… But it’s still no fun eating crow!
I used to think—and repeatedly claimed publicly—that “global warming” was a hoax. But that’s now changed—I have changed. I read a number of articles on the subject in the Seattle Times (Sunday Oct. 9, 2005) that gave convincing testimony that global warming is For Real, and not just part of the natural cycles of the earth as I had erroneously assumed. Real scientific data seems conclusive that it is caused not by any changes in solar activity, not by increased geothermal activity, but by man’s industrialization & continued reliance on hydrocarbon fuels (principle source of escalating levels of atmospheric carbon-dioxide, the biggest part of the problem). Its effects will be increasingly noticeable & dramatic (potentially catastrophic), very long term (centuries) and are now unavoidable and, at least as far as we (and the next few generations) are concerned, irreversible.
I don’t want to be alarmist, though. I believe God is “in charge” of His creation as He always was and always will be. He created the earth, and He created it for man. But all the same, He ordinarily permits the consequences of man’s actions (individually and collectively), however evil, to run their natural course, and I don’t expect any miracles on a global scale to set things back to how they were in the 18th Century before the Industrial Revolution started the ball rolling. Man adapted & survived the last great ice age, and I’m confident he has the God-given means to do the same as the earth gets warmer. I’m concerned (it’s not a good situation), but I’m not worried. Life on earth will certainly change in coming generations, but it will go on.
As I hinted above, the global warming trend apparently started in the 19th Century with the Industrial Revolution and is getting progressively worse year by year & decade by decade. The professional naysayers (who I used to listen to) were being financed, it turns out (surprise, surprise), by “Big Business” (oil, mining, transportation and manufacturing industries), those who stand to gain financially by the status quo that fuels the whole problem [pun intended]. One could say that the global warming trend started by accident (we didn’t know then what we know now), but it accelerates today as a result of deliberate decisions involving the grave sin of greed (avarice). (Granted, they don’t necessarily want global warming, they just don’t care about it nearly as much as they care about their personal fortunes.)
There is viable technology available today (has been for years) to drastically cut (or even eliminate) the use of hydrocarbon fuels: the fuel cell. If I understand the mechanism correctly, cars and other vehicles could fill up with what amounts to a non-toxic soap solution and, by means of a solid catalyst material in the fuel cell, convert it into electricity and the by-product of pure water (this is how the astronauts get their electrical power and drinking water on the International Space Station). There are ZERO harmful emissions (unlike the “reduced” emissions that come out of the hybrid cars being produced currently).
If the “leaders” in corporate-industrial America were serious about “The Environment,” they’d stop (for example) putting internal combustion engines in cars and trucks and start producing them with fuel cells and electric motors instead. Larger fuel cells could also be used to generate electricity locally (in individual homes and businesses), eliminating the need for huge coal-, gas- & oil-burning power plants—not to mention all those cross-country high-tension power lines, substations and all the rest!
So why isn’t this change being implemented today? My personal answer is: there is still a great deal of MONEY to be made (by certain people—who don’t actually need any more than they already have) by the continued use of hydrocarbon fuels. “Leaders” in industries and governments could make the decisions right now—today—to begin the change-over to this efficient (and cheap!) system of (electrical) power, but that would mean much less (economic and political) power for them! So those decisions are left un-made. They keep their heads in the sand (as mine was until a few days ago—mea culpa) and everyone will increasingly suffer as a result.
But, as I’ve said many times before, suffering and sin of all kinds—including greed—are part of life. Sin is the cause of all suffering, and every sin causes some suffering somewhere (even if we don’t readily see it). We can stand up to others and exhort them to greater acts of justice, charity, compassion, stewardship and all the other virtues, but when it comes to actually rooting out sin, the only place we can do that is in our own individual hearts, through personal repentance.
[ Please read the follow-up to this essay, I once thought I was wrong ... of June 17, 2006. ]
Friday, October 14, 2005
Thursday, October 06, 2005
The ongoing phenomenon of JohnnyK
Those who visit this blog & view the comments attached to each post are surely familiar with the, um… “extraordinary” views of a fellow who goes by the name JohnnyK. I tell myself from time to time that his remarks are in the main so outlandish that they’re really not worth responding to. My wife gets upset too, because she’s convinced I’m wasting my time even giving his comments a passing thought, much less bothering to craft reasoned responses to them. So why do I keep doing it?
Well, for several reasons:
My wife and I met him years ago in a class we all attended. (Years later we were even the Best Man and Matron of Honor at his wedding.) But then, rather suddenly (within a matter of months), a series of personal traumas in his life were apparently the occasion of a profound shift in his way of thinking about the world (both material and spiritual).
I wish now that I’d been aware of what he was going through at the time so I could have helped him sort it all out. (I was of course aware of the external circumstances of his situation, but I didn’t realize the nature or depth of his inner turmoil & transformation until it was “too late.”)
At present, he & I are what you might call “perfect strangers.” I respect his chosen on-line “anonymity” (I hope I haven’t violated it by explaining things as I have), and he respects mine. And I appreciate and thank him for that. However I think I have some information and insights (concerning certain personal matters both past and present) that I believe would be of interest to him, but he has thus far declined my invitation to “private conversation” via e-mail. (I choose not to initiate the exchange so he knows I’m not “spamming” him.)
Because he was once my friend, I now read his remarks with deep feelings of sadness & personal regret. I hope (apparently against hope) that something I say might spark some idea in his mind & cause him to rethink some aspect of his current world view so that we might return to some kind of “common ground.” (I also hope I don’t inadvertently end up pushing him further away than he already is.) I saw what he went through (well, parts of it) and I understand the profound depth of emotional and psychic pain he suffered, and, in a limited way, I can relate to it & sympathize with him! (His way of dealing with that pain, on the other hand, was in my judgment a bit, well, extreme.)
So I still respond to him occasionally. My teenager reads our exchanges and says, “Gee Dad, you ought to put that on your main blog & not just leave it in the comment box. You’d have a lot more room, more people would see it, … (etc.)” Up until now I’ve resisted that option for a number of reasons, but I have a lot to say about several comments he recently made on my last post (the one about Hurricane Katrina) and I decided to avail myself of it at this time. So, as they say, here goes nothing…
[You can read his remarks in full if you wish (although I had to edit out some indiscreet passages) by clicking on the link and wading through the “comments” at the bottom of that post.]
-------------------
“Fundamentally, then, it is about worshipping every cell, atom and molecule in one's body… you feel transformed into a God or Goddess… Temple style Lomi Lomi is about worshipping the body…”
Because it is intrinsic to human nature, everyone must worship someone or something. It’s only a question of who or what you choose to worship. JohnnyK admits here—unless I misunderstand him—that he worships his own body (and perhaps other people’s bodies as well) and, because of the pleasure he experiences through his senses (and the New Age sci-fi psychobabble he’s been ingesting over the last couple of years), he now suffers under the delusion that he must be (or at least might be) a god himself.
-------------------
“There is nothing to forgive, hence, no one is guilty of anything. The solution is to teach people how to create more pleasure for themselves…”
I’d like to hear him say this right after some joker decides to create more pleasure for himself by stealing his car, emptying his bank account or “massaging” his nose with his fist.
-------------------
“People who are punishing themselves with pain seek to punish others with just as much pain. To love is to be happy with. This is why I say that there aren't very many happy criminals.”
Um, excuse me, but…aren’t criminals precisely those people who place themselves and their own desires above and before those of others & their property? Isn’t it their blind pursuit of their own shallow view of “happiness” (and not pain) that sets them on the path of crime in the first place? Isn’t that pretty much the definition of crime?
The real reason criminals are almost universally unhappy is precisely for this reason. Blinded by their own narrow and self-serving notion of what constitutes “good” and focused exclusively on themselves, they reject the natural rights of others & are surprised when they are caught, frequently becoming bitter when their spree is over and they are brought to justice (although some do (sooner or later) repent of their crimes). Their misery is the inevitable & understandable (albeit unintended) natural consequence of their own disordered & distorted self-love.
-------------------
“Now, what is it about taking 100% responsibility that you object to?”
What I object to is his implied definition of “100% responsibility.” Here’s what I mean:
“In order to be 100% responsible, you must see that we are a much more powerful beings than you have ever realized.”
Thinking you are a “much more powerful being” than you actually are is called hubris, a failure of the virtue of humility or modesty. The trick is to recognize and accept your true place in the universe and not pretend you are something that you’re not.
-------------------
“...why can't we be forgiven after we die? This is also out of harmony with your opening statement that we are free to have our own opinions...but then you imply that we are not free to have our own opinions...if we want to avoid TORTURE after death.”
Actually, this is perfectly harmonious and consistent with everything I’ve said all along. Think about it: there are right choices, and wrong choices. You are always free to choose between the two (sometimes there are more than two choices, or morally neutral choices, but I’m not talking about those here).
The consequences of your free choices, however, are intrinsic to the things (behaviors or acts) you choose to do, and are independent of the free operation of your will in choosing to act in any given way.
For example, I am utterly free to either drop an egg or hold on to it. But since the law of gravity operates independently of my will, the egg will fall to the floor if I choose to drop it, whether I actually wish it to or not. The consequence (egg smashing on the floor) is in the nature of physical reality and we cannot change it. If I don’t want the egg to break on the floor, I’d better hold onto it (or take some other suitable precaution to prevent its falling to the floor). Dropping the egg (in this case) would be the “wrong” choice, but I’m still perfectly free to do it. I just have to live with the natural consequences of that choice, that’s all.
So it is in our everyday lives. We are continually faced with the choice between doing right & doing wrong, and we are always free to choose between them. The wrong choice (if sufficiently grave) puts us on the path to hell (eternal “TORTURE”) [if it is not grave, it at least orients us toward the path to hell], whereas choosing to do the right sets us on the path toward heaven (eternal happiness/reward). But it is still our FREE choice. Our problem (the reason we frequently choose the wrong, i.e. to sin) is that we are not always mindful of the consequences of our actions (long-term or short-term, either for ourselves or for others) and choose instead to do what feels good at the moment.
People who believe that pleasure is the highest good in life are called hedonists. People who consistently fail to consider the possible consequences of their actions we call reckless. (Just in case you weren’t sure.) People such as these are generally considered morally weak by normal society. (Frequently society judges it necessary to lock such people up so they can’t harm themselves or others by their habitually disordered behavior.) Conversely, people who freely choose to accept the risk or certainty of personal pain, hardship and privation in order to help others are generally admired—and rightly so—for their personal sacrifice!
Which one (hedonism/recklessness, or sacrificial service) is a more reasonable indicator of personal responsibility? Hmm, let me think about it…
Seen in this light, JohnnyK’s egocentric analysis of human behavior seems rather superficial to say the least, and I’d say, well, backward. I hope he reconsiders his “core philosophy/principles” and chooses in the future to turn outward toward others and to love & serve them for their own sakes as persons rather than for the sake of just their bodies and the pleasure they can give him. I guarantee that, while it might not be as much “fun,” he will definitely be truly happy. (If he doesn’t know how to begin, he can give me a call.) Maybe then he will begin to understand the true meaning of responsibility.
Well, for several reasons:
- Occasionally he says something that is coherent enough that it might possibly lead a reasonable person to misunderstand either the point I was making or some other aspect of reality that JK is criticizing. So I try to straighten out the kinks and twists employed in JK’s reasoning for the benefit of the unwary reader. (In such explanations, I usually refer to him in the 3rd person rather than addressing him in the 2nd.)
- It’s good practice in honing my rhetorical skills.
- Perhaps most importantly, I respond because he used to be my friend.
My wife and I met him years ago in a class we all attended. (Years later we were even the Best Man and Matron of Honor at his wedding.) But then, rather suddenly (within a matter of months), a series of personal traumas in his life were apparently the occasion of a profound shift in his way of thinking about the world (both material and spiritual).
I wish now that I’d been aware of what he was going through at the time so I could have helped him sort it all out. (I was of course aware of the external circumstances of his situation, but I didn’t realize the nature or depth of his inner turmoil & transformation until it was “too late.”)
At present, he & I are what you might call “perfect strangers.” I respect his chosen on-line “anonymity” (I hope I haven’t violated it by explaining things as I have), and he respects mine. And I appreciate and thank him for that. However I think I have some information and insights (concerning certain personal matters both past and present) that I believe would be of interest to him, but he has thus far declined my invitation to “private conversation” via e-mail. (I choose not to initiate the exchange so he knows I’m not “spamming” him.)
Because he was once my friend, I now read his remarks with deep feelings of sadness & personal regret. I hope (apparently against hope) that something I say might spark some idea in his mind & cause him to rethink some aspect of his current world view so that we might return to some kind of “common ground.” (I also hope I don’t inadvertently end up pushing him further away than he already is.) I saw what he went through (well, parts of it) and I understand the profound depth of emotional and psychic pain he suffered, and, in a limited way, I can relate to it & sympathize with him! (His way of dealing with that pain, on the other hand, was in my judgment a bit, well, extreme.)
So I still respond to him occasionally. My teenager reads our exchanges and says, “Gee Dad, you ought to put that on your main blog & not just leave it in the comment box. You’d have a lot more room, more people would see it, … (etc.)” Up until now I’ve resisted that option for a number of reasons, but I have a lot to say about several comments he recently made on my last post (the one about Hurricane Katrina) and I decided to avail myself of it at this time. So, as they say, here goes nothing…
[You can read his remarks in full if you wish (although I had to edit out some indiscreet passages) by clicking on the link and wading through the “comments” at the bottom of that post.]
-------------------
“Fundamentally, then, it is about worshipping every cell, atom and molecule in one's body… you feel transformed into a God or Goddess… Temple style Lomi Lomi is about worshipping the body…”
Because it is intrinsic to human nature, everyone must worship someone or something. It’s only a question of who or what you choose to worship. JohnnyK admits here—unless I misunderstand him—that he worships his own body (and perhaps other people’s bodies as well) and, because of the pleasure he experiences through his senses (and the New Age sci-fi psychobabble he’s been ingesting over the last couple of years), he now suffers under the delusion that he must be (or at least might be) a god himself.
-------------------
“There is nothing to forgive, hence, no one is guilty of anything. The solution is to teach people how to create more pleasure for themselves…”
I’d like to hear him say this right after some joker decides to create more pleasure for himself by stealing his car, emptying his bank account or “massaging” his nose with his fist.
-------------------
“People who are punishing themselves with pain seek to punish others with just as much pain. To love is to be happy with. This is why I say that there aren't very many happy criminals.”
Um, excuse me, but…aren’t criminals precisely those people who place themselves and their own desires above and before those of others & their property? Isn’t it their blind pursuit of their own shallow view of “happiness” (and not pain) that sets them on the path of crime in the first place? Isn’t that pretty much the definition of crime?
The real reason criminals are almost universally unhappy is precisely for this reason. Blinded by their own narrow and self-serving notion of what constitutes “good” and focused exclusively on themselves, they reject the natural rights of others & are surprised when they are caught, frequently becoming bitter when their spree is over and they are brought to justice (although some do (sooner or later) repent of their crimes). Their misery is the inevitable & understandable (albeit unintended) natural consequence of their own disordered & distorted self-love.
-------------------
“Now, what is it about taking 100% responsibility that you object to?”
What I object to is his implied definition of “100% responsibility.” Here’s what I mean:
“In order to be 100% responsible, you must see that we are a much more powerful beings than you have ever realized.”
Thinking you are a “much more powerful being” than you actually are is called hubris, a failure of the virtue of humility or modesty. The trick is to recognize and accept your true place in the universe and not pretend you are something that you’re not.
