Seeming free-will conundrum

[desales09]

My brother seems to have turned from faith in God. It started with the issue of hell. He failed to see any justice in the doctrine, and here was the essence of his reasoning, as best as I can understand and describe it:

“God put our first parents in the garden - they were given free will. Then He put the serpent, the source of temptation in the garden. The fall, therefore, was facilitated by God. And a second point, related to the first, is that God could have made it so that our first parents were unable to fall. After all, doesn’t He do this with the Saints in heaven? Don’t give me that line that “free will is necessary in order for there to be love,” because the Saints in heaven are able to love, aren’t they, and yet they are forever secure.”

This is a difficult one for me to respond to. I’m not sure I understand fully the difference between the condition of our first parents in the garden (before the fall), and the condition of the Saints in heaven. Any ideas, or any references to materials which specifically deal with this issue?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

My brother seems to have turned from faith in God. It started with the issue of hell. He failed to see any justice in the doctrine, and here was the essence of his reasoning, as best as I can understand and describe it:

“God put our first parents in the garden - they were given free will. Then He put the serpent, the source of temptation in the garden. The fall, therefore, was facilitated by God. And a second point, related to the first, is that God could have made it so that our first parents were unable to fall. After all, doesn’t He do this with the Saints in heaven? Don’t give me that line that “free will is necessary in order for there to be love,” because the Saints in heaven are able to love, aren’t they, and yet they are forever secure.”

This is a difficult one for me to respond to. I’m not sure I understand fully the difference between the condition of our first parents in the garden (before the fall), and the condition of the Saints in heaven. Any ideas, or any references to materials which specifically deal with this issue?

It all comes down to choice. God created Adam and Eve with free will. God also created Satan, who chose to reject him. Satan continues to reject God, and in so doing chose to tempt Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve made the choice to reject God as well.

Had God made it so they were unable to do this, it would have removed their free will. By removing their free will, this would have made them incapable of loving God (since love is a free act, and cannot be forced). Hence, since God only desires our love, he allowed them their free will, knowing full well that they could chose to reject him, just as he does for all of us.

God does not prevent the angels from falling. At creation they made their choice. This choice was irrevocable because, having full knowledge of God, they made the choice with 100% knowledge of Him, this means that there was absolutely no uncertainty in the decision, no if/and. This absolute knowledge essentially rendered the decision irrevocable. Hence, those who chose God knowing full well what that meant would never “unchose” him. It’s not that God prevents it, it’s the the angles would never again reject him.

The main difference between the saints in heaven and Adam and Eve is that the saints have already made their decision, they chose God, and now, much in the same way as the angles, they would never “unchose” him.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

God does not prevent the angels from falling. At creation they made their choice. This choice was irrevocable because, having full knowledge of God, they made the choice with 100% knowledge of Him, this means that there was absolutely no uncertainty in the decision, no if/and. This absolute knowledge essentially rendered the decision irrevocable. Hence, those who chose God knowing full well what that meant would never “unchose” him. It’s not that God prevents it, it’s the the angles would never again reject him.

I find this interesting because Before A&E ate from the tree they had no knowledge of good and evil nor death. They couldn’t have understand the choice that they were making nor the weight that it carried.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

I find this interesting because Before A&E ate from the tree they had no knowledge of good and evil nor death. They couldn’t have understand the choice that they were making nor the weight that it carried.

You raise a valid point, to which I have no answer currently. I am intrigued, and hope someone else will pop in to say something ^^

Even if I’m not sure of the answer, here’s my opinion on the subject:

We’re not actually sure of the form the sin took, so eating the apple is necessarily a literal event. What we know is that Adam and Eve were instructed against a certain action, and chose to ignore that instruction. From this, we can infer that they knew that their action was “wrong” even if they did not have a fully formed concept of “right and wrong” at the time. Even if they didn’t fully understand what they were doing, they still made a solid and concrete decision to reject God’s command.

 

[polytropos]

I find this interesting because Before A&E ate from the tree they had no knowledge of good and evil nor death. They couldn’t have understand the choice that they were making nor the weight that it carried.

They knew they were created by God and they knew what God had ordered, did they not?

