Is Love really the greatest? (1 Corinthians 13:13)

[spockrates]

I’d like to check whether we’re talking about the same thing:

**Charity **
1822 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.

If this is what the thread is dealing with , if this is the Agape about which we’re told by the NT, I am at loss if you ask me to tell you something wiser than that.
We’re not speaking about mere sentiment , emotion, as beautiful and marvellous as that can be.​

At this point you might want to consider and comment the quotation from Deus Caritas est in post 276, which could turn out IMHO very helpful.

Maybe I could say that Christianity IMHO believes there’s nothing wiser than Loving God. Are you telling me that I am definitely wrong Spock ?

What is wiser than loving God above all things ? What is wiser than wanting what God wants ?
"Thy will be done "

Yes, noting is wiser than loving God and others, but is saying Love is wise the same thing as saying Love is Wisdom? Think about it. Love is an emotion that motivates us to action. Wisdom is rational thought that guides our action. If an act can be loving, yet unwise, that means that Love (apart from wise action) is *not *Wisdom; doesn’t it? If an act can be wise, yet done with indifference, that means that Wisdom (apart from feeling of compassion) is *not *Love; doesn’t it?

I mean, when you or I say, “Love is wise,” what we mean is that Love and Wisdom working together is wise. We do not mean that Love working without Wisdom is wise; do we? Don’t you agree that this is the conclusion we reach if we accept that the Wisdom is a different class of virtue than Love?

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Wisdom is not the same as Love, is she?

 

[spockrates]

Here we are. If we consider Loving God in its dimension as idem velle, to want the same things as He, we understand IMHO that the granddaughter did not love God.

She did not love as God wanted; but can you deny that she did indeed love God? If you can, then please explain why her love was insincere.

My present appraisal of the quoted short sentence by St. Augustine “love and do what you will “ builds on your suggestion about putting God’s will into the picture.

If you love God, …. you want what He wants.
Assembling then the Pope’s insights with yours own, we can have “Love God and do what you will. Because the more you love Him, the more your will is according to His will”

Yes, but is it not a real possibility that one can misunderstand what God wants? For example, does the granddaughter’s misunderstanding make her love for God and her grandmother disingenuous?

We can definitely love creatures in an unwise manner, as we saw.
If I kill my grandmother or anybody out of love for her, I am not loving God, or not enough.
Also, if I love my son or anybody more than I love Jesus, I am not loving God enough.

Yes, you might be on to something, here!



We might say that the granddaughter believes she is loving God and grandma, but is mistaken. She knows her feelings of affection for them are genuine (and how can we disagree that such emotion is not real)? She also believes that her actions are a true expression of that emotion, but you and I know better. For we understand that she is, in reality, actually deceived by what she feels is right. How, then, might she have escaped such deception?

 

[spockrates]

We can say, I suppose, both of the following: that in order to be in communion of will with God I must know His will, and that it is being in communion that shows I really know His will.

7If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you. 8This is to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples.
9"As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. 10If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commands and remain in his love. 11I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. ( John 15)

“…and my words remain in you,” you quoted the Logos (or the Wisdom) as saying. Yet, when we feel love, we think not words, but compassion, or passion, or righteous indignation. These thoughts are not of the words of the Word of God, but are in tune with the Spirit of God. But let me ask you this, P7: When you think about what is the right thing to do in any situation, do you not think in words? Do you not ask yourself and God what should be done, and then answer yourself or allow God to answer you with the words of Wisdom from Sacred Scripture and elsewhere? These words are not the same as the feelings of Love. Are they not the words of the virtue of Wisdom?

I cannot see how we, in Loving Him, could be unwise.

Agreed! Genuine Love cannot be unwise. But only Wisdom can tell us for certain if the love we have is genuine Love, or deception in disguise! Don’t you agree?

You see why I focused on the distinction between loving Him and loving our neighbour.

At present I cannot “unsee” , that Loving Him, approaching a communion of wills with Him ( do you agree that loving Him means approaching a communion of wills ?), is supreme Wisdom.

Are we saying similar things , but calling similar things in different manner ?

If, eg, you do not want to call communion with His will “Love”, but simply “Wisdom”, so be it.
Then, that wisdom, which with the Church I call Love, is greatest.