-------------------
“...why can't we be forgiven after we die? This is also out of harmony with your opening statement that we are free to have our own opinions...but then you imply that we are not free to have our own opinions...if we want to avoid TORTURE after death.”
Actually, this is perfectly harmonious and consistent with everything I’ve said all along. Think about it: there are right choices, and wrong choices. You are always free to choose between the two (sometimes there are more than two choices, or morally neutral choices, but I’m not talking about those here).
The consequences of your free choices, however, are intrinsic to the things (behaviors or acts) you choose to do, and are independent of the free operation of your will in choosing to act in any given way.
For example, I am utterly free to either drop an egg or hold on to it. But since the law of gravity operates independently of my will, the egg will fall to the floor if I choose to drop it, whether I actually wish it to or not. The consequence (egg smashing on the floor) is in the nature of physical reality and we cannot change it. If I don’t want the egg to break on the floor, I’d better hold onto it (or take some other suitable precaution to prevent its falling to the floor). Dropping the egg (in this case) would be the “wrong” choice, but I’m still perfectly free to do it. I just have to live with the natural consequences of that choice, that’s all.
So it is in our everyday lives. We are continually faced with the choice between doing right & doing wrong, and we are always free to choose between them. The wrong choice (if sufficiently grave) puts us on the path to hell (eternal “TORTURE”) [if it is not grave, it at least orients us toward the path to hell], whereas choosing to do the right sets us on the path toward heaven (eternal happiness/reward). But it is still our FREE choice. Our problem (the reason we frequently choose the wrong, i.e. to sin) is that we are not always mindful of the consequences of our actions (long-term or short-term, either for ourselves or for others) and choose instead to do what feels good at the moment.
People who believe that pleasure is the highest good in life are called hedonists. People who consistently fail to consider the possible consequences of their actions we call reckless. (Just in case you weren’t sure.) People such as these are generally considered morally weak by normal society. (Frequently society judges it necessary to lock such people up so they can’t harm themselves or others by their habitually disordered behavior.) Conversely, people who freely choose to accept the risk or certainty of personal pain, hardship and privation in order to help others are generally admired—and rightly so—for their personal sacrifice!
Which one (hedonism/recklessness, or sacrificial service) is a more reasonable indicator of personal responsibility? Hmm, let me think about it…
Seen in this light, JohnnyK’s egocentric analysis of human behavior seems rather superficial to say the least, and I’d say, well, backward. I hope he reconsiders his “core philosophy/principles” and chooses in the future to turn outward toward others and to love & serve them for their own sakes as persons rather than for the sake of just their bodies and the pleasure they can give him. I guarantee that, while it might not be as much “fun,” he will definitely be truly happy. (If he doesn’t know how to begin, he can give me a call.) Maybe then he will begin to understand the true meaning of responsibility.
Tuesday, September 06, 2005
What “caused” Hurricane Katrina?
[Before anyone goes and blows a gasket, this is only my opinion. It is the personal view of one Catholic, and it is (to the best of my knowledge) in full conformity with ordinary Catholic teaching; but you, dear readers, are of course free to hold to other opinions.]
As Christians, we believe that all suffering and hardship in this world is the result of the original sin of our first parents, and all the sin that followed in its wake. Everything that's "bad" is (ultimately) the result of sin. Even natural disasters like earthquakes and hurricanes. (Sin puts the whole earth--the whole universe, in fact--in a state of chaos, turmoil and upheaval (Gen. 3:16-19; Rom. 8:19-23). Frequently many good & innocent people suffer as a result, and many die.) God does not "create" or "decree" suffering on human beings (or even on animals), but He does permit suffering to fall on us as the natural consequence of our own acts and the acts of others (i.e., sin), and He always somehow draws greater good out of any evil that occurs. (I realize this is an extremely subtle and difficult distinction for some people, between causing suffering and permitting suffering, but it is essential to understanding Catholic teaching on this point). Fortunately for us, physical death is not the ultimate calamity, since death comes to everyone sooner or later (i.e., no one ever gets out of this world alive), and we believe it is only the “door” through which we enter into eternity. No, the ultimate calamity would be passing through that door and finding oneself in hell.
Hurricane Katrina is, by all reports, the absolute, hands-down WORST natural disaster to hit the United States, not just in memory, but in history. But, as they say, every cloud has a silver lining. Among the many possible good things that did happen (or bad things that didn’t happen) as a result of the storm and its aftermath:
- Meteorologists tell us that hurricanes and other tropical cyclones are part of the earth’s natural “air conditioning” system, helping to cool certain areas that apparently need it badly (from a meteorological standpoint)
- People (who might not have otherwise done so) were prodded into helping their neighbors (both near and far)
- Many people (who might not have otherwise done so) started to turn to God in their need (and many souls may have been saved as a result, even if some of them might also have died in the turmoil)
- The president of Red China, who was scheduled to visit the United States last week (to tour Boeing in the Seattle area, among other things I suppose), couldn’t because GWBush was all tied up dealing with the disaster and couldn’t be there to meet him (ah, the intricacies of diplomacy!)
- There was a huge casino (as I understand it) that was supposed to open in Baton Rouge that was severely damaged and might turn out to be a total loss (I’m not at all happy about the financial loss per se of the owners, but only point out that—as businesses go—casinos are arguably (either directly or indirectly) responsible for more broken people, broken families and general misery than perhaps any other)
- And last, but not least—the annual Labor Day weekend festival held in New Orleans known as Southern Decadence was cancelled. (No telling how many souls might have been steered from the path to perdition as a result.)
Now, I know there are many, especially among Evangelical Christians (and even some Catholics), who are tempted to say, “See? God is punishing the homosexuals for their perversion, just like Sodom & Gomorrah!” (Or at least that He was punishing Louisiana (& vicinity) for allowing the festival to go on for all these years.)
But the Church teaches that that’s not normally how God works. As I mentioned above, He’s not (at least since the time of Christ) in the habit of “throwing thunderbolts at the wayward" in order to punish them, but rather sits back (in sorrow) and permits them to create their own “punishment” (natural consequences again), hoping they will come to their senses and turn away from the sins that led to their own misery (& that of others) in the first place (cf. Lk. 15:11-32).
I'd heard that years ago, someone asked Pope John Paul II if AIDS was a punishment sent by God to punish the sin of homosexuality. He responded to the effect that God’s ways are absolutely inscrutable to us and that we can never know the answer to that question, but that regardless of whether it was or wasn’t, we still had the moral obligation to minister to everyone who had AIDS in every way possible.
Is AIDS a punishment sent by God? Was Katrina a punishment sent by God? No, neither one. But ALL suffering (from the Catholic perspective) is the result of sin, and since everyone is a sinner, EVERYONE has to help "pay" that price no matter what (at least by participating in death—Rom. 6:23). So everyone must suffer. And everyone must work to help their neighbors who are suffering, whoever they are and wherever they are found (cf. Lk. 10:29-37, James 2:14-18).
Did homosexuality cause Hurricane Katrina? Well, yes … and no. ALL sin, not just homosexuality, contributes to the sum total of human misery. If there were no sin, there would be no misery (not even from hurricanes). But in the real world in which we all live, sin abounds and we all share equally in the guilt for its effects. By itself, homosexuality did NOT create the storm and draw its fury to be spent over New Orleans. (Whew! That’s a relief!)
Homosexuality has gotten a lot of press coverage in the last 30 years or so (good or bad, depending on your perspective), but objectively speaking, it’s NOT the worst sin in the world! The absolute worst sin in the whole wide world is final impenitence because it is the one sin that cannot be forgiven.
Friday, September 02, 2005
I think I'll post about ... hmm ...
I know blogs are supposed to be updated every few days at least, but I've been rather busy and otherwise occupied lately.
I've thought about what I should write about here, and I have a number of candidates:
What is "love" and what's it really all about?
Insights about God gained from reading The Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene (a physicist).
Prayer.
World views.
Heaven & our instinctive desire for it.
There may be other topics that I've considered but can't remember at the moment.
There's also the question of time. Computer time to compose an essay & computer+internet time to put it on the blog. This might not seem like much, but with my work and other responsibilities combined with competition within the family for use of the one internet-access computer we own and other related priorities, there just isn't much personal time available for blogging. I might have a little more time in the near future to deal with this situation, though, so I should be back soon with something interesting.
I've thought about what I should write about here, and I have a number of candidates:
What is "love" and what's it really all about?
Insights about God gained from reading The Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene (a physicist).
Prayer.
World views.
Heaven & our instinctive desire for it.
There may be other topics that I've considered but can't remember at the moment.
There's also the question of time. Computer time to compose an essay & computer+internet time to put it on the blog. This might not seem like much, but with my work and other responsibilities combined with competition within the family for use of the one internet-access computer we own and other related priorities, there just isn't much personal time available for blogging. I might have a little more time in the near future to deal with this situation, though, so I should be back soon with something interesting.
Sunday, August 07, 2005
Saturday, July 16, 2005
Bear Kids
One of my frequent critics, JohnnyK by name, has a SERIOUS problem with God (although he probably wouldn't put it quite that way). He seems to think that God could not possibly love us, because the Bible recounts SO MANY occasions of God angrily inflicting pain and suffering upon innocent [sic] people, the people He (allegedly) created. "He must REALLY get his jollies hurting people," JohnnyK reasons, "so he must IN FACT be an EVIL TYRANT and NOT the loving God Christians make him out to be!" (If you've read any of the comments on my past posts, I'm sure you've seen his...um...musings...on the subject.) [You see, for some reason JohnnyK doesn't seem able or willing to consider or deal with the reality of personal sin, or that it might have undesirable & unavoidable personal consequences (which makes man responsible for his own suffering, rather than God), and thinks all suffering is God's fault and it's cruel and unfair for God to make such a big deal out of sin.]
The thing he KEEPS bringing up, time and again (apparently as his "ace in the hole" which PROVES that God is NOT the God of love but rather of CRUELTY) is an isolated tale involving Elisha the prophet. It is described in all of TWO VERSES of Scripture. It is found in 2 Kings 2:23-24 (JohnnyK never did give the actual reference--I had to track it down myself, & it wasn't easy).
Let's see if we can put this into some kind of context, shall we?
The two books of Kings tell--among other things--the story of several kings of Israel and how many of them married pagan wives and (in order to please their wives) re-introduced pagan worship and practices in their realms in violation of the Covanent between God and His Chosen People. Possibly the worst of these was King Ahab (not the A-rab) and his pagan wife Jezebel (yes, THE Jezebel)! At Chapter 17 of 1 Kings, we are introduced to the prophet Elijah the Tishbite. God sent Elijah to Ahab to chastise (discipline) him for his turning away from the worship of the true God to the worship of idols (false gods), for the sake of impressing a woman. 1 Kings 18:17-40 tells the comic/tragic story of Elijah's famous contest on Mount Carmel with the 450 prophets of Baal (a pagan idol).
In 1 Kings 19:19, Elijah meets Elisha, son of Shaphat (as God foretold in verse 16), who follows him as his disciple. 1 Kings ends (at ch. 22) and 2 Kings begins with the death of Ahab and the reign of his son Ahaziah (who is still enthralled with paganism). In 2 Kings 2:6-14, the firy chariot appeared and Elijah was taken up to heaven in a whirlwind, and Elisha (with a "double share of his spirit") picked up his mantle and succeeded him as prophet of the Lord. Verses 19-22 tell how he miraculously purified the spring at Jericho using a bowl of salt.
NOW we finally get to the nub of JohnnyK's gripe. Let's start at verse 23 and read through verse 25 (Revised Standard Version): "[23] He went up from there [Jericho] to Bethel; and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, 'Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!' [24] And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys. [25] From there he went on to Mount Carmel, and thence he returned to Sameria."
That's it.
It isn't even clear which city the boys came from: Jericho or Bethel. No matter.
At first glance, you might be tempted to say (as JohnnyK repeatedly does), "What a cruel & blood-thirsty god he must be to do such a thing to innocent little kids!" But like most passages of Scripture, this one admits of several possible--and widely divergent--interpretations or explanations. Let's explore just a few:
1. This is just a fairy tale--the Bible is nothing BUT fairy tales--fit only to be ignored. "God" doesn't really exist. (The only problem is when some people read the Bible & actually take it seriously and get all fanatical and expect other people to behave "morally," etc., etc....) Therefore "God" had nothing to do with the incident.
2. If this event actually occurred at all, it was just an unfortunate coincidence that the 2 she-bears attacked just at the moment Elisha shouted his nonsense at the children who were chasing and mocking him. (He might just as well have shouted, "Sticks and stones may break my bones..." or "How about pizza for dinner?" for all the power "God" has to do ANYTHING. After all, "God" is only a figment of the fevered imaginations of the people who believe in him, he doesn't really exist, and consequently has no power whatsoever. Therefore "God" had nothing to do with the incident.
3. Since there is no "God," it was obviously Elisha's own mental powers that caused the she-bears to attack. Or maybe he accidentally conjured them up out of thin air (the text isn't too clear on this, so it MIGHT have happened, right?). So it wasn't "God's" fault. (There IS no God.) Elisha, and Elisha alone, was the murderer and he should have been tracked down and executed for his heinous crime!
4. She-bears generally only attack when their young are being threatened. Their cubs must have been nearby (unbeknownst to any of the humans) and the she-bears must have thought that the mob of noisy children was harassing their cubs. That's natural and reasonable, isn't it? Therefore "God" had nothing to do with the incident.
5. Well...maybe there is a god (one among many) that might have heard Elisha's curse and responded by sending out the she-bears to do his dirty work. Such a god, feeding vicariously on the blood of the innocent, hardly needs an excuse to attack and kill children at play who mean no harm. In fact, the truly amazing thing would be that anyone ever escapes a terrifying death at the hands of such a monster.
6. Suppose the text actually depicts a real event as it occurred. Suppose--just for the sake of argument--that there is One All-Powerful God, and Elisha was indeed His prophet (official spokesman). The text (at least this translation) doesn't actually say that the bears "killed" anyone, only that they "tore" (or mauled, seriously injured)* 42 of them (it also doesn't say how many boys there were in all, or how many might have escaped injury). (Lots of people have been mauled by bears and lived to tell the tale.) Now, you wouldn't have thought that TWO bears could have taken the time to kill even one or two if they actually mauled 42 kids. Had they actually doen so, the other 40 would have been able to get away virtually unscathed... (The lesson to be learned here: "Don't mess with the prophets of God!")
* (although I did note one translation that said "tore them to pieces.")
7. God is real, a material being (a Monster) who is also losing his hair and was vicariously offended at the children's taunting of Elisha & wanted to "even the score, plus more" ("That'll teach 'em to say 'Baldy'!"). (This would be an amazing interpretation, since it is so incongruous with all the rest of the Bible, which seems bent on depicting a good God, a pure spirit--not a material being at all--who wants to save men from the consequences of their own sins. Hmm...)
8. God is still real and still a Monster. It's the same God of Catholicism today who prohibits artificial contraception so His worshipers will have lots and lots of children that he can then kill with maurauding she-bears (the blood-thirsty swine!).
9. Jericho at that time was still rife with paganism, as was Bethel [that's an historical fact]. What the pagans worshiped as "gods" were actually what we today would call demons or fallen angels (Satan or Lucifer & the angels who followed him), who sometimes appeared to men in various forms (such as men, animals, giants or mythical beasts) [that's a theory]. Things are not always as they appear. The "children" in the story may have actually been demons harassing Elisha. The she-bears may have been (good) angels in disguise, sent by God to defend Elisha from the disguised demons. Elisha, not understanding this "true reality" himself, might have judged the appearances only and told what he saw to someone, who passed it on (etc.) to whomever eventually wrote it down in the book.
