Do You Believe In The "one True Love" Thing?

[Indwelling Trinity]

sorry for the partial double post... the editor is not working right.

[Indwelling Trinity]

sorry for the partial double post... the editor is not working right.

[Antigonos]

[quote name='Indwelling Trinity' timestamp='1343118528' post='2458385']
sorry for the partial double post... the editor is not working right.
[/quote]

Obviously .

[Maggyie]

It is not possible to hurt God's feelings. Think of if your child disobeyed you and ran out in the street and was struck by a passing vehicle. Your feelings would not be hurt - you would be grieved on your child's behalf, that THEY were hurt. That's how God feels about us when we sin.

However, failing to properly discern a vocation is not really a sin (unless you set out thinking "hmm how can I do the opposite of God's will for me). More like an imperfection, maybe. It's an invitation, not a subpoena. You must answer your subpoena to religious life or be held in contempt for all eternity... no.

I don't believe in "one true love" but I do believe my husband is who God planned for me to be with.

There are some widows with grown children who enter religious life (the Visitation order for instance) were they ignoring their call when they married their husbands, and are only now following it? Maybe for some of them but I don't think that's necessarily the case. First God called to marriage, then He called to religious life, for many of them, I'm sure.

[ACS67]

Emma if you have time to read all of this it has a plethora of sources:

[url="http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2009/01/church-fathers-on-immutability.html"]http://socrates58.bl...mutability.html[/url]

and more on the Divine simplicity of God:

[url="http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2009/01/gods-immutability-omniscience.html"]http://socrates58.bl...mniscience.html[/url]

That God is immutable is a dogma of the Catholic Church

[url="http://www.theworkofgod.org/dogmas.htm#Dogma-I-Trinity"]http://www.theworkofgod.org/dogmas.htm#Dogma-I-Trinity[/url]

Emma, you misunderstood me. I did not say our relationship is not about "Love" I said it is not about "human love" and that seems to be what many mistakenly equate it to, in my opinion. As I stated, it is on very different plane, even a different "realm" if you will.

No I am not a religious. God willing someday, however.

I would further add that the "bride of Christ" with the actual ceremony, wedding dress etc. only came in around late Middle Ages. There is no trace of that in early monastacism and it still does not exist in the East. Too bad marigold is no longer here or she would verify this. I'm not saying it is wrong I'm just stating that there is a deeper union that was sought by the early monastics (especially monks who in no way held a "romantic" notion of their love for God/Christ) and that is certainly the union I am after.

Edited July 24, 2012 by ACS67

[mantellata]

First, I agree with the above (obviously) God is immutable.

Second, feelings are a biochemical response but since we are both body and soul our feelings and emotions interact with our minds - and once upon a time in the garden of Eden before original sin our feelings did not push the mind to come to conclusions as much as the soul was able to harness the emotions to carry out it's willed desires. (caveat.. remember [b]we[/b] are are the acting person her... I'm almost personalizing will and soul and mind in order to talk about an interaction but they are all part and parcel of a [u]person.[/u])

Third, I love the analogy of God being grieved as opposed to hurt.



BUT

While in the strict sense we cannot apply "feelings" to God aka [b]the Divinity [/b]still we have to allow for the fact that the second person of the Trinity became Incarnate which now means a few mind boggling (and fun sources of meditation) things...........

1. Christ, as one who is Incarnate is not two persons in one being but rather His Divinity was so joined to His humanity and He took on everything completely that we [u]must[/u] believe (otherwise we'd be falling into heresy) that a) Jesus had two wills, two minds, two spirits - one human and one divine with the human being perfectly in accord with the divine. b) Jesus is only one [u]Person[/u] (using the strict philosophical sense of person here. c) Jesus had human [u]emotions[/u] and so, since the Incarnation is not divided, we say not "the human nature of Jesus experienced emotions but [b]Jesus experienced emotions.[/b]

2. When Christ rose from the dead He ascended into heaven [u]with[/u] His humanity.

3. God now has a human heart. In heaven, right now, there is a human heart beating in the second person of the Trinity. Humanity is [u]so crazy one with God!!!![/u]


So God in the second person of the Trinity could be "hurt" as well as grieved. [b]BUT[/b] we can't [u]do[/u] anything to the Divinity in a destructive way -- the word "hurt" to describe the human emotion of experiencing something hoped for, probably needs to be better defined for our discussion here.

