Predestination/Calvinism

[JustaServant]

Originally Posted by PRmerger

No, I don't believe that these 2 saints believed in a schizophrenic psychopathic despotic god.

And, presuming to answer for benedictus2, I would say she doesn't believe these saints believed this either.

To my understanding, neither of these 2 saints proposed that a god creates a soul that's been predestined to hell.

That, Sycarl, is a god that's a schizophrenic psychopathic despot.

And that is exactly the problem people have with their theology, Protestant and Catholic. Its sad that many Reformed christians do not see how their theology comes off to the "unknowledgable".
Isn't it better to leave these matters to God, who is love, and concentrate on feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, giving to the poor?

[benedictus2]

Originally Posted by SyCarl

Did they teach that God predestined or chose some for eternal life? If so, it seems to logically follow that by not chosing the rest they have been predestined to hell.

Hi SyCarl,

I will ignore your succeeding quotes from St Thomas because I have already stated that I do not agree with him on this matter.

As for the point that scripture supports predestination to heaven so therefore reprobation must be true, well I think that is a wrong conclusion to draw.

Notice how, while there are scriptural verses supporting predestination to salvation, everyone is hard pressed to provide support for predestination to damnation. The quotes that everyone supply for the latter, all relate to temporal punishment and does not equate to hell.

I think that is quite telling.

So let me give an explanation of how I understand predestination to salvation and why I think my take is more Biblical.

Firstly I affirm predestination to salvation and negate predestination to damnation.

Here’s why.

This whole discussion centres on the economy of salvation.

Now we cannot talk about salvation without bringing in the reason for why we need salvation – therefore sin, particularly original sin.

But if there is no getting away from creating sinful men because of the fall, then God does this knowing full well that they will be sinful. So why create them at all.

Here, I think St Thomas contradicts himself.

God is love. St Thomas says that to love is TO WILL THE GOOD OF THE OTHER.

If God is love, then God wills the good of everyone. If God’s will is paramount, then His willing our good is paramount. Can reprobation be referred to as willing our good? If that is so then hell must be good.

St Augustine said that God made us for Himself. If God made us for Himself then our end is meant to be Him. How then can He will for us to be damned? Would that not go against His own will?

So here’s how I think predestination to heaven works and why I think the Bible is silent on predestination to damnation.

God predestines some ( think of our Lady, the Saints) to heaven not for themselves but as a way to bring about the recapitulation, so that every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.

In short it does not necessarily mean that those who are predestined are the only ones who will be saved.

I think the best way to illustrate this is to think of the recent bird or swine flu outbreak.

In such emergencies, the first ones to be vaccinated will be the health care workers, firemen, police, etc. In other words those needed to maintain an orderly society and those that will be bearing the brunt of the epidemic because they will be dealing with those who become ill.

Even before the outbreak, this is a policy that is already set in place by any good government. These people we can say are the “predestined” because prior to the outbreak we know that they will be given the vaccine.

But these people are not given the vaccine for themselves alone. They are only inoculated first because they will be needed to care for the population. They will be the ones to ensure that the sick are attended to.

I think predestination to heaven works in the same way. There are indeed those who are predestined but God did not choose them merely for themselves but so that He can accomplish His plan for our salvation.

Our Lady, the Apostles, the Saints all have a role to play in bringing us to Him, because how God effects salvation is by forming the Body of Christ, which is after all the Communion of Saints.

You can see this particularly in our Blessed Mother’s case, in how instrumental she has been in the conversion of so many.

We can also see this in how God effected salvation via a Church. He first picks a few men, but these few men will in turn proclaim His Gospel and become fishers of men.

So I think all those verses that support predestination to heaven have been misinterpreted in some way.

[benedictus2]

Originally Posted by JustaServant

And that is exactly the problem people have with their theology, Protestant and Catholic. Its sad that many Reformed christians do not see how their theology comes off to the "unknowledgable".
Isn't it better to leave these matters to God, who is love, and concentrate on feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, giving to the poor?

