Love trumps faith and morals

[gsaccone]

AlanFromWichita:

Dear Greg,

I like your idea, at least theoretically.

Unfortunately, as far as her practices, if the Church is infallible in matters of faith and morals, then your equation must not be operative.

Alan

Alan,
Have you considered the possibility that Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son because he loved God AND had faith in Him? Faith that God would raise his son up even if he did sacrifice him? He trusted that God would honor his promise to give him innumerable descendants. He must have wondered, “how will that promise come true if I sacrifice my only son?” Since he had FAITH AND LOVE he could have logically concluded that God would give him his son back! (raise him up = ressurrect)
Peace in Christ,
Greg

 

[AlanFromWichita]

gsaccone:

Alan,
Have you considered the possibility that Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son because he loved God AND had faith in Him? Faith that God would raise his son up even if he did sacrifice him? He trusted that God would honor his promise to give him innumerable descendants. He must have wondered, “how will that promise come true if I sacrifice my only son?” Since he had FAITH AND LOVE he could have logically concluded that God would give him his son back! (raise him up = ressurrect)
Peace in Christ,
Greg

Dear Greg,

That is also an interesting possibility. OTOH, if he had faith, he would not necessarily needed to have formed any conclusions at all, since faith is the evidence of things not seen, the substance of things hoped for.

Still, I kind of like the idea that Abraham is used as the model of great faith, and Jesus the model of great love. Maybe Elijah or Mary could be models of hope? Now I’m just pulling stuff out of the air, but my brain gets kind of stormy sometimes!

Alan

 

[Pax]

AlanFromWichita:

Dear veritas,

If Jesus did not descend into hell, then the Church needs to revise the Apostle’s Creed. I was taught the Apostle’s creed when I received my first communion over 35 years ago, and if it is wrong the Church has had plenty of time to fix it. I thought that when we professed a “creed” that meant that actually believed what we were saying, but apparently not even the Creed is without convoluted interpretations. Now my own children are learning it in school, and you’re telling me that it contains mistruths?

This is exactly the kind of thing that makes me second guess everything the Church says. At any given moment, she may or may not mean what she says so you have to go through some bizarre gyrations to figure out what she supposedly meant. Is it any wonder I am confused?

Thank you for helping to clear up that “hell” thing.

Alan

Alan,

The term “hell” is the English word/equivalent of the Greek term “Hades.” Hades and Sheol describe the place of the dead, and do not simply mean the place of the damned. The modern use of the term “hell” refers to the place of the damned. This is not the original meaning. The Church really has nothing to “fix” in this case.

The KJV and the Douay versions of the bible are in an older style of English. While very beautiful, the language sometimes takes some effort to work through. I do not criticize either of these bibles because of their style and vocabulary even though I prefer a more modern translation. My attitude is the same when it comes to the use of the term “hell” in the creed.

Frankly, I think the term “hell” in the creed is helpful because it forces people to think about what they are reading, saying, and professing. This means that they will have questions and they will, hopefully, seek answers. In turn they will deepen their faith. I have questioned many things in the bible and in the Church’s teachings because I didn’t know what they truly meant and I am still learning. All of this, however, has lead me to realize that there has always been a sound answer for my every question. My confidence in the Church has been so enriched that I have completely surrendered to the Church. Afterall, what is my wisdom compared to the 2000 plus years of Christian wisdom found in the one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church?

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Pax:

Frankly, I think the term “hell” in the creed is helpful because it forces people to think about what they are reading, saying, and professing. This means that they will have questions and they will, hopefully, seek answers. In turn they will deepen their faith. I have questioned many things in the bible and in the Church’s teachings because I didn’t know what they truly meant and I am still learning.

I agree with your philosophy, but in this case I never questioned it. For decades I have gone saying “hell” thinking it meant “hell” because it was so straightforward it was beyond question. If the Church is going to speak in the vernacular, then it needs to adapt, if necessary, to changing meaning of words because their meanings, as you’ve pointed out, are not set in stone.

All of this, however, has lead me to realize that there has always been a sound answer for my every question. My confidence in the Church has been so enriched that I have completely surrendered to the Church. Afterall, what is my wisdom compared to the 2000 plus years of Christian wisdom found in the one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church?

In many cases, I have found as you did and nearly surrendered completely to the Church on several occasions until she did something to knock me out of whack again.

Alan