Aquinas on Predestination

[Daniel_Monroe]

I have long been an avid reader of Aquinas, but from time to time I am stumped by his reasoning. Here is an example.

In the Summa I-II, A. 23, Q. 1, we read as follows.

Objection 1. It seems that men are not predestined by God, for Damascene says (De Fide Orth. ii, 30): “It must be borne in mind that God foreknows but does not predetermine everything, since He foreknows all that is in us, but does not predetermine it all.” But human merit and demerit are in us, forasmuch as we are the masters of our own acts by free will. All that pertains therefore to merit or demerit is not predestined by God; and thus man’s predestination is done away.

Then we read this rebuttal.

Reply to Objection 1. Damascene calls predestination an imposition of necessity, after the manner of natural things which are predetermined towards one end. This is clear from his adding: “He does not will malice, nor does He compel virtue.” Whence predestination is not excluded by Him.

My problems are as follow.
(1) Damascene does not seem to call predestination “an imposition of necessity” (at least not in my version of the Exposition).
(2) Damascene does not seem to limit his discussion of predestination to “natural things which etc.”
(3) Is it possible in re (2) that by saying “He does not will malice etc.” Aquinas takes Damascene to mean that God does not will malice in “natural things etc.”?
(4) The claim that God “does not will malice, nor does He compel virtue” seems to exclude predestination (at least in some versions of predestination).

My thanks to anyone who can enlighten me.
Thanks, Dan

PS. For reference, Damascene’s discussion of predestination may be found at orthodox.net/fathers/exactii.html#BOOK_II_CHAPTER_XXX.

 

[JerryZ]

Predestination is really a very complicated theological and phylosophical exercise.

We are finite creatures with finite intelect.
God is something so beyond our comprehension that some just flat out deny Him.

God is Omniscient and outside time. He is present throughout the history of the Universe from beginning to end.
And He knows each and everyone that was saved and will be saved conversely He also know each and everyone that was damned and will be damned.

And yet He did not Choose our destinies. He did no impose His will to us.
If we choose to cooperate or not with His design is up to us.

From our perspective because He know what will be our choices we could objectively deduce that He predestined our lives.
But since fixing any one’s destiny goes against “free will” we have a problem.
The Church of course sees this and for example declares “double predestination” a heresy. This teaching was espoused by Calvin.
However in the strict sense that God knows the salvation plan and has for example manifested Himself to us in order to fulfill it we can rightly say “They were predestined” Abraham, Moses, Mary, etc. And yet they could always say no.
Choose NOT to accept. This we can see it in the Scriptures.
It is a tough nut to crack, have fun.

 

[Daniel_Monroe]

I totally agree that predestination is terribly difficult–in fact that is why I am avoiding it. My aim is to understand Aquinas’ rationale for arguing that Damascene (St. John of Damascus) does not exclude predestination. Thanks anyway.

 

[Andrew_Lorimer]

My problems are as follow.
(1) Damascene does not seem to call predestination “an imposition of necessity” (at least not in my version of the Exposition).

St Thomas is not quoting Damascene here, he is stating his understanding of Damascene’s conception of predestination

(2) Damascene does not seem to limit his discussion of predestination to “natural things which etc.”

Damascene does not limit his discussion of predestination to “natural thing which etc.”

(3) Is it possible in re (2) that by saying “He does not will malice etc.” Aquinas takes Damascene to mean that God does not will malice in “natural things etc.”?

Yes.

(4) The claim that God “does not will malice, nor does He compel virtue” seems to exclude predestination (at least in some versions of predestination).

This fourth problem of yours seems many other things too.

 

[Daniel_Monroe]

ANDREW. This fourth problem of yours seems many other things too.

DAN. I don’t suppose you would care to be more specific?

 

[Bob_Crowley]

I have a problem with this area, based on personal experience. I’ve often said that the night my father died, he appeared in my room. He started with an apology, we argued and talked, and at the end he gave this almighty scream and disappeared.

But during the exchange, at one stage he blurted out, “I always was doomed! I didn’t really have any choice!” I argued back, saying “That can’t be right!” (and I was an atheist at the time). He replied, “Oh, it’s right, all right. Youi can see that from here!”

Later however in the same exchange he said, “I was WILLING!” ( to do the cruel stupid things that condemned him).

I struggle with the bit about “not really having any choice”.

Now he died in January 1979 in a suburb called Nundah… Sometime in late 2005, I was driving a cab part time (and later a Maxi Taxi part time). One night I happened to be driving a cab in Nundah, and thinking about this exchange which had taken place. He’d also made a few predictions, some of which have come true eg. I’d meet a certain pastor, that I’d be driving a cab for some time, and some other things.

