theology 131 dacanay master notes

First Semester SY 2005-2006

THEOLOGY 131CHRISTIAN VOCATION AND MARRIAGE

A. N. Dacanay, S.J.

Chapter 1: CHRISTIAN ANTHROPOLOGY

0.0 INTRODUCTION0.1 Theology

- intellectual, cognitive- should be intelligible even to non-Christians and should present a belief that is

understandable0.2 Christian Anthropology in General

- not only an understanding of what man is but also what man ought to be- not only descriptive but also prescriptive0.2.1 Man and the Good

- man is related to the good on three levelsa. knowledge (conscience 2)

- we have the capacity to know the goodb. will (conscience 3)

- we can will, desire, do the good- it is possible to know the good and not will it (exercise of freedom)- it is possible not to know the good (ignorance)

c. orientation (conscience 1)- man is attracted, oriented, drawn towards the good- not a part of our freedom; we were simply constructed this way; “default

program”- experience validates our orientation towards the good where it is in the

doing of the good which brings us fulfillment and satisfaction- basis of morality: something is right or wrong ultimately because it will

either help or harm the human person; it is in doing the good that we become most fully ourselves

- Man is attracted towards the good and it is in the doing of the good that he realizes his highest potential. Man is this way because this is how God designed us—in His own image and likeness not that we are already good but that we can do good and realize values

0.2.2 O’Connell on Conscience- the experience of conscience tells us something fundamental about the human

person0.2.2.1 Conscience as a HUMAN CHARACTERISTIC

- not decided on; part of the human condition every human has ita. dynamism attraction towards the good

- when we do the good, we find inner peace; we find ourselves satisfied, fulfilled, happy

- developing good: perception of good develops through time children have a simpler sense of the good and the bad, then it

1


becomes more complex as we grow older (crude understanding to something deeper)

- there is an attraction towards the good though the good evolvesb. moral phototropism

- mongo seed grows toward the light in order to grow and survive- we tend to grow towards the good for survival (moral, physical, etc)

becoming better human persons by fulfilling man’s need to do the good; man is attracted towards the good because it is in the doing of the good that man becomes fully himself.

c. capacity for self-direction thus responsibility- we are not simply products of blind processes- there are also many things we have to accept in terms of what’s given- “I am accountable for my actions and will accept the responsibilities and

consequences that come with it” presupposes that we are free the reason we are responsible is because we are free

- In moments of grace where we can see what’s wrong, we can move out CHANGE!

- In the really important things, you have a choice. You can do something about it.

- Example : I’m not smart but I can choose to be hard-working.- We are ultimately responsible for the kind of person we turn out to be and

we can only blame others so much- We are accountable. To be human is to be accountable.

d. category of values- moral norms are meant to protect a value- When people debate over something (the good to be done or evil to be

avoided), it doesn’t mean there are no values or disvalues. It means it’s important enough that people debate about it, and it proves its existence.

- Question: Is there an attraction towards evil?Answer: Yes, but attraction to the good is logically prior. Attraction towards evil is superimposed. Good = part of original design of manEvil = corruption of the original designAnd even after this evil is done, you feel sorry for it later on.

- The fact that we do good doesn’t mean we’re neutral about it. We follow it because it gives us inner peace, integrity, completeness. Doing otherwise makes us feel rotten. It is our vocation to do the good.

0.2.2.2 Conscience as a PROCESS- process of collecting facts and figures in our making of a correct judgment- process of continuing reflection, discernment and analysis of the good to be

donea. “good” is not always clear

- Our instincts are not always the best guide in the good we want to do or evil we want to avoid because the good to be done is not always clear in all circumstances.

i. competing values- Example : Let father sacrifice himself for you OR risk sacrificing both?

ii. ambiguous culture- Example : a culture that tolerates slavery (what about equality??)

a culture that tolerates a counter-hierarchy of value

2


iii. incomplete knowledge- Example : When people discovered CFC, they thought it was the

answer to starvation, not knowing (yet) they were destroying more than they were helping.

iv. changing circumstances- Example : usury = charging excessive interest but used to mean any interest = imposed because of change of role of money in society

: pawnshop story- but not every issue is a conscience issue- Example : help old lady cross the road or snatch bag?