 

[Robertanthony]

My brother seems to have turned from faith in God. It started with the issue of hell. He failed to see any justice in the doctrine, and here was the essence of his reasoning, as best as I can understand and describe it:

“God put our first parents in the garden - they were given free will. Then He put the serpent, the source of temptation in the garden. The fall, therefore, was facilitated by God. And a second point, related to the first, is that God could have made it so that our first parents were unable to fall. After all, doesn’t He do this with the Saints in heaven? Don’t give me that line that “free will is necessary in order for there to be love,” because the Saints in heaven are able to love, aren’t they, and yet they are forever secure.”

This is a difficult one for me to respond to. I’m not sure I understand fully the difference between the condition of our first parents in the garden (before the fall), and the condition of the Saints in heaven. Any ideas, or any references to materials which specifically deal with this issue?

Did he raise the point, about hell, that God absolutely insists on keeping the damned alive when he could simply let them perish once his wrath has at least partially been satisfied, after, say, 1000x1000years (a million years) of agony in hell for a single, unrepented act of, say, masturbation? If not, don’t mention this to him because this’ll probably be the last nail in the coffin of his faith.

Also, don’t mention the fact that each and every demon individually chose for or against God and was afterwards retributed accordingly, whereas Adam and Eve chose to disobey God and we get to be born in a fallen world through no individual fault of our own, how fair is that? The odds of me choosing God would be much better if I were in Eden, rather than this wretched place. A&E should have been banished from Eden and every human down the line should have been able to choose to obey God or not. The demons had to make a decision before they were kicked out of Heaven, we were all kicked out because our ancestors millenia ago acted dumb once…

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

I don’t know if they would know what consequences were without the concept of good and evil. How would know what a poor choice was if there was no poor outcomes.

Gen 2 -

16The LORD God gave the man this order: You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden
17except the tree of knowledge of good and evil. From that tree you shall not eat; when you eat from it you shall die.

Death entered the world with the fall, they wouldn’t know what death was so how can that be a deterrent?

It’s a puzzler for sure.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Did he raise the point, about hell, that God absolutely insists on keeping the damned alive when he could simply let them perish once his wrath has at least partially been satisfied, after, say, 1000x1000years (a million years) of agony in hell for a single, unrepented act of, say, masturbation? If not, don’t mention this to him because this’ll probably be the last nail in the coffin of his faith.

Also, don’t mention the fact that each and every demon individually chose for or against God and was afterwards retributed accordingly, whereas Adam and Eve chose to disobey God and we get to be born in a fallen world through no individual fault of our own, how fair is that? The odds of me choosing God would be much better if I were in Eden, rather than this wretched place

He doesn’t will any of it. He gave each of us the gift of an immortal soul. It is up to us to decide how we use it. Our choices in life ultimately determine our fate, and if we go to hell it is ultimately because we made the choice to reject him, and he will respect that choice rather than force himself on us. Hell is, at its basic level, the absence of God. Since all that is good is derived from God, Hell is, necessarily, the absence of all that is good.

It’s not a matter of wrath, it’s a matter of acknowledging our choices and respecting them.

Also, if you don’t want us mentioning reality and the logical result of actions, then that’s fine, just don’t expect to actually learn anything. We are born disconnected from God because, by their actions, Adam and Eve severed their ability to connect with Him. If they couldn’t do it, how are they to be expected to impart us with that gift? It’s like genetics, a guy with blonde hair and a girl with brown hair can’t give birth to a redhead (ignoring recessive traits for the sake of simplicity). They no longer possessed the capacity, so they couldn’t pass it on to their children. Instead, God himself made the choice to become a man and suffer horrendously, just to restore the grace that Adam and Eve chose to abandon.

One last thing on this. You are a petty, insignificant human being, just like the rest of us. Why would you presume to think that your human conceptions of what is just and unjust outweigh the justice of the one who created you, and without whom your entire existence would be, literally, void?

I don’t know if they would know what consequences were without the concept of good and evil. How would know what a poor choice was if there was no poor outcomes.

Death entered the world with the fall, they wouldn’t know what death was so how can that be a deterrent?

It’s a puzzler for sure.

#1, Again, not literal “death entering the world,” rather spiritual death.

#2Even if it were literal death, just because they wouldn’t die doesn’t mean they couldn’t comprehend death.

 

[Robertanthony]

He doesn’t will any of it. He gave each of us the gift of an immortal soul. It is up to us to decide how we use it. Our choices in life ultimately determine our fate, and if we go to hell it is ultimately because we made the choice to reject him, and he will respect that choice rather than force himself on us. Hell is, at its basic level, the absence of God. Since all that is good is derived from God, Hell is, necessarily, the absence of all that is good.

