዬ ውስጥ ስላለ በእነሱ ላይ አይተኩሱም ብዬ አላመንኩም ነበር። [አንዱን ተቃዋሚ] ወደ ክሊኒኩ አምጥቼ ህክምና ሰጠሁት። ፖሊሶቹ ሌላውን ተቃዋሚ እንደወደቀ ሊይዙት እንደተቃረቡ ፖሊሶቹንን አቁሜ ግብግቡን እንዳይቀጥሉ ጠየቅኳቸው። ለዚያም ነው ፖሊሱ ያላሰረው፤ ያለበለዚያ እነሱ ይይዙትና ከዚያም በጎትተቱ ነበር።

በሕዝቡ ላይ እየደረሰ ያለውን ነገር እንዳያችሁት እነሱ[ወታደሮቹ]የሕዝብ ጠባቂዎች እንዳልሆኑ ሆኖ ይሰማኛል። ሰዎች ደህና ሁኔታ አይደለም ያሉት እናም ጭካኔ የተሞላበት እስራት በሌሊት ይካሄዳል። የአንዲት ወጣት እናት ከሞተ አካል አጠገብ ስታለቅስ የሚያሳየውን ቪዲዮ ሳይ በጣም አዘንኩ። እኔ ደግሞ አምቡላንስ ሲወድም እና ባለሞያዎች በጠመንጃ ሲደበደቡም አይቻለሁ። እነሱ እኛን መጠበቅ ነበረባቸው፤ ግን ህዝባችን እራሱን መከላከል አለበት። በጎ አይደለም። እነሱ (የደህንነት ኃይሎች) የማይወዷቸውን ይይዟቸዋል፣ ይደበድቧቸዋል፣ ይገድሏቸዋል። የማያንማር ሕዝብን የሚከላከል ማንም የለም። ሰዎች እራሳቸውን መከላከል እና እርስ በእርስ መረዳዳት አለባቸው።”

❖ ዋው! ድንቅ ድንቅ ነው! በሁዳዴ መግቢያ ይህን ያሳየን እግዚአብሔር አምላክ የተመሰገነ ይሁን! የአክሱም ጽዮን ልጆች በአውሬው ላይ ድል የሚቀዳጁበት ጊዜ እየተቃረበ ነው!

አንዲት የምያንማር መነኩሴ በጦርነት ቀጠና ውስጥ ተንበርክከው መሳሪያ ስላልታጠቁ ዜጎች ህይወት ለመማፀን ሲለምኑ ፖሊሶች መንቀሳቀስ አቅቷቸው ቆሙ፤ ይህ ድንቅ ምስል በመላው ዓለም ዞሯል። ቤተክርስቲያኗ እጅግ በጣም እምነት የለሽ በሆነችበት ጊዜ ብቸኛዋ መነኩሴ በሁከት ፣ ሽብር እና ስቃይ በተሞላባት ዓለም ውስጥ ሰላም የሰፈነበትን የእግዚአብሔርን መንግሥት ይመስላሉ። “የሚያስተራርቁ ብፁዓን ናቸው፥ የእግዚአብሔር ልጆች ይባላሉና።” [የማቴዎስ ወንጌል ምዕራፍ ፭፥፱] የኛዎቹስ አስታራቂዎችና ሰላም ፈጣሪዎች የት አሉ?

መነኩሴ‘አን ሮዛ ኑ ታውንግ‘ ለዓለም፤ በተለይ ለኢትዮጵያ እውነተኛ እና ታማኝ ምስክር ለመሆን ህይወታቸውን ለመስጠት የተዘጋጁ ጀግና የክርስቶስ ልጅ ናቸው። ሃይማኖታዊ ቅድስና ከፖለቲካ ርዕዮተ ዓለም ጋር ግራ አላጋባቸውም። በሚቀጥሉት መቶ ዘመናት በቤተ መቅደሳቸው ዙሪያ ስለሚያበሩት ሻማዎች እያሰቡም አልነበረም፣ ጸሎት በማድረግና በቅዳሴ ሥርዓት ላይ በመገኘት ብቻ ያለተግባር ፍትህ እንደማይገኝ፣ በዓይናቸው ለማየት በቅተው ነበር፣ መላ ሰውነታቸው በሰው ልጅ ስቃይ ፣ በሰው ልጅ ርህራሄ እና በሰው ልጅ ነፃነት ተውጧልና። አንድ ሰው ከእግዚአብሔር አምላኩ ጎን ነፍሱን ለአባቱና ለእናቱ፣ ለወንድሞቹና ለእህቶቹ፣ ለሚስቱና ለባሏ፣ ለልጆቹና ለጎረቤቶቹ፣ ለጓደኞቹና ለወገኖቹ ከሚሰጠው ፍቅር የበለጠ ፍቅር ሊኖር አይችልም።

እኝህ ድንቅ የምያንማር መነኩሴ ለጊዜያዊ ስልጣን፣ ተወዳጅ ለመሆን ወይም ተፅዕኖ ለመፍጠር ፍላጎት የላቸውም ፣ እማማ አን ሮዛ የራሳቸውን ስጋዊ አካል እንኳን ለማዳን አልፈሩም፣ ፍላጎትም አልነበራቸውም። የተለየ ኃይል እና ተጽዕኖ ያለው ተለዋጭ ታሪክን በመናገር ራሱን በመስቀል ላይ ለሞት አሳልፎ የሰጠውን ኢየሱስ ክርስቶስን ይህ ቅዱስ የሆነ የመነኩሴዋ ተግባር በከፊል ያሳየናል። የአዲስ ኪዳን ትምህርት ለዓለም ምስክር መሆኑን ያስተምረናል። አዎ! በሰይፍ የሚኖሩ በሰይፍ ይወድቃሉ!

