The Five Points of Calvinism or TULIP


#146

Catholics deny double predestination. God has given the angels and humans free will and sufficient grace such that God will not be responsible for damnation, for God generally wants the salvation of all.

Titus 2:11: "the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all men "


#147

I totally agree. Salvation is offered to all, even at the end of days. But many reject it, even in the Apocalypse.

The mental gymnastics required to try to reconcile free will with double predestination are astounding.


#148

That’s good.

Could you explain what is meant by passed over?

Some souls God has “elected” to receive the salvation available through Jesus Christ, but others are passed over.

Also???

It is grace that saves people, not their virtuous acts; this distinction between salvation by grace and salvation by deeds lay at the heart of the Reformation’s break with the Catholic Church.

Is this still taught to you guys? The Catholic Church has never taught we are saved by our deeds. Which would mean the heart of the reformation is a misunderstanding wouldn’t it?

It seems the Presbyterian Church has no problem claiming Calvin as there founder however neither article mentions how or why they distanced themselves from his teaching on double predestination. Any info on the history of this or why they believe he erred?

Thanks,

God Bless


#149

Yes you are correct PCA is not part of PCUSA. I think I attached below some website that talks doctrine etc with PCUSA. PCUSA is the mainline denomination . Since most Presbyterians are confessional they adhere to the Confessions of the Church both ancient and from the beginning as well as modern confessions and catechisms of the church today. When you are talking more of the evangelical and five pointed Calvinists which are rare, they would be more in the PCA and Orthodox Presbyterian which are separate denominations. I hope that clears that up. It is like comparing Roman Catholic church with splinter and offshoots of the RC church. While Presbyterians for the most part except the Cumberland are not part of Arminianism such as the Baprist, Methodist, Pentecostals etc they do understand that we have a chance in this life to turn from unrighteousness and damnation and seek salvation, but they do believe that this is in god’s divine providence and will. Now only conservative Presbyterian such as PCA and OPC would believe or hold someone especially in ministry to double predestination- This is taken from the Westminster Confession regarding Predestination.

he relevant sections in the Westminster Confession of Faith are Chapter 3, Article 6, and Chapter 7, Article 3. The relevant Westminster Larger Catechism question is Question 67. I quote them below:

Chapter 3, Article 6. As God has appointed the elect unto glory, so has He, by the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto.Wherefore, they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by His Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by His power, through faith, unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.

Chapter 6, Article 3. Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein He freely offers unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in Him, that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life His Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe.

Q. 67 What is effectual calling?

A. Effectual calling is the work of God’s almighty power and grace, whereby (out of his free and special love to his elect, and from nothing in them moving him thereunto) he doth, in his accepted time, invite and draw them to Jesus Christ, by his Word and Spirit; savingly enlightening their minds, renewing and powerfully determining their wills, so as they (although in themselves dead in sin) are hereby made willing and able freely to answer his call, and to accept and embrace the grace offered and conveyed therein.


#150

Come on really?? You want to start an argument? I mean tell me that the RC does not teach transubstantiation? Show me scripture that backs that up. We believe that Christ is Spiritually present but where in the bible where the Lord’s Supper( Last Supper) is being partaken does it talk about that doctrine? I mean if you want to start going point by point we most certainly can. Now do I agree with everything that was done with the Reformation, no. However that said, many RC brothers and sisters understand it. And are you ready for this, in 2 Presbyterian Churches in NYC on Reformation Sunday one Bishop preached and in another Presbyterian Church in NYC a RC Priest of a very big RC church preached. And btw, in the RC Church the Presbyterian minister preached. This was on Reformation Sunday…so hmmmm what do you think about that? And were you also aware that in one of the theological Presbyterian seminaries in the SF Bay area ( SF Theological Seminary) for years the Dean of the School was a Roman Catholic Sister!! So hmmm what do you think about that? We need to stop divisions!!


#151

I’m a Thomist Catholic too, so I understand your thinking and your post. No. 137.

I believe CCC 600 but we Thomists have to be very careful with it because can be easily misunderstand if we don’t interpret it according to the teachings of Thomism and the Scripture.

Most of the paragraphs of the Catechism built on Thomism and the Scripture, but the CCC 600 among the few paragraphs which built on Molinism.

In order to understand the difference between Thomism and Molinism first we have to understand the differences the way God’s graces works in Thomism and in Molinism.

.
THE WAY GOD’S GRACES WORKING IN THOMISM and we may say in the Scripture and in the paragraphs of the CCC built on Thomism.
.
The Mystery of Predestination by John Salza.

Man always freely rejects sufficient grace, if the grace is efficacious, then man freely cooperates with it.
.
This is way St. Paul in Philippians 2:13 says that God works in man both to will (operating grace) and to accomplish (cooperating grace).

