Appetite

When reading Aquinas, one of the coolest things for me was reading about what he describes as "the ultimate end." One statement in particular that stood out to me was in chapter 26 when he said "Moreover, all men agree to the fullest extent in their appetite for the ultimate end, for it is natural." This simple statement got me thinking,  we as humans have an inherent need to know and be loved by God. Still, we hear of stories even in the secular realm where people have all they could ever want but are still absolutely miserable. From our perspective as Christians, we really have an obvious answer to this problem, and that's God. However, even people who don't call themselves Christians find happiness as well as joy in friends and family, in helping others and things like that. I would argue that people find joy in those things because they do offer a taste of the fulfillment God has to offer. Still, they are only a taste. Nonetheless, that need and that desire are hardwired into every one of us as humans.

PS I commented on Jamie's "Purpose"

Virtue

So since I just stressed over my paper I decieded to incorporate it into my blog post.

The topic of my paper was what the casue of virtue is. A specific question that I discussed was whether or not humans could obtain certain virtues through habituation, or through developing habits through our actions. The objection to this idea being that there is no good without the soverighn God, that by the grace given by God we are saved and therefore virtue cannot be obtained by habitiation, but only as a gift bestowed by God. Further that actions that lead to virtue lack the perfection of true virtues, and cannot therefore be virtuous becaseu "an effect cannot be more virtuous that its casue". However, actions made on the pre-existing idea of good established by God can have the effect of producing a type of virtue.

ps-I commeneted on Brian's.

Paolo and Francesca

I found the story of Paolo and Francesca very interesting for a few reasons. I found it interesting that the two lovers were to be stuck in hell together for all of eternity. 'Wouldn't it be more painful for them to be separated?' was my initial thought. Looking into the text, though, one sees that only Francesca does the talking. She does evoke pity, laying the blame at the feet of others'. Paolo's perspective is never given--in fact, it seems as if part of his punishment is his silence. Then I realized the distinction between love and lust. They were not in love, but they acted on the whim of lust. Here it seems like the 'what is the punishment's relation to the sin' question comes into play. Since this couple acted out of lust, unthinking, most likely not thinking in a permanent, lasting effect, they are made to suffer together for eternity. They are unable to escape one another, can must be left with their past sins only to tell. Though the notion of lovers ending up in hell together seems romantic, it is anything but that.




I commented on Jannah's

Can I Just Ramble?

I wish that I could thank Dante for this fictional description of Hell because for starters, I have never been so intrigued about learning about Hell before! I have had plenty of discussions about the different "levels" of Heaven and Hell that might exist, but Dante puts it into a WHOLE new perspective. It was genius for him to classify the levels by the categories of sin, as not necessarily the quantity. People were punished according to their worst deeds, and those deeds that they committed were then used against them for eternal punishment. For instance, the philosophers in Hell could never acquire any hope through problem solving and critical thinking. It was pure torment to experience this....

I also enjoyed reading about the different types of ancient gods that existed in Hell. It was clever of Dante since be basically indirectly implied that God is superior to other religions. He basically put them in Hell to say that these religions are worthless, and that they will only get you INTO Hell.

After reading Inferno, it almost seems to put the fear of sinning back into you. I feel like today's generation has become numb to the Gospel and that we are no longer a God fearing people. We still do what we want to despite our knowledge of where that will get us. Personally, I do not have as much fear of doing wrong anymore, and I know that that is incredibly dangerous. However, it is descriptions and stories like these that help me to remember what this life is. I mean, I hate that I can lose care for my actions at times, but I believe that it is a stubbornness that exists in our human nature. What this generation needs to do is draw themselves back to God and to realize His power and what He can do. We need a fear of God placed in our hearts.

P.S. I commented on Jasmine's "Dante's Hell."

The Lust of Achilles

The Lust of Achilles

Okay! So I remembered to write my blog. Awesome! 

I found it interesting that Achilles was stuck in the Circle of Lust, along with Helen and Paris. One would think that for sure Achilles would be thrown in the people who went to Hell for being slaves to Wrath instead, but apparently not. Perhaps Achilles lusted after battle and glory, and was sentenced accordingly? Yes, there were women involved in his life, but it seemed to me when we read the Iliad that Achilles cared more about Glory,Honor,and War than cared about women. I also found it funny that he's stuck there with Paris and Helen, the two people that are probably the main cause of The Trojan war. Yet, they're all stuck in the same place, bearing the same about of punishment. But I do think Achilles lusted after battle. After all, when he was given the choice to return home and live a life without glory, or stay and die on the battle field WITH glory, he chose the latter. I think that says a lot about the character of this mighty warrior. The question is, are there multiple types of lust? I would say so. Achilles didn't partake of the sexual-lust so much as he did of war-lust. Achilles was a courageous and invincible warrior, but it seemed that his lust for war ended up being....his "Achilles' Heel". Ha...Ha...Ha.

