Author Topic: Jamie I have a little quote for you to consider (Read 1871 times)

CM · « **on:** February 03, 2010, 06:48:25 PM »

Quote from: Ven. Anthony Mary Claret, in "The Pains of Hell",

O my soul, up to now there has not been any angel who has been able to comprehend what eternity is. So how can you comprehend it?

What do you make of this?

CM · « **Reply #1 on:** February 06, 2010, 04:49:05 AM »

Hi Jamie! :wave:

Jamie · « **Reply #2 on:** February 16, 2010, 12:28:17 AM »

Quote from: CM

Hi Jamie! :wave:

Hey - I just spotted this post - I will ponder it and reply when I have more time later (about to have dinner).

Jamie · « **Reply #3 on:** February 16, 2010, 01:25:49 PM »

Quote from: CM

Quote from: Ven. Anthony Mary Claret, in "The Pains of Hell",
O my soul, up to now there has not been any angel who has been able to comprehend what eternity is. So how can you comprehend it?

What do you make of this?

Okay - my first thought on this is that he by comprehend he means what the scholastics mean - that comprehension is not just fully apprehending something, but also fully comprehending it - not just understanding but knowing. This is the most perfect type of knowledge possible.

Until we die, our souls are limited to apprehensive knowledge of eternity only. I would hazard a guess (and I am willing to be corrected on this if wrong) that only God truly comprehends eternity - whereas created beings can only understand it if God imparts that knowledge directly.

So, I would say that Venerable Anthony Mary Claret is simply saying: "If not even the angels fully comprehend eternity, how can I (a mere human)?"

Essentially he is showing his reader that no matter how deeply they try to understand just how long the suffering of hell will be, they will not do so.

CM · « **Reply #4 on:** February 16, 2010, 06:43:11 PM »

Possibly so. I would also infer from his "up to now" that he believes the angels and saints in heaven still experience the passage of time (since the Final Judgment has not yet occurred, nor the end of time).

Jamie · « **Reply #5 on:** February 16, 2010, 06:57:14 PM »

Quote from: CM

Possibly so. I would also infer from his "up to now" that he believes the angels and saints in heaven still experience the passage of time (since the Final Judgment has not yet occurred, nor the end of time).

Summa Theologica 1, 61, Art 2:

Reply Obj. 2. An angel is above that time which is the measure of the movement of the heavens; because he is above every movement of a corporeal nature. Nevertheless he is not above time which is the measure of the succession of his existence after his non-existence, and which is also the measure of the succession which is in his operations. Hence Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. viii. 20, 21) that God moves the spiritual creature according to time.

So, the passage of time as known by us is not what the angels experience.

But, that aside, having read the above article by Aquinas, the Claret quote you provided is obviously in reference to the fact that the angels cannot comprehend eternity because they did not begin in eternity - only God is eternal in both direction - angels have a point of creation within eternity. Thus and angel, and humans, will never be able to comprehend eternity (even in the afterlife unless God infuses that to us) - we can only apprehend it.

CM · « **Reply #6 on:** February 16, 2010, 07:31:35 PM »

Quote

So, the passage of time as known by us is not what the angels experience.

Agreed. But still, you have not accounted for the "up to now". This definitely seems to imply that they have not yet entered into eternity, which is what I currently believe.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 16, 2010, 10:17:38 PM »

Jamie quoting Aquinas said:

Quote

Nevertheless he is not above time which is the measure of the succession of his existence after his non-existence, and which is also the measure of the succession which is in his operations.

This throws me off. So there is time in heaven, but it isn't measured by movement. If it can be measured at all, it is by the "succession of existence." An angel who didn't exist at one moment of eternity then exists the next moment, and forever after that.

Isn't this to say there is movement in heaven after all, since this angel in a way measures his existence by change -- the change from not-being into being?

There are certain events, such as Gabriel visiting Mary, a moment that happens once and then never again. The post-Mary Gabriel has accomplished something the pre-Mary Gabriel had not. He had changed, not in his essence but in what St. Thomas calls the "measure of the succession which is in his operations." How is this not movement through time? Of course, with the Annunciation you also have the problem of an eternal being stepping into time, or from one form of time to another.

I cannot quite grasp time WITH change, but WITHOUT movement.

Jamie · « **Reply #8 on:** February 16, 2010, 10:20:18 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

Jamie quoting Aquinas said:
Quote
Nevertheless he is not above time which is the measure of the succession of his existence after his non-existence, and which is also the measure of the succession which is in his operations.

This throws me off. So there is time in heaven, but it isn't measured by movement. If it can be measured at all, it is by the "succession of existence." An angel who didn't exist at one moment of eternity then exists the next moment, and forever after that.