በሃገራችን እንዳየነው ክርስቲያን ነን የሚሉት ሳይቀሩ ሰላምን ለማስከበር በሚል የአውሬው ቅጥፈት ተታለው ለጊዚያዊ ጥቅም፣ ለስልጣን እና ኢጎ ሲሉ በትግራይ ሕዝብ ላይ ዓመፅን ተጠቅመው በሰላማዊ ሕዝብ ላይ አሰቃቂ ጭፍጨፋ እንዲካሄድባቸው ፈቀዱ። ጦርነቱ “ፍትሃዊ ጦርነት” ባለመሆኑ፤ ሁከት ሁከትን ይወልዳልና በሰይፍ የሚኖሩ በሰይፍ እየወደቁ እንደሆኑ እያየናቸው ነው።

👉“ተዋሕዶ አባቶች ባካችሁ እንደ በርማ መንኩሴዎች ደጅ ወጥታችሁ የተቃውሞ ስልፉን ምሩት”

______________________________

If You Love Something, Love it Completely, Cherish it, Say it, But Most Importantly, Show it.

_________

ፕሬዚደንት፣ ጳጳስ፣ ዶክተር፣ ፈላስፋ፣ ነጭ፣ ጥቁር፣ ቢጫ፣ ኃብታም፥ ታዋቂ፣ አማራ፣ ትግሬ፣ ኦሮሞ ብትሆን ፍቅር ግን ከሌለህ ከንቱ ነህ!!!

እጅግ በጣም ኃይለኛና ልብን ኩምሽሽ የሚያደርግ ጥቅስ ነው፤ ዋውውው! እህታችን ጥቅሱን የምታነብበት ድምጽና እስትንፋስ ይህን በደንብ ይገልጹታል።

በዚህ አጋጣሚ፡ የክርስቶስ ልጆች፡ በተለይ ውጭ ያለነው፡ በያዝናቸው ቀናት አጥብቀን ልንጠነቀቅ ይገባናል!  ከጃንዋሪ 10 እስከ ፌብርዋሪ 10 አካብቢ ባሉት ቀናት አጋንንት በብዛት የተለቀቁበት ግዜ ነው፤ ሥራ ቦታ፣ ትምህርት ቤት፣ በየጎረቤቱና መንገዱ እንዲሁም በሶሺያል ሜዲያ ላይ ጋኔን ተሸካሚዎቹ ፀረ–ክርስቶሳውያን በጣም ይፈታተኑናልና በተቻለ መጠን ከእነርሱ መራቅ፣ አለማናገሩና ቸል ማለቱ ይመረጣል።

መንፈስ ቅዱስ ሁሌም ከእኛ ጋር ይሁን!

______

Hating Valentine’s – Why Islamists And The Radical Left Loathe The Day Of Love.

Today, February 14, is Valentine’s Day, the sacred day that intimate companions mark to celebrate their love and affection for one another. If you’re thinking about making a study of how couples celebrate this day, the Muslim world and the milieus of the radical Left are not the places you should be spending your time. Indeed, it’s pretty hard to outdo Islamists and “progressives” when it comes to the hatred of Valentine’s Day. And this hatred is precisely the territory on which the contemporary romance between the Left and Islamic Supremacism is formed.

The train is never late: every year that Valentine’s comes around, the Muslim world erupts with ferocious rage, with its leaders doing everything in their power to suffocate the festivity that comes with the celebration of private romance. Imams around the world thunder against Valentine’s every year — and the celebration of the day itself is literally outlawed in Islamist states.

This year, for example, the Islamabad High Court in Pakistan banned the celebration of Valentine’s Day in public places, and at an official level, and prohibited all electronic and print media from covering any festivities or mentioning of the occasion. Several cities across Muslim-majority Indonesia, meanwhile, banned people from celebrating the day. In the city of Surabaya, a group of school students, which included many girls wearing the hijab, denounced Valentine’s Day. In Muslim-dominant Malaysia, the group The National Muslim Youth Association directed females not to use emoticons and perfume in a pre-Valentine’s Day message.

Last year, Pakistan also banned Valentine’s Day, calling it an “insult” to Islam and warning that “strict” action against anyone daring to celebrate the day in any part of Islamabad. In the past, Valentine’s Day activities were disrupted by Jamaat-e-Islami, Pakistan’s main religious party, but in the last two years the state and court now get involved to ban celebration of the day. Back on Valentine’s Day in Pakistan in 2013, supporters of Jamat-e-Islami took to the streets in Peshawar to vehemently denounce the Day of Love. Demonizing it as “un-Islamic,” the Muslim protestors shouted that the day had “spread immodesty in the world.” Shahzad Ahmed, the local leader of the student wing of Jamat-e-Islami, declared that the organization will not “allow” any Valentine’s Day functions, warning that if Pakistani law enforcement did not prevent Pakistanis from holding such functions, that the Jamat-e-Islami would stop them “in our own way.” Khalid Waqas Chamkani, a leader in Jamat-e-Islami, calls Valentine’s a “shameful day.”

These Islamist forces in Pakistan cannot, of course, completely succeed in preventing couples from showing love to each other on this special day, and so many Pakistanis still cryptically celebrate Valentine’s Day and exchange presents in secret.

