Summary of text [comment] pages 87 and 88
[To me, it seems that concupiscence (literally, ‘the state of being with Cupid’) resonates with bondage. Disintegration goes with words.
Imprisoning, disintegrating words are co-opposed to bondage-inducing concupiscence.]
[Responsibility and freedom are open to grace.
Words and bondage are not open to grace.]
[Note how Schoonenberg echoes the previous co-oppositions.
Obligation is co-opposed to exercises of the heart.
Responsibility is co-opposed to freedom.
Words are co-opposed to bondage.]
The images of imprisonment and bondage are evocative, but concupiscence and disintegration would also be appropriate images.
Summary of text [comment] pages 87 and 88
Grace maintains balance in the heart.
As long as the individual does not admit grace with “his” free choice, thus allowing the Holy Spirit to increase “his” Christian Liberty, the sinner clings to “his” own sinful choices, imprisoning “himself” in the houses of sin, law and death.
He falls into [words and] bondage.
Summary of text [comment] pages 87 and 88
[On one hand, the realm of actuality does not like contradictions.
It obeys the laws of non-contradiction.
On the other hand, if there is a contradiction, then there is actuality.
This is why the person knows “he” has a heart2 only when it is broken (filled with contradictions).]
Summary of text [comment] pages 87 and 88
[For the thought experiment where ‘I choose something’, the interscope does not have a heart.
The intersection has a heart and that heart is broken. My heart2 is the single actuality containing my choice2V and something that situates my potential2H.
The imposition of a psychological experiment generates contradictions within these two actualities.]
[Obviously, the interscope and intersection are exclusive.
The nested forms go either one way or the other.]
[When can a researcher know whether the interscope or intersection applies to the conditions of the survey?]
