Is this a proper world view of morality?

[sidetrack]

When God gives us free will it means that were free to choose to do good or bad but what that really means is that you have the ability to chose to do good or bad things to a certain number of times letting bad things still happen even though your good (if you’ve done more good then bad to you) and letting only bad things happen if you’ve done more bad then good (no longer letting good things happen to you) while being fairly detrimental to which afterlife you’ll go to.However if you’ve done excessive amounts of bad you can out that “debt” of “bad points” if you do good actions even though bad things still continue to happen t you.This nullifies the “bad points” and “neutralizes” you bit by bit.Eventually you can get to a certain point of neutrality where you no longer have any “bad points” but no “good points” either.It’s not like you can stay that way forever though because your next action whether (intentional or not) will go towards “bad points” or “good points”.Also the nature of certain actions can account for a larger magnitude of “good points” or “bad points”.I have a feeling that this view resembles the concept of karma but just to say I’ve been thinking (and still do to some extent) like this and have had this concept LLLOOONNNGG before I found out about the word karma.Thank you very much so for your time.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

When God gives us free will it means that were free to choose to do good or bad but what that really means is that you have the ability to chose to do good or bad things to a certain number of times letting bad things still happen even though your good (if you’ve done more good then bad to you) and letting only bad things happen if you’ve done more bad then good (no longer letting good things happen to you) while being fairly detrimental to which afterlife you’ll go to.However if you’ve done excessive amounts of bad you can out that “debt” of “bad points” if you do good actions even though bad things still continue to happen t you.This nullifies the “bad points” and “neutralizes” you bit by bit.Eventually you can get to a certain point of neutrality where you no longer have any “bad points” but no “good points” either.It’s not like you can stay that way forever though because your next action whether (intentional or not) will go towards “bad points” or “good points”.Also the nature of certain actions can account for a larger magnitude of “good points” or “bad points”.I have a feeling that this view resembles the concept of karma but just to say I’ve been thinking (and still do to some extent) like this and have had this concept LLLOOONNNGG before I found out about the word karma.Thank you very much so for your time.

That seems like a black and white picture without any rainbow colors. It is like a curtain that closes or opens when goes right or left.

Isn’t this too mechanic. You could do a software program and everyday put an (name removed by moderator)ut and see whether you are more black or white (no grey background allowed!).

Karma ? It is a nice word. I like the sound of it…

 

[1ke]

When God gives us free will it means that were free to choose to do good or bad

No. Authentic freedom is freedom to choose the good.

but what that really means is that you have the ability to chose to do good or bad things to a certain number of times letting bad things still happen even though your good (if you’ve done more good then bad to you) and letting only bad things happen if you’ve done more bad then good (no longer letting good things happen to you) while being fairly detrimental to which afterlife you’ll go to.However if you’ve done excessive amounts of bad you can out that “debt” of “bad points” if you do good actions even though bad things still continue to happen t you.This nullifies the “bad points” and “neutralizes” you bit by bit.Eventually you can get to a certain point of neutrality where you no longer have any “bad points” but no “good points” either.It’s not like you can stay that way forever though because your next action whether (intentional or not) will go towards “bad points” or “good points”.Also the nature of certain actions can account for a larger magnitude of “good points” or “bad points”.I have a feeling that this view resembles the concept of karma but just to say I’ve been thinking (and still do to some extent) like this and have had this concept LLLOOONNNGG before I found out about the word karma.Thank you very much so for your time.

Um, no. This is completely nonsensical and NOT Catholic teaching in any way, shape, or form.

 

[sidetrack]

Um, no. This is completely nonsensical and NOT Catholic teaching in any way, shape, or form.

Okay then.Would you (or anyone who’s read this thread for that matter) mind correcting me then and/or pointing out some stuff to me?.I’m totally open to what others have to say about this.I really should have put that in the end of the original posting.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

Okay then.Would you (or anyone who’s read this thread for that matter) mind correcting me then and/or pointing out some stuff to me?.I’m totally open to what others have to say about this.I really should have put that in the end of the original posting.

Sidetrack, I think the focus of morality is not so much on racking up good points and avoiding bad points, as if there were a list of good things and bad things somewhere and someone was keep track, but is more focused on disposing us to behave in ways that are loving and self-giving. Actions that destroy relationships rather than build them up; actions which block the expression of what is good, true or beautiful; actions which are self-oriented, selfish or narcissistic–none of these sorts of actions are good. Many of them can look very good, however, but the goods which they promise and to which they are oriented are illusory.