I agree with you to some extent. But I think this wondering about the will of God and the hows and whys of salvation is part and parcel of the fact that God made us intelligent creatures. Faith and Reason compliment each other.

And here is another why I think this is so. Because God is Truth and He has put that desire for Truth deep in our beings.

[benedictus2]

Originally Posted by SyCarl

Did God create angels and men? Why then did He create them with the capacity to sin? Did God know that Adam would sin when He created him?

Yes.

If so we did He create him in that way? By creating Adam knowing that he would sin did He not create men knowing some would go to hell because they would not all believe?

Because God is able to bring about an even greater good.

At every Easter Vigil, the Exultet is chanted which goes,

O happy fault
O necessary sin of Adam,
which gained for us so great a Redeemer!

I often think of it as a game of chess between God and the devil.

The devil makes a move thinking I will win this game, I will corrupt His precious creature.

But God knew this would be his move so He smiles and thinks, I'll checkmate him with my Son.

How is there any real difference between this and predestination to hell?

The difference is Christ.

Because we Catholics (and Scriptures) say that Christ died for all, therefore the Grace of Salvation is available to all. But free will allows us to reject this grace.

If there is no Grace, and God left it at creating men after the fall, then certainly we have been predestined to hell.

But because God is Love, then His love triumphs.

Here is something that I think illustrates how God deals with us.

When the GPS Satellite Navigator first came out, our IT manager was the first one is our company to have one. One day he gave me a lift home and I was truly fascinated by this little contraption.

After punching in our location and then punching in our address, the machine calculated a most direct route. But I told my friend to take a different route and all through-out our trip, this voice toldl us we've gone the wrong way and starts to recalculate our route and to re-orient us to our destination.

I was so amazed by this and then I thought, wow, that is exactly how God deals with us.

In our hearts He has implanted the coordinates to heaven. We know the way. But every so often we take a detour here, a wrong turn there. And at everyone point He recalculates to direct us back to our true destination. The more waylaid we get the harder the return becomes because we could end up in ditches, traffic and dead end streets. But always, His grace is there re-calculating our navigation system to lead us home.

When we were driving from France to Spain, my brother-in-law's GPS kept saying "Route Recalculation". I wondered then how many route recalculations God will have to do before I finally make it home.

[PRmerger]

Originally Posted by SyCarl

Did they teach that God predestined or chose some for eternal life? If so, it seems to logically follow that by not chosing the rest they have been predestined to hell.

I don't think your conclusion naturally follows, SyCarl. God could predestine the elect, and leave the others to work out their salvation with fear and trembling.

[PRmerger]

Originally Posted by SyCarl

Did God know that Adam would sin when He created him? If so we did He create him in that way?

We Catholics answer that question every Easter Vigil: So we could have so great a Redeemer.
felix culpa!
"O happy fault,
O necessary sin of Adam,
which gained for us so great a Redeemer!"

[JustaServant]

Originally Posted by benedictus2

I agree with you to some extent. But I think this wondering about the will of God and the hows and whys of salvation is part and parcel of the fact that God made us intelligent creatures. Faith and Reason compliment each other.

And here is another why I think this is so. Because God is Truth and He has put that desire for Truth deep in our beings.

I understand that. But I have to wonder about a theology that makes determinations as to who is and who is not 'elect'. I mean if one truly believes their doctrine, what is the point of being pro-life? The aborted babies were probably unelect anyway Why help the poor and downtrodden? If they are unelect, it seems useless. What a depressing way to look at the world around us.
Good heavens if the early Church thought this way Christianity would have been a forgotten cult.
The whole theology makes life useless and meaningless.

[JReducation]

Merry Christmas everyone!

A good friend invited me to comment on this thread. I have to admit that reading every post is a daunting task, so I read the first 10-15 and that last 10-15. That kind of gives me a sense of where the conversation was going. If I say something that has been said, in between the two ends, please excuse me.

