From: richarra@gmail.com   
      
   Love follows knowledge of the good   
      
      The prophets had a clearer knowledge of God, just as the splendor   
   of sunrise surpasses that of dawn and the first half-light of day.   
   They knew God as the supreme being, eternal, self-subsistent,   
   infinite, the sole origin of all things. Unlike the philosophers,   
   however, they knew him to be the source not only of nature but of   
   grace as well, and the ruler not only of the world but also of the   
   people of God. They knew him as Lord, the most holy, just, good, and   
   great king and judge, of infinite power, wisdom, benevolence, mercy,   
   justice, and love. Yet they had no clear knowledge that God is both   
   one and three, that he is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.   
      It is our privilege that God has revealed to us this divine,   
   incomprehensible, and ineffable mystery, and given us sublime   
   knowledge of himself so that we should love him with the highest, most   
   perfect kind of love. For just as warmth follows the light of the sun,   
   so love follows knowledge of the good. An unknown good cannot possibly   
   be loved, but a known good is loved in proportion to its goodness and   
   our knowledge of it. Now God is infinitely good, he is all goodness,   
   just as the sun is all light and fire is all heat.   
   --Lawrence of Brindisi   
      
   <<>><<>><<>>   
   July 7th - Saint Pantænus, Father and Apostle to the Indies.   
      
   (d. ca. 214)   
   This learned Doctor and apostolic man flourished in the second   
   century. Born in Sicily, he was a Hebrew Christian who had studied   
   Holy Scripture and also Greek philosophy. His esteem for virtue had   
   led him into an acquaintance with the Christians, and being charmed   
   with the innocence and sanctity of their conversation, he opened his   
   eyes to the truth. It was under the disciples of the Apostles that he   
   studied Holy Scripture in the orient, before his thirst for sacred   
   learning brought him to Alexandria in Egypt, where the disciples of   
   Saint Mark had instituted a celebrated school of Christian doctrine.   
      
   Pantænus did not seek to display his talents in that center of   
   literature and commerce; but his great progress in sacred learning was   
   discovered, and he was drawn out of the obscurity in which his   
   humility had sought to bury itself. He was placed at the head of the   
   Christian school some time before the year 179. His learning and   
   excellent manner of teaching raised the school’s reputation above all   
   schools of the philosophers, whom he strove to win to Christianity.   
   The lessons which he read and commented, gathered from the prophets   
   and Apostles, conveyed light and knowledge into the minds of all his   
   hearers.   
      
   The Indian traders who came to Alexandria entreated Saint Pantænus to   
   pay their country a visit and vanquish false philosophy by the true   
   faith. He was advised by the bishop of Alexandria to consent, and   
   therefore left the school and went to preach the Gospel to the eastern   
   nations. In India he found some seeds of the faith already sown, and   
   there he was shown the Gospel of Saint Matthew in Hebrew, which   
   according to Eusebius’ account in his History of the Church, was taken   
   there by Saint Bartholomew. He brought it back with him to Alexandria,   
   where he returned after he had zealously employed several years in   
   instructing the Indians in the faith. Saint Pantænus continued to   
   teach privately until about the year 214, when he closed a noble and   
   excellent life by a holy and happy death as Rufinus writes. [1] His   
   name is inserted in all western martyrologies on the 7th of July.   
      
     The beauty of the Christian morality, and the sanctity of its   
   faithful professors, which by their charms converted this true   
   philosopher, appear no where to greater advantage than when they are   
   compared with the imperfect and often false virtue of the most famous   
   sages of the heathen world. [2] Into what contradictions and gross   
   errors did they fall, even about the divinity itself and the sovereign   
   good! To how many vices did they give the name of virtues! How many   
   crimes did they canonize! It is true they showed indeed a zeal for   
   justice, a contempt of riches and pleasures, moderation in prosperity,   
   patience in adversities, generosity, courage, and disinterestedness.   
   But these were rather shadows and phantoms than real virtues, if they   
   sprang from a principle of vanity and pride, or were infected with the   
   poison of interestedness or any other vitiated intention, which they   
   often betrayed, nay sometimes openly avowed, and made a subject of   
   their vain boasts.   
      
   See St. Jerome, Catal. Clem. Alex. and Eusebius. Also Ceillier, t. 2, p. 237.   
      
   Note 1. Rufin. b. 5, c. 10.   
   Note 2. Socrates in all things he said, used to add this form of   
   speech, “By my Demon’s leave.” Just upon the point of expiring, he   
   ordered a cock to be sacrificed to Esculapius. (Plato’s Phædo sub   
   finem.) And in his trial we read one article of his impeachment to   
   have been a charge of unnatural lust. Thales, the prince of   
   naturalists, being asked by Crœsus what God was, put off that prince   
   from time to time, saying, “I will consider on it.” But the meanest   
   mechanic among the Christians can explain himself intelligibly on the   
   Creator of the Universe. Diogenes could not be contented in his tub   
   without gratifying his passions. And when with his dirty feet he trod   
   upon Plato’s costly carpets, crying that he trampled upon the pride of   
   Plato, he did this, as Plato answered him, with greater pride.   
   Pythagoras affected tyranny at Thurium, and Zeno at Pyrene. Lycurgus   
   made away with himself because he was unable to bear the thought of   
   the Lacedæmonians correcting the severity of his laws. Anaxagoras had   
   not fidelity enough to restore to strangers the goods which they had   
   committed to his trust. Aristotle could not sit easy till he proudly   
   made his friend Hermias sit below him; and he was as gross a flatterer   
   of Alexander for the sake of vanity, as Plato was of Dionysius for his   
   belly. From Plato and Socrates the stoics derived their proud maxim,   
   “The wise man is self-sufficient.” Epictetus himself allows “to be   
   proud of the conquest of any vice.” Aristotle (Ethic ad Nicom. l. 10,   
   c. 7,) and Cicero patronize revenge. See B. Cumberland of the Laws of   
   Nature, c. 9, p. 346. Abbé Batteux demonstrates the impiety and vices   
   of Epicurus mingled with some virtues and great moral truths. (La   
   Morale d’Epicure, à Paris, 1758.) The like blemishes may be found in   
   the doctrine and lives of all the other boasted philosophers of   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)