God’s goodness and the permission of evil

God’s permission of evil in the things governed by Him is not inconsistent with the divine goodness. For, in the first place, the function of providence is not to destroy but to save the nature of the beings governed. The perfection of the universe requires the existence of some beings that are not subject to evil, and of other beings that can suffer the defect of evil in keeping with their nature. If evil were completely eliminated from things, they would not be governed by divine providence in accord with their nature; and this would be a greater defect than the particular defects eradicated.

Secondly, the good of one cannot be realized without the suffering of evil by another. For instance, we find that the generation of one being does not take place without the corruption of another being, and that the nourishment of a lion is impossible without the destruction of some other animal, and that the patient endurance of the just involves persecution by the unjust. If evil were completely excluded from things, much good would be rendered impossible. Consequently it is the concern of divine providence, not to safeguard all beings from evil, but to see to it that the evil which arises is ordained to some good.

Thirdly, good is rendered more estimable when compared with particular evils. For example, the brilliance of white is brought out more clearly when set off by the dinginess of black. And so, by permitting the existence of evil in the world, the divine goodness is more emphatically asserted in the good, just as is the divine wisdom when it forces evil to promote good.

Thomas Aquinas, Compendium of Theology (Chapter 142)

The spiritual effects of tearing down Christian culture

Image: Church in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania converted into brewery

 

So long as Christ does not reign over nations, His influence even over individuals remains superficial and exposed to overthrow. If it is true that the work of the apostolate consists in the conversion of individuals and that nations do not go to heaven, but souls, one by one, we must not forget, nevertheless, that the individual member of society lives under the never-ceasing influence of his environment, in which; if we may not say that he is submerged, he is, at least, deeply plunged. If the environment is non-Catholic, it prevents him from embracing the faith, or, if he has the faith, it tends to root out of his heart every vestige of belief. If we suppose Catholic social institutions, with our Lord no longer living in the hearts of the individual members of society, then religion is merely a signboard which will soon disappear. But, on the other hand, try to convert individuals without Catholicizing the social institutions and your work is without stability. The structure you erect in the morning others will tear down in the evening. Is not the strategy of the enemies of God there to teach us a lesson? They want to destroy the faith in the hearts of individuals, it is true, but they direct still more vigorous efforts to the extirpation of religion from social institutions. Even one defeat of God in this domain means the weakening, if not the ruin, of the faith in the souls of many.* 

Rev. Denis Fahey, The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World (pp. 164-5)

* Paqe« choisies du Cardinal Pie, quoted in La RoyauU Sociale de N.S. JtBU8- Christ, p. 59, by Pere de Saint-Just., a.M.C.

Man’s triumphs are being placed more and more at the service of demoniacal hate

For St. Thomas, as we have seen in a previous chapter, contemplation is the end of civil government, not that civil government is meant to aim at it as its proportionate end, but because it can prepare for it as for a higher end, superior to political ends and preferable to them. Thus, when a tiller of the soil makes ready the ground for planting, he is preparing for the flowers and fruits that will spring from the cultivated soil. Civilization, as we have already said, has directly in view the development of human nature here below, but mediately it is ordained to the Kingdom of God, that is, to the order of eternal and supernatural life begun here below, and it is from the Kingdom of God that it must receive the supreme rule and measure. Civilization is the development of the truly human life of the State. It belongs of itself to the natural order: metaphysics, art, science, politics, civic virtues. But it cannot attain its full development except under the supernatural sky of the Church. Christian civilization is the overflow of the Kingdom of heaven. It is the impress of the Mystical Body of Christ on man's natural social organization.