In order to discuss predestination there are several points that we must take into consideration. Some of them have been hinted at, but not quite broken open. One must remember that the Church’s teaching on this subject predates the scriptures. The whole idea that “I have to say this in a manner that is consistent with the bible” is a half truth or a half effort. We have to speak to this point in a manner that is consistent with the faith of the Church. The New Testament was written to reflect the faith of the Church. There were many writings at the time and they were not allowed into the canon, because they failed to reflect the faith of the Universal Church at the time.

Having said that, we have to go back into history and ask ourselves what did the early Christians believe when they used the word “predestination”? Without getting deep into exegesis, it is very interesting to note that they were very Jewish in their usage of the term, even though the term, as we know it today, is a translation of a translation. The earliest uses of this term date back to the Old Testament, the term in Hebrew translates into “chosen”.

When the first-generation Christians speak of predestination, they are speaking of those who are chosen for salvation. That being said, everyone of the Apostolic writings and the Fathers of the Church tell us that all are chosen for salvation, because Christ dies for all.

Therefore, St. Thomas Aquinas is correct. St. Thomas read the scriptures through a Jewish lens. God loves all men and creates all men to be happy. Augustine is also right when he tells us that all are created to return to God. Both theologians are expressing God’s will. They are not saying anything new. They are saying what Jesus had already said, Paul had repeated and later the Fathers. All have been chosen or predestined for salvation, meaning that salvation is available to all.

The term “predestination” sneaks into Christian theology with the use of Greek. As we know, much of the NT is either written in Greek or translated into Greek very early. The translators were Gentile Christians, not Jewish Christians. To the Gentile Christians, the term “chosen people” was foreign to them. To the Jewish Christians, it was a reference to Israel. They preserve the meaning, but use the Greek verb “to predestine”. When you were predestined, you were chosen. All men have been chosen to go to heaven. God creates all men to be happy.

How to explain those who go to hell . . . as St. Thomas explains, God wants all men to be happy. God gives man free will to choose what makes him happy. In the end, the soul who goes to hell is not sent there by God, but chooses to go there, because he will never be happy in heaven. Heaven is contrary to his will. Such as soul will only be happy in eternal misery. It reminds me of the often used expression, “He’s not happy unless he’s miserable.” We’ve all met that kind of person. The soul who goes to hell is just as much loved by God as the one who goes to heaven. God will not inflict on the soul what is contrary to its free will. If eternity with God is contrary to the will of the individual, God will not impose it.

God is not an unmerciful God who creates souls to go to hell. He creates souls to be happy. Because he is eternal, he knows what the soul will choose as its eternal reward. God, who is all love, like the father in the Prodigal Son, allows his sons and daughters to choose, even what is contrary to his will for them. Some return and others do not.

One final note, Mary was not predestined to go to heaven, nor were the Apostles. She was chosen to be saved and to be the Mother of the Son. Mary, like every human being, responds with her own choice. Because God lives outside of space and time, he saw Mary’s choice and selects her to be the Theotokos. But the Thetokos must be free of Original Sin, so that the human nature of the Son is never contaminated. Christ’s redemptive act on the cross saves Mary, just as it saved those prophets and patriarchs who lived long before him. Mary is saved, because she chose to love of God. Her Immaculate Conception is a show of God’s glory and a statement about Christ’s unblemished human nature.


Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

[benedictus2]

Hi JR,

That was a well thought out post. Thanks for joining us.

I would like to make a few comments regarding the points your raised.

Originally Posted by JReducation

Therefore, St. Thomas Aquinas is correct. St. Thomas read the scriptures through a Jewish lens. God loves all men and creates all men to be happy. Augustine is also right when he tells us that all are created to return to God. Both theologians are expressing God’s will. They are not saying anything new. They are saying what Jesus had already said, Paul had repeated and later the Fathers. All have been chosen or predestined for salvation, meaning that salvation is available to all.

When I was reading the Thomist and Augustinian view of predestination, it struck me how similar it is to Calvinism.

I think what I found problematic is in both views (unless I completely misunderstood it), grace is always efficacious.