God wills the grace to be either sufficient or efficacious from the very beginning of the operation.

A sufficient grace has an operating effect only (empowering the will to act),

whereas an efficacious grace has both an operating and cooperating effect (applying the will to act).

.
When God wills a person to perform a salutary act (e.g., prayer, good works), He grants him the means (an efficacious grace) that infallibly produces the end (the act willed by God).

If God wills to permit a person to resist His grace, He grants him a sufficient, and not an efficacious, grace.

.
An important question;
Way would God wills that we resist his grace?
Because sometimes He wills to permit us to do acts of sins for the reason to convert our sins into good, this is a part of the process the way God makes us saints.
.
As we see above, with the provisions of sufficient and efficacious graces God absolutely Governs/ controls the entire human race.
.
In the theory of Molinism there are only sufficient graces, if someone decide without God’s aids to cooperate with it his consent makes the grace efficacious.

As we see above, God has no control over the Molinists.
.
For a Molinist CCC 600 offered by God with a sufficient grace, if he choose he accepts it, if he choose he rejects it. – Heaven is a maybe, man’s fate (heaven or hell) is in himself.

.
For a Thomist CCC 600 offered by God with an efficacious grace which enlightens the mind and freely and infallible applying the will to choose the good and to act. – With efficacious graces Heaven is 100 % sure, man’s fate is in God.
.
Catholic Encyclopedia Divine Providence says.
Life everlasting promised to us, but unaided we can do nothing to gain it.
.
If we mix Thomism and Molinism together it causes us the greatest confusions.

Strictly speaking, if a Thomist ends up in hell his blood is in God’s hands, because his fate/ destiny is in God, if a Molinist ends up in hell his blood is in his own hands, because his fate/ destiny is in himself.
.
God bless


#152

Nope. I’m just trying to give you the opportunity to define the difference between God predestining someone to hell and God passing over someone. If you prefer I guess I could start an argument that it seems like your saying the same thing using different words. :wink:

Also, what seems so argumentative about pointing out the miss information that Catholic’s believe we are saved by our deeds is still taught to you guys? I would think me showing you that you shouldn’t really bring this up would actually start less arguments for you in the future.

Sure the third statement could come across as picking a fight so we can skip that one, I am just on a history kick right now and am interested in the actual documented how’s and why’s things came about. The more I study it seems the misinformation of what people where told and falsely believe, is what people point to as at the heart of the reformation. Which is not what really happened historically.

Let’s not even go here because you know the first thing I am going to ask you is show me in scripture where Jesus taught us that everything we believe is concealed in the pages of scripture, which will be a back and forth argument that will get us no where.

If you would like I would love to start at the very beginning and go point by point with someone. But it seems everyone always wants to start with advanced stuff like transubstantiation. To me this makes no sense if we don’t start with how Jesus set up His Church and how He intended for us to come to an understanding of the “advanced stuff”.

Not sure what you mean by understand? Are you saying agree with it?

Never claimed presbyterians can’t know anything or don’t know how to preach.

I totally agree. I guess in the future I will have to keep in mind that questioning what a non-Catholic posts on a Catholic website is considered to be division. Pretty much the norm of how this country is anymore. Doesn’t matter what I do but as soon as you question me about it you are either a hater or trying to cause division. Yep that is the new American way.

Sorry that my three simple questions, trying to understand what you teach, instead of jumping to my own conclusions has stirred up such resentment and division in you.

Have a good day.

God Bless


#153

What St. Thomas Aquinas wrote supports the dogmas of faith of the Catholic Church (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ludwig Ott), particularly St. Thomas quotes Agustine:

  • Despite men’s sins God truly and earnestly desires the salvation of all men. (Sent. fidei proxima.)
  • God, by His Eternal Resolve of Will, has predetermined certain men to eternal blessedness. (De fide.)
  • God, by an Eternal Resolve of His Will, predestines certain men, on account of their foreseen sins, to eternal rejection. (De fide.)

Summa Theologiae > First Part > Question 19. The will of God > Article 6. Whether the will of God is always fulfilled?

Reply to Objection 1 . The words of the Apostle, “God will have all men to be saved,” etc. can be understood in three ways.

First, by a restricted application, in which case they would mean, as Augustine says (De praed. sanct. i, 8: Enchiridion 103), “God wills all men to be saved that are saved, not because there is no man whom He does not wish saved, but because there is no man saved whose salvation He does not will.”

Secondly, they can be understood as applying to every class of individuals, not to every individual of each class; in which case they mean that God wills some men of every class and condition to be saved, males and females, Jews and Gentiles, great and small, but not all of every condition.

