What’s the free will?

[Vico]

Vico:

Catechism - Compendium 28, 171, 213 (excerpts)

…
You say that faith is necessary for salvation. But it’s not something that we can simply choose to have. …
So faith would seem to be something over which we have no conscious control. … Perhaps faith is simply about doing what my conscience tells me that I should do, even in the face of those who are telling me that I’m wrong. …

There are two matters to consider, conscience, and actual grace of God, always given.

Catechism

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

To understand it more fully, there is something necessary for salvation which we cannot control: grace. Actual grace can be received before conversion. Additionally the Catholic Church has doctrines that:

• Despite men’s sins God truly and earnestly desires the salvation of all men. (Sent. fidei proxima.)
• God gives all innocent unbelievers (infideles negativi) sufficient grace to achieve eternal salvation. (Sent. certa.)
• God gives all the just sufficient grace (gratia proxime vel remote sufliciens) for the observation of the Divine Commandments. (De fide.)
• God gives all the faithful who are sinners sufficient grace (gratia saltem remote sufficiens) for conversion. (Sent. communis.)

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, by Ludwig Ott, pp. 239-241.

 

[STT]

Free will is ability to consciously and freely choose between available options.

 

[o_mlly]

Free will is ability to consciously and freely choose between available options.

The Catholic concept of free will is more than the ability to choose between options. Animals, moved by senses, appetites, instincts and memories make choices. The lion passes on the elephant and chooses to run down the injured gazelle instead. The beast is hungry. It senses the size difference, the odd gate of the gazelle and remembers the last stomping that elephant gave it on a previous hunt.

Man as animal makes the same kinds of choices. However, free will in man engages his rational faculties – intellect, reason and imagination – as well as his animal faculties. Human acts or moral acts involve choices that have effects which are good or bad. In moral decisions, the truth regarding the goodness of the act is an act of the rational mind. We will always choose the apparent good but the apparent good is not always the true good. A conscience informed with the truth knows the difference.

For instance, when hungry the decision to eat is a moral decision. In normal concrete circumstances, the decision to eat is good because the truth is not eating depletes the body which causes bad effects. The subsequent decision on what to eat is not moral, not a matter of truth but only a matter of taste.

It is possible, that in other circumstances man may suppress his appetite and choose not to eat when fasting for good material or spiritual purposes, e.g.,weight loss, heart health, diabetes control, mental focus, self control, mortification, religious reasons, etc.

 

[Bradskii]

Free will is ability to consciously and freely choose between available options.

What if it were proved that the unconscious mind, in some controlled experiments, countered that idea? That it is the unconscious mind making the call in some situations. Before a conscious decision was thought to have been made.

Where does that leave us?

Notwithstanding the question as to whether ‘we’ are both our conscious and unconscious minds.

 

[fhansen]

If God sends a sufficient grace, it gives the full and complete power to do something good; but it is infallibly certain we will not do good, but will sin.

If He sends an efficacious grace, it is infallibly sure we will do good.

I don’t know if anyone’s offered this so far but:

“The human will remains free under the influence of efficacious grace, which is not irresistible.” ( De fide )

"Innocent X condemned as heretical the following proposition of Cornelius Jansen: “In the condition of fallen nature interior grace is never resisted.”"
Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, pg 246

I really don’t think there’s much if any difference between sufficient and efficacious grace at the end of the day, especially where the terms are used in regard to justification and salvation. Either way, when the human will is removed completely from the equation the entire Christian gospel crumbles, gutted of its meaning, its message corrupted into purposelessness.

There is absolutely no reason for all the ugliness, evil, sin, and suffering that humans have committed and endured down through the centuries, or God’s patiently working with humanity during that time, if the next step was simply for Him to say, “Hey, now I’ll send my Son so He can save the predestined elect and send the rest to hell, without regard to their wills .” He may as well have stocked heaven with the elect and hell with the rest to begin with!

Instead, the human will is obviously the prize , that God has been patiently cultivating and coaxing and drawing rather than coercing. And this for our own good -because the greater our participation the greater our own justice -which is what He’s been after in us-and for us- all along.
.

 

[fhansen]

Where does that leave us?

We should free all the prisoners-never hold another human being accountable for their actions, certainly not based on moral grounds. There’s no such thing as injustice, no rhyme or reason to ever experience moral outrage or righteous indignation. Humans have been wrong about that all along. Thank God for science. With it we can know with absolute incontrovertible assurance the reasons and motivations beneath the actions of the human machine. At least until we find the next better theory anyway. Until then, applying this new truth we should never, ever discipline our “errant” teenager, or feel right about it anyway.

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

Where does that leave us?

