Luman Fidei encyclical letter

  • Thread starter Thread starter Norwich12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Saint Bonaventure –

ON THE MOST HOLY BODY OF CHRIST

Hidden for four reasons:
  1. This treasure is hidden under the cover of bread and wine for four reasons, and so Isaiah 45:3 says: I will give you hidden treasures:
firstly, because of the merit of faith;
secondly, because of a suggestion of crudity;
thirdly, because of the imperfection of our senses;
fourthly, because of the exclusion of unbelievers.

First reason:
Firstly, this treasure is hidden under the veil of bread and wine because of the merit of faith. A person, believing what this Sacrament means, accumulates great merit in overcoming most strongly seven opponents. These opponents are the five senses all of which sense that the Body of Christ is not here; and imagination is also contrary for in no way can it imagine that the great man, the whole Christ who hung on the cross, could be hidden in such a small host. Reason is also opposed to all this, namely, that the same Body can be at one and the same time in different places, as appears in this Sacrament; that he is most perfectly in heaven, while being nevertheless food on the altar, and not many, but one only and the same Body. Because of this merit of faith the Body of Christ is hidden.[34] Gregory: ‘Faith has no merit when human reason gives a proof’.[35]

Second reason:
33. Secondly, the Body of Christ is hidden because of a suggestion of crudity. A horror of crudity could hold back many from this Sacrament if they were to think of a living person eating another person and devouring raw flesh. For this reason, this Body is given under a sign and covering associated with eating, namely, under the appearances of bread. The Lord deigned to call himself our bread when he said in John 6:51: I am the living bread, so that by eating Christ under the appearances of bread one would not feel a horror of crudity.

Third reason:
34. Thirdly, the Body of Christ is hidden because of the imperfection of our senses. Were he to show himself in the glory of his brightness, just as he is, no mortal could bear the sight of such brightness. Moses, from speaking with the Lord, received such splendour and brightness in his face that he covered his face when speaking with the children of Israel because they were not able to look at him due to the brightness of his face. So too Christ, taking account of our weakness, placed a covering over his brightness.

Fourth reason:
35. Fourthly, the Body of Christ is hidden to exclude unbelievers. He said in Matthew 7:6: Give not that which is holy to dogs, neither cast your pearls before swine. What he said in word was done in fact because he hides his face in the Sacrament and so excludes dogs and swine, that is, all who are unworthy of knowledge of this Sacrament.
Therefore, let the mercies of the Lord give glory to him because he prefigured his Body for us in the theme of heavenly treasure.
 
The Light of Faith_
The Star of Bethlehem
The Transfiguration
The Resurrection
The Image on the Turin Shroud
The Hidden Light of the Eucharist
  1. Thirdly, the Body of Christ is hidden because of the imperfection of our senses. Were he to show himself in the glory of his brightness, just as he is, no mortal could bear the sight of such brightness. Moses, from speaking with the Lord, received such splendour and brightness in his face that he covered his face when speaking with the children of Israel because they were not able to look at him due to the brightness of his face. So too Christ, taking account of our weakness, placed a covering over his brightness.
    (From Saint Bonaventure --see my last post)
The Light of Faith = Lumen Fidei

View attachment 18083
 
Norwich12 said:
Saint Bonaventure –

ON THE MOST HOLY BODY OF CHRIST

Hidden for four reasons:
  1. This treasure is hidden under the cover of bread and wine for four reasons, and so Isaiah 45:3 says: I will give you hidden treasures:
firstly, because of the merit of faith;
secondly, because of a suggestion of crudity;
thirdly, because of the imperfection of our senses;
fourthly, because of the exclusion of unbelievers.

First reason:
Firstly, this treasure is hidden under the veil of bread and wine because of the merit of faith. A person, believing what this Sacrament means, accumulates great merit in overcoming most strongly seven opponents. These opponents are the five senses all of which sense that the Body of Christ is not here; and imagination is also contrary for in no way can it imagine that the great man, the whole Christ who hung on the cross, could be hidden in such a small host. Reason is also opposed to all this, namely, that the same Body can be at one and the same time in different places, as appears in this Sacrament; that he is most perfectly in heaven, while being nevertheless food on the altar, and not many, but one only and the same Body. Because of this merit of faith the Body of Christ is hidden.[34] Gregory: ‘Faith has no merit when human reason gives a proof’.[35]

Second reason:
33. Secondly, the Body of Christ is hidden because of a suggestion of crudity. A horror of crudity could hold back many from this Sacrament if they were to think of a living person eating another person and devouring raw flesh. For this reason, this Body is given under a sign and covering associated with eating, namely, under the appearances of bread. The Lord deigned to call himself our bread when he said in John 6:51: I am the living bread, so that by eating Christ under the appearances of bread one would not feel a horror of crudity.

