God created us out of His Divine Love

[Ranklyfrank]

As you know, Tonyrey, I’m a theist. But I can easily see how moral systems and moral progress can be made without reference to a Deity. Two bases for such systems are commonality and survival. There are non religious ways to see that. And the very observation that there are tens of thousands of religions, each purporting to be moral guides, all of which fail for members of any one of them, we can also say that religion is not an adequate base, or even belief in God. Again let’s notice that prison population reflect the general demographic by faith. And those folks have their own “morality” based on the perceived needs of their community.

 

[tonyrey]

As you know, Tonyrey, I’m a theist. But I can easily see how moral systems and moral progress can be made without reference to a Deity. Two bases for such systems are commonality and survival. There are non religious ways to see that.

Frank, within secular views of life commonality and survival are a matter of choice whereas within a religion (when practised sincerely) moral laws are absolute obligations.

And the very observation that there are tens of thousands of religions, each purporting to be moral guides, all of which fail for members of any one of them, we can also say that religion is not an adequate base, or even belief in God.

In what way do they all fail?

Again let’s notice that prison population reflect the general demographic by faith. And those folks have their own “morality” based on the perceived needs of their community.

The genuineness of prisoners’ faith is open to question! Moreover most people are inconsistent because they do not practise precisely what they profess…

 

[Ranklyfrank]

Frank, within secular views of life commonality and survival are a matter of choice whereas within a religion (when practised sincerely) moral laws are absolute obligations.

As is the adoption of a religion a choice, unless one grows up in it and has it engramed on the brain. That is why it takes a major shock or deep devotional practice to get past religion to spirituality. And why do those being a choice make them wrong?

In what way do they all fail?

Hmmmm… Let’s see. The people around Jesus were religious. They either abbeted or failed to prevent His execution. Every religion, including Catholic, has conducted pogroms of the unfaithful, holy wars, inquisitions or random acts of violence based on belief. That Catholics claim to be the One, True,…etc. seems not to have made them immune in this regard. Go to any religious channel and listen to some other religion getting exhorted as the devils brew. And you can abstract the “faith” from the person, but really, all those people are the intellectual and emotional embodiment only of what they acquired as their religion. And having been Catholic, I know a bit about our own closet’s contents, both theoretically and experientially.

The genuineness of prisoners’ faith is open to question! Moreover most people are inconsistent because they do not practise precisely what they profess…

And that is the failure of religion, and not just with prisoners. It allows profession without actual internally convinced conformity. It is just an intellection. That means nothing less than that what the religion is meant to be in Substance is not in fact transmitted to even devoted, knowledgeable followers. That is left to mystics who find the Source of religion within themselves, as distinct from the rest, who have it pasted on. That is why they fail.

 

[tonyrey]

            *

Don’t you enjoy sharing your joy with others or being praised for your love?

Sarah, our vices incur their own punishment. God condemns no one. We condemn ourselves if we choose to love ourselves at the expense of others. Selfishness inevitably leads to isolation and frustration because selfish people alienate everyone else.

How do you know

that’s not an option? Because Im going to die, my children are going to die, their children and their childrens children will die, and eventually the sun and earth will die.

How do you** know** we are just bodies which exist by chance?

If you knew it would have killed you would you have gone ahead?

That’s a show stopping question. Well done. I think I probably would have, to give my husband a child and bring new life into the world. I think I might have judged it worth the risk. Thats a really good question.

Thank you. Would it have been fair to run the risk of leaving your husband grief-stricken, probably guilt-ridden and certainly
afflicted with the task of bringing up a motherless child on his own?

Ignorance of good and evil doesn’t mean good and evil are merely a matter of opinion. Otherwise there is no such thing as moral progress.

But they seem to be to someone like me. For example, holy books say it was fine to slay your enemies, I was fine to stone women for adultery, it was fine to make human sacrifices. Then the story changed. In christianity I understand these things are no longer acceptable, but in other faiths they still are. But before the story changed, these things were fine - they had to be, otherwise god has contradicted himself and thats not possible.