We should free all the prisoners-never hold another human being accountable for their actions, certainly not based on moral grounds. There’s no such thing as injustice, no rhyme or reason to ever experience moral outrage or righteous indignation. Humans have been wrong about that all along. Thank God for science. With it we can know with absolute incontrovertible assurance the reasons and motivations beneath the actions of the human machine. At least until we find the next better theory anyway. Until then, applying this new truth we should never, ever discipline our “errant” teenager, or feel right about it anyway.

You ask questions that are difficult to answer. Should someone who has a physical and/or mental problem that is not their choice be held accountable?

 

[fhansen]

fhansen:

Bradskii:

Where does that leave us?

We should free all the prisoners-never hold another human being accountable for their actions, certainly not based on moral grounds. There’s no such thing as injustice, no rhyme or reason to ever experience moral outrage or righteous indignation. Humans have been wrong about that all along. Thank God for science. With it we can know with absolute incontrovertible assurance the reasons and motivations beneath the actions of the human machine. At least until we find the next better theory anyway. Until then, applying this new truth we should never, ever discipline our “errant” teenager, or feel right about it anyway.

You ask questions that are difficult to answer. Should someone who has a physical and/or mental problem that is not their choice be held accountable?

That’s a different scenario, and not the norm. Yes, and they generally are treated differently

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

fhansen:

Bradskii:

Where does that leave us?

We should free all the prisoners-never hold another human being accountable for their actions, certainly not based on moral grounds. There’s no such thing as injustice, no rhyme or reason to ever experience moral outrage or righteous indignation. Humans have been wrong about that all along. Thank God for science. With it we can know with absolute incontrovertible assurance the reasons and motivations beneath the actions of the human machine. At least until we find the next better theory anyway. Until then, applying this new truth we should never, ever discipline our “errant” teenager, or feel right about it anyway.

You ask questions that are difficult to answer. Should someone who has a physical and/or mental problem that is not their choice be held accountable?

That’s a different scenario, and not the norm. Yes, and they generally are treated differently

So who chooses what is considered to be a problem or not?

 

[fhansen]

You already outlined it pretty well. If a person commits an act not by choice then we hold them less accountable, if at all

 

[STT]

Intellect in case of human only defines options which matters for human.

 

[STT]

I would say that the experimental setup is wrong. According to Libet, there are two phenomena which matters in a conscious decision, conscious want and real decision that he assign to unconscious mind. He think that the real decision comes before conscious want. I have a scientific argument in favor of free will which means that conscious want and real decision are two dependent phenomena: Let’s assume that conscious want and real decision are two independent phenomena. We however always observe fantastic correlation between what we consciously want and what happens (which the latter according to Libet is related to unconscious mind). In another word, we have never observed that conscious want and real decision oppose each other. Therefore, they are not two independent phenomena. I think that we can agree that we can accept that free conscious decision is a single phenomenon since decision and conscious want always correlate with each other.

 

[Latin]

There is absolutely no reason for all the ugliness, evil, sin, … if the next step for Him to say, “Hey, now I’ll send my Son so He can save the predestined elect and send the rest to hell, without regard to their wills .” He may as well have stocked heaven with the elect and hell with the rest to begin with!

I agree with you Fhansen, thanks to the grace of God and Catholic Soteriology this is the reason I don’t believe in hell for the human race. – Of course with many other Catholics includes many Catholic theologians.
.
God did not decided to take the human race to perfection through the dramas of evil and sins to take a FEW elect to heaven and to throw the rest of the human race to the pains of hell for all eternity.

.
One addition: “… regard to their wills.”

If God would give someone “free will” independent from Him and His graces, that would be His responsibility to give him the power and knowledge to use his “free will” correctly without relying on His graces and than, if God would made His creation correctly, the free will of His creation would be always in line with His will, without being a puppet. – God could do this if He would will it.
.
God did not created us to be independent from Him, without Him we can do NOTHING, we are 100 % dependent on His graces, even our ability to cooperate is caused by His graces.

.
Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott,

For every salutary act internal supernatural grace of God (gratia elevans) is absolutely necessary. (De fide.)

There is a supernatural intervention of God in the faculties of the soul, which precedes the free act of the will. (De fide.)

With efficacious grace, man is able to resist the grace but does not, because the grace causes him to freely choose the good. – By God’s supernatural intervention in the faculties of the soul, which precedes the free act of the will.
.
308 The truth that God is at work in all the actions of his creatures is inseparable from faith in God the Creator.
God is the first cause who operates in and through secondary causes:
"For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure."171
Far from diminishing the creature’s dignity, this truth enhances it.

