Summary of text [comment] page 75
Good always entails more than what is attributed to nature alone.
This echoes the doctrine about free will in fallen man promulgated by the Council of Trent. Original Sin unloosed concupiscence. Yet, our free will is by no means taken away, although weakened and inclined to evil.
Summary of text [comment] page 75
Not all acts by sinners are sins. Similarly, not all acts by the justified are virtuous. There is a divine orientation that provides a coordinate system. Perhaps, the word ‘ordination’ applies. That divine ordination may be seen in nature itself.
‘Good without grace’ consists of acts without apparent direction from ‘the divine ordination in nature’ that arises in ‘God Recognizing Himself in Love’.
This good does not derive from the divine virtue of Love, but it disposes one to the reception of love.
Summary of text [comment] pages 74 and 75
What about the sinner, unable to love or practice virtue?
What does the church say about the life of a “man” who lives in a state of sin?
Grace does not justify. It prepares the way for justification.
Let us take, hypothetically, the extreme case of only two states for man: the state of love and the state of concupiscence. They may be contradict, but they are not closed. There are always moments when the other state calls.
The virtuous may slip downwards, away from love. The sinful may slip upwards, towards love.
[I am not sure what the answer is.
Is Grace somehow related to the design of Creation?
No human can own it. No human lives without it.]
[Who knows?
Maybe, grace is an actuality on the adjacent lower level to Creation. That would produce a complete interscope, containing the following virtual nested form in the category of actuality:
Father and Son2c( Creation2b( Grace2a))]
[The Creation belongs to a nested form that accompanies ‘God Recognizing Himself’.
God Recognizing Himself accounts for Creation.
This is how actuality works. Secondness is dyadic.
Yet…
…As soon as I acknowledge the dyad in objectrel2cC, it transforms into an interscope.]
[But here is a problem:
Humans evolved to recognize and participate in normal contexts and possibilities (in addition to actualities). We process actuality in terms of the nested form.
Consequently, the dyad within the monotheistic objectrelation2cC is experienced as a pair of nested forms.]
[‘Grace’ is not What the Father Recognizes.
‘Grace’ is not the Son, the Object of the Father’s Love and Recognition.
‘Grace’ is like the dynamic of their Love and Recognition. This dynamic belongs to Creation because ‘the possibility of Creation’ synchronizes with ‘the Potential of God Recognizing Himself’.
Perhaps, the theological One True Triune God may be regarded as ‘a relation outside of time (eternal and archetypal)’ even as it engenders, by belonging to the realm of actuality, ‘another relation inside of time (immanent and conditional)’.]
[The nested form of the Triune God serves as the third model.
This model is open to further exploration.
Grace, like love, seems to belong to the design inherent in the normal context the Holy Spirit, who brings the Father and the Son into relation.
Grace also seems to belong to the Possibility of God’s Self-Recognition.
In this model, the word ‘grace’ points to ‘the bringing of actuality from the Possibility of God Recognizing Himself according to the Designs of the Holy Spirit’.
Yet, the word ‘grace’ differs from both ‘the Possibility of God Recognizing Himself’ and ‘the Designs of the Holy Spirit’.
‘Grace’ differs from both ‘the Foundation of Love’ and ‘Love’.
Yet, belongs to both.]
