|
作者
|
內容
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/12/6 上午 10:25:27
|
|
|
"我不入地獄誰入地獄" is noble indeed, but is it noble enough to merit Hevean?
Or: Does this motive correspond to the supernatural End of a person?
(Normally, whatever good human will wills, if it is not directed to God as the supreme End and acting within the Law of God, are called sins)
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/12/6 上午 10:28:52
|
|
|
What did St. Paul actually mean when he says something similar?
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/12/6 上午 10:35:33
|
|
|
Is "為上天堂而行善" selfish enough to be rendered love of (created) self?
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2004/12/6 下午 06:59:21
|
|
|
奧兄：
你說「normally」，若不以天主作為終極目標而在天主之律的範圍內行事，則屬於「罪」。
那麼，未皈依天主的人，所作的任何事按你的定義，豈不都成為罪了？
你的說法，如何與特倫多大公會議的教導相協調呢？
－－－－－－－－－－
法規七
誰若說：所有的人在成義之前所做的一切行為，不拘因哪一個理由而做的，都是真正的罪惡，或都應遭受天主的惱恨；或說：人越是努力準備自己，領受恩寵，則越是嚴重的犯罪，那麼，這種人，應受絕罰。
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2004/12/6 下午 07:13:57
|
|
|
況且，佛家所說的地獄，與天主教所說的地獄，也大不相同。
單以佛家「輪迴」的觀點，就與天主教不同。若輪迴的說法成立，那麼，多落幾次地獄，也是為普度眾生而已；但若地獄是永恆的，那麼，落一次已是太多。
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/12/7 上午 11:06:43
|
|
|
What I mean is:
Men normally wills what are (apparently) good.
But God is the source of all goodness, so men in willing whatever finite goodness, is in a quest for the Good.
So Men, catholics or not, knowingly or unknowingly, wills "directed to God as the supreme End", although they may sometimes violate the Law of God, which is the path God sets for us to fulfill our End, the quest for eternal Goodness.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/12/7 上午 11:22:00
|
|
|
"whatever good human will wills, if it is not directed to God as the supreme End and acting within the Law of God, are called sins." I admit, is not clear enough.
Let me put it as:
"whatever good human will wills are directed to the Good, i.e. God, though sometimes they misplaced the Good by goodness of creatures, this is the same as "turn away from God" in common terms. Concretely, this amounts to
acting outside the Law of God, and are called sins"
Under this context, not all the works of the infidels are sins if God's Laws are not violated. (協調Canon 7) Some are even naturally good acts, as opposed to elevated supernatural goodness resulting from the infused virtues.
For example, a non-catholic cares for the sick according to his conscience (Natural Law), this is naturally good act (definitely not evil). However, if a catholic does the same thing for the Love of God (supernatural charity), the same act is elevated and has a supernatural goodness.
That's why I say elsewhere, "Charity without the Faith is not true charity".
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/12/7 上午 11:58:36
|
|
|
I started this discussion because:
The reward of Heaven is a pure gift of God and we are created for it as our End and we are obliged to strive for it. There is nothing "selfish" in this since this is our obligation to do good works to merit Heaven.
Someone may say doing good works for Heaven solely lacks the "spirit of sacrifice for others"/"concern for others"/ or is "selfish"......
When one says "I would rather go to Hell to save someone, etc..." actually is looking for his OWN satisfaction, the heroic feeling.
"I don't need Heaven so much as to keep my image as the good guy, hero sacrificing for others"......what is behind this? Nothing but Pride, the sin of Lucifer.
What could be more important than one's OWN (not others) soul?! Can anyone not yet a friend of God help others become one?
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2004/12/7 下午 03:27:32
|
|
|
藉行善而上天國，並沒有問題，也不自私，正如你努力工作去賺錢嘆世界，也是正當的，不算自私。
我提出的問題是：
行善，究竟是目的，還是手段？
如果行善只是上天國的手段，那麼一個善良的基督徒，在地上儲夠上天國所需的分數（假設上國的準則如儲信用咭積分換禮物），他就不須積極再行善了。
可是，如果行善本身就是目的，是為減輕別人的痛苦，那麼，這個善良的基督徒，即使已有資格上天國，他仍會繼續行善。
德蘭修女終身行善，你以為她是因為怕上不了天國嗎？
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/12/8 上午 08:51:09
|
|
|
This is a good question.
