Yet Eckhart takes this question into territory subtler than any obvious analysis.
This focus on the inner, on attitude, and how it creates relationship with life does not obstruct the question of an outer response to outer conditions; and it does not strip us of a freedom of action here, either. Rather it confers freedom, in the sense that our attitude is free of the attachments formed by a presumption of agency.
In turning toward the perception of another quality, I see that my usual thinking, feeling and sensation cannot help, and I give up my ordinary attitude and my illusion about myself. I can "do" nothing. Nevertheless, I can become conscious of how things take place in me, and I can find an attitude, an inner posture, that will allow opening to a higher energy. (The Reality of Being, P. 83)
In opening to this higher energy, the divine influence, we cease to be combatants in life. We become participants; and in participating, all of the tension created by the presumption of our own agency sloughs off.
As participants, we embrace; as participants, we include. Nothing is excluded or forbidden, from the outer action we incline to or the inner experiences we are subject to. They all exist; as we do. Yet this existence is informed by this inward freedom which is in, and of, God.
Yet, I think, we persistently misunderstand this question of the inner and the outer, and we somehow think that one can fix the other. It is this idea of fixing, which we are (you will excuse me here) fixated on, that's actually useless; nothing can ever actually be fixed. To suffer is to allow, and if we want to truly understand what Gurdjieff meant by intentional suffering, this understanding of what it means to allow must eventually enter the picture.