How sacrilegious is this on Christmas Eve?

[itsjustdave1988]

ThisOne:

…all I could say now is that any “lack” in us (and I’m not sure what you mean by “Original Justice”) is given to us by our Creator, with His evident full knowledge of what would happen.

Let me first clarify what I mean by Original Justice…

From Fr. John Hardon:

**ORIGINAL JUSTICE. **The state of Adam and Eve before they sinned. It was the simultaneous possession of sanctifying grace, with its right to enter heaven, and the preternatural gifts. Had Adam not sinned, original justice would have been transmitted to all his descendants. Later, through repentance, he personally recovered sanctifying grace but not the other prerogatives of original justice. Since Adam, human beings are said to be deprived of original justice. Jesus Christ, the new head of the human race, by his passion and death expiated human sin and regained what Adam had lost. Sanctifying grace is restored at justification, but the preternatural gifts are returned only as capacities (such as the ability to overcome concupiscence) or only eventually (such as bodily immortality after the final resurrection). [John Hardon, *Pocket Catholic Dictionary

]

Adam and Eve sinned and were punished. However, I believe they were redeemed by Christ and are in a state of justice even more wonderful than their original state.

When we are born, due to the sin of Adam, we are not born with the gifts we would have had if Adam had not squandered his first gifts.

Archbishop Fulton Sheen put it this way:

You might say that it was very unjust of God to deprive us of friendship with him, and of these other gifts, simply because Adam sinned. There would have been injustice if God deprived you of your due, but you are no more entitled to be a child of God than a razor has a right to bloom, or a rose has the right to bark, or a dog has the right to quote Dante. What Adam lost was gifts, not a heritage. (Preface to Religion)

ThisOne:

If He created us with a “lack,” then He chose to do so and I cannot see where WE are to blame.

I had my heart broken by a young lady when I was in college. Years later I realized that I would definitely risk rejection all over again just to experience real love. I began to realize that for love to be real, it must include risk.

God certainly knew being born without sanctifying grace, in a fallen state would make it more difficult to master sin. There’s even a risk that God would be rejected as a result of his Divine plan. Love involves risk, if it is to be real love. There must be a risk on God’s part, and there is certainly a risk on our part. Yet, God knew that it would not be impossible (just risky) to choose the good over evil, because God did not abandon man, even in his fallen state.

For example, Cain had sin “crouching at his door.” God gave him Divine help, a direct supernatural revelation enlightening his intellect and strengthening his will by warning him of his sinful thoughts and exhorting him that it is necessary to master sin. Cain didn’t do God’s will, even though he was given the gifts to do so.

So, even though we are not born just, we are not left giftless by God, we are not left alone by God. God is constantly helping us through what theologians call “actual grace.” God knows what man can do if only we act in accord with actual grace.

I can see where I am to blame when I sin in my own life, but God gives ME more than a second chance, doesn’t He? Why didn’t he afford Adam and Eve the same thing He affords me?

I think he did. The following icon depicts Christ lifting Adam and Eve from limbus patrum or “Abraham’s bosom” (Luke 16:22). Repentence and sorrow due to love for God brings remittance of all sin. “Lover covers all offenses” (Proverbs 10:12; cf. 1 Pet 4:8). The grace of Christ gave Adam and Eve a chance for heaven, just as his grace is our only chance.
http://www.monasteryicons.com/products/regular/453.jpg

 

[itsjustdave1988]

ThisOne:

… Sometimes there is this nagging question of “Why’d He bother doing all this?”

I think it has to do with the nature of love. When you expose yourself to someone you love, and instead of turning away from you they love you in return, it’s worth all the pain and sorrow in the world. Love is worth the risk of rejection.

 

[ThisOne]

itsjustdave1988:

I think it has to do with the nature of love. When you expose yourself to someone you love, and instead of turning away from you they love you in return, it’s worth all the pain and sorrow in the world. Love is worth the risk of rejection.

I mean by “all this” the whole thing – the universe, mankind, everything.

Why did God create human beings at all?