So I prayed for a “sign” that there was truth in what he said, and it was not a deception. I got this sort of sense that I ought to know better, but I persevered anyway.

Now either later that same night, or the next night I was driving, I was waiting at a cab rank in the city, when a bloke finally rolled up, a bit the worse for wear, hopped in the back, and just said “Nundah!”. I said “Whereabouts in Nundah?” He replied “Just drive and I’ll tell you where to go”.

So off we went, with him directing, and ended up at a house directly opposite the unit where my father died. As far as I was concerned, here was my “sign”. Now I had free will where I drove, traffic lights and other traffic deternined my path, the other cab drivers had an influence on when I got to the cab rank, and how long I’d have to wait for my next fare; the radio operator had an finfluence. Yet within a day or so, God had managed to overcome all these factors, and send a bloke to the house directly opposite my father’s place of death.

Now Brisbane has about 400,000 ratepayers, so there are probably about 300,000 or more private residences, if we allow a guess of 25% for businesses, shops and so on. Yet within two driving shifts I was directed to an address right opposite where my father died.

Was I “predestined” to get that fare, and was he “predestined” to get my cab/ Did my prayer for a “sign” have any influence, or was it “predestined” from the beginning?

In a similar vein, my old prophetic pastor made a prediction sometime circa 1991 (hed died himself in 1992) that “I think you’ll be doing a cleaning job for a short time. You won’t be doing it for long, and you won’t like it much, but I think the Lord will just want you to hear about a ghost.”

I knew by that time how accurate he was, but even so I thought that was silly, and over the top.

Fast forward to 2006, and I was doing a cleaning job for a short time, didn’t like it much, and heard about a ghost (a former store manager who committed suicide sometime in the 1960’s). Moreover sometime in 2010, this same prediction of his involved an Australian priest saying a mass for him. yet this priest was the only Australian Priest I’d seen on Catholic Answers (I was able to email him via the system), and he just “happened” to be located at the very church which was closest to the store where the “ghost” had been located.

Coincidence? Or predestination? There was no way the pastor could have predicted that using his own logic or thought processes, so I think God was telling him. And he then told me.

Was the suicide “predestined” to be released by a mass said in 2010, approximately 40 to 50 years after his suicide?

However I still made decisions, to drive a cab, or do cleaning. But within those decisions, my steps seemed to take certain directions, which I did not plan on taking.

So I would have to say I was “always” going to do those things.

I think predestination is a more potent factor than we think. Yet we are still “willing”.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

To add to my own post above, I can’t see how God could have a plan without a certain degree of predestination. Otherwise all you’d have would be a whole bunch of clowns all doing their own thing, and somehow this would jell into a “plan”.

It would be like trying run a football club with nobody dedicated to the central issue of football. The captain would be off fishing, the umpires playing golf, the players away for the weekend, and the fans playing poker in the stalls.

For God to have a plan, there has to be a central thesis, and everything would have to be directed to that thesis. That couldn’t possibly happen if the only factor in creation was free will.

 

[empther]

When Aquinas uses the word “predestination”, he applies it positively,
that is,
only to something, grace, conscience, whatever you want to call it, that leads man to eternal life.

Predestination
newadvent.org/summa/1023.htm#article2

Article 1, Whether men are predestined by God? I answer that…

Hence the type of the aforesaid direction of a rational creature towards the end of life eternal is called predestination.

That is, God stacks the deck in the game for the human soul.

Nevertheless,
Article 3. Whether God reprobates any man? I answer that…

Thus, as men are ordained to eternal life through the providence of God, it likewise is part of that providence to permit some to fall away from that end; this is called reprobation. Thus, as predestination is a part of providence, in regard to those ordained to eternal salvation, so reprobation is a part of providence in regard to those who turn aside from that end.

In other words,
God predestined all men to be saved by giving grace, conscience, whatever you want to call it, sufficient for salvation,
but man can still reject it. :bighanky:

**So, friends, this is not the predestination of Calvin who said God chooses which men to save and which to damn, and man has nothing to say about it. :bigyikes:
Where does it say that in the Bible?
**

And in Article 1 Reply to objection 4

[Reply to Objection 4. Even if by a special privilege their predestination were revealed to some, it is not fitting that it should be revealed to everyone; because, [COLOR=“Red”]**if so, those who were not predestined **would despair;

and security would beget negligence in the predestined./QUOTE]

So those who will go to Heaven are predestined to do so,
but those who will be damned are not predestined…

 

[Aelred_Minor]

I can’t speak to whether Aquinas’ attempt to harmonize his views with those of St. John Damascene works or not. I’ve never read anything by Damascene.