In Iran, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia last year, and as always, Valentine’s Day was outlawed. Under the Islamic regime in Iran, for instance, any sale or promotion of Valentine’s Day related items, including the exchange of gifts, flowers and cards, is illegal. The Iranian police consistently warn retailers against the promotion of Valentine’s Day celebrations.

Over the years, Islamic religious leaders and officials in Malaysia have warned Muslims against celebrating Valentine’s Day. In Saudi Arabia, the morality police outlaw the sale of all Valentine’s Day items, forcing shopkeepers to remove any red items, because the day is considered a Christian holiday.

Malaysia and Saudi Arabia are carrying the torch for the Indonesian Ulema Council in Dumai, Riau, and for the Education, Youth and Sport Agency in Mataram, West Nusa Tenggara, both of which issue a dire warning each year to people against celebrating Valentine’s Day, stating that the Day of Love “is against Islam.” This is because, as the Indonesian Ulema Council 2011 judgment explained, Valentine’s Day takes young people into a “dark world.”

Malaysia’s State mufti chief assistant Mat Jais Kamos always keeps his mind focused on that dark world and so, in 2014, a few days before Valentine’s Day, he ordered young people to stay clear of celebrating the Day of Love: “The celebration emphasizes the relationship between two individuals rather than the love between family members or married couples,” he affirmed, and department officials backed up his command by distributing leaflets to remind Muslims of the 2006 ban on Valentine’s Day issued by the state fatwa council. In Islamic Uzbekistan, meanwhile, several universities habitually make sure that students actually sign contracts promising not to celebrate Valentine’s.

All these Islamic outcries against Valentine’s Day reflect myriad other efforts to suffocate the day of love throughout the Muslim War. For instance, in Aceh province in Indonesia every year, Muslim clerics issue stern warnings to Muslims against observing Valentine’s Day. Tgk Feisal, general secretary of the Aceh Ulema Association (HUDA), has stated that “It is haram for Muslims to observe Valentine’s Day because it does not accord with Islamic Sharia.” He has stressed that the government must watch out for youths participating in Valentine’s Day activities in Aceh. One can only imagine what happens to the guilty parties.

As mentioned, the Saudis consistently punish the slightest hint of celebrating Valentine’s Day. The Kingdom and its religious police always officially issue a stern warning that anyone caught even thinking about Valentine’s Day will suffer some of the most painful penalties of Sharia Law. Daniel Pipes has documented how the Saudi regime takes a firm stand against Valentine’s every year and how the Saudi religious police monitor stores selling roses and other gifts.

Christian overseas workers living in Saudi Arabia from the Philippines and other countries always take extra precautions, heeding the Saudis’ warning to them specifically to avoid greeting anyone with the words “Happy Valentine’s Day” or exchanging any gift that reeks of romance. A spokesman for a Philippine workers group has commented:

We are urging fellow Filipinos in the Middle East, especially lovers, just to celebrate their Valentine’s Day secretly and with utmost care.

The Iranian despots, meanwhile, as mentioned above, consistently try to make sure that the Saudis don’t outdo them in annihilating Valentine’s Day. Iran’s “morality” police sternly order shops to remove heart-and-flower decorations and images of couples embracing on this day — and anytime around this day.

Typical of this whole pathology in the Islamic world was a development witnessed back on February 10, 2006, when activists of the radical Kashmiri Islamic group Dukhtaran-e-Millat (Daughters of the Community) went on a rampage in Srinagar, the main city of the Indian portion of Kashmir. Some two dozen black-veiled Muslim women stormed gift and stationery shops, burning Valentine’s Day cards and posters showing couples together.

In the West, meanwhile, leftist feminists are not to be outdone by their Islamist allies in reviling — and trying to exterminate — Valentine’s Day. Throughout many Women’s Studies Programs on American campuses, for instance, you will find the demonization of this day, since, as the disciples of Andrea Dworkin angrily explain, the day is a manifestation of how capitalist and homophobic patriarchs brainwash and oppress women — and push them into spheres of powerlessness.

As an individual who spent more than a decade in academia, I was privileged to witness this war against Valentine’s Day up close and personal. Feminist icons like Jane Fonda, meanwhile, help lead the assault on Valentine’s Day in society at large. As David Horowitz has documented, Fonda has led the campaign to transform this special day into “V-Day” (“Violence against Women Day”) — which is, when it all comes down to it, a day of hate, featuring a mass indictment of men.

So what exactly is transpiring here? What explains this hatred of Valentine’s Day by leftist feminists and Islamists? And how and why does it serve as the sacred bond that brings the Left and Islam together into its feast of hate?

The core issue at the foundation of this phenomenon is that Islam and the radical Left both revile the notion of private love, a non-tangible and divine entity that draws individuals to each other and, therefore, distracts them from submitting themselves to a secular deity.

The highest objective of both Islam and the radical Left is clear: to shatter the sacred intimacy that a man and a woman can share with one another, for such a bond is inaccessible to the order. History, therefore, demonstrates how Islam, like Communism, wages a ferocious war on any kind of private and unregulated love. In the case of Islam, the reality is epitomized in its monstrous structures of gender apartheid and the terror that keeps it in place. Indeed, female sexuality and freedom are demonized and, therefore, forced veiling, forced marriage, female genital mutilation, honor killings and other misogynist monstrosities become mandatory parts of the sadistic paradigm.