Third reason:
34. Thirdly, the Body of Christ is hidden because of the imperfection of our senses. Were he to show himself in the glory of his brightness, just as he is, no mortal could bear the sight of such brightness. Moses, from speaking with the Lord, received such splendour and brightness in his face that he covered his face when speaking with the children of Israel because they were not able to look at him due to the brightness of his face. So too Christ, taking account of our weakness, placed a covering over his brightness.

Fourth reason:
35. Fourthly, the Body of Christ is hidden to exclude unbelievers. He said in Matthew 7:6: Give not that which is holy to dogs, neither cast your pearls before swine. What he said in word was done in fact because he hides his face in the Sacrament and so excludes dogs and swine, that is, all who are unworthy of knowledge of this Sacrament.
Therefore, let the mercies of the Lord give glory to him because he prefigured his Body for us in the theme of heavenly treasure.
Click to expand...
St. Bonaventure dealt primarily with the Ecclesiastical nature of the Eucharist. He did not deal specifically with its Sacramental theology; and especially with the theology of the Sacrificial Sacrament of the Mass. This was covered later on through Saint Thomas Aquinas, the Catholic Theologians of Salamanca, and finally confirmed by The Council of Trent.

Thus theology progressed thereafter – as it ever must - and incidentally in line with our encyclical avoiding “fragmenting” time and changing it into space”…

In this particular case Sacramental theology was summarized in the early part of the last century in Vonier’s famous exposition “The Doctrine of the Eucharist”. It is worth noting that this exposition was -in England at least – a compulsory study/final examinations for all Catholic Seminarians up until only just recently (I certainly do not know what the American curriculum contained).

Further, this much I will say from personal experience of my own reading of the matter – and it is that **Holy Mother Church has not been exactly at the forefront of ‘encouraging’ its study **– not only on adverting to its existing clarity – but also on its further development.

To be fair however there are some members on this forum who, I think, have referred to Vonier’s work; albeit in other topic titles.

However those parts of his exposition that are the most difficult to understand do in fact impinge upon the passage of dialogue we are currently progressing along. And if you wish I will copy** onto this topic an extract for you and those listening in here to dwell upon.

Paduard

**NB. However before I do this it appropriate to mention that, in respect of the particular passage I may think suitable to paste, St. Thomas Aquinas – reflecting himself on such – described the ‘understanding’ in this area of thought as requiring “A Leap of the Intellect’ (or words to that effect). And as Vonier remarked himself “The division of reality from reality is the only difficulty for the thinker”.

It is my personal opinion that such a leap could be much easier for someone – much like yourself and others here – who possess a scientific background and perhaps a certain familiarity with particle physics. (an edge if you like over persons such as myself who possess a rather ragged theological one).
 
paduard said:
St. Bonaventure dealt primarily with the Ecclesiastical nature of the Eucharist. He did not deal specifically with its Sacramental theology; and especially with the theology of the Sacrificial Sacrament of the Mass. This was covered later on through Saint Thomas Aquinas, the Catholic Theologians of Salamanca, and finally confirmed by The Council of Trent.

Thus theology progressed thereafter – as it ever must - and incidentally in line with our encyclical avoiding “fragmenting” time and changing it into space”…

In this particular case Sacramental theology was summarized in the early part of the last century in Vonier’s famous exposition “The Doctrine of the Eucharist”. It is worth noting that this exposition was -in England at least – a compulsory study/final examinations for all Catholic Seminarians up until only just recently (I certainly do not know what the American curriculum contained).

Further, this much I will say from personal experience of my own reading of the matter – and it is that **Holy Mother Church has not been exactly at the forefront of ‘encouraging’ its study **– not only on adverting to its existing clarity – but also on its further development.

To be fair however there are some members on this forum who, I think, have referred to Vonier’s work; albeit in other topic titles.

However those parts of his exposition that are the most difficult to understand do in fact impinge upon the passage of dialogue we are currently progressing along. And if you wish I will copy** onto this topic an extract for you and those listening in here to dwell upon.

Paduard

**NB. However before I do this it appropriate to mention that, in respect of the particular passage I may think suitable to paste, St. Thomas Aquinas – reflecting himself on such – described the ‘understanding’ in this area of thought as requiring “A Leap of the Intellect’ (or words to that effect). And as Vonier remarked himself “The division of reality from reality is the only difficulty for the thinker”.