In Christ
P7

Yes, I think we are close to agreeing completely.



You see, I’m wondering whether there is a difference between the virtues of Wisdom and Love. And you and I agree that the Catholic Encyclopedia and the Catechism of the Catholic Church make a distinction between the two virtues. You and I agree that having wisdom without Love is no virtue of Wisdom at all, but a fraud. You and I agree that having love without Wisdom is not a virtue either, but also an impostor. You and I agree that if one’s act of love is against the will of God, then one is deceived. I wonder if we also agree that Wisdom (and her aspects of fortitude, prudence, temperance, justice, and the like) are what keep us from being deceived and keep our Love in line with the will of God. Do we?

 

[spockrates]

At this point I’d like to post an excerpt from *Deus Caritas est *by B16,

*God does not demand of us a feeling which we ourselves are incapable of producing. He loves us, he makes us see and experience his love, and since he has “loved us first”, love can also blossom as a response within us.

In the gradual unfolding of this encounter, it is clearly revealed that love is not merely a sentiment. Sentiments come and go. A sentiment can be a marvellous first spark, but it is not the fullness of love. Earlier we spoke of the process of purification and maturation by which eros comes fully into its own, becomes love in the full meaning of the word. It is characteristic of mature love that it calls into play all man’s potentialities; it engages the whole man, so to speak. Contact with the visible manifestations of God’s love can awaken within us a feeling of joy born of the experience of being loved. But this encounter also engages our will and our intellect. Acknowledgment of the living God is one path towards love, and the “yes” of our will to his will unites our intellect, will and sentiments in the all- embracing act of love. *

But this process is always open-ended; love is never “finished” and complete; throughout life, it changes and matures, and thus remains faithful to itself. Idem velle atque idem nolle [9]—to want the same thing, and to reject the same thing—was recognized by antiquity as the authentic content of love: the one becomes similar to the other, and this leads to a community of will and thought.
The love-story between God and man consists in the very fact that this communion of will increases in a communion of thought and sentiment, and thus our will and God’s will increasingly coincide: God’s will is no longer for me an alien will, something imposed on me from without by the commandments, but it is now my own will, based on the realization that God is in fact more deeply present to me than I am to myself.[10]

Then self- abandonment to God increases and God becomes our joy (cf. Ps 73 [72]:23-28).

Isn’t that insightful and beautiful ?

P7:

Thanks for reminding me to respond to this post.

Yes, I agree! Love is *not *merely a sentiment. As the Boston song of my youth wisely said, she is, “More than a feeling.” Love is so much more than an emotion of passion, righteous indignation, or compassion. She is a motivation that compels us, a decision to act for the benefit of others, an action that completes the motivation and action. Yet, is Love a rational determiner of truth? Or is this quality an attribute of Wisdom alone? If Love does impart wisdom, then how does she do it? Does she give us a feeling that what we intend to do is indeed God’s will?

 

[ryanoneil]

Yes, Ryan, and think about what you just said: “…Wisdom did not exists at one** time**…”

Tell me, Ryan, do you think it possible that time itself was created by God?

Absolutely!

 

[spockrates]

Absolutely!

Thank you for responding, Ryan! I share your confidence about this answer, and am glad you arrived just in time. You see, I believe we have an urgent matter to which to attend. For I find I myself am in labor and about to give birth to what I hope is a living and healthy truth! You see, I am in the pangs of wonder as to whether the following possible: When we hear Wisdom speak in this passage,

"The LORD brought me [Wisdom] forth as the first of his works,
before his deeds of old;

I was appointed from eternity,
from the beginning, before the world began.

When there were no oceans, I was given birth,
when there were no springs abounding with water;

before the mountains were settled in place,
before the hills, I was given birth,

before he made the earth or its fields
or any of the dust of the world.

I was there when he set the heavens in place,
when he marked out the horizon on the face of the deep,

when he established the clouds above
and fixed securely the fountains of the deep,

when he gave the sea its boundary
so the waters would not overstep his command,
and when he marked out the foundations of the earth.

Then I [Wisdom] was the craftsman at his side.
I was filled with delight day after day,
rejoicing always in his presence,

rejoicing in his whole world
and delighting in mankind."