10. A footnote (unauthoritative, but plausible) in an edition of the New American Bible states: "This story, like the one about Elijah and the captains (2 Kings ch. 1), is preserved for us in Scripture to convey a popular understanding of the dignity of the prophet. Told in popular vein, it becomes a caricature, in which neither Elisha nor the bears behave in character. See note on 2 Kings 1:12..." [which note said:] "divine fire: literally 'fire of God' which in Hebrew sounds quite like man of God. The play on words is the basis for Elijah's alleged retort. This story was told among the people to enhance the dignity of the prophet and to reflect the power of God whom he served. The mercy which God extends even to the wicked is described in Wisdom 11:17-12:22, and the prophet Elijah was well aware of it (1 Kings 21:28f)."
11. Elisha, although a "holy man," was still a sinner like everyone else & was not immune from excesses of pride or anger. Also, the fact that this mob of pagan children was chasing and taunting a known prophet of God could suggest that they weren't so innocent after all, and he may indeed have been in danger of losing his life. And God's name is POWERFUL, so be very careful how you use it. Otherwise, someone might die.
CONCLUSION: So that's over ten possible ways to interpret these two verses, and I'm sure there are others. They can't ALL be true (for example, there either IS a God, or there ISN'T--you can't have it both ways). Which interpretation is the right one? Who died and made you the infallible interpreter of Scripture? How would you know if your favorite interpretation is the right one? (Or do you just MAKE it the right one by the sheer power of your MIND?)
What really puzzles me is why anyone would focus so much attention and energy on these two enigmatic verses out of all of Scripture, unless he were in fact looking for some excuse for his a priori hatred of the God he knows to exist.
The thing he KEEPS bringing up, time and again (apparently as his "ace in the hole" which PROVES that God is NOT the God of love but rather of CRUELTY) is an isolated tale involving Elisha the prophet. It is described in all of TWO VERSES of Scripture. It is found in 2 Kings 2:23-24 (JohnnyK never did give the actual reference--I had to track it down myself, & it wasn't easy).
Let's see if we can put this into some kind of context, shall we?
The two books of Kings tell--among other things--the story of several kings of Israel and how many of them married pagan wives and (in order to please their wives) re-introduced pagan worship and practices in their realms in violation of the Covanent between God and His Chosen People. Possibly the worst of these was King Ahab (not the A-rab) and his pagan wife Jezebel (yes, THE Jezebel)! At Chapter 17 of 1 Kings, we are introduced to the prophet Elijah the Tishbite. God sent Elijah to Ahab to chastise (discipline) him for his turning away from the worship of the true God to the worship of idols (false gods), for the sake of impressing a woman. 1 Kings 18:17-40 tells the comic/tragic story of Elijah's famous contest on Mount Carmel with the 450 prophets of Baal (a pagan idol).
In 1 Kings 19:19, Elijah meets Elisha, son of Shaphat (as God foretold in verse 16), who follows him as his disciple. 1 Kings ends (at ch. 22) and 2 Kings begins with the death of Ahab and the reign of his son Ahaziah (who is still enthralled with paganism). In 2 Kings 2:6-14, the firy chariot appeared and Elijah was taken up to heaven in a whirlwind, and Elisha (with a "double share of his spirit") picked up his mantle and succeeded him as prophet of the Lord. Verses 19-22 tell how he miraculously purified the spring at Jericho using a bowl of salt.
NOW we finally get to the nub of JohnnyK's gripe. Let's start at verse 23 and read through verse 25 (Revised Standard Version): "[23] He went up from there [Jericho] to Bethel; and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, 'Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!' [24] And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys. [25] From there he went on to Mount Carmel, and thence he returned to Sameria."
That's it.
It isn't even clear which city the boys came from: Jericho or Bethel. No matter.
At first glance, you might be tempted to say (as JohnnyK repeatedly does), "What a cruel & blood-thirsty god he must be to do such a thing to innocent little kids!" But like most passages of Scripture, this one admits of several possible--and widely divergent--interpretations or explanations. Let's explore just a few:
1. This is just a fairy tale--the Bible is nothing BUT fairy tales--fit only to be ignored. "God" doesn't really exist. (The only problem is when some people read the Bible & actually take it seriously and get all fanatical and expect other people to behave "morally," etc., etc....) Therefore "God" had nothing to do with the incident.
2. If this event actually occurred at all, it was just an unfortunate coincidence that the 2 she-bears attacked just at the moment Elisha shouted his nonsense at the children who were chasing and mocking him. (He might just as well have shouted, "Sticks and stones may break my bones..." or "How about pizza for dinner?" for all the power "God" has to do ANYTHING. After all, "God" is only a figment of the fevered imaginations of the people who believe in him, he doesn't really exist, and consequently has no power whatsoever. Therefore "God" had nothing to do with the incident.
3. Since there is no "God," it was obviously Elisha's own mental powers that caused the she-bears to attack. Or maybe he accidentally conjured them up out of thin air (the text isn't too clear on this, so it MIGHT have happened, right?). So it wasn't "God's" fault. (There IS no God.) Elisha, and Elisha alone, was the murderer and he should have been tracked down and executed for his heinous crime!
4. She-bears generally only attack when their young are being threatened. Their cubs must have been nearby (unbeknownst to any of the humans) and the she-bears must have thought that the mob of noisy children was harassing their cubs. That's natural and reasonable, isn't it? Therefore "God" had nothing to do with the incident.
5. Well...maybe there is a god (one among many) that might have heard Elisha's curse and responded by sending out the she-bears to do his dirty work. Such a god, feeding vicariously on the blood of the innocent, hardly needs an excuse to attack and kill children at play who mean no harm. In fact, the truly amazing thing would be that anyone ever escapes a terrifying death at the hands of such a monster.
6. Suppose the text actually depicts a real event as it occurred. Suppose--just for the sake of argument--that there is One All-Powerful God, and Elisha was indeed His prophet (official spokesman). The text (at least this translation) doesn't actually say that the bears "killed" anyone, only that they "tore" (or mauled, seriously injured)* 42 of them (it also doesn't say how many boys there were in all, or how many might have escaped injury). (Lots of people have been mauled by bears and lived to tell the tale.) Now, you wouldn't have thought that TWO bears could have taken the time to kill even one or two if they actually mauled 42 kids. Had they actually doen so, the other 40 would have been able to get away virtually unscathed... (The lesson to be learned here: "Don't mess with the prophets of God!")
* (although I did note one translation that said "tore them to pieces.")
7. God is real, a material being (a Monster) who is also losing his hair and was vicariously offended at the children's taunting of Elisha & wanted to "even the score, plus more" ("That'll teach 'em to say 'Baldy'!"). (This would be an amazing interpretation, since it is so incongruous with all the rest of the Bible, which seems bent on depicting a good God, a pure spirit--not a material being at all--who wants to save men from the consequences of their own sins. Hmm...)
8. God is still real and still a Monster. It's the same God of Catholicism today who prohibits artificial contraception so His worshipers will have lots and lots of children that he can then kill with maurauding she-bears (the blood-thirsty swine!).
9. Jericho at that time was still rife with paganism, as was Bethel [that's an historical fact]. What the pagans worshiped as "gods" were actually what we today would call demons or fallen angels (Satan or Lucifer & the angels who followed him), who sometimes appeared to men in various forms (such as men, animals, giants or mythical beasts) [that's a theory]. Things are not always as they appear. The "children" in the story may have actually been demons harassing Elisha. The she-bears may have been (good) angels in disguise, sent by God to defend Elisha from the disguised demons. Elisha, not understanding this "true reality" himself, might have judged the appearances only and told what he saw to someone, who passed it on (etc.) to whomever eventually wrote it down in the book.
10. A footnote (unauthoritative, but plausible) in an edition of the New American Bible states: "This story, like the one about Elijah and the captains (2 Kings ch. 1), is preserved for us in Scripture to convey a popular understanding of the dignity of the prophet. Told in popular vein, it becomes a caricature, in which neither Elisha nor the bears behave in character. See note on 2 Kings 1:12..." [which note said:] "divine fire: literally 'fire of God' which in Hebrew sounds quite like man of God. The play on words is the basis for Elijah's alleged retort. This story was told among the people to enhance the dignity of the prophet and to reflect the power of God whom he served. The mercy which God extends even to the wicked is described in Wisdom 11:17-12:22, and the prophet Elijah was well aware of it (1 Kings 21:28f)."
11. Elisha, although a "holy man," was still a sinner like everyone else & was not immune from excesses of pride or anger. Also, the fact that this mob of pagan children was chasing and taunting a known prophet of God could suggest that they weren't so innocent after all, and he may indeed have been in danger of losing his life. And God's name is POWERFUL, so be very careful how you use it. Otherwise, someone might die.
CONCLUSION: So that's over ten possible ways to interpret these two verses, and I'm sure there are others. They can't ALL be true (for example, there either IS a God, or there ISN'T--you can't have it both ways). Which interpretation is the right one? Who died and made you the infallible interpreter of Scripture? How would you know if your favorite interpretation is the right one? (Or do you just MAKE it the right one by the sheer power of your MIND?)
What really puzzles me is why anyone would focus so much attention and energy on these two enigmatic verses out of all of Scripture, unless he were in fact looking for some excuse for his a priori hatred of the God he knows to exist.
Sunday, July 10, 2005
Living a life of virtue (part 4)
The Gifts and Fruits of the Holy Spirit
The moral life of Christians is sustained by the gifts of the Holy Spirit. These are permanent dispositions which make man docile in following the promptings of the Holy Spirit.
The seven gifts of the Holy Spirit are wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord. They belong in their fullness to Christ, Son of David (cf. Isaiah 11:1-2). They complete and perfect the virtues of those who receive them. They make the faithful docile in readily obeying divine inspirations.
"Let your good spirit lead me on a level path" (Psalm 143:10).
"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God ... If children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ" (Romans 8:14, 17).
The fruits of the Spirit are perfections that the Holy Spirit forms in us as the first fruits of eternal glory. The are identifiable effects of the Holy Spirit, supernatural works that show forth His presence and action in the lives of believers. The tradition of the Church lists twelve of them: "charity, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, generosity, gentleness, faithfulness, modesty, self-control, chastity" (Galatians 5:22-23) (Vulgate).
The gifts of the Holy Spirit can seem confusing at first glance. What's the difference between knowledge and understanding, for example, or between wisdom and counsel? Fr. John Hardon, SJ (1914-2000) explains them in his Modern Catholic Dictionary (1980).
Wisdom: The first and highest of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It makes the soul responsive to God in the contemplation of divine things. Where faith is a simple knowledge of the articles of Christian belief, wisdom goes on to a certain divine penetration of the truths themselves. Built into wisdom is the element of love, which inspires contemplative reflection on these divine mysteries, rejoices dwelling on them, and directs the mind to judge all things according to their principles.
Understanding: This gift is given to the mind for grasping revealed truths easily and profoundly. It differs from faith because it gives insight into the meaning of what a person believes, whereas faith, as such, merely assents to what God has revealed.
This gift produces three principal effects in those who possess it. They are enabled to pentrate [intuitively] to the very core of revealed truths, without fully understanding their meaning [in any technical sense]; they are confirmed in their belief by acquiring great certitude in the revealed word of God; and they are brought to the knowledge of a greater number of truths by drawing numerous conclusions from revealed principles.
[Fr. William Saunders of the Catholic Diocese of Arlington (Virginia) explains it this way: Understanding is a gift "to give a deeper insight and penetration of divine truths held by faith, not as a transitory enlightenment but as a permanent intuition." Illuminating the mind to truth, The Holy Spirit aids a person to grasp truths of faith easily and intimately, and to penetrate the depths of those truths. This gift not only assists in penetrating revealed truths, but also natural truths in so far as they are related to the supernatural end. The essential quality of this gift is a "penetrating intuition" — in a sense, the moving beyond the surface. This gift, penetrating the truths of faith, operates in several ways: disclosing the hidden meaning of Sacred Scripture; revealing the significance of symbols and figures (like St. Paul seeing Christ as fulfillment of the rock of the Exodus account that poured forth water to quench the thirst of the Israelites (1 Cor 10:4); showing the hand of God at work in a person’s life, even in the most mysterious or troublesome events (like suffering); and revealing the spiritual realities that underlie sensible appearances (like penetrating the mystery of the Lord’s sacrifice in the ritual of the Mass). This gift brings the virtue of faith to perfection. Accordingly, St. Thomas said, "In this very life, when the eye of the spirit is purified by the gift of understanding, one can in a certain way see God" (Summa theologiae II-II, q. 69, a. 2, ad. 3).]
Counsel: This gift perfects the virtue of prudence. Its function is to enable a person to judge promptly and rightly, as by a sort of supernatural intuition, what should should be done, especially in difficult situations. With the gift of counsel, the Holy Spirit speaks, as it were, to the heart and in an instant enlightens a person what to do. It corresponds to the promise made by Christ to His followers, "When they hand you over, do not worry about how to speak or what to say; what you are to say will be given to you when the time comes; because it is not you who will be speaking; the Spirit of your Father will be speaking in you" (Matthew 10:19).
Counsel refers primarily to prudent conduct in one's own case, and only secondarily in favor of others. Enlightened by the Spirit, a person learns what to do in a specific case and what advise to give when consulted or command to make if he is in authority.
Fortitude: This gives a person a special strength of will. This gift confers an extraordinary readiness to undergo trials for love of God or in fulfillment of the divine will; unusual courage to bear difficulties even for many years; firmness in carrying arduous tasks to their completion; perseverance in a lifetime of fidelity to one's vocation in spite of heavy trials or disappointments sent by God; and gladness in being privileged to suffer persecution or humiliation in union with Christ and for the sake of His name.
Knowledge: By the illuminating action of the Holy Spirit, this gift perfects the virtue of faith. It gives a person the ability to judge everything from a supernatural viewpoint. The object of this gift is the whole spectrum of created things insofar as they lead one to God. Through infused knowledge the faithful can see the providential purpose of whatever enters their lives, and they are able to put creatures to the right use according to God's will for themselves and for others. Sometimes called "the science of the saints," it enables those who have the gift to discern easily and effectively between the impulses of temptation and the inspirations of grace.
Piety: This gift perfects the virtue of religion, which is the practice of justice toward God. It produces an instinctive filial affection for God and a devotion toward those who are specially consecrated to God. As an infused gift of God, it is ready loyalty to God and the things of God, arising not so much from studied effort or acquired habit as from a supernatural communication conferred by the Holy Spirit.
This gift enables a person to see in God not only one's sovereign Master but a loving Father, according to the teaching of St. Paul: "Everyone moved by the Spirit is a son of God. The spirit you received is not the spirit of slaves bringing fear into your lives again; it is the spirit of sons, and it makes us cry out, 'Abba, Father!'" (Rom. 8:14-15). It engenders in the soul a filial respect for God, a generous love toward Him, and an affectionate obedience that wants to do what He commands because it loves the one who commands.
Fear of the Lord: This gift confirms (strengthens) the virtue of hope and inspires a person with profound respect for the majesty of God. Its corresponding effects are protection from sin through dread of offending the Lord, and a strong confidence in the power of His help.
The fear of the Lord is not servile but filial. It is based on the selfless love of God, whom it shrinks from offending. Whereas in servile fear the evil dreaded is punishment; in filial fear it is the fear of doing anything contrary to the will of God.
The gift of fear comprises three principal elements: a vivid sense of God's greatness, a lively sorrow for the least faults committed, and a vigilant care in avoiding occasions of sin. It is expressed in the prayer of the Psalmist, "My whole being trembles before you, your ruling fills me with fear" (Psalm 119:120). One of its salutary effects is to induce a spirit of deep humility in dealing with others, especially with inferiors, since it makes a person aware that he stands constantly before the judgement of God.