It is my personal opinion that such a leap could be much easier for someone – much like yourself and others here – who possess a scientific background and perhaps a certain familiarity with particle physics. (an edge if you like over persons such as myself who possess a rather ragged theological one).
Click to expand...
At the very end of the extract from Vonier’s book as given below (in following post due to length) – and written in hand by the examiner/teacher?}in ink in the book I bought second-hand some years ago – is the following. Which I confess for me is vague in its layout but probably understood by the student. Certainly I find it very confusing ! So I have duplicated it exactly as I see it i.e. in the same format and spacing:-

*Sacramentum tantum = natural sign. Significat not –atur.

Res = Inner operation of grace. Significatur - not - at.
Specific sacramental = effect.
Sacramentum et res. Significat & Significatur
= Intermediary element…
i.e. = The specific character of the sacrament.*

For myself I have noticed that ‘the thing’ referring to ‘res’ is not the same as the Thing mentioned in the last paragraph.

Best of luck
Paduard:-
 
EXTRACT

Sacramental Harmony [Part of Chapter VII] :-

Before ending this chapter I must say a few words on the theological distinction here made use of by St. Thomas, which runs through his whole sacramental doctrine.

The Schoolmen made this threefold division: sacramentum tantum, the sacrament only; sacramentum et res, the sacrament and the thing; res tantum, the thing only.

The first, sacramentum [sacrament only] , is all that we know as the signification, with its divine power and its commemorative affinities.The sacrament and the thing is the spiritual inwardness of the whole sacramental signification and no longer the external symbolism. Thus in Baptism the character which is distinct from all the other spiritual results of Baptism would be called by St. Thomas sacramentum et res, because baptismal character, an entirely spiritual result of the external rite, is still a sacramental thing, since in its turn it is a representation of, a configuration with, the sacerdotal office of Christ, as will be explained later. ‘Sacrament and thing’ thus holds a very important position in the old theology. It is a blending of the internal spiritual reality, res, with signification, sacramentum. Quite logically, then St. Thomas declares in the above passage that in the Eucharist ‘sacrament and thing’ is in the external matter itself, because truly the ‘thing,’ the spiritual reality, the Body and Blood of Christ, under the appearance of bread and wine, is also ‘sacrament’ – that is, representative in a new way of the Christ on the Cross, when Body and Blood were separated. St. Thomas really admits a double signification in the sacraments – at least, in some of them; first, the external thing signifies; and then the internal, spiritual reality, immediately produced by the sacrament, has, in its turn, the role of representation.

**The Eucharist excels, because in it sacramentum et res is not in the recipient, but in the external signs of bread and wine. Here again we have a truly sacramental basis for the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist. **

Coming now to the res – the ‘thing’ – it would not be an accurate reading of the old masters to say that by it is meant grace in general. What is meant is specific, sacramental grace, such as spiritual regeneration in Baptism or the union of charity in the Eucharist, when the faithful receive It in Holy Communion.

The middle member of the threefold division – sacramentum et res – is really the most interesting to the theologian, because it means a transposing of the sacramental signification into the first spiritual results of the sacrament. For the Eucharist is means that not only the whole external rite of Mass signifies sacrifice, but the consecrated elements, or rather, the infinitely holy Thing under the elements, also signifies sacrifice, as being the immediate representation of Christ immolated on the Cross.
 
Thank you Paduard – your last paragraph above is the most complex statement of theology
about the Eucharist that I have ever read!

To better interpret your work will require defining “represent” and “re-present”
in terms of NonFragmentation of Time…

That will be a challenge – like Robert Frost wrote in his poem –
The Road less traveled will make all the Difference.
 
paduard said:
EXTRACT

Sacramental Harmony [Part of Chapter VII] :-

Before ending this chapter I must say a few words on the theological distinction here made use of by St. Thomas, which runs through his whole sacramental doctrine.

The Schoolmen made this threefold division: sacramentum tantum, the sacrament only; sacramentum et res, the sacrament and the thing; res tantum, the thing only.

The first, sacramentum [sacrament only] , is all that we know as the signification, with its divine power and its commemorative affinities.The sacrament and the thing is the spiritual inwardness of the whole sacramental signification and no longer the external symbolism. Thus in Baptism the character which is distinct from all the other spiritual results of Baptism would be called by St. Thomas sacramentum et res, because baptismal character, an entirely spiritual result of the external rite, is still a sacramental thing, since in its turn it is a representation of, a configuration with, the sacerdotal office of Christ, as will be explained later. ‘Sacrament and thing’ thus holds a very important position in the old theology. It is a blending of the internal spiritual reality, res, with signification, sacramentum. Quite logically, then St. Thomas declares in the above passage that in the Eucharist ‘sacrament and thing’ is in the external matter itself, because truly the ‘thing,’ the spiritual reality, the Body and Blood of Christ, under the appearance of bread and wine, is also ‘sacrament’ – that is, representative in a new way of the Christ on the Cross, when Body and Blood were separated. St. Thomas really admits a double signification in the sacraments – at least, in some of them; first, the external thing signifies; and then the internal, spiritual reality, immediately produced by the sacrament, has, in its turn, the role of representation.

