"Thus the angels were charged with leading the nations toward the one true God. But, as a matter of fact, the study of religions does not show that they succeeded especially well. Though containing bits of the truth, all the religions before Christ, except Judaism, are profoundly corrupt. Why? Pseudo-Dionysius answers:'If anyone asks, `How does it happen that the Jewish people was elevated to the splendor of a theocracy?` we must answer that the angels fulfilled their office of guardians with perfect honesty, and that it is not their fault if the other nations went astray into the cult of false gods. For it was these nations themselves, of their own impulse, which abandoned the right way of spiritual ascent toward the divine. Their foolish worship of things which they thought possessed a certain divinity clearly shows their egoism and their presumption.'
Pseudo-Dionysius takes up here the same doctrine that St. Paul expresses in the Epistle to the Romans 1:23. 'God has made Himself known to the nations by means of the visible realities of the world,' but men 'have changed the glory of the incorruptible God for an image made like to corruptible man and to birds and four-footed beasts and creeping things.'"Daniélou, p 20-21
(I pulled the quote from Denys into its own sub-block)
* *
* * *
* *
Such is the beautiful and non-rationalistic ecumenism of the Fathers. But a question arises: perhaps Plato and the Bagavad Gita were just written by perceptive geniuses. Why involve angels at all? After all, the needs of the heart (which is to say: the self, the human person) are common to people everywhere. I'm familiar with these needs in my own heart and know that they are a reliable criteria: if what I find does not satisfy, then these needs will not let me be. At the same time, I realize that having this criteria is not enough. I also need to keep it always before me, and yet I recognize that I lack the capacity to do so. As Ovid quipped, Video meliora, proboque; deteriora sequor - I see the right way and approve it but then I follow the worse. No doubt Plato and the author of the Bagavad Gita were geniuses, men of great awareness and reflection. However, I have noticed that intelligence does not make it easier to keep the needs of the heart foremost. If the intelligence that I have does not help me be more faithful then I doubt that great intelligence will either. I know my own moral incoherence, and I know that the smartest are not always the most moral.
Something else is needed, and the Church calls this something grace. It occurs to me that the notion I have of grace is amorphous, vague: a cloud, a force, something interior or psychological. But Scripture and Tradition insist upon angels: intelligent agents that are unfailingly faithful to the will of the Father. I look again at the visible world: the wild variety of plants and birds and life: the diversity of human forms and temperaments. Why should not the invisible world be every bit as articulated and diverse as this? God brought order to the chaos, and so why shouldn't the supernatural world be every bit as ordered as the natural world?
A Boy Scout in the woods recognizes the great diversity and order of life — he knows the names of things. If I feel that grace is amorphous and vague, then likely it's from the same cause: I never bothered to learn the names and seasons and order and in short, I lack familiarity with grace. So, here is the prayer to St. Michael, the head of the heavenly hosts and the defender of Israel:
* * *
* *
Such is the beautiful and non-rationalistic ecumenism of the Fathers. But a question arises: perhaps Plato and the Bagavad Gita were just written by perceptive geniuses. Why involve angels at all? After all, the needs of the heart (which is to say: the self, the human person) are common to people everywhere. I'm familiar with these needs in my own heart and know that they are a reliable criteria: if what I find does not satisfy, then these needs will not let me be. At the same time, I realize that having this criteria is not enough. I also need to keep it always before me, and yet I recognize that I lack the capacity to do so. As Ovid quipped, Video meliora, proboque; deteriora sequor - I see the right way and approve it but then I follow the worse. No doubt Plato and the author of the Bagavad Gita were geniuses, men of great awareness and reflection. However, I have noticed that intelligence does not make it easier to keep the needs of the heart foremost. If the intelligence that I have does not help me be more faithful then I doubt that great intelligence will either. I know my own moral incoherence, and I know that the smartest are not always the most moral.
Something else is needed, and the Church calls this something grace. It occurs to me that the notion I have of grace is amorphous, vague: a cloud, a force, something interior or psychological. But Scripture and Tradition insist upon angels: intelligent agents that are unfailingly faithful to the will of the Father. I look again at the visible world: the wild variety of plants and birds and life: the diversity of human forms and temperaments. Why should not the invisible world be every bit as articulated and diverse as this? God brought order to the chaos, and so why shouldn't the supernatural world be every bit as ordered as the natural world?
A Boy Scout in the woods recognizes the great diversity and order of life — he knows the names of things. If I feel that grace is amorphous and vague, then likely it's from the same cause: I never bothered to learn the names and seasons and order and in short, I lack familiarity with grace. So, here is the prayer to St. Michael, the head of the heavenly hosts and the defender of Israel:
St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle.
Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil.
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou O prince of the heavenly hosts
thrust into hell Satan and all the other evil spirits who wander through the world seeking the ruin of souls.
+Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment