• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Wanting to impact/influence the course of history, pride vs magnanimity


Claritas Prayer Group#9435
I started thinking about something today, when does the desire to impact, influence or change the course of history become arrogant or prideful? I do not think it, in and of itself is prideful, I think it can actually be a great example of the virtue of magnanimity, the virtue of seeking to do great things. (Magnanimity comes from the Latin words “magna” meaning “great” and “anima” meaning soul, this it means, “greatness of soul.”)

What’s got me thinking about this, is an ongoing controversy in the Church involving a bishop by the name of Marcel Lefebvre; back in the 80s, Lefebvre found himself in a difficult situation in which he came to believe that basically, he had to influence the course of history. I personally believe Lefebvre ended-up making the wrong decision, (mainly because, not to go on a brief discourse here but, the vast majority of the arguments in defense of Lefebvre are just awful, I shared this article in a previous thread, and I think a lot of the issues here actually have to do with the NT sense of identity because, well, I have hard time figuring out why the apologetics for Lefebvre is so awful most of the time: https://neuroclastic.com/the-identi...autistic-identity-is-experienced-differently/) but what’s interesting is what motivated Lefebvre to make this move, he was motivated by a desire to save souls; which as a Catholic I consider to be the best and highest reason to want to impact and influence the course of history. Thus we get to precisely what I’m wondering about here, when does the desire and effort to impact or influence the course of history become arrogant, prideful or the like?

It doesn’t have to be about saving souls or the like, it could be some other great goal; perhaps there’s a question of the ends justifying the means in all this. What are your thoughts?
Each one of us has gifts and talents that we're supposed to use to better our lives and the lives of those around us. But if you use them to hurt others, then it is evil.
when does the desire and effort to impact or influence the course of history become arrogant, prideful or the like?

I wonder how many people set out to change the course of history, and how many do affect this change as a result of their conviction in one small case known to them; from which ripples flow and in their turn change history.
Depends on if you want to change the world biblically or humanely. If it is biblical then he calls you if it is humanity then it depends in what area.
I can't imagine that deciding you, personally, know what is best for the world or history is anything but prideful.

To decide you know, above all others, that you will shape the world because you have decided what is best. That can never be anything but prideful. History is full of such characters. Most did not end well.

New Threads

Top Bottom