**The Eucharist excels, because in it sacramentum et res is not in the recipient, but in the external signs of bread and wine. Here again we have a truly sacramental basis for the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist. **

Coming now to the res – the ‘thing’ – it would not be an accurate reading of the old masters to say that by it is meant grace in general. What is meant is specific, sacramental grace, such as spiritual regeneration in Baptism or the union of charity in the Eucharist, when the faithful receive It in Holy Communion.

The middle member of the threefold division – sacramentum et res – is really the most interesting to the theologian, because it means a transposing of the sacramental signification into the first spiritual results of the sacrament. For the Eucharist is means that not only the whole external rite of Mass signifies sacrifice, but the consecrated elements, or rather, the infinitely holy Thing under the elements, also signifies sacrifice, as being the immediate representation of Christ immolated on the Cross.
Click to expand...
Norwich l2

The role of representation referred to by Vonier above is not understood in the sense that an oil painting can be said to represent e.g. Christ on the Cross; but as a true continuation of His Sacrifice within the Sacramental Mode of Being each time a Mass is celebrated.

I am quite sure you already understand this, but felt it necessary to qualify it on the forum.

The other points you raise do of course go a little deeper.

God Bless
Paduard
 
Categories of TIME

Birthdays, bank loans, car guarantees, train schedules, years of schooling, and medical treatments – each and all of those are examples of Linear Time.

Next is a quote from Paduard dated Autust 30th, #47

The role of representation referred to by Vonier above is not understood in the sense that an oil painting can be said to represent e.g. Christ on the Cross; but as a true continuation of His Sacrifice within the Sacramental Mode of Being each time a Mass is celebrated.

To better understand Paduard’s excellent but complex thoughts about Sacrifice/Eucharist let’s look at Linear Time and Time in a Circle.

TS Eliot quote from his fantastic poem “The Four Quartets.”

Time present and time past
Are both perhaps present in time future
And time future contained in time past.
If all time is eternally present
All time is unredeemable.
What might have been is an abstraction
Remaining a perpetual possibility
Only in a world of speculation.
What might have been and what has been
Point to one end, which is always present.

selected lines from “Burnt Norton” and bolds are mine)

View attachment 18127

A several hour exposure photo – stars appearing to circle the North Star (because of earth’s rotation)

More to follow…
 
Categories of TIME

Birthdays, bank loans, car guarantees, train schedules, years of schooling, and medical treatments – each and all of those are examples of Linear Time.

Next is a quote from Paduard dated Autust 30th, #47

The role of representation referred to by Vonier above is not understood in the sense that an oil painting can be said to represent e.g. Christ on the Cross; but as a true continuation of His Sacrifice within the Sacramental Mode of Being each time a Mass is celebrated.

To better understand Paduard’s excellent but complex thoughts about Sacrifice/Eucharist let’s look at Linear Time and Time in a Circle.

TS Eliot quote from his fantastic poem “The Four Quartets.”

Time present and time past
Are both perhaps present in time future
And time future contained in time past.
If all time is eternally present
All time is unredeemable.
What might have been is an abstraction
Remaining a perpetual possibility
Only in a world of speculation.
What might have been and what has been
Point to one end, which is always present.

(selected lines from “Burnt Norton” and bolds are mine)
What is the central Event of Linear Time that divides the stream of years on the calendar into Before and After?

The birth of Jesus Christ who had been conceived by the power of the Holy Sprit in Immaculate Mary.

View attachment 18135

(“Birth of Christ” - 1745 oil painting by the French artist Antoine Pesne)
 
Time in a Circle

Examples in everyday life would be the winning time of a horse or race car on a circular track.

I will give three examples from Nature – in small, medium, and very large:

The building block of all living plants, animals, and humans is the Carbon Atom.

View attachment 18148

The revolution of our Earth around our Sun is one year.

View attachment 18149

The revolution of the Sun around the center of the Milky Way galaxy is called a Galactic Year and is over 200 million years.

View attachment 18150

But think what it means to make a circular path around the center. The center does not move. Therefore the center does not experience or exhibit time in the same way as the object or observer making the orbital path.
 