You are assuming **all **the beliefs and values of the Old Testament were inspired by God!

But it’s not an arbitrary test

.
I think it is.

How can it be arbitrary when moral laws are facts about the way our personality develops? Do you think a criminal mentality is as rewarding and fulfilling as that of a person who respects the rights of others?

Wouldn’t you give your life for others if you believed it would liberate them from the vicious spiral of hate, revenge, violence and destruction?
What is more important: saving your own skin or saving others from unnecessary suffering and death?

My family and children without question. Good question, - for others, strangers, I dont know - Im not so sure. Maybe - it might depend on the circumstances.

Is your family isolated from the rest of humanity? Won’t your descendants be affected by the evils of the society in which they live?

Why not? You agree that living for love is what you would like to see…

Yes. Here. I dont see any evidence that good or bad here makes any difference afterwards, but theres no denying living a good, moral, loving life makes the whole world better for everyone, right here and now.

It also makes it better for future generations. It is a mistake to live as if the here and now are the only things that matter. The most important things in life are not what we can see and touch but intangibles like truth, goodness, freedom, justice, beauty and love. Science cannot tell us how to live or love!

 

[tonyrey]

Within secular views of life commonality and survival are a matter of choice whereas within a religion (when practised sincerely) moral laws are absolute obligations.

You are assuming that religion and spirituality are incompatible. If they were no religion at all individuals would have to begin from scratch whereas they now have the opportunity to build on the foundations they have inherited. The accumulated spiritual wisdom of mankind should be prized rather than despised! To reject one’s heritage lock, stock and barrel is a sign of hubris rather than progress…

The people around Jesus were religious. They either abbeted or failed to prevent His execution. Every religion, including Catholic, has conducted pogroms of the unfaithful, holy wars, inquisitions or random acts of violence based on belief. That Catholics claim to be the One, True,…etc. seems not to have made them immune in this regard. Go to any religious channel and listen to some other religion getting exhorted as the devils brew. And you can abstract the “faith” from the person, but really, all those people are the intellectual and emotional embodiment only of what they acquired as their religion. And having been Catholic, I know a bit about our own closet’s contents, both theoretically and experientially.

You are equating religion with those to profess to follow that religion. It is a mistake to judge any ideology by those who claim to adhere to it when in fact they don’t! In fact corruptio optima pessima… Without religion there would have been no schools, hospitals, asylums, orphanages, hospices for the dying…

The genuineness of prisoners’ faith is open to question! Moreover most people are inconsistent because they do not practise precisely what they profess…

And that is the failure of religion, and not just with prisoners. It allows profession without actual internally convinced conformity.

What is “it”? Neither a creed nor those who teach it can compel others to adhere to it.
Internal conviction cannot be imposed by external coercion.

It is just an intellection. That means nothing less than that what the religion is meant to be in Substance is not in fact transmitted to even devoted, knowledgeable followers. That is left to mystics who find the Source of religion within themselves, as distinct from the rest, who have it pasted on. That is why they fail.

True religion is not just an intellection but a dedication of one’s whole being to the Source of truth, goodness, freedom, justice, beauty and love. The differences between individual religions are less important than the beliefs and values they share: that human beings are not merely material objects but spiritual beings who are members of a community which does not exist by chance. In his book “The Perennial Philosophy” Aldous Huxley explains how all religions have the same basic values, principles and goals.

You underestimate the influence of religion on the vast majority of ordinary people who are not criminals, terrorists or fanatics. The savagery of tribal communities reveals the extent to which modern civilisation had progressed from the paucity of values in paganism. But the failure of secularism is most evident in countries like the UK with the disintegration of families and the disappearance of communities: over a million one-parent families and most old people living alone or with strangers in pitiful circumstances. The price of material progress has been a moral regress which is consistent with the exaltation of science as the supreme form of knowledge - which, ironically, deprives life of all meaning, value and purpose. What else do you expect from the doctrine that we are merely naked apes? That is certainly not a rational basis for belief in human rights and the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity - unlike the belief that we were created out of divine love!