2022; “The divine initiative in the work of grace precedes, prepares, and elicits the free response of man. …”

St. Thomas teaches that God effects everything, the willing and the achievement. S. Th.II/II 4, 4 ad 3:

St. Thomas also teaches that all movements of will and choice must be traced to the divine will: and not to any other cause, because Gad alone is the cause of our willing and choosing. CG, 3.91.

Aquinas said, “God changes the will without forcing it. But he can change the will from the fact that He himself operates in the will as He does in nature,” De Veritatis 22:9.

As we see above God operates in our wills without forcing it, this theological fact “far from diminishing the creature’s dignity, this truth enhances it.”
.
God bless

 

[fhansen]

God did not decided to take the human race to perfection through the dramas of evil and sins to take a FEW elect to heaven and to throw the rest of the human race to the pains of hell for all eternity.

Let me ask you this. How does God perfect the human race, or an individual human being for that matter, through the “dramas of evil and sins”, regardless of whether or not all are ultimately saved? What does this perfection entail?

 

[Latin]

…

This is the best answer I can give.

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia : Evil
God could created this world in which evil would have no place.

310 But why did God not create a world so perfect that no evil could exist in it?
With infinite wisdom and goodness God freely willed to create a world in a state of journeying towards its ultimate perfection, 314 through the dramas of evil and sin.

.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Divine Providence explains;

“His wisdom He so orders all events within the universe that the end for which it was created may be realized.

He directs all, even evil and sin itself, to the final end for which the universe was created.”

Evil He converts into good (Genesis 1:20; cf. Psalm 90:10); and suffering He uses as an instrument whereby to train men up as a father traineth up his children (Deuteronomy 8:1-6; Psalm 65:2-10;

Evil, therefore, ministers to God’s design (St. Gregory the Great, op. cit., VI, xxxii in “P.L.”,

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12510a.htm

.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Free Will explains;

“God’s omnipotent providence exercises a complete and perfect control over all events that happen, or will happen, in the universe.

God is the author of all causes and effects, but is not the author of sin, because an action ceases to be sin if God wills it to happen. Still God is the cause of sin.

Unless man is really free, he cannot be justly held responsible for his actions, any more than for the date of his birth or the colour of his eyes.

All alike are inexorably predetermined for him.
.
Thomist urges with considerable force … that God’s exercise of His absolute dominion over all man’s acts and man’s entire dependence on God’s goodwill.
.
Jesuit School, frequently styled Molinists, though they do not accept the whole of Molina’s teaching and generally prefer Francisco Suárez’s exposition.

The infinite intelligence of God sees clearly what would happen in any conceivable circumstances.

This knowledge is the scientia media, “middle knowledge”, intermediate between vision of the actual future and simple understanding of the merely possible.

God freely decides according to His own wisdom whether He shall supply the requisite conditions, including His co-operation in the action, or abstain from so doing, and thus render possible or prevent the realization of the event.

He now decrees to supply the needed conditions, including His corcursus/ (the influx of divine causation upon secondary causes), or to abstain from so doing.

He thus holds complete dominion and control over our future free actions, as well as over those of a necessary character.”

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06259a.htm
.
As we see above there is no practical difference between the Thomist and Jesuit/ Molinist Schools.

In both schools, God holds complete dominion and control over our future free actions.
.
At the end of our journey through the dramas of evil and sins we all will be well informed battle hardened glorified saints.
.
God bless

 

[fhansen]

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Free Will explains; In both schools, God holds complete dominion and control over our future free actions.

Here’s a comment opposing the sternly deterministic Reformed position from the same article in the CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA on Free Will:
"The will can resist grace if it chooses. It is not like a lifeless thing, which remains purely passive. Weakened and diminished by Adam’s fall, free will is yet not destroyed in the race."

At the end of our journey through the dramas of evil and sins we all will be well informed battle hardened glorified saints.

Yes, and what is being worked on, educated, molded, drawn, by the experience-the knowledge-of good and evil, along with grace, is the human will, as a matter of our perfecting. And, again, here are some relevant teachings on the matter:
1731 Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one’s own responsibility. By free will one shapes one’s own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude.

1732 As long as freedom has not bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is God, there is the possibility of choosing between good and evil , and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. This freedom characterizes properly human acts. It is the basis of praise or blame, merit or reproach.

And whatever happens in the end, as Julian of Norwich was told, God will do something truly awesome then. And we’ll all know that “All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well”, to quote one of her “shewings” as the Catechism does. God will do the right thing-beyond our imagination. But we cannot put the cart ahead of the horse, claiming to know that salvation is universal, or that we’re certainly numbered among the elect, as examples. Or presuming that all will be perfected. For us now we just need to know that we must strive, we must abide in God, we must persevere in doing the “right thing”. And He’ll do the rest, judging rightly with mercy and love.