Norwich12 said:
Categories of TIME

Birthdays, bank loans, car guarantees, train schedules, years of schooling, and medical treatments – each and all of those are examples of Linear Time.

Next is a quote from Paduard dated Autust 30th, #47

The role of representation referred to by Vonier above is not understood in the sense that an oil painting can be said to represent e.g. Christ on the Cross; but as a true continuation of His Sacrifice within the Sacramental Mode of Being each time a Mass is celebrated.

To better understand Paduard’s excellent but complex thoughts about Sacrifice/Eucharist let’s look at Linear Time and Time in a Circle.

TS Eliot quote from his fantastic poem “The Four Quartets.”

Time present and time past
Are both perhaps present in time future
And time future contained in time past.
If all time is eternally present
All time is unredeemable.
What might have been is an abstraction
Remaining a perpetual possibility
Only in a world of speculation.
What might have been and what has been
Point to one end, which is always present.

(selected lines from “Burnt Norton” and bolds are mine)
What is the central Event of Linear Time that divides the stream of years on the calendar into Before and After?

The birth of Jesus Christ who had been conceived by the power of the Holy Sprit in Immaculate Mary.

View attachment 18135

(“Birth of Christ” - 1745 oil painting by the French artist Antoine Pesne)
Click to expand...
I find your recent postings very interesting.

Regarding Eliot - I will post something similar from Newman’s ‘Dream of Gerontius’. But we are in my opinion approaching too fast towards the theology of the ‘End-Times’ i.e. life after death and Heaven etc. However to be consistent with the matter of circles, what interests me is not so much the principle but the number of circles - inasmuch as the number may represent our choices in Heaven (if we get there as we all probably will) according to each persons Degree of Glory.

But enough of that for now…please continue.

God Bless
Paduard
 
Norwich 12:

Here is the passage by Newman. Compare it with Eliot.

*Angel (speaking to the Soul after Death)

Thou art not let; but with extremest speed
Art hurrying to the Just and Holy Judge:
For scarcely art thou disembodied yet.
Divide a moment, as men measure time,
Into its million-million-millionth part,
Yet even less than that the interval
Since thou didst leave the body; and the priest
Cried “Subvenite,” and they fell to prayer;
Nay, scarcely yet have they begun to pray.

For spirits and men by different standards mete
The less and greater in the flow of time.
By sun and moon, primeval ordinances—
By stars which rise and set harmoniously—
By the recurring seasons, and the swing,
This way and that, of the suspended rod
Precise and punctual, men divide the hours,
Equal, continuous, for their common use.
Not so with us in the immaterial world;
But intervals in their succession
Are measured by the living thought alone,
And grow or wane with its intensity.
And time is not a common property;
But what is long is short, and swift is slow,
And near is distant, as received and grasp’d
By this mind and by that, and every one
Is standard of his own chronology.
And memory lacks its natural resting-points
Of years, and centuries, and periods.
It is thy very energy of thought
Which keeps thee from thy God.*

Paduard
 
Thank you Paduard,

I have read Venerable John Henry Newman’s poem "Dream of Gerontius " written in about 1865.

It was about a soul (very recently separated from its dead body) in conversation with an Angel.

The soul is in Purgatory; not a temporary Hell; but a place to be made pure.

The important issue of time is presented.

“Precise and punctual, men divide the hours,
Equal, continuous, for their common use.
Not so with us in the immaterial world;
But intervals in their succession
Are measured by the living thought alone,
And grow or wane with its intensity.
And time is not a common property;
But what is long is short, and swift is slow,
And near is distant, as received and grasp’d
By this mind and by that, and every one
Is standard of his own chronology.
And memory lacks its natural resting-points
Of years, and centuries, and periods.
It is thy very energy of thought
Which keeps thee from thy God.”

Elements of Linear Time and Circular Time
are there. I have made a comparison to Time in TS Eliot’s
“The Four Quartets.”

For that comparison I need to use a PC in daylight!
It is 2 AM in North Carolina…
 
LINEAR TIME in the two poems to be compared at the request of Paduard.

There was a good description of “Linear Time” in October of 2008 in a forum called Drummerworld :

Linear time is a concept where by time is seen sequentially, as a series of events that are leading toward something: beginning, and an end. In Newtonian theory it is something absolute in reality, regardless of human perception.

It is hard to find Linear Time in either poem. In Eliot’s poem, it is about this world but written in a mystical and spiritual way.

