|
作者
|
內容
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2003/4/21 下午 08:22:01
|
|
|
Dear Anoiting,
對於誰可上天堂，可參考瑪竇（馬太）福音，第二十五章三十一至四十六節。
基於這段經文，我相信但凡有愛心的好人，必會得教。
Simon
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/22 下午 01:05:40
|
|
|
Verses 41-45 are irrevelant here. As geniune Christianity requires a living faith---with good works (cf. Ep. to St. James:"Faith without good works is dead") TOGETHER with the Catholic Profession of Faith as handed down from the Bible, Fathers and those solemnly defined at Ecumenical Councils...etc.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/22 下午 01:25:27
|
|
|
Back to the first verses:
Consider the good thief at the right of Christ on the cross. He did not "clothed, gave food to, gave drink to, nor visited anyone: he is sentenced to death simply because his whole earthly life DESERVES death.
Yet the Lord lead him to that Beatitude which NO NATURAL GOOD WORKS what-so-ever on their own could merit. The thief, as was our great fathers Abraham, Issac,...St. Paul are saved by Faith, (read Romans)---not "Alone" but with good works AFTERWARDS deserving merit---good in God's eyes.
Do you think a Buddhist/aethist(eg. some "nice" commumists or existentialist like Jean Satre or humanists like Voltaire)
who continually deny the name of Jesus and
spurn the illumination of the Holy Ghost to accept the Truth will 100% sure to
be rendered among those blessed?
Remember: I refer to those who does a lot of natural good works(unmeritable) BUT is so stubborn(or ignorantly stubborn) to refuse the Truth IN HIS CONSCIENCE---misled conscience.
As we said MANY TIMES before, we could not be sure for his eternal fate. And you DO promise him Heaven. How are you so sure?
Good works that merits, (in the eyes of God of course---not those natural good works) , are consequences of supernatural (sanctifying) grace. This grace may be bestowed under many forms, possibly outside the Catholic Church, but one form that is 100% sure is the Holy Baptism and the sacraments. That is why we always not sure all people outside the Catholic Church are condemned eternally.
In a word, although non sufficet per se, intellectual Faith DOES preceed all good works. Actually it is the BASIS for any good meritable works. We may say:"Good works without Faith is dead" as well.
If you say": "good works before sanctifying grace ALONE is SUFFICIENT for salvation" you will face many difficulties. I hope I correctly understands your notion :" 但凡有愛心的好人，必會得教".
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2003/4/23 下午 08:21:23
|
|
|
What does 100% sure mean? Absolutely sure? Why we need to tell others in these terms like "absolutely sure" so as to "gurantee the promise of heaven"?
Even if we are in the Church, we can never be absolutely sure concerning our sanctity status. None of us here can be absolutely sure that he WILL go to heaven.
As human beings, we live in a conditional world. We can only guarantee things in a very limited extent. Only God is absolute.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/24 下午 08:31:15
|
|
|
The "but one form that is 100% sure is the Holy Baptism and the sacraments" as I said of course means the person be in the state of (sanctifying) grace.
Because Holy Baptism, which is effective, brings a person into this state of grace. And at least at the moment he is baptized, he is in the state of grace. So I said he be 100% sure to Heaven.
No one knows what happens next. He may die in mortal sin and perish eternally.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/24 下午 08:40:11
|
|
|
But even that does not affect my main point:
"One could not guarantee any nice and charitable person the promise of Heaven, just by their charitable acts. Actually, any acts not in the state of grace, which fallen men very rarely achieve outside the Christian Faith, do not deserve merit in any sense, let alone the Promise of Heaven."
Or simply, "You can't tell any person: Be nice and love your neighbors! You will THEN go to Heaven."
It is this distorted version of "100% sure" that I am against.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2003/4/24 下午 09:53:04
|
|
|
Then could I say: "Why were you baptised so early? I would suggest you to be baptised (or, to wish to be baptised) only at the moment of death then you will be 100% sure to be going straight to heaven!!!" ?
How can any adult be so 100% certain that one is in the state of grace?
No one of us here doubt of Christ's efficacy of redemptive grace. But whether it is efficient to us all depends a lot on the factors of the recipient.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2003/4/25 上午 10:54:18
|
|
|
我有時真的攪不清楚,究竟是中世紀士林神學家的問題,還是人自身的問題.
edward是問得好的,歷史上最出名的代表人物是君士坦丁大帝,如果他真是有領洗的話.
不過為那類人,仍有臨終的修和聖事,傅油和臨終大赦.
如修和赦免了你的大罪,傅油洗去你的小罪,大赦免卻你的一切罪罰,人是否可以直升天堂?
馬丁路得可能就是因為感到這些保證也不怎麼實在,令願相信不要怕,只要信.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2003/4/25 下午 04:32:18
|
|
|
What does Augustine's "state of grace" mean? Does it mean a state of God's actual grace or that of sanctifying grace?
It seems that as God wills all men to be saved, all people should be under God's care who make the sun rise "for just and unjust alike" - and hence to a certain degree of actual grace.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2003/4/25 下午 04:40:10
|
|
|
"To be a nice and charitable person" - I think that unless we love with the Love of God (Caritas Dei) Himself, we can never be saved.