Regarding the theological issue at hand here though, the main issue seems to be necessity. Does God, by predestining a man to heaven or simply to an individual meritorious act, impose necessity on that man’s choice? If so, there can be no free will.

But according to the Thomists, God’s movement of the will does not impose necessity upon it.

According to Thomism, the human will naturally and inevitably chooses good. The will is not so free that it could choose pure evil as such, but always chooses something which the intellect has perceived as a good. Now, if the intellect perceives something as entirely good with no admixture of anything not good then the will inevitably chooses that thing. This happens only in the case of the Beatific Vision. In every other case the goods in question are only partial goods. Even if the object of consideration is infinitely good in itself (God), prior to the Beatific Vision our intellects do not perceive that infinite goodness directly and so the mystery that surrounds God causes our wills to treat Him also like a partial good.

Now, when intellect perceives partial goods the will responds to them with what Thomists call “indifference.” That is, the will is not drawn automatically to one good or another. Put in more Molinist terms, the will is free to choose or not to choose a partial good. In the case of goods that are contrary to each other, when the choice of one means the forfeiting of another, the will responds to both with indifference and thus is not bound to choose either one of them, even if one is clearly perceived by the intellect to be a greater good. This is why we can choose sin over God, for example. This is what is meant by “free will”, at least from the Thomist theological perspective.

Now God is the Prime Mover. He is the ultimate origin of everything that happens in Creation, including human choices. If he were not then his foreknowledge of human choices would be determined by man, and nothing in God can be determined by a creature.

But when God moves the human will to accept a particular good, he does so in a way that preserves this natural indifference to partial goods. Thus God moves the will without forcing it, without imposing necessity on it, without, in other words, taking away free will. It was evidently Aquinas’s claim that Damascene’s apparent rejection of strong views of predestination was really a rejection of the idea that God imposes necessity upon the will, and this imposition of necessity Aquinas also denied.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

When Aquinas uses the word “predestination”, he applies it positively,
that is,
only to something, grace, conscience, whatever you want to call it, that leads man to eternal life.

Predestination
newadvent.org/summa/1023.htm#article2

Article 1, Whether men are predestined by God? I answer that…

That is, God stacks the deck in the game for the human soul.

Nevertheless,
Article 3. Whether God reprobates any man? I answer that…

In other words,
God predestined all men to be saved by giving grace, conscience, whatever you want to call it, sufficient for salvation,
but man can still reject it. :bighanky:

**So, friends, this is not the predestination of Calvin who said God chooses which men to save and which to damn, and man has nothing to say about it. :bigyikes:
Where does it say that in the Bible?
**

And in Article 1 Reply to objection 4

[Reply to Objection 4. Even if by a special privilege their predestination were revealed to some, it is not fitting that it should be revealed to everyone; because, [COLOR=“Red”]**if so, those who were not predestined **

Notice that St. Thomas said “predestination is a part of providence,** in regard to those ordained to eternal salvation**” (emphasis mine, of course)

Those who are predestined to heaven will go to heaven. Those who are not predestined to heaven will not go to heaven. Both cases are parts of God’s providential plan for the universe, but while the predestination of the saints is a positive thing that God brings about by grace the reputation of the damned is a negative thing merely permitted by God. Everything positive about any human act, even the physical act of sin, comes from God, who is the source of everything with positive existence. That some people sin and eventually go to hell is the result of something purely negative, non-existing. Things like a choice to cooperate with grace and turn to God which God made present in the predestined but did not make present, at least at the moment of death, in the reprobate.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

When Aquinas uses the word “predestination”, he applies it positively,
that is,
only to something, grace, conscience, whatever you want to call it, that leads man to eternal life.

Predestination
newadvent.org/summa/1023.htm#article2

Article 1, Whether men are predestined by God? I answer that…

That is, God stacks the deck in the game for the human soul.