 

[PatK63]

Your life and all the things you ask about are gifts from God. You didn’t asked for it or deserve it. A total gift. God wants that every one of us be with Him in heaven, but he does not make us slaves. He loves us to much for us to be slaves. Free will is our ability to chose good or choose evil.

 

[Latin]

"The will can resist grace if it chooses. It is not like a lifeless thing, which remains purely passive.

In The Mystery of Predestination by John Salza explains.

“With efficacious grace, man is able to resist the grace but does not, because the grace causes him to freely choose the good.

If God wills to permit a person to resist His grace, He grants him a sufficient, and not an efficacious, grace.”

By Adam’s fall, free will is yet not destroyed in the race.

In the light of Catholic Soteriology I reformulate your above statement as follows;

By Adam’s fall, free will is yet not totally destroyed in the race because with our unaided free wills we still can choose lying and acts of sins but we cannot choose even one salutary act.
.
Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott,

For every salutary act internal supernatural grace of God (gratia elevans) is absolutely necessary. (De fide.)

There is a supernatural intervention of God in the faculties of the soul, which precedes the free act of the will. (De fide.)
.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Divine Providence also explains;
Life everlasting promised to us, (Romans 5:21); but unaided we can do nothing to gain it (Rom.7:18-24).

1731; 1732.

Yes we have free wills, but 1731; 1732; etc., must be understand in the light of Catholic Soteriology, as the above dogmas, etc. and the following paragraphs of the CCC explains it:
God is the first cause of our willing and acting who operates in and through secondary causes.
.
308 The truth that God is at work in all the actions of his creatures is inseparable from faith in God the Creator.
God is the first cause who operates in and through secondary causes:
"For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure."171
Far from diminishing the creature’s dignity, this truth enhances it.
.
307 God thus enables men to be intelligent and free, causes in order to complete the work of creation.
Though often unconscious collaborators with God’s will, they can also enter deliberately into the divine plan by their actions.
.
301 God does not abandon his creatures to themselves.
He not only gives them being and existence, but also, and at every moment, upholds and sustains them in being, enables them to act and brings them to their final end.
Recognizing this utter dependence with respect to the Creator is a source of wisdom and freedom, of joy and confidence.

.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Free Will explains;
God is the author of all causes and effects, but is not the author of sin, because an action ceases to be sin if God wills it to happen. Still God is the cause of sin.
.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Divine Providence explains;

“His wisdom He so orders all events within the universe that the end for which it was created may be realized.

He directs all, even evil and sin itself, to the final end for which the universe was created.”
.
God bless

 

[Latin]

He loves us to much for us to be salves. Free will is our ability to chose good or choose evil.

OUR UNAIDED FREE WILL ONLY GOOD FOR LYING AND SIN

The Council of Sens (1140) condemned the idea that free will is sufficient in itself for any good. Donez., 373.

Council of Orange (529)
In canon 20, entitled hat Without God Man Can Do No Good. . . Denz., 193; quoting St. Prosper.

In canon 22, says, “ No one has anything of his own except lying and sin. Denz., 194; quoting St. Prosper.

.
ST. AUGUSTINE ON GRACE AND PREDESTINATION

De gratia Christi 25, 26:
For not only has God given us our ability and helps it, but He even works [brings about] willing and acting in us; not that we do not will or that we do not act, but that without His help we neither will anything good nor do it.
.
De gratia et libero arbitrio 16, 32:
It is certain that we will when we will; but He brings it about that we will good . . . . It is certain that we act when we act, but He brings it about that we act, PROVIDING MOST EFFECTIVE POWERS TO THE WILL.

.
St. Thomas teaches that all movements of will and choice must be traced to the divine will: and not to any other cause, because Gad alone is the cause of our willing and choosing. CG, 3.91.
.
Aquinas said, “God changes the will without forcing it.
But he can change the will from the fact that He himself operates in the will as He does in nature,” De Veritatis 22:9.

St. Thomas teaches that God effects everything, the willing and the achievement. S. Th.II/II 4, 4 ad 3:

2022; “The divine initiative in the work of grace precedes, prepares, and elicits the free response of man. …”
.
As we see above, this is the correct understanding of free will.
.
God bless

 

[fhansen]

In the light of Catholic Soteriology I reformulate your above statement as follows;

You should stop reformulating Catholicism and admit you disagree with it. That would be more honest IMO.

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott, For every salutary act internal supernatural grace of God (gratia elevans) is absolutely necessary. (De fide.)

That doesn’t support your position, nor does it conflict with the following:
Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott,

“The human will remains free under the influence of efficacious grace, which is not irresistible.” ( De fide )