P.S. commented on Skylar's "Be Careful What You Sin For"

Be careful what you sin for!

Reading Dante's Inferno really set my imagination into motion. This is because whenever I use to think about Hell I use to imagine just this big black pit of fire that all the people that weren't Christians or didn't believe in Christ would be. Never did I image that there were levels that were specifically designed for a persons' greatest sin including lust, wrath, and gluttony. Granted this is simply a fictional epic poem, but still it makes the mind wander what Hell will actually be like. Now even though I will never wind up in Hell as far as I know, I find it would be very interesting and appropriate if Hell was actually as detailed as Dante talks about. Every person has their biggest fears or their own personal "hell", so to be able to know that your punishment in Hell is specifically designed for you and other people with the same problems as yourself is pretty believable and terrifying. What we were discussing in class I found pretty hilarious also when someone mentioned that all the poets and philosophers wound up together continuously trying to discover the truth but not being able to because they trusted in their own knowledge and not the wisdom of Christ. It is also interesting to me that in cantos V line 77 -78 the only way Dante can speak to the souls in the second layer of Hell, which is the layer for the lustful, is to "entreat them by the love that leads them." This in a way signifies that whatever level you end up in, your soul still succumbs to the power of that sin.It makes me wonder where I would end up and what my greatest sin would be that would eternally follow me around, if I did not believe in Jesus Christ.


p.s. commented on jasmne's Dante's Hell

wasted by sin

The most interesting level of hell to me so far is the fourth, Avarice and Prodigality. Descending into the pit, the description seems especially striking.  “And why do our sins so waste us?” It intrigues me that Dante notes “Here, the sinners were more numerous than elsewhere.” Looking at our world today, it seems like it’s accurate for avarice to be the most prevalent sin. We have always been told that “you can’t take anything with you when you die” but Dante’s depiction seems to be the most hellish place possible for such people. Imagine having to shove the burden of your earthly possessions around with your chest for all of eternity… locked in an eternal scuffle. “All the gold that lies beneath the moon, or ever did, could never give a moment’s rest to any of these wearied souls,” and their punishment shows that the condition of their souls was so consumed with the temporal that they disregarded the eternal. I can’t imagine wasting my life in such a way, then being forced to recognize and continue the waste in eternity. Never resting, always scuffling and striving -like the ladder climbing of life- except no one makes any progress. They are taunted by each other, and you can almost feel the desperation to cling tighter mixed in with the despair that this is all they have to cling to…forever. Dante also (somewhat gleefully it seems) notes the prevalence of clergy in this level. So, to return to Dr. Abernathy’s questions… how did primal love create this? Perhaps it is because God loves his creation but that pure love for things/people was distorted by sin into greed and avarice. What does the punishment say about the sinner? Their overwhelming need for temporal things shows both their ignorance of the reality of eternity and their pride and selfishness. They are prideful and selfish because they probably believed that satisfying their own needs was the most pressing concern of life. They spent all their time and efforts to get these things… and now they are stuck with them and people like themselves for all of eternity. How tragically torturous.

P.S. commented on Jannah’s “How does love create hell?”

Purpose

Tuesday in class we talked about Aquinas and his view regarding the ultimate end of man.  The ultimate end is the contemplation of God, but one thing that came up was how individual people go about contemplating God.  I think that there are some people who really are called to live a life totally devoted to only prayer and the study of God, but I also think that there are more people who are called to live with normal jobs in normal communities.  One is no greater than the other, because they are both living as the people they were created to be.  However, if someone who was called to be a professional underwater basket weaver decides to go and live a life of contemplation, he is not living as the best version of himself.

commented on Tinsley's "Honors Paper..."

Thomas Aquinas' First Cause

There is something inherently in every human that wants to legitimize his existence. As humans, people tend to search for their identity from where they come from or where they are going but many search for the origin of life. I found interesting the way that Aquinas legitimizes his reason that 'the ultimate end' for the intellect is to understand God because everyone to some extent wants to know the origin of life. The origin of life would give people a sense of identity of where they came from. Scientists try to search for the origin of life because it is a question that humas explore and have not found an answer to. Even though, scientists have found evidence to support the big bang these same scientists at one time believed the earth was flat and up to about sixty years ago they did not even know there was something smaller than an atom. My whole point is that every body has a theory about the origin of life but Aquinas stands on his opinion by stating that the first cause of everything was God so to understand the origin of life one must know God.


P.s. I commented on Tinsley's blog

How does Love create Hell?