 

[atheistgirl]

I can only make a quick response right now as it’s family time. But quickly:

Would it have been fair to run the risk of leaving your husband grief-stricken, probably guilt-ridden and certainly
afflicted with the task of bringing up a motherless child on his own?

Like I said that’s such a great question. I know we would have talked about it, and I know I would respect my husbands wishes. I also know if it was as important to him as it was to me, I would have definately laid down my life in childbirth to bring life into the world and give my husband a child, so long as we were all agreed.

You are assuming **all **the beliefs and values of the Old Testament were inspired by God!

You’’ have to excuse my ignorance please. I thought they were. When God told Moses to slay, or demanded animal sacrifice, or to kill all adult males and take the female virgins as concubines, I thought that was accepted as the inspired word?

                 Is your family isolated from the rest of humanity? Won't your descendants be affected by the evils of the society in which they live?  
                                             It also makes it better for future generations. It is a mistake to live as if the here and now are the only things that matter.

But we know this, and we dont live for the here and now. We invest heavily in education, science, research of all sorts, infrastructure, politics… all to make things better not just for this generation but for future generations.

The most important things in life are not what we can see and touch but intangibles like truth, goodness, freedom, justice, beauty and love. Science cannot tell us how to live or love!

But science does. Just look at food technology. Science has taught us the dangers of smoking, living to excess, health and diet… science does indeed tell us how to live - we are free to reject the advice of course, but we cant deny the role of science in improving our living standards. Im not saying we live or lives as robots, slaves to science, but science has most definately help us impoove our lives. We now have phenominal understanding of things our forfathers took to be majic, superstitions, occult and the divine.
Truth, Goodness, Beauty, Justice, Love - they are in some ways intangible, but we know them when we feel them or experiece them, We all have an innate sense of justice and fairness, we have that innate sense that tells us what is right and wrong, and despite what anyone says, it’s not relative. Beauty can be seen and felt and created and it has the power to take us somewhere else, the transcentent, and beauty, music, poetry, a good book, can all do this.

Sorry, I havent got time for more now.

Sarah x

 

[tonyrey]

Would it have been fair to run the risk of leaving your husband grief-stricken, probably guilt-ridden and certainly afflicted with the task of bringing up a motherless child on his own?

I think there are very few men who would encourage you to do so - especially if you already have other children. What is encouraging is your willingness to sacrifice your life for another person and your recognition that an unborn child is a person!

You are assuming **all **

the beliefs and values of the Old Testament were inspired by God!
You’’ have to excuse my ignorance please. I thought they were. When God told Moses to slay, or demanded animal sacrifice, or to kill all adult males and take the female virgins as concubines, I thought that was accepted as the inspired word?

Only by those who believe every sentence is literally true.

Is your family isolated from the rest of humanity? Won’t your descendants be affected by the evils of the society in which they live?
It also makes it better for future generations. It is a mistake to live as if the here and now are the only things that matter.

But we know this, and we dont live for the here and now. We invest heavily in education, science, research of all sorts, infrastructure, politics… all to make things better not just for this generation but for future generations.

So your concern is not just for your family…

The most important things in life are not what we can see and touch but intangibles like truth, goodness, freedom, justice, beauty and love. Science cannot tell us how to live or love!
But science does. Just look at food technology. Science has taught us the dangers of smoking, living to excess, health and diet… science does indeed tell us how to live - we are free to reject the advice of course, but we cant deny the role of science in improving our living standards. Im not saying we live or lives as robots, slaves to science, but science has most definitely helped us improve our lives. We now have phenomenal understanding of things our forefathers took to be magic, superstitions, occult and the divine.