If we would define the exact difference between the virtues and gifts, it lies in the need for having a supernatural counterpart for the natural instincts of mind and will. Even the infused virtues are not enough. They do not, by themselves, so perfect man on the road to heaven that he has no further need of being moved by the yet higher promptings of the Holy Spirit. For whether we consider human reason and will in their natural powers alone, or as elevated by the theological virtues, they are still very fallible and require help: wisdom against folly, understanding against dullness, counsel against rashness, fortitude against fears, knowledge against ignorance, piety against hardness of heart, and fear of God against pride. The gifts of the Holy Spirit supply this help by giving us remedies against these defects and making us amenable to the promptings of His grace.
The moral life of Christians is sustained by the gifts of the Holy Spirit. These are permanent dispositions which make man docile in following the promptings of the Holy Spirit.
The seven gifts of the Holy Spirit are wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord. They belong in their fullness to Christ, Son of David (cf. Isaiah 11:1-2). They complete and perfect the virtues of those who receive them. They make the faithful docile in readily obeying divine inspirations.
"Let your good spirit lead me on a level path" (Psalm 143:10).
"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God ... If children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ" (Romans 8:14, 17).
The fruits of the Spirit are perfections that the Holy Spirit forms in us as the first fruits of eternal glory. The are identifiable effects of the Holy Spirit, supernatural works that show forth His presence and action in the lives of believers. The tradition of the Church lists twelve of them: "charity, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, generosity, gentleness, faithfulness, modesty, self-control, chastity" (Galatians 5:22-23) (Vulgate).
The gifts of the Holy Spirit can seem confusing at first glance. What's the difference between knowledge and understanding, for example, or between wisdom and counsel? Fr. John Hardon, SJ (1914-2000) explains them in his Modern Catholic Dictionary (1980).
Wisdom: The first and highest of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It makes the soul responsive to God in the contemplation of divine things. Where faith is a simple knowledge of the articles of Christian belief, wisdom goes on to a certain divine penetration of the truths themselves. Built into wisdom is the element of love, which inspires contemplative reflection on these divine mysteries, rejoices dwelling on them, and directs the mind to judge all things according to their principles.
Understanding: This gift is given to the mind for grasping revealed truths easily and profoundly. It differs from faith because it gives insight into the meaning of what a person believes, whereas faith, as such, merely assents to what God has revealed.
This gift produces three principal effects in those who possess it. They are enabled to pentrate [intuitively] to the very core of revealed truths, without fully understanding their meaning [in any technical sense]; they are confirmed in their belief by acquiring great certitude in the revealed word of God; and they are brought to the knowledge of a greater number of truths by drawing numerous conclusions from revealed principles.
[Fr. William Saunders of the Catholic Diocese of Arlington (Virginia) explains it this way: Understanding is a gift "to give a deeper insight and penetration of divine truths held by faith, not as a transitory enlightenment but as a permanent intuition." Illuminating the mind to truth, The Holy Spirit aids a person to grasp truths of faith easily and intimately, and to penetrate the depths of those truths. This gift not only assists in penetrating revealed truths, but also natural truths in so far as they are related to the supernatural end. The essential quality of this gift is a "penetrating intuition" — in a sense, the moving beyond the surface. This gift, penetrating the truths of faith, operates in several ways: disclosing the hidden meaning of Sacred Scripture; revealing the significance of symbols and figures (like St. Paul seeing Christ as fulfillment of the rock of the Exodus account that poured forth water to quench the thirst of the Israelites (1 Cor 10:4); showing the hand of God at work in a person’s life, even in the most mysterious or troublesome events (like suffering); and revealing the spiritual realities that underlie sensible appearances (like penetrating the mystery of the Lord’s sacrifice in the ritual of the Mass). This gift brings the virtue of faith to perfection. Accordingly, St. Thomas said, "In this very life, when the eye of the spirit is purified by the gift of understanding, one can in a certain way see God" (Summa theologiae II-II, q. 69, a. 2, ad. 3).]
Counsel: This gift perfects the virtue of prudence. Its function is to enable a person to judge promptly and rightly, as by a sort of supernatural intuition, what should should be done, especially in difficult situations. With the gift of counsel, the Holy Spirit speaks, as it were, to the heart and in an instant enlightens a person what to do. It corresponds to the promise made by Christ to His followers, "When they hand you over, do not worry about how to speak or what to say; what you are to say will be given to you when the time comes; because it is not you who will be speaking; the Spirit of your Father will be speaking in you" (Matthew 10:19).
Counsel refers primarily to prudent conduct in one's own case, and only secondarily in favor of others. Enlightened by the Spirit, a person learns what to do in a specific case and what advise to give when consulted or command to make if he is in authority.
Fortitude: This gives a person a special strength of will. This gift confers an extraordinary readiness to undergo trials for love of God or in fulfillment of the divine will; unusual courage to bear difficulties even for many years; firmness in carrying arduous tasks to their completion; perseverance in a lifetime of fidelity to one's vocation in spite of heavy trials or disappointments sent by God; and gladness in being privileged to suffer persecution or humiliation in union with Christ and for the sake of His name.
Knowledge: By the illuminating action of the Holy Spirit, this gift perfects the virtue of faith. It gives a person the ability to judge everything from a supernatural viewpoint. The object of this gift is the whole spectrum of created things insofar as they lead one to God. Through infused knowledge the faithful can see the providential purpose of whatever enters their lives, and they are able to put creatures to the right use according to God's will for themselves and for others. Sometimes called "the science of the saints," it enables those who have the gift to discern easily and effectively between the impulses of temptation and the inspirations of grace.
Piety: This gift perfects the virtue of religion, which is the practice of justice toward God. It produces an instinctive filial affection for God and a devotion toward those who are specially consecrated to God. As an infused gift of God, it is ready loyalty to God and the things of God, arising not so much from studied effort or acquired habit as from a supernatural communication conferred by the Holy Spirit.
This gift enables a person to see in God not only one's sovereign Master but a loving Father, according to the teaching of St. Paul: "Everyone moved by the Spirit is a son of God. The spirit you received is not the spirit of slaves bringing fear into your lives again; it is the spirit of sons, and it makes us cry out, 'Abba, Father!'" (Rom. 8:14-15). It engenders in the soul a filial respect for God, a generous love toward Him, and an affectionate obedience that wants to do what He commands because it loves the one who commands.
Fear of the Lord: This gift confirms (strengthens) the virtue of hope and inspires a person with profound respect for the majesty of God. Its corresponding effects are protection from sin through dread of offending the Lord, and a strong confidence in the power of His help.
The fear of the Lord is not servile but filial. It is based on the selfless love of God, whom it shrinks from offending. Whereas in servile fear the evil dreaded is punishment; in filial fear it is the fear of doing anything contrary to the will of God.
The gift of fear comprises three principal elements: a vivid sense of God's greatness, a lively sorrow for the least faults committed, and a vigilant care in avoiding occasions of sin. It is expressed in the prayer of the Psalmist, "My whole being trembles before you, your ruling fills me with fear" (Psalm 119:120). One of its salutary effects is to induce a spirit of deep humility in dealing with others, especially with inferiors, since it makes a person aware that he stands constantly before the judgement of God.
If we would define the exact difference between the virtues and gifts, it lies in the need for having a supernatural counterpart for the natural instincts of mind and will. Even the infused virtues are not enough. They do not, by themselves, so perfect man on the road to heaven that he has no further need of being moved by the yet higher promptings of the Holy Spirit. For whether we consider human reason and will in their natural powers alone, or as elevated by the theological virtues, they are still very fallible and require help: wisdom against folly, understanding against dullness, counsel against rashness, fortitude against fears, knowledge against ignorance, piety against hardness of heart, and fear of God against pride. The gifts of the Holy Spirit supply this help by giving us remedies against these defects and making us amenable to the promptings of His grace.
Friday, June 24, 2005
Living a life of virtue (part 3)
The Theological Virtues
The human virtues are rooted in the theological virtues, which adapt man's faculties for participation in the divine nature, for the theological virtues relate directly to God. They dispose Christians to live in a relationship withthe Holy Trinity. They have the One and Triune God for their origin, motive and object.
The theological virtues are the foundation of Christian moral activity; they animate it and give it its special character. They inform and give life to all the moral virtues. They are infused by God into the souls of the faithful to make them capable of acting as His children and of meriting eternal life. They are the pledge of the presence and action of the Holy Spirit in the faculties of the human being. The theological virtues are three in number: faith, hope, and charity.
Faith
Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that He has said and revealed to us, and that Holy Church proposes for our belief, because He is truth itself. By faith man freely commits his entire self to God. For this reason the believer seeks to know and do God's will. "The righteous shall live by faith" (Romans 1:17). Living faith "work[s] through charity" (Galatians 5:6).
The gift of faith remains in one who has not sinned against it. But "faith apart from works is dead" (James 2:26): when it is deprived of hope and love, faith does not fully unite the believer to Christ and does not make him a living member of His Body.
The disciple of Christ must not only keep the faith and live on in it, but also profess it, confidently bear witness to it, and spread it: "All must be prepared to confess Christ before men and to follow Him along the way of the Cross, amidst the persecutions which the Church never lacks" (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, art. 42). Service of and witness to the faith are necessary for salvation: "So every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven; but whosoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 10:32-33).
Hope
Hope is the theological virtue by which we desire the kingdom of heaven and eternal life as our happiness, placing our trust in Christ's promises and rely not on our own strength, but on the help of the grace of the Holy Spirit. "Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful" (Hebrews 10:23). "The Holy Spirit ... He poured our upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that we might be justified by His grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life" (Titus 3:6-7). [Oftentimes Protestants (and sometimes Catholics) commingle the virtue of hope with that of faith, saying in effect that faith means--among other things--"trusting in Jesus." Although this is technically not correct in this context, the difference is mostly semantic and not essentially doctrinal, and ordinarily poses no problem to interfaith dialogue and understanding. In other words, it's generally "close enough."]
The virtue of hope responds to the aspiration of happiness which God has placed in the heart of every man; it takes up the hopes that inspire men's activities and purifies them so as to order them to the Kingdom of heaven; it keeps man from discouragement; it sustains him during times of abandonment; it opens up his heart in expectation of eternal beatitude. Bouyed up by hope, he is preserved from selfishness and led to the happiness that flows from charity.
Christian hope takes up and fulfills the hope of the chosen people which has its origin and model in the hope of Abraham, who was blessed abundantly by the promises of God fulfilled in Isaac, and who was purified by the test of sacrifice (cf. Genesis 17:4-8; 22:1-18). "Hoping against hope, he believed, and thus became the father of many nations" (Rom. 4:18).
Christian hope unfolds from the beginning of Jesus' preaching in the proclamation of the beatitudes (Matt. 5:3-12). The beatitudes raise our hope toward heaven as the new Promised Land; they trace the path that leads through the trials that await the disciples of Jesus. But through the merits of Jesus Christ and of His Passion, God keeps us in the "hope that does not disappoint" (Rom. 8:8). Hope is the "sure and steadfast anchor of the soul ... that enters ... where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf" (Heb. 6:19-20). [The iconographic symbol of the virtue of hope is a ship's anchor.] Hope is also a weapon that protects us in the struggle of salvation: "Let us ... put on the breastplate of faith and charity, and for a helmet the hope of salvation" (1 Thessalonians 5:8). It affords us joy even under trial: "Rejoice in your hope, be patient in tribulation" (Rom. 12:12). Hope is expressed and nourished in prayer, especially in the Our Father, the summary of everything that hope leads us to desire.
We can therefore hope in the glory of heaven promised by God to those who love Him and do His will (cf. Rom. 8:28-30; Matt. 7:21). In every circumstance, each one of us should hope, with the grace of God, to persevere to the end of one's life (cf. Matt. 10:22) and to obtain the joy of heaven, as God's eternal reward for the good works accomplished with the grace of Christ. In hope, the Church prays for "all men to be saved" (1 Timothy 2:4). She longs to be united with Christ, her Bridegroom, in the glory of heaven:
"Hope, O my soul, hope. You know neither the day nor the hour. Watch carefully, for everything passes quickly, even though your impatience makes doubtful what is certain, and turns a very short time into a long one. Dream that the more you struggle, the more you will rejoice one day with your Beloved, in a happiness and rapture that can never end." --St. Teresa of Avila
Charity
Charity is the theological virtue by which we love God above all things for His own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God.
Jesus makes charity the new commandment. By loving His own "to the end" (John 13:1), He makes manifest the Father's love which He receives. By loving one another, the disciples imitate the love of Jesus which they themselves receive. Wence Jesus says: "As the Father has loved me, so I have loved you; abide in my love." And again: "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you" (Jn 15: 9, 12).
Fruit of the Spirit and fullness of the Law, charity keeps the commandments of God and His Christ: "Abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love" (Jn. 15:9-10; cf. Matt. 22:40; Rom.13:8-10).
Christ died out of love for us, while we were still "enemies" (Rom. 5:10). The Lord asks us to love as He does, even our enemies, to make ourselves the neighbor of those farthest away, and to love children and the poor as Christ himself (cf. Matt. 5:44; Luke 10:27-37; Mark 9:37; Matt. 25:40, 45).
The Apostle Paul has given an incomparable depiction of charity: "charity is patient and kind, charity is not jealous or boastful; it is not arrogant or rude. Charity does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right. Charity bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things" (1 Corinthians 13:4-7).
"If I ... have not charity," he says, "I am nothing." Whatever my privilege, service, or even virtue, "if I ... have not charity, I gain nothing" (1 Cor. 13:1-4). Charity is superior to all the virtues. It is the first of the theological virtues: "So faith, hope and charity abide, these three. But the greatest of these is charity" (1 Cor. 13:13).
The practice of all the virtues is animated and inspired by charity, which "binds everything together in perfect harmony" (Colossians 3:14); it is the form of the virtues; it articulates and orders them among themselves; it is the source anf the goal of their Christian practice. Charity upholds and purifies our human ability to love, it raises it to the supernatural perfection of divine love.
The practice of the moral life animated by charity gives to the Christian the spiritual freedom of the children of God. He no longer stands before God as a slave, in servile fear, or as a mercenary looking for wages, but as a son responding to the love of Him who "first loved us" (1 Jn 4:19):
"If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, ... we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for Him who commands ... we are in the position of children." --St. Basil of Caesarea (The Great)
The fruits of charity are joy, peace, and mercy; charity demands beneficence and fraternal correction; it is benevolence; it fosters reciprocity and remains disinterested and generous; it is friendship and communion:
"Love is itself the fulfillment of all our works. There is the goal; that is why we run: we run toward it, and once we reach it, in it we shall find rest." --St. Augustine of Hippo
Next: The Gifts and Fruits of the Holy Spirit
The human virtues are rooted in the theological virtues, which adapt man's faculties for participation in the divine nature, for the theological virtues relate directly to God. They dispose Christians to live in a relationship withthe Holy Trinity. They have the One and Triune God for their origin, motive and object.
The theological virtues are the foundation of Christian moral activity; they animate it and give it its special character. They inform and give life to all the moral virtues. They are infused by God into the souls of the faithful to make them capable of acting as His children and of meriting eternal life. They are the pledge of the presence and action of the Holy Spirit in the faculties of the human being. The theological virtues are three in number: faith, hope, and charity.