The puritanical nature of totalist systems (whether Fascist, Communist, or Islamist) is another manifestation of this phenomenon. In Stalinist Russia, sexual pleasure was portrayed as unsocialist and counter-revolutionary. More recent Communist societies have also waged war on sexuality — a war that Islam, as we know, wages with similar ferocity. These totalist structures cannot survive in environments filled with self-interested, pleasure-seeking individuals who prioritize devotion to other individual human beings over the collective and the state. Because the leftist believer viscerally hates the notion and reality of personal love and “the couple,” he champions the enforcement of totalitarian puritanism by the despotic regimes he worships.

The famous twentieth-century novels of dystopia, Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We, George Orwell’s 1984, and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, all powerfully depict totalitarian society’s assault on the realm of personal love in its violent attempt to dehumanize human beings and completely subject them to its rule. In Zamyatin’s We, the earliest of the three novels, the despotic regime keeps human beings in line by giving them license for regulated sexual promiscuity, while private love is illegal. The hero breaks the rules with a woman who seduces him — not only into forbidden love but also into a counterrevolutionary struggle. In the end, the totality forces the hero, like the rest of the world’s population, to undergo the Great Operation, which annihilates the part of the brain that gives life to passion and imagination, and therefore spawns the potential for love. In Orwell’s 1984, the main character ends up being tortured and broken at the Ministry of Truth for having engaged in the outlawed behavior of unregulated love. In Huxley’s Brave New World, promiscuity is encouraged — everyone has sex with everyone else under regime rules, but no one is allowed to make a deep and independent private connection.

Yet as these novels demonstrate, no tyranny’s attempt to turn human beings into obedient robots can fully succeed. There is always someone who has doubts, who is uncomfortable, and who questions the secular deity — even though it would be safer for him to conform like everyone else. The desire that therefore overcomes the instinct for self-preservation is erotic passion. And that is why love presents such a threat to the totalitarian order: it dares to serve itself. It is a force more powerful than the all-pervading fear that a totalitarian order needs to impose in order to survive. Leftist and Muslim social engineers, therefore, in their twisted and human-hating imaginations, believe that the road toward earthly redemption (under a classless society or Sharia) stands a chance only if private love and affection is purged from the human condition.

This is exactly why, forty years ago, as Peter Collier and David Horowitz demonstrate in Destructive Generation, the Weather Underground not only waged war against American society through violence and mayhem, but also waged war on private love within its own ranks. Bill Ayers, one of the leading terrorists in the group, argued in a speech defending the campaign:

Any notion that people can have responsibility for one person, that they can have that ‘out’ — we have to destroy that notion in order to build a collective; we have to destroy all ‘outs,’ to destroy the notion that people can lean on one person and not be responsible to the entire collective.

Thus, the Weather Underground destroyed any signs of monogamy within its ranks and forced couples, some of whom had been together for years, to admit their “political error” and split apart. Like their icon Margaret Mead, they fought the notions of romantic love, jealousy, and other “oppressive” manifestations of one-on-one intimacy and commitment. This was followed by forced group sex and “national orgies,” whose main objective was to crush the spirit of individualism. This constituted an eerie replay of the sexual promiscuity that was encouraged (while private love was forbidden) in We, 1984, and Brave New World.

It becomes completely understandable, therefore, why leftist believers were so inspired by the tyrannies in the Soviet Union, Communist China, Communist North Vietnam and many other countries. As sociologist Paul Hollander has documented in his classic Political Pilgrims, fellow travelers were especially enthralled with the desexualized dress that the Maoist regime imposed on its citizens. This at once satisfied the leftist’s desire for enforced sameness and the imperative of erasing attractions between private citizens. As I have demonstrated in United in Hate, the Maoists’ unisex clothing finds its parallel in fundamentalist Islam’s mandate for shapeless coverings to be worn by both males and females. The collective “uniform” symbolizes submission to a higher entity and frustrates individual expression, mutual physical attraction, and private connection and affection. And so, once again, the Western leftist remains not only uncritical, but completely supportive of — and enthralled in — this form of totalitarian puritanism.

This is precisely why leftist feminists today do not condemn the forced veiling of women in the Islamic world; because they support everything that forced veiling engenders. It should be no surprise, therefore, that Naomi Wolf finds the hijab “sexy”. And it should be no surprise that Oslo Professor of Anthropology, Dr. Unni Wikan, found a solution for the high incidence of Muslims raping Norwegian women: the rapists must not be punished, but Norwegian women must veil themselves.

Valentine’s Day is a “shameful day” for the Muslim world and for the radical Left. It is shameful because private love is considered obscene, since it threatens the highest of values: the need for a totalitarian order to attract the complete and undivided attention, allegiance and veneration of every citizen. Love serves as the most lethal threat to the tyrants seeking to build Sharia and a classless utopia on earth, and so these tyrants yearn for the annihilation of every ingredient in man that smacks of anything that it means to be human.

And so perhaps it is precisely on reflecting yesterday’s Valentine’s Day that we are reminded of the hope that we can realistically have in our battle with the ugly and pernicious Unholy Alliance that seeks to destroy our civilization.

This day reminds us that we have a weapon, the most powerful arsenal on the face of the earth, in front of which despots and terrorists quiver and shake, and sprint from in horror into the shadows of darkness, desperately avoiding its piercing light.

That arsenal is love

And no Maoist Red Guard or Saudi Islamo-Fascist cop ever stamped it out — no matter how much they beat and tortured their victims. And no al-Qaeda jihadist in Pakistan or Feminazi on any American campus will ever succeed in suffocating it, no matter how ferociously they lust to disinfect man of who and what he is.

Love will prevail.

Long Live Valentine’s Day.