(Proverbs 8:22-31)

our lady physician Wisdom educes me to wonder whether she is speaking of what occurs in time, rather than what occurred in eternity past (if indeed eternity can accurately be said to have a past or a future and not merely be an eternal now). At least, I think she might be properly understood to not be speaking of what occurred before there was time (or, maybe, in the place outside of time), as she mentions nothing of eternity, before time was.

Thus, the truth might be that God did *not *develop the virtue of Wisdom, as if at one time He was not wise! Instead, God might rightly be said to always be wise, even before time itself was delivered. But at the time time was born, Wisdom was the first virtue (or among the first virtues) God exercised to deliver the infant tempus. For to create creation in a haphazard and unwise way would make God less than He is–less than omniscient. And I think it does not take omniscience to conceive that truth! Therefore, if the idea that we have just delivered is the truth, and not stillborn, then I believe we have eliminated the apparent contradiction of Wisdom saying, “The LORD brought me forth as the first of His works.”

But wait! It appears I’m giving birth to twin truths, and the second is not coming out as easily as the first! For as Wisdom holds up the truth she has just helped to deliver, I find my joy is mixed with concern as the pangs of a second remain. That concern is this: We appear to be left with two alternatives.

Either:

1. 
   *]Wisdom is first in chronology (in which case we have to wonder whether God’s creation was motivated by love, for motivation comes before action),
   
   or
   
   *]Wisdom is first in importance in God Himself (in which case Wisdom is found to be greater than Love in God Himself and we would be forced to ask ourselves why she is not greater than Love in we ourselves).
   
   What do you prefer, my good friend? And why?

 

[pneuma07]

Agreed; Wisdom, it seems, is something God freely gives us, so this virtue can rightly be called a gift. The Holy Spirit, it seems, somehow gives us the wisdom God Himself has. But is not Love also a virtue freely given by God through the Holy Spirit?

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

(Galatians 5:22-23)

Or would you say, P7, that the fruit of the Holy Spirit not a free gift, but an earned reward?

Dear Spock,

JPII said in 1980 on this

If mastery in the sphere of ethos is manifested and realized as “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control”—as we read in the Letter to the Galatians—then behind each of these realizations, these ways of behaving, these moral virtues, there is a specific choice, that is, an effort of the will, the fruit of the human spirit permeated by the Spirit of God, which is manifested in choosing good. Speaking with the language of Paul, “The desires of the Spirit are against the flesh” (Gal 5:17). …In this struggle between good and evil, man proves himself stronger, thanks to the power of the Holy Spirit, who, operating within man’s spirit, causes his desires to bear fruit in good. Therefore, these are not only—and not so much—“works” of man, as “fruit,” that is, the effect of the action of the Spirit in man.

No reward is strictly earned before God.

It seems by calling these virtues fruits of the Spirit, rather than gifts, Paul wants to underline a dimension of work

. Remember BTW that Catholicism sees man as active co-worker of God, while clearly teaching the absolute preminence of God’s intiative.

In James 1:5 this dimension is not specifically implied, and it seems about Wisdom that we ask and we’re given. That appears to justify the distinction between fruits of the Spirit and gifts of the Spirit, which sustain moral life, and therefore the other virtues.

Interesting that the first of the fruits of the Spirit is …Love.

 

[pneuma07]

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. They complete and perfect the virtues of those who receive them. They make the faithful docile in readily obeying divine inspirations.

(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1831)

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...s.Files/11/5226.StarTrekSpockFascinating1.jpg

In a word: Fascinating! Our dialog, and perhaps the Holy Spirit, has brought us to a point of understanding I never suspected!



Rather than many classes of immortal virtue, there now appears to be only two–Love and Wisdom. Love is that class of virtue which is guided by emotion (but not reason), and Wisdom is that class of virtue which is guided by reason (but not emotion). And all of the other virtues might fit under one or the other of these two categories. Consider the six aforementioned virtues:

• understanding
• counsel
• fortitude
• knowledge
• piety
• fear of the Lord

All of these appear now to me to be aspects of Wisdom, for they are examples of what it means to be wise! Consider other virtues as well:

• temperance
• prudence
• justice

These, the Catholic Encyclopedia indicates, are the moral virtues.

newadvent.org/cathen/15472a.htm

Yet, are they not also examples, or kinds, of Wisdom? ?