The moral life is about living a life of self-giving love. The moral life is not about keeping score, either for ourselves or for others, but about conforming ourselves to the cruciform shape of the good, i.e. conforming ourselves to the example of Christ who showed us on the cross (and in the Resurrection!) what the good truly looks like. When the moral life becomes about accumulating good points or bad points and not about living that life of utter self-giving love that has been shown to us in Christ, then we empty the morality of any real value–it becomes a dead letter. Merely a set of rules. But it’s not that at all. It’s much much more than that. Much more freeing, and much more demanding.

I hope that helps!

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[1ke]

Okay then.Would you (or anyone who’s read this thread for that matter) mind correcting me then and/or pointing out some stuff to me?.I’m totally open to what others have to say about this.I really should have put that in the end of the original posting.

Start with the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 

[sidetrack]

Actions that destroy relationships rather than build them up; actions which block the expression of what is good, true or beautiful; actions which are self-oriented, selfish or narcissistic–none of these sorts of actions are good. Many of them can look very good, however,** but the goods which they promise and to which they are oriented are illusory**.

Could you please explained the part I bolded in much more detail,please?.Would say a happy functional family if give up your alcoholism or a spouse who reciprocates your love or a secure job if you refrain from immorality and apply yourself during a school’s “exam season” count as “goods which they promise and to which they are oriented are illusory”?

The moral life is about living a life of self-giving love. The moral life is not about keeping score, either for ourselves or for others, but about conforming ourselves to the cruciform shape of the good, i.e. conforming ourselves to the example of Christ who showed us on the cross (and in the Resurrection!) what the good truly looks like. When the moral life becomes about accumulating good points or bad points and not about living that life of utter self-giving love that has been shown to us in Christ, then we empty the morality of any real value–it becomes** a dead letter**. Merely a set of rules. But it’s not that at all. It’s much much more than that. Much more freeing, and much more demanding.

What do mean by “dead letter”?.When you say* “and much more demanding”* do you mean like* say*…-_-…a set of rules?.That’s how morality feels like to me a lot of times espeically when I feel more jaded.

 

[MartyrForJesus]

Okay then.Would you (or anyone who’s read this thread for that matter) mind correcting me then and/or pointing out some stuff to me?.I’m totally open to what others have to say about this.I really should have put that in the end of the original posting.

Nice to know you are interested in finding things out, good luck and God Bless!

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

Could you please explained the part I bolded in much more detail,please?.Would say a happy functional family if give up your alcoholism or a spouse who reciprocates your love or a secure job if you refrain from immorality and apply yourself during a school’s “exam season” count as “goods which they promise and to which they are oriented are illusory”?

Sidetrack, are you wondering if giving up alcoholism or some other vice for the sake of others is a hollow good? It’s not hollow at all! Are you wondering whether giving up such things for the improvement of one’s life and soul are hollow as well? Not at all! To give up vice and to seek virtue is never just a benefit to ourselves, but will always dispose us to be a blessing to others as well. Jesus says in the summary of the Law: Love God and love your neighbor. And here’s something wonderful about the nature of love and the beauty of Jesus’ summary: you cannot love God without also loving your neighbor!

When we act in pursuit of self-seeking pleasure, however–when we attempt to appropriate the good things we should naturally desire instead of loving them as God’s good gifts to us and for his sake–then the goods to which we lay claim often seem good only to us. And only for a moment. If I indulge my lust, I may find that I have pleasure–but it’s fleeting and will leave me empty. If I covet something my neighbor has and I steal it from him, I may think I’ve done something quite lovely, but in depriving my neighbor of one of his goods, I’ve sinned egregiously. In seeking our own pleasure at the expense of others, or at the expense of our own virtue, we do not thereby gain hold of some rare treasure–instead, we move ourselves closer to destruction and death. That’s what sin is: self-destruction and death.
sidetrack;8678175:

What do mean by “dead letter”

?.When you say* “and much more demanding”* do you mean like* say*…-_-…a set of rules?.That’s how morality feels like to me a lot of times espeically when I feel more jaded.

I’m saying that when we conceive of the moral life as just following a set of rules, we may not actually be grasping the big picture. The rules are there to help us grasp the big picture. When St. Paul writes of the necessity of love in that famous passage from 1 Corinthians, he’s basically saying, “if you give everything away, if you follow all the rules, if you do everything you’re supposed to and are a really impressive person, but you don’t have love, what good is any of it?” St. James writes of the Royal Law of Love, and St. Augustine writes that if we’re seeking for a single rule to follow, that rule is: Love. It’s not always very easy, and that’s why rules are there–to help us better understand what it is to love. But following the rules begrudgingly or out of fear or because one is forensically racking up nice points is no replacement for just living a life of self-giving love after the pattern of Lord Jesus, his Mother, and his Saints. That’s what I mean by more demanding–so often, it’s easy for us to go through the motions. What’s hard, but so so so necessary, is actually living that life of self-giving love.

I hope that helps!

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!