Science tells us how to live physically but not morally, socially or personally - as you point out:

Truth, Goodness, Beauty, Justice, Love - they are in some ways intangible, but we know them when we feel them or experience them, We all have an innate sense of justice and fairness, we have that innate sense that tells us what is right and wrong, and despite what anyone says, it’s not relative. Beauty can be seen and felt and created and it has the power to take us somewhere else, the transcendent, and beauty, music, poetry, a good book, can all do this.

Sorry, I havent got time for more now.

That’s enough; you have said all that matters in your last paragraph - which is that there is far more in life than material objects! The key word is “transcendent”…

 

[atheistgirl]

What is encouraging is your willingness to sacrifice your life for another person and your recognition that an unborn child is a person!

Of course the unborn child is a person! Their life is to be protected as much as any born persons! But there again I have an issue with some fundamentalists, who seem to think that the unborn child is more valuable, or has more rights, than a living person. Think of the example of that doctor executed by christian fundamentalists. They certainly didnt seem to subscribe to the idea of the scantity of all human life.

Only by those who believe every sentence is literally true.

Is it not? I dont know - I ask from ignorance. If it’s not, how is one to know what is and isnt literal? Did Moses literally recieve the 10 commandments, but not literally slay whateveer tribe it was? Was the instruction to stone adulterers, and homosexuals not literal? How would someone know back then? (Fundamentalists even today do take the Bible literally)

So your concern is not just for your family…

My first concern is always for my family. But within that is obviously a huge concern for the community and society we all share, not to mention the planet. I do all I can, everytime I can, with as much as I can, to make things betetr for them and everyone else. But this is only natural, and has nothing to do with rewards for me in the future. It’s about caring, which is innate in all of us.

That’s enough; you have said all that matters in your last paragraph - which is that there is far more in life than material objects! The key word is “transcendent”…

I can lose myself, as can most Im sure, in a wonderful piece of music, a play, a poem, whatever, and experience something almost outside of myself, and in fact I have done. But this again is part of our humanity, and has nothing to do with other worlds, in the literal sense.

Sarah x

 

[levinas12]

I am completely completely stumped here.

You may be an atheist but you are an incredible theologian. Your question is the big one. God does not need us … God without creation is just as great as God with creation (which is one of the hidden assumptions of the infamous ontological argument) … the world is totally unnecessary … but God created it anyway out of generosity … out of a love that is solely intent on the good of the other … and what is this good? … the wild and crazy adventure of existing …

 

[Ranklyfrank]

You may be an atheist but you are an incredible theologian. Your question is the big one. God does not need us … God without creation is just as great as God with creation (which is one of the hidden assumptions of the infamous ontological argument) … the world is totally unnecessary … but God created it anyway out of generosity … out of a love that is solely intent on the good of the other … and what is this good? … the wild and crazy adventure of existing …

Wow…SO close…

 

[levinas12]

Wow…SO close…

I’m working on it … but passively … if you know what I mean …

 

[tonyrey]

Think of the example of that doctor executed by christian fundamentalists. They certainly didnt seem to subscribe to the idea of the sanctity of all human life.

They don’t represent the vast majority.

If it’s not, how is one to know what is and isnt literal? Did Moses literally receive the 10 commandments, but not literally slay whateveer tribe it was? Was the instruction to stone adulterers, and homosexuals not literal? How would someone know back then? (Fundamentalists even today do take the Bible literally)

The criterion is whether an action or command is consistent with the teaching of Jesus that God is a loving Father.

My first concern is always for my family. But within that is obviously a huge concern for the community and society we all share, not to mention the planet. I do all I can, everytime I can, with as much as I can, to make things better for them and everyone else. But this is only natural, and has nothing to do with rewards for me in the future. It’s about caring, which is innate in all of us.

Innate but not inevitable! Many choose to be uncaring and indifferent to the needs of others.