Thirdly, according to Damascene (De Fide Orth. ii, 29), they are understood of the antecedent will of God; not of the consequent will. This distinction must not be taken as applying to the divine will itself, in which there is nothing antecedent nor consequent, but to the things willed.


#154

And this was all going so well! Somebody always has to get twisted off.

This is exactly like our Thanksgiving dinner table. We sit down, we say a prayer, we carve the bird, we take some of everything - even the stuffsuspendedinpurplejello. And we start talking and everyone is having a good time, and somebody says something like “I wonder if they’re going to increase the capital gains tax rate this year”. And then everybody’s really mad at each other.

The good news is we’re family (mostly - there’s always a boyfriend/girlfriend thrown in there), so we can’t escape each other.


#155

I apologize.

I guess in my defense all I can say is at least I read the articles. I guess in the future I will just figure it out on my own and not ask for clarification?

I did type a sarcastic response here, but deleted it.

God Bless


#156

Lutheran doctrine similarly denies that “free will” exists, for good reason. When we speak of “free will” this is specifically in the context of salvation and our ability to effect salvation. We would say that as creatures, man does not have free will, we have contingent will. So as an example, in the garden, God communicated his will to us: 1) he told us that we were to have dominion over his creation; 2) we were to go forth and multiply and fill the earth; 3) BUT we were told not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. So God gave us specific commands and limits. This means our will is contingent upon God’s will for us. In violating God’s will we fell under his condemnation, were corrupted by sin, and are not slaves to sin. We cannot of our own merit be made righteous. It is God’s will that he has sent his son to die in our stead and bear the penalty for our condemnation. Man didn’t will this, God did. It is God’s will to work through the Holy Spirit through such means as the proclamation of the gospel and the administration of the sacraments to work faith in us. It is God’s will to give us the Holy Spirit to guide us and sanctify us. All of this is at the initiative of God, not man. So our will isn’t “free” it is contingent upon God’s good grace. Otherwise we are condemned due to our sin.


#157

Hahahahahaha - I wasn’t talking about you MT!!! Keep up the good work (see how I did that!)


#158

Right and those commands and limits can be broken. That’s what we call sin. Agreed thus far.

Right, man is totally unable to effect his justification in the fallen state. He still has the God-given faculties of deliberating and making decisions but both of those powers are darkened and weakened, not totally, though. Fallen man cannot choose the supernatural good apart from grace.

Right.

And right again.


#159

More on this subject,

Since God forbids all sin, it cannot be His positive will that men commit sin. So, while all men are morally obliged by the commandments, they are not physically compelled to keep them. We believe that God has given man the ability to choose between good and evil. It is God’s positive will that men choose the good and His permissive will when they choose to abuse their liberty and choose the evil. The wrongdoer is entirely responsible for his sin, since God does not impel anyone to commit sin. No one is forced to choose evil but rather it is an act made out of our free will. On the other hand, grace enables us to choose the supernatural good. Grace builds upon our nature and fulfills it.


#160

So you couldn’t get me to fall off my wobble board laughing. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Figured you would try a new tactic to throw me off. :wink:

I’ll try my best to keep up the good work. Not going to make any promises though cause I’m no saint yet.

God Bless


#161

Here’s a post on Romans 9 that is intended to shift the discussion away from predestination and onto what Paul was really trying to get at.


#162

The Calvinist view of “Total Depravity” is actually based on the fact Calvinism is Pelagian at its very core:


#163

And Limited Atonement is based on a completely wrong view of the Cross and Atonement, which Protestants call “Penal Substitution”. This blog has many articles on Calvinism with unique looks at tough issues (e.g. Romans) that you wont see on most apologetics sites, including CatholicAnswers:

https://catholicnick.blogspot.com/search/label/Penal%20Substitution


#164

Very cool! Thanks for posting it here @Catholic_Dude!


#165

When I was a Protestant (without protested anything) I believed double predestination.

Now as I’m a Catholic I don’t believe double predestination because I believe the fulfilment of God’s Universal Salvific Will.

As the whole Catholic Church (CCC 1058) praying for Universal Salvation I believe God designed and provides the salvation of the entire human race.
.
Eph.1:11; In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will. – Which is God saves everyone.

So, how could I believe double predestination!!!

If I would believe double predestination, technically I would have to believe some people will end up in hell and I would also have to believe, the God who I believe in He is really not an Almighty God because He doesn’t have the power and enough efficacious grace to aide everyone to choose heaven and to make his Universal Salvific Will a reality.
.
Makes no difference how we cut it, it is the Creator’s RESPONSIBILITY to take his creations home to heaven.
.
God bless


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.