My biggest (possibly) stumbling block

  • Thread starter Thread starter Atreyu
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Atreyu

Guest
I consider myself a faithful Catholic in that I try my hardest to discern what is official Church teaching, and then I follow that up with an effort to believe in that teaching. But there’s one thing that bothers me, and I’d really like to know what the official Church teaching on this subject is.

The subject is Satan. I find it so hard to believe in him, as he just seems so… stupid! I can easily believe in a Satan that is a figure for sin, but it is my understanding that the Church teaches that he was a literal creature. Is that true? Do we know for sure that he is a fallen angel?
 
Atreyu said:
I consider myself a faithful Catholic in that I try my hardest to discern what is official Church teaching, and then I follow that up with an effort to believe in that teaching. But there’s one thing that bothers me, and I’d really like to know what the official Church teaching on this subject is.

The subject is Satan. I find it so hard to believe in him, as he just seems so… stupid! I can easily believe in a Satan that is a figure for sin, but it is my understanding that the Church teaches that he was a literal creature. Is that true? Do we know for sure that he is a fallen angel?
Click to expand...
I don’t have a direct answer for you, but I personally believe he is real. But sometimes asking a question (or a few) to answer a question puts the first question in perspecitve:
  1. Do you believe the Eucharist (bread and wine) is the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ?
  2. Do you belive that Mary was Assumed bodily into heaven ?
  3. Do you belive Christ rose from the dead?
If you can say yes to these three questions, I really wonder why you cannot consider that satan was a real creature.

He was not stupid. He was prideful.

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com

JMJ+
 
Atreyu said:
I consider myself a faithful Catholic in that I try my hardest to discern what is official Church teaching, and then I follow that up with an effort to believe in that teaching. But there’s one thing that bothers me, and I’d really like to know what the official Church teaching on this subject is.

The subject is Satan. I find it so hard to believe in him, as he just seems so… stupid! I can easily believe in a Satan that is a figure for sin, but it is my understanding that the Church teaches that he was a literal creature. Is that true? Do we know for sure that he is a fallen angel?
Click to expand...
Yes he is a person. First, we know from Scripture that he is a person and a fallen angel. Also, we know from Tradition the same. Further we know from the experience of the Saints and their interactions with Satan that he is and is something not to be trifled with.

I would suggest a read of “The Screwtape Letters” by CS Lewis on this topic. It is a novel but it gets the message across among others.
 
Its not so hard for me to believe.

What is his motto, “I will not serve?”

Do you not know people that seem they would rather reign in hell then serve in heaven?

And then when after they spurned heaven try to deface everything that the one who loves made, as a little kid throwing a temper tantrum ripping up a something precious of his parents (except on a diobolical level.)

A quick search in the Catechism shows up pargraph 391, which quotes the fourth lateran council: ** 'The devil and the other demons were indeed created naturally good by God, but they became evil by their own doing. ’ **Or when Jesus talks about Satan he refers to him in the singular. So I think its pretty solid church teaching.

But thats just my two cents.**
**
 
trth_skr said:
I don’t have a direct answer for you, but I personally believe he is real. But sometimes asking a question (or a few) to answer a question puts the first question in perspecitve:
  1. Do you believe the Eucharist (bread and wine) is the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ?
  2. Do you belive that Mary was Assumed bodily into heaven ?
  3. Do you belive Christ rose from the dead?
Click to expand...

  1. *]yes.
    *]yes.
    *]and yes.
    If you can say yes to these three questions, I really wonder why you cannot consider that satan was a real creature.
    Click to expand...
    I didn’t say that! Of course I have considered that he is a real creature, I just find it hard to believe!
 
Atreyu said:
I consider myself a faithful Catholic in that I try my hardest to discern what is official Church teaching, and then I follow that up with an effort to believe in that teaching. But there’s one thing that bothers me, and I’d really like to know what the official Church teaching on this subject is.

The subject is Satan. I find it so hard to believe in him, as he just seems so… stupid! I can easily believe in a Satan that is a figure for sin, but it is my understanding that the Church teaches that he was a literal creature. Is that true? Do we know for sure that he is a fallen angel?
Click to expand...
Also, keep in mind that Father Amaroth (sp?- the Vatican excorcist), Martin Malachi (also an exorcist), and others have said that the greatest deception of the devil is to get people to believe he does not exist.

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com

JMJ+
 
I_A said:
Its not so hard for me to believe.

What is his motto, “I will not serve?”

Do you not know people that seem they would rather reign in hell then serve in heaven?

And then when after they spurned heaven try to deface everything that the one who loves made, as a little kid throwing a temper tantrum ripping up a something precious of his parents (except on a diobolical level.)

A quick search in the Catechism shows up pargraph 391, which quotes the fourth lateran council: ** 'The devil and the other demons were indeed created naturally good by God, but they became evil by their own doing. ’ **Or when Jesus talks about Satan he refers to him in the singular. So I think its pretty solid church teaching.

But thats just my two cents.**
**
Click to expand...
Cheers I A. And cheers again, Mosher. I wonder, why is the devil given so much power, so to speak? What makes him different to any other demon? I have no trouble believing in fallen angels - I guess they have free will as much as humans do, right? But I just don’t understand why one of these angels would be given so much credence, when his actions seem to be so stupid!
 
Atreyu said:
Cheers I A. And cheers again, Mosher. I wonder, why is the devil given so much power, so to speak? What makes him different to any other demon? I have no trouble believing in fallen angels - I guess they have free will as much as humans do, right? But I just don’t understand why one of these angels would be given so much credence, when his actions seem to be so stupid!
Click to expand...
No more stupid than Adam and Eve.