     In class today, Dr. Abernathy told us to remember the question, "How does love create Hell?" It seemed boggling to me at first. How can I, as a Christian who says my God is a loving, how can He create through love such a terrible loveless place as Hell? How is it possible?
     First we have to examine the text. How does Dante say it was created exactly? In Cantos III, lines 4-6 it says this, "Justice Moved My Maker On High. Divine Power Made Me. Wisdom Supreme, and Primal Love".  Primal, means first or original, so through God's first love, Hell was created.  It hit me at this point.  God's first love isn't us! (Shocking right?) God's first love is Himself. If that is true, God has to love and respect every aspect of Himself. True love protects, honors, is steadfast. He loves Justice, Wisdom, Love and hates everything that opposes this.
     This is what Satan and the fallen angels did. They opposed God and committed sin against the Most High, Satan loved himself more than God. He honored himself more than God, and sinned. Sin is the opposite of God and His nature. Sin cannot exist where God dwells, so God had to create a place for Sin that was apart from Him. He being moved by Justice, with Divine Power and Supreme Wisdom, created Hell through Primal Love.
    This being said, Hell was never intended for humans, but as a punishment for those who opposed God. When Creation fell, mankind now was doomed to eternity apart from Him. But through His great love, grace and mercy... He came down as Christ, god incarnate, and took our place. Through love He made a way for all to be saved. Sadly, many people die in their sin, which can never enter the presence of Christ. Then they die a double death, physical and spiritual. All hope is lost.
   One thing we must understand is that God is ultimate, and above all must glorify and love Himself. We are not the end, we are not what God worships. What kind of God could worship His creation? He out of Perfect Justice and Love had to create a place to keep sin, that which is anything and everything against Him. This is how through love Hell was created, and it will be eternal just as God is eternal, to forever separate Perfection and Imperfection.

P.S. commented on Hannah Burch's post
   

Dante Dante Dante Dante Dante. Dante.

Like Rebekah, I have never read anything about Dante before. I wasn’t in class today, so I missed the discussion. But from my reading, I have found Dante’s Inferno to be pretty interesting and familiar. As I continued to read, it seemed that at many times there was some sort of bad thing/person/etc. to trouble Dante (especially in the beginning).  Of course these things frightened him, like it would with most of us. I then started comparing Dante to myself. Like Dante, sometimes I get afraid by unexpected things in my life. We all do, right? It’s normal, but the more I think about it, I ask myself why? Why do we get so scared or worried about things? When Virgil first showed up, Dante was scared.  To me, Virgil represents one of those troublesome, unexpected things in life. But then Virgil turned out to be good and helpful. I know this has nothing to do with the story, but it’s relative to life. Because sometimes things come in our life that scare us at first, but then they turn out to be helpful and are something that we may need. J

I commented on Rebekah’s “Oh Dante..”

Dante's Hell.

I really like the way Dante portrays hell. While readin I almost invision the underworld in Hercules with all the different demons and the river Styx. When he's going through these different layers of hell it is not all hot and fiery, but the punishment is fit to the sin. Like with the philosophers they are in constant discussion knowing they will never find the truth, which for them is worse than burnin in hell. The characters in each layer are also interesting... And where is Aneas? It's kind of funny that we have not come across him, and Virgil is Dante's your guide. Anyways Dante's version of hell is much cooler than the version that I have always pictured...get it cooler like as in not on fire... Ha. Ha. Ha.



Ps I commented on Tyler cofeilds

Abraham's Bosom vs Limbo

     Let me start off by saying that I have absolutely loved the Inferno so far and I think I will continue to to enjoy it. In class today as we were talking about Limbo, Abraham's Bosom came up and I started to think of the similarities and differences between them. In Dante's Limbo you have everybody who lived a moral life but didn't get baptised and if they were alive before the time of Jesus then they must not have worshiped God in the right way. Abraham's Bosom as presented in the bible, is a place where the believers of God in the old testament go when they die and then are raised to heaven when Jesus dies on the cross. Other than the difference of the moral unbelievers in Limbo it seems as though that Abraham's Bosom and Limbo are exactly the same and I just thought the connection between these two was very interesting.    

PS: I commented on Rebekah's post "Oh Dante"

Pink Mythos

My first ten cantos of The Inferno are full of pink. I circled every name I recognized, mainly so that I could easily spot who was where, and I underlined passages that I found important or intriguing. I really loved Dante. The language, even translated to English, is beautiful and flowing. I found the presence of characters from Greek and Roman mythology especially interesting. Dante was as Christian, so why did he feel the need to insert Charon, the River Styx, Aeneas, Dido, Achilles, Paris, Helen, and so many others?  It’s not like Dante didn’t have other real historical figures that he could have inserted into the circles of Hell, in fact, he did insert many historical figures into Hell. This both intrigues and frustrates me as I don’t know that there’s any way to truly answer this question without going back in time and asking Dante himself. And, since I don’t speak Italian, that would be slightly difficult to do.

