Tag: featured

Mere Christianity – Book III – Chapter 2 (“The ‘Cardinal Virtues'”)

One comment

Book-3

Picking back up my notes for C.S. Lewis’ “Mere Christianity”…

Notes & Quotes

1. We may speak of Christian morality in terms of the seven virtues

(b) Three are called “Theological” virtues

“…as a rule, only Christians know about [these]…”

(a) Four are called “Cardinal” virtues

“…all civilised people recognise [these]… It comes from a Latin word meaning “the hinge of a door…they are, as we should say, ‘pivotal'”

(i) Prudence

“Prudence means practical common sense, taking the trouble to think out what you are doing and what is likely to come of it”

Some think that prudence isn’t really a virtue and that it’s okay to be a foolish and childish, but…

(a) Christ wants us to grow

“Christ never meant that we were to remain children in intelligence… He wants us to be simple, single-minded, affectionate, and teachable, as good children are; but He also wants every bit of intelligence we have to be alert at its job, and in first-class fighting trim.

He has room for people with very little sense, but He wants every one to use what sense they have”

(b) Christianity is an education in itself

“Anyone who is honestly trying to be a Christian will soon find his intelligence being sharpened: one of the reasons why it needs no special education to be a Christian is that Christianity is an education itself. That is why an uneducated believer like Bunyan* was able to write a book that has astonished the whole world”

* John Bunyan, the author of “The Pilgrim’s Progress”.

(ii) Temperance

“Temperance referred not specially to drink, but to all pleasures; and it meant not abstaining, but going the right length and no further”

(a) Temperance, or even abstinence, does not mean the thing is bad in and of itself

“…An individual Christian may see fit to give up all sorts of things for special reasons-marriage, or meat, or beer, or the cinema; but the moment he starts saying the things are bad in themselves, or looking down his nose at other people who do use them, he has taken the wrong turning”

(b) We should not think that temperance is restricted to drink

“One great piece of mischief has been done by the modern restriction of the word Temperance to the question of drink. It helps people to forget that you can be just as intemperate about lots of other things. A man who makes his golf or his motor-bicycle the centre of his life, or a woman who devotes all her thoughts to clothes or bridge or her dog, is being just as “intemperate” as someone who gets drunk every evening. Of course, it does not show on the outside so easily: bridge-mania or golf-mania do not make you fall down in the middle of the road. But God is not deceived by externals”

(iii) Justice

“It is the old name for everything we should now call “fairness”; it includes honesty, give and take, truthfulness, keeping promises, and all that side of life”

(iv) Fortitude 

“And Fortitude includes both kinds of courage-the kind that faces danger as well as the kind that “sticks it” under pain. “Guts” is perhaps the nearest modern English. You will notice, of course, that you cannot practise any of the other virtues very long without bringing this one into play”

2. There is a difference between an individual act and a character

“Someone who is not a good tennis player may now and then make a good shot. What you mean by a good player is the man whose eye and muscles and nerves have been so trained by making innumerable good shots that they can now be relied on… In the same way a man who perseveres in doing just actions gets in the end a certain quality of character. Now it is that quality rather than the particular actions which we mean when we talk of ‘virtue'”

If we think only of particular actions, embrace three wrong ideas:

(a) How and why don’t matter

“…whether you did it willingly or unwillingly, sulkily or cheerfully, through fear of public opinion or for its own sake. But the truth is that right actions done for the wrong reason do not help to build the internal quality or character called a “virtue,” and it is this quality or character that really matters”

(b) God cares more about rules

“We might think that God wanted simply obedience to a set of rules: whereas He really wants people of a particular sort”

(c) Virtues are only for this life

“Now it is quite true that there will probably be no occasion for just or courageous acts in the next world, but there will be every occasion for being the sort of people that we can become only as the result of doing such acts here… if people have not got at least the beginnings of those qualities inside them, then no possible external conditions could make a “Heaven” for them…”

Discussion Questions

1. What are the “Cardinal Virtues”?

2. What is the difference between the “Cardinal” and “Theological” virtues?

3. Why might some Christians not think that prudence is a virtue?

4. Why is it dangerous to restrict “temperance” to “drink” and “teetotalism”?

5. What is the difference between acts and character? How might we go wrong if we think more about acts than character?

C.S. Lewis Doodle

No doodle!