Accordingly, as man's contemplation of God in the actual world is meant to be not merely natural but supernatural, that civilization is simply and absolutely (simpliciter) the most perfect in which the well-being and moral rectitude of society is sought in a manner calculated to pave the way for supernatural contemplation. Such a civilization may be surpassed by others in a certain department or departments (secundum quid), but these latter will lack the harmony and power of recuperation of the former. For the true progress of a people, the rulers must ever keep these principles in view. True progress will always respect the line of formal development of man. It will give rise to qualitative civilizations such as was the civilization of Greece in the fourth century before the birth of our Lord and, in a higher degree, the civilization of Western Europe in the thirteenth century. If a people's attention is diverted from things spiritual and turned to material conquests, to the cultivation of the useful, that is of whatever serves as a means of furthering human intercourse and ministers to man's bodily needs and comforts, the whole direction of life gradually changes. The means become the end. The civilization is quantitative instead of qualitative. As mind tends invincibly to universality, it will then seek it in the realms of matter. The reign of quantity, of mass production and of standardized parts will be inaugurated. In such a civilization, metaphysicians will be of little social account compared with financiers. Arts in which matter is excessively prominent, such as the noble art of self defence and certain games, will occupy a place altogether out of proportion to their importance. The winning of material comfort which appeals to the animality in man (animality is so universal that it belongs also to beings other than man) will become all-absorbing. By all this we do not mean to convey that those technical triumphs are devoid of intelligence and idealism. Far from it. We simply want to emphasize the fact that, in our quantitative civilization, intelligence and idealism are placed at the service of the animality in us and turned downwards to the manipulation of matter rather than upwards to contemplation and suprasensible reality. With the rejection of the great truth of our membership of the Mystical Body of Christ Crucified, these very material conquests are leading to a state of awful disorder. Man can now overcome the obstacles of time and space with what may be termed, of course with exaggeration, angelic swiftness, but his triumphs are being placed more and more at the service of demoniacal hate. Matter is the principle of division.

Rev. Denis Fahey, The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World (pp. 145-7)

Justly? or unjustly? at 1 Peter 2:23

1 Peter 2:23 in the Complutensian Polyglot

I came across this odd reading in the Vulgate recently. I would think they would have changed this, since the Greek of the 1514 Complutensian Polyglot has the better reading, but it's still found in the 1592 Clementine Vulgate New Testament I'm currently reading through. There's a big difference, after all, between unjustly and justly. 

I must say that when I read this passage as "unjustly" I immediately thought of Jesus before Pontius Pilate, given the context of the passage, and, apparently, some of the church Fathers had the same impression.

“Who, when he was reviled, did not revile: when he suffered, he threatened not, but delivered himself to him that judged him unjustly” (1 Peter 2:23 Douay-Rheims).

qui cum malediceretur non maledicebat cum pateretur non comminabatur tradebat autem iudicanti se iniuste” (1 Peter 2:23 Latin Vulgate).

“Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously” (1 Peter 2:23 King James).

ὃς λοιδορούμενος οὐκ ἀντελοιδόρει πάσχων οὐκ ἠπείλει παρεδίδου δὲ τῷ κρίνοντι δικαίως (1 Peter 2:23 (Stephanus 1550).

The Latin Vulgate reads injuste (unjustly) at 1 Peter 2:23 instead of δικαίως (justly) as is found in the Greek text.

The Greek text of the Completensian Polyglot at 1 Peter 2:23 reads δικαίως and the Latin text reads injuste

(See: https://biblehub.com/1_peter/2-23.htm)

“There is a curious various reading which is adopted by the Vulgate, though without any solid authority, and evidently a mere blunder, the interpretation of which we may leave to those who are committed to it: ‘He gave Himself over to him (or, to one) who judgeth unrighteously.’ St. Cyprian seems to have understood it of our Lord's voluntary self-surrender to Pilate” (Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers).

“There is a curious reading, entirely without the authority of existing Greek manuscripts, represented by the Vulgate, Tradebat judicanti se injuste, as if the words were understood of the Lord's submitting himself ‘to one who judged unrighteously,’ that is, to Pilate” (Pulpit Commentary).

“The strange rendering in the Vulgate, ‘tradebat judicanti se injuste’ as though the words referred not to God, but to Pilate, for which there is no Greek MS. authority, must be regarded as an arbitrary alteration made on the assumption that this was the crowning act of submissive patience” (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges).