: study or rape? ;pb. Conscience 2 is fragile

i. changing- good is not etched on wood; what is good today may not be good

tomorrow- we have a fragile hold on the truth because it changes or evolves; at

one point, we cannot know everything- what is demanded of us may change because of concrete circumstances- Example : Should you save someone drowning if you can’t swim? But

if you know how to swim, you have an obligation to save the person.- evolving understanding of the good- Example : the social position of women- people often disagree on the values to be pursued people have to

discussii. fallible (possibility of error)

- process can be defective or lead to wrong judgment- changing norms- Example : Inquisition

: monarchy as a divinely willed form of governmentc. THUS we have a RESPONSIBILITY to challenge the norms and to question

it- a person has to be convinced of the good to be donei. constant reflection and questioning

- we need people to question norms (iconoclasts, Ghandi, Jesus, etc) to make us reflect about the usual things we do

- freedom of expression: only you allow an idea to prosper : market of ideas should not be

protected; let the best idea survive- gadflies- “censors” abominable

ii. sincere (subjective) and correct (objective)- a sincere conscience always seeks to be correct (correct = truth)- well-formed (well-educated) and well-informed (has necessary data)

0.2.2.3 Conscience as an EVENT- the point at which a person makes a decision whether to commit to doing the

good- we are not just contemplatives of the good but are doers of the gooda. concrete judgment of a specific individual

- judgment of conscience is concrete

3


- making a concrete judgment of conscience for a specific situation- Example : stealing or not: matter of principle, not conscience : question is not if it was stealing or not but whether it is even stealing- specific individual: he makes a judgment only for himself, not for everyone

b. supreme but tentative- supreme: nothing above it; highest norm for a person- Thomas Aquinas would rather be excommunicated than go against his

conscience- conscience of individual is supremely binding that they can’t do anything

else- tentative: it’s possible for us to change our minds tomorrow, if let’s say,

there is more information or a different situation; changes with new circumstances

- not universal; people disagree on the good to be done- not a legislator of moral norms but an “applicator”

c. “infallible”- infallible: cannot be wrong; freedom from error- there are sincere and well-formed people who have made mistakes- not freedom from factual error but freedom from subjective/moral error- act according to a well-formed, sincere conscience and you can’t be

accused of committing sin- free from moral error why? Supremely binding? Infallible? We are

ultimately responsible for the people we become. In matter of great decision, you can’t just pin yourself on another person (not simply following leader). You have to make your own decision. basis of human dignity: we are able to say this is me and I am responsible.

d. difference and relationship between Conscience 2 and 3- Conscience 3: committing yourself to a particular course of action;

Conscience 2: no commitment- Conscience 3: doing good; Conscience 1: wants good to be done

0.3 Christian Anthropology- man has a vocation referring to the fact that the direction to which we move is part of

what a human person is drawn towards the good God (absolute good) draws us toward Himself

- humans are awaiting completion there is a certain co-naturality that completes us realizing of virtues and values completes us

a. man is not an accidentb. man is an intentional act of God

- if you don’t believe in God, there is still a transcendental being- Scripture explains not the how but the why of creation

c. capacity for self-transcendence- St. Paul, St. Ignatius, St. Francis of Assisi: people who have practiced this capacity1- In the things that really matter, you have a freedom to choose to go beyond what man is.