I’m a bit confused about this, as you can see, especially because whatever awareness Adam and Eve had, or judgment, or ability to think clearly, or anything they possessed, was GIVEN to them by God, who knew their capacities. He knew not only their capacities, but what they would actually do. So why is presented as if they could have done differently? Am I missing something? Is it that God wanted to see if mortals made in His image could think for themselves? Is it kind of like humans wanting to create a computer that can “think”?

Whenever we talk about original sin and so forth, I think we are working from our vantage point back to what we think God intended rather than knowing for sure WHY He did any of it. I’d like to know that part, not just our view “from here,” as it were. Do you get what I am trying to say?

I do realize that what I want may not be available at all except as we can find it in the scriptures or in other writings in the Church, but I think philosophically, it’s a valid question.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

ThisOne:

I mean by “all this” the whole thing – the universe, mankind, everything.

Why did God create human beings at all?

I agree with the-3rd-parent, the nature of love is to create. Love unshared is something I cannot even imagine. If God is love, then I think it is His nature to share that love with another.

ThisOne:

He knew not only their capacities, but what they would actually do. So why is presented as if they could have done differently? Am I missing something?

Last week I told my kids to clean their room. I don’t claim to have foreknowledge, but I was darn certain they weren’t going to clean their rooms. My “certainty” of what they would do did not determine their actions. They still had freewill, even if I knew before hand (although imperfectly), what they would do.

Likewise, God’s foreknowledge does not take away our freewill. His certainty is absolute, whereas mine is merely mortal guesswork. However, the principle is the same. Divine foreknowledge is not the same as absence of freewill.

ThisOne:

I think we are working from our vantage point back to what we think God intended rather than knowing for sure WHY He did any of it. I’d like to know that part, not just our view “from here,” as it were. Do you get what I am trying to say?

Yes, I think so. Albert Einstein said, “I want to know God’s thoughts, the rest are just details.” We all have a desire to know God more perfectly than we possibly can this side of heaven. St. Paul taught, "For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood" (1 Cor 13:12).St. Augustine wrote, “Thou hast made us for thyself and restless is our heart until it comes to rest in thee.” (*Confessions of Augustine, *Bk I, ch. 1) I think they are all expressing the same thing you are.

I do realize that what I want may not be available at all except as we can find it in the scriptures or in other writings in the Church, but I think philosophically, it’s a valid question.

It is certainly valid to wonder what motivated God in his Divine Plan. But we have a revealed religion. If God doesn’t reveal it, I think some things that we wonder about will remain simply wonderful.

Archbishop Fulton Sheen asserted, “Perfection of personality does not consist in knowing God’s plan, but in submitting to it as it reveals itself in the circumstances of life.” (The Seven Words of Jesus and Mary). I think God want’s our lives to be filled with wonder about Him, because even this wonder has great value in our journey toward Him. Yet, we are often like a child having to wait for Christmas, although we have an urge to open our presents early.

Merry Christmas :angel1:

 

[ThisOne]

Thanks, Dave. Much as I thought/knew/needed to hear from someone other than myself.

I also see that Fulton Sheen had that knack for knowing people’s questions before they can even formulate them. I really need to read more of what he wrote. I’ve only read his Life of Christ and your quote reminds me that he’s probably an excellent author for me to read right about now.

Thanks, again!!

 

[reen12]

quote: ThisOne

I mean by “all this” the whole thing – the universe, mankind, everything.

Why did God create human beings at all?

I’m a bit confused about this, as you can see, especially because whatever awareness Adam and Eve had, or judgment, or ability to think clearly, or anything they possessed, was GIVEN to them by God, who knew their capacities. He knew not only their capacities, but what they would actually do. So why is presented as if they could have done differently? Am I missing something? Is it that God wanted to see if mortals made in His image could think for themselves? Is it kind of like humans wanting to create a computer that can “think”?

Well, there are many here who can give you the
reply of Christianity [and that of the CC, within
Christianity].

How about this?
If I see the book of Genesis as conveying something
that God wanted me to know…i.e., somewhere along
the line, a man and woman chose their own will over
God’s will…then, as a result, there were reprecussions.