In my understanding, Heaven is a free gift but we still need good works to merit Heaven.
Now for those who obtain Heaven. Are they on the same level of sanctity when they are alive? Obviously not, otherwise it would be injust for some to suffer in Purgatory while the marytrs, for instance, go to Heaven directly.
Therefore it is more reasonable that, in view of God's justice, the reward to the Just in Heaven is proportionate to their merits on earth despite being free gift.
The parable of the vineyard laborers (Mat.20:1-16) warns of boasting to receive the faith earlier, a comparison of the Jews and Gentiles, but could not be a counterproof that reward of Heaven is the same to all.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/12/8 上午 09:11:11
|
|
|
Second. "努力工作去賺錢嘆世界" and "藉行善而上天國", has a difference.
("如果行善本身就是目的，是為減輕別人的痛苦"?
>Solely 為減輕別人的痛苦 is not enough to be a (supernaturally) good act that generate merits. You need Charity-Love of God (before you love anybody)) So I assume "行善" here, as a piece of Good Work that merits, presupposes Charity.
Of course both are lawful.
The former being a naturally good act, the latter being elevated to a supernaturally good act.
When one tries to "藉行善而上天國", he is directly willing the infinite Good (Heaven). (Not just willing a finite good-嘆世界, which is not a sin of course, but he will be tempted to misreplace the Good by this good, pleasure; that's called sin).
It is unfair to put the two motives: one for infinite goodness and the other for finite goodness on the same ground, which is a confusion of the natural and supernatural orders.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/12/8 上午 09:38:43
|
|
|
Third. When one wills the supreme Good, God, directly (even for the fear of Hell), he is already practicing Charity-the Love of God, though in an imperfect way (that's why attrition is different from contrition).
Fearing Hell and to love God are inseparable. I fear Hell, so I fear losing the Good, which is God. Vice versa, I love God above all, so I fear Hell which is the eternal separation from God. This is the End God sets for us. He wants us to fear Hell (for his justice) and at the same time
love Him (for his mercy).
Analyze this statement: Men are obliged to love God. A duty to love which has no counterpart in human relations.
There are reasons why people are always trying to tear up obeying (for fear of Hell) and loving God:
We have duties towards other human beings, for example, I have duties towards my students; but I am not compelled to love or will all of them, as they may not be apparently good. That makes loving another person "nobler" than obeying another due to duties.
We humans are used to this sense of nice feeling that my love for others is not due to them, and people are not necessarily loved by me. I could have not loved him but I did, that makes me a noble guy (a nice feeling......).
But to God? Can we say the same? Are we "free" not to love Him?? Do we become a "good guy" when we love Him, does God need our love?
We must obey as well as to love Him. Claiming to obey God (fear Hell) while not loving Him is a lie. Why? because we are created to love Him and to avoid Hell simultaneously. Are we free to love Him while "obeying" Him? No. In fact, whenever we love or will, is a proof that we must love the Good (or misplaced image of Him in sins), since God is the cause of all goodness.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/12/8 上午 09:50:24
|
|
|
Now we know love has no boundaries (St. Paul Cor 1), there is no completely fulfilled love of God, we love God and always try to love more. The same is said of good works (acts of obedience).
For the love of God pushes (not purely 是為減輕別人的痛苦) Mother Thersea to obey God (do good works), not only this moment but to continue forever.
Q:"行善，究竟是目的，還是手段？"
(1) In general good works (as 手段) merit Heaven (as目的) for sure. Nothing selfish because fulfiling an obligation is never selfish. And God is so good that this obligation is benefits us.
(2) Good works follows Charity, and Charity nevers ends so good works should not stop.
If you say you have done enough good works to merit that proves you are not truly loving God. For love always strives to love more. "The Love of God compels us"---as St. Paul says. Exactly what Mother THersea did.
|