But self-transcendence cannot be equal for all people.- awaiting completion; in potency anyone can be a potential something- in the process of becoming [homo viator]: man on a journey becoming more ourselves

d. man has a goal/directione. to which he moves and where he finds completion and satisfaction

- to be created in God’s image and likeness tells us a lot about what we should be- it is in doing good that we become most fully ourselves

4


1.0 SACRED SCRIPTUREBigger Picture: What does Scripture have to say about Christian Anthropology?

What does Scripture say about the good to be done? (agreement between Scripture and conscience)

1.1 Old Testament- not understand vocation as in a religious vocation- we are talking about where God is calling us, what God intended us to become- God put a default program in us that will make us satisfied only in doing gooda. life

- religion deals with the fact that God created the world (not how He did)- biblical expression = God created us in His own image and likeness special imprint of

God on man- we were created by an absolutely loving God we have the capacity to love, understand

and the freedom to make decisions (God’s imprints)- it is in living out God’s ideals (going back to God) where we realize ourselves

b. co-creatorship- we are co-creators in the most remote sense compared to God- what we do is a kind of reflection of what God did- expressed in the naming of animals- name is signal of entering new life (like in religious vocations)- name describes person (primitive)- name made the person, name made you who you are (more primitive)- Example : Juan Tamad became lazy because he was named Tamad.

c. covenant life with Yahweh- covenant between Yahweh and Israel, led by Moses- too many Israelites kill/limit them became slaves (Exodus)- “You will be my people and I will be your God”- terms of covenant in Ten Commandments

1-3: relationship with God 4-10: relationship with man

- Yahweh entered a covenant not with individuals but with Israel as a community- man becomes most fully himself not in isolation but together with other people in a

community worship God as a community; we cannot find Him all by ourselves- greatest fear of man is being alone- Mt 5 (talks about commandments)

there is a certain development in the understanding of the good taking things literally is inadequate we are only punished for sins we’ve committed, not our forefathers good to be done and evil to be avoided is also developed

1.2 New Testament (clarification of the Old Testament)1.2.1 Mt 2:15 “out of Egypt I called my son”

- usually heard after Christmas about wise men- this is to fulfill what the prophet had said- Mt 2:15 – son = Jesus Christ – freedom from present-day events- Hos 11:1 – son = Israel (people) – liberation from Egypta. flight unlikely

- biblical scholars say flight is unlikely – not a historical event- not written by any other biblical witness- unlikely because it took 40 years for Holy Family to go to Egypt

b. if so, what’s the point?- preparatory move to enable him to quote Hos 11:1

5


c. to quote Hos 11:1- climax: to fulfill what the prophet said: “When Israel was a child I loved him, out

of Egypt I called my son.”- he had to bring Holy Family to Egypt

d. literary technique of Matthew- applies texts that used to refer to Old Israel that now apply to Jesus- Example : Mt 13: 35, 27: 9-10

e. Matthew’s point- Jesus is the New Israel- For the longest time, the Israelites saw themselves as the chosen people of God

and that only they can be saved. (what Jews still believe)- Matthew’s point is that chosen people is not just Israel; salvation is not only for

them1.2.2 Mt 12:48 “For whoever does the will of my heavenly Father is my brother, sister,

and mother.”- being Israelites before meant it was just an accident that you’re an Israelite; you are

an Israelite descendant- but the community of God is not formed this way—it is not by accident of birth but

by the free and independent decision of an individual- Example : listening to and living out the Word of God- it is by living the good that we know that we become members of the body of Christ

1.2.3 Ekklesia – Church- community of those who are called; community of believers- those baptized and live out the Word of God

1.3 Life of the Christian Today1.3.1 Baptism

- through baptism, we become a member of the body of Christ, the Church- does not only pertain to the ritual of baptism but its implications- it implies that we commit to living a Christian life- “it is not longer I who live but Christ who lives in me”- Sacraments are signs. Humans are symbol-makers.

1.3.2 As Christians…- baptism is not disconnected with our daily lives- in fact, it helps us realize what we will do for the rest of our lives- as part of the Church, the good to be done is then what Christ would want me to do- Jesus is our model, our basis of morality- Scripture and values of Christ to be normative in our daily lives- Baptism is not only an act of the person. It is also an act of Christ. In baptism, we

become part of his possession—he also takes care of us and loves us. The sooner we get baptized, the sooner we become part of His love.

