Is our free choice real

[Vico]

So God only cares about the spiritual, and not the temporal. To God, the temporal is unimportant and dismissed.
I have trouble seeing the wisdom of creating people imperfect, which causes their free will to decrease.
I see the wisdom of creating humans with free will, but free will must not be reduced to made into a cruel joke through humans being created imperfect, lest that we be set up to fail and have no choice in the matter.
In addition, free will is eliminated when it is ridiculously easy to go to hell but horrifically difficult to go to heaven. The scales are out of balance, and that is proof that free will is a cruel joke.
Actually, we have far less free will than they did. We are far more imperfect than Adam and Eve ever were, and thus we are at a bigger disadvantage.
Free will is a cruel joke at best or nonexistent at worst when people are imperfect.
And how do we know how big imperfections are before free will is impacted negatively?
There are those who want grace but won’t get it. There are those who want to improve themselves and have horrific difficulty doing it, and failing miserably. God’s going to throw them in hell?
God’s grace is so dependent on God’s willingness to give it, that our willingness and ability to actually receive it is an afterthought. That is the reality.

The natural man cannot save himself nor even make the first move toward salvation. It requires the grace of God for both. It is a dogma of faith that God gives the grace needed for conversion, and also for those baptized, the grace necessary to not sin mortally. It is then only by exercise of free will that one would end in hell. It is neither a joke nor cruel because God is all good. It is true that there are those who want to improve themselves and have horrific difficulty doing it, and failing miserably, but that does not imply a state of mortal sin. Saints are sinners that fought the good fight until their death and left this life in a state of grace. We are truly journeying and like Christ, we suffer in the process.

Mark 10
28 And Peter began to say unto him: Behold, we have left all things, and have followed thee. 29 Jesus answering, said: Amen I say to you, there is no man who hath left house or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or children, or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, 30 Who shall not receive an hundred times as much, now in this time; houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions: and in the world to come life everlasting. 31 But many that are first, shall be last: and the last, first.

 

[BobCatholic]

The natural man cannot save himself nor even make the first move toward salvation.

Precisely. Our default destination is hell.

It requires the grace of God for both. It is a dogma of faith that God gives the grace needed for conversion, and also for those baptized, the grace necessary to not sin mortally.

It also requires the will of God.

It is then only by exercise of free will that one would end in hell.

I question whether free will can exist with imperfections.

It is neither a joke nor cruel because God is all good.

Then why is it ridiculously easy to go to hell and horrifically hard to go to heaven? The scales are way out of balance.

And how bad do imperfections have to be before free will is actually eliminated? Where does the Church draw the line?

It is true that there are those who want to improve themselves and have horrific difficulty doing it, and failing miserably, but that does not imply a state of mortal sin.

The fig tree would beg to differ.

It failed. Christ cursed it.

 

[Vico]

Precisely. Our default destination is hell.
It also requires the will of God.
I question whether free will can exist with imperfections.
Then why is it ridiculously easy to go to hell and horrifically hard to go to heaven? The scales are way out of balance.
And how bad do imperfections have to be before free will is actually eliminated? Where does the Church draw the line?
The fig tree would beg to differ.
It failed. Christ cursed it.

• So it is important to receive baptism that we may attain heaven and be Catholic to have access to the sacrament of confession.
• It is God’s will to give those graces. See dogmatic canons posted before.
• Free will can exist with imperfections. See dogmatic canons posted before.
• Ridiculously easy and horrifically hard are subjective and will vary per person – however, for the baptized one in the state of grace at death attains heaven.
• Speak to a priest privately in confession about freedom of will so he can ask the necessary questions. The sins may only be venial even though grave matter. As a general guide see Catechism 2352 … To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.
• The fig tree parable, the tree is given time to bear fruit of repentence. For us this is our entire life-time.

 

[fbl9]

Precisely. Our default destination is hell.

It also requires the will of God.

I question whether free will can exist with imperfections.

Then why is it ridiculously easy to go to hell and horrifically hard to go to heaven? The scales are way out of balance.

And how bad do imperfections have to be before free will is actually eliminated? Where does the Church draw the line?