Nevertheless,
Article 3. Whether God reprobates any man? I answer that…

In other words,
God predestined all men to be saved by giving grace, conscience, whatever you want to call it, sufficient for salvation,
but man can still reject it. :bighanky:

**So, friends, this is not the predestination of Calvin who said God chooses which men to save and which to damn, and man has nothing to say about it. :bigyikes:
Where does it say that in the Bible?
**

And in Article 1 Reply to objection 4

[Reply to Objection 4. Even if by a special privilege their predestination were revealed to some, it is not fitting that it should be revealed to everyone; because, [COLOR=“Red”]**if so, those who were not predestined **

Notice that St. Thomas said “predestination is a part of providence,** in regard to those ordained to eternal salvation**” (emphasis mine, of course)

Those who are predestined to heaven will go to heaven. Those who are not predestined to heaven will not go to heaven. Both cases are parts of God’s providential plan for the universe, but while the predestination of the saints is a positive thing that God brings about by grace the reputation of the damned is a negative thing merely permitted by God. Everything positive about any human act, even the physical act of sin, comes from God, who is the source of everything with positive existence. That some people sin and eventually go to hell is the result of something purely negative, non-existing. Things like a choice to cooperate with grace and turn to God which God made present in the predestined but did not make present, at least at the moment of death, in the reprobate.

Edit: I’ve tried this twice now. Something is preventing the quoted post from showing up correctly, as a quote.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

In other words,
God predestined all men to be saved by giving grace, conscience, whatever you want to call it, sufficient for salvation,
but man can still reject it. :bighanky:

So those who will go to Heaven are predestined to do so,
but those who will be damned are not predestined.

How do you reconcile these two statements? First you say that everyone is predestined (thus apparently equating predestination with God’s universal salvific will) and then later you say (quite rightly) that those who will be damned are not predestined.

 

[empther]

How do you reconcile these two statements? First you say that everyone is predestined (thus apparently equating predestination with God’s universal salvific will) and then later you say (quite rightly) that those who will be damned are not predestined.

Instead of just creating man and leaving him entirely on his own to work out his salvation,
a fifty-fifty game, a split the cards game,
God rigs the game by giving every man a conscience, and graces of many kinds to help himself get to Heaven. So every man is born with this eternal life goal.
But, some men can reject it. So they lose the Presence of the Holy Spirit, and other graces of predestination. They lose theier predestination.

 

[Andrew_Lorimer]

ANDREW. This fourth problem of yours seems many other things too.

DAN. I don’t suppose you would care to be more specific?

It is not a lack of care but the propriety of responding in greater depth that disinclines me to say more other than to recommend a book: ‘The Varieties of Reference’ by Gareth Evans, ISBN: 0-19-824686-2; OUP, 2002. You may gather in viewing the contents list of this book, some of the possible approaches one might take in responding to what you have written.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Instead of just creating man and leaving him entirely on his own to work out his salvation,
a fifty-fifty game, a split the cards game,
God rigs the game by giving every man a conscience, and graces of many kinds to help himself get to Heaven. So every man is born with this eternal life goal.
But, some men can reject it. So they lose the Presence of the Holy Spirit, and other graces of predestination. They lose theier predestination.

Now it sounds like you are equating predestination with grace.

 

[empther]

Now it sounds like you are equating predestination with grace.

It is.

It was John Calvin who started the idea that God predestined men to Heaven or to hell. That’s not the way Aquinas or anybody else saw it.
Calvin’s idea so pervades society you don’t stop and think it could be anything else.
Get over it! Think for yourself!

Presdestination is God stacking the deck in the game to win men’s souls. This gives God an advantage over the devil who doesn’t have much to manipulate men except conscupiscence which God gives us the means to overcome. So without God’s help, most men would probably be lost. “Ain’t gonna be that way” God decided.

But men can refuse help. So the devil may win a point once in a while. Hitler’s future looks dim.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

It is.

It was John Calvin who started the idea that God predestined men to Heaven or to hell. That’s not the way Aquinas or anybody saw it.
Calvin’s idea so pervades society you don’t stop and think it could be anything else.
Get over it!

Presdestination is God stacking the deck in the game to win men’s souls. This gives God an advantage over the devil who doesn’t have much to manipulate men except conscupiscence which God gives us the means to overcome. So without God’s help, most men would probably be lost. “Ain’t gonna be that way” God decided.

But men can refuse help. So the devil may win a point once in a while. Hitler’s future looks dim.

John Calvin was not the first one to teach this “double predestination”, but those who had taught it before him were also condemned.

However, Augustine, Aquinas, and many others taught that the elect are predestined while the reprobate are not.