If grace is always efficaciouus then it erodes free will.
IF grace is always efficacious, then that means that God willfully withheld this efficacious grace from men conceived in sin. Without such a grace, how then is man supposed to give a yes to God?

If as you wrote above St Thomas said that God loves all men and creates all men to be happy. If Grace is always efficacious, then does it not follow that for those unable to say yes to God this grace has been withheld?

If this grace has been withheld, then how can we say that God created all men and wants all men to be happy?

I was wondering if you could take the time to read my post 258, 259 and 393 as I would like to know if there is any error in the way I have presented the Thomist view.

How to explain those who go to hell . . . as St. Thomas explains, God wants all men to be happy. God gives man free will to choose what makes him happy.

But here again the problem raised by the proposition that all grace is efficacious rears its head. With a sinful nature, without the efficacious grace, does it not mean that he has left the soul to go it's sinful way so in effect willing their damnation?

One final note, Mary was not predestined to go to heaven, nor were the Apostles. She was chosen to be saved and to be the Mother of the Son. Mary, like every human being, responds with her own choice.

If grace is always efficacious as per St Thomas and St Augustine then we can say that Mary was predestined, i.e. chosen. I think we affirm that when we say that the woman whose seed will crush the head of the serpent is Mary.

The apostles and the Saints are predestined in the sense that they are chosen but not that they are chosen for themselves. Rather they were chosen because this is the way God runs the economy of salvation.

Because God lives outside of space and time, he saw Mary’s choice and selects her to be the Theotokos. But the Thetokos must be free of Original Sin, so that the human nature of the Son is never contaminated. Christ’s redemptive act on the cross saves Mary, just as it saved those prophets and patriarchs who lived long before him. Mary is saved, because she chose to love of God. Her Immaculate Conception is a show of God’s glory and a statement about Christ’s unblemished human nature.

That is beautiful explanation of the Immaculate Conception.


Peace!

Cory

[benedictus2]

Originally Posted by JustaServant

I understand that. But I have to wonder about a theology that makes determinations as to who is and who is not 'elect'. I mean if one truly believes their doctrine, what is the point of being pro-life? The aborted babies were probably unelect anyway Why help the poor and downtrodden? If they are unelect, it seems useless. What a depressing way to look at the world around us.
Good heavens if the early Church thought this way Christianity would have been a forgotten cult.
The whole theology makes life useless and meaningless.

Yes, that is true.

This is why I always say, bow to the Magisterium. The Church cannot err on on this.

I think there is an assumption that St Augustine's and St Thomas's view is the Catholic Church's teaching. But that is not necessarily the case.

As I wrote in post 393 the Catholic Church has come to a clearer understanding with regards this matter and have rejected some of the tenets of St Augustine and consequently St Thomas's as well.

God is Love. Any discussion on the whys and hows of salvation should have that as the first premise.

[cooterhein]

Originally Posted by benedictus2

If grace is always efficaciouus then it erodes free will.

What's your definition of free will? Are you making the usual argument for libertarian free will and the non-existence and/or inconsistency of compatibilism?

[benedictus2]

Originally Posted by cooterhein

What's your definition of free will? Are you making the usual argument for libertarian free will and the non-existence and/or inconsistency of compatibilism?

That one is always free to choose good or to choose evil.

[JReducation]

Benedictus, I read your previous posts and I can see the problem. You may be having the same problem with Augustine and Aquinas that Calvin had.

Augustine comes from the approach that man is a fallen creature and without God’s help he can do nothing for himself. This is not a falsehood, albeit a rather pessimistic view of humanity. One has to understand Augustine’s personal journey to understand his viewpoint. He looks at his own life and realizes that his conversion is a the work of grace.

Here is where Calvinism gets into problems . . . the meaning of the term, grace. Aquinas, explains it to us as a share in God’s life. Augustine had not thought it through this far. He understood grace to be a gift from God. But he does not unwrap the full meaning. It is Aquinas who realizes that grace is Divine life within the soul. This is later confirmed by the writings of the great mystics such as Bernard, Teresa, Therese, John of the Cross, Catherine and others. God shares his life with the soul. That is grace.