“The Vulg. strangely translates: tradebat judicanti se injuste; according to which Lorinus interprets: tradidit se Christus sponte propriaque voluntate tum Judaeis, tum Pilato ad mortem oblatus. Cyprian (de bono patientiae) and Paulinus (Ephesians 2) quote the passage as it stands in the Vulg. Augustin (Tract. in John xxi.) and Fulgentius (ad Trasimarch. lib. I.), on the other hand, have juste” (Meyer’s NT Commentary).

“Judicanti se injuste. In the present Greek we read Greek: dikaios, juste, as also some Latin Fathers read. St. Augustine, (tract. 21. in Joan.) Commendabat autem judicanti juste; and so the sense is, that he commanded and committed his cause to God, the just judge of all” (Haydock Catholic Bible Commentary).

See commentaries: https://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_peter/2-23.htm

 

The day of eternity (2 Peter 3:18)

2 Peter 3:18 (last verse) Complutensian Polyglot)

 

I came across an odd reading at 2 Peter 3:18 where the word “day” (Greek: ἡμέραν, Latin: diem) is missing from the King James Version.

The ESV, NASB, CSB, HCSB, have “day” whereas the NIV and the NLT do not, and read like the KJV (see: https://biblehub.com/2_peter/3-18.htm}.

“But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen” (King James Version)

αὐξάνετε δὲ ἐν χάριτι καὶ γνώσει τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ νῦν καὶ εἰς ἡμέραν αἰῶνος ἀμήν (Stephanus 1550).

But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and unto the day of eternity. Amen (Douay-Rheims).

crescite vero in gratia, et in cognitione Domini nostri, et Salvatoris Jesu Christi. Ipsi gloria et nunc, et in diem aeternitatis. Amen (Clementine Vulgate).

“The Greek phrase for “for ever” (literally, for the day of the æon, or eternity) is a peculiar one, and expresses the thought that ‘the day’ of which the Apostle had spoken in 2 Peter 3:10; 2 Peter 3:12 would be one which should last through the new æon that would then open, and to which no time-limits could be assigned” (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges).

“ἡμέραν αἰῶνος, the day of eternity) This title agrees with that sense, in which the apostle employed it, through the whole of this chapter. Eternity is a day, without night, unmixed and perpetual” (Bengel’s Gnomen).

“‘For ever is, literally, ‘for the day of the age or of eternity (εἰς ἡμερὰν αἰῶνος).’ This remarkable expression is found only here, and is variously interpreted. Bengel explains it as, ‘dies sine nocte, morus et perpetuus;’ Huther as, ‘the day on which eternity begins as contrasted with time, but which day is likewise all eternity itself.’ Fronmuller quotes St. Augustine: ‘It is only one day, but an everlasting day, without yesterday to precede it, and without tomorrow to follow it; not brought forth by the natural sun, which shall exist no more, but by Christ, the Sun of Righteousness.” (Pulpit Commentary).

Link to commentaries above: https://biblehub.com/commentaries/2_peter/3-18.htm

Christ: the sign of contradiction

Among the truths that Jesus gave His Apostles before sending them out into the world to preach His gospel are the following: “Do not think I have come to bring peace upon the earth; I have come to bring a sword, not peace… He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take up his cross and follow Me, is not worthy of Me. He who seeks his life shall lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake, will find it.” When He was presented in the temple as a baby, Simeon prophesied: “This child is set for the rise and fall of many and as a sign of contradiction.” Yet Jesus’ message is one of love and good will. He proclaims the Father’s love and the coming of His kingdom. He invites people to the peace found in life in obedience to His Father’s will.

The more faithful a Christian becomes the deeper the chasm between him and those who refuse to accept Christ. When it comes to a choice between family harmony and Jesus, members must value Jesus the divine source of their being and goal of their eternal happiness, infinitely higher than the most intimately loved parents, relatives, and friends. This often calls for cutting the bonds at the core of the deepest relationships. This is extremely hard to accomplish. Temptations of a psychological nature drive persons to preserve their dearest ties. But Jesus warns everyone: If you cling tenaciously to your natural life, abandoning Me for it, you shall lose your own eternal life. If you let your natural life go for My sake, you will find yourself enjoying divine, inexhaustible life.

Rev. Vincent Miceli, Rendezvous with God (pp. 159-60)