The fig tree would beg to differ.

It failed. Christ cursed it.

Have you forgotten what was said of the promised one? He will not quench the smoking ember nor break the bruised reed.

 

[BobCatholic]

• So it is important to receive baptism that we may attain heaven and be Catholic to have access to the sacrament of confession.

Agreed, the problem is that those are not enough to keep people saints. There’s a reason confession is repeatedly used (and I’m glad it is available!!!)

• It is God’s will to give those graces. See dogmatic canons posted before.

We have 2 billion Christians. Why aren’t a huge overwhelming majority of them saintly people already?

Imperfections. That is why. Imperfections are an impediment to sanctity.

• Free will can exist with imperfections. See dogmatic canons posted before.

Sanctity cannot exist with imperfections. Imperfections are an impediment to sanctity.
So if one is blocked from sanctity, how do they have free will with imperfections when they’re keeping people from getting saintly?

I hear the argument all the time that “God allows evil to occur because he allows us to have free will, so we have a choice between good and evil.” So if there were no evil, there is no free will. Then why is the opposite not true: If there is no good, there is no free will? If one is blocked from choosing good and being saintly, there is no free will for that person. THIS is my point.

• Ridiculously easy and horrifically hard are subjective and will vary per person – however, for the baptized one in the state of grace at death attains heaven.

There is zero guarantee that one will get final perseverance. Unless God wills it, game over.

• Speak to a priest privately in confession about freedom of will so he can ask the necessary questions. The sins may only be venial even though grave matter. As a general guide see Catechism 2352 … To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.

And this is where I get the idea that imperfections are an impediment to sanctity. If imperfections do lessen or eliminates moral culpability, it also lessens or eliminates free will.

• The fig tree parable, the tree is given time to bear fruit of repentence. For us this is our entire life-time.

A fig tree has zero free will. Yet it is punished as if it had free will. That’s the part I can’t understand.

Also, In one version of the parable, it was not even the season for it to bear fruit anyway and it got cursed!

 

[Vico]

Agreed, the problem is that those are not enough to keep people saints. There’s a reason confession is repeatedly used (and I’m glad it is available!!!)
We have 2 billion Christians. Why aren’t a huge overwhelming majority of them saintly people already?
Imperfections. That is why. Imperfections are an impediment to sanctity.
Sanctity cannot exist with imperfections. Imperfections are an impediment to sanctity.
So if one is blocked from sanctity, how do they have free will with imperfections when they’re keeping people from getting saintly?
I hear the argument all the time that “God allows evil to occur because he allows us to have free will, so we have a choice between good and evil.” So if there were no evil, there is no free will. Then why is the opposite not true: If there is no good, there is no free will? If one is blocked from choosing good and being saintly, there is no free will for that person. THIS is my point.
There is zero guarantee that one will get final perseverance. Unless God wills it, game over.
And this is where I get the idea that imperfections are an impediment to sanctity. If imperfections do lessen or eliminates moral culpability, it also lessens or eliminates free will.
A fig tree has zero free will. Yet it is punished as if it had free will. That’s the part I can’t understand.
Also, In one version of the parable, it was not even the season for it to bear fruit anyway and it got cursed!

I posted some of the Catholic dogmas of faith before (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, by Ludwig Ott) and again now:

• There is a supernatural intervention of God in the faculties of the soul, which precedes the free act of the will. (De fide.)
• There is a supernatural influence of God in the faculties of the soul which coincides in time with man’s free act of will. (De fide.)
• God gives all the just sufficent grace (gratia proxime vel remote sufficiens) for the observation of the Divine Commandments. (De fide.)
• The Human Will remains free under the influence of efficacious grace, which is not irresistable. (De fide.)

God does not actively cause anyones damnation, that was condemned by the Church, and is called double predestination (predestinarianism). Council of Trent

If any one saith, that the grace of Justification is only attained to by those who are predestined unto life; but that all others who are called, are called indeed, but receive not grace, as being, by the divine power, predestined unto evil; let him be anathema (CANON XVII)

Not all are baptised, so many are lacking from that, and others that were baptized, willfully sinned. Sanctity is a state of sanctifying grace which we receive through baptism and confession, and that will be increased in the other sacraments.