EAST COKER
(No. 2 of Four Quartets by TS Eliot)

There is, it seems to us,
At best, only a limited value
In the knowledge derived from experience.
The knowledge imposes a pattern, and falsifies,
For the pattern is new in every moment
And every moment is a new and shocking
Valuation of all we have been.
In the long poem by Newman, it is also hard to find references to Linear Time. The Dream poem refers to the next world…
The Dream of Gerontius

In the Third Phase of the poem where the Angel is talking to the Soul (recently departed from the body and now in Purgatory)—there is a brief mention of Linear Time.
But it is brought up to contrast it to Time in the Spiritual World.
*ANGEL:

THOU art not let; but with extremest speed
Art hurrying to the Just and Holy Judge:
For scarcely art thou disembodied yet.
Divide a moment, as men measure time,
Into its million-million-millionth part,
Yet even less than that the interval
Since thou didst leave the body; and the priest
Cried “Subvenite,” and they fell to prayer;
Nay, scarcely yet have they begun to pray.
For spirits and men by different standards mete
The less and greater in the flow of time.
By sun and moon, primeval ordinances—
By stars which rise and set harmoniously—
By the recurring seasons, and the swing,
This way and that, of the suspended rod
Precise and punctual, men divide the hours,
Equal, continuous, for their common use.
Not so with us in the immaterial world;*
(the quote from the poem will be continued by me in the discussion of Time in a Circle in “The Four Quartets” by TS Eliot and this long poem, The “Dream of Gerontius” by John Henry Newman).

That presentation will be in my next post tomorrow.
 
Sep 4, '13, 1:11 pm (this is a copy-paste from Paduard’s recent post)

paduard
Junior Member
Posts: 247
Religion: Catholic

Re: Lumen Fidei encyclical letter
Norwich 12:

Here is the passage by Newman (Dream of Gerontius). Compare it with Eliot (Four Quartets).

Angel (speaking to the Soul after Death)

Thou art not let; but with extremest speed
Art hurrying to the Just and Holy Judge:
For scarcely art thou disembodied yet.
Divide a moment, as men measure time,
Into its million-million-millionth part,
Yet even less than that the interval
Since thou didst leave the body; and the priest
Cried “Subvenite,” and they fell to prayer;
Nay, scarcely yet have they begun to pray.

For spirits and men by different standards mete
The less and greater in the flow of time.
By sun and moon, primeval ordinances—
By stars which rise and set harmoniously—
By the recurring seasons, and the swing,
This way and that, of the suspended rod
Precise and punctual, men divide the hours,
Equal, continuous, for their common use.
Not so with us in the immaterial world;
But intervals in their succession
Are measured by the living thought alone,
And grow or wane with its intensity.
And time is not a common property;
But what is long is short, and swift is slow,
And near is distant, as received and grasp’d
By this mind and by that, and every one
Is standard of his own chronology.
And memory lacks its natural resting-points
Of years, and centuries, and periods.
It is thy very energy of thought
Which keeps thee from thy God.

Paduard

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is my new post today 7 September (Norwich12)

For Newman, I gather that time in this world is linear. Time in the Hereafter is non-linear, possibly in circles.

View attachment 18201

Precise and punctual, men divide the hours,
Equal, continuous, for their common use.
Not so with us in the immaterial world;
But intervals in their succession
Are measured by the living thought alone,
And grow or wane with its intensity.
And time is not a common property;

(from the Dream of Gerontius, presented by Paduard)
In the First and Last of the Four Quartets by Eliot, time is presented in a non-linear way.

“time past and time future
what might have been and what has been
point to one end, which is always present.”
― T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets

The union of past and future suggests for Eliot, Time is in a Circle.

“Time present and time past / are both perhaps present in time future.”
― T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets

We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.”
― T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets

These two passages sound like spiritual seaching and enlightenment.

“In my end is my beginning.”
― T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets

View attachment 18202

Christ the Redeemer,Brazil
 
Norwich12 said:
Sep 4, '13, 1:11 pm (this is a copy-paste from Paduard’s recent post)

paduard
Junior Member
Posts: 247
Religion: Catholic

Re: Lumen Fidei encyclical letter
Norwich 12:

Here is the passage by Newman (Dream of Gerontius). Compare it with Eliot (Four Quartets).

Angel (speaking to the Soul after Death)

Thou art not let; but with extremest speed
Art hurrying to the Just and Holy Judge:
For scarcely art thou disembodied yet.
Divide a moment, as men measure time,
Into its million-million-millionth part,
Yet even less than that the interval
Since thou didst leave the body; and the priest
Cried “Subvenite,” and they fell to prayer;
Nay, scarcely yet have they begun to pray.