Faith
Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that He has said and revealed to us, and that Holy Church proposes for our belief, because He is truth itself. By faith man freely commits his entire self to God. For this reason the believer seeks to know and do God's will. "The righteous shall live by faith" (Romans 1:17). Living faith "work[s] through charity" (Galatians 5:6).
The gift of faith remains in one who has not sinned against it. But "faith apart from works is dead" (James 2:26): when it is deprived of hope and love, faith does not fully unite the believer to Christ and does not make him a living member of His Body.
The disciple of Christ must not only keep the faith and live on in it, but also profess it, confidently bear witness to it, and spread it: "All must be prepared to confess Christ before men and to follow Him along the way of the Cross, amidst the persecutions which the Church never lacks" (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, art. 42). Service of and witness to the faith are necessary for salvation: "So every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven; but whosoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 10:32-33).
Hope
Hope is the theological virtue by which we desire the kingdom of heaven and eternal life as our happiness, placing our trust in Christ's promises and rely not on our own strength, but on the help of the grace of the Holy Spirit. "Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful" (Hebrews 10:23). "The Holy Spirit ... He poured our upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that we might be justified by His grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life" (Titus 3:6-7). [Oftentimes Protestants (and sometimes Catholics) commingle the virtue of hope with that of faith, saying in effect that faith means--among other things--"trusting in Jesus." Although this is technically not correct in this context, the difference is mostly semantic and not essentially doctrinal, and ordinarily poses no problem to interfaith dialogue and understanding. In other words, it's generally "close enough."]
The virtue of hope responds to the aspiration of happiness which God has placed in the heart of every man; it takes up the hopes that inspire men's activities and purifies them so as to order them to the Kingdom of heaven; it keeps man from discouragement; it sustains him during times of abandonment; it opens up his heart in expectation of eternal beatitude. Bouyed up by hope, he is preserved from selfishness and led to the happiness that flows from charity.
Christian hope takes up and fulfills the hope of the chosen people which has its origin and model in the hope of Abraham, who was blessed abundantly by the promises of God fulfilled in Isaac, and who was purified by the test of sacrifice (cf. Genesis 17:4-8; 22:1-18). "Hoping against hope, he believed, and thus became the father of many nations" (Rom. 4:18).
Christian hope unfolds from the beginning of Jesus' preaching in the proclamation of the beatitudes (Matt. 5:3-12). The beatitudes raise our hope toward heaven as the new Promised Land; they trace the path that leads through the trials that await the disciples of Jesus. But through the merits of Jesus Christ and of His Passion, God keeps us in the "hope that does not disappoint" (Rom. 8:8). Hope is the "sure and steadfast anchor of the soul ... that enters ... where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf" (Heb. 6:19-20). [The iconographic symbol of the virtue of hope is a ship's anchor.] Hope is also a weapon that protects us in the struggle of salvation: "Let us ... put on the breastplate of faith and charity, and for a helmet the hope of salvation" (1 Thessalonians 5:8). It affords us joy even under trial: "Rejoice in your hope, be patient in tribulation" (Rom. 12:12). Hope is expressed and nourished in prayer, especially in the Our Father, the summary of everything that hope leads us to desire.
We can therefore hope in the glory of heaven promised by God to those who love Him and do His will (cf. Rom. 8:28-30; Matt. 7:21). In every circumstance, each one of us should hope, with the grace of God, to persevere to the end of one's life (cf. Matt. 10:22) and to obtain the joy of heaven, as God's eternal reward for the good works accomplished with the grace of Christ. In hope, the Church prays for "all men to be saved" (1 Timothy 2:4). She longs to be united with Christ, her Bridegroom, in the glory of heaven:
"Hope, O my soul, hope. You know neither the day nor the hour. Watch carefully, for everything passes quickly, even though your impatience makes doubtful what is certain, and turns a very short time into a long one. Dream that the more you struggle, the more you will rejoice one day with your Beloved, in a happiness and rapture that can never end." --St. Teresa of Avila
Charity
Charity is the theological virtue by which we love God above all things for His own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God.
Jesus makes charity the new commandment. By loving His own "to the end" (John 13:1), He makes manifest the Father's love which He receives. By loving one another, the disciples imitate the love of Jesus which they themselves receive. Wence Jesus says: "As the Father has loved me, so I have loved you; abide in my love." And again: "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you" (Jn 15: 9, 12).
Fruit of the Spirit and fullness of the Law, charity keeps the commandments of God and His Christ: "Abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love" (Jn. 15:9-10; cf. Matt. 22:40; Rom.13:8-10).
Christ died out of love for us, while we were still "enemies" (Rom. 5:10). The Lord asks us to love as He does, even our enemies, to make ourselves the neighbor of those farthest away, and to love children and the poor as Christ himself (cf. Matt. 5:44; Luke 10:27-37; Mark 9:37; Matt. 25:40, 45).
The Apostle Paul has given an incomparable depiction of charity: "charity is patient and kind, charity is not jealous or boastful; it is not arrogant or rude. Charity does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right. Charity bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things" (1 Corinthians 13:4-7).
"If I ... have not charity," he says, "I am nothing." Whatever my privilege, service, or even virtue, "if I ... have not charity, I gain nothing" (1 Cor. 13:1-4). Charity is superior to all the virtues. It is the first of the theological virtues: "So faith, hope and charity abide, these three. But the greatest of these is charity" (1 Cor. 13:13).
The practice of all the virtues is animated and inspired by charity, which "binds everything together in perfect harmony" (Colossians 3:14); it is the form of the virtues; it articulates and orders them among themselves; it is the source anf the goal of their Christian practice. Charity upholds and purifies our human ability to love, it raises it to the supernatural perfection of divine love.
The practice of the moral life animated by charity gives to the Christian the spiritual freedom of the children of God. He no longer stands before God as a slave, in servile fear, or as a mercenary looking for wages, but as a son responding to the love of Him who "first loved us" (1 Jn 4:19):
"If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, ... we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for Him who commands ... we are in the position of children." --St. Basil of Caesarea (The Great)
The fruits of charity are joy, peace, and mercy; charity demands beneficence and fraternal correction; it is benevolence; it fosters reciprocity and remains disinterested and generous; it is friendship and communion:
"Love is itself the fulfillment of all our works. There is the goal; that is why we run: we run toward it, and once we reach it, in it we shall find rest." --St. Augustine of Hippo
Next: The Gifts and Fruits of the Holy Spirit
Sunday, June 19, 2005
Living a life of virtue (part 2)
The Human Virtues: the cardinal virtues (continued)
Justice is the moral virtue that consists in the consistent and firm will to give one's due to God and neighbor. Justice toward God is called the "virtue of religion." Justice toward men disposes one to respect the rights of each and to establish in human relationships the harmony that promotes equity with regard to persons and to the common good. The just man, often mentioned in the Sacred Scriptures, is distinguished by habitual right thinking and the uprightness of his conduct toward his neighbor. "You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor" (Leviticus 19:15). "Masters, treat your slaves justly and fairly, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven" (Colossians 4:1).
Fortitude is the moral virtue that ensures firmness in the difficulties and constancy in the pursuit of the good. It strengthens the resolve to resist temptations and to overcome obstacles in the moral life. The virtue of fortitude enables one to conquer fear, even fear of death, and to face trials and persecutions. It disposes one even to renounce and sacrifice his life in defense of a just cause. "The Lord is my strength and my song" (Psalm 118:14). "In the world you have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world" (John 16:33).
Temperance is the moral virtue that moderates the attraction of pleasures and provides balance in the use of created goods. It ensures the will's mastery over instincts and keeps desires within the limits of what is honorable. The temperate person directs the sensitive appetites toward what is good and maintains a healthy discretion: "Do not follow your inclination and strength, walking according to the desires of your heart" (Sirach 5:2 [you'll need a Catholic bible to read the book of Sirach]; cf. 37:27-31). Temperance is often praised in the Old Testament: "Do not follow your base desires, but restrain your appetites" (Sir 18:30). In the New Testament it is called "moderation" or "sobriety." We ought "to live sober, upright, and godly lives in this world" (Titus 2:12).
In his treatise De moribus ecclesiae catholicae (On the Morality of the Catholic Church) (A.D. 388), St. Augustine of Hippo sums up these human virtues in this fashion: "To live well is nothing other than to love God with all one's heart, with all one's soul and with all one's efforts; from this it comes about that love is kept whole and incorrupted (through temperance). No misfortune can disturb it (and this is fortitude). It obeys only [God] (and this is justice), and it is careful in discerning things, so as not to be surprised by deceit or trickery (and this is prudence)."
The virtues and grace
Human virtues acquired by education, by deliberate acts and by a perseverence ever-renewed in repeated efforts are purified and elevated by divine grace. With God's help, they they forge character and give facility in the practice of the good. The virtuous man is happy to practice them.
It is not easy for man, wounded by sin, to maintain moral balance. Christ's gift of salvation offers us the grace necessary to persevere in the pursuit of the virtues. Everyone should always ask for this grace of light and strength, frequent the sacraments, cooperate with the Holy Spirit, and follow His calls to love what is good and shun evil.
Next: the theological virtues
Justice is the moral virtue that consists in the consistent and firm will to give one's due to God and neighbor. Justice toward God is called the "virtue of religion." Justice toward men disposes one to respect the rights of each and to establish in human relationships the harmony that promotes equity with regard to persons and to the common good. The just man, often mentioned in the Sacred Scriptures, is distinguished by habitual right thinking and the uprightness of his conduct toward his neighbor. "You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor" (Leviticus 19:15). "Masters, treat your slaves justly and fairly, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven" (Colossians 4:1).
Fortitude is the moral virtue that ensures firmness in the difficulties and constancy in the pursuit of the good. It strengthens the resolve to resist temptations and to overcome obstacles in the moral life. The virtue of fortitude enables one to conquer fear, even fear of death, and to face trials and persecutions. It disposes one even to renounce and sacrifice his life in defense of a just cause. "The Lord is my strength and my song" (Psalm 118:14). "In the world you have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world" (John 16:33).
Temperance is the moral virtue that moderates the attraction of pleasures and provides balance in the use of created goods. It ensures the will's mastery over instincts and keeps desires within the limits of what is honorable. The temperate person directs the sensitive appetites toward what is good and maintains a healthy discretion: "Do not follow your inclination and strength, walking according to the desires of your heart" (Sirach 5:2 [you'll need a Catholic bible to read the book of Sirach]; cf. 37:27-31). Temperance is often praised in the Old Testament: "Do not follow your base desires, but restrain your appetites" (Sir 18:30). In the New Testament it is called "moderation" or "sobriety." We ought "to live sober, upright, and godly lives in this world" (Titus 2:12).
In his treatise De moribus ecclesiae catholicae (On the Morality of the Catholic Church) (A.D. 388), St. Augustine of Hippo sums up these human virtues in this fashion: "To live well is nothing other than to love God with all one's heart, with all one's soul and with all one's efforts; from this it comes about that love is kept whole and incorrupted (through temperance). No misfortune can disturb it (and this is fortitude). It obeys only [God] (and this is justice), and it is careful in discerning things, so as not to be surprised by deceit or trickery (and this is prudence)."
The virtues and grace
Human virtues acquired by education, by deliberate acts and by a perseverence ever-renewed in repeated efforts are purified and elevated by divine grace. With God's help, they they forge character and give facility in the practice of the good. The virtuous man is happy to practice them.
It is not easy for man, wounded by sin, to maintain moral balance. Christ's gift of salvation offers us the grace necessary to persevere in the pursuit of the virtues. Everyone should always ask for this grace of light and strength, frequent the sacraments, cooperate with the Holy Spirit, and follow His calls to love what is good and shun evil.
Next: the theological virtues
Friday, June 10, 2005
What obsolete skill are you?
This is what I am:
You are 'Latin'. Even among obsolete skills, the
tongue of the ancient Romans is a real
anachronism. With its profusion of different
cases and conjugations, Latin is more than a
language; it is a whole different way of
thinking about things.
You are very classy, meaning that you value the
classics. You value old things, good things
which have stood the test of time. You value
things which have been proven worthy and
valuable, even if no one else these days sees
them that way. Your life is touched by a
certain 'pietas', or piety; perhaps you are
even a Stoic. Nonetheless, you have a certain
fascination with the grotesque and the profane.
Also, the modern world rejects you like a bad
transplant. Your problem is that Latin has
been obsolete for a long time.
What obsolete skill are you?
brought to you by Quizilla
Thank you, hoody, for this interesting quiz.
You are 'Latin'. Even among obsolete skills, the
tongue of the ancient Romans is a real
anachronism. With its profusion of different
cases and conjugations, Latin is more than a
language; it is a whole different way of
thinking about things.
You are very classy, meaning that you value the
classics. You value old things, good things
which have stood the test of time. You value
things which have been proven worthy and
valuable, even if no one else these days sees
them that way. Your life is touched by a
certain 'pietas', or piety; perhaps you are
even a Stoic. Nonetheless, you have a certain
fascination with the grotesque and the profane.
Also, the modern world rejects you like a bad
transplant. Your problem is that Latin has
been obsolete for a long time.
What obsolete skill are you?
brought to you by Quizilla
Thank you, hoody, for this interesting quiz.
Interlude... concerning "Gay Pride" Month
It seems that June has been designated "Gay Pride Month" in various places.
A friend of mine gave me a copy of an e-mail message (apparently non-confidential in nature, so I don't expect any problem sharing it with you) sent by Mr. J.A.B., president and acting-CEO of a well-known multinational corporation, to all of that company's employees (including my friend).
Here it is in its entirety (I will edit out identifying information):
"Subject: Gay Pride Month in context.
"June is Gay Pride Month, when we celebrate the contribution that this particular group of employees has made to [our company's] success. Since first publication of the Gay Pride Month link [on our internal employee website] earlier this month, I and members of the Executive Council have received a number of negative and derogatory messages against the company's support of Gay Pride Month.
"[Our company] observes various 'heritage months': Black History Month in February; Women's History Month in March; Asian Pacific Month in May; Gay Pride Month in June; Hispanic Heritage Month in September; Disability Awareness Month in October; American Indian Month in November; and Multicultural Celebration Day in December [I guess that means "Call-It-Anything-But-Christmas"?--G/F]. The point of all these is to drive inclusion, fight harassment and discrimination, and remind us to value people as individuals. Recognizing diversity--all elements of it--is a key component of our business strategy.
"The foundation of our success [here] is based on our ability to attract and retain the best people possible for the jobs we have. To do that, we must create and maintain an environment where, collectively, we can design, produce, and support products and services that make our customers and shareholders successful. A key part of creating that environment is aimed at helping all employees know that they are appreciated for the contributions they make toward helping [this company] meet its business objectives.
"We need to ensure that we treat all employees--including gay and lesbian employees--with dignity and respect. While we could point to the law as the rationale for our actions, I believe that it's our obligation to demonstrate on a regular basis not only our commitment--but also our resolve--to provide an opportunity for each employee to learn more about the diversity that underlies this company's strength.
"Thank you. --J..."
Well, that was rather instructive, I think. I don't quite understand his oblique reference to "the law" in the last paragraph, though. I'm not aware of any law that compels all companies to observe Gay Pride Month. (Maybe it has to do with possible government contracts the company has, I dunno...) All very politically correct and all.
I suggested to my friend that he respond to this message--as charitably as possible--through the company's approved channels, and he said he already intended to do so at the first opportunity.
If it were me, I'd respond like this:
Clarifying the context of Gay Pride Month
Dear Mr. B... ~
In your message titled "Gay Pride Month in context," you said rightly that "a key part of creating that environment (of success) is aimed at helping all employees know that they are appreciated for the contributions they make toward helping [this company] meet its business objectives."
