[Bill Ferny]

Greyhavener,

I assure you that the above definition of predestination is straight from Saint Thomas Aquinas [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] Of course, this is metaphysics and not theology, but it is a Catholic metaphysic.

If we inject original sin and redemption into the picture: Original sin is an inordinate disposition, arising from the destruction of the harmony which was essential to original justice, even as bodily sickness is an inordinate disposition of the body, by reason of the destruction of that equilibrium which is essential to health. As sickness does not make the body into something other than what it was before the sickness, original sin does not destroy the nature that remains ordered toward the Good, but it corrupts human nature, making it impossible for human nature to achieve that to which it is ordered. Its like a boy being in love with a girl, but not being able to gain her affections because he is simply an ugly person. Redemption was won by Christ’s passion for only He could satisfy the sin of human nature, for he both took on human nature (in and of itself still good), yet retained His divine nature. So its kind of like the girl takes everything desirable about herself and gives it to the boy, so now the boy can gain the affections of the girl (well, the example really breaks down at this point [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] ). Let it suffice to say that redemption makes it possible for our natures to achieve their original, intended, predestined, ends.

I also think the example breaks down in Tolkien’s writings as well. I simply do not see a Christ figure in Tolkien that satisfies the Catholic paradigm. However, we do see in Tolkien the work of original sin in Middle-Earth, and many characters who must suffer, take on the sins of their ancestors, in order to find some measure of redemption. However, in no case is redemption absolute. As my wife likes to point out, there is no happy ending to LotR. Frodo suffers, Arwen suffers, the elves suffer, the hobbits disappear, the dwarves disappear, only humans seem to get a fair shake, and even then the humans still have a big mess to clean up, they are still just as feeble (but I would add, still just as strong in many ways) as they always were. I think this is because, for Tolkien, as he envisioned Middle-Earth as a real, kind of pre-pre-historic time, the real work of salvation, which belonged to humans only, was way, way into the future.

HerenIstarion,

I would hold along with Saint Thomas, that we act morally when we act according to our natures, or, in other words, when we act according to the ultimate end of the human person: life in/with God (divination). Of course, in order to achieve such an end, a Christian would hold that grace is necessary (as did Saint Thomas). The state of original grace existed before the state of original sin. Redemption gives us back the possibility of living once again in that state of original grace, albeit in a world still suffering under the weight of actual sin.

[ December 27, 2002: Message edited by: Bill Ferny ]