C
clmowry
Guest
Nah, just casue somebody’s wrong about one thing doesn’t make them wrong about everything.
Chuck
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Chuck
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
A true Thomist believes in the Catholic Church.
Tell me how someone that believes as St. ThomaAquinas did can do so and still be Protestant.
Tell me how someone that believes as St. ThomaAquinas did can do so and still be Protestant.
C
cpayne
Guest
Well, I see your point. But there are certain features of Aquinas’s philosophy which do not depend specifically on his Catholicism. His general theme of grace perfecting nature, but not overturning it, is not usually held by Protestants, but can be. The arguments on various topics that he brings out from this general theme can also be held by Protestants.A true Thomist believes in the Catholic Church.
Tell me how someone that believes as St. ThomaAquinas did can do so and still be Protestant.
There’s a good book on this very topic: Aquinas for Evangelicals, by Norman Geisler. I don’t recommend everything Geisler has written, but this particular book spells out Thomistic areas in which Protestants and Catholics can be in general agreement. There are enough that one could be called a Thomist, even if not Catholic.
But I do agree that continued study of Aquinas does lead one in a Catholic direction, definitely.
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
What people should never forget is that the Catholic Church does say that it is OK to believe in Molinism or Congruism which are not what St. Thomas Aquinas taught.
In other words the Catholic Church says it is OK to disagree with St. Thomas in that direction.
The Catholic Church however teaches that to believe in the double predestination view of Calvinism is not permitted!
In other words there isn’ such a thing as a Calvinistic Catholic.
There are Molinistic Catholics though!
And if some Thomists are right and there isn’t such a thing as a Father Mostian Thomist:
there are at least some people who think the truth lies between the Thomists and the Molinists or Congruists.
Believing that way is just being a good Catholic who can value more than one train of accepted Catholic thought.
Is that such a bad thing?
In other words the Catholic Church says it is OK to disagree with St. Thomas in that direction.
The Catholic Church however teaches that to believe in the double predestination view of Calvinism is not permitted!
In other words there isn’ such a thing as a Calvinistic Catholic.
There are Molinistic Catholics though!
And if some Thomists are right and there isn’t such a thing as a Father Mostian Thomist:
there are at least some people who think the truth lies between the Thomists and the Molinists or Congruists.
Believing that way is just being a good Catholic who can value more than one train of accepted Catholic thought.
Is that such a bad thing?
C
Contarini
Guest
Yes. Reformed, I believe. Unless she’s converted recently (she was certainly a Protestant on the couple of occasions I’ve heard her speak, most recently in 1999–not that the evangelicals who organized the two conferences in question wouldn’t have invited a Catholic, but I remember her mentioning that she attended a Reformed church).Whoa! Contarini—Eleonore Stump is a Protestant? Say what?
Edwin
M
mgrfin
Guest
Send her an email at St. Louis University and ask.Whoa! Contarini—Eleonore Stump is a Protestant? Say what?
stumpep@slu.edu
peace
C
cpayne
Guest
Okay, I did. Will keep you notified.
M
mgrfin
Guest
Thanks. Like you, I am completely suprised. St. Louis University. A foremost educator on St. Thomas Aquinas. An outstanding resume as long as your arm.Okay, I did. Will keep you notified.
Of course, experts can abound, and yet, personally, have their own disparite beliefs.
peace
C
cpayne
Guest
Well, the thing is, I heard her speak once and defend the need for the Magisterium. That’s why I was surprised—you don’t hear a Protestant do that too often. :nope:
M
mgrfin
Guest
Well, it is not certain, but Eleanor Stump might be.A true Thomist believes in the Catholic Church.
Tell me how someone that believes as St. ThomaAquinas did can do so and still be Protestant.
The jury is still out on that one.
peace
C
cpayne
Guest
Come to think about it, Mortimer Adler was a Thomist, of a certain selective variety, before he even became a Christian!
M
mgrfin
Guest
Another 'brain" - he read Plato when he was five.Come to think about it, Mortimer Adler was a Thomist, of a certain selective variety, before he even became a Christian!
He became a Catholic in 2000.
Peace
C
cpayne
Guest
Okay, here’s the official word on Eleonore Stump (I heard back from the lady herself, in a very gracious e-mail—she was surprised we were even interested in her). She is Catholic and a lay member of the Dominican Order.
Also a very good writer, especially a lot of her work co-written with Norman Kretzmann (R.I.P.).
Also a very good writer, especially a lot of her work co-written with Norman Kretzmann (R.I.P.).
M
mgrfin
Guest
Thank you for that info. Her resume is thick enough to choke a horse. Of course, faith is a gift. What she believes is a function of the gifts she has received. However, it is nice to know that such a great Thomist is also a member of the fold.Okay, here’s the official word on Eleonore Stump (I heard back from the lady herself, in a very gracious e-mail—she was surprised we were even interested in her). She is Catholic and a lay member of the Dominican Order.
Also a very good writer, especially a lot of her work co-written with Norman Kretzmann (R.I.P.).
peace.
C
Contarini
Guest
Thanks for this info! I’m not entirely surprised that she has converted since I last heard her speak, which as I said was in 1999. Lots of Protestant Thomists do (Joshua Hochschild, for instance).Okay, here’s the official word on Eleonore Stump (I heard back from the lady herself, in a very gracious e-mail—she was surprised we were even interested in her). She is Catholic and a lay member of the Dominican Order.