Source

___

በሣር መካከል ያለች ውብ አበባ

ዮሐንስና ቤተሰቦቹ ወደ አዲሱ ቤታቸው በመግባታቸውና በአካባቢው አቀማመጥ ለጥቂት ጊዜ ለመደመም የቤታቸው ፎቅ ላይ በመውጣታቸው ተደስተዋል።

ዮሐንስ ከልጁ ከሰምዖን ጋር ሲጨዋወት ከቆየ በኋላ “ለረዥም ዓመታት እንክብካቤ ያላገኘውን ይህ ሣር ምንድር ነው የምናደርገው?” በማለት ጠየቀው።

“የአትክልት ቦታውን ለማስዋብና ጥቂት አበቦች ለመትከል የምችለውን ሁሉ አደርጋለሁ።”

“ተመልከት ስምዖን፤ በሣሩ መካከል አንዲት ውብ ነጭ አበባ አለች።

“የታለች?”

“በስተቀኝ በኩል ከጎረቤታችን አጥር ወደ እኛ አንድ ሜትር ገባ ብላ አድጋለች።” አለ ዮሐንስ።

“በዚህ ሁሉ ሣር መካከል ማንም ሊመለከታት አይችልም። በጣም ውብ አበባ ናት። አበባዋ ብቸኛ አበባ ስለ ሆነች መጀመሪያ የምወስደው እርሷን ነው።”

ስምዖን በስተቀኝ በኩል ወዳለው የአትክልት ቦታ ሄደ። ይሁ እንጂ ሣሩ ረዣዥም ስለ ነበር አበባዋን ሊያገኛት አልቻለም። አባቱ ወደ ፎቁ እንዲወጣ ሲያደርገው ግን አገኛት። ይህችን የመሰለች ውብ አበባ በማግኘቱም ተደነቀ፡ ተደሰተ። ያደገችው በጎረቤታቸው የአትክልት ቦታ ውስጥ ሊሆን ይችላል ብሎም አሰበ።

“ይህችን የመሰለች ውብ አበባ በዚህ ረዣዥም ሣር መካከል ማግኘት ምንኛ ድንቅ ነገር ነው!”

“ስምዖን፤ እነዚህ አበቦች እኮ እግዚአብሔር የሚንከባከባቸውና ሥሮቻቸውን እስከ ሰማያት ድረስ የዘረጉ የአማኞች ነፍሳት ናቸው። እውነተኛ ክርስቲያን እግሮቹ በዚይ ዓለም ላይ ተተክለው የእግዚአብሔርን ሕልውና የሚናጸባርቅ አበባ ቢተክልም ሥሩን የሚሰድደው ወደ ሰማያት ነው። ለዚህ ነው አበባዋ ውብ የሆነችው” አለ ዮሐንስ

“…በሚድኑቱና በሚጠፉቱ ዘንድ ለእግዚአብሔር የክርስቶስ መዓዛ ነንና፤ ለእነዚህ ለሞት የሚሆን የሞት ሽታ ለእነዚያም ለሕይወት የሚሆን የሕይወት ሽታ ነን።” (2ኛ ቆሮ 2:15-16)

መላው ዓለም በሣር ቢሸፈንም እንኳ በመካከሉ ውብ አበባ ለመኖሩ እርግጠኛ ነኝ።

አቤቱ እግዚአብሔር ሆይ፦ አንተ በእያንዳንዱ ትውልድ ውስጥ ምክር አለህ።

ጌታዬ ሆይ፦ በሣር መካከል የበቀልሁ አበባ እሆን ዘንድ አድለኝ። ይህን  ካደረግህልኝ “

በእሾህ መካከል እንዳለ የሱፍ አበባ፤ እንዲሁ ወዳጄ በቆነጃጅት መካከል ናት።

እንደ ዱር እንኮይ እንዲሁ ውዴ በልጆች መካከል ነው።” (መኃ. 2:2-3) የሚለው ጣፋጭ ድምፅህን እሰማለሁና።

__

ኅዘን

በ ዲ/ን የሺጥላ ሞገስ

• በግዴታ ማዘንና

• በፈቃድ ማዘን

ኅዘን የሰው ልጅ አካላዊና ስሜታዊ ጉዳት ሲደርስበት እና ስቃዩ ሲገነፍል የሚከተል ክስተት ነው። በሁለተኛ ትርጉሙ ሰው ራሱን ከጠፋበት ሲያገኝ ያለበት ቦታ ትክክለኛ አለመሆኑን ሲገነዘብ የጥፋተኝነት ስሜት የተሰማውን ሕሊናውን ለማጠብና ለማሳረፍ በፈቃዱ በውስጡ የሚፈጥረው ለተሰማው የበደለኝነትና የጥፋተኝነት ስሜት የሚከፍለው ካሣ የፈቃድ ኅዘን የምንለው ነው።

በሰው ልጅ ሕይወት ላይ ከሚደርሱ ችግሮች አንዱ እና ከባዱ ኅዘን ነው። ኅዘን ውስጣዊ ስሜታችንን የሚቀጠቅጥና የሚያደቅ መዶሻ ነው። በእርግጥ ማናቸውም ከአቅም በላይ የሆኑ ችግሮች የሚመሩን ወደ ሀዘን ነው። ይሁ እንጂ እያንዳንዳችን ላይ የሚደርስብን ኅዘን የስሜት ደረጃ ይለያይ ይሆናል። የግዴታ ኅዘን የምንለው ግን የጭንቀት መነሾ ወይም መበቀያ ሥር የምንለው ነው።