- Argument about Baptism while a Child: baptize later so he could make a responsible decision; parents don’t want to make any undue influence on child parents have to fight to influence kids, or if not, they will be influenced by other forces like media

1.3.3 Seminal Ideas to be Developed in Lumen Gentium and Familiaris Consortioa.1 vocation (from God)

- an act of God- God calls or invites us to share in a very specific kind of life- experience of being drawn to God

6


- we must have been intended/designed by God to be contented in the doing of the good

- calls us to a vocation of love or holinessa.2 vocations (from man)

- response of man to God’s invitation- response is to do good and avoid evil- not just man doing individual good acts but really the choice of the way of life he

lives and has chosen choice of a strategic plan; part of a bigger plan that includes and excludes certain things

- specific: choice by an individual person- not objective but rather self-determined: find out through discernment looking

at all of myself—my strengths and weaknesses and everything about me—looking at the community I belong to, where does God call me? Where will I be happy, where will I grow, where will I be of most help to those around me and myself?

- this kind of vocation is an interplay between the native dispositions of a person (skill, aptitude, etc)

- these decisions are ones a person makes on the basis of a person’s analysis of himself

- if it were objective (no participation in choice; pre-destined), it’s like saying I am not responsible for what I am doing

- self-determined: we are ultimately responsible for the person we become and decisions we make

b. specific vocations- must not be “isolated” or “special”- we must not think of a certain vocation as special or better; there is no special

and ordinary- there is no “better” vocation in becoming a good Christian- do not think of them as isolated from each other like separate services to God

we must think of them as complementary services to God- many parts and functions but only one body- work together to make body function more effectively

2.0 MAGISTERIUM- teaching authority of the Catholic Church- tradition of moral leadership in and out of Church- teaching and life of Jesus Christ is normative in life of Catholics

* two descriptions of what we call the good: image in God and teaching and example of Jesus Christ

2.1 Familiaris Consortio = lovea. God inscribed in humanity man and woman the vocation—thus capacity and responsibility

to love- issued by John Paul II in 1981- God created man in His image and likeness love is fundamental and innate vocation of

man- God is love man is created by God in love man has the capacity and responsibility

to love- not a neutral capacity- capacity to love makes THE difference in the doing of the good- when we genuinely love, we realize our fullest capacity

b. Man loves as an incarnate spirit (sign and meaning)

7


- we are not pure spirits, we’re not just flesh and blood we love as an incarnate spirit- sign: there is a need of a sign that he or she understands (a hug, a gift, etc)

: sign rooted in a meaning specified by the spirit- meaning: signs become meaningful because of the giver

: it may be one among others but it is specified and meaningful because of the giver

- Example : many watches like this, but it is meaningful because my mother gave it to me

: sex between a married couple; rape = sex without meaning, without love

- physical/material act (sign) with meaning how we love as incarnate spiritsc. Total self-giving only in marriage

- total: complete array of expressing love- more total from the point of view of marriage because it includes physical sexual

expression of love2.2 Lumen Gentium 39-41

39 – All Christians are called to holiness. does not mean only priests, clergy, etc are called All Christians are called.

40 – Forms of life are many (i.e. nun, priest, married, single) but there is only one holiness that underneath all these different forms, you are still called to a life of holiness. We become holy not only through extraordinary things, but even in fulfilling the ordinary responsibilities in our lives.

41 – Whether we live the religious or married life, we are still called to holiness. Hint: READ IT!

2.3 Concluding Remarksa. statement that all vocations are equal was not always so

- 1 Cor 7: 8 says that for those unmarried or widows, if they can’t control themselves, “they should marry because it is better to marry than to be on fire.” people used to believe that to reach God faster, you should remain a virgin

- 1 Cor 7: 32 says that a married man will not be single-minded about God because he worries about pleasing his wife, so he will be divided.

