What do You Think of Calvinists?


#1

Just curious to know what folks here think about Calvinists…


#2

Tip toe through the T.U.L.I.P. …(plays that funky ukelele)

TULIP is an ackronym that is specific to the Calvinist heresy.

I would venture to wager, if he isn’t out on a fishin’ trip, that good 'ol Jimmy Akin would be able to amplify that for you. Unfortunatley, I can’t remember what it stands for.

By the way, there is a series of books out called “Surprized by Truth” in which Jimmy’s conversion story appears. I highly recommend reading it. Its great.


#3

Drstevej, while theologically I disagree with you, I still like you and the atmosphere you bring to threads is entertaining (to say the least).

Catch you later Piel


#4

Thanks for the comments, Xenon. If Jimmy Akin loves fishing then he’s OK in my book.

Some even call me The Pocket Fisher of Men.


#5

[quote=drstevej]Just curious to know what folks here think about Calvinists…
[/quote]

Everybody knows that Calvinists are mean and unloving. And they have bad breath. Just kidding … but do you really mean for us to say what we think of Calvinists (the people who adhere to a particular interpretation of the Gospel) or what we think of Calvinism (the particular interpretation of the Gospel)? In the one place, I hope none of us judge the person who confesses his Calvinist beliefs. In the other … well a lot of people on these forums have strong opinions about that.

You can read Jimmy Akin’s tiptoe through t.u.l.i.p. here:
cin.org/users/james/files/tulip.htm


#6

In response to Akin’s Thomistic Tulip, I (as an Amyrauldian – four Point Calvinist) submit the Amyraldian version as stated by my Calvinist friend, FReeper Orthodox Presbyterian…

Amyrauldian Calvinism

Total Depravity
Unrestricted Atonement
Limited Election
Irresistible Grace
Preservation of the Saints


#7

If the Apostles had taught Calvinist principles, the Catholic Church would be teaching them.

The Apostles didn’t teach them, so neither does the Church. The Church teaches what the Apostles taught before, during, and after the NT was written. Period.

Calvinism is a 16th century interpretation of the NT that was never seen by any Christian before him.

All Protestant denominations result from a different interpretation of the same, 66-book cut version of the Bible. Calvinism is no exception.

The Catholic Church did not come out of the Bible; rather, the Bible came out of the Church. Any Bible-based church is not the one Christ founded. The Church founded by Christ wrote the NT and formed the Bible when she was nearly 400 years old. The New Testament is based on the Church.

Peace be to all who post at Catholic Answers.


#8

Katholikos, yours certainly is a predictable response.


#9

Well said, Katholikos.

I have a Calvinist friend…and it seems like a lot of his answers to my theological questions are blanket statements like: “We don’t know why God does it this way” or “It’s not up to us to know.” (Such as why God would create people for no other reason than to send them to hell= Double Predestination).

I have nothing against them per se, but I strongly disagree with most of their theological “inventions” that Calvin just seemed to come up with. What authority does he have to interpret the Bible?


#10

If I could I would introduce you to one of my greatest inspirational writers. If I could, it would sound something like this:

Dr. Steve meet Dr. Scott. Dr. Scott Hahn that is.

Scott is a former ardent Calvinistic Presbyterian minister.

He was top in his class at Gordon-Conwell, in Massachusetts.

and…he swam the Tiber

Now he’s playing the lead axe at the Franciscian University in Stubenville, Ohio.

It is from him that I cultivate my view of Calvin and his hobbs.


#11

I like us.


#12

[quote=Calvin]I like us.
[/quote]

w00t! A fellow Calvanist.

~mango~


#13

I tend to think that they accept irresistable grace and eternal security because they are scared of Hell and don’t like personal freedom and responsibility, but that is probably just my own ignorant perspective that is terribly generalized.


#14

Calvinists? Aren’t they the “frozen chosen”???

:slight_smile:


#15

Calvinists “do it” with total depravity. Sorry that’s a bumper sticker.

If you read Jimmy Akin’s book The Salvation Controversy, he goes along with Calvin on most of his points, with slight modifications. A version of one of his chapters on TULIP is here

Tiptoe Through TULIP

My article from Jim Burnham explains some of the differences

Calvinism and Catholicism Contrasted

Phil P


#16

I am familiar with Scott Hahn, but actually I find Gerry Matatics more impressive as a Catholic apologist – must be his training (ABD from Westminster Theological Seminary’s Reformation history and theology program).

BTW, that same program is the dr in drstevej.

Blessings to you.


#17

[quote=Christopher]I tend to think that they accept irresistable grace and eternal security because they are scared of Hell and don’t like personal freedom and responsibility, but that is probably just my own ignorant perspective that is terribly generalized.
[/quote]

I think they believe eternal life means eternal life rather than conditional life.


#18

[quote=drstevej]I think they believe eternal life means eternal life rather than conditional life.
[/quote]

Which specific Scripture reference are you personally interpreting and how does it apply to this topic?


#19

Katholikos,

As far as I can tell, you’re right about the Calvinist doctrine of “perseverance of the saints” being a new interpretation (though it wasn’t original with Calvin himself–Bucer definitely taught it and I’m not sure about Zwingli). But the other four elements of TULIP can all be found either in Augustine or in the medieval scholastic tradition. Calvin is not as innovative as you think.

Other aspects of Calvinism, such as his sacramental theology, are less defensible from the tradition, though Calvin was drawing on elements of the patristic and medieval tradition there as well. I assumed that you like most people are thinking of “TULIP” when you say “Calvinism,” but I’d be delighted to be wrong (Calvin’s ecclesiology, in particular, should get more attention than it does).

As for what I think of Calvinism–if drstevej is speaking of the “doctrines of grace” in particular I think they are overly speculative and at most a legitimate speculation within the Tradition (except for perseverance of the saints, which as Calvinists teach it is clearly erroneous because it contradicts baptismal regeneration, which is a pretty central part of the Christian Faith). The broader Reformed/Calvinist tradition is, IMHO, the most systematic and consistent Western alternative to Catholicism, but it is vitiated by quasi-Nestorianism and iconoclasm, both of which saddle it, perhaps irredeemably, with an inadequate grasp of the incarnation.

In Christ,

Edwin


#20

[quote=drstevej]Just curious to know what folks here think about Calvinists…
[/quote]

I think we’re great! :smiley:

Just to be fair, however, I have great respect for virtually anyone who holds to election ante praevisa merita (that means “before foreseen merits”… essentially anyone who believes God elects of people not on the basis of their foreseen decisions or beliefs).

And, along with Edwin, I would agree that there is more to Calvinism than predestination, but since most of you are probably only thinking of his predestinarian views, that’s all I bring up.

ken


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.