I can lose myself, as can most Im sure, in a wonderful piece of music, a play, a poem, whatever, and experience something almost outside of myself, and in fact I have done. But this again is part of our humanity, and has nothing to do with other worlds, in the literal sense.

Is our humanity adequately explained by purposeless processes?

 

[atheistgirl]

They don’t represent the vast majority.

I agree with you the vast majority of pro life supports would not actually kill an adult human being to save an as yet unborn human being. But it’s that fundamentalist religious mind that allows stuff like that to happen. The guy was executed and called on his ''followers to kill as many abortionists as they could. He was smiling and singing hymns on the way to his execution, and said he was looking forward to paradise. Does that have any echos in another mainstream religious belief?

The criterion is whether an action or command is consistent with the teaching of Jesus that God is a loving Father.

So if I read the early books of the Bible, what youre saying is I have to take literally everything that confirms God as a loving father, but ignore or take metaphorically or allegorically everything and anything that might contradict that view? Can you see why I would have problems with that approach?

Innate but not inevitable! Many choose to be uncaring and indifferent to the needs of others.

Sadly, this is true, But as the vast majority have a faith of some sort, this means the ‘‘many’’ you refer to includes a huge number of people with faith.

Is our humanity adequately explained by purposeless processes?

The process of me growing, developing, meeting my husband, marrying, having my children, teaching them, setting up in business, earning my degrees, watching my family grow and develop and become wonderful human beings, meeting strangers and from there fostering live long friendships, looking after my animals and my own little bit of land, never losing that feeling of awe and wonder at a shooting star, or a full moon, or watching the sun rise… is anything but purposeless processes.
It’s completely in synch with the rythms and rhymes of nature and the world.
And it’s wonderful.

 

[LogisticsBranch]

Hello Sarah. I’d like to address a few of your comments:

You’’ have to excuse my ignorance please. I thought they were. When God told Moses to slay, or demanded animal sacrifice, or to kill all adult males and take the female virgins as concubines, I thought that was accepted as the inspired word?

You might find it helpful to read the article, “Bible As Dark Biblical “Weirdness” - Atheists Attack God as a monster” that was written by Father John Flynn, LC on February 20, 2011 from Rome: zenit.org/article-31799?l=english

But we know this, and we dont live for the here and now. We invest heavily in education, science, research of all sorts, infrastructure, politics… all to make things better not just for this generation but for future generations.

Most definitely true. I’m also involved with a quite a few fund-raising projects.

Truth, Goodness, Beauty, Justice, Love - they are in some ways intangible, but we know them when we feel them or experiece them, We all have an innate sense of justice and fairness, we have that innate sense that tells us what is right and wrong, and despite what anyone says, it’s not relative. Beauty can be seen and felt and created and it has the power to take us somewhere else, the transcentent, and beauty, music, poetry, a good book, can all do this.

Yes, I have a sense that we agree more than disagree. And I also agree with what Pope Benedict XVI said this year, “No one in the Christian community must be hungry or poor: this is a fundamental obligation. Communion with God, expressed as brotherly communion, is lived out in practice in social commitment, in Christian charity and in justice.”

Best wishes to you and your family.

 

[Ranklyfrank]

zenit.org/article-31799?l=english

I read this. Even as a former Catholic and as a current theist, I find it refutable in several ways. I don’t buy it.

 

[fhansen]

I read that on another post.

What does that mean - created us out of His divine Love? And Divine love for who? And why - why not just leave us uncreated? And what sort of love is it that creates other creatures to worship the creator?

Edited to say this is not an ‘‘anti’’ post - I would just like to look further into the ideas.

Sarah x

God is all that is-which includes being the mind behind nature itself, of course. His creation is an intimate expression of Himself which He continuously sustains, not merely an object over in one little corner of his universe as if there might even be a possibility of its being forgotten. And for creation to worship Him means for creation to worship love/goodness as the highest value, not because they’re compelled to, but simply because they’ve arrived at the fact that it’s stupid to do anything else. As part of creation, but also possessing free will, we’re obligated by love to place Love first-simply because that’s the right thing to do with our freedom-and also happens to be the source of unending happiness.

