If Lucifer chose to rebel before the fall, why would we not be able to do the same in heaven?

[Neoplatonist]

I presume that you are aware that Tolkein was a devout Catholic, and most of his works are overtly Catholic in nature. Thus it would be closer to the truth to state that the first chapter of the Silmarillion sounds a lot like Catholic creation theology.

Through Reason. Based on what we do know of Angles, of the Beatific Vision and of the Will, we can determine how the angelic choices came about.

God is logically consistent, after all.

Right, so my question was: who reasoned this out? Father Fortea all on his own?

That Tolkien’s story parallels the Catholic creation story does not make it true. There are plenty of things in the Silmarillion that are added on, or stretched, or contrast with Catholic doctrine as well, so we would need to compare that to a more central source to distinguish among those categories.

 

[Dorothy]

Right, so my question was: who reasoned this out? Father Fortea all on his own?

That Tolkien’s story parallels the Catholic creation story does not make it true. There are plenty of things in the Silmarillion that are added on, or stretched, or contrast with Catholic doctrine as well, so we would need to compare that to a more central source to distinguish among those categories.

The Doctor of the Church, St. Thomas Acquinas helped a lot.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Right, so my question was: who reasoned this out? Father Fortea all on his own?

That Tolkien’s story parallels the Catholic creation story does not make it true. There are plenty of things in the Silmarillion that are added on, or stretched, or contrast with Catholic doctrine as well, so we would need to compare that to a more central source to distinguish among those categories.

Have a look at the following links. Taken together they might give you some ideas on the origin of church teaching in angels, and the teaching of people like Fr. Fortea.

tanbooks.com/doct/angels.htm

therealpresence.org/archives/Angelology/Angelology_027.htm

catholictradition.org/Angels/angels.htm (note - this one takes a bit of time to load as it’s lavishly illustrated)

solemncharge.com/post/2012/10/02/Catholic-Teaching-on-the-Guardian-Angels.aspx

By the time you’ve finished reading these, you’ll also find that what Fr. Fortea wrote has come down through the distilled experience of the church Fathers and theologians.

 

[Neoplatonist]

Have a look at the following links. Taken together they might give you some ideas on the origin of church teaching in angels, and the teaching of people like Fr. Fortea.

tanbooks.com/doct/angels.htm

therealpresence.org/archives/Angelology/Angelology_027.htm

catholictradition.org/Angels/angels.htm (note - this one takes a bit of time to load as it’s lavishly illustrated)

solemncharge.com/post/2012/10/02/Catholic-Teaching-on-the-Guardian-Angels.aspx

By the time you’ve finished reading these, you’ll also find that what Fr. Fortea wrote has come down through the distilled experience of the church Fathers and theologians.

Cool, thanks!

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Of course I cannot imagine *desiring *to rebel in heaven, however…
I went on with the Catholic view that once we are in heaven or hell we are there for eternity.
Surely we can choose God or reject him in this life, but why not afterward?

So a lot of the circular arguments are due to definitions.
Defining “heaven” might be a good place to start.

If heaven signifies the only “place” where we can be completely happy because that is what our nature was designed/created for … then the question resolves itself.
We simply know that any other choice of “place” would be a bad choice. And nobody willingly makes “bad choices.”

Of course there may be one exception…
If heaven signifies “me choosing to do whatever I choose” (regardless of whether or not it is what my nature was made for) then obviously eternity with God isn’t necessarily going to make us happy. We will only be completely happy if we are also able to choose things that go against what God made us for. But people with this attitude will never make it into the above heaven in the first place. God know’s they won’t be happy there.

But of course, those who see “heaven” as being the pure exercise of their own will (rather than what God made them for) will also be in “heaven” by not being in the above heaven.
And as they supremely worship their own will they will always be with “god” as well - cos “god” is then just themselves.

So everybody gets the heaven they want and everybody is free and rebellion is never possible.

Individual experience may vary .

 

[Kicks]

@Neoplatonist, tonyrey, and Charlemagne III

Though different, because the angels saw that God existed, even if they did not see Him in His full glory, whereas humans are required to accept even that fact on trust.

Sartre (who had no vested interest in Christian doctrine!) pointed out that “We are our choices” and “An individual chooses and makes himself”. We cease to be persons if we lack our God-given power to make our own decisions and demonstrate that we are made in His image and likeness.

We would not rebel in heaven because we had worked so hard to earn heaven. Satan did not earn heaven … and thus did not appreciate what he had not earned and threw it away.

This webpage is linked in response to the three persons quoted above.
ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/FRWILL.HTM
The webpage above is brought to you by EWTN.com, a Pro-Catholic website which contains wonderful explanations for Catholic doctrines.

@Jesus4ever - post #5
I’m currently reading my own copy of the ‘The Mystical City of God’, which is filled to the brim with information regarding various topics such as the fall of Adam and Eve, the virgin Mary, and of course, as Jesus4ever said, the angels and the fall of Lucifer.

‘The Mystical City of God’ is an exhausting and insightful read which I highly recommend.