Efficacious is much easier to understand. Efficacious comes from the root word, efficient. Without getting into etymology, let’s just work with English. That which is efficient does what it sets out to do. Sanctifying grace is a share in God’s life. It’s God’s way of saving us. If it is accepted by the recipient, it does exactly what it is supposed to do; therefore, it is efficacious.

God does give us the means to salvation. Whether we accept them or not is totally dependent on us. In other words, what Aquinas and Augustine are saying is that God’s grace does save and it is enough to save. Therefore, in our language, it’s perfect efficiency. However, neither Augustine nor Aquinas ever say that grace cannot be rejected.

God gives the necessary grace for salvation to all. This does not mean that all choose to accept it and preserve it. God does not interfere in human freedom. If God did interfere in human freedom, then grace would not be efficacious. For man to be saved, man must choose it. God cannot impose it. God can and does provide the means. If man were not free to choose to accept God’s gift, then there is no merit on man’s part.

Here is where Calvin gets caught up, poor guy. He believes that man cannot do anything toward his salvation. Man is a passive beneficiary of God’s grace, which is not true. There are many stories in scripture that show us that the Church has never believed this, but let’s take two, for the sake of brevity.

In the story of the Prodigal Son, the father gives the sons everything necessary for happiness. The one son takes his inheritance and leaves, contrary to the father’s will. But he returns. What is important in this story is that the father does not force him to return, yet he celebrates his return. The father gives the gifts, but the son must choose to return of his own free will.

The other story that sends the same message is the story of David. David is murderer, as we all know. Yet he dies a saint. God provides the grace for him to return, but it is David who must take the initiative to do penance for his sins and to ask for forgiveness. The graces that David receives as a result of his contrition and his penance are made possible by the triumph of Christ on the cross. Once David asks for forgiveness and makes reparation, grace saves his soul.

What we have is a beautiful dynamic tension between God’s life, which can save us and our free will to accept the life that he offers. God is so generous that he makes it very simple for us. He gives us a sacramental system. We don’t have to be perfectly contrite to receive sanctifying grace. Even imperfect contrition is enough. Again, the example of the Prodigal Son. His contrition was imperfect. He came back because he was miserable. David’s contrition is perfect. He also returns to God, but out of perfect love. In both cases, God provides a share in his Divine Life (grace), that makes it possible to attain salvation. Grace is efficacious. Grace is offered to all. But not all accept the gift. The best example are the two men who are crucified with Jesus. The one verbally abuses Jesus and makes demands. The other makes the perfect prayer, “Remember me.” Jesus gives him enough (efficacious) grace to redeem him from all his sins. The same grace was available to the other thief, but he did not choose it, because what made him happy was to be bitter to the end.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

[JReducation]

Someone mentioned that the idea that Christ died for the salvation of all can be a form of Pelagianism, which raises some eyebrows, because the Church says that Christ died for all.

What has to be understood is what Pelagius was saying and what the Church is saying. Try to remember elementary school grammar. You have a subject, a predicate and an extended predicate. The Pelagius and the Church disagree on the extended predicate.

Pelagius would say “Jesus died for all to set an example of what man should be.” The Church is saying, “Jesus died for all to redeem man from the effects of the sin of Adam.” The extended predicates are very different.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

[benidict]

Originally Posted by jericho777

But the place is limbo and not heaven they do not receive the full love of God because it's a lesser place. Scripture leaves only two places as a final destination. Scripture does not answer the question. I would like to see all conceived people go to heaven. Because God is just all people will be judged for sin.

hey! we agree! i would like to see all conceived people go to heaven too! so would God. he desires that all men, would come to know him. nicely done jericho. i for one do not believe in limbo. i believe that those who die in infancy, or in the womb, are in Heaven. i think that Jesus made this pretty clear, at least to my understanding. again, i have this option. limbo is not dogma. Peace