Catholic Encouragement for reading Scripture

One comment

Jerome

I have finally returned to a manuscript I wrote last year for a book on leading Bible Study. Each chapter begins with a quotation from a Saint or Church document which praises God’s Word or exhorts the faithful to the reading of Scripture. Today’s post will function as a notepad for all the quotations I’ve found…

Is there a quotation you love which I have omitted? Please share it in the Comments!

2nd Century

St. Irenaeus of Lyons

For we learned the plan of our salvation from no others than from those through whom the gospel came to us.  They first preached it abroad, and then later by the will of God handed it down to us in Writings, to be the foundation and pillar of our faith
– St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 3.1.1 (2nd Century)

3rd Century

Origen of Alexandria

One must therefore portray the meaning of the sacred writings in a threefold way upon one’s own soul, so that the simple person may be edified by what we may call the flesh of the scripture, …the obvious interpretation; while the one who has made some progress may be edified by its soul, as it were; and the one who is perfect… may be edified by the spiritual law, which has “a shadow of the good things to come” (cf. Rom. 7:14). For just as the human being consists of body, soul and spirit, so in the same way does the scripture, which has been prepared by God to be given for humanity’s salvation.
– Origen of Alexandria, On First Principles 4.11 (3rd Century)

4th Century

St. Jerome

Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ
– St. Jerome, Commentary on Isaiah (4th Century)

When we pray, we speak to God; but when we read, God speaks to us
– St. Jerome (4th Century)

“Do you pray? You speak to the Bridegroom. Do you read? He speaks to you”
– St. Jerome, Letter XXII to Eustochium, 25 (4th Century)

“Read assiduously and learn as much as you can. Let sleep find you holding your Bible, and when your head nods let it be resting on the sacred Page”
– St. Jerome (4th Century)

St. Athanasius

“Scripture is of all things most sufficient for us.”
– Saint Athanasius, Father and Doctor of the Church  (4th Century)

“These books are the fountains of salvation, so that he who thirsts may be satisfied with the oracles contained in them”
-Saint Athanasius, Father and Doctor of the Church, Letter 39.6 (4th Century)

St. Epiphanius of Salamis

“Reading the Scriptures is a great safeguard against sin”
– St. Epiphanius (4th Century)

St. Ambrose of Milan

 “…we speak to Him when we pray; we hear Him when we read the divine saying.”
– St. Ambrose of Milan, On the Duties of Ministers I, 20,88: PL l6,50 (4th Century)

“Let the Word of God come; let it enter the Church; let it become a consuming fire, burning the hay and stubble, and consuming whatever is worldly”
– St. Ambrose of Milan (4th Century)

St. John Chrysostom

“The Holy Scriptures were not given to us that we should enclose them in books, but that we should engrave them upon our hearts”
– St. John Chrysostom (4th Century)

“It is not possible, I say not possible, ever to exhaust the mind of the Scriptures. It is a well which has no bottom”
– St. John Chrysostom (4th Century)

St. Augustine

“If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself”
– St. Augustine, Father and Doctor of the Church (4th Century)

“He will find there in much greater abundance things that are to be found nowhere else, but can be learnt only in the wonderful sublimity and wonderful simplicity of the Scriptures”
– St. Augustine, Father and Doctor of the Church, De Doctr. Christ. 2,42,63 (4th Century)

“The New Testament lies hidden in the Old, and the Old is unveiled in the New”
– St. Augustine, Father and Doctor of the Church (4th Century)

St. Ephraim the Syrian

“When you begin to read or listen to the Holy Scriptures, pray to God thus: “Lord Jesus Christ, open the ears and eyes of my heart so that I may hear Thy words and understand them, and may fulfill Thy will”
– St. Ephraim the Syrian (4th Century)

Read more

Maybe

One comment

Just a quick micro-rant today concerning one of my pet hates…

You may think that “Maybe” is a fairly innocent word…

…but it’s not, not at all.

When someone sends you a Facebook invite, please don’t choose “Maybe”.

Check your calendar.

Make a decision.

Be decisive.

Thank you, that is all.

Was Irenaeus wrong?

10 comments

A while ago, I had a chap called Roscoe commenting on my blog, denying the Catholic claims concerning St. Peter and the See of Rome. In response, I quoted St. Irenaeus, one of the most important witnesses concerning the Church at Rome:

“…that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; …which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority…

…The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate [of Rome]. Of this Linus…Anacletus…Clement…[and] Eleutherius does now…hold the inheritance of the episcopate.