 

[LogisticsBranch]

I read this. Even as a former Catholic and as a current theist, I find it refutable in several ways. I don’t buy it.

Hi Ranklyfrank. I’m a woman over 50 years of age and been a Catholic all my life. Never waivered from it. Curious to know what kind of theist you are now since you claim you aren’t a Catholic any longer. What do you disagree with pertaining the article, “Bible As Dark Biblical “Weirdness” - Atheists Attack God as a monster” ( zenit.org/article-31799?l=english )that was written by Father John Flynn, LC on February 20, 2011 from Rome?

Doesn’t seem like the Church is hurting for Catholics:

Permalink: zenit.org/article-31803?l=english
GLOBAL CATHOLIC POPULATION CONTINUES TO GROW

Nearly Half of Church’s Members Live in the Americas

VATICAN CITY, FEB. 20, 2011 (Zenit.org).- The number of baptized Catholics on the planet continues to grow and half of their number are in the Americas. The number of priests and seminarians is also on the rise.

This is some of what can be learned from the data of the 2011 papal yearbook, the Annuario Pontificio, presented to Benedict XVI on Saturday morning by his secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, and Archbishop Fernando Filoni, undersecretary for general affairs.

The statistical data from the year 2009 furnish a summary view of the principal dynamics of the Catholic Church in her 2,956 ecclesiastical entities across the globe: The number of baptized Catholics has increased from nearly 1.16 billion in 2008 to 1.18 billion in 2009, with an absolute increase of 15 million faithful.

The distribution of Catholics among the continents differs notably from that of the population. In regard to percentage of the global population, between 2008 and 2009 the Americas did not change, keeping at a steady 13.6%. In the same two years, the number of Catholics in the Americas climbed to a level that constitutes 49.4% of the Catholic population of the world.
In Asia the Catholic population grew from 10.6% to 10.7% while the total population of Asia is 60.7% of the world’s population.

The total population of Europe, with respect to the total population of the globe, was three points below that of the Americas and represented 24% of the world’s Catholic population.
The countries of Africa and Oceania were both reported to be 15.2% of the world’s population and 0.8% of the total Catholic population of the planet.

Between 2008 and 2009 the number of bishops in the world grew from 5,002 to 5,065, increasing 1.3%. Africa led in this growth (1.8%), followed by Oceania (1.5%), while Asia and the Americas were below the median at 0.8% and 1.2% respectively. Europe was on a par with the median at 1.3%.

The number of priests continues the trend of moderate increase that began in 2000. The number of diocesan and religious priests grew in the last decade from 405,178 in 2000 to 410,593 in 2009.

In 2009 the number of priests increased by 0.34% over 2008. This figure derives from the 0.08% decrease in religious priests and the 0.56% increase in diocesan priests. There was a decrease in religious priests on every continent except for Asia and Africa. The number of permanent deacons increased 2.5% between 2008 and 2009, from 37,203 to 38,155.

The total population of professed women religious decreased from 739,068 in 2008 to 729,371 in 2009, despite the growth in numbers in Africa and Asia.

The number of candidates for the priesthood has climbed 0.82%, increasing from 117,024 in 2008 to 117,978 in 2009. A large part of the growth is attributable to Asia and Africa where the percentages of increase were 2.39% and 2.2% respectively. Europe and the Americas registered contractions of 1.64% and 0.17% respectively during the period.
Have a nice day.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

I read that on another post.

What does that mean - created us out of His divine Love? And Divine love for who? And why - why not just leave us uncreated? And what sort of love is it that creates other creatures to worship the creator?

Edited to say this is not an ‘‘anti’’ post - I would just like to look further into the ideas.