But unless my memory is really playing tricks with me, I’m pretty sure she was a Protestant back then (because I had also assumed that she was Catholic and remember being surprised that she wasn’t).
Edwin
C
cpayne
Guest
Actually, Joshua Hochschild was also a speaker at the conference at which I last saw Stump. At that time, HE was a Protestant (the conference was at Wheaton College).Thanks for this info! I’m not entirely surprised that she has converted since I last heard her speak, which as I said was in 1999. Lots of Protestant Thomists do (Joshua Hochschild, for instance).
But unless my memory is really playing tricks with me, I’m pretty sure she was a Protestant back then (because I had also assumed that she was Catholic and remember being surprised that she wasn’t).
Edwin
P
Pat_the_Cat
Guest
Predestinarianism is a HERESY which has been condemned by the Catholic Church
To believe Predestinarianism you have to accept the flawed concept that God wills the **salvation **or **damnation **of the individual, without regard to his merits or demerits. Why would a loving God WILL damnation for ANYONE? Why would he purposely with-hold His grace just to watch someone rot in hell for all eternity? Have you not read what the Church teaches us about what Hell is like, and the eternal sufferings that people endure there.
To believe Predestinarianism you also have to accept that God, disregards the freedom of the will of the elect under the influence of efficacious grace. He also puts the reprobate under the necessity of committing sin in consequence of the absence of grace. Why would God will that people sinned? This is NOT the same God that died on the cross for me!
That is just so-oo wrong!
To believe Predestinarianism you have to accept the flawed concept that God wills the **salvation **or **damnation **of the individual, without regard to his merits or demerits. Why would a loving God WILL damnation for ANYONE? Why would he purposely with-hold His grace just to watch someone rot in hell for all eternity? Have you not read what the Church teaches us about what Hell is like, and the eternal sufferings that people endure there.
To believe Predestinarianism you also have to accept that God, disregards the freedom of the will of the elect under the influence of efficacious grace. He also puts the reprobate under the necessity of committing sin in consequence of the absence of grace. Why would God will that people sinned? This is NOT the same God that died on the cross for me!
That is just so-oo wrong!
V
Voco_proTatiano
Guest
So what is predestination?
In my ignorance, I assumed that the meaning was to be taken as literal. That is, the future of every particle in this universe of universes is fixed, like a recording being played, and by pressing ‘fast forward’ the future can be seen, and known.
Myself, I find this concept utterly incompatible with Church teaching on ‘free will’ and also with the best teachings of our best physicists, who are convinced, that the future is only predictable over an infinitesimal instant of time, after which Heisenberg uncertainty utterly fuzzies the prognosis, the further into the future you predict, the fuzzier the result.
If you mean by predestination, that there are propensities, based on probabilistic reactions to circumstances, where the probabilities are variable, and might be preset to varying levels, then yes, that is acceptable, both to me, and as far as I know, to physics.
Or maybe you mean something else…
In my ignorance, I assumed that the meaning was to be taken as literal. That is, the future of every particle in this universe of universes is fixed, like a recording being played, and by pressing ‘fast forward’ the future can be seen, and known.
Myself, I find this concept utterly incompatible with Church teaching on ‘free will’ and also with the best teachings of our best physicists, who are convinced, that the future is only predictable over an infinitesimal instant of time, after which Heisenberg uncertainty utterly fuzzies the prognosis, the further into the future you predict, the fuzzier the result.
If you mean by predestination, that there are propensities, based on probabilistic reactions to circumstances, where the probabilities are variable, and might be preset to varying levels, then yes, that is acceptable, both to me, and as far as I know, to physics.
Or maybe you mean something else…
M
mgrfin
Guest
And to whom are you directing your post?Predestinarianism is a HERESY which has been condemned by the Catholic Church
To believe Predestinarianism you have to accept the flawed concept that God wills the **salvation **or **damnation **of the individual, without regard to his merits or demerits. Why would a loving God WILL damnation for ANYONE? Why would he purposely with-hold His grace just to watch someone rot in hell for all eternity? Have you not read what the Church teaches us about what Hell is like, and the eternal sufferings that people endure there.
To believe Predestinarianism you also have to accept that God, disregards the freedom of the will of the elect under the influence of efficacious grace. He also puts the reprobate under the necessity of committing sin in consequence of the absence of grace. Why would God will that people sinned? This is NOT the same God that died on the cross for me!
That is just so-oo wrong!
peace
E
Evoken
Guest
Speaking about Thomism, with regards to reprobation, is the teaching of Negative Reprobation legitimate or does it goes against defined dogma?
I have read in some places like Catholic Encyclopedia and from Fr. Most that it contradicts the divine desire for the salvation of all, but reading St. Thomas, I notice that he teaches something virtually identical to Negative Reprobation.
Personally, I find this theory to be the logical consequence of predestination to eternal bliss prior to any merits and it leads to a very coherent and consistent system as far as Thomism is concerned.
Thanks,
I have read in some places like Catholic Encyclopedia and from Fr. Most that it contradicts the divine desire for the salvation of all, but reading St. Thomas, I notice that he teaches something virtually identical to Negative Reprobation.
Personally, I find this theory to be the logical consequence of predestination to eternal bliss prior to any merits and it leads to a very coherent and consistent system as far as Thomism is concerned.
Thanks,
- Status
- Not open for further replies.