For spirits and men by different standards mete
The less and greater in the flow of time.
By sun and moon, primeval ordinances—
By stars which rise and set harmoniously—
By the recurring seasons, and the swing,
This way and that, of the suspended rod
Precise and punctual, men divide the hours,
Equal, continuous, for their common use.
Not so with us in the immaterial world;
But intervals in their succession
Are measured by the living thought alone,
And grow or wane with its intensity.
And time is not a common property;
But what is long is short, and swift is slow,
And near is distant, as received and grasp’d
By this mind and by that, and every one
Is standard of his own chronology.
And memory lacks its natural resting-points
Of years, and centuries, and periods.
It is thy very energy of thought
Which keeps thee from thy God.

Paduard

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is my new post today 7 September (Norwich12)

For Newman, I gather that time in this world is linear. Time in the Hereafter is non-linear, possibly in circles.

View attachment 18201

Precise and punctual, men divide the hours,
Equal, continuous, for their common use.
Not so with us in the immaterial world;
But intervals in their succession
Are measured by the living thought alone,
And grow or wane with its intensity.
And time is not a common property;

(from the Dream of Gerontius, presented by Paduard)
In the First and Last of the Four Quartets by Eliot, time is presented in a non-linear way.

“time past and time future
what might have been and what has been
point to one end, which is always present.”
― T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets

The union of past and future suggests for Eliot, Time is in a Circle.

“Time present and time past / are both perhaps present in time future.”
― T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets

We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.”
― T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets

These two passages sound like spiritual seaching and enlightenment.

“In my end is my beginning.”
― T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets

View attachment 18202

Christ the Redeemer,Brazil
Click to expand...
Just a small interjection at this point:-

I am uncertain really that Newman necessarily eliminated “Linear Time” from the Heavenly dimension. His reference to ‘slow’ & ‘fast’ may well lead one towards the concept of individual “subjectivity”, inasmuch as in this life e.g. boredom on a train journey or a child’s expectation of the arrival of Christmas may appear slow as compared to actual reality of the passage of days thereto. On the other hand sometimes the real passage of time appears to pass all too quickly e.g. in relation to emotional excitements during a lovers embrace.

The “speed of thought” can be of another interest i.e. almost instantaneous.

What do members here think?

Paduard
 
Yes Paduard – IMO, time in Eternity is Linear, Circular, and Timeless.

Universe rotates around the Still Point – The Incarnate Word

**At the still point of the turning world. **Neither flesh nor fleshless;
Neither from nor towards; at the still point, there the dance is,
But neither arrest nor movement.
And do not call it fixity,
Where past and future are gathered. Neither movement from nor towards,
Neither ascent nor decline.

(from “Burnt Norton” in the *The Four Quartets *poem by TS Eliot,1935)
If the lost word is lost, if the spent word is spent
If the unheard, unspoken
Word is unspoken, unheard;
Still is the unspoken word, the Word unheard,
The Word without a word, the Word within
The world and for the world;
And the light shone in darkness and
Against the Word the unstilled world still whirled
About the centre of the silent Word.

(From Section V of *Ash Wednesday *poem by TS Eliot, 1930)
**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;
the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

(Gospel of John, 1:1-5, New American Bible)
View attachment 18220
Bolds are mine.
Peace of the Lord,
Norwich12
 
Norwich12 said:
Yes Paduard – IMO, time in Eternity is Linear, Circular, and Timeless.

Universe rotates around the Still Point – The Incarnate Word

**At the still point of the turning world. **Neither flesh nor fleshless;
Neither from nor towards; at the still point, there the dance is,
But neither arrest nor movement.
And do not call it fixity,
Where past and future are gathered. Neither movement from nor towards,
Neither ascent nor decline.

(from “Burnt Norton” in the *The Four Quartets *poem by TS Eliot,1935)
If the lost word is lost, if the spent word is spent
If the unheard, unspoken
Word is unspoken, unheard;
Still is the unspoken word, the Word unheard,
The Word without a word, the Word within
The world and for the world;
And the light shone in darkness and
Against the Word the unstilled world still whirled
About the centre of the silent Word.

(From Section V of *Ash Wednesday *poem by TS Eliot, 1930)
**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;
the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

(Gospel of John, 1:1-5, New American Bible)
View attachment 18220
Bolds are mine.
Peace of the Lord,
Norwich12
Click to expand...
Thank you Norwich 12 for that agreement. And I am 100% in agreement on what you have said about The Incarnate Word of God - Our Lord Jesus Christ.

It is one thing to understand philosophy in relation to ‘time’ – i.e. for both Heaven & Earth (and there has been much written! on the subject).