Sarah x

Firstly, “worship”, in the Christian sense of worship, should not be seen as a worship of power; whether it be absolute or otherwise. I am not obliged to worship God because he is more powerful, and neither am I obliged to worship God because he created us. To demand worship because one is more powerful or because one has given life, is nothing more than abuse and tyranny.

Christians who worship God (Christians with an understanding of what it is they worship) do so because they believe that God is the objective root of what they understand to be the “moral ought”. God is the root of moral truth; and that is to say, Gods intrinsic nature is the reason why something is good or something is wrong, for God’s nature is the measure of being. God is love, God is good, not in potentiality, but** intrinsically**, as in to say that this is in fact Gods actual nature of being. You ought to worship God, simply because you ought to worship love, and to worship love is to place the nature of love above all things “self serving”. Therefore to be born in to God (in to existence) is to be measured by Gods eternal love. If your actions do not correspond with the reality of God, the reality of love, the reality of good, then your actions are by definition immoral and anti-reality; for God is the root of reality. To be born in to such a reality is to automatically have a purpose, and that purpose is to share the love that is God; and that is what it means to serve God, nothing more and nothing less. To worship God is merely to conform to that which is good for you. To worship God is simply to conform to love as an eternal act of reality. God wants you to be with him only because God knows that you will be eternally happy and fulfilled in him; this is to say that you will be fulfilled if you love perfectly. Its Got nothing to do with brute authority.

This is hard to see because of the problem of evil; but what I present here is not an argument for Gods goodness or his existence, but rather it is an explanation of what Catholics understand God to be.

 

[LogisticsBranch]

This is hard to see because of the problem of evil; but what I present here is not an argument for Gods goodness or his existence, but rather it is an explanation of what Catholics understand God to be.

Hi MindOvermatter. This is how I understand God and his existence:

BENEDICT XVI
ANGELUS
Solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity
Saint Peter’s Square
Sunday, 7 June 2009
Dear Brothers and Sisters,

After the Easter Season which culminated in the Feast of Pentecost, the liturgy provides for these three Solemnities of the Lord: today, Trinity Sunday; next Thursday, Corpus Christi which in many countries, including Italy, will be celebrated next Sunday; and finally, on the following Friday, the Feast of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Each one of these liturgical events highlights a perspective by which the whole mystery of the Christian faith is embraced: and that is, respectively the reality of the Triune God, the Sacrament of the Eucharist and the divine and human centre of the Person of Christ. These are truly aspects of the one mystery of salvation which, in a certain sense, sum up the whole itinerary of the revelation of Jesus, from his Incarnation to his death and Resurrection and, finally, to his Ascension and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Today we contemplate the Most Holy Trinity as Jesus introduced us to it. He revealed to us that God is love “not in the oneness of a single Person, but in the Trinity of one substance” (Preface). He is the Creator and merciful Father; he is the Only-Begotten Son, eternal Wisdom incarnate, who died and rose for us; he is the Holy Spirit who moves all things, cosmos and history, toward their final, full recapitulation. Three Persons who are one God because the Father is love, the Son is love, the Spirit is love. God is wholly and only love, the purest, infinite and eternal love. He does not live in splendid solitude but rather is an inexhaustible source of life that is ceaselessly given and communicated. To a certain extent we can perceive this by observing both the macro-universe: our earth, the planets, the stars, the galaxies; and the micro-universe: cells, atoms, elementary particles. The “name” of the Blessed Trinity is, in a certain sense, imprinted upon all things because all that exists, down to the last particle, is in relation; in this way we catch a glimpse of God as relationship and ultimately, Creator Love. All things derive from love, aspire to love and move impelled by love, though naturally with varying degrees of awareness and freedom. “O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth!” (Ps 8: 1) the Psalmist exclaims. In speaking of the “name”, the Bible refers to God himself, his truest identity. It is an identity that shines upon the whole of Creation, in which all beings for the very fact that they exist and because of the “fabric” of which they are made point to a transcendent Principle, to eternal and infinite Life which is given, in a word, to Love. “In him we live and move and have our being”, St Paul said at the Areopagus of Athens (Acts 17: 28). The strongest proof that we are made in the image of the Trinity is this: love alone makes us happy because we live in a relationship, and we live to love and to be loved. Borrowing an analogy from biology, we could say that imprinted upon his “genome”, the human being bears a profound mark of the Trinity, of God as Love.