Cautiosness in seeing so many mere manifestations of wisdom should be considered IMHO.

Let’s not forget or undervalue distinctions. Why are the gifts seven ?

First, Aquinas reminds us that the three most basic gifts belong to the appetitive power, rather than the cognitive one, to which the further four, comprising wisdom belong.

This is what Aquinas proposes

Accordingly on the part of the things proposed to faith for belief, two things are requisite on our part: first that they be penetrated or grasped by the intellect, and this belongs to the gift of understanding. Secondly, it is necessary that man should judge these things aright, that he should esteem that he ought to adhere to these things, and to withdraw from their opposites: and this judgment, with regard to Divine things belong to the gift of wisdom, but with regard to created things, belongs to the gift of knowledge, and as to its application to individual actions, belongs to the gift of counsel. ( summa theologica, second part of the second part, the gift of understanding)

From this point of view each of the gifts has its place and task of its own. Wisdom being the highest.
Same about justice and the other cardinal virtues.

In St Thomas’ view, the seven gifts of the Spirit are linked to the seven moral virtues.
More in particular each of them is specifically linked to a virtue. Wisdom to Love.

 

[pneuma07]

Yes, noting is wiser than loving God and others, but is saying Love is wise the same thing as saying Love is Wisdom? Think about it. Love is an emotion that motivates us to action. Wisdom is rational thought that guides our action. If an act can be loving, yet unwise, that means that Love (apart from wise action) is *not *Wisdom; doesn’t it? If an act can be wise, yet done with indifference, that means that Wisdom (apart from feeling of compassion) is *not *Love; doesn’t it?

I mean, when you or I say, “Love is wise,” what we mean is that Love and Wisdom working together is wise. We do not mean that Love working without Wisdom is wise; do we? Don’t you agree that this is the conclusion we reach if we accept that the Wisdom is a different class of virtue than Love?

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_bSeTzlEp74s/R9lKkLanRpI/AAAAAAAAAGk/iOUUmksf7QA/0000008339_20060920152430.jpg

Wisdom is not the same as Love, is she?

I do not say L = W.
We easily conclude that acts of love and of wisdom do not always overlap. And it would not be useful erasing the distinction between these concepts.

But ….nothing is wiser than loving God.
And we can probably say that the strongest motivation to ask for the gift of wisdom is to be able to better love God. Can we ?

Do you want to love God to become wise, or do you want to become wise to love God ?
I am inclined towards the latter.

If my ultimate goal is wisdom and knowledge in itself , making thus them the greatest for me, I am a new Adam or Eve. I do not follow God’s paths.
I want to become similar to Him outside Him. Which would be very unwise of me.

IMHO if we want on the contrary to become similar to Him in harmony with Him, this harmony itself is the ultimate goal. In other words love, communion of wills. So we have to ask for wisdom as guide into this harmony, into love for God.
Which is our ultimate goal.

Just thinking aloud.

 

[pneuma07]

She did not love as God wanted; but can you deny that she did indeed love God? If you can, then please explain why her love was insincere.



Yes, but is it not a real possibility that one can misunderstand what God wants? For example, does the granddaughter’s misunderstanding make her love for God and her grandmother disingenuous?



Yes, you might be on to something, here!



We might say that the granddaughter believes she is loving God and grandma, but is mistaken. She knows her feelings of affection for them are genuine (and how can we disagree that such emotion is not real)? She also believes that her actions are a true expression of that emotion, but you and I know better. For we understand that she is, in reality, actually deceived by what she feels is right. How, then, might she have escaped such deception?

What I was saying elaborating on St. Augustine “love and do what you will”, helped by yourself and the Pope is:

“be in communion with His will.”

What we can say is IMHO that the granddaughter, in acting as she did, was not in communion with His will ( according to what we can know about His will through Revelation )

 

[pneuma07]

“…and my words remain in you,” you quoted the Logos (or the Wisdom) as saying. Yet, when we feel love, we think not words, but compassion, or passion, or righteous indignation. These thoughts are not of the words of the Word of God, but are in tune with the Spirit of God. But let me ask you this, P7: When you think about what is the right thing to do in any situation, do you not think in words? Do you not ask yourself and God what should be done, and then answer yourself or allow God to answer you with the words of Wisdom from Sacred Scripture and elsewhere? These words are not the same as the feelings of Love. Are they not the words of the virtue of Wisdom?