Due to free will there it is possible to choosed between good and evil acts.

The fig tree story is a parable, a teaching story, which is an analogy, therefore it is not supposed to be exactly the same, but similar.

 

[BobCatholic]

God does not actively cause anyones damnation, that was condemned by the Church, and is called double predestination (predestinarianism). Council of Trent

Actually, I’m not talking about double predestination.

What I’m talking about is:

• God creates someone imperfect.
• The imperfect person sins because the imperfections make it ridiculously easy to fall into sin.
• Instead of saying “OK, I created the person imperfect, so why not just give them grace to fix the imperfections” God says “you’re responsible for your actions. Period.” and behaves like people have full free will.

This makes no sense to me. I’d be more gentle on them, showing them mercy. God doesn’t do that. He just says “you’re responsible”

I don’t treat my son who has a mental disease the same way I would treat a neurotypical (ordinary) kid. I know he can’t help a lot of the stuff he does. The mental disease is a massive imperfection.

In the same way, humanity now is masssively imperfect. Adam & Eve were imperfect, and humanity now is like 50 times more imperfect. We are mentally ill and insane compared to them.

But God still says “you have free will and are responsible for 100% of your actions.”

This makes no sense to me. Why does God do this?

Due to free will there it is possible to choosed between good and evil acts.

It is ridiculously easy to sin. It is horrifically difficult to become a saint (which is required to go to heaven) and impossible to become perfect through our efforts. As a result, the scales are way out of balance. How is there free will? How can one choose between good and evil if evil is ridiculously easy to do while good is horrifically difficult?

Imagine if you were bad at math and never got past 8th grade math and the exam to get into heaven requires Calculus III with a grade of 100%.

God’s standards are just waaaaaaaaaay too high.

The fig tree story is a parable, a teaching story, which is an analogy, therefore it is not supposed to be exactly the same, but similar.

But it shows Christ punishing something not giving fruit when it was not supposed to have fruit at the time. And boy did he punish it hard!

The fig tree HAD NO CHOICE AND NO FREE WILL and got punished anyway!!!

In other words, the message to us is that we will be punished for not doing something we can’t do or are not required to do.

That is a horrible, unmerciful message.

It contradicts the Church’s teaching that our culpability will be reduced or eliminated by imperfections. We will STILL get punished. Luke 12:47

 

[Vico]

Actually, I’m not talking about double predestination.

What I’m talking about is:

• God creates someone imperfect.
• The imperfect person sins because the imperfections make it ridiculously easy to fall into sin.
• Instead of saying “OK, I created the person imperfect, so why not just give them grace to fix the imperfections” God says “you’re responsible for your actions. Period.” and behaves like people have full free will.

This makes no sense to me. I’d be more gentle on them, showing them mercy. God doesn’t do that. He just says “you’re responsible”

I don’t treat my son who has a mental disease the same way I would treat a neurotypical (ordinary) kid. I know he can’t help a lot of the stuff he does. The mental disease is a massive imperfection.

In the same way, humanity now is masssively imperfect. Adam & Eve were imperfect, and humanity now is like 50 times more imperfect. We are mentally ill and insane compared to them.

But God still says “you have free will and are responsible for 100% of your actions.”

This makes no sense to me. Why does God do this?

It is ridiculously easy to sin. It is horrifically difficult to become a saint (which is required to go to heaven) and impossible to become perfect through our efforts. As a result, the scales are way out of balance. How is there free will? How can one choose between good and evil if evil is ridiculously easy to do while good is horrifically difficult?

Imagine if you were bad at math and never got past 8th grade math and the exam to get into heaven requires Calculus III with a grade of 100%.

God’s standards are just waaaaaaaaaay too high.

But it shows Christ punishing something not giving fruit when it was not supposed to have fruit at the time. And boy did he punish it hard!

The fig tree HAD NO CHOICE AND NO FREE WILL and got punished anyway!!!

In other words, the message to us is that we will be punished for not doing something we can’t do or are not required to do.