b. connected with a certain world view- a view that sees the world as source of evil and temptation; as impediment to heaven

gives the impression that marriage is inferior- St. Thomas Aquinas: How do we become perfect? “We become perfect by renouncing

the temporal and clinging only to the spiritual.”- Marriage was the last Christian sacrament to be accepted (Council of Verona) because to

them, how can you consider marriage a sacrament if it is available for sin? (sex)- Some became monastic in practice (isolated, pray all day, weave baskets) attitude that

the world is not important- Example : Catholic countries are not as developed possibly because we don’t value the

world as muchc. sacramental structure of human experience

- we communicate meaning (i.e. love) through material symbols/ world of matter

- communicate world of spirit through world of matter- if we were deprived of the world of matter, then we would lose the very

language with which we grow and love other peopled. Thus…

- they are not necessarily competitors as it were

8


- if we have a better understanding between the world of matter and spirit, we could have a more positive view of marriage and the meaning of sexual relations

- instead of opposing one another, the world of matter and of spirit complement and reinforce each other

2.4 Summarya. All men are called to a life of love and holiness.b. All vocations are equal. (O’Connell, Lumen Gentium)c. 1 Cor 7: 8, 32 (presupposition of WOM and WOS as opposing)

3.0 THE MEANING OF GENUINE LOVE (contribution of empirical sciences)3.1 Scott Peck’s description of love involves 4 elements:

“The will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own and another’s spiritual growth.”a. Teleological – Genuine love can be distinguished and specified by its fruits or end-result

which is spiritual growth- can’t tell by the intensity of feelings- you can tell whether it is genuine by the fruit it bears = spiritual growth of

both- What kind of person am I becoming as a result of this relationship?- spiritual growth is about a person maturing

not only thinking about himself; other-oriented; generally interested in the good/welfare/comfort of others

expanding your world; your world is not only inhabited by yourself recognize that I am not the only person in the world and everyone has their own lives

and problems It isn’t genuine love if you do things (i.e. giving gifts) that are pleasurable to you, and

you stop when it isn’t as fun anymore. This shows that all that time, you did it for yourself because it pleased you. It wasn’t really about the other.

- It’s not love if you treat relationships as something that defines you.- Genuine love in a relationship grows together with the rest of the world. It’s not like you

have your own world during the entire time. It should be able to co-exist with other healthy relationships; more than that, it should flourish with them.

b. There is only love that embraces both parties. One love should lead to spiritual growth of both parties. It is not as though there are two moments of love; first I will love myself and then, in a second and subsequent as it were, I will love the other party.- the act with which you love another is the very same act with which you love yourself- Love is circular. When I love a person, that love comes back to me.- Legitimate love of self: In loving another person, you begin to love yourself.- Genuine love is self-replenishing.

c. Genuine love involves real effort. It’s not always easy. It’s not always driven by strong and sheer emotion.- novelty wears away (gifts, surprises, etc)- Things done during “in love” stage become benchmark you become disappointed later

on because you depend on them- genuine love is not just doing what feels pleasurable- test of real love when it becomes difficult- Example : When wife is nagging and husband is inattentive, children parents are ATM

Genuine love is when you want to do something else, but you choose to stay true to your commitment.

- Example : broken marriages – they give up too soon and they’re not as willing tosacrifice

- set such a high benchmark from honeymoon stage

9


d. Genuine love is an act of the will; it should be an exercise of genuine freedom.- there may or may not be feelings of high but we shouldn’t identify this with genuine love- we don’t have control over our feelings amoral/ neither right nor wrong- an act of the will means you made a choice love is a free decision for which you are

responsible- genuine love is born out of freedom- feelings make sacrificing easier; willing becomes more rewarding with feelings- but there is no necessary connection between feelings and genuine love

3.2 Genuine love as distinguished from other seemingly similar phenomena3.2.1 Falling in love is not genuine love

a. What is falling in love?- experience of a very very strong attraction, usually physical or external attraction- an idealized state, unreal state

b. Falling in love and the collapse of ego boundaries- extending one’s self means you have limits; first it’s just us in our world then

extending when you include others- not really extending boundaries; just a collapse and it’s possible for it to snap

backc. not genuine because…

- the two of you are trying to impress each other- begin to impose expectations from the otheri. not a free and conscious choice but a chemical reaction