Nevertheless it is quite another exercise to propel ideas forward into the 21st Century.

However in my opinion the Encyclical does encourage us to do just that. And for myself I see such encouragement as being quite new!

So, inasmuch as we are now discussing the subject of time, below is an extract from the document; which brings us back to base so to speak. Well at least back to base in respect of just one extraction; which is as follows:-

LUMEN FIDEI

CHAPTER FOUR

GOD PREPARES A CITY FOR THEM

[Extract from last para. of No. 57]

Let us refuse to be robbed of hope, or to allow our hope to be dimmed by facile answers and solutions which block our progress, “fragmenting” time and changing it into space. Time is always much greater than space. Space hardens processes, whereas time propels towards the future and encourages us to go forward in hope.

Perhaps you and any others here might like to comment on it? After all it IS an official and important document.

In the meantime I will endeavour to post some ideas further to any comments on the above. As they may be thought to be a little radical, it might take me a little while to compose such.

God Bless
Paduard
 
paduard said:
Thank you Norwich 12 for that agreement. And I am 100% in agreement on what you have said about The Incarnate Word of God - Our Lord Jesus Christ.

It is one thing to understand philosophy in relation to ‘time’ – i.e. for both Heaven & Earth (and there has been much written! on the subject).

Nevertheless it is quite another exercise to propel ideas forward into the 21st Century.

However in my opinion the Encyclical does encourage us to do just that. And for myself I see such encouragement as being quite new!

So, inasmuch as we are now discussing the subject of time, below is an extract from the document; which brings us back to base so to speak. Well at least back to base in respect of just one extraction; which is as follows:-

LUMEN FIDEI

CHAPTER FOUR

GOD PREPARES A CITY FOR THEM

[Extract from last para. of No. 57]

Let us refuse to be robbed of hope, or to allow our hope to be dimmed by facile answers and solutions which block our progress, “fragmenting” time and changing it into space. Time is always much greater than space. Space hardens processes, whereas time propels towards the future and encourages us to go forward in hope.

Perhaps you and any others here might like to comment on it? After all it IS an official and important document.

In the meantime I will endeavour to post some ideas further to any comments on the above. As they may be thought to be a little radical, it might take me a little while to compose such.

God Bless
Paduard
Click to expand...
Thank you Paduard – As I am a surgeon, I can only try to relearn physics to form an answer.

Speaking of the 21st Century, it was a century since Einstein developed the Theory of General and Special Relativity.
Space Time Continuum

In 1906, soon after Albert Einstein announced his special theory of relativity, his former college teacher in mathematics, Hermann Minkowski, developed a new scheme for thinking about space and time that emphasized its geometric qualities. In his famous quotation delivered at a public lecture on relativity, he announced that,
“The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality.”
This new reality was that space and time, as physical constructs, have to be combined into a new mathematical/physical entity called ‘space-time’, because the equations of relativity show that both the space and time coordinates of any event must get mixed together by the mathematics, in order to accurately describe what we see. Because space consists of 3 dimensions, and time is 1-dimensional, space-time must, therefore, be a 4-dimensional object. It is believed to be a ‘continuum’ because so far as we know, there are no missing points in space or instants in time, and both can be subdivided without any apparent limit in size or duration. So, physicists now routinely consider our world to be embedded in this 4-dimensional Space-Time continuum, and all events, places, moments in history, actions and so on are described in terms of their location in Space-Time.
Space-time does not evolve, it simply exists. When we examine a particular object from the stand point of its space-time representation, every particle is located along its world-line. This is a spaghetti-like line that stretches from the past to the future showing the spatial location of the particle at every instant in time. This world-line exists as a complete object which may be sliced here and there so that you can see where the particle is located in space at a particular instant. Once you determine the complete world line of a particle from the forces acting upon it, you have ‘solved’ for its complete history. This world-line does not change with time, but simply exists as a timeless object. Similarly, in general relativity, when you solve equations for the shape of space-time, this shape does not change in time, but exists as a complete timeless object. You can slice it here and there to examine what the geometry of space looks like at a particular instant. Examining consecutive slices in time will let you see whether, for example, the universe is expanding or not.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Dr. Sten Odenwald (Raytheon STX) for the NASA Astronomy Café
But from what Pope Francis wrote about fragmenting time changing to space, and time being greater (in quantity?) than space – I don’t know how to compare billions of years with light years of space.

So from my experience with neuroscience, I think the Pope was comparing RAM and ROM with human patterns of thought and memory as they are influenced by faith/belief.

More to follow in a couple days. But please, Paduard and I want other Forum members to join in the discussion!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top