Isn't this to say there is movement in heaven after all, since this angel in a way measures his existence by change -- the change from not-being into being? Wasn't Michael the Archangel a humble, lowly, drone angel who then was raised to high importance by God? That means there was change in his life, and this is what Thomas means by the "measure of the succession which is in his operations."

Then there are certain events, such as Gabriel visiting Mary, a moment that happens once and then never again. How is this not movement through time? Angels would have to be stepping into and out of time.

I cannot quite grasp time WITH change, but WITHOUT movement.

Because it is very hard for us to grasp things that occur in the realm of the immaterial. A change in that realm does not need movement - movement is a function of matter.

This leads me to a question I always wondered about but could never think of an answer: Our Lady and Our Lord both ended up in Heaven in body - how is that possible when Heaven is immaterial?

Raoul76 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 16, 2010, 10:21:33 PM »

That was a fast answer! As you can see, I radically rewrote my post but you were already there.

I had written about Michael the Archangel being a lowly, humble angel before his battle with Lucifer, but then realized I must have picked this up from some extra-Biblical source, so I erased it.

Jamie · « **Reply #10 on:** February 16, 2010, 10:24:26 PM »

Quote from: CM

Quote
So, the passage of time as known by us is not what the angels experience.

Agreed. But still, you have not accounted for the "up to now". This definitely seems to imply that they have not yet entered into eternity, which is what I currently believe.

Are you saying that the angels and saints don't see the beatific vision until the final judgement? That was the heresy of Pope John XXII wasn't it?

Now - as I said earlier, no angel will EVER comprehend eternity, so it is perfectly true to say that "up until now" they have not comprehended it. It would be true if I were to say the same this moment - all these years after Ven Anthony Mary Claret.

NB: I believe that God could infuse a comprehension of eternity in an angel or saint, but that is obviously something we cannot prove through reason and would need it to be revealed for it to be known.

Jamie · « **Reply #11 on:** February 16, 2010, 10:28:35 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

That was a fast answer! As you can see, I radically rewrote my post but you were already there.

I had written about Michael the Archangel being a lowly, humble angel before his battle with Lucifer, but then realized I must have picked this up from some extra-Biblical source, so I erased it.

I think my previous answer still holds true to your modified comment. The example you give (of St Gabriel visiting Our Lady) would serve as a "marker" so to speak for St Gabriel in Heaven, but it has not caused a physical change (or movement) in Heaven as those are impossible due to being immaterial. I guess ultimately the issue is this:

1. Time on earth relates to change and movement
2. Time in Heaven relates to events lacking change and movement and it is beyond our comprehension (and indeed even difficult to apprehend) until we join the immaterial world.

Jamie · « **Reply #12 on:** February 16, 2010, 10:29:42 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

That was a fast answer! As you can see, I radically rewrote my post but you were already there.

I had written about Michael the Archangel being a lowly, humble angel before his battle with Lucifer, but then realized I must have picked this up from some extra-Biblical source, so I erased it.

Oh - and there is nothing wrong with believing extra-biblical sources as long as the Church has approved them - as in the case of Catherine Emmerich -without whom we would know much less about the passion of Christ.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #13 on:** February 16, 2010, 10:32:19 PM »

The mention of John XXII ties two threads together neatly. In another thread I had said that I suspected Meister Eckhart was a heretic despite never being condemned. Well...

Wikipedia entry on John XXII --

Quote

"On March 27, 1329 John XXII condemned many writings of Meister Eckhart as heretical in his papal bull In Agro Dominico."

I always thought that no one would be with God until after the Last Judgment also... Sheesh. I guess I was a heretic. The reason this is heretical according to Wikipedia, which makes sense, is that the saints can't intercede with God on our behalf if they are waiting for the Resurrection.

So what happens, are their souls with God while they await their physical bodies? How do they get into heaven without being judged? I thought the judgment was on the last day.

Or has the Final Judgment sort of always-already happened, the way that the Word always-already happened, and before time was, the Word was?

Raoul76 · « **Reply #14 on:** February 16, 2010, 10:40:00 PM »

Whenever you see a picture of the Last Judgment, Christ is coming in glory and the saints are kneeling at His feet, with angels fluttering around Him. The way I always imagined this is that Christ comes back, the earth and heavens are consumed in fire, a new Earth is created on top of the old one, and then the bodies kind of shoot out of the graves and are reunited with their souls for the judgment, and that this is what we are seeing when we see the saints, since they have been called up first. Call Ibranyi crazy if you will, but his vision of the New Jerusalem being built on top of the ashes of the old is quite compelling and believable.

I guess what really happens is that the saints must come down in a way with Christ, like the angels do, having been with Him all the time. That makes more sense, now that I think about it. Otherwise why not show ALL the resurrected people, those of the evil as well as the good, surrounding Christ?

St. Augustine and St. Bernard and other saints will be dropping from the skies like paratroopers.