Posted on 10/02/2006 1:21:33 PM PDT by Pyro7480
Is the Guardian Angel Less Intelligent than the Demon?
by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira
The Church teaches that God created angels vastly superior to man. Pure spirits possessing a most lucid intelligence and great power, they surpass by nature even the most gifted of men. As a consequence of their revolt, the fallen angels lost their virtue, but not their intelligence or power. In accord with His Divine Providence, God restrains their activity. However, they remain far superior to man, by nature.
Accordingly, the Church always approved artists’ depictions of the demon as an intelligent, shrewd, astute and powerful being, although full of malice in all his designs. She even sanctions his portrayal as a creature with captivating charms, reflecting the qualities that the spirit of darkness exploits to disguise himself so that he may seduce men.
Our first picture is an example are such presentation of the demon. Diabolical and shrewd, astute with a penetrating psychology and full of guile, the demon suggests, in a beguiling manner, thoughts of perdition to slumbering Dr. Faust. This is the classical depiction of the devil. We can hardly imagine him otherwise.
However, how are faithful angels portrayed today?
They are shown as well-intentioned, happy and innocent beings. This is in conformance with their eminent sanctity, blessedness, and purity.
Nevertheless, such depictions lack proper balance by emphasizing the goodness and purity of the faithful angels, while failing to convey their admirable intelligence, strength and majesty. Instead, they are often painted as weak creatures with no hint of courage.
Our second picture shows a child crossing a wobbly bridge. A guardian angel is protecting her.
Naturally, the idea of a child continuing her carefree walk lovingly guarded by a celestial Prince is quite touching. Still, if we pay closer attention to this prince, especially his countenance, does he not lack the strength, intelligence, acuteness, and agility proper to angelic nature, as present in every portrayal of the Prince of Darkness?
Examine the body of the good angel in the painting. Observe the soft, unintelligent and slackened attitude. Compare it to the lithe agility and alertness of the demon.
Could the contrast be any sharper?
Does it make sense?
By insistently representing the demon as intelligent, lively and capable; and the good angel as soft, expressionless and almost foolish, what impression is conveyed to the public?
One impression is that the practice of virtue results in creatures lacking in backbone and sense, while, on the contrary, vice is the practice of powerful and intelligent beings.
Thus we see yet another example of the deception which romanticism continues to exercise profoundly over many religious ambiences.
Catholic ping!
I thought this was about "The Curtis & Kuby Show."
lol
Often the one with superior knowledge who restrains his actions to within definite moral boundaries is ridiculed as being "less intelligent." The wilfully unsophisticated are often written off as lesser beings, mentally.
It just ain't so.
Thus we see yet another example of the deception which romanticism continues to exercise profoundly over many religious ambiences.
***************
The author does have a point.
I've always wondered if God knew that the angels were going to fall.
It sounds ridiculous because it's a rhetorical question.
Of course He did. He's omniscient.
then I guess we agree. And I got a chance to get on my soapbox and begin to say something I've wanted to say for a while.
Most of the portraits of angels, esp. guardian angels, as soft, simpering idiots are a direct product of the worst aspects of the Victorian Age. The same artists that produced the simpering, weak, effeminate portrayals of Jesus produced simpering, weak, effeminate portrayals of the angels.
It's an artistic fashion that, thankfully, has passed. Other ages had their lousy art as well as our own.
One of my first books, an old edition of Andersen's fairy tales, was illustrated by Arthur Szyk, the famous Jewish artist and illuminator. He drew a simple black and white depection of the angel bearing the Good Child's soul to heaven. The angel is masculine, not conventionally handsome, powerful, and yet compassionate, as he lifts the tiny child in a cloud of feathers and whirling garments.
Here's a better picture of a Guardian angel:
No, the expression does not communicate 'intelligence' the way a look of mischievous delight at the prospect of destroying a soul does in the depiction of a demon. Rather it betokens sorrow at the sins of the beneficiary of the heavenly prince's care, which if one's priorities are correctly ordered is a sign of intelligence applied to what matters most.
Also, Plinio's denial of the future role of priests - and the exclusion in the present of priests from all the more secret aspects of the group - led Monsignor Castro de Mayer, for decades Plinio's patron among the Brazilian bishops, to state:
"TFP is a heretical sect since, although they do not say so in words or in writing, lives and acts according to a principle which undermines the very basis of all true Christianity, that is the Catholic church".
Hymn dedicated to Dona Lucilia, the mother of Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira:
Lady Lucilia, pray for us
Mother of Mister Doctor Plinio, pray for us
Mother of the Doctor of the Church, pray for us
Mother of our Father, pray for us
Mother of the Unspeakable, pray for us
Mother of all of us, pray for us
Mother of the coming centuries, pray for us
Mother of the Axiological Principle, pray for us ....
...the Axiological Principle": this means a principle requiring no previous principle, in other words God himself.
More than its political character, it was this highly suspect theological nature of the group which led to its demnation by the Council of Brazilian bishop During its 23rd plenary assembly, the Council of Brazilian bishops approved a note concerning the 'Brazilian Society for the Defence of Tradition, Family and Property', advising Catholics not to join the above mentioned Society […]. Its esoteric character, its religious fanaticism, the personality cult of the founder and of his mother, the abuse of the name of the Virgin Mary […] can absolutely not be approved of by the Church"
(Osservatore Romano, July 7, 1985, p. 12, n. 408, weekly Spanish edition quoted in Tradizione Famiglia Proprietà: Associazione cattolica o setta millenarista?, Rimini 1996, frontispiece)
*they are crackpots
Is the Catholic Church bereft of sane living Professors?
Btw, visit the TFP wsebsite and look for any links to Johannes Paulus Magnus or Pope Benedict. I saw six books by The Axiological Principle. None by/about Pope John Paul II or Pope Benedict
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.