Agreed! Genuine Love cannot be unwise. But only Wisdom can tell us for certain if the love we have is genuine Love, or deception in disguise! Don’t you agree?



Yes, I think we are close to agreeing completely.



You see, I’m wondering whether there is a difference between the virtues of Wisdom and Love. And you and I agree that the Catholic Encyclopedia and the Catechism of the Catholic Church make a distinction between the two virtues. You and I agree that having wisdom without Love is no virtue of Wisdom at all, but a fraud. You and I agree that having love without Wisdom is not a virtue either, but also an impostor. You and I agree that if one’s act of love is against the will of God, then one is deceived. I wonder if we also agree that Wisdom (and her aspects of fortitude, prudence, temperance, justice, and the like) are what keep us from being deceived and keep our Love in line with the will of God. Do we?

While dancing around the relationship Wisdom-Love I am fascinated by considering Jesus as Wisdom Incarnate. ( could I say Incarnate out of Love ?).

And by this passage from John H. Newman on Her Mother, which you can find on EWTN library
SEDES SAPIENTIAE—SEAT OF WISDOM

Mary has this title in her Litany, because the Son of God, who is also called in Scripture the Word and Wisdom of God, once dwelt in her, and then, after His birth of her, was carried in her arms and seated in her lap in His first years. Thus, being as it were, the human throne of Him who reigns in heaven, she is called the “Seat of Wisdom.” …… Moses had the privilege only now and then, from time to time; but Mary for thirty continuous years saw and heard Him, being all through that time face to face with Him, and being able to ask Him any question which she wished explained, and knowing that the answers she received were from the Eternal God, who neither deceives nor can be deceived.

You consistently and persuasively underline that Wisdom tells us whether we have Love.
Not a minor point.

OTOH we have that:

Everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God. As simple as that.

Can I know God if I do not have Wisdom ?

So tonight our dialogue is leading into this seeming aporia.

How do we know whether we love ? By His Wisdom.
Ho do we know that we got His Wisdom ? If we love.


Your considerations on the excerpt I posted from Deus Caritas est lead into the very same issue.

How can Love and Wisdom measure, test each other ?

In Christ
P7

 

[spockrates]

Dear Spock,

JPII said in 1980 on this

If mastery in the sphere of ethos is manifested and realized as “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control”—as we read in the Letter to the Galatians—then behind each of these realizations, these ways of behaving, these moral virtues, there is a specific choice, that is, an effort of the will, the fruit of the human spirit permeated by the Spirit of God, which is manifested in choosing good. Speaking with the language of Paul, “The desires of the Spirit are against the flesh” (Gal 5:17). …In this struggle between good and evil, man proves himself stronger, thanks to the power of the Holy Spirit, who, operating within man’s spirit, causes his desires to bear fruit in good. Therefore, these are not only—and not so much—“works” of man, as “fruit,” that is, the effect of the action of the Spirit in man.

Yes, interesting, P7! However, I think not surprising. But I’m wondering (for I’m sure it is obvious by now that wonder is how I roll!) if this list is exhaustive. I mean, are

• love
• joy
• peace
• patience
• kindness
• goodness
• faithfulness
• gentleness
• self-control

the only fruits of the spirit? Paul’s intentions might not be to list every gift, but to list a few that are applicable to his subject of the letter to the Galatians. What about the moral virtues of Justice, Prudence and Fortitude? Does the Holy Spirit not empower us to be more just, more prudent and more courageous? And it’s not surprising to me that he does not mention Wisdom, for the Galatians appear to believe they had a wisdom superior to Paul’s.

No reward is strictly earned before God.

It seems by calling these virtues fruits of the Spirit, rather than gifts, Paul wants to underline a dimension of work

. Remember BTW that Catholicism sees man as active co-worker of God, while clearly teaching the absolute preminence of God’s intiative.