Appreciated for their contributions to the business' success, certainly, but not for their "lifestyles" (or, more precisely, their personal socio-sexual inclinations, decisions or behaviors).
Being "gay" has nothing to do with who they are--despite their inevitable protestations to the contrary--as persons (as is the case with Blacks, women, Hispanics, American Indians, Italians, Chinese or Croatians), but rather what they do (their socio-sexual attitudes or behaviors and/or political/social activism).
If some employees choose to identify themselves primarily according to this psychological element of their personalities, that's fine & I have no problem understanding that. But there is no credible reason that a company such as yours should highlight this personal condition. (Please NOTE: Not all people who experience same-sex attractions identify themselves as "gay." That appellation was adopted/co-opted by a particular socio-political movement. It is improper (and to some degree, insulting) to refer to all homosexuals as "gays.")
However, if your company chooses to continue to observe "Gay Pride Month" in the future, why not (in all fairness) balance this by establishing "Christian Heritage Month" (how about in April?) to draw attention to the heritage of those employees (certainly much more numerous than those who identify themselves as gay) who identify themselves as Christians, to let them all know how much their contributions are valued and appreciated? After all, it would be a perfect "opportunity for each employee to learn more about the diversity that underlies this company's strength," don't you agree?
I have every confidence that this proposal would not offend non-Christian employees any more than non-gay or non-Hispanic employees are offended by the special recognition afforded those groups (which is to say not at all).
Thank you for your kind and thoughtful consideration.
Respectfully yours,
~ "the Green Flash"
A friend of mine gave me a copy of an e-mail message (apparently non-confidential in nature, so I don't expect any problem sharing it with you) sent by Mr. J.A.B., president and acting-CEO of a well-known multinational corporation, to all of that company's employees (including my friend).
Here it is in its entirety (I will edit out identifying information):
"Subject: Gay Pride Month in context.
"June is Gay Pride Month, when we celebrate the contribution that this particular group of employees has made to [our company's] success. Since first publication of the Gay Pride Month link [on our internal employee website] earlier this month, I and members of the Executive Council have received a number of negative and derogatory messages against the company's support of Gay Pride Month.
"[Our company] observes various 'heritage months': Black History Month in February; Women's History Month in March; Asian Pacific Month in May; Gay Pride Month in June; Hispanic Heritage Month in September; Disability Awareness Month in October; American Indian Month in November; and Multicultural Celebration Day in December [I guess that means "Call-It-Anything-But-Christmas"?--G/F]. The point of all these is to drive inclusion, fight harassment and discrimination, and remind us to value people as individuals. Recognizing diversity--all elements of it--is a key component of our business strategy.
"The foundation of our success [here] is based on our ability to attract and retain the best people possible for the jobs we have. To do that, we must create and maintain an environment where, collectively, we can design, produce, and support products and services that make our customers and shareholders successful. A key part of creating that environment is aimed at helping all employees know that they are appreciated for the contributions they make toward helping [this company] meet its business objectives.
"We need to ensure that we treat all employees--including gay and lesbian employees--with dignity and respect. While we could point to the law as the rationale for our actions, I believe that it's our obligation to demonstrate on a regular basis not only our commitment--but also our resolve--to provide an opportunity for each employee to learn more about the diversity that underlies this company's strength.
"Thank you. --J..."
Well, that was rather instructive, I think. I don't quite understand his oblique reference to "the law" in the last paragraph, though. I'm not aware of any law that compels all companies to observe Gay Pride Month. (Maybe it has to do with possible government contracts the company has, I dunno...) All very politically correct and all.
I suggested to my friend that he respond to this message--as charitably as possible--through the company's approved channels, and he said he already intended to do so at the first opportunity.
If it were me, I'd respond like this:
Clarifying the context of Gay Pride Month
Dear Mr. B... ~
In your message titled "Gay Pride Month in context," you said rightly that "a key part of creating that environment (of success) is aimed at helping all employees know that they are appreciated for the contributions they make toward helping [this company] meet its business objectives."
Appreciated for their contributions to the business' success, certainly, but not for their "lifestyles" (or, more precisely, their personal socio-sexual inclinations, decisions or behaviors).
Being "gay" has nothing to do with who they are--despite their inevitable protestations to the contrary--as persons (as is the case with Blacks, women, Hispanics, American Indians, Italians, Chinese or Croatians), but rather what they do (their socio-sexual attitudes or behaviors and/or political/social activism).
If some employees choose to identify themselves primarily according to this psychological element of their personalities, that's fine & I have no problem understanding that. But there is no credible reason that a company such as yours should highlight this personal condition. (Please NOTE: Not all people who experience same-sex attractions identify themselves as "gay." That appellation was adopted/co-opted by a particular socio-political movement. It is improper (and to some degree, insulting) to refer to all homosexuals as "gays.")
However, if your company chooses to continue to observe "Gay Pride Month" in the future, why not (in all fairness) balance this by establishing "Christian Heritage Month" (how about in April?) to draw attention to the heritage of those employees (certainly much more numerous than those who identify themselves as gay) who identify themselves as Christians, to let them all know how much their contributions are valued and appreciated? After all, it would be a perfect "opportunity for each employee to learn more about the diversity that underlies this company's strength," don't you agree?
I have every confidence that this proposal would not offend non-Christian employees any more than non-gay or non-Hispanic employees are offended by the special recognition afforded those groups (which is to say not at all).
Thank you for your kind and thoughtful consideration.
Respectfully yours,
~ "the Green Flash"
Monday, June 06, 2005
Living a life of virtue (part 1)
"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things." (Philippians 4:8)
At paragraph 1803, the Catechism of the Catholic Church begins its article on the virtues with the above quote from Holy Scripture. A virtue is an habitual and firm disposition to do the good. It allows the person not only to perform good acts, but to give the best of himself. The virtuous person tends toward the good with all his sensory and spiritual powers; he pursues the good and chooses it in concrete actions.
The article is divided into 3 parts: The Human Virtues (moral virtues, including the 4 cardinal virtues); The Theological Virtues; and The Gifts and Fruits of the Holy Spirit, all of which I intend to discuss in the next few posts.
The Catechism organizes its exposition of Catholic doctrine into 4 parts: "The Profession of Faith" (the basic articles of faith in the creed); "The Celebration of the Christian Mysteries" (the theology and practice of the sacraments); "Life in Christ" (the moral life and the Ten Commandments); and "Christian Prayer" (obvious). The article on the virtues falls in Part 3 (Life in Christ), Section 1 (Man's Vocation: Life in the Spirit), Chapter 1 (The Dignity of the Human Person). The articles in this chapter are: (1) Man: the Image of God; (2) Our Vocation to Beatitude; (3) Man's Freedom; (4) The Morality of Human Acts; (5) The Morality of the Passions; (6) Moral Conscience; (7) The Virtues; and (8) Sin. (Chapter 2 of this section, The Human Community, then launches into man's relationship to and participation in human society.)
I. The Human Virtues
Human virtues are firm attitudes, stable dispositions, habitual perfections of intellect and will that govern our actions, order our passions, and guide our conduct according to reason and faith. They make possible ease, self-mastery, and joy in leading a morally good life. The virtuous man is he who practices the good.
The moral virtues are acquired by human effort. They are the fruit and seed of morally good acts; they dispose all the powers of the human being for communion with divine love.
The cardinal virtues
Four virtues play a pivotal role and accordingly are called cardinal [Latin: "hinge"]; all others are grouped around them. They are prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance. These virtues are praised under other names in many passages of Scripture.
Prudence is the virtue that disposes practical reason to discern our true good in every circumstance and to choose the right means of achieving it. Prudence is "right reason in action," writes St. Thomas Aquinas, following Aristotle. It is not to be confused with timidity or fear, nor with duplicity or dissimulation. It has been called auriga virtutem (the charioteer of the virtues) since it guides the other virtues by setting rule and measure. It is prudence that immediately guides the judgment of conscience. The prudent man determines and directs his conduct in accordance with this judgment. With the help of this virtue we apply moral principles to particular cases without error and overcome doubts about the good to acheive and the evil to avoid.
Next: Justice, Fortitude & Temperance.
At paragraph 1803, the Catechism of the Catholic Church begins its article on the virtues with the above quote from Holy Scripture. A virtue is an habitual and firm disposition to do the good. It allows the person not only to perform good acts, but to give the best of himself. The virtuous person tends toward the good with all his sensory and spiritual powers; he pursues the good and chooses it in concrete actions.
The article is divided into 3 parts: The Human Virtues (moral virtues, including the 4 cardinal virtues); The Theological Virtues; and The Gifts and Fruits of the Holy Spirit, all of which I intend to discuss in the next few posts.
The Catechism organizes its exposition of Catholic doctrine into 4 parts: "The Profession of Faith" (the basic articles of faith in the creed); "The Celebration of the Christian Mysteries" (the theology and practice of the sacraments); "Life in Christ" (the moral life and the Ten Commandments); and "Christian Prayer" (obvious). The article on the virtues falls in Part 3 (Life in Christ), Section 1 (Man's Vocation: Life in the Spirit), Chapter 1 (The Dignity of the Human Person). The articles in this chapter are: (1) Man: the Image of God; (2) Our Vocation to Beatitude; (3) Man's Freedom; (4) The Morality of Human Acts; (5) The Morality of the Passions; (6) Moral Conscience; (7) The Virtues; and (8) Sin. (Chapter 2 of this section, The Human Community, then launches into man's relationship to and participation in human society.)
I. The Human Virtues
Human virtues are firm attitudes, stable dispositions, habitual perfections of intellect and will that govern our actions, order our passions, and guide our conduct according to reason and faith. They make possible ease, self-mastery, and joy in leading a morally good life. The virtuous man is he who practices the good.
The moral virtues are acquired by human effort. They are the fruit and seed of morally good acts; they dispose all the powers of the human being for communion with divine love.
The cardinal virtues
Four virtues play a pivotal role and accordingly are called cardinal [Latin: "hinge"]; all others are grouped around them. They are prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance. These virtues are praised under other names in many passages of Scripture.
Prudence is the virtue that disposes practical reason to discern our true good in every circumstance and to choose the right means of achieving it. Prudence is "right reason in action," writes St. Thomas Aquinas, following Aristotle. It is not to be confused with timidity or fear, nor with duplicity or dissimulation. It has been called auriga virtutem (the charioteer of the virtues) since it guides the other virtues by setting rule and measure. It is prudence that immediately guides the judgment of conscience. The prudent man determines and directs his conduct in accordance with this judgment. With the help of this virtue we apply moral principles to particular cases without error and overcome doubts about the good to acheive and the evil to avoid.
Next: Justice, Fortitude & Temperance.
Friday, May 27, 2005
What's next?
Wow! That last one was really long (but I think it was worth it). I'll try to keep subsequent posts much more brief.
I plan to post soon on the 7 gifts of the Holy Spirit, and maybe several of the virtues, fruits of the Holy Spirit, etc.
If you have any suggestions of other things you'd like to know more about, leave a comment and I'll research it & see what I can come up with.
I plan to post soon on the 7 gifts of the Holy Spirit, and maybe several of the virtues, fruits of the Holy Spirit, etc.
If you have any suggestions of other things you'd like to know more about, leave a comment and I'll research it & see what I can come up with.
Sunday, May 08, 2005
"Offer it up..."
These are words that every Catholic has (or should have) grown up hearing. Whenever you had a pain, whether physical or emotional, or some disappointment or any kind of suffering, your mother would tell you, "Offer it up." This was to say, turn your personal suffering into a prayer and offer it as a sacrifice, along with the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross, to God the Father, in expiation for your own sins and the sins of others.
Sin always results in suffering. If not for you directly or immediately, then for someone else. There is a balance to the universe and when we sin, we upset the balance, and justice demands that the balance be restored: by making amends--righting the wrong we've done--or, if that isn't possible, by accepting the natural consequences and doing what we can to restore peace to our relationships with God, our fellow man (society) and the rest of creation (that's why one of the symbols of Justice is the balance).
Because sin abounds in this world, wherever we look, suffering is unavoidable. It is inevitable, from the moment the doctor slaps us on the butt when we enter the world, to the last moment of our death throes when we leave it.
[Dr. Alice von Hildebrand taught philosophy at a university for 37 years. (Her husband, Dietrich von Hildebrand (1889-1977), was one of the great philosophers of the last century.) Much of the following was expressed by her in 1999 in a talk on EWTN, the global Catholic television network. Some of this is paraphrase, but you can almost hear her quaint little German accent....]
Why is there suffering? This has always been one of the main arch-questions of all of human history. And, for many, one of the greatest obstacles to belief in God. Why are millions of people in despair, suffering, greiving, being tortured while we are comfortable & safe? Why, if God is all-good and all-powerful, WHY does He allow little children to be tortured? Injustice? All manner of suffering? Mankind has always searched for the answer to suffering.
The great French philosopher Gabriel Marcel (1889-1973) made a distinction between problem and mystery. Mysteries [not supernatural mysteries, such as the triune nature of God, the incarnation or transubstantiation--he's not talking about those here] are questions of human existence that are so complex & so deep that they can never be answered fully and completely. A problem is something outside myself which has no relationship to myself, but which creates a difficulty which must be solved.
Problems can be solved, and once a problem is solved, it is no longer a problem. Flying to the moon was once a problem, but we solved that problem and now we can fly to the moon. Getting computers to talk to each other was a problem, but we learned how to network computers; that problem is solved, and we can move on to the next problem.
But a mystery is something else altogether. Evil. Suffering. Although much has been written to help man deal with such things, we can never say, "Now the problem [of suffering] is solved! Now we can finally get beyond that and move on."
Because men are arrogant and impertinent, they say from time to time such things as, "OK, everybody just follow MY rules, follow MY teaching, my ideas, and you will be liberated!"
1. Buddha said, basically, we suffer because we have an illegitimate attachment to existence. So if you sort of sever your craving for existence, and you extinguish it, you're going to reach this state of calm which is the door to Nirvana. Now this is a very attractive idea. If you just follow the rules and methods of Buddhism, one fine day you'll be like the Buddha--sitting serenely, looking inward, a smile upon his face, immovable, and you say, "That must be a very comfortable state."
Now, for a moment, compare the smiling Buddha to Christ on the cross. Which is more attractive?
2. Then there was Karl Marx. His basic idea was that there isn't happiness because there is social injustice & inequality. Let the State take over completely & totally, distribute wealth equally & justly. Then you will have what? The Workers' Paradise! This was introduced in Russia in 1917, but unfortunately the Workers' Paradise turned into gulags. Well that was rather a big disillusion when you were promised Paradise and the way it was implemented, you were sent to concentration camps by the millions. What his ideas created was much worse than the injustice he was planning to correct.
Obviously, when you look at it this way, suffering is a mystery. (You can never wrap your mind all the way around it & say "Ah, now I understand it completely!")
[Here is Dr. von Hildebrand's main thesis:]
In Christianity, you'll discover two things that are unique and amazing.
1. Christianity teaches the art of suffering; and
2. (Particularly emphasized in Roman Catholicism) the meaning of suffering.
Now, I might be such a coward & a sissy that I cannot take the prick of a needle on my finger if it has no meaning. Why should I take that? I don't like it! But the amazing thing is that when Christians discover the meaning of suffering, they can carry crushing crosses, and have a smile on their faces. We're going to get there.
The art of suffering, or should I say the holy art of suffering. This is not easy to learn because (due to original sin) we have a rebellious nature and we like to enjoy things and take it easy. And so suffering comes in and disturbs all our plans.