It’s not a matter of wrath, it’s a matter of acknowledging our choices and respecting them.

Also, if you don’t want us mentioning reality and the logical result of actions, then that’s fine, just don’t expect to actually learn anything. We are born disconnected from God because, by their actions, Adam and Eve severed their ability to connect with Him. If they couldn’t do it, how are they to be expected to impart us with that gift? It’s like genetics, a guy with blonde hair and a girl with brown hair can’t give birth to a redhead (ignoring recessive traits for the sake of simplicity). They no longer possessed the capacity, so they couldn’t pass it on to their children. Instead, God himself made the choice to become a man and suffer horrendously, just to restore the grace that Adam and Eve chose to abandon.

You didn’t address the “insisting on keeping the damned alive” thing. That’s just cruel. Even “good” old Adolf deserves a million years of heart-wrenching agony, then let the old bastard simply cease to exist.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

You didn’t address the “insisting on keeping the damned alive” thing. That’s just cruel. Even “good” old Adolf deserves a million years of heart-wrenching agony, then let the old bastard simply cease to exist.

That would represent the deliberate destruction of His creation; it would also represent a violation of the free will of that individual, by basically rendering all of their choices mute.

It would also deny justice to those who suffered at the hands of that individual.

Again, you’re thinking of it in human terms. An understandable folly, but a folly none-the-less.

 

[Robertanthony]

That would represent the deliberate destruction of His creation; it would also represent a violation of the free will of that individual, by basically rendering all of their choices mute.

It would also deny justice to those who suffered at the hands of that individual.

Again, you’re thinking of it in human terms. An understandable folly, but a folly none-the-less.

One could argue that a soul in hell is indeed a destroyed creation, I say a million years of heart-wrenching agony is a good enough start for justice. I’d say a billion years for Hitler. Does half a billion years of torture, agony, and pain of loss, plus the “worm that dieth not” for one unrepented act of body defilement seem satisfactory, justice-wise? Isn’t that like getting a life sentencein a tiny cell, solitary confinement, never to see the light of the sun again, for stealing a powder lollipop costing 5 cents? You know what I think? If the CC taught infallibly that the damned would stop to exist after sentences of variable durations in hell, everyone would applaud, saying it befits a mercyful God, God would be cruel otherwise to let people suffer ad vitam aeternam. Since the CC doesn’t teach that, everyone clutches at straw to reconcile the horror of hell with God’s goodnes and justice.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

One could argue that a soul in hell is indeed a destroyed creation, I say a million years of heart-wrenching agony is a good enough start for justice. I’d say a billion years for Hitler. Does half a billion years of torture, agony, and pain of loss, plus the “worm that dieth not” for one unrepented act of body defilement seem satisfactory, justice-wise? Isn’t that like getting a life sentencein a tiny cell, solitary confinement, never to see the light of the sun again, for stealing a powder lollipop costing 5 cents? You know what I think? If the CC taught infallibly that the damned would stop to exist after sentences of variable durations in hell, everyone would applaud, saying it befits a mercyful God, God would be cruel otherwise to let people suffer ad vitam aeternam. Since the CC doesn’t teach that, everyone clutches at straw to reconcile the horror of hell with God’s goodnes and justice.

That soul is not destroyed, it is simply experience the repercussions of its choices. They are painful and saddening repercussions, sure, but the soul remains intact. It may seem unjust to you, but you are a mere human. God is not, He is above and beyond us; who are we to question his justice?

Also, that one act of defilement speaks to an underlying disregard for God. In order for an action to be mortal it requires three things:

#1: It’s a grave matter
#2: You have full knowledge that it’s a grave matter
#3: You have full consent of will, making the deliberate choice to engage in that action.

Basically, this means that even though you know an action is morally indefensible, you make the full and complete decision to engage in that action.

This basically applies to people who say “screw you God, I’m doing it in spite of you.” Special concession may be made to those who suffer addiction or coercion, since their will is not entirely their own. In addition, a large percentage of people may fall outside of the spectrum for “knowing” something is wrong, due to their upbringing, cultural influences, etc. This, however, is not a sure thing, and should not be relied upon. It is best to work to avoid the sin, and seek forgiveness when you do fall. There is far, far more to it than simply “you sinned, so you’re screwed.”