That is a horrible, unmerciful message.

It contradicts the Church’s teaching that our culpability will be reduced or eliminated by imperfections. We will STILL get punished. Luke 12:47

The imperfect person, without sanctifying grace, sins because the imperfections make it ridiculously easy to fall into sin. However, as the Church teaches, with sanctifying grace it is posssible to remain without mortal sin; God makes that possible. Mortal sin is a result of a free will act.

 

[BobCatholic]

The imperfect person, without sanctifying grace, sins because the imperfections make it ridiculously easy to fall into sin. However, as the Church teaches, with sanctifying grace it is posssible to remain without mortal sin; God makes that possible. Mortal sin is a result of a free will act.

Possible, yes. Guaranteed, no.

Grace does not overrule or cure imperfections, if it did, that would help make the scales more balanced, depending on how powerful it is. But God doesn’t do it that way. St. Paul still had to deal with his thorn in his side and God said “my grace is sufficient for you.” St. Peter was still impetuous and over the top (St. Paul had to correct him on it!) St. Jerome was a grouch even though a saintly person. Read the lives of the saints. Grace did not cure their imperfections. Their life was a horrific struggle to stay in grace. They complained about how easy it was to fall out of grace.

People still sin, and confession is a lifeline of grace. However, confession doesn’t take away the temporal punishments of sin and people can be stuck in purgatory for ages.

Imperfections make final perseverance questionable at best and impossible at worst.
Even with grace, life is a horrendously difficult struggle for sanctity. It is still easy to sin due to the imperfections and horrendously difficult to stay in grace.

Hence, the scales are out of balance. And thus there is no free will, unless the scales are more in balance.

All grace does is give someone A CHANCE to go to heaven.

Adam and Eve had only one rule. ONE RULE, if followed, and they’d keep their grace. In addition they had preternatural and supernatural advantages. None of them were enough to overcome their imperfections, and thus it was only a matter of time before they fell.

We have 10 rules interpreted countless ways to break them, to follow to keep the grace. It is like a million times harder to keep the grace than they did. But wait! We are 50 to a million times more imperfect. That makes it horrifically difficult to follow God’s standards.

And this is WITH grace. God’s grace is fragile and is easily lost. One has to go to confession thousands of times.

The only hope for a Catholic is to drop dead 5 seconds after walking out of the church after confession.

God’s grace is the only hope for salvation, but it is so ridiculously easy to lose it. All I have to do is not do something.

 

[Vico]

Possible, yes. Guaranteed, no …
God’s grace is the only hope for salvation, but it is so ridiculously easy to lose it. All I have to do is not do something.

It is not merely possible but guaranteed with your willful cooperation. It is only by your deliberate consent (free will) that sanctifying grace is lost.

God gives all the just sufficient grace (gratia proxime vel remote sufliciens) for the observation of the Divine Commandments. (De fide.)

Gratia proxime sufficiens enables one to perform a salutary act directly; *Gratia remote sufficiens *enables one to perform an act which disposes one to receive grace to perform a salutary act. e.g., the grace of prayer in a person lacking sanctifying grace.

The Second Council of Orange. having already stated this doctrine (Denzinger 200), **the Council of Trent **declared that God’s commandments are not incapable of fulfilment by man: Si quis dixerit, Dei praecepta hornini etiam iustificato et sub gratia constituto esse ad observandum impossibilia, A.S. Denzinger 828.

The contrary teaching of Jansenius was rejected by the Church as heretical. Denzinger 1092.

According to the testimony of Holy Writ, God directs His special care towards the just. Cf. Ps. 32, 18 et seq., 36, 25 et seq., Mt. 12, 50 ; John 14, 21; Rom. 5, 8-10. God’s commandments are easily fulfilled by the just; Mt. I I, 30. “My yoke is sweet, and my burden is light.” 1 John 5, 3 et seq.: For this is the charity of God: when we love God and keep His commandments. And His commandments are not heavy. For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world." 1 Cor. 10, 13 : And God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above what you are able: but will make also with temptation issue. that you may be able to bear it."