- you think each other is perfect- try to measure up to expectations- do unreal things

ii. it is not nurturing; there is no spiritual growth- not nurturing because when you give, it’s because it makes YOU happy

does not have anything to do with caring for the other; pleasure is mainly for yourself

d. what is it then?- Scott Peck: it is part of the survival instinct of the human race- coming together of male and female- if you don’t think at all, you’ll be mating like an animal

e. similar to genuine love because…- similar because you think you’re really caring for the other person; sometimes

overlaps with genuine love- not that it is wrong but we must recognize it for what it is don’t make it a

benchmark for any relationship- don’t make important decisions on the basis of it

f. importance or function- you see that he or she isn’t perfect but you’re still interested- has that function of bringing two people together- when in love, you have an explanation for everything even when he or she makes

a mistake- when ego boundaries snap back, you see clearly once again

3.2.2 Dependency- normal human phenomenon- patheological dependency: person fails to experience fullness and cannot function in

ordinary acts of life because there is no special someone- cannot be the basis of a lifelong, wholesome relationship

10


- legitimate self-interest: a person’s right to experience fullness and joy in life this isn’t met in dependency and self-sacrifice

3.2.3 Cathexis- you care for something or someone- Example : relationship between a master and his pet

: you feed it, groom it, take it to the vet, etc : you love it because it sits when you sit : you get irritated when it doesn’t obey you : you don’t want it to be independent; it will only be a pet- likewise, it’s like you are not really interested in the growth of the other person- you see him or her only as a pet- you care for them only up to a certain point

3.2.4 Self-sacrifice- requires effort- violating non-negotiables; giving up something that belongs to the core of your being

which violates yourself- physical abuse in a loving relationship is no excuse (some wives think it’s their fault

when their husbands beat them)- not always easy to delineate where non-negotiable core is- sacrifice, on the other hand, is giving up something but not from the core of yourself;

extending yourself rather than losing a part of you- when a person seems to be giving up something for another but already giving up

own legitimate self-interest- there are person-specific non-negotiables like religion* marriage is a supportive relationship; you bring out the best in each other* marriage is a way of fulfilling this vocation—of doing the good, of loving, etc.

3.3 Summary and Observationsa. boyfriend-girlfriend relationships are part of growing up

- we have an innate capacity to love, but physical expression to love is something we must learn to temper

- teaches you to be drawn out of yourself; to learn to love and be concerned about someone outside yourself

b. physical expression should be supported by a real loving relationship- expression should be a symbol of your love- introducing sexual relations early in the relationship may or will elbow out other aspects

of relationshipc. get over the “toys for the big boys” stage before getting married

- couples usually fight over whether to spend money on luxury or on basic needsd. unrequited love is probably not genuine

- in an “imaginary” relationship, it’s hard to have a real relation. It’s hard to put this into closure when it didn’t even start at all

- falling in love with a projectione. unconditional love

- violates the whole meaning of love because love isn’t just accepting, but rather, it should make you a better person

- no reform or change; prevents growth- love is not completely unconditional; there are limits, but this doesn’t mean they

don’t genuinely love each otherf. long-distance relationship

- impractical; you won’t see each other growg. “I need space”

11


- if indeed serious with relationship, we don’t need to say this. In real love, problems are shared and talked about by both.

- in the company and support of the other4 FUNDAMENTAL OPTION

Big Picture: We were taught about sin as something we do. We see them as specific, concrete, distinct actions. But in reality, sin is not only merely about what you’ve done, but also about what you’ve become as a result of what you’ve done. Sin is not so much in the particular acts but in the fundamental option we have chosen ourselves. In Christian anthropology, we look at the person not only as what he is but also as what he ought to become. It is prescriptive rather than descriptive. He must do the good he knows, follow the teaching of Jesus Christ, live a life of love (FC), live a life of holiness (LG). Sin prevents a person from fully realizing himself. He is not being true to being in the image in which he was created. He doesn’t do the good he knows and violates his highest potential.