Also, even if we did teach that hell was temporary, it wouldn’t make it so. You seem to misunderstand; Dogma isn’t true because we teach it; we teach Dogma because it is true. We could never teach that infallibly because it is not infallible, and is, in fact, wrong. Honestly though, I agree with you; I wish that Hell was not an eternal thing; but me wishing that has no affect on the reality of Hell. I’d rather be aware of its reality and work to avoid it, than believe a falsehood and wind up jumping into it.

 

[dmar198]

My brother seems to have turned from faith in God. It started with the issue of hell. He failed to see any justice in the doctrine, and here was the essence of his reasoning, as best as I can understand and describe it:

“God put our first parents in the garden - they were given free will. Then He put the serpent, the source of temptation in the garden. The fall, therefore, was facilitated by God. And a second point, related to the first, is that God could have made it so that our first parents were unable to fall. After all, doesn’t He do this with the Saints in heaven? Don’t give me that line that “free will is necessary in order for there to be love,” because the Saints in heaven are able to love, aren’t they, and yet they are forever secure.”

This is a difficult one for me to respond to. I’m not sure I understand fully the difference between the condition of our first parents in the garden (before the fall), and the condition of the Saints in heaven. Any ideas, or any references to materials which specifically deal with this issue?

One part of this issue involves the unique experience of time that only bodily creatures have. Disembodied spirits experience time too, but it is very different from the way we experience it on earth. In our earthly way of experiencing time, time is mediated through a physical brain that is slow and mechanical. Disembodied spirits perceive what they “see” or “hear” directly, without a physical or mechanical processor, and therefore they immediately understand what they experience and its consequences, in an instant of time.

Because of our slow way of acquiring information, our mind doesn’t keep up with our will. If someone introduces new information to us by presenting its “good” side, our first inclination is to want it, because our mind hasn’t perceived its “bad” aspects yet. If you tried that on an angel or a saint, they would perceive all the consequences at once, good and bad, and thus be able to make an informed decision about it immediately. Humans immediately want whatever good we see, before we consider its bad side, and if we don’t check the force of will, we make bad decisions. That is why we ought to think about our decisions and their consequences before we make them. Adam and Eve chose to follow their will very quickly, without waiting to think about their decision, because they wanted the power and glory of the godhead, and through lack of restraint (rooted in pride) they sinned. A saint or an angel doesn’t have the problem of time-restraint (not in matters of thought) and so they aren’t subject to the same need for thinking about something before making a decision, nor do they have the moral obligation to restrain the impulse of the will, because they know what is good or bad immediately. That is why Adam and Eve were in a different situation than the angels and saints. Satan very cleverly took advantage of the human condition to lead them into sin: he pitted our quick-moving will against our slow-moving intellect and led Adam and Eve to not restrain their will by motivating them through pride.

Anyway I hope that helps you see why the saints are in a different condition in regards to why they don’t sin. In both our cases, the will is free, and yes, it must be free in order for there to be true love. But the saints have the added benefit of the instantaneous intellect, which makes them not have to restrain their will. God doesn’t “make them unable to fall.” They just value God more than themselves, and when they see a given choice, they know immediately whether it puts God first or themselves first, and they put God before themselves.

 

[Love4All]

My brother seems to have turned from faith in God. It started with the issue of hell. He failed to see any justice in the doctrine, and here was the essence of his reasoning, as best as I can understand and describe it:

“God put our first parents in the garden - they were given free will. Then He put the serpent, the source of temptation in the garden. The fall, therefore, was facilitated by God. And a second point, related to the first, is that God could have made it so that our first parents were unable to fall. After all, doesn’t He do this with the Saints in heaven? Don’t give me that line that “free will is necessary in order for there to be love,” because the Saints in heaven are able to love, aren’t they, and yet they are forever secure.”

This is a difficult one for me to respond to. I’m not sure I understand fully the difference between the condition of our first parents in the garden (before the fall), and the condition of the Saints in heaven. Any ideas, or any references to materials which specifically deal with this issue?

Love is God’s Will. Free will is for choosing Love. Since it is a choice, plainly, the alternative is to reject Love. The angels, being spirits, each made that choice, either Love or the rejection of Love. And that was the only morally significant choice an angel ever made. (We can restrict our definition of free will for the sake of this argument to morally significant free will.)