St. Augustine advanced the proposition whtch was adopted by the Council of Trent: “God does not abandon the just unless they first abandon Him.” Denzinger 804 ; cf. St. Aug., De nat. et grato 26, 29.

From reason it is clear that God is obliged by His fidelity to bestow sufficient grace on the just to enable them to reach Heaven to which they have been called.

So the only way condemnation for the baptized happens is through free will (deliberate consent) because mortal sin is the only way for the baptised to end in hell and mortal sin requires three conditions: Catechism:

1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.”

 

[Vico]

. …

Denzinger References (Sources of Catholic Dogma)
patristica.net/denzinger

Denzinger 828. Canons On Justification
828 Can. 18. If anyone shall say that the commandments of God are even for a man who is justified and confirmed in grace impossible to observe: let him be anathema [cf. n. 804].

Denzinger 1092.

Errors (5) of Cornelius Jansen [Excerpts from “Augustinus” and condemned in the Constitutions “Cum occasione,” May 31. 1658]

1092 I. Some of God’s precepts are impossible to the just, who wish and strive to keep them, according to the present powers which they have; the grace, by which they are made possible, is also wanting.

Declared and condemned as rash, impious, blasphemous, condemned by anathema, and heretical.

Denzinger 804.

Chap. II. The Observance of the Commandments, and the Necessity and Possibility thereof

804 But no one, however much justified, should consider himself exempt from the observance of the commandments [can. 20]; no one should make use of that rash statement forbidden under an anathema by the Fathers, that the commandments of God are impossible to observe for a man who is justified [can. 18 and 22: cf. n. 200]. “For God does not command impossibilities, but by commanding admonishes you both to do what you can do, and to pray for what you cannot do, and assists you that you may be able”; * “whose commandments are not heavy” [1 John 5:3], “whose yoke is sweet and whose burden is light” [Matt. 11:30]. For they who are the sons of God, love Christ: “but they who love him, (as He Himself testifies) keep his words” [John 14:23], which indeed with the divine help they can do. For although in this mortal life men however holy and just fall at times into at least light and daily sins, which are also called venial [can. 23], they do not for that reason cease to be just. For that word of the just, “Forgive us our trespasses” [Matt. 6:12; cf. n.107], is both humble and true. Thus it follows that the just ought to feel themselves more bound to walk in the way of justice, in that having been now “freed from sin and made servants of God” [Rom. 6:22], “living soberly and justly and piously” [Tit. 2:12], they can proceed onwards through Christ Jesus, through whom they “have access unto this grace” [Rom. 5:2]. For God “does not forsake those who have once been justified by His grace, unless He be first forsaken by them.” * And so no one should flatter himself because of faith alone [can. 9, 19, 20], thinking that by faith alone he is made an heir and will obtain the inheritance, even though he suffer not with Christ “that he may be also glorified” [Rom. 8:17]. For even Christ Himself (as the Apostle says), “whereas he was the Son of God, he learned obedience by the things which he suffered and being made perfect he was made to all who obey him the cause of eternal salvation” [Heb. 5:8 ff.] For this reason the Apostle himself admonishes those justified saying: “Know you not, that they who run in the race, all run indeed, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that you may obtain. I therefore so run, not as at an uncertainty, I so fight, not as one beating the air, but I chastise my body and bring it under subjection, lest perhaps when I have preached to others, I myself should become a castaway” [1 Cor. 9:24ff.]. So also the chief of the Apostles, Peter: “Labor the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election; for doing these things, you shall not sin at any time” [2 Pet. 1:10]. Thence it is clear that they are opposed to the teaching of orthodox religion who say that the just man sins at least venially in every good work [can. 25], or (what is more intolerable) that he merits eternal punishments; and that they also who declare that the just sin in all works, if in those works, in order to stimulate their own sloth and to encourage themselves to run in the race, with this (in view), that above all God may be glorified, they have in view also the eternal reward [can. 26, 31], since it is written: “I have inclined my heart to do thy justifications on account of the reward” [Ps. 118:112], and of Moses the Apostle says, that he “looked to the reward” [Heb. 11:26].