The Virgin Mary, in her docile humility, became the handmaid of divine Love: she accepted the Father’s will and conceived the Son by the power of the Holy Spirit. In her the Almighty built a temple worthy of him and made her the model and image of the Church, mystery and house of communion for all human beings. May Mary, mirror of the Blessed Trinity, help us to grow in faith in the Trinitarian mystery.

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/angelus/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_ang_20090607_en.html

 

[GreggAlvarez]

I read that on another post.

What does that mean - created us out of His divine Love?

Pure Love seeks out Life. Love is a Truth of Life. It cannot be reduced to a mere feeling. When we say “He created us out of divine Love”, we are merely saying who He really is. That is that Love seeks to love its own without condition, without anything in return and without anything owed.

And Divine love for who?

If I understand your question, then my answer is “His creation or, more significantly, us.”

And why - why not just leave us uncreated?

Pure Love’s desire is that it give itself to His own. Love needs Life to love. And Love desires that its own love it back, but that is not a requirement. That is, Pure Love is totally unconditional. That is not to say that it does not desire it back, but that is a desire and not a requirement. Look at good parents who give themselves completely to their newborn without complaint. The child as it grows and matures will clearly has the choice to reject that love and do its own thing.

And what sort of love is it that creates other creatures to worship the creator?

This question goes to what the meaning of worship is. It is the complete praise, adoration and honor given to that of a religious or sacred being or even icon. (Some worship non-beings.) In its most technical sense, I can sense why that technicality would be bothersome to the irreligious or non-religious.

But, then it goes back to what Love is. This next part will be purely speculation (I think).

Pure Love is a complete giving of oneself to another without requiring anything in return, but that Pure Love does fully desire that the recipient of that love love it in return. Love desires, not requires. (Yes, I realize how lame that was. ) When one looks at worship from a skeptic point of view, they see it as perhaps many prayers, going to church, reading sacred texts, listening to priests preach, etc… In the minds of the religious though, we see worship as praise and adoration of our own Creator who deserves all that praise. We see worship as a response to those very gifts (especially of Live and Love) given to us; that is, we see it as a desire to return that very love given to us.

So, I guess the idea of “creating creatures to worship” is more of the fulfillment of the desire for Pure Love to be loved back in return (but not required). Pure Love seeks to love unconditionally and be loved in the same manner. Worship can be seen as a giving of oneself to the object of worship. In the Catholic sense (I cannot speak for all Christians or religions), this giving of oneself is fulfilled in praise, adoration, obedience, the mind, the heart, even suffering, etc… These things are seen as desired by the worshipper to do for the “worshippee” without requirement of anything in return. We can only hope for blessings, fulfillments of promises and for salvation later on. If we know we have given ourselves completely to our God, then that hope will be reality (in our beliefs anyway).

Perhaps, this “creating creatures for worship” is seen as God knowing the inner desires of the human person. (This goes back to Pascal’s Wager. The belief is that if you go to the Christian side of the wager and start to worship, you will realize your inner desire to love your Creator unconditionally.) We can also see it as a fulfillment of the promises of eternal life by telling us to worship Him, our Creator.

Edited to say this is not an ‘‘anti’’ post - I would just like to look further into the ideas.

Sarah x

Good questions. They certainly were not easy!

As a disclaimer, I am not trying to claim this all as the reality (although I certainly believe it). I am only trying to answer your questions in the Catholic sense as I understand it. If a Catholic reads this and finds that it is completely or partially wrong, then let it be anathema.

I hope my response answered your questions.

Take care

Gregg