Now, God is omniscient, even including future contingent events, so, He knew before He created His Creation that man would fall. So in a certain sense it can be said that God willed for man to fall, but this is understood as God’s permissive, rather than His prescriptive Will. God commands, but He allows His creatures with free will to transgress His commands, and, nothing can escape His Will. This is why we have to divide God’s Will, which in reality is only One, into His permissive and prescriptive wills, just in order to take into account the free will of creatures.

But just as an angel decides once with finality, so a human eventually decides with finality, either to love or to reject all love. The moral impact of that final decision is the same for a human or for an angel; it is the difference between Heaven and Hell. The difference is that humans exercise their free will over the course of a lifetime, rather than in one instant.

The Blessed in Heaven, then, are able to love because they have chosen it with their free wills, and then their free wills, having fulfilled their purpose, are mercifully taken away from them; so that, in Heaven, there is only God’s Will and no other will to be done. In other words, Heaven is all Love. Those who choose Love, are choosing Heaven, and to be in Heaven means to have no more free will because free will has fulfilled its purpose. To be in Heaven is to be completely confirmed in grace. Whereas, Adam and Eve, were on probation. They had not yet exercised their free wills. When they did, they sinned. But God saved them from their sin, proving His Mercy by allowing Adam and Eve to reverse their first free will decision. So that is why we still have free will here in Church Militant; so that, having decided at one time or another to sin, we could reverse that decision, with God’s assistance in His grace.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

That would represent the deliberate destruction of His creation; it would also represent a violation of the free will of that individual, by basically rendering all of their choices mute.

It would also deny justice to those who suffered at the hands of that individual.

Again, you’re thinking of it in human terms. An understandable folly, but a folly none-the-less.

It is my understanding that free will doesn’t apply after death. You can’t reconcider after death.

Re: A&E’s understanding of death. How could they understand something they’ve never had any expirence of? For all they knew death = knowledge.

 

[Anthony_V]

I find this interesting because Before A&E ate from the tree they had no knowledge of good and evil nor death. They couldn’t have understand the choice that they were making nor the weight that it carried.

I must disagree with this. Adam and Eve had infused knowledge. They knew full well that doing against what God said was bad, or else it would be superfluous for God to have said, “…you will surely die”. The “knowledge” from the tree they would have been gained anyway by cooperating with God’s grace and growing in love. But instead of choosing to become like God, they decided to take the “quick” route by making themselves gods, to seize the knowledge for themselves. They certainly got the knowledge alright, but they destroyed their relationship with God, which is what mattered in the end.

[BIBLEDRB]Ecclesiasticus 17:5-9[/BIBLEDRB]

CCC 396 God created man in his image and established him in his friendship. A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God. The prohibition against eating “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” spells this out: “for in the day that you eat of it, you shall die.” The “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” symbolically evokes the insurmountable limits that man, being a creature, must freely recognize and respect with trust. Man is dependent on his Creator, and subject to the laws of creation and to the moral norms that govern the use of freedom.

 

[Love4All]

One could argue that a soul in hell is indeed a destroyed creation, I say a million years of heart-wrenching agony is a good enough start for justice. I’d say a billion years for Hitler. Does half a billion years of torture, agony, and pain of loss, plus the “worm that dieth not” for one unrepented act of body defilement seem satisfactory, justice-wise? Isn’t that like getting a life sentencein a tiny cell, solitary confinement, never to see the light of the sun again, for stealing a powder lollipop costing 5 cents? You know what I think? If the CC taught infallibly that the damned would stop to exist after sentences of variable durations in hell, everyone would applaud, saying it befits a mercyful God, God would be cruel otherwise to let people suffer ad vitam aeternam. Since the CC doesn’t teach that, everyone clutches at straw to reconcile the horror of hell with God’s goodnes and justice.

There are no straws needed to clutch at. Hell exists, because of God’s goodness and justice. Hell is not for all sinners, but for unrepentant sinners. There is no particular sin to which graces of contrition for sin could not apply, but what about a final decision to reject all graces of contrition for sin? That is called the Sin against the Holy Ghost, and it is this sin that will not be forgiven; because, not of any lack of mercy in God, but of its own will.

 

[Love4All]

Did he raise the point, about hell, that God absolutely insists on keeping the damned alive when he could simply let them perish once his wrath has at least partially been satisfied, after, say, 1000x1000years (a million years) of agony in hell for a single, unrepented act of, say, masturbation? If not, don’t mention this to him because this’ll probably be the last nail in the coffin of his faith.