በግዴታ ማዘን

የኹከትና የጭንቀት መነሻ የምንለው እንዲህ ዓይነቱን ኅዘን ነው። በግዴታ እንድናዝን የምንገደድበትን አጋጣም የሚከስተውን ኅዘን። ይህ እንዴትና መቼ እንደሚገጥመን አስቀድሞ መገመት አይቻልም። ስለዚህ የሚከሰተውን ኅዘን ተቀብሎ ለማስተናገድ በቂ የመንፈስ ዝግጅት ላናደርግ ስለምንችል ኅዘናችንን ከባድና የጭንቀት መብቀያ ሥር ሆኖ በሕይወታችን ሊተከል ይችላል።

በክርስቶስ ሆኖ ብዙ የዚህን ዓለም ነገር ንቆ መኖር የዚህ ዓይነተኛ መፍትሔ ሲሆን በተጨማሪ የደረሰብን ኅዘን ሥር እንዳይሰድ የኅዘናችንን መፍትሔ እንጂ የኅዘናችንን ምክንያት አለማውጠንጠን ተገቢ ነው። እንዲሁም ኅዘናችንን እንዳንረሳ ዙሪያውን ከሚያራግቡ ነገሮች አጥብቆ መሸሽ ወይም እነዚያን ነገሮች ማራቅ ትልቅ እረፍት ይሰጣል።

በአንድ ወቅት አንዲት ሴት የንግድ ቦታዋ በእሳት አደጋ ወደመባት። ይህች ሴት የአንድ ልጅ እናት ስትሆን፡ አነስተኛ የንግድ ቦታ ነበራት። በእሳት አደጋ ከወደመባት በኋላ በከፍተኛ ኅዘን ተመታች። በአካባቢዋ ያሉና ጥቂት ዘመዶቿ እርሷን ለማቋቋም ያደረጉላት ዕርዳታ ከወደመው አምስት እጅ ሁለት እጅ እንኳ አይሆንም።

ስለዚህ ለዓመታት ያህል ጊዜ ታዝንና መጽናናትንም እንቢ አለች። ብስጭት፣ ጭንቀት፣ ለብቻ ማውራት የየዕለት ሥራዋ አደረገችው።

ከተወሰኑ ጊዜ በኋላ አንድ ልጇን አንጠልጥላ መንገድ ለመንገድ መዞርና ከማኅበረሰቡ ተገሎ ለመኖር ተገደደች።

ከዚህ ታሪክ የምንማረው ኅዘን በሕይወታችን ሥር እንዲሰድና በኋላም ጭንቀትን እንዲያበቅል እድል ላለመስጠት ከፍተኛ ተጋድሎ ማድረግና መስዋዕትነት መክፈል እንደሚጠበቅብን እና ሁሉ በክርስቶስ ከንቱ ማድረግ እንደሚገባት ነው።

በእርግጥም በዚህ ዓለም ሁሉ ነገር ከንቱ ነው። አንድስ እንኳ ከእኛ ጋር ለዘላለም አይኖርም። ኅዘንም ቢሆን እንኳ።

“ከንቱ ከንቱ የከንቱ ከንቱ ሁሉ ከንቱ ነው ይላል፡ ከፀሐይ በታች በሚደክምበት ድካም ሁሉ የሰው ትርፉ ምንድን ነው? ትውልድ ይሔዳል ትውልድ ይመጣል” (መ.መክ. 1:2)

__

Soul Mates?

Everything happens for a reason. We should know that some of the people that come into our life are merely there just to help teach us a lesson and make a real impact on our life. Of course, Soul mate connection would be the perfect connection —  a telepathic one.

 I was told about a Carolina Governor who was carrying on with a woman who was not his wife, and, when it became public, justified himself on the grounds that she was his “soul mate.” The term is used constantly now and some assume, unfortunately, that we should be constantly looking for this soul mate. This is utter rubbish, of course. There’s no such thing, at least not in the sense we use the term now.

My dad taught me a great number of wise things before his untimely death, and one of them was that we don’t fall in love with “the one person” who was created for us; what usually happens is that we reach a point in life where we’re ready to have a family and the person who most closely resembles our vision of a spouse at that point is the one we focus our attention on. There is a lot of truth in that. I’ve seen it over and over as a parish priest.

At one time that wasn’t a bad thing, either. We generally kept around folks who had been raised with the same basic values and background that we had. Our families often had known each other for some time. Expectations were shared. Now, people can share only four years of college (or a night in a bar) and an overwhelming lust – what a foundation! – but they say, “I’ve met my soul mate.”

Real love, the kind that really works and is good for us, requires more than attraction and appreciation; it requires active, sacrifi cial love. Real love is not about self-actualization and self-discovery – that can be therapy, not love. Real love requires the Cross of Christ, because God is love. This is the tough stuff: we don’t want sacrifice, we want romanticism instead. A person who is set only on romantic love will never find true love. The romantic is ultimately the sad, melancholic figure at the edge of a cliff watching the crashing of the sea far below.

Love is self-offering, and self-oblation. Could it be any different? Christ himself said that “a greater love hath no man than to lay down his life.” This is the ultimate definition of love. Most people immediately turn to I Corinthians 13, but the Gospel comes first. Yes, love is patient and kind, and so forth, because that is the way we sacrifice ourselves for the other person on a daily basis. Love is the Cross embraced personally for someone other than myself. That is not an easy task. It is a struggle to do it, but it is actually the true Christian struggle.

