Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YT
[Before I go another round in chewing the cud on this, I want to briefly re-iterate the interscope and intersection proposed in section 2.1.
Consider two nested forms:
I recognize myself as an image of God.
My human nature is to participate in divine nature.
The intersection produces two contrasting single actualities: grace and self-destruction.
Here they are.]
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YS
Summary of text [comment] page 88
[Here, I take a breath and step back.
I have been going round and round within the model of ‘the thought experiment where ‘I choose something’.
At least I am not still on page 83 of Schoonenberg’s text.]
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YQ
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.]
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YP
[Responsibility and freedom are open to grace.
Words and bondage are not open to grace.]
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YO
[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.]
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YN
The images of imprisonment and bondage are evocative, but concupiscence and disintegration would also be appropriate images.
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YM
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.
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YL
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).]