Summary of text [comment] pages 57 and 58

The third question that Schoonenberg addressed is:

What do we mean when we say that God punishes sin?

In the Old Testament, God’s mercy comes after God’s punishment.

What was this punishment?

Sometimes, it was death. The sons of Levi killed the worshipers of the golden calf, for example.

There are many Old Testament examples of people who were suddenly struck dead for various transgressions. Sometimes, it was individuals. Sometimes, it was whole groups. Even in the New Testament, the death of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) reminds us of the connection between sin and death.

The connection between sin and death became a Scriptural theme.

Summary of text [comment] page 56

[Growing up is painful.

“The tears of the child” brings ‘her’ into greater awareness.

So maybe pain belongs to the big picture.]

Schoonenberg quoted Paul’s Letter to the Romans 11:32-34.

Summary of text [comment] page 56

Why, if evil is an unavoidable byproduct of becoming, has God willed any creation at all? If God plans to wipe every tear away at the end, why not prevent the tears in the first place?

[This sounds like the utopianism of the Progressives, no?

If capitalism leads to an unavoidable byproduct (of some succeeding more than others), then why have a marketplace at all?

The answer has to be that there are no goods without a marketplace.

The marketplace is the site of exchange of both goods and information.

Does “the success of some” indicate “the failure of all others”?

Not in a spontaneous order.]

Summary of text [comment] page 56

The answer posed by God in the Story of Job was provisional.

The answer was realized through Jesus.

Christ transforms evil into a greater good.

[But, many sinners will say, as Cain did in An Archaeology of the Fall, “not for me”.

If “not for me”, then what good is “the entire spontaneous order that is our Lebenswelt”?

The answer is that “the good is for you”, but “it is not what you want it to be”.

This answer gets supercharged through Girard’s mimetic mechanisms.]

Summary of text [comment] page 56

The book of Job struggles to reconcile the existence of evil with God’s goodness. God’s answer, coming at the end, confronts Job with a question: How can a part comprehend the whole? Were you present at the founding of your world?

[We can ask the same types of questions with respect to spontaneous orders.

How can any particular anti-entropic entity contemplate the entire anti-entopic spontaneous process?

How can an organ comprehend a body?

How can a person comprehend a society?

How can a society comprehend its Mythos and Logos?]

Summary of text [comment] pages 55 and 56

[The devil lives in the details.

“The metaphor of the devil” as “an order that is parasitic to spontaneous orders” may be useful in understanding our own experiences, as well as biblical witness.

Evil is parasitic on the energy sustaining any spontaneous order, eventually diminishing that order and eroding its abundance.

Ted Peters’ book on radical evil details the process of possession in seven steps. These seven steps may be depicted as an interscoping form:

Blasphemy_3c( cruelty_2c(_1c))

Self-justification_3b( concupiscence_2b(_1b))

Pride_3a( anxiety_2a( unfaith_1a))

All these nested forms are parasitic of the good within their host.]

Summary of text [comment] pages 55 and 56

[Once we view ourselves as living and working within a spontaneous order, then the devil cannot be an independent divine substance. The devil exists only within a spontaneous order.

The devil plays within the dynamics of any spontaneous order in the same way that a parasite plays within the dynamics of its host. Devils divert energy from the entire system in order to preserve themselves in being, thereby weakening the entire order.

Devils, then, may possess a person, an organization, an institution, or a society in the same fashion that a parasite possesses its host. Like a parasite, the devil looks for vulnerability and power.

The devil exploits the spontaneous order in order to harvest power (and souls) for itself.]

Summary of text [comment] pages 55 and 56

[Prior blogs discussing Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, offer another perspective on natural evil.

We humans participate in spontaneous orders on multiple levels. There are many opportunities to fail (that is, to slip back into the realm of possibility).

Evil for living entities (due to limitations and challenges) is intrinsic to biological spontaneous orders. However, the good of living (being in actuality) is necessarily greater.

Otherwise, failure and physical evil would not be considered deficiencies of good.]

Summary of text [comment] pages 55 and 56

[Rene Girard offers another perspective.

Evil (specifically Satan and scandal) is a consequence of mimesis (people imitating other’s desires).

The benefits of mimesis should outweigh the evils, although, at times, the opposite seems to be the case.]