A
AndyF
Guest
Most free will choices presented to us scripturally are weighed in a situational context. But why does the decision require it to involve the elements of good and evil to carry any weight of dis/approval? Why couldn’t he make an overriding free will decision to remove himself from all situations he could find himself.?
If simply free will and choices is what counts, the decision making process where it is not initiated from a situational temptation/concupiscence should carry just as much value as the right choice in a temptational setting. Where a decision is made is not an issue for the Church, therefore decision making out of an evil or good context should also be honoured. A person can make a right choice without a good or bad context. Then he should be given just as much credit for it as well.
A person can with much thought, decide that he would prefer to forego a good that he has optionally, and in so doing offer it as a permanent sacrifice, as it would no longer be available to him.
For instance. A person makes the free will decision to sacrifice his right to sexual probagation and sexual pleasures, and makes a general formal proclaimation to that effect. Hypothetically he becomes asexual at that instant.
He has made an uninfluenced antecedant Supreme free choice that overrides all the subordinate free choices that he will ever be confronted with. His future temptational suggestions to his free will scrutiny now are disqualified or non-existant, as he is no longer on the sexual testing roster of sorts.
Dogmatically, the credit rule should still apply, has much emphasis is made on making a correct choice, rather than concern itself with the various sources of it’s influence. Therefore proclaimational free choices should be of value. A person making this proclaimation can only hope to lose some good, therefore he sacrifices in charity that good. His free will decision to opt out of the sex bandwagon prevents many sins that would have occured, cutting off his right hand(?) as it were. Enduring his self imposed sacrifice, at least now he takes comfort he is saved.
After such a proclaimation, if our subject is still tempted by sexual sins, the effects of his choice should be ignored, as it was another’s decision to ignore his free choice to forego that sensual category. If Harry is still sexually stimulated by X activity, then it occurs under conditions not of is previous Supreme free choice. In other words, he shouldn’t be exposed to* situational* cases of free choice. Of course all this can only occur in Devine cooperation.
(some things that might come up and I’m aware is that God has the right to test His creation, understood, but that doesn’t negate the positive of this supposition, it merely presents a situation to be ironed out.)
If simply free will and choices is what counts, the decision making process where it is not initiated from a situational temptation/concupiscence should carry just as much value as the right choice in a temptational setting. Where a decision is made is not an issue for the Church, therefore decision making out of an evil or good context should also be honoured. A person can make a right choice without a good or bad context. Then he should be given just as much credit for it as well.
A person can with much thought, decide that he would prefer to forego a good that he has optionally, and in so doing offer it as a permanent sacrifice, as it would no longer be available to him.
For instance. A person makes the free will decision to sacrifice his right to sexual probagation and sexual pleasures, and makes a general formal proclaimation to that effect. Hypothetically he becomes asexual at that instant.
He has made an uninfluenced antecedant Supreme free choice that overrides all the subordinate free choices that he will ever be confronted with. His future temptational suggestions to his free will scrutiny now are disqualified or non-existant, as he is no longer on the sexual testing roster of sorts.Dogmatically, the credit rule should still apply, has much emphasis is made on making a correct choice, rather than concern itself with the various sources of it’s influence. Therefore proclaimational free choices should be of value. A person making this proclaimation can only hope to lose some good, therefore he sacrifices in charity that good. His free will decision to opt out of the sex bandwagon prevents many sins that would have occured, cutting off his right hand(?) as it were. Enduring his self imposed sacrifice, at least now he takes comfort he is saved.
After such a proclaimation, if our subject is still tempted by sexual sins, the effects of his choice should be ignored, as it was another’s decision to ignore his free choice to forego that sensual category. If Harry is still sexually stimulated by X activity, then it occurs under conditions not of is previous Supreme free choice. In other words, he shouldn’t be exposed to* situational* cases of free choice. Of course all this can only occur in Devine cooperation.
Code:
Ok, just throwing this out to you for some fun. Disect away. :DAndyF