Notice that the assumption behind the soul mate is that the other person is really oriented towards me. The desire for a soul mate is concerned with my happiness, my fulfillment, my completion. As fallen human beings, however, we are so fickle that what makes us happy this week will be bland next week. As long as my emotions and passions are the measure of love, then I will never find love. That is only found when we move outside of ourselves and willingly, deliberately offer ourselves to someone else.

The special status of soul mates in the minds of many makes crystal clear why marriage and love seem to be failing left and right. We are celebrating romanticism and narcissism. Thank God we don’t allow people to write their own marriage vows in the Orthodox Church, because the ones I have heard are ghastly things that proclaim the opposite of love. “You are my fulfillment, my joy, my hope … .” Yuck. Why not be really honest and talk about the act of the will to commit oneself to one’s spouse. “I’m going to die for you every day, in little ways and big ones, until God takes away my breath.” That won’t wow them at Hallmark. How much better the old vows really are, because they are about giving and not about receiving. (It seems to me that our Lord might have said something like that.)

Sentimentality goes hand in hand with this distorted notion of love and romanticism, because it is simply the syrupy side of self-love. It makes me feel good. To wit, if we were honestly Christian we would have to reply, “I’m sure Christ didn’t feel too good on the Cross, but he called that love. What do your feelings have to do with it?”

I hinted that there is perhaps a good use of the term soul mate. And I believe that there is. In a perfectly true sense, a soul mate is a person who joins us in the spirituality of sacrifice and oblation. This is done sacramentally and mystically in the Church. These two become true soul mates, for their souls are directed together in the Cross which leads to suffering, death and resurrection.

The Governor lost what could have been his soul mate because he opted for romanticism and self-fulfillment on his terms. He lost the possibility of real love. He traded happiness (something fleeting and undependable) for joy. “Joy cometh in the morning,” that is, after the dark night of oblation and sacrifice.

Fr. John Winfrey
St. George Orthodox Church, Grand Rapids, Michigan

___

A Different Kind of Love Story

Last night, a good part of America tuned in to see how the latest love story would unfold on the Bachelor.

Today, I watched a real-life love story in a hospital in Tennessee. I watched an unassuming man gently pat his wife’s leg as he described with the utmost care what she might need while he went to grab breakfast.  He returned and gave her a foot rub.  It was obvious there was nowhere else he’d rather be.

His loving deeds will never be broadcast on the local TV channel and (because of his humility) he’ll never relay them to anyone. The tender integrity conveyed in that foot rub could not be captured in ten years of romantic TV shows, no matter how many exotic trips or luxurious surroundings were in the backdrop.

This week’s pop culture headlines are flooded with this season’s Bachelor who is captivated by a perfectly toned flirtatious woman who “thinks they’ll make cute babies.” Yes, I imagine those babies would be quite attractive.

But beauty … let me tell you about beauty.

Contained in that small hospital room were two lovers who put their heart’s work into beautiful riches the world doesn’t understand. Theirs is a narrative not found in most romance novels, but one that extends far beyond themselves. This man and woman have three grown children all desiring to live for the glory of God, whose deep concern for their parent’s plight is a testimony to their character. And their heritage extends to grandchildren.  In fact because of them, two babies who once had no family now go to bed each night with the securing kisses of a Mom and Dad.

This couple doesn’t live luxuriously, but together they have experienced something glorious of eternal significance that few ever will.

And that my friends …. is a real love story.

Source: Patheos

___________________________________________________________

Modern Love

From Romeo and Juliet to the one-night stand— modern societies are torn between the ideal of fidelity and the thirst for freedom.

Most civilizations have been based on some comprehensive idea of justice, but ours alone is based on love, both in its religion and in the principles that guide its relations between the sexes. Christianity and chivalry, from which our practices in part descend, recognized clearly that love (like freedom) must be disciplined and may require sacrifice. Today both of these moral commitments—indeed, all forms of commitment among us—are rather vestigial, and the whole idea of love is in danger of sinking to the level of sentimental tosh.

Modern Western states have, of course, always been graded into various kinds of class and status, but they have also been notably individualistic. The result has been a freedom of association, an exploration of the passions, that could not generally happen where a society conformed to comprehensive rules of justice, such as a caste system or a tribal hierarchy. Little wonder that the packaging of our Western morals as “rights” has been found so disruptive in other cultures.

The most common form of society has always been one in which social status tells people where they stand in relation to one another. Seniority, sex or just brute force located everyone in a hierarchy. As bad as the ranking might be, people knew where they stood. Human beings often prefer such knowledge to the hazards of a free society, for freedom leaves us at the mercy of the likes and dislikes of others and also (no less fickle) our own likes and dislikes.

We in the West, then, have opened ourselves up to the risks of both love and freedom. That means that our societies are (as Tocqueville noted) vastly more vulnerable to changing manners and mores. As we have lost a sense of the rigors that love requires, and the discipline that freedom needs, we have evolved, over little more than two generations, from the consuming passion of “Romeo and Juliet” to the fleeting encounter of the one-night stand. Falling in love has given way to endless testing and experiment. Now two French academics offer to make sense of our new situation.

The novelist and philosopher Pascal Bruckner’s “The Paradox of Love” is a brilliant account of the sexual muddles of our time. Paradox abounds in a time like our own, when the didactic impulse chases after wisdom in every possible direction. “We have to find in the interminable nonresolution of [love’s] problems,” he writes, “the charm of a possible solution.” We should be so lucky!

