Hate the sin, love the sinner?

[dacoobob]

… continued from above …

"I imagine somebody will say, `Well, if one is allowed to condemn the enemy’s acts, and punish him, and kill him, what difference is left between Christian morality and the ordinary view?’ All the difference in the world. Remember, we Christians think man lives for ever. Therefore, what really matters is those little marks or twists on the central, inside part of the soul which are going to turn it, in the long run, into a heavenly or a hellish creature. We may kill if necessary, but we must not hate and enjoy hating. We may punish if necessary, but we must not enjoy it. In other words, something inside us, the feeling of resentment, the feeling that wants to get one’s own back, must be simply killed. I do not mean that anyone can decide this moment that he will never feel it any more. That is not how things happen. I mean that every time it bobs its head up, day after day, year after year, all our lives long, we must hit it on the head. It is hard work, but the attempt is not impossible. Even while we kill and punish we must try to feel about the enemy as we feel about ourselves - to wish that he were not bead, to hope that he may, in this world or another, be cured in fact, to wish his good. That is what is meant in the Bible by loving him: wishing his good, not feeling fond of him nor saying he is nice when he is not.

I admit that this means loving people who have nothing loveable about them. But then, has oneself anything loveable about it? You love it simply because it is yourself. God tends us to love all selves in the same way and for the me reason: but He has given us the sum ready worked out in our own case to show us how it works. We have en to go on and apply the rule to all the other selves. Perhaps it makes it easier if we remember that that is how He loves us. Not for any nice, attractive qualities we think we have, but just because we are the things called selves. For really there is nothing else in us to love: creatures like us who actually find hatred such a pleasure that to give it up is like giving up beer or tobacco." (from Mere Christianity)

 

[blessedtoo]

**Really? I don’t see that at all. But one of the attributes of Catholicism has been that we don’t go around prostyletizing like some do. We have an excellent trained clergy, religious and magisterium for that. **

I get a kick when people just assume that speaking, living, and sharing the truth means “prostylestizing”, a charged word if there ever was one. We are all the Body of Christ. We are all charged with the obligation to spread the truth. Tell me how do you think Christianity would have spread if the teaching was relegated only to the twelve?
**

Do you not see or agree that one on one this kind of telling other grown adults they are sinful and in dire need of repentance can be viewed as extreme arrogance, unwanted interference, and as having the exact opposite impact on the sinful one you are ministering to? (We are not talking about parental/family issues here)

**

Well, sure, when you put it like that. However, that’s not really my style. It wasn’t our Lord’s style either. And it’s hard to be arrogant when you’ve lived as sinful a lifestyle as I have - and all know it. So, contrary to what you seem to think, I’m not on a high horse. Generally, I tell those I care for that I love them and want them to be in heaven, with me hopefully. And then I share with them the instructions on how to get there. If they get mad, so be it. I’ve planted the seed. Someday, it will take root and grow. I might be dead and gone, but that’s not really the point, is it? I’m not in it for the personal glory.

**

I just question the morality of telling someone they are “immoral” as Christian mission.

**
Yes, I can see that clearly. It’s hard to be certain of how to act when you are not certain of the truth yourself.

 

[blessedtoo]

****I think we are probably parsing here. Love no doubt is feeling. It is certainly beyond some intellectual belief. You love you wife, husband, children, pets…these are all objective love objects but we all agree we feel love for these same people as well. ****

**Really? How do you “feel” about our President? Do you have loving “feelings” for him? I’m going to go out on a limb here and say probably not. Yet, we are called to love everyone, even our enemies. What happens when the “feeling” just isn’t there? **

How about when your husband, mother, father, child hurts you deeply? Do you have loving “feelings”? Wouldn’t you agree that the rush of “feelings” comes and goes, depending very much on external circumstances? In the dark moments we make the choice to LOVE, whether we feel it or not.

******I think I’m getting it now. You believe that to feel something gives license to people to follow their feelings instead of what objectively they know they should believe. That is a very different issue. ******

**No, you’re not. I am talking about the Christian understanding of love. Read Pope Benedicts first encyclical, Deus Caritas Est. It is most decidedly NOT a very different issue. It speaks to this issue quite eloquently.

******Again, I think you separate what cannot really be separated. ******

No surprise. Many are influenced by the pop psychology of our culture which believes that feelings are the guide to life. A quick look around at the condition of our society should give a good indication of where that ideology has led.

******If feelings are relative and love doent rely on the way we feel, then you are simply saying that you intellectually love the sinner while personally feeling anything but love for him/her. That I submit is the problem.You claim to know Christ’s true feelings were not in line with his statements. What other examples do you claim prove Christ’s love was different than his feelings? ******

****I didn’t say any such thing. I would never presume to know what Our Lord was “feeling” at the moment they pressed the crown of thorns into His head. However, I do know how I would feel. And most likely how you would feel. The point is, we are called to love those who persecute us and hate us, just as Our Lord did. In all His references to loving one another, He never spoke of the “feeling” of love. ****

******What? I submit, how do you intellectually love without feeling anything? The mere recitation of the words? ******

I never said anything about intellectually loving someone. In fact, I dismissed this a few posts back. Christian love is an act of the will. It is not dependent on feelings, thoughts, or circumstances.