A simple way to look at it is this:

1. God wills antecedently (that is, before consideration of anything else) that all human beings be saved.
2. God wills efficaciously (in such a way that He omnipotently brings it about) the salvation of the elect while permitting, much as it goes against his universal salvific will, that others go to damnation in order that some greater good may come about.
3. God gives sufficient grace for salvation to all, as a consequence of point 1 and because it would be unjust to demand obedience while not giving the ability to obey.
4. God moves the wills of the elect to freely cooperate with grace in such a way that they finally achieve salvation, but does not so move the wills of the rest of humanity, as a consequence of point 2.
5. The elect actually go to heaven and the reprobate go to hell.

Only the elect are predestined and ultimately these are always saved. The rest of humanity, the reprobate, go to hell through their own fault and in spite of being given sufficient grace for salvation. This is the basic Augustinian/Thomist view. Scotism basically taught the same thing. Congruism teaches basically the same thing regarding predestination and salvation, though it has a different opinion on the movement of the will. Of Catholic schools of thought (at least in the West) only non-Congruist Molinism seriously differs, and even in this case only the elect who will really go to heaven, and not the reprobate, are regarded as having ever been predestined.

 

[Daniel_Monroe]

1. God wills efficaciously (in such a way that He omnipotently brings it about) the salvation of the elect while permitting, much as it goes against his universal salvific will, that others go to damnation in order that some greater good may come about.

Only the elect are predestined and ultimately these are always saved. The rest of humanity, the reprobate, go to hell through their own fault and in spite of being given sufficient grace for salvation. This is the basic Augustinian/Thomist view. Scotism basically taught the same thing. Congruism teaches basically the same thing regarding predestination and salvation, though it has a different opinion on the movement of the will. Of Catholic schools of thought (at least in the West) only non-Congruist Molinism seriously differs, and even in this case only the elect who will really go to heaven, and not the reprobate, are regarded as having ever been predestined.

On this point Aquinas comments “**The reason for the predestination of some, and reprobation of others, must be sought for in the goodness of God. **Thus He is said to have made all things through His goodness, so that the divine goodness might be represented in things. Now it is necessary that God’s goodness, which in itself is one and undivided, should be manifested in many ways in His creation; because creatures in themselves cannot attain to the simplicity of God. Thus it is that for the completion of the universe there are required different grades of being; some of which hold a high and some a low place in the universe. That this multiformity of grades may be preserved in things, God allows some evils, lest many good things should never happen, as was said above (Question 22, Article 2). Let us then consider the whole of the human race, as we consider the whole universe. God wills to manifest His goodness in men; in respect to those whom He predestines, by means of His mercy, as sparing them; and in respect of others, whom he reprobates, by means of His justice, in punishing them. This is the reason why God elects some and rejects others” (Q. 23. Art. 5). This passage makes it sound as if the goodness of God is the cause of predestination and reprobation in the sense that the “multiformity of grades” of being requires reprobation: if all men were saved, multiformity of grades would not be preserved.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

On this point Aquinas comments “**The reason for the predestination of some, and reprobation of others, must be sought for in the goodness of God. **Thus He is said to have made all things through His goodness, so that the divine goodness might be represented in things. Now it is necessary that God’s goodness, which in itself is one and undivided, should be manifested in many ways in His creation; because creatures in themselves cannot attain to the simplicity of God. Thus it is that for the completion of the universe there are required different grades of being; some of which hold a high and some a low place in the universe. That this multiformity of grades may be preserved in things, God allows some evils, lest many good things should never happen, as was said above (Question 22, Article 2). Let us then consider the whole of the human race, as we consider the whole universe. God wills to manifest His goodness in men; in respect to those whom He predestines, by means of His mercy, as sparing them; and in respect of others, whom he reprobates, by means of His justice, in punishing them. This is the reason why God elects some and rejects others” (Q. 23. Art. 5). This passage makes it sound as if the goodness of God is the cause of predestination and reprobation in the sense that the “multiformity of grades” of being requires reprobation: if all men were saved, multiformity of grades would not be preserved.

Excellent quote.

However, let us never forget that evil is a mystery. Even if certain philosophical explanations, such as this one, may technically cover the whole phenomenon, the way in which they do or the reason why they do remains painfully hidden. Why would this “multiformity of grades” or the manifestation of God’s justice through punishment be worth the eternal torment of so many of God’s beloved children? The good seems so abstract and unnecessary to our minds, the evil that is permitted for its sake so terribly visceral. Ultimately I think we will only get a satisfying answer to this question at the General Judgment.

 

[empther]

However, Augustine, Aquinas, and many others taught that the elect are predestined while the reprobate are not.

But not in the sense that the predestined have no choice. This is where Calvin was wrong, and people who don’t look into it carefully are mistaken about what it’s about.

God gives every man a head start but we have to finish the race.