 

[BobCatholic]

It is not merely possible but guaranteed with your willful cooperation. It is only by your deliberate consent (free will) that sanctifying grace is lost.

Then how do I know if I’m not fooling myself?

I think I’m in a state of grace. But I could be fooling myself. Whether deliberately, or unintentionally, I can’t say because, I could be fooling myself there too.

I go to confession, and make a point of confessing mortal sins and forgotten mortal sins when I remember them. I include the phrase “I confess all forgotten sins and those redefined in error.” to make sure all the bases are covered.

I keep getting the sense it is not good enough for God. I’m afraid that, I didn’t confess all mortal sins. Or I’m committing the sin of omission.

The imperfection of fooling myself can easily rob me of my free will or God’s grace, take your choice.

According to the testimony of Holy Writ, God directs His special care towards the just.

But first, I have to be just. If I’m fooling myself, thinking I’m just, when I’m not, I’m going to be unpleasantly surprised when this life is over.

“My yoke is sweet, and my burden is light.”

If this is true, why do I see hard burdens, painful suffering in the lives of the saints?

So the only way condemnation for the baptized happens is through free will (deliberate consent) because mortal sin is the only way for the baptised to end in hell and mortal sin requires three conditions

How much imperfection does a person have to have before the imperfection is considered to have eliminated free will? Sure the obvious like insanity, mental illness, comas, etc. But what about fooling oneself?

Another imperfection is my need to have encouragement from God. When I don’t see the encouragement from God, that’s the same to me as discouragement. And that’s the devil’s department!

 

[Vico]

Then how do I know if I’m not fooling myself?

I think I’m in a state of grace. But I could be fooling myself. Whether deliberately, or unintentionally, I can’t say because, I could be fooling myself there too.

I go to confession, and make a point of confessing mortal sins and forgotten mortal sins when I remember them. I include the phrase “I confess all forgotten sins and those redefined in error.” to make sure all the bases are covered.

I keep getting the sense it is not good enough for God. I’m afraid that, I didn’t confess all mortal sins. Or I’m committing the sin of omission.

The imperfection of fooling myself can easily rob me of my free will or God’s grace, take your choice.

But first, I have to be just. If I’m fooling myself, thinking I’m just, when I’m not, I’m going to be unpleasantly surprised when this life is over.

If this is true, why do I see hard burdens, painful suffering in the lives of the saints?

How much imperfection does a person have to have before the imperfection is considered to have eliminated free will? Sure the obvious like insanity, mental illness, comas, etc. But what about fooling oneself?

Another imperfection is my need to have encouragement from God. When I don’t see the encouragement from God, that’s the same to me as discouragement. And that’s the devil’s department!

It takes time to properly form the conscience. Ignorance that is not willful is not sinful but one should strive to eliminate it.

Going back to December now in the other thread “Re: Heaven is our choice” #54 and prior.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=1033661&page=4

When a choice is wrong, that is error. Culpability, however, refers to responsibility for error, and is based upon proper formation of conscience and will.

Catechism 1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

This way:

• Do you learn what the Church teaches, for example in the Catechism?
• Do you take measures to avoid the near occassions of sin?
• Do you have proper contrition for sin, regretting all mortal sins done, and intending seriously to not repeat them?

Haydock Commentary on Matt.11:29 “For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”
For my yoke is sweet, &c. For though, in regard of our weak nature, it be a very heavy yoke, yet the grace of God renders it easy and light, because our Lord himself helps us to bear it, according to that of the prophet Osee, (Chap. xi, ver. 4) I will be unto them as he that takes the yoke from off their head. St. Bernard says, that our Saviour sweetens by the spiritual unction of his grace, all the crosses, penances, and mortifications of religious souls. St. Augustine owns that before he knew the power of grace, he could never comprehend what charity was, nor believe that any one was able to practice it; but the grace of God renders all things easy. (Rodriguez, On Mortification. Chap. xix.)

 

[BobCatholic]

It takes time to properly form the conscience. Ignorance that is not willful is not sinful but one should strive to eliminate it.

Agreed, but how to avoid being temporally held responsible even though not sinful?