Was there a garden? A speaking serpent?
Original Justice? Who, in heaven’s name, knows?
[Christianity will maintain, fervently, that there was
a garden, that Original Justice existed etc.] but
the fact is, that generates more questions than it
answers.]

If I am to accept both Judaic thought and Christian
thought, then I need accept that somewhere,
somehow, sometime humans sinned. And that
a Messiah was promised.

[Now, the interesting thing is, Orthodox Judaism does not
hold that there is any such* thing as Original Sin…and
that the losses incurred were physical in nature, in
addition to the loss of the close walk with God.
[Adam walked with God, in the Garden.]

aish.com/spirituality/growth/Human_Nature_Inherently_Good_or_Evil$_Ethics_of_the_Fathers_17.asp

[This link describes, I think, the idea that human beings
are totally depraved, in nature [Luther] rather than the
Catholic position, that human beings are wounded in their nature.
Still, the contrast is: Judaism does not hold either position.
[That is, there is no “sin” of Adam, passed down, through
the generations.]
In Orthodox Judaic thought, there is an inclination toward good and
an inclination toward evil, and human beings
are to chose the good…with an “unwounded” nature.]

Additionally, the question can be put as:
What is all this business about life, followed
by eternal life? Why not cut to the chase and
start off…in heaven.
“My ways are not your ways, My thoughts are not
your thoughts.”

quote: reen12

And, if this makes sense: I looked for the
purpose of life and then I realized …the question is *not *
What am I doing here? but what is God’s purpose for me,
since I’m here. [emphasis mine]

Does this make any sense? I end up throwing up
my hands and saying: I don’t get it. I look at these
elegant “explanations” and say: “Yeah…right.”

I suppose the questions could be addressed as:
God said: Let there by light, and there was light.
He needed no one’s permission. And, perhaps
He thought: there will be those who will wonder
why I did all of this? why I did it in this way?
and I will ask of them a great thing…trust.

Trust…that I will their good. Trust…that I am with them.
Trust…that I will save them, and that they will, one day,
understand the “why” because the “why” is not an
“explanation,” but a Person.

For, then, they will see me face to Face, they will
know, even as they are known. They see now,
as in a mirror, darkly, but then, face to Face. [St. Paul]

reen12

 

[ThisOne]

Reen wrote: "Does this make any sense? I end up throwing up
my hands and saying: I don’t get it. I look at these
elegant “explanations” and say: “Yeah…right.” "

EXACTLY!

I have been sick, reen, and I am recovering, so I am re-“covering” some old ground. You know, stuff I just accepted when I converted, and if I thought about it in depth at all, was satisfied with the answers I got. I just hadn’t recently approached these questions and needed some other believers’ (name removed by moderator)ut. You know exactly what I am talking about, as Dave and I’m sure everyone else does. And you’ve expressed it quite eloquently – “Yeah, right!”

LOL.

Peace,

ThisOne

 

[reen12]

Hello, ThisOne,

It may be of interest to know that I have dealt
with mental illness for 50 years…yet, it never touched
my ability to reason, thank God. The whole thing
threw me totally off-balance, 10 years ago, and that was the
start of “re-building” reen, from the ground floor up.

I guess I end up asking myself: if I appeared before
God, tonight, what could I look in Him the eye and
say I really believed. [Actually, I plan to to cast
myself before Him, and beg for mercy.]

• this*, like I need the flu! ]

As I said, above, for me it came down to a matter of trust.
Spiritual works can be redolent of the age in which they
are written. Thomas is a bit over the top, for me, but
perhaps not for others.

Best wishes,

reen12

 

[ThisOne]

Serves me right for visiting strange forums here.

I should stick with Introduction to the Devout Life and Treatise on the Love of God by St. Francis de Sales, my old stand-bys.

 

[reen12]

quote: ThisOne

I should stick with Introduction to the Devout Life and Treatise on the Love of God by St. Francis de Sales, my old stand-bys

Works for me! :tiphat:

reen12

 

[AquinasXVI]

This One:

Try the Theology of the Body…it addresses your questions beautifully.

I don’t think it’s sacreligious at all, out of the liturgical season, maybe…but very fundamental questions are perennial.

in XT.