Consider what could be termed illegitimate sufferings. Self-made sufferings. Things that we are not supposed to suffer at all, but that we do suffer because of our own fault. St. Paul said that God does not try us beyond our strength (cf. 1 Cor 10:13). But every day, we say "That's wrong. I'm tried way beyond my strength to bear it. Therefore, either St. Paul & God are wrong or it is unjust. Why should I bear this? It's too much! I can't take it!"
Now think of this: Don't add to your suffering. Suppose for example that someone is full of vanity. You love compliments and notice and people praising you ... and suddenly someone criticizes you for what you're wearing or something you said, etc., and all of a sudden you feel very depressed.
Here is an example from Pride and Prejudice [one of Dr. von Hildebrand's favorites].
Mrs. Bennett has 5 daughters and wants very badly for them all to be married. One day she goes into hysterics & fits of despair. "Nobody knows what I suffer because I never complain ... (blah, blah, blah) ...." Why was she so upset? Because her next door neighbor's daughter got engaged ahead of her own daughters. Can you imagine anything so crushing, so terrible, so absolutely heart-rending? Who can take it!? And what's more, her husband (Mr. Bennett) is a bit of a cynic and was so cruel that he couldn't manage to shed a few crocodile tears along with her! She's SO misunderstood!
Is this legitimate suffering to go through such torture over such a small thing? It is silly, it's petty. But she is suffering, no question!
Another example:
Once my husband and I were visiting an elderly countess in Spain who described to us "the most terrible night of my life."
"I was 16, going to my first ball. I had such beautiful gems, such a beautiful gown! I was convinced I was going to be the queen of the ball! And as I entered this grand hall, I noticed that my 'best friend' had jewels that were much finer than mine & her dress was much more beautiful... I was crushed! All at once, the lights became dim, the flowers lost their perfume... It was a terrible night."
Now of course we had to pretend to sympathize with her out of courtesy, all the while doing our best to contain our mirth--inside, we were in stitches--at someone suffering so much over such a petty thing.
Or say I tend to be envious of others. What is envy? I might see someone who has a quality or some possession, which I might not necessarily want for myself, but I resent that he has it. And I suffer tortures that he has something good. But if I recognize my envy for what it is, & decide that I won't let it triumph over me, I can let it go and no longer allow it to cause me suffering. If I complain to someone that I am crushed by carrying this heavy burden, and he says, "Well, why do you cary it then?" Oh, yes, you're right. I don't need to.
Or take self-pity. Suppose you go to the hospital and you start feeling sorry for yourself. "Why should this have happened to ME? Why should I go through this and it doesn't happen to so-and-so?" and you start crying over yourself, and it's like deflating a tire. In a little while it's flat and you can no longer go.
To avoid self-pity, you turn your thoughts to people who suffer more than you do. And all of a sudden you realize that you're fortunate. Maybe you lost one leg, but the guy in the next bed lost two legs and a hand! There's always the possibility that things could be worse for you. If you turn to another person lovingly, you find that you can carry your own cross more easily.
The amazing thing is that if you carry the cross of another person, yours becomes lighter, it doesn't become heavier.
By far, the worst of all sources of illegitimate suffering: Pride. And that is the suffering of Satan. The pride of someone who refuses to acknowledge that anyone or anything is higher than himself. The proud person wants to be above everything else. After all, what is pride? To want to become God. That was the original sin. "Why should HE be God & not ME? I think I could pull it off extremely well. I want to be God!"
These people suffer constant torture because they feel that other people do not discover, are so blind that they do not see that they are geniuses. You see that among university professors, many of them (not all), who are so animated by pride that they beg you, so to speak, to recognize their genius, and if you don't give the proper expected response, they are crushed & they will hate you. To feel superior to others is a terrible burden. Forgetting that their talents come from God, they forget so completely that they feel superior to God.
The two phrases that the proud person cannot utter:
"Thank you." It is simply an acknowledgement that another person has been kind to me, but it is something that is fast disappearing from the English language.
And even worse: "Forgive me." We ought to say this every day, to family members, friends, neighbors, co-workers, strangers, but most especially to God. "Forgive me, O Lord, because I am a sinner."
"What do you mean to call me a sinner!? I am a perfectly good and decent person! How dare you call me a sinner!" And you see these people suffer tortures. I know people who are paralyzed by their pride.
The trouble here is that this kind of suffering is needless because it is self-made.
If I know I have a problem being envious, for example, and I suffer because of my envy of others, I can't just say, "I won't be envious any more." It's not something you can turn off like a switch.
But I can say that this attitude is wrong and I don't want to be this way. I reject it and disavow it, I oppose it.
Then you begin the practice of what I call "holy pestering." You beg God day after day after day that He will liberate you from this sinful attitude.
St. Therese of Lisieux, from the age of 4 until 13, was a hypersensitive cry-baby. At the slightest word she would burst into tears. Hypersensitive people are so easily offended that whatever you say will be interpreted negatively, then they will either literally or figuratively storm off and feel dreadfully sorry for themselves. So it was with Therese.
Then when she was 13, the family had just returned from Christmas midnight Mass. Her sisters had decorated the house very nicely, with the beautiful tree and presents all around and so forth. Her father was elderly (63 at the time) and he was tired. As he walked in, he said "Well, I hope this is going to be the last time, because Therese is getting much too big for this." Well, this was of course one of her favorite feasts of the year. She burst out crying and ran up the stairs. Half way up the stairs, God's grace hit her. She stopped, turned around, returned to her family, smiling, and said, "from this day on I will never shed an unnecessary tear." But it took her 9 years of prayers before God granted her request to overcome this weakness.
So obviously we can't change the fact overnight, whether it is vanity, jealousy, pride, all these stupidities. But if we keep disavowing them, then you cut off the head of these ugly attitudes, and you keep begging God--holy pestering--keep knocking and keep knocking, and one day He will give it to you and then you will be liberated. And the day you are liberated, you will be capable of carrying very heavy crosses, because you won't be adding an ounce to the weight of the cross God is sending you. You will be able to bear crushing crosses, and nevertheless have peace, and have a smile on your face.
I am always noticing that some people carry crushing crosses and they're always at peace and always radiant; and some people carry just about *this much* and the next day they're flat on the floor, and telling you that they're being "treated unjustly by God, who I thought was a GOOD God..." You know, God is good as long as He does what I like. As soon as He does something I don't like, He is my enemy, He is mean, unjust and cruel.
No, a legitimate suffering is one that God chooses for me. He knows what we can handle and what is too much for us, and will not send us any more than we are able to bear. He loves us (much more than we love ourselves) and He sends us suffering to strengthen us, to teach us to call on Him for help, to teach us to help one another, to see our own weakness & come to realize that we cannot bear up under our own power, that we need Him and His grace to give us the strength to go on, to teach us patience, sympathy for others, compassion, and so on. The only way we can learn to practice virtue is by struggling with some kind of suffering, either our own or that of others.
But we need the supernatural life of God to do it. We need grace, because without Christ we can do nothing. And many of us fail to beg and beg and beg for help. We should say, "My love is about *this much*. God increase my love." Or, "My contrition is not what I know it should be, give me the gift of contrition." We are beggars. In fact, we are very happy beggars because we have a God who is so infinitely good & merciful and can give us what we ask for. We need to realize that we are just crawling on our own, but one day, if we persevere, he will give us wings.
The crosses God sends me are taylor-made. Just for me and no one else. And it fits. Me. It is very unwise to choose your own crosses because we invariably choose the wrong one & it doesn't fit & we cannot bear it. Let God send the cross that He chooses for you.
When we discover this art of suffering, we turn to Catholic teaching and we discover that suffering also has a meaning. It has no meaning in Buddhism, you're supposed to escape from it. It has no meaning in paganism, you escape from it. It has no meaning in Islam, you escape from it. For the ancient Greeks, suffering was an expression of the wrath of the gods, and you were a victim of the capricious fury of the gods.
But in Christianity, the amazing thing is that suffering is given a profound and sublime meaning. Paul Claudel (1868-1955), a great French Catholic poet, once wrote, "Christ did not come to abolish suffering, but to join in our suffering. He did not come to abolish the cross, He chose to lay down on the cross to save us."
It shows that the meaning of suffering on this earth is to be an expression of love. All of us know that when we love someone, we start to suffer. I love my child but I cannot protect him all the time. I love my spouse, my brothers, my parents, my friends, and I suddenly realize that I cannot protect them from suffering...from sickness, from poverty, from death.
Many times, I found myself fretting because my husband Dietrich was late returning from some talk he was giving, and because I love him, I worry, my imagination runs wild--he could have suffered a heart attack or been in an accident--what could have happened to him, & I cannot protect him. If you don't love somebody, you shrug and say, "Well, everybody has to die sometime, it's part of life. Why make such a big deal out of it?" But when you love someone, you can't help but suffer over them. So in this life, you cannot sever the link between love and suffering. They belong together.
But that happens to everyone, not just Christians. Now it gets even deeper. Now comes Christianity.
When Christ was crucified, suffering agonizing tortures that we cannot even picture, who was at the foot of the cross? His mother. And (I am proud to say) the other holy women. Where were the men? The apostles all fled (except St. John who came back). Why did the women stay? Because they loved more.
And the Holy Virgin could not do a thing to relieve the suffering of her beloved. Just imagine the torture of standing there for THREE HOURS seeing Him agonizing ... she can't do a thing! What did she do? She suffered with Him.
Now in modern pragmatic society, we are so utilitarian in our views, I hear some people say such stupid things as, "If he's in the hospital & they can't do anything for him, then why do you go there to visit him?"
We all know, if we have suffered, that to have someone there present, that the person cannot do a thing, cannot relieve your pain, but can simply say, "I am there and I am suffering with you."
The word compassion comes from 2 Latin words that mean to "suffer with." If you love, you want to suffer with the beloved. This is an expression of authentic love which endorses suffering because the beloved one is suffering. I am not going to say, "Oh, my husband is dying--I think I'll take a cruise to Bermuda to relax." Who would dream of doing that? How many mothers spend days and days at the side of a dying child without a thought of food or sleep--they want to be there, and they suffer with them.
The greatest love that exists is to give one's life for ones friends, and that is what Christ did for us. Not only did He suffer with us, but He suffered for us so that the doors of paradise could be reopened to us. This is the culmination of love: not only that you suffer because you love; not only that you suffer with; but that you suffer for.
Now what is the meaning of suffering for a Christian? That when I suffer a legitimate cross, sent by God--He is giving me His grace--and suddenly I realize I am deigned to join Christ on the cross, to be there with Him who has suffered--what is my suffering compared to His? And somehow in this moment He says to me, "Come close to my heart that has bled for you, that has suffered for you, that has been pierced by a lance for you."
This is why the saints, when they receive a cross, they see it as a way of coming closer to our Lord. And this is why, even though the sufferings can be terrible and agonizing, somehow they can be transfigured with a joy of knowing they are there on the cross with our Savior. This is uniquely stressed in Roman Catholicism. From this point of view, day in and day out, we should sing a song of gratitude because He has died for us, and He has given us the grace to carry our crosses.
How do we make suffering a joy?
Well, we cannot make it so by an act of will. But by accepting it, by meditating on the meaning of suffering, on the greatness of Christ's sacrifice (and our voluntary participation in it), one day it can be given to us as a reward.
One of the things my husband Dietrich developed so well was the idea that there are things I can do, and there are things I cannot do. I can command an action--I am going to drink--and I do it. But there are many things that I cannot command by an act of will, and nevertheless there is a great deal that I can do about it indirectly. He calls it "indirect freedom."
For example, one's prayer life. Or one's meditation on the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, that you read the passion in the gospels and meditate on it. That you read in the lives of the saints and you see the sufferings they have borne for the sake of God's kingdom. And one very fine day it comes to you as a sort of reward, but you cannot command it. It is something that God gives to those who are faithful & persevering, and obviously it doesn't come overnight.
Is suffering a part of one's purification?
When we sin, and we all do of course, we owe a "debt" of sorts to God. Now in actuality, there is no way we can physically injure God the Father, and there is no way we can pay a debt of any kind to God, who created the entire universe out of nothing and is totally self-sufficient from all eternity, and technically has no need of us or anything that we can give Him or do for Him.
But God is not technical, and He created us out of love and for love, and we give Him that love--just because He is God.
You can think of it like a king who has a subject who refuses to pay the ordinary homage of respect to the king. Now the subject owes the king respect just because he is the king. If he refuses to show such respect, the king has every right to throw him into prison until he does. When we sin, we are offending the infinite love and majesty of God and, in all justice, we must make amends.
Once I experience authentic contrition, "Lord, have mercy on me, I am a sinner," then comes the desire to pay my debt, and usually this is suffering. But in Christianity it goes beyond that, because I not only suffer to expiate my own sins, which I should do, but I can also suffer for others. Suppose I have satisfied all the requirements of justice for my own debts. Then I can offer my suffering for the debts of others, and God accepts that in the service of love for my fellow man. We can pray and suffer for those who reject suffering, who may even commit crimes to avoid suffering. Then comes a moment of joy because like Christ, and with Him, we are suffering for the sins of others.
Expiation for sins is a punishment, and punishment is not supposed to be pleasant, that's not in the nature of punishment. You don't tell a child, "I'm going to punish you for what you did. Here is some ice cream." He won't learn that he's done something wrong and to avoid it in the future. So punishment has an essential element of education to it.
Sin always results in suffering. If not for you directly or immediately, then for someone else. There is a balance to the universe and when we sin, we upset the balance, and justice demands that the balance be restored: by making amends--righting the wrong we've done--or, if that isn't possible, by accepting the natural consequences and doing what we can to restore peace to our relationships with God, our fellow man (society) and the rest of creation (that's why one of the symbols of Justice is the balance).
Because sin abounds in this world, wherever we look, suffering is unavoidable. It is inevitable, from the moment the doctor slaps us on the butt when we enter the world, to the last moment of our death throes when we leave it.
[Dr. Alice von Hildebrand taught philosophy at a university for 37 years. (Her husband, Dietrich von Hildebrand (1889-1977), was one of the great philosophers of the last century.) Much of the following was expressed by her in 1999 in a talk on EWTN, the global Catholic television network. Some of this is paraphrase, but you can almost hear her quaint little German accent....]
Why is there suffering? This has always been one of the main arch-questions of all of human history. And, for many, one of the greatest obstacles to belief in God. Why are millions of people in despair, suffering, greiving, being tortured while we are comfortable & safe? Why, if God is all-good and all-powerful, WHY does He allow little children to be tortured? Injustice? All manner of suffering? Mankind has always searched for the answer to suffering.
The great French philosopher Gabriel Marcel (1889-1973) made a distinction between problem and mystery. Mysteries [not supernatural mysteries, such as the triune nature of God, the incarnation or transubstantiation--he's not talking about those here] are questions of human existence that are so complex & so deep that they can never be answered fully and completely. A problem is something outside myself which has no relationship to myself, but which creates a difficulty which must be solved.
Problems can be solved, and once a problem is solved, it is no longer a problem. Flying to the moon was once a problem, but we solved that problem and now we can fly to the moon. Getting computers to talk to each other was a problem, but we learned how to network computers; that problem is solved, and we can move on to the next problem.
But a mystery is something else altogether. Evil. Suffering. Although much has been written to help man deal with such things, we can never say, "Now the problem [of suffering] is solved! Now we can finally get beyond that and move on."
Because men are arrogant and impertinent, they say from time to time such things as, "OK, everybody just follow MY rules, follow MY teaching, my ideas, and you will be liberated!"