“In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth 

– Against Heresies III.3.3 (c. AD 180)

Irenæus_af_Lyon copy

Not founded by Peter and Paul

In reply to my quotation of Irenaeus, Roscoe wrote the following:

There are no historical facts to support the idea that Peter and Paul founded the church at Rome. Rome was over 1000 miles away from where they were. We can see what Peter was doing in Acts and he was not in Rome at this time. Most likely the faith was brought there by pilgrims who were converted in the early chapters of Acts.

Roscoe’s main argument seems to be:

1. Irenaeus says Peter and Paul “founded” the church at Rome.

2. Jews from Rome were present at Pentecost and converted to Christianity. It would have most likely been these Christians who would have brought the faith to Rome.

3. Irenaeus is proven demonstrably wrong and therefore his testimony concerning Rome should be regarded as extremely dubious.

I’ve heard this kind of argument a few times in the comment section of other blogs, so today I’d like to respond to it…

Read more

Paternal Protestations

4 comments

As you’ll see from the categorization of this entry, this is an apologetics post. In this article I am going to be defending the use of the writings of the Early Church Fathers in demonstrating the historicity and veracity of the Catholic Faith.

The problem with writing a defence of anything is that, even with the best will in the world, it’s still easy to come across as though you’re attacking those to whom you are responding.

So, if you’re reading this post and you feel that it comes across as Protestant-bashing then I’m truly sorry.  This is certainly not my intention.  In fact, this was one of the reasons why I penned the Ecumenical Apologist entry, to try and dispel such charges. In this post I simply want to present something of an explanation as to why one should care about the Early Church Fathers.

Forgotten Treasure

On the occasions when I’ve been engaged in apologetics with non-Catholic Christians I’ve often mentioned the Early Fathers.  I’m usually met with blank stares.  The Early who?! Unfortunately, like Catholics, our separated brethren haven’t read much of the Early Church Fathers either 🙁

One of my hopes for this blog is that it will encourage both groups to read the Fathers and learn more about our common heritage.  The Early Church Fathers are fundamentally important in ecumenical work since they were living in a time prior to the divisions of the Great East/West Schism and the Reformation.

On the odd occasion when I do encounter non-Catholics who have heard of the Fathers, they usually only have second-hand information and have actually not read any of their writings.  This is not true of all non-Catholics, of course, but in my limited experience it has at least been the larger majority. It should come as no surprise then, upon meeting Catholic or Protestant Christians unfamiliar with the Fathers, I immediately encourage them to begin by reading the letters of my favourite Early Church Father, St. Ignatius of Antioch 🙂

How You Shouldn’t Treat The Fathers

Yesterday, Joe over at Shameless Popery wrote a great post entitled Three Ways You Shouldn’t Treat The Church Fathers. Here were his three points:

Wrong Way #1: Ignoring or Fearing the Church Fathers
Reason: It Reduces Christianity to Incoherence

Wrong Way #2: Exploiting the Church Fathers
Reason: It Doesn’t Treat the Fathers Honestly

Wrong Way #3: Treating the Church Fathers as Infallible
Reason: The Fathers Occasionally Disagree

In this blog post I would like to talk a little bit about the third item. In apologetic exchanges I have often had to correct the non-Catholic assertion that we regard the Fathers as infallible. We don’t. As Joe points out, the Fathers occasionally disagree. It is on this point that I sometimes hear another objection. Here is what someone recently wrote to me:

“The fathers didn’t agree on every matter of doctrine so their opinion is no more reliable than anyone else’s. There were some heated arguments between some of them.  In what way are they different from two modern-day non-Catholic pastors disagreeing over a certain interpretation of the Bible?“

I would like to take the rest of this blog entry to address this objection.

Read more

PWJ: S1E16.5 – Bonus – “Mea Culpa”

Leave a comment

Guilty

Sorry guys! I don’t think I’m going to be able to get out an episode of the Eagle and Child this week! We’ll be back next week. To make sure you don’t miss any episode, be sure to subscribe to our podcast stream, either manually, or through iTunes, Google Play, Podbean, Stitcher and TuneIn.

If you’d just like to chat, feel free to send us a message through my website or tweet us @pintswithjack.

In the meantime, why not look at the beautiful C.S. Lewis quotations we’ve put on our new Instagram account?

Episode 16.5: Mea Culpa (Download)

— Show Notes —

• Mea culpa!

1 … 60 61 62 63 64 … 172