In James 1:5 this dimension is not specifically implied, and it seems about Wisdom that we ask and we’re given. That appears to justify the distinction between fruits of the Spirit and gifts of the Spirit, which sustain moral life, and therefore the other virtues.

Interesting that the first of the fruits of the Spirit is …Love.

If Paul’s list is exhaustive, then it does indeed follow that Wisdom is in no way a fruit of the spirit, as is Love. It would also follow that Faith and Hope are no more divinely produced than Wisdom, either. Are you saying that Faith and Hope are not evidence of the work of the Spirit of God in us?

http://www.lisapaitzspindler.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/bsg_women_2.jpg

**Are Hope, Wisdom and Faith really not fruits produced in you and me by the Holy Spirit? **

 

[spockrates]

Cautiosness in seeing so many mere manifestations of wisdom should be considered IMHO.

Let’s not forget or undervalue distinctions. Why are the gifts seven ?

First, Aquinas reminds us that the three most basic gifts belong to the appetitive power, rather than the cognitive one, to which the further four, comprising wisdom belong.

This is what Aquinas proposes

Accordingly on the part of the things proposed to faith for belief, two things are requisite on our part: first that they be penetrated or grasped by the intellect, and this belongs to the gift of understanding. Secondly, it is necessary that man should judge these things aright, that he should esteem that he ought to adhere to these things, and to withdraw from their opposites: and this judgment, with regard to Divine things belong to the gift of wisdom, but with regard to created things, belongs to the gift of knowledge, and as to its application to individual actions, belongs to the gift of counsel. ( summa theologica, second part of the second part, the gift of understanding)

From this point of view each of the gifts has its place and task of its own. Wisdom being the highest.
Same about justice and the other cardinal virtues.

In St Thomas’ view, the seven gifts of the Spirit are linked to the seven moral virtues.
More in particular each of them is specifically linked to a virtue. Wisdom to Love.

It seems my lack of the gift of Wisdom is showing, for I’m not quite sure I understand the wise words of the venerated saint as well as you do!



And rather than stay in my ignorance, I think it wise to follow Socrates’ wise counsel:

A wise man is not likely to talk nonsense. Let us try to understand him.

(Theaetetus)

I believe you are saying that a distinction should be made between gifts of the Holy Spirit and fruits of the Holy Spirit. But I’m not quite sure how that distinction should be made. You see, it seems to me that every fruit of the Holy Spirit is a gift of His, for (as you appear to agree) how can we earn such precious virtues as a deserved reward? So I think you and Aquinas would agree that all fruits of the Spirit are gifts of the Spirit.

What I think you are saying, then, is that virtues like Wisdom, Justice, Prudence, Fortitude, Faith and Hope are gifts of the Spirit of a different kind. This must mean that you are both saying the Holy Spirit gives us what we need to produce these gifts naturally (by our own human efforts) but never supernaturally (by His divine efforts).

Is this the wisdom you are trying to give to me? Or am I still in ignorance and there is a different kind of distinction between the fruit and gifts of the Spirit that I’m missing?

 

[spockrates]

I do not say L = W.
We easily conclude that acts of love and of wisdom do not always overlap. And it would not be useful erasing the distinction between these concepts.

Yes, that’s why I posed the question, for I was pretty sure you did not have the same opinion as James regarding Love and Wisdom being one and the same. I just wanted to hear it from your own mouth (or fingers) to be completely certain.

But ….nothing is wiser than loving God.
And we can probably say that the strongest motivation to ask for the gift of wisdom is to be able to better love God. Can we ?

Yes, it is wise to love God. But I’m thinking that to love Him more fully and completely and perfectly, one necessarily must know God. As Saint Paul wrote in Philippians:

What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith. I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.

(Philippians 3)

I would say that one’s Love for God is less without knowledge of God and the depth of His love for that one. It seems, then, that if one’s goal is to love God, this goal cannot be achieved without knowledge of who God is and what He has done. Such knowledge is given to us through Wisdom and Faith, not Love.

You see, Love is great, but she has two deficits: First, she is blind. For she knows she greatly desires to love, but cannot see not how to go about it. Second, she is mute. For being an emotion, rather than rational thought, she can only feel what is right, but not say it in words. Therefore, she has great value to you and me in her ability to move us to feel compassion, or passion, or righteous indignation. Yet, by herself, she is useless to us when it comes to deciding whether to love in one way or another. Even if she did happen know how best to love, she could not explain to us why, for she cannot say a word, but only feel what seems right at the moment.