1. Buddha said, basically, we suffer because we have an illegitimate attachment to existence. So if you sort of sever your craving for existence, and you extinguish it, you're going to reach this state of calm which is the door to Nirvana. Now this is a very attractive idea. If you just follow the rules and methods of Buddhism, one fine day you'll be like the Buddha--sitting serenely, looking inward, a smile upon his face, immovable, and you say, "That must be a very comfortable state."
Now, for a moment, compare the smiling Buddha to Christ on the cross. Which is more attractive?
2. Then there was Karl Marx. His basic idea was that there isn't happiness because there is social injustice & inequality. Let the State take over completely & totally, distribute wealth equally & justly. Then you will have what? The Workers' Paradise! This was introduced in Russia in 1917, but unfortunately the Workers' Paradise turned into gulags. Well that was rather a big disillusion when you were promised Paradise and the way it was implemented, you were sent to concentration camps by the millions. What his ideas created was much worse than the injustice he was planning to correct.
Obviously, when you look at it this way, suffering is a mystery. (You can never wrap your mind all the way around it & say "Ah, now I understand it completely!")
[Here is Dr. von Hildebrand's main thesis:]
In Christianity, you'll discover two things that are unique and amazing.
1. Christianity teaches the art of suffering; and
2. (Particularly emphasized in Roman Catholicism) the meaning of suffering.
Now, I might be such a coward & a sissy that I cannot take the prick of a needle on my finger if it has no meaning. Why should I take that? I don't like it! But the amazing thing is that when Christians discover the meaning of suffering, they can carry crushing crosses, and have a smile on their faces. We're going to get there.
The art of suffering, or should I say the holy art of suffering. This is not easy to learn because (due to original sin) we have a rebellious nature and we like to enjoy things and take it easy. And so suffering comes in and disturbs all our plans.
Consider what could be termed illegitimate sufferings. Self-made sufferings. Things that we are not supposed to suffer at all, but that we do suffer because of our own fault. St. Paul said that God does not try us beyond our strength (cf. 1 Cor 10:13). But every day, we say "That's wrong. I'm tried way beyond my strength to bear it. Therefore, either St. Paul & God are wrong or it is unjust. Why should I bear this? It's too much! I can't take it!"
Now think of this: Don't add to your suffering. Suppose for example that someone is full of vanity. You love compliments and notice and people praising you ... and suddenly someone criticizes you for what you're wearing or something you said, etc., and all of a sudden you feel very depressed.
Here is an example from Pride and Prejudice [one of Dr. von Hildebrand's favorites].
Mrs. Bennett has 5 daughters and wants very badly for them all to be married. One day she goes into hysterics & fits of despair. "Nobody knows what I suffer because I never complain ... (blah, blah, blah) ...." Why was she so upset? Because her next door neighbor's daughter got engaged ahead of her own daughters. Can you imagine anything so crushing, so terrible, so absolutely heart-rending? Who can take it!? And what's more, her husband (Mr. Bennett) is a bit of a cynic and was so cruel that he couldn't manage to shed a few crocodile tears along with her! She's SO misunderstood!
Is this legitimate suffering to go through such torture over such a small thing? It is silly, it's petty. But she is suffering, no question!
Another example:
Once my husband and I were visiting an elderly countess in Spain who described to us "the most terrible night of my life."
"I was 16, going to my first ball. I had such beautiful gems, such a beautiful gown! I was convinced I was going to be the queen of the ball! And as I entered this grand hall, I noticed that my 'best friend' had jewels that were much finer than mine & her dress was much more beautiful... I was crushed! All at once, the lights became dim, the flowers lost their perfume... It was a terrible night."
Now of course we had to pretend to sympathize with her out of courtesy, all the while doing our best to contain our mirth--inside, we were in stitches--at someone suffering so much over such a petty thing.
Or say I tend to be envious of others. What is envy? I might see someone who has a quality or some possession, which I might not necessarily want for myself, but I resent that he has it. And I suffer tortures that he has something good. But if I recognize my envy for what it is, & decide that I won't let it triumph over me, I can let it go and no longer allow it to cause me suffering. If I complain to someone that I am crushed by carrying this heavy burden, and he says, "Well, why do you cary it then?" Oh, yes, you're right. I don't need to.
Or take self-pity. Suppose you go to the hospital and you start feeling sorry for yourself. "Why should this have happened to ME? Why should I go through this and it doesn't happen to so-and-so?" and you start crying over yourself, and it's like deflating a tire. In a little while it's flat and you can no longer go.
To avoid self-pity, you turn your thoughts to people who suffer more than you do. And all of a sudden you realize that you're fortunate. Maybe you lost one leg, but the guy in the next bed lost two legs and a hand! There's always the possibility that things could be worse for you. If you turn to another person lovingly, you find that you can carry your own cross more easily.
The amazing thing is that if you carry the cross of another person, yours becomes lighter, it doesn't become heavier.
By far, the worst of all sources of illegitimate suffering: Pride. And that is the suffering of Satan. The pride of someone who refuses to acknowledge that anyone or anything is higher than himself. The proud person wants to be above everything else. After all, what is pride? To want to become God. That was the original sin. "Why should HE be God & not ME? I think I could pull it off extremely well. I want to be God!"
These people suffer constant torture because they feel that other people do not discover, are so blind that they do not see that they are geniuses. You see that among university professors, many of them (not all), who are so animated by pride that they beg you, so to speak, to recognize their genius, and if you don't give the proper expected response, they are crushed & they will hate you. To feel superior to others is a terrible burden. Forgetting that their talents come from God, they forget so completely that they feel superior to God.
The two phrases that the proud person cannot utter:
"Thank you." It is simply an acknowledgement that another person has been kind to me, but it is something that is fast disappearing from the English language.
And even worse: "Forgive me." We ought to say this every day, to family members, friends, neighbors, co-workers, strangers, but most especially to God. "Forgive me, O Lord, because I am a sinner."
"What do you mean to call me a sinner!? I am a perfectly good and decent person! How dare you call me a sinner!" And you see these people suffer tortures. I know people who are paralyzed by their pride.
The trouble here is that this kind of suffering is needless because it is self-made.
If I know I have a problem being envious, for example, and I suffer because of my envy of others, I can't just say, "I won't be envious any more." It's not something you can turn off like a switch.
But I can say that this attitude is wrong and I don't want to be this way. I reject it and disavow it, I oppose it.
Then you begin the practice of what I call "holy pestering." You beg God day after day after day that He will liberate you from this sinful attitude.
St. Therese of Lisieux, from the age of 4 until 13, was a hypersensitive cry-baby. At the slightest word she would burst into tears. Hypersensitive people are so easily offended that whatever you say will be interpreted negatively, then they will either literally or figuratively storm off and feel dreadfully sorry for themselves. So it was with Therese.
Then when she was 13, the family had just returned from Christmas midnight Mass. Her sisters had decorated the house very nicely, with the beautiful tree and presents all around and so forth. Her father was elderly (63 at the time) and he was tired. As he walked in, he said "Well, I hope this is going to be the last time, because Therese is getting much too big for this." Well, this was of course one of her favorite feasts of the year. She burst out crying and ran up the stairs. Half way up the stairs, God's grace hit her. She stopped, turned around, returned to her family, smiling, and said, "from this day on I will never shed an unnecessary tear." But it took her 9 years of prayers before God granted her request to overcome this weakness.
So obviously we can't change the fact overnight, whether it is vanity, jealousy, pride, all these stupidities. But if we keep disavowing them, then you cut off the head of these ugly attitudes, and you keep begging God--holy pestering--keep knocking and keep knocking, and one day He will give it to you and then you will be liberated. And the day you are liberated, you will be capable of carrying very heavy crosses, because you won't be adding an ounce to the weight of the cross God is sending you. You will be able to bear crushing crosses, and nevertheless have peace, and have a smile on your face.
I am always noticing that some people carry crushing crosses and they're always at peace and always radiant; and some people carry just about *this much* and the next day they're flat on the floor, and telling you that they're being "treated unjustly by God, who I thought was a GOOD God..." You know, God is good as long as He does what I like. As soon as He does something I don't like, He is my enemy, He is mean, unjust and cruel.
No, a legitimate suffering is one that God chooses for me. He knows what we can handle and what is too much for us, and will not send us any more than we are able to bear. He loves us (much more than we love ourselves) and He sends us suffering to strengthen us, to teach us to call on Him for help, to teach us to help one another, to see our own weakness & come to realize that we cannot bear up under our own power, that we need Him and His grace to give us the strength to go on, to teach us patience, sympathy for others, compassion, and so on. The only way we can learn to practice virtue is by struggling with some kind of suffering, either our own or that of others.
But we need the supernatural life of God to do it. We need grace, because without Christ we can do nothing. And many of us fail to beg and beg and beg for help. We should say, "My love is about *this much*. God increase my love." Or, "My contrition is not what I know it should be, give me the gift of contrition." We are beggars. In fact, we are very happy beggars because we have a God who is so infinitely good & merciful and can give us what we ask for. We need to realize that we are just crawling on our own, but one day, if we persevere, he will give us wings.
The crosses God sends me are taylor-made. Just for me and no one else. And it fits. Me. It is very unwise to choose your own crosses because we invariably choose the wrong one & it doesn't fit & we cannot bear it. Let God send the cross that He chooses for you.
When we discover this art of suffering, we turn to Catholic teaching and we discover that suffering also has a meaning. It has no meaning in Buddhism, you're supposed to escape from it. It has no meaning in paganism, you escape from it. It has no meaning in Islam, you escape from it. For the ancient Greeks, suffering was an expression of the wrath of the gods, and you were a victim of the capricious fury of the gods.
But in Christianity, the amazing thing is that suffering is given a profound and sublime meaning. Paul Claudel (1868-1955), a great French Catholic poet, once wrote, "Christ did not come to abolish suffering, but to join in our suffering. He did not come to abolish the cross, He chose to lay down on the cross to save us."
It shows that the meaning of suffering on this earth is to be an expression of love. All of us know that when we love someone, we start to suffer. I love my child but I cannot protect him all the time. I love my spouse, my brothers, my parents, my friends, and I suddenly realize that I cannot protect them from suffering...from sickness, from poverty, from death.
Many times, I found myself fretting because my husband Dietrich was late returning from some talk he was giving, and because I love him, I worry, my imagination runs wild--he could have suffered a heart attack or been in an accident--what could have happened to him, & I cannot protect him. If you don't love somebody, you shrug and say, "Well, everybody has to die sometime, it's part of life. Why make such a big deal out of it?" But when you love someone, you can't help but suffer over them. So in this life, you cannot sever the link between love and suffering. They belong together.
But that happens to everyone, not just Christians. Now it gets even deeper. Now comes Christianity.
When Christ was crucified, suffering agonizing tortures that we cannot even picture, who was at the foot of the cross? His mother. And (I am proud to say) the other holy women. Where were the men? The apostles all fled (except St. John who came back). Why did the women stay? Because they loved more.
And the Holy Virgin could not do a thing to relieve the suffering of her beloved. Just imagine the torture of standing there for THREE HOURS seeing Him agonizing ... she can't do a thing! What did she do? She suffered with Him.
Now in modern pragmatic society, we are so utilitarian in our views, I hear some people say such stupid things as, "If he's in the hospital & they can't do anything for him, then why do you go there to visit him?"
We all know, if we have suffered, that to have someone there present, that the person cannot do a thing, cannot relieve your pain, but can simply say, "I am there and I am suffering with you."
The word compassion comes from 2 Latin words that mean to "suffer with." If you love, you want to suffer with the beloved. This is an expression of authentic love which endorses suffering because the beloved one is suffering. I am not going to say, "Oh, my husband is dying--I think I'll take a cruise to Bermuda to relax." Who would dream of doing that? How many mothers spend days and days at the side of a dying child without a thought of food or sleep--they want to be there, and they suffer with them.
The greatest love that exists is to give one's life for ones friends, and that is what Christ did for us. Not only did He suffer with us, but He suffered for us so that the doors of paradise could be reopened to us. This is the culmination of love: not only that you suffer because you love; not only that you suffer with; but that you suffer for.
Now what is the meaning of suffering for a Christian? That when I suffer a legitimate cross, sent by God--He is giving me His grace--and suddenly I realize I am deigned to join Christ on the cross, to be there with Him who has suffered--what is my suffering compared to His? And somehow in this moment He says to me, "Come close to my heart that has bled for you, that has suffered for you, that has been pierced by a lance for you."
This is why the saints, when they receive a cross, they see it as a way of coming closer to our Lord. And this is why, even though the sufferings can be terrible and agonizing, somehow they can be transfigured with a joy of knowing they are there on the cross with our Savior. This is uniquely stressed in Roman Catholicism. From this point of view, day in and day out, we should sing a song of gratitude because He has died for us, and He has given us the grace to carry our crosses.
How do we make suffering a joy?
Well, we cannot make it so by an act of will. But by accepting it, by meditating on the meaning of suffering, on the greatness of Christ's sacrifice (and our voluntary participation in it), one day it can be given to us as a reward.
One of the things my husband Dietrich developed so well was the idea that there are things I can do, and there are things I cannot do. I can command an action--I am going to drink--and I do it. But there are many things that I cannot command by an act of will, and nevertheless there is a great deal that I can do about it indirectly. He calls it "indirect freedom."
For example, one's prayer life. Or one's meditation on the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, that you read the passion in the gospels and meditate on it. That you read in the lives of the saints and you see the sufferings they have borne for the sake of God's kingdom. And one very fine day it comes to you as a sort of reward, but you cannot command it. It is something that God gives to those who are faithful & persevering, and obviously it doesn't come overnight.
Is suffering a part of one's purification?
When we sin, and we all do of course, we owe a "debt" of sorts to God. Now in actuality, there is no way we can physically injure God the Father, and there is no way we can pay a debt of any kind to God, who created the entire universe out of nothing and is totally self-sufficient from all eternity, and technically has no need of us or anything that we can give Him or do for Him.
But God is not technical, and He created us out of love and for love, and we give Him that love--just because He is God.
You can think of it like a king who has a subject who refuses to pay the ordinary homage of respect to the king. Now the subject owes the king respect just because he is the king. If he refuses to show such respect, the king has every right to throw him into prison until he does. When we sin, we are offending the infinite love and majesty of God and, in all justice, we must make amends.
Once I experience authentic contrition, "Lord, have mercy on me, I am a sinner," then comes the desire to pay my debt, and usually this is suffering. But in Christianity it goes beyond that, because I not only suffer to expiate my own sins, which I should do, but I can also suffer for others. Suppose I have satisfied all the requirements of justice for my own debts. Then I can offer my suffering for the debts of others, and God accepts that in the service of love for my fellow man. We can pray and suffer for those who reject suffering, who may even commit crimes to avoid suffering. Then comes a moment of joy because like Christ, and with Him, we are suffering for the sins of others.
Expiation for sins is a punishment, and punishment is not supposed to be pleasant, that's not in the nature of punishment. You don't tell a child, "I'm going to punish you for what you did. Here is some ice cream." He won't learn that he's done something wrong and to avoid it in the future. So punishment has an essential element of education to it.
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Sorry it's been so long...
...since my last post. I've been rather busy. I had some difficulties with my computer, JohnnyK has been a big distraction lately (don't let it go to your head, JK)--see the many "comments" on the last post (Happy Easter!)--and miscellaneous other stuff.
Pope John Paul the Great, rest in peace!
God bless and long live Pope Benedict XVI!
I intend to post soon (God willing) on the topic of suffering based on thoughts by Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, so stay tuned....
Pope John Paul the Great, rest in peace!
God bless and long live Pope Benedict XVI!
I intend to post soon (God willing) on the topic of suffering based on thoughts by Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, so stay tuned....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)