4.0 Introduction. We want to understand the meaning of sin and we would like to do this in this manner:a. understand the person who commits the sin, and in this understanding, we collocate sin not so

much in what the person does as in what the person becomes as a result of what he does;- Aristotle: “we become what we repeatedly do”

b. the traditional understanding of sin;c. sin reconsidered taking into account the insight that the locus of sin is on the level of the

becoming rather than merely doingThe following are important conceptual tools:a. doing and becomingb. particular acts and fundamental option

- particular acts are concrete, specific, discreet actions categorical actions- Example : cheating in a quiz, stealing money, disobeying parents, etc.- but these actions are not completely disconnected from one another; there are incoherences

but by and large, they are coherent with each other- option to live going in a certain direction

c. categorical freedom and transcendental freedom- categorical freedom is exercised when you make categorical choices- two options: go in favor of or violate self-interest; do the good or not- transcendental freedom: concrete decisions are what make you go towards your general

direction in your life4.1 Understanding the human person who acts

4.1.1 Persons and actionsa. a person is more than the sum of his actsb. underneath the act is the person who is a subject and doerc. the subject perjures and it is from this free agent that responsibility arises

continuity of a person is experienced more clearly in memory; you know that the person is a subject who is a doer of all these particular actions; the person underneath is the source of responsibility

- a person forms himself through his actions (back to Aristotle)- a person expresses himself in and through his acts

4.1.2 Personal Human Identity. Beneath the actions that a person does and revealing itself through these acts is a fundamental stance.But this fundamental stance that defines and expresses the personal human identity of an individual did not always exist. There was a moment at which we exercised that transcending kind of freedom in order to define ourselves as persons—the fundamental option.

4.1.3 Fundamental Optiona. FO refers to both the moment the decision is taken as well as the decision made.

12


b. The fundamental decision does not exist by itself; it is a mediated decisionc. Categorical decisions are about things that we do; the FO is about what we become.d. FO is an inner act of self-definition; while they are not irrevocable; such changes are

not easy or done often.4.1.4 The Dimension of Time

- when you’re older, you become more accountable for your actions4.2 Sin in Tradition

- not referring to sin as a violation of a law- with or without law, it doesn’t make things any better- sin is the destruction of a value human person- it prevents human persons from making concrete the image in which it was created- sin doesn’t help the person realize what he ought to become- Example : masturbation makes you selfish and there are no real relationships- sin frustrates the development of the human person- in the following, all the components are present in each; the difference is in how they all

interrelate with each other4.2.1 Sin as an ACT

- things you have or have not done of which you are accountable4.2.2 Sin as a FACT

- original sin sin of Adam and Eve- not something you did; not responsible for it- it is the sinfulness we inherited from them

4.2.3 Sin as a STATE- person we’ve become as a result of what we repeatedly do

FACT ACT STATE- the relationship is that sin is an action (specific, concrete)- this understanding of sin as a fact is the same way we understand the sinful act of Adam and

Eve (eating the forbidden fruit)- we become what we repeatedly doFACT ACT STATE- understood sin as fact, not as something done in the past but understand as situation of

sinfulness in the world which makes the commission of act so much simpler- Example : a culture that tolerates slavery makes it “legal” to look down on others and

treat them as nonpersons : some people may feel that they don’t have a stake in society so how will

this sin affect others? What does it matter? results in collective sin4.3 Sin Reconsidered Today. The dimensions of the human act which the defined the human

person:a. The human act that defined the human person [understood primarily as a doer-agent] was

characterized by freedom and knowledge;b. The human act was also characterized by a third dimension—namely the human identity, that

from which the action proceedsc. The fourth dimension is time. We evolve in our consciousness and we become progressively

more free, and therefore more accountable. At the transcendental level, this growth means that the depth and the strength with which we choose evil or good increase with age.

4.3.1 Sin as FACT4.3.2 Sin as ACT4.3.3 Sin as Personal State or Direction

13

theology 131 dacanay master notes

Documents