******Sorry, but I still can’t see what distinction you claim between love and feeling love. ******

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20051225_deus-caritas-est_en.html

**BTW: Using boldface makes my posts bold as well. ****

 

[TMC]

Really? How do you “feel” about our President? Do you have loving “feelings” for him? I’m going to go out on a limb here and say probably not. Yet, we are called to love everyone, even our enemies. What happens when the “feeling” just isn’t there?

How about when your husband, mother, father, child hurts you deeply? Do you have loving “feelings”? Wouldn’t you agree that the rush of “feelings” comes and goes, depending very much on external circumstances? In the dark moments we make the choice to LOVE, whether we feel it or not.

No, you’re not. I am talking about the Christian understanding of love. Read Pope Benedicts first encyclical, Deus Caritas Est. It is most decidedly NOT a very different issue. It speaks to this issue quite eloquently.

No surprise. Many are influenced by the pop psychology of our culture which believes that feelings are the guide to life. A quick look around at the condition of our society should give a good indication of where that ideology has led.

I didn’t say any such thing. I would never presume to know what Our Lord was “feeling” at the moment they pressed the crown of thorns into His head. However, I do know how I would feel. And most likely how you would feel. The point is, we are called to love those who persecute us and hate us, just as Our Lord did. In all His references to loving one another, He never spoke of the “feeling” of love.

I never said anything about intellectually loving someone. In fact, I dismissed this a few posts back. Christian love is an act of the will. It is not dependent on feelings, thoughts, or circumstances.

I just don’t understand what you mean by love, I guess. You say it is neither an act of the intellect or a feeling. You say it is an act of will. Not sure how that is separate from the intellect. Does it come from the heart? From the head? From the soul? To me love is all of these things. It encompasses both intellect and will. We are charged with mastering our intellect and bending our will to God’s will. In doing so we become able to truly love one another, feelings and all.

I have read the marvelous DEUS CARITAS EST that you link to several times. Everyone should. I don’t see that Benedict draws the distinction that you do. He explains that love is not a mere sentiment, but he also explains that it encompasses both the intellect and the will. If the love we receive from God is fully accepted and returned, it engages our entire being, our full self, including “feelings” and this is what enables us to truly love others in the same way that God loves us and that we love God. And as we learn to love the other, we learn to love God all the more, until we begin to see the world the way He does.

Benedict teaches us:

Love of neighbour is thus shown to be possible in the way proclaimed by the Bible, by Jesus. It consists in the very fact that, in God and with God, I love even the person whom I do not like or even know. This can only take place on the basis of an intimate encounter with God, an encounter which has become a communion of will, even affecting my feelings. Then I learn to look on this other person not simply with my eyes and my feelings, but from the perspective of Jesus Christ. His friend is my friend. Going beyond exterior appearances, I perceive in others an interior desire for a sign of love, of concern. This I can offer them not only through the organizations intended for such purposes, accepting it perhaps as a political necessity. Seeing with the eyes of Christ, I can give to others much more than their outward necessities; I can give them the look of love which they crave.

To me this is not merely willing ourselves to wish the best for others, it is true love, agape, feelings and all. Yes, we all sometimes react to those we love, brothers, children, spouses with anger and bitterness. We call this sin. We are all imperfect sinners, but we all strive to love.

Let me ask a different question that gets to the heart of this from a different angle. I feel a deep abiding agape love for my own children, for my siblings, and for my dearest friends. Is “Christian love” something different from this love? Do you believe that love for children, siblings and friends is an act of will that is divorced from feeling? Or is the love Christ called us to something different from the love we feel for family and friends? If it is something different, why do we call it love? Why do we call each other brothers and sisters?

Christ calls us to love everyone the same way that we love those closest to us. He loves each of us in this way, that much is certain. It is not easy. It is very very hard. Maybe no sinner can get all the way there. But that is what He has commanded and we should try.

 

[blessedtoo]

I am responding to your assertion that:

I certainly don’t agree that feelings, whether ours or our neighbors, are secondary to the issue of Christian love.

Maybe I am misunderstanding YOU, but I doubt it since I am pretty familiar with your posts on sin, love, etc.

He explains that love is not a mere sentiment

Correct. Sentiment, in this case, meaning “feelings”.

I feel a deep abiding agape love for my own children, for my siblings, and for my dearest friends. Is “Christian love” something different from this love?

No. Agape, as described by B16 is exactly what we, as Christians, are called to - the love of Christians for other persons, corresponding to the love of God for humankind.

If the love we receive from God is fully accepted and returned, it engages our entire being, our full self, including “feelings” and this is what enables us to truly love others in the same way that God loves us and that we love God.

Love is not dependent on how we “feel” at any given time. Our “feelings” do not enable us to truly love others.

As Christians, we are called to help one another get to heaven. Sometimes, that endeavor can invoke unpleasant “feelings”, either within us or in others. That can be very easily illustrated by any number of posts and threads right here on CAF - wives who pray for their husband’s conversion, parents who pray for their children’s immoral lifestyles, etc. Or a more basic example - ask a young mama how much love she “feels” for her two year old when he has just thrown his spaghetti dinner all over the nice white ceiling.

Maybe we are talking past eachother but your assertion that our “feelings are not secondary to the issue of Christian love” stopped me in my tracks. A Catholic understanding of love is transcendent and goes beyond our culture’s Hallmark greeting card theology.