Until next time,

Tantum e tenebris receptum constabit,

Meghan

PS I commented on Tinsley’s “Honor’s Papers: Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here”

Oh Dante...

Oh Dante...

Beginning the readings of Dante was such an experience for me... I have never read Dante before, so it is all new. I will not lie to you all and pretend like I am fully understanding everything about Dante, but the more I read, the more I looked up, and the more we talked in class, the more I grasped. The more I was able to grasp, the more I like it. Dante was such an insightful man, who looked at life much like the rest of us. Searching for God, yet stumbling along the way. This is the life of a follower of Christ. We seek, and yet we fall. When reading such powerful works of literature, I find it refreshing to realize that the authors really are more like me then I think. 

P.s. I commented on TinsleyG's post- Honor's Papers: Abandon Hope, all Ye who enter here ;)

Honor's Papers: Abandon Hope, all Ye who enter here ;)

Reading the Inferno is incredible.  I really love seeing the coronations with the ancient Greek and Roman epics, particularly in the details we read from last semester.  I mentioned this briefly in class today, but it's funny how attached I get to characters in books, even within the ancient epics, and seeing these characters in Hell is pretty disturbing.  I know it's only going to get darker from here, but while it is very frightening and sad, it's amazing as well.  The creativity and detail of Dante amazes me, and the depth of his work is incredible.  I can't wait to continue reading, and make the correlations to the ancient works, and to the characters!!

P.S. If you can't tell by my title, this Honor's paper is going to be... interesting ;) can't wait for tomorrow night!!  Commented on Mallory's "Aquinas."

Well isn't that just lovely...

Today we discussed how Dante's Inferno suggests that Hell was created out of Primal Love. While I am not entirely certain of my research, I do want to present my findings in the form of a theory. So feel free to offer differing theories!

The first thing to consider is the definition of Primal Love. Since there are various forms of love (especially in the older languages of the Bible) it is important to know how Primal Love is different. It is a very basic form of love that exists among everything in existence. This means that it is apparent to everything in existence because it is constantly being exercised. When the Bible discusses that God is apparent through nature, this is what it is referring to. Primal Love is essentially the foundation of all kinds of love because it states that since God is love, then love exists in the things that he has created. The world was created for a specific purpose through this love, and when this purpose is not achieved, then the very foundation of all forms of love is non-existent. As a result, Primal Love is essential to life as we know it because it helps to define our purpose for existence.

In order to understand how Primal Love produced Hell, we must look to Satan's fall from heaven. Satan was considered to be a "high-class" angel in heaven, but his selfishness drove him to the point of rebellion against God. Instead of simply destroying Satan and the angels who followed him, God chose to create a place for him to dwell in his miserable state of existence (the destruction comes later! aka: Revelation). Hell was created for this reason alone, but when humans chose to follow in Satan's footsteps (meaning, they chose selfishness over God) they had to be punished accordingly. For those who choose to say "yes" to God, they are able to exist with Him for eternity in heaven. For those who choose to say "no" to God, the punishment is that they are given what they truly desire: to be separated from God for eternity in Hell.

Therefore, Primal Love is the proof of God's existence through His creation. If you are not able to see this love, deny yourself, and seek after God with all of your heart, then you are practicing selfish behavior. At the core of all sin lies a seed of selfish intention that seeks to corrupt what is ultimately good and true. God never intended for us to live on our own, and He still desires to be everything that we need in life (since He is love and everything good comes from Him.) So...out of Primal Love, Hell was born.

Ready. Set. Debate!

P.S. I commented on Mallory Searcy's "Aquinas"

Aquinas

In class we discussed the mary/martha dilemma. Or really, we discussed whether or not someone could be called to just sit in a corner and pray all day for the glory of God.
Dr. Brekke talks a lot about the fact that we see the individual as  needing to be balanced, but the medieval mind saw that society had to be balanced. I think both are flawed views, but i love the idea of a community functioning as one thing.
I think that's a concept completely lost on us. The idea that alike and equal aren't the same concepts. That the hand is not the same thing as a foot but neither is better. I doubt medieval's struggled much with gender roles, or relationship roles. It's fascinating to me. I don't know if it ends up looking more like a caste system or the body of Christ. I know it's supposed to look like the body, but can this practically play out?  What do you guys think? Would you rather return to a communal understanding or do you like individualist isolationist America? We certainly bathe more.


I commented on Meghan's post.