Paradox piles on paradox, but soon Mr. Bruckner gets down to realities. Adultery is a symptom, he says, of an individualist society torn between the ideal of fidelity and a thirst for freedom. But not everything fits into this tension between desire and restraint. “The vertiginous increase of divorce rates in Europe,” he tells us, “is not the result, as is often said, of our selfishness, but rather of our idealism: the impossibility of living together combined with the difficulty of remaining alone.”

In short, our sense of the “impossibility of living together” is directly related to the freedom we pursue so heedlessly—at the expense, too often, of happiness (“the difficulty of remaining alone”). Mr. Bruckner points to “a new conformism that waves the flag of transgression in order to sing the praises of the status quo.” In the end, he wants to synthesize the stability of the past with some of the liberations of our own time, and he ends with wise if familiar words: “Don’t allow yourself to be intimidated! There is more than one road to joy.”

The sociologist Jean-Claude Kaufmann in “The Curious History of Love” has, by contrast, a plot to explain our travails. What we call “love,” he says, comes to us in the contrasting forms of “agape” (or universal) love, which derives from Christianity, and passion, which emerges from medieval cults and various versions of chivalry. Passion, being focused on a single object, does not consort happily with agape. The reason of the Greek philosophers in some degree could make these two drives lie down together, but the modern world has been dominated by economics, alias capitalism.

Mr. Kaufman thinks that it is self-interest that makes capitalism tick, but he identifies self-interest with the vice of greed. Putting bad things down to human greed is, of course, the fashion of the moment. Modern Western societies no doubt have their share of this particular vice, but greed is certainly not lacking in other cultures. Mr. Kaufman’s view—that a society based on love is at war with the calculating individualism of modern reason—is distinctly theoretical. Take away greed, and we would all love one another? Unlikely!

Mr. Kaufmann wants to replace individualism—and greed and other bad things—with a proper community, and he speaks of “love’s revolution” as if this abstraction might take over the role of the proletariat in Marxism. As he sees it, love is defeated by the calculating habits of market economics—but “it also lives to fight another day.” The way we respond to our emotions, he believes, has major repercussions for society at large. The conclusion Mr. Kaufmann draws is that “knowing how to surrender to our emotions is political.” Everything personal, these days, is political. The habit of seeing politics under every bush, one might rather say, constitutes the predicament from which we suffer.

Neither Mr. Bruckner nor Mr. Kaufmann tangles with the problem of feminism, but feminism is central to the state of love today because it rejects the complementary character of men and women—an idea that is central to our cultural tradition. As different as we are, we need one another, and any theory that does not understand that pattern will be destructive.

When the 1960s idea of liberation needed content, the only thing the unimaginative feminists of those days could think to do with their new free time and expensive education was to plunge into the labor force. Mr. Kaufmann is certainly right to believe that there is no room for chivalry in an economy. Indeed, that is one of the reasons why feminists hate chivalry. It doesn’t fit in with women as labor units.

Feminism, as it is too often defined, makes women essentially economic agents, and children and family life are marginalized in ways that may suit some female graduates but certainly not lots of other women. The whole outlook presumes an end to complementarity—the destruction of the feminine. An ever-increasing scaffolding of politically correct regulation, bureaucracy and law has been needed to sustain the illusion that men and women are indistinguishable agents.

In the chivalric practices of our history, women depended for protection upon the concern of men who respected them as women. The feminist project was to equip women with rights and transfer the job of protection to the state. The results have been mixed, to say the least. To take but one vexed area of social custom and legal practice: Laws about sexual harassment impose penalties on luckless employers who fail to protect female employees from their co-workers. But the presumption that women are so weak as to need protecting from rude male behavior was something that feminism, with its emphasis on empowerment and equal status, seemed eager to attack. It is all marvelously absurd. The zones of love and desire are now invaded by statutes and committees of inquisition.

Mr. Bruckner’s central paradox is that of persecution in the name of love, but that has been an attribute of “loving” relations from time immemorial. He cites, in evidence, both Christianity and communism, in the name of which harm has come to those who were to be loved or saved. He appears to believe that communism is nothing more than a Christian heresy that “allows us to see magnified Christianity’s defects.” Marxism, it seems, “imagined a future society as the terrestrial fulfillment of the promises made by the Gospels.” This claim makes Marx and Jesus prophets in the same line of business, but you do not have to be a Christian to see that Marx is way out of his league here. It is clear that Mr. Bruckner is better at paradoxes than at affinities.

Can love lead to persecution? As a passion, it can lead to anything at all, including death, but the point about both Christianity and the Soviet state is that they were institutions, and institutions have drives of their own. Marriage is an institution, too, and the point of institutions is to discipline us. Love, by contrast, is a spontaneity, always rather intermittent. Neither can be a substitute for the other.

Both Mr. Bruckner and Mr. Kaufmann deplore love as a market. The consumer’s greed in this new condition of love is to accumulate not only material objects but people as well. Men and women sink to the level of mere commodities, giving and receiving satisfactions of an ever-fluctuating kind. Mr. Bruckner thinks that the state of commodified love is worse in America: “Whereas in the United States the co-existence of the sexes always seems on the verge of exploding, Europe is better protected against this plague by the age-old culture of gallantry.”

And that claim perhaps suggests the ultimate mistake of our time: Manners have been erased by doctrine. Individualists—men and women alike—may pursue any enterprise that fits their desires and their talents, but doctrine traps some people into the masquerade of trying to be what they are not. It drains reality from them. Those who live by doctrine rather than passion are diminished by it.

Mr. Minogue is the author, most recently, of “The Servile Mind: How Democracy Erodes the Moral Life.”

 

Source: Washington Post, March 10, 2012

_______________________________