In addition, there’s the problem of people being able to fooling themselves.

This way:

• Do you learn what the Church teaches, for example in the Catechism?
• Do you take measures to avoid the near occassions of sin?
• Do you have proper contrition for sin, regretting all mortal sins done, and intending seriously to not repeat them?

Got this and I do this. But I think this is not enough.

I still think I am fooling myself and thus my free will is not there.

Remember Catechism 1735

Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.

The problem is that I’m still being temporally held responsible, despite reduced imputability and responsibility.

In other words, despite the Church’s teachings, the temporal part of the universe doesn’t listen. There is something between God and man that blocks God’s will here, reflected in Church teaching, that despite diminished or nullified responsibility, the temporal responsibility is still there and sometimes even worsened.

This is one of many reasons I believe imperfections rob us of free will.

Add into the mix the parable of the fig tree and how it was punished severely despite having reduced or eliminated free will…this is confusing to me.

 

[Vico]

Agreed, but how to avoid being temporally held responsible even though not sinful?
In addition, there’s the problem of people being able to fooling themselves.
Got this and I do this. But I think this is not enough.
I still think I am fooling myself and thus my free will is not there.
Remember Catechism 1735
Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.
The problem is that I’m still being temporally held responsible, despite reduced imputability and responsibility.
In other words, despite the Church’s teachings, the temporal part of the universe doesn’t listen. There is something between God and man that blocks God’s will here, reflected in Church teaching, that despite diminished or nullified responsibility, the temporal responsibility is still there and sometimes even worsened.
This is one of many reasons I believe imperfections rob us of free will.
Add into the mix the parable of the fig tree and how it was punished severely despite having reduced or eliminated free will…this is confusing to me.

The best one can do is not to commit mortal or venial sins because they all bring temporal punishments due sin (so the attachments must be eliminated). We must all do penance (prayer, fasting, almsgiving). Gain many partial if not plenary indulgences for yourself and the faithfully departed.

Some punishments are medicinal, not due to actual sin or analogical sin. We do not have any temporal responsibility (first cause) for what we do not do personally. As you read Romans 5 and in Genesis 3, we do experience consequences:
Romans 3
12 Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned. 13 For until the law sin was in the world; but sin was not imputed, when the law was not. 14 But death reigned from Adam unto Moses, even over them also who have not sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, who is a figure of him who was to come.
Genesis 3
16 To the woman also he said: I will multiply thy sorrows, and thy conceptions: in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children, and thou shalt be under thy husband’s power, and he shall have dominion over thee.

17 And to Adam he said: Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat, cursed is the earth in thy work; with labour and toil shalt thou eat thereof all the days of thy life.

18 Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou eat the herbs of the earth.

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth, out of which thou wast taken: for dust thou art, and into dust thou shalt return.

The Baltimore Catechism has this on sorrow for sin:

Q. 755. What kind of sorrow should we have for our sins?
A. The sorrow we should have for our sins should be interior, supernatural, universal, and sovereign.

Interior

Q. 756. What do you mean by saying that our sorrow should be interior?
A. When I say that our sorrow should be interior, I mean that it should come from the heart, and not merely from the lips.

Supernatural

Q. 757. What do you mean by saying that our sorrow should be supernatural?
A. When I say that our sorrow should be supernatural, I mean that it should be prompted by the grace of God, and excited by motives which spring from faith, and not by merely natural motives.

Universal

Q. 759. What do you mean by saying that our sorrow should be universal?
A. When I say that our sorrow should be universal, I mean that we should be sorry for all our mortal sins without exception.

Sovereign

Q. 761. What do you mean when you say that our sorrow should be sovereign?
A. When I say that our sorrow should be sovereign, I mean that we should grieve more for having offended God than for any other evil that can befall us.

Imperfect Contrition

Q. 768. What other name is given to imperfect contrition and why is it called imperfect?
A. Imperfect contrition is called attrition. It is called imperfect only because it is less perfect than the highest grade of contrition by which we are sorry for sin out of pure love of God’s own goodness and without any consideration of what befalls ourselves.