To be fair to Love, Wisdom has her defects, too:You see, Wisdom is quite a cripple when it comes to Love. She has no doubt that she should love, and is completely certain how to go about it. But when it comes to getting up and loving, her legs cannot support the effort. For she is incapable of expressing the emotion of love–in fact, she is incapable of feeling any emotion. So she is valuable to you and me in telling us what is the best way to love, and she can clearly, concisely and cogently tell us why this is the wisest way to love. But when it comes to producing in us the emotions of compassion, or passion, or righteous indignation, she cannot move us at all, for she cannot move herself.

Therefore, since Love is blind and mute, and Wisdom is crippled, neither is self-sufficient. They need one another, and we need both of them, if we are to Love as God intends. Don’t you agree? And if you agree, then how can we say either Love is greater than Wisdom, or Wisdom is greater than Love? It seems, I think, that their dependence on one another means they are somehow equal in their importance and desirability to us.

 

[djeter]

"But what precisely is love? We have a tendency, especially in our rather romantic culture, to identify it with a feeling or a sentiment. But authentic love, in the biblical sense, is only marginally related to emotions. To love is to will the good of the other as other (Aquinas), really to want what is advantageous to another person and to act concretely on that desire.”

Fr. Barron and Michael Gerson (who wrote a great little book on the Apostle) continue on St. Paul’s hymn to love here:

payingattentiontothesky.com/2009/05/21/the-hymn-to-love/

Hope you enjoy it. Will bring you completely up to speed.

dj

 

[djeter]

You see, Love is great, but she has two deficits: First, she is blind…she is mute.​

No way – ever try to fool someone who really loves you? Doesn’t happen. And they will tell you exactly why also.

Romantic love is foolish and blind and suffers from an inability to express. You’ve got it all mixed up – watching too many sitcoms maybe?

dj

 

[karoleck]

"The LORD brought me [Wisdom] forth as the first of his works,
before his deeds of old;

I was appointed from eternity,
from the beginning, before the world began.

When there were no oceans, I was given birth,
when there were no springs abounding with water;

before the mountains were settled in place,
before the hills, I was given birth,

before he made the earth or its fields
or any of the dust of the world.

I was there when he set the heavens in place,
when he marked out the horizon on the face of the deep,

when he established the clouds above
and fixed securely the fountains of the deep,

when he gave the sea its boundary
so the waters would not overstep his command,
and when he marked out the foundations of the earth.

Then I [Wisdom] was the craftsman at his side.
I was filled with delight day after day,
rejoicing always in his presence,

rejoicing in his whole world
and delighting in mankind."

(Proverbs 8:22-31)
You quote this Spocrates to sort of comparing Wisdom and Love,I do not pretent to be on your intelligent level of arguementation,so I make this observation.The Wisdom that you quoted from the above comes from the old dispensation.The Holy Spirit is hidden from the Jewish race,His Chosen People as was Jesus,the Second Person of The Trinity.Though God The Father is preparing them throught what He did and said through His Prophets. At The The Baptism of Christ ,the followers of St.John the Baptist learnt that Jesus is Gods’ beloved Son and The Messiah: who is to show how much God so loved the world.From this greatest Love,The Holy Spirit the fruit of this LOVE appeared.So The God of Wisdom as described in Proverbs gives witness that Love is really the greatest!! Thank you for your postings and beautiful pictures ,in the end you have no choice but to agee with St.Paul which you do anyway.It reminds me of an old truism :a fool will ask more questions than a wise man will dare to answer.!! (this is not a shot at you,just a good saying)

 

[ryanoneil]

"The LORD brought me [Wisdom] forth as the first of his works,
before his deeds of old;

I was appointed from eternity,
from the beginning, before the world began.

When there were no oceans, I was given birth,
when there were no springs abounding with water;

our lady physician Wisdom educes me to wonder whether she is speaking of what occurs in time, rather than what occurred in eternity past (if indeed eternity can accurately be said to have a past or a future and not merely be an eternal now). At least, I think she might be properly understood to not be speaking of what occurred before there was time (or, maybe, in the place outside of time), as she mentions nothing of eternity, before time was.