In Christian language, it is when we are incorporated with Christ Himself in baptism that we begin to love with Christ's love.
Can we exclude the existence of this kind of love amongst those who doesn't know Christ? If it isn't God that predisposed a certain longing for Him amongst non-believers, how will they be able to believe Him through Revelation?
Let's call it "Seed of Faith".
That person with the seed of Faith can have several possible outcomes:
1. never encounters revelation, and thus no faith
2. encounters false witnesses of revelation, thus either - a) refuses and has no faith; or - b) accepts and has a false faith, i.e. no true faith
3. encounters true witnesses of revelation, and thus - a) accepts and has faith; or - b)i) refuses due to invincible "ignorance" or "error" in this life and so has no faith - or b)ii) refuses due to personal "weakness" and have no faith
It seems that for us who are inside the Church now, only 3a. applies. But then we must face the question of whether God is a God who is 不教而誅。
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2003/4/25 下午 11:41:50
|
|
|
Augustine,
一個人在生時努力做好事，又愛他人，就是不信天主。如果這人最後不能上天國，那麼我們的天主跟黑社會大佬有什麼分別？順我者生，逆我者亡？
Simon
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/26 下午 06:22:35
|
|
|
"Then could I say: "Why were you baptised so early? I would suggest you to be baptised (or, to wish to be baptised) only at the moment of death then you will be 100% sure to be going straight to heaven!!!" ?"
My answer: Yes if you really believe in the power of the sacrament as the sacrament. Look at the Good thief.
But watch-out, we still have the Purgatory to pay for your offenses there. Even in Heaven there are different ranks and individual rewards to the souls who are redemeed. The Good thief may(I don't know) omit the Purgatory but that's Jesus's special grace, can we be jealous?
And in the Gospel we read the parable of the workers who started working late but paid the same wages. Can we be jealous of others who had been a selfish sinner BUT repented TRULY and CONSCIENCIOUSLY before death to share Heaven with us? That is, though rare, possible.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/26 下午 06:28:03
|
|
|
"Even if we are in the Church, we can never be absolutely sure concerning our sanctity status"
Yes, I agree to this too. There are no contradiction to my previous claim: "IF we are in that state of (sanctifying) grace, you will be saved." It doesn't matter whether there is AN EMPIRCAL/observable test here on Earth to see whether a man is really in that state, (though "Good tree bears good fruit").
In fact, because we could not test if a man is in that state, we could not say 100% sure anyone is rejected the Beatific Vision. BY THE SAME REASON, CHRISTIANS OUGHT TO LIVE IN TREMBLING, for fear he may fall and fail to remain in state of Sanctifying Grace.
The CHristian life should not be easy, but be a true cross to bear. Devils are jealous of your state of grace and will try everything to tempt you to give up Faith or sin.
Because we are not sure we will PERSIST through the Valley of Tears we need to be vigilant.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/26 下午 06:39:30
|
|
|
I here quote: "It seems that as God wills all men to be saved, all people should be under God's care who make the sun rise "for just and unjust alike" - and hence to a certain degree of actual grace."
I don't understand your meaning of "God wills"?
Can God's Will fails? That is,
Is this Will sufficient (to EVERY individual man's salvation) in the usual sense or merely "sufficient" in the sense of the term "suffucient grace"(a grace that is not sufficient and needs actual grace to bring someone to Heaven)?
"A certain degree of actual grace"...I don't get the idea. You know actual grace itself is not enough for Heaven. (In certain goods/virtues that even pagans perform DOES carry this help from God). But what I mean by state of grace is the sanctifying Grace(which is really a STATE, unlike Actual graces in circumstances)
What 's the point of Actual Grace here?
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/26 下午 06:59:46
|
|
|
In Romans we read God will judge those people in edward's case (1), ie those who never heard about any faith, according to their conscience. Cases (2) is similar. They are Similar because although one COULD have no apparent religion or faith(case 1), he still has a faith in the creatures, money or vainglory, even in himself only.
In fact in my theory I have never excluded these cases (1 and 2) outside the Gate of Heaven nor promised as Simon did. I just concentrated on those who have heard but stubbornly refuses to believe. Please read previous discussions on what I mean by "stubbornly".
For cases 3(b), this really is the point:
If someone follow their "conscience"-a "conscience" which rejects the illumination of the True Faith and Holy Ghost AND IGNORANTLY FAIL To BELIEVE. I (as I said many many times) dare not say they go to Hell...Case 3(b)(i)
But I know those who understands what the Truth is but (by human weakness/work of the devil) refuses to believe---they will not be saved.
THERE EXISTS PEOPLE WHO FOR VARIOUS REASONS(e.g.: VAINGLORY/the appearance of a philanopist...)
act charitable acts and appears a perfect moral man in the eyes of the world. BUT IF YOU ASk:"Do YOu believe you are a real sinner and you need JESUS to escape Fire of hell?" He could answer:"NO I don't". HE IS SO SURE Of HIMSELF that HE DOES NOT NEED GOD to save him.
