Calvinism and Catholicism?

[Jotobo]

Are these in contradiction with each other? If so, how much and at what points?

 

[tabsie3210]

Calvinism - God picked out whom He wanted to go to heaven either before He created the universe, or after the Fall. Calvinism says that no human is capable of doing anything to save himself, because we can only be saved by God’s Grace, period, but we’re so lowly that we can’t even choose to accept said Grace. God grants that Grace to the people He wants saved. Since we know that people do go to hell, then, that means that God withholds His Grace from everyone who is not saved. That means he actively sends people to hell. That’s the Calvinist definition of predestination. In short, people are puppets and God damns people He doesn’t want in heaven.

Catholicism - God offers His Grace equally to all people. People have the free will to choose to accept that Grace, or to reject it. God did not create us to be puppets, but to choose to love Him and accept His Grace. When people sin, they actively push God away, and by choosing to reject God, people send themselves to Hell. God wants the whole universe to be saved, but He won’t force us to be saved. Because time is not real - God is outside of time, and God created time - God can see what will happen in the future as well as what is happening now and what happened in the past, all at the same time. By our free will actions, God can see that some people actively reject Him throughout their lives, and he respects their rejection by allowing them to send themselves to Hell - to be separated out from Him. That is Catholic predestination. In short, people are free to do as they please, and God allows them to damn themselves to hell, if they choose, but throughout their lives He offers all people all the Grace needed to reach heaven, should they choose.

 

[kristanl]

Calvinism - God picked out whom He wanted to go to heaven either before He created the universe, or after the Fall. Calvinism says that no human is capable of doing anything to save himself, because we can only be saved by God’s Grace, period, but we’re so lowly that we can’t even choose to accept said Grace. God grants that Grace to the people He wants saved. Since we know that people do go to hell, then, that means that God withholds His Grace from everyone who is not saved. That means he actively sends people to hell. That’s the Calvinist definition of predestination. In short, people are puppets and God damns people He doesn’t want in heaven.

Catholicism - God offers His Grace equally to all people. People have the free will to choose to accept that Grace, or to reject it. God did not create us to be puppets, but to choose to love Him and accept His Grace. When people sin, they actively push God away, and by choosing to reject God, people send themselves to Hell. God wants the whole universe to be saved, but He won’t force us to be saved. Because time is not real - God is outside of time, and God created time - God can see what will happen in the future as well as what is happening now and what happened in the past, all at the same time. By our free will actions, God can see that some people actively reject Him throughout their lives, and he respects their rejection by allowing them to send themselves to Hell - to be separated out from Him. That is Catholic predestination. In short, people are free to do as they please, and God allows them to damn themselves to hell, if they choose, but throughout their lives He offers all people all the Grace needed to reach heaven, should they choose.

Said very well!!

 

[wade_a_wilson]

I can’t accurately explain Calvinism position, but I have articulated to an actual Calvinist something very similar to what you wrote it above.

Her response was that the “people who go to hell never had a chance” description is an unfair description.

She tried to explain something about how God knows how you will live your life at the moment of creation, so He was able to pass judgement at that time too. I don’t think that a fair description either.

I’m not saying your wrong, but you might want to get something “official” to read.

 

[tabsie3210]

I can’t accurately explain Calvinism position, but I have articulated to an actual Calvinist something very similar to what you wrote it above.

Her response was that the “people who go to hell never had a chance” description is an unfair description.

She tried to explain something about how God knows how you will live your life at the moment of creation, so He was able to pass judgement at that time too. I don’t think that a fair description either.

I’m not saying your wrong, but you might want to get something “official” to read.

Thank you! I appreciate the feedback.

I tried to paraphrase as best I could from a combination of three sources - The Catholic Encyclopedia (found on this very website! Yay!), a class on early American literature (since 99% of the people writing were religious, 99% of what was written was religious in nature, and understanding the Calvinist viewpoint made understanding what really happened in Salem a lot easier, so we spent several periods discussing Calvinism), and from talks with a Calvinist co-worker of mine.