Either:

1. 
   *]Wisdom is first in chronology (in which case we have to wonder whether God’s creation was motivated by love, for motivation comes before action),
   
   or
   
   *]Wisdom is first in importance in God Himself (in which case Wisdom is found to be greater than Love in God Himself and we would be forced to ask ourselves why she is not greater than Love in we ourselves).
   
   What do you prefer, my good friend? And why?

1. 
   If we are talking about the personification I would not choose either. Wisdom (Logos) is uncreated and existed from all eternity with Love (The Father). I don’t know exactly what Solomon is saying. Whatever he is saying, his words point to Wisdom (Logos) being above all creation and bringing all creation into existence.
   
   In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to be through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race; (John 1:1-4)

 

[ryanoneil]

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. They complete and perfect the virtues of those who receive them. They make the faithful docile in readily obeying divine inspirations.

(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1831)

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...s.Files/11/5226.StarTrekSpockFascinating1.jpg

In a word: Fascinating! Our dialog, and perhaps the Holy Spirit, has brought us to a point of understanding I never suspected!



Rather than many classes of immortal virtue, there now appears to be only two–Love and Wisdom. Love is that class of virtue which is guided by emotion (but not reason), and Wisdom is that class of virtue which is guided by reason (but not emotion). And all of the other virtues might fit under one or the other of these two categories. Consider the six aforementioned virtues:

• understanding
• counsel
• fortitude
• knowledge
• piety
• fear of the Lord

All of these appear now to me to be aspects of Wisdom, for they are examples of what it means to be wise! Consider other virtues as well:

• temperance
• prudence
• justice

These, the Catholic Encyclopedia indicates, are the moral virtues.

newadvent.org/cathen/15472a.htm

Yet, are they not also examples, or kinds, of Wisdom? Thus, I was in error in asserting that Justice is a separate category of virtue from Wisdom, for now she appears to be merely an aspect of her! If Spock were to make such a mistake, he would have cause to be as embarrassed as I am. (But being the non-emotional and rational kind, I suppose such feeling would be beneath him.) For he said:

Don’t forget to include Faith and Hope with Love, because they are the theological virtues. They are the root and foundation of the moral virtues.

CCC 1812 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 with the Holy Trinity. They have the One and Triune God for their origin, motive, and object.

CCC 1813 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. There are three theological virtues: faith, hope, and charity.

Compair this to

CCC 1830 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.

and we can conclude that the gifts of the Holy Spirit sustain the moral life while the theological virtues animate the moral life.

What do you make of animate and sustain?

That kind of gets back to your earlier question of Chronology and importance.

 

[spockrates]

"But what precisely is love? We have a tendency, especially in our rather romantic culture, to identify it with a feeling or a sentiment. But authentic love, in the biblical sense, is only marginally related to emotions. To love is to will the good of the other as other (Aquinas), really to want what is advantageous to another person and to act concretely on that desire.”

Fr. Barron and Michael Gerson (who wrote a great little book on the Apostle) continue on St. Paul’s hymn to love here:

payingattentiontothesky.com/2009/05/21/the-hymn-to-love/

Hope you enjoy it. Will bring you completely up to speed.

dj

DJ:

I think it best to test what the good friar said to see whether it is true, or we might be found guilty of the same error of Socrates friend, to whom he said:

The men of old … deemed that if they heard the truth even from an “oak or rock,” it was enough for them. Whereas you seem to consider not whether a thing is or is not true, but who the speaker is!

(Phaedrus)

The three possibilities, I think, are these:

1. 
   *]One feels compassion, or some other feeling of good will, and loves the one for whom compassion is felt by committing an act of love for the benefit of the one loved.
   *]One hates, or feels some other feeling of ill will, but loves the one hated by committing an act of love for the benefit of the one hated.
   *]One feels neither love nor hate nor any feeling at all, but loves the one for whom there is indifference by committing an act of love for the benefit of the one for whom nothing is felt.
   
   Do you think all three possibilities are actualities? Or do you think two, or only one of the three are actual? If two, or only one, which ones or one do you choose, and why?