Also, don’t mention the fact that each and every demon individually chose for or against God and was afterwards retributed accordingly, whereas Adam and Eve chose to disobey God and we get to be born in a fallen world through no individual fault of our own, how fair is that? The odds of me choosing God would be much better if I were in Eden, rather than this wretched place. A&E should have been banished from Eden and every human down the line should have been able to choose to obey God or not. The demons had to make a decision before they were kicked out of Heaven, we were all kicked out because our ancestors millenia ago acted dumb once…

For one thing: where do you get off, with the attitude that God owes you Heaven? He doesn’t owe you a thing. You owe Him everything.

Secondly, it was the whole human race together, who decided to sin.

Third, we are born into the condition of nature, exactly as we would, had Adam and Eve never received grace. It is grace, that we lack, not anything we have by nature. And if grace is not gratis, how would it be grace? But gratis means freely given, not as a debt but as a gift. So we are born, needing a gift from God, which God freely supplies to us. How, again, is God being ungracious?

And finally: here you are, in the Garden. Do not sin. If you cannot avoid sinning in your present condition, ask God for grace, and you will receive it.

You have, at one time or another, decided to sin, so the idea that if you were in Adam and Eve’s place you wouldn’t have, is obviously absurd. They were the whole human race. So you are born into nature, needing grace. Then seek it, and you shall find it.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

It is my understanding that free will doesn’t apply after death. You can’t reconcider after death.

Re: A&E’s understanding of death. How could they understand something they’ve never had any expirence of? For all they knew death = knowledge.

It’s not that it doesn’t apply, it’s that there is no more need for it. The choice is made, either you chose God or you chose death.

As to A&E, It wasn’t a matter a of understanding. The short answer is, God gave them a command, they chose to ignore it. They had perfect knowledge of God, and so their rejection was a perfect rejection, like those of the angles who chose to follow Satan. Luckily for them, being human, they still had time to know their sin and repent. The angles did not have that capacity because they were fully aware of the consequences of their choice when they made it.

For one thing: where do you get off, with the attitude that God owes you Heaven? He doesn’t owe you a thing. You owe Him everything.

Secondly, it was the whole human race together, who decided to sin.

Third, we are born into the condition of nature, exactly as we would, had Adam and Eve never received grace. It is grace, that we lack, not anything we have by nature. And if grace is not gratis, how would it be grace? But gratis means freely given, not as a debt but as a gift. So we are born, needing a gift from God, which God freely supplies to us. How, again, is God being ungracious?

And finally: here you are, in the Garden. Do not sin. If you cannot avoid sinning in your present condition, ask God for grace, and you will receive it.

You have, at one time or another, decided to sin, so the idea that if you were in Adam and Eve’s place you wouldn’t have, is obviously absurd. They were the whole human race. So you are born into nature, needing grace. Then seek it, and you shall find it.

I hope you don’t take offense at this, but generally I have trouble agree with some of what you write.

This time, I have to say, seems spot on to me. Cudos.

 

[Anthony_V]

To the OP

My brother seems to have turned from faith in God. It started with the issue of hell. He failed to see any justice in the doctrine, and here was the essence of his reasoning, as best as I can understand and describe it:

“God put our first parents in the garden - they were given free will. Then He put the serpent, the source of temptation in the garden. The fall, therefore, was facilitated by God. And a second point, related to the first, is that God could have made it so that our first parents were unable to fall. After all, doesn’t He do this with the Saints in heaven? Don’t give me that line that “free will is necessary in order for there to be love,” because the Saints in heaven are able to love, aren’t they, and yet they are forever secure.”

This is a difficult one for me to respond to. I’m not sure I understand fully the difference between the condition of our first parents in the garden (before the fall), and the condition of the Saints in heaven. Any ideas, or any references to materials which specifically deal with this issue?

The saints in heaven have eternally chosen to love God by participating in his life of love forever. Adam and Eve had not yet done that, obviously, or else they would not have fallen. He has is understanding of the Fall backwards:
Why didn’t God create Adam and Eve “free” of the free-will? Because true and authentic freedom stands in love. There is no freedom apart from love. The saints in heaven are secure because they infinitely love God as an act of the will, because they have chosen to love him in eternity for him first loving them.