Q. 769. Is imperfect contrition sufficient for a worthy confession?
A. Imperfect contrition is sufficient for a worthy confession, but we should endeavor to have perfect contrition.

 

[Vico]

…

Also, if you have not neglected your duty to understand what is sin and is not sin, then if you are “fooling yourself” which in this case would mean invincible ignorant (since you dilligently tried to understand the faith), then you are not cuplable for objectively grave sins committed.

Also if you have proper contrition when you confess any sins and are not hiding any intentionally, and you receive absolution for you sins, then all sins mortal and venial of your life are covered. If you come to understand later that one was **mortal **and unconfessed, then you simply include it in a confession as a recently rememberd sin.

 

[fbl9]

chop… since Vico covered this

Add into the mix the parable of the fig tree and how it was punished severely despite having reduced or eliminated free will…this is confusing to me.

While pondering this parable i think it doesn’t have anything to do with punishment for sin. Rather the fig tree represents the Jewish peoples and the the one who said it was not the season represents those that did not recognize Christ as the Messiah.

We note in another fig tree parable the gardener asks for time to fertilize and nurture the tree for another year. Which was granted.

 

[Rudy_Baga]

I’m going to expand on this.

The cause need not necessarily precede the effect; they may be one and the same, or it may be at the end, pulling us forward.

That is just foolishness right there. It amazes me to see the irrational rationalizations in these forums. Just how might we have an effect without a cause? As much as I may agree with you on some points, you cannot change the natural order of creation to justify your beliefs. How can an effect create (or cause) a cause? Why oh why would God have to step outside of the natural order of cause-then-effect that he so perfectly created? It is at the basis of every single teaching in the bible. Why would it be different in Genesis?

Not only is it illogical, but it causes everything else that you said to be questionable. The effect being that it makes it easier to dismiss the rest of the comment no matter how logical it may seem.

 

[Aloysium]

That is just foolishness right there. It amazes me to see the irrational rationalizations in these forums. Just how might we have an effect without a cause? As much as I may agree with you on some points, you cannot change the natural order of creation to justify your beliefs. How can an effect create (or cause) a cause? Why oh why would God have to step outside of the natural order of cause-then-effect that he so perfectly created? It is at the basis of every single teaching in the bible. Why would it be different in Genesis?

Not only is it illogical, but it causes everything else that you said to be questionable. The effect being that it makes it easier to dismiss the rest of the comment no matter how logical it may seem.

I decided to write something. I the writer, am the efficient cause.
The material cause of this, involves the computer, the internet and so on.
The formal cause would be, if I have the philosophy straight, its being a form of communication.
Ultimately what you are reading exists because it was drawn from me from a future goal, which now is past. This would be a final cause.
The causes of this being in existence involves my sitting down to the computer and attempting to communicate. Until this note is completed, I do not stop.

With respect to matter and what it does, we can say that there are no causes and effects, only variables having relationships which can be described in terms of a formula.
Things happen right then and there. In terms of their being efficient causes, tt’s all determined by what they are.
It is people who can cause something to happen, manipulating independent variables, producing a change in the dependent variable.
It is from God that we have this capacity, a finite version of His infinite creativity.

That’s the short of it. Sorry if it is confusing.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

It is ridiculously easy to sin. It is horrifically difficult to become a saint (which is required to go to heaven) and impossible to become perfect through our efforts. As a result, the scales are way out of balance. How is there free will? How can one choose between good and evil if evil is ridiculously easy to do while good is horrifically difficult?

Your extremes are not well described.

It is as horrifically difficult to be a sinner as it is to be a saint. The reason for this is that God gives us the grace to be saved, There is no remorse in being good and being saved. There is great remorse in sinning and being close to damnation.

Augustine has a good take on this.

“Will is to grace as the horse is to the rider.”

The horse can only resist the will of the rider with the greatest difficulty. So it is with us, we can only resist our natural impulse to do good with the greatest difficulty. God is our Rider. Only by giving ourselves over to the devil can the devil become our rider. But that way lies guilt and madness … not so easy a destiny to choose though we might pluck out our eyes not to see it.