YET, Jesus did and still does experience human emotions. They are just glorified and perfected as ours will be -- and once were in the garden of Eden.





So... Jesus loves us, wants the best for us, desires us personally and yes, with human emotions connected to the whole bit as He is Incarnate. Yet when we are young we tend to want experience everything as a passionate "feeling" for ourselves and others to be considered human and true. Humanity is so much more that [u]just[/u] feelings (without negating the goodness of emotions) that we do not want to reduce our human interactions - or Christ's Incarnate's actions to simply "needing" a feeling base.

A willed action (with the emotions following) is so much more beautiful than "butterflies". God wills our happiness.... For some of us He invites us to a particular way of life that will make us holy and happy by belonging only to Him in [u]this[/u] life as well as the next. In heaven we will all be like religious - that is, we will not be given in marriage but have an undivided heart for the Lord. I suppose one way of looking those desirous of religious life are a bit impatient to live as much of the heavenly life [u]now [/u]as we can!




I apologize for the fact that I'm having difficulty expressing what I'm intending and I think I actually was trying to prove two points here.

So if this makes no sense.... sorry for wasting your time!

[Annie12]

Oh! You aren't wasting anyone's time! Your answer was quite interesting.

I have a question though. You sounded like you think we shouldn't even pay attention to our desires, but can it be that God uses our desires sometimes in the long run to glorify him? For example, if someone deeply desires to be a consecrated religious, or on the other side of the spectrum to be a devoted spouse, didn't God place in their hearts that desire because it is his holy will? If our feelings are in line with "goodness" I would think they can be though not always) the most noticeable sign of God's will.

[ACS67]

Mantellata

You explained it perfectly! My argument is that far too many(young and old) focus exclusively on Christ's humanity. This is a HUGE problem in the Catholic Church today and it is the very reason humanism has bled into the Church and even our catechesis. This also creates a problem of subjectivism. Christ becomes whoever I conceive him to be in my "mind" or "fantasy." That can't be.

St. Thomas Aquinas tells us the concepts of God and the descriptions we attribute to him are for our benefit, not his. God is all those things and yet he is known of them. It is the essence of apophatic and cataphatic theology, negative and positive.

Edited July 24, 2012 by ACS67

[mantellata]

Hi Annie....

I wasn't trying to "discount" feelings - just put less emphasis on them.

There is also a difference between a feeling - an emotion that is a biochemical response to a stimulus that is either something perceived by the body or the soul - and a desire -- in which emotions interact but is principally in the will.

A desire (which may include emotions) to serve God in religious life [b]is[/b] a necessary sign that one is actually called to the life. It is not the only sign however.

Feelings - emotions require [u]a lot[/u] of asceticism to prune away the dross, and are never fully redeemed this side of paradise. Said better - the emotions are not the [u]principal[/u] thing to be trusted. Emotions are part of the material part of our existence and while not [u]bad[/u] are not our highest faculties. The emphasis needs to be placed on the intellect and the will. (And by intellect I do not mean intelligence but the part of our soul that apprehends reality and/or perceived reality). The intellect perceives the good (religious life) and the will goes towards it to make it happen. (Discerning first that there are no impediments, then that with grace God draws a person to love Him in this exclusive way etc... removal of debts, spending more time in prayer and with the Sisters, finding a group that is faithful to the Church and lives by a rule that promises to aid in the very transformation we seek etc...)

It can seem like this somehow makes the experience less human and less passionate - but actually it is more so precisely [u]because[/u] it is a conscious choice. Daily we renew our offering. I knew a bishop who once said that every morning he "feels" like quitting, and every morning he [u]resolved[/u] to live more energetically and passionately for Christ alone. This is a bishop who everyone would assume is not only the most joyful soul, but also one who finds his life for Christ as easy. It takes daily commitment - and it doesn't mean it is distasteful - just that we are [u]so much more than feelings.[/u]

I hope this helps.

And thank you all for your kind words. I need to go back to philosophy class.

[emmaberry]

[quote name='mantellata' timestamp='1343170065' post='2458540']
I need to go back to philosophy class.
[/quote]

I disagree-you just schooled me. Reading that was like being back [i]in [/i]philosophy class!