What's his religion? He believe in himself, that's his religion.
You cannot stand at the gate of heaven and say:"Forgive me and let me in because my disbelief is just my human weakness." Weakness IS NEVER an excuse, on matters of your faith.
Man perceives through the senses---normal standards of men, God sees through the heart and discerns intentions and thoughts. They are very different.
If you geniunely believe, you act charity and never vice versa. That is you won't automatically become an elect just by doing charity.
Salvation is a gift, God can't force you to accept this gift. If you choose to reject Faith you lose it and Heaven.
SO I answer case 3(b). God of course is not 不教而誅. Case 3b(ii) will not be saved because they choose so.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/26 下午 07:35:29
|
|
|
Hello Simon:
"順我者生，逆我者亡？" But if someone chose to "亡" by refusing to believe, who can he blame?
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2003/4/26 下午 11:16:12
|
|
|
Dear Augustine,
天主若真的如你所描述，祂和黑社會沒有分別了。順我者昌，逆我者亡，即使你在一生人中做盡好事也沒用。
幸好你不是天主的代言人。
主佑。
Simon
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/28 上午 11:42:25
|
|
|
Of course I do not presume to be "天主的代言人".
Have you read my statement clearly?
I said "we could NOT BE SURE whether Heaven is there for those cases like cases (1)-(2) and 3b(i)according to edward's categorization".
But you claim "我相信但凡(!)有愛心的好人，必會(means: implies ==>) 得教", you are clearly asserting a positive novel statement. It seems you are more like a "代言人" of some sort.
Do you know how this kind of false optimism is harmful? Did you not see the greatest tragedy of human history:"French Revolution and the so-called Enlightment" took direct root in this indifferentism and pantheism/naturalism? What you sound really reminds me of those freemasons.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2003/4/28 下午 02:54:31
|
|
|
如果我說我相信天主是絕對公義同時也是絕對仁慈的,我想兩位不會反對吧.他一定不會判錯案,也一定不會濫用刑.
現在的問題是我們是否真的願意相信天主吧了?
如是,便讓他去做判官吧,不要把判斷的職責硬加於自己的身上吧.
也不見得現在的社會比法國大革命前的歐洲差.
起碼現代的教會領導人,不會將反對他的人拿去燒.
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2003/4/28 下午 06:23:15
|
|
|
Dear Augustine,
Your statements are contradicting. You say:
1/ we could NOT BE SURE whether Heaven is there for those cases like cases (1)-(2) and 3b(i)according to edward's categorization".
2/ Do you know how this kind of false optimism is harmful?
My question is:
If you cannot be certain whether......, how can you say my idea is false optimism?
Simon
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/29 下午 08:44:55
|
|
|
Your optimism is false because:
1)The conditions implied by Edward's
cases 1,2,3a(i)
are by themselves unconclusive to those
people's salvation.
Furthermore,
You cannot make them conclusive by adding "if they be nice and charitable", because you have not explained my counter-example, i.e. the good thief. And those people who repent at the last moment of their breath.
2)But you claim:"ALL living human being, if they be nice and charitable, will be saved".
Let me give an analogy:
Whether tomorrow will stay sunny is uncertain, but if you claim:"if I do something, like saying
'RAIN RAIN RAIN!' three times, then
,tomorrow will not rain".
That's false optimism for 'RAIN RAIN RAIN' is irrelevant to the occurence of tomorrow's weather.
So "false" optimism really means "UNJUSTIFIED/unproven" optimism. I did not say the (possible) fact that someone in cases (1),(2)&3a(i) are saved is, false.
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2003/4/29 下午 11:06:48
|
|
|
Dear Augustine,
Unproven things are unproven things. False things are false things. False things are something that have been proven to be false.
Unproven things are different from false things. I do not like mixing up unproven things and false things.
Simon
|
|
歸一
管理人員
|
Posted -
2003/4/30 上午 11:10:01
|
|
|
幾位的討論，令我聯想到教義/教條與信仰的問題。信仰主是得救的必然途徑，這是教義，我們要相信，但是教義不能直接變成信仰。因為在信仰的進程中，我們都會對教義有新的理解，例如中世紀對教會之外無救恩的想法，那個教會就是有形的教會，但是今天如何理解教會，往往是會指無形的教會。這是由於信仰的幅度不同了。奧兄堅持教義，是正確，但是企圖把教義變成人人絕對的信仰標準，就有點難度了。
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/30 下午 12:53:40
|
|
|
Oops, "False things are something that have been proven to be false", I would not say so.
After all, the human intellect is so limited that he might not prove/disprove certain hard propositions. But that does not mean these statements are per se false/true, just because humans(like you and me) aren't able to prove/disprove them.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2003/4/30 下午 12:58:55
|
|
|
If you don't like my use of the word "false optimism" to denote UNJUSTIFIED optimism, I think "naive optimism" or "irrational---lack of justification or reason, and thereby irrational, optimism" would sound more comfortable to you, right?
After all, they produced the same effect as I said earlier (and so are equally damaging): unjustified optimism blinds the human soul of its guilt and need of the Christian Faith.
|