If you understand angelic beings then you will understand how Satan is the way he is. All angels are different from the next. Some are closer in likeness to God than others. As the story goes - Lucifer (light bearer) was the highest of the created angels meaning that he was most like God. Thus when he fell, by his proclamation of “non serviat,” his natural created characteristics would not have been diminished. And now we must suffer because of his pride. It is not as if Satan fell in some way to be an anti-character in the story of salvation but rather it happened and so then we must deal with the consequences which can remind us that there is no such thing as private sin.
 
See the Catechism, Part One, “Paragraph” Seven, section II (or, article/para 391 through 395, particularly the first).

Yes, the Devil/Satan is real. Yes, he is taught to be a “fallen angel”, as are all demons. Perhaps it would help to remember that, in Catholic teaching, Evil is not a separate created Order, but the mere/profound absence of Good. It is not a dualistic force opposing Good, as is popularly portrayed.

And, yes, the whole situation, as it is commonly and popularly portrayed, is silly. Why would Lucifer be so stubborn and stupid?

Yet, Pride is a powerful stumbling block, as it is so subtle from the perspective of the victim (the self). It will cause even an otherwise intelligent mind to completely ignore any evidence which contradicts its own descision. And worse, they will never realize what is going on without outside Grace to wake them up.

Furthermore, and perhaps more contraversial, is the issue that according to the Church, the choice of the demons to rebell was a singular event, and that single choice was eternally and irrevocably binding. As such, Satan cannot “repent” and reenter the heavenly ranks, even if he has come to his senses about the whole thing. I say this is contraversial, as I have seen that some Orthodox do not agree with this particular facet of the theology.
 
The only actions of Satan’s that are stupid are the ones that you perceive, and consider to be stupid. You don’t perceive his more subtle, clever, brilliant tricks, necessarily, or don’t recognise them as his work.

Then again, who’s to say Satan never does anything stupid? Don’t we ALL sin fairly frequently, and don’t we often kick ourselves after having done so and say ‘how can I have been so stupid’? It doesn’t always take brilliance to fool your average (or even above-average) human being - just takes a knowledge of their weaknesses.
 
Atreyu said:
I consider myself a faithful Catholic in that I try my hardest to discern what is official Church teaching, and then I follow that up with an effort to believe in that teaching. But there’s one thing that bothers me, and I’d really like to know what the official Church teaching on this subject is.

The subject is Satan. I find it so hard to believe in him, as he just seems so… stupid! I can easily believe in a Satan that is a figure for sin, but it is my understanding that the Church teaches that he was a literal creature. Is that true? Do we know for sure that he is a fallen angel?
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that when we talk about demons, we… don’t really know what we’re talking about. 🙂

Personally, I don’t necessarily believe it has to be, literally, some big hulking red guy with wings and horns. Do we even know what it means to be possessed - even granting that it occurs?

My view of satan has always been something akin to thought. Not that satan is some kind of metaphor for thought, but that certain thoughts are unwilled, unwelcome, and ultimately outside of our control to a point (Akin to ‘Don’t think pink’, but on a more intricate level.) This is all my own personal understanding, mind you. But, you don’t need a body to affect the human mind (and by extension, soul) drastically.
 
Nullasalus said:
Keep in mind that when we talk about demons, we… don’t really know what we’re talking about. 🙂

Personally, I don’t necessarily believe it has to be, literally, some big hulking red guy with wings and horns. Do we even know what it means to be possessed - even granting that it occurs?

My view of satan has always been something akin to thought. Not that satan is some kind of metaphor for thought, but that certain thoughts are unwilled, unwelcome, and ultimately outside of our control to a point (Akin to ‘Don’t think pink’, but on a more intricate level.) This is all my own personal understanding, mind you. But, you don’t need a body to affect the human mind (and by extension, soul) drastically.
Click to expand...
Please read the Summa and On Angels by St. Thomas. I assure you that you will have a clear conception about the nature of the fallen angels after that.
 
I think I understand where the OP may be coming from.

The issues that trouble me about the concept of Satan are:

Why does he play by a script that has him lose in the end?
Why does he either not give up, knowing he loses in the end, or elect to no longer be evil personified?

If he can’t change, why can’t he?

What is his motive? The concept of evil for the sake of evil is a confusing concept to grasp. To expend energy is purposeful. Satan expends energy in his quest to destroy souls. When he aquires the soul, what purpose did he attain? Why does he desire this?

On this note, there is another, yet similiar issue that troubles me about the concept of Satan. If Satan wins a soul out of his cleverness, why is the soul fully accountable? (I probably should have saved this for another thread).
 
From the Summa Theologica:

THE ANGELS (SPIRIT)

SUBSTANCE: Their substance considered absolutely (50), and in relation to corporeal things, such as bodies (51) and locations (52). Their local movement (53).
INTELLECT: His power (54) and medium (55) of knowledge. The immaterial (56) and material (57) objects known. The manner (58) whereby he knows them.
WILL: The will itself (59) and its movement, which is love (60).
ORIGIN: How they were brought into natural existence (61) and perfected in grace (62). How some of them became wicked: Their sins (63) and punishment (64).

If you understand the nature of angels, the nature of devils (Satan included) becomes much more clear. Once the nature is understood, the function likewise becomes understandable.

God Bless,
RyanL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top