And you’re right, it’s not “official” by any stretch. I was trying to touch base on where the two religions diverged the most. I hope the OP will kindly read my post with a grain of salt on his or her lips. But that’s the touchstone, and by looking up “predestination” and Calvinism and Catholicism, one can get a better sense, via official documents, where we differ there and why.

 

[AlanF]

Are these in contradiction with each other? If so, how much and at what points?

In the 16th to 18th centuries followers of Cornelius Otto Jansen tried to merge them and became a movement known as Jansenism. It was condemned as a heresy by Pope Innocent X.

 

[Hesychios]

In the 16th to 18th centuries followers of Cornelius Otto Jansen tried to merge them and became a movement known as Jansenism. It was condemned as a heresy by Pope Innocent X.

I think it would be fair to say that Jansenism was not a deliberate attempt to merge the two (although as a Counter-Reformation movement, I would not be surprised if it had some success winning over Calvinists and attracting former Calvinists).

The Calvinists chucked the sacramental priesthood and hierarchy, the Jansenists adhered to that aspect of the church. Many priests and religious (the Port Royal convent especially) were involved in Jansenism. I am pretty sure that they never saw themselves as something new, but as a strong defense of traditional Latin Catholicism.

Both Calvinism and the Jansenist party of the Latin church were strongly influenced by the writings of Saint Augustine, thus the similarities.

http://www.monasteryicons.com/graphics/products/regular/703.jpg

 

[AlanF]

I think it would be fair to say that Jansenism was not a deliberate attempt to merge the two (although as a Counter-Reformation movement, I would not be surprised if it had some success winning over Calvinists and attracting former Calvinists).

The Calvinists chucked the sacramental priesthood and hierarchy, the Jansenists adhered to that aspect of the church. Many priests and religious (the Port Royal convent especially) were involved in Jansenism. I am pretty sure that they never saw themselves as something new, but as a strong defense of traditional Latin Catholicism.

Both Calvinism and the Jansenist party of the Latin church were strongly influenced by the writings of Saint Augustine, thus the similarities.

No, of course it wasn’t a deliberate attempt to merge them, but it was a merging of Calvinist heresies on predestination etc.(as well as the puritan side of it / stripping the liturgy back to the basics etc.) with Catholicism.

 

[Hesychios]

No, of course it wasn’t a deliberate attempt to merge them, but it was a merging of Calvinist heresies on predestination etc.

That was actually Augustine, he posited a double predestination. It ultimately did not win over the church, but it comes from him.

This is why I have difficulty seeing this as a merging of Calvinist ideas into Catholicism. It could be argued that Jansenism might have arisen in the church even if Jean Calvin had never been born. Strong support of Augustine’s ideas in the church predates the life of Jean Calvin, it had a home in the church as theological opinion. Jansen certainly would not have had to read Calvin to come up with his own position (it is possible that he never did read Calvin), he need only read Augustine.

Clearly, had the church not already dealt with these concepts opposing Calvin she would have had to take it on with Jansen anyway, and if Jansen had not been on the scene there would probably have been another.

Double predestination is a heresy that has it’s roots much earlier than Calvin.

I will say that if one was a Jansenist Catholic trying to win over the local Calvinist community one should probably have had an easier time of convincing them than a Molinist Catholic working in the same area. In that sense I suppose this can be a merging of like minds but I seriously doubt that this was a case of Calvinist teaching infecting or distorting Catholicism, which is how many people tend to explain it.

It was more like Augustine influencing the thinking of churchmen generally … especially in France, Flanders and Holland.

(as well as the puritan side of it / stripping the liturgy back to the basics etc.) with Catholicism.

This is interesting to me.

I did not know that the Jansenists were generally ‘Puritan’ in that sense. I think the Brethren of the Common Life were similarly inclined, but I don’t have a lot of information on them.

Previous to that era I believe that it was the Cistercians who were most notably ‘Puritan’ in the sense of simpler liturgies and spaces. This was supposedly a reaction to the ‘excesses’ at Cluny.

Elaborateness/simplicity in worship seems to be a trend of fashion, or style from time to time and place to place. People might react to what they perceive as ‘excesses’ and start